Biodiversity Challenge
This page is used to provide assessment scores for the grant. Please use the rubric below the grant details
to enter your assessment score
Decoding the Evolutionary History of Senna Mill. (Leguminosae, Cassieae): integrating Phylogenomic, Biogeographic and Taxonomic Approaches
Project summary:
Senna Mill is a speciose and economically important legume genus. We are performing a comprehensive phylogenomic analysis with representatives of all sections and series within Senna, and carrying out collections-based research, to support a new infrageneric classification proposal and biogeographic analysis of Senna across its entire geographical distribution.
Vidal de Freitas Mansano
Team Members
Brazil
Instituto de Pesquisas do Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro
Alexandre Gibau de Lima
Brazil
Instituto de Pesquisas do Jardim Botânico do Rio de Janeiro / University of Gothenburg
Referee 1:
Dr. Christine Bacon
Referee 2:
Dr. Gwilym Peter Lewis
Referees
Scoring Rubric
Reviewer name:
1. Collection generation/improvement/maintenance (10 points available total)
(1a) contribution of physical and/or digital images of specimens (10 points)
or
(1b) infrastructure improvements including enhanced access to the physical collections, database development, database enhancement, digitization (10 points)
or
(1c) improvements to the physical collections (for example, better folders, better glue, paper, pest management, storage systems) (10 points)
or
(1d) distribution of duplicates (or orphan collections) to other regional or international herbaria (10 points)
2. Methods and funding consistency (10 points)
How well do the methods and funds requested match the effort needed to achieve the objectives?
3. Perceived need (10 points)
Score Small Collections Initiative applications here [30 points total]
(see below for Taxonomy and Systematics rubric)
Initiative for this application:
Taxonomic and Systematic Initiative
Reviewers should assign a score of 1 to 10 to each of the following three items (1 being poorly implemented, 10 superbly planned), plus a one-sentence comment detailing the score.
1. Originality of the proposal (10 points)
How well does the proposal advance knowledge in terms of a biodiversity perspective as well as from a taxonomic and systematic perspective?
Reviewers should assign a score of 1 to 10 to each of the following three items (1 being poorly implemented, 10 superbly planned), plus a one-sentence comment detailing the score.
Score Taxonomy and Systematics applications here [50 points total]
(see above for Small Collections Initiative rubric)
2. Training (10 points available total)
(2a) Training of staff and students (10 points)
or
(2b) Outreach and/or community activities (10 points)
This proposal scores:
/10
This proposal scores:
/10
This proposal scores:
/10
This proposal scores:
/10
This proposal scores:
/10
This proposal scores:
/10
5. Training (10 points total)
(5a) Training of staff and students (10 points)
or
(5b) Outreach and/or community activities (10 points)
4. Qualification of the team (10 points)
Based on reference letters and CVs
3. Perceived need (10 points total)
(3a) Demonstrated need and discussion of threat and/or understudied taxa (10 points)
or
(3b) Vanishing taxonomic expertise (10 points)
This proposal scores:
/10
This proposal scores:
/10
Flowering plants
Cost: $
10000
