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
The value of herbarium collections for determining the coverage by protected areas of important sites for mountain biodiversity
Project summary:
The JRAU herbarium, which is already considered a valuable resource for ethnobotanical, anatomical and molecular research; is envisioned to also become an important mountain research resource. However, for the herbarium to not only be accessible but also expanded, the specimens need to be georeferenced and digitized; as well as properly curated. There is a need for a designated herbarium technician who can take on the responsibility of curating and digitizing the JRAU collection to ensure that it can be used as a research tool for multidisciplinary projects in the future.
Ashton Welcome
Team Members
South Africa
University of Johannesburg, JRAU
Referee 1:
Mbali Mkhize
Referee 2:
Shanelle Ribeiro
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:
Small Collections 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: $
6262
