top of page

Small Collections Grant

This page is used to provide assessment scores for each  grant application assigned to you. Please use the rubric below the grant details to enter your assessment scores and any notes you wish to include.
Please note that all scores entered must be whole numbers (no decimals), or you will be unable to save this form.

Gary A. Fewless (UWGB) Herbarium Specimen Imaging and Digitization

wefferlk@uwgb.edu

United States of America

Database, Digitally image

Cost (USD): 

2000

UWGB

University of Wisconsin–Green Bay

Objective:

The Fewless Herbarium houses ~40,000 vascular plant specimens, mainly from Wisconsin. The collection is strong in Carex, other Cyperaceae, and other wetland plants. Label data are mostly entered into a local database (partly available through WisFlora, the Online Flora of Wisconsin). We are preparing to upload data to the Consortium of Midwest Herbaria (CMH). To improve access, we will photograph and upload high-resolution images, with locality and label metadata, to CMH. The project will also provide training to undergraduate and graduate students in digitization and data management.

Timetable:

Harris and Marsico (2017) estimate that one person working ~10 hours per week can digitize 20,000 specimens in 115 weeks (or 2.4 years). This includes pre-digitization curation, imaging, databasing, and uploading of data to an accessible portal.

At ~40 hours per week, including student help and curator project management, and for a collection of about 40,000 specimens, we expect the digitization effort to take approximately 58 weeks, or about 14.5 months. Assuming that the herbarium digitization process will take place only during the school year, we can begin the digitization project in January of 2021, work until May 2021, begin again in September 2021 and be complete by May of 2022.

Literature Cited:
Harris, K. M., & Marsico, T. D. (2017). Digitizing specimens in a small herbarium: A viable workflow for collections working with limited resources. Applications in plant sciences, 5(4), 1600125.

Scoring Rubric

Reviewer's name:

Collection Improvement (max. 120 points)

​​

  • Facilitating access to the physical collections by digitization (e.g., data entry, setting up database structure with an outline of the platform to be used, purchasing equipment, and imaging specimens) – up to 30 points.

  • Enhancing physical collections by improving the conservation status of specimens in the herbarium (e.g., better folders, protecting covers, mounting paper, labeling, etc.) – up to 30 points.

  • Curating specimens (e.g., updating families, species identification, identifying types) – up to 20 points.

  • Increasing our understanding of the flora or funga by making new herbarium specimens available, such as processing of backlog or collecting and mounting of new specimens from understudied sites – up to 20 points.

  • Securing collections by distribution of duplicates (or orphan collections) to other regional or international herbaria or shipping endangered collections to another herbarium – up to 20 points.

This proposal scores:

/120

Methods & Funding (max. 40 points)

​

  • Match between the proposed budget and methods for the aims described – up to 10 points.

  • Perceived need, the extent to which the project will benefit from IAPT funding: e.g., due to active floristic work or contribution to poorly collected sites, due to threatened conditions of collections, and for the degree of involvement of others (outreach and education). We give more points for herbaria in low- and middle-income countries – up to 20 points.

  • Sharing duplicate specimens with other herbaria – up to 10 points.

This proposal scores:

/40

Broader Impacts (max. 40 points)

​

  • Degree of regional importance of the collection or the taxonomic importance of the targeted collection – up to 10 points.

  • The project will yield durable benefits (specimens, digitized metadata, databases, websites) – up to 15 points.

  • The project involves outreach/mentoring and broad dissemination – up to 15 points.

This proposal scores:

/40

Proposal

​

Year of last successful SCG application:

Has applicant applied for SCG before?:

​

Plan:

With a Small Collections Grant, we can buy equipment to obtain high-quality images of specimens and store and back up data. Our Budget includes a custom lightbox with integrated camera stand, a digital camera, and two external hard drives. The lightbox, designed by the Director of Biodiversity Informatics at Botanical Research Institute of Texas (BRIT), is economical, durable, and provides even and reliable lighting for high-quality photographs (J. Best, BRIT, personal communication). The selected camera is mid-range but of sufficient quality for high-resolution images (Harris and Marsico 2017). Data will be stored on UWGB OneDrive cloud storage and backed up on external hard drives kept on- and off-site.

Barcodes and a barcode scanner are funded through the Cofrin Center for Biodiversity (CCB), approved by Director Bob Howe (50,000 barcodes and scanner ~$1300).

Funding from the CCB will cover student help in digitization (the equivalent of 40 student hrs/wk). Additional funding for a graduate student Herbarium intern is being pursued. The Herbarium Curator, PI Keir Wefferling, will manage the digitization effort and will be responsible for uploading data to CMH.

Digitization comprises these steps (based on Harris and Marsico, 2017):
Pre-digitization and imaging:
1. Check nomenclature, and annotate if needed
2. Apply barcodes
3. Image specimens

Databasing and dissemination:
1. Upload images
2. Enter label information (already mostly complete)
3. Export to CMH, hosted by S

Institution:

IH Code:

Country:

Target areas:

Applicant First Name/s:

email:

​

"Other" target:

Keir Wefferling

​

Applicant Last Name/s:

bottom of page