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
Lichenized fungi from the CGMS Herbarium: reference for species conservation in Brazil
Project summary:
The CGMS Herbarium is proposing: (1) Improved storage conditions for species with appropriate cabinets; (2) Record the occurrence of species in the biomes present in the MS State, such as Cerrado, Chaco and Pantanal; (3) Provide images of all types deposited in CGMS in online databases; (4) Ensure ways to digitize the herbarium collection with images; (5) Improve the reference collection of lichenized fungi in the herbarium of the Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul, with good specimens collected and correctly identified; (6) Expand the collection by exchanging specimens.
Luciana Canêz
Team Members
Brazil
Universidade Federal do Mato Grosso do Sul - UFMS
Adriano Afonso Spielmann
Brazil
Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul - UFMS
Referee 1:
Frank Bungartz
Referee 2:
Arnildo Pott
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
Fungi
Cost: $
10000
