S
Stuart Wilson
Guest
That the SAA provide ?3000 of sponsorship (?1000 per year for 3 years) to part fund a PhD student whose research project would be to identify the genetic markers that uniquely identify the cyprinid species. With sponsorship from a recognised body such as the SAA the student should be able to obtain a NERC grant for the research.
Without having seen anything wriiten down, I cannot see this idea as a goer at all.
Firstly, I would have thought that with modern molecular techniques, developing a method to allow cyprinid hybrids to be identified would be a piece of academic work that is almost trivial. I cannot see it forming the basis of a PhD thesis. Given the right support, a bright student could probaly have a good stab at it over the summer vacation. There may be huge complications that I don't know about, but I would be interested to see the proposal.
Secondly, NERC studentships are not easy things to come by. There is a huge literature on hybridastion in fish - some very interesting studies of hypridisation amongst wild Telapeid fish in Lake Victoria were done by British Fisheries Scientists back in the days of Empire.
To have any real chance of success with NERC, a propsal would have to demonstrate detailed knowledge of this early work and stress why the applicants feel it is important to undertake further studies. There would have to be a clear objective that is of real importance to the scientific discipline as a whole. Simply being able to identify hybrids is very unlikely to be considered worthwhile. I am sure Barrie Rickards will agree with me, that most professional academic scientists find it very difficult to write good proposals, it is a huge task that requires much effort and a substantial background experience. What's more, the lack of money means that many (if not most) good proposals are not funded simply on financial ground. It is not that unusual to spend 2 - 3 months putting together a good proposal, for it to receive excellent support from all of the external referees, but for it to fail simply because the agency does not have the money to fund all alpha rated projects.
Given this situation I would be very surprised if a project based upon devloping a technique to allow hybrids to be identified by a Record fish commitee would every recieve a high enough priority score to be fundable. I would have thought that such a propsal would have to include a substantial comitment to study (for example) the impact of hybridisation on the environment; its significance to the the evolution of fish; or (possibly more interesting) understanding why fish such as Roach / Rudd / Bream which can have been able to remain as separate species. I know hybrids are generally sterile, but surely the odd fertile one must be produced.
Sorry - think it's a dead horse.
Without having seen anything wriiten down, I cannot see this idea as a goer at all.
Firstly, I would have thought that with modern molecular techniques, developing a method to allow cyprinid hybrids to be identified would be a piece of academic work that is almost trivial. I cannot see it forming the basis of a PhD thesis. Given the right support, a bright student could probaly have a good stab at it over the summer vacation. There may be huge complications that I don't know about, but I would be interested to see the proposal.
Secondly, NERC studentships are not easy things to come by. There is a huge literature on hybridastion in fish - some very interesting studies of hypridisation amongst wild Telapeid fish in Lake Victoria were done by British Fisheries Scientists back in the days of Empire.
To have any real chance of success with NERC, a propsal would have to demonstrate detailed knowledge of this early work and stress why the applicants feel it is important to undertake further studies. There would have to be a clear objective that is of real importance to the scientific discipline as a whole. Simply being able to identify hybrids is very unlikely to be considered worthwhile. I am sure Barrie Rickards will agree with me, that most professional academic scientists find it very difficult to write good proposals, it is a huge task that requires much effort and a substantial background experience. What's more, the lack of money means that many (if not most) good proposals are not funded simply on financial ground. It is not that unusual to spend 2 - 3 months putting together a good proposal, for it to receive excellent support from all of the external referees, but for it to fail simply because the agency does not have the money to fund all alpha rated projects.
Given this situation I would be very surprised if a project based upon devloping a technique to allow hybrids to be identified by a Record fish commitee would every recieve a high enough priority score to be fundable. I would have thought that such a propsal would have to include a substantial comitment to study (for example) the impact of hybridisation on the environment; its significance to the the evolution of fish; or (possibly more interesting) understanding why fish such as Roach / Rudd / Bream which can have been able to remain as separate species. I know hybrids are generally sterile, but surely the odd fertile one must be produced.
Sorry - think it's a dead horse.