Caudata.org

Caudata.org (http://www.caudata.org/forum/)
-   2009 Grant (http://www.caudata.org/forum/f1-general-topics/f5-general-discussion-news-members/f1184-2009-grant/)
-   -   Caudata.org Grant Poll (http://www.caudata.org/forum/f1-general-topics/f5-general-discussion-news-members/f1184-2009-grant/60174-caudata-org-grant-poll.html)

taherman 15th March 2009 01:45

Re: Caudata.org Grant Poll
 
I didn't contribute to this donation drive, as I don't feel that my personal finances as a zookeeper are my strongest asset for contributing to amphibian conservation ;)

However, to play devil's advocate to what is now a clear leader in this donation drive...

Both of the hellbender populations being assessed in #9 fall within areas which were glaciated during the Wisconsinan (most recent) glaciation event, ending roughly 10,000 years ago. Although the Susquehanna River is unique in that it contains the only hellbender population which does not reside within the Mississippi River watershed, 10,000 years is a blink of an eye in terms of salamander mitochondrial genetics and I think it is highly unlikely that much, if any, genetic differentiation would be detectable between these two rivers. Broader scope genetic analyses have already been conducted on this species (Sabatino and Routman 2008; Routman et al. 1994; Routman 1993) which, as expected, showed that the deep genetic divergences occur in the southern populations. Sabatino and Routman (2008) included samples from both the Susquehanna and Ohio River watersheds and found them to be indistinguishable. Though this study may provide data which helps the state of New York allocate it's hellbender research resources, it probably won't have a major impact on salamander (or even hellbender) conservation writ large.

Though the hellbender's plight is extremely serious, a LOT of research attention and funding (relative to other salamanders) has already been directed at this species. It is on the verge of being federally listed, which will likely result in this attention and funding being vastly increased.

In the interest of transparency, it should be pointed out that I am affiliated with one of the other applications indirectly. It wasn't an easy decision to comment in this thread, because of that potential bias, though in the end I figure that I am a caudata.org member who may have more information at his disposal than others do, and my input might be useful. My comments above stem from my experience with salamander genetics rather than a bias towards other applications. I want to see this grant be used in a way which provides the greatest salamander conservation bang for your donation buck :)

-Tim

John 15th March 2009 18:11

Re: Caudata.org Grant Poll
 
Just an fyi, there will be a second poll based on the applications that got most votes. I'm still mulling over whether or not this next poll will be decided by a committee or a poll like this one.

Jan 19th March 2009 12:06

Re: Caudata.org Grant Poll
 
John - any further thoughts on the method to be used to make the grant award?

John 19th March 2009 16:58

Re: Caudata.org Grant Poll
 
I'm going to take the applications that received 2 or more votes and form a small committee to decide which should get the grant. I'll try to have this going in the next few days.

John 19th March 2009 18:19

Re: Caudata.org Grant Poll
 
The final decision rests now with the grant committee: http://www.caudata.org/forum/f1-general-topics/f5-general-discussion-news-members/f1184-2009-grant/60485-grant-proposals-committee.html


All times are GMT. The time now is 22:28.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO
Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website & Content 2001 - 2017 Caudata.org Caudata.org Newt & Salamander Portal
(Users retain image copyrights)