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
Improvement of the procedure for automated entry of images and field information to herbarium database through the development of a mobile application
Project summary:
We request support to continue with the rescue of the only herbarium in Nayarit (Mexico), to automate some of its processes through a mobile application (app) to optimize its operation even with the scarce personnel that attends it, to promote the exchange with other herbariums and to advance in the implementation of its virtual space for a greater impact on teaching, research, and dissemination of knowledge of the regional flora.
Ana María Hanan Alipi
Team Members
México
Herbario UAN de la Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit
Rosa Esthela González Flores
México
Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit
Referee 1:
Ana Rosa López-Ferrari
Referee 2:
Heike Vibrans
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
Algae, Bryophytes, Ferns and fern allies, Gymnosperms, Flowering plants
Cost: $
10000
