top of page

Our research group develops new chemical reactions to reach bioactive natural product space. We are passionate about this work: its beauty, its difficulty, its utility.



We aim for scientific rigor by recursive exclusion of competing hypotheses, which requires humility, determination and technical precision. But we also dare to dream, we risk sounding foolish, we’re not afraid to admit our ignorance and seek answers: “I don’t know, so I’m going to find out.”  



Training Goals:  

• Integrity: results are obtained with rigor. Data collection and proper documentation are carried out and readily shared.

• Collaboration: ideas are shared among the group with few barriers to access.  

• Humility: evaluation of hypotheses occurs by experimentation and frequently means admitting you were wrong.  

• Excellence: we constantly strive to learn more and “improve our craft." This requires hard work and rest.  



All people—regardless of race, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, nationality, ethnicity, economic status or disability—are capable of these pursuits. And more than being capable, everyone is welcome.



Our group is committed to inclusion and diversity, not as pretense or by mandate, but because talent courses through all people, regardless of identity. Certain groups are under-represented in US science due to entrenched biases, both conscious and unconscious, and active discrimination. We encourage active anti-discrimination. We recognize that ability is multi-factorial and experience is often a privilege. We maintain high standards but we help one another meet those standards, including senior personnel and the primary investigator.



Diversity is more than a metric. Professor Marilyn Strathern quipped[1]  "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure." Our research group has been diverse because of our values, not because diversity is a box to check. If people become the means to an end, the actual end is lost.  

[1] Byrne, A. “Measure for measure: the system assessing the link between science and innovation is flawed” Nature Index, 2017, S22.

bottom of page