top of page

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

Biogeographic insights into the Mexico-eastern North America disjunction using herbariomics

Project summary:

Asteraceae, one of the largest plant families, remains understudied despite its importance. Here, we advance densely sampled species-level phylogenomic studies in two genera of Asteraceae representing local radiations in the Americas. We use these two clades as model systems to advance studies of the eastern North America–Mexico disjunction.

Sushil Dahal

Team Members

United States of America

Mississippi State University

Carolina M. Siniscalchi

United States of America

Mississippi State University

Ryan Folk

United States of America

Mississippi State University

Referee 1:

Dr. Benoit Loeuille

Referee 2:

Dr. Gustavo Heiden

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

bottom of page