Research Interest

Enzymology Kinetics

FEBS Constituent Society

Italy (SIB)

Other Expertise/Interests

Postgraduate training Undergraduate teaching

Followed by

Popular contributions

FEBS Network special areas

Channels contributed to:


Rooms participated in:

Coronavirus insights FEBS Member Society Representatives

Recent Comments

Apr 29, 2020
Replying to László Fésüs

Dear Andrea,

I have seen a nice publication in the recent issue of Science from the group of Rolf Hingenfeld who is excellent strucural biologist working in Lübeck.

Crystal Strucutre of SARC-COV-2 main protease provides a basis for design of improves alfa.ketoamide inhibitors. Science 24 April 2020 Vol 368 Issue 6489 pp 409-412 open access

Thank you Laszlo, I'm adding it to the list! Andrea

Dec 13, 2019

Nice article! Let me add one consideration. Marriages, arranged or otherwise, are not judged by peer review experts. When husband and wife sign a letter or a postcard it is immaterial whose name comes first. Not so in collaboration papers. Competitive access to research funding and publish or perish politics may kill collaborations.

Jun 13, 2018

As a post scriptum to this article I remark that Nature has published  the commentary: "Italian scientists increase self-citations in response to promotion policy. Study reveals how research evaluations can lead to self-serving behaviour." by Dalmeet Singh Chawla. link:

Jun 13, 2018
Replying to Isabel Varela Nieto

Food for thought! Indeed it is a topic with many facets and open for discussion.
Which should we use as a reference index to objectively evaluate the impact of colleagues' work?

I do not have a solution, aside from what I wrote in the post. Clearly we should first decide which is the scope of evaluation: allocating funds? promoting a scientist's career? awarding a position? Evaluation should be limited at those instances where it is really needed. A wrong use of evaluation is that of justifying  reduction of resources: i.e. we have less thus we adopt stricter rules.