FY 2001 Innovative proposal 200100800
Contents
Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary
Reviews and Recommendations
Additional documents
| Title | Type |
|---|---|
| 22013 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Genetic sex of chinook salmon in the Columbia River Basin |
| Proposal ID | 200100800 |
| Organization | University of Idaho (UI) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Dr. James J. Nagler |
| Mailing address | Department of Biological Sciences, University of Idaho Moscow, ID 83844-3051 |
| Phone / email | 2088854382 / jamesn@uidaho.edu |
| Manager authorizing this project | Dr. Larry Forney, University of Idaho |
| Review cycle | FY 2001 Innovative |
| Province / Subbasin | Systemwide / Systemwide |
| Short description | Determine with molecular tests whether wild chinook salmon are correctly expressing their genetic sex, and assess the incidence of males with abnormal numbers of Y-chromosomes. Over the 4-year sampling period assess these effects on breeding populations. |
| Target species | chinook salmon |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2001 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 1.25; PI (25%) and graduate student (100%) | $18,666 |
| Fringe | 28.5%-full-time employee; 1.0%-graduate student | $920 |
| Supplies | molecular biology reagents; lab consumables | $7,000 |
| Travel | sample collection; scientific meetings | $2,500 |
| Indirect | 47% UI Indirect Cost Rate; assess 47% on first $25,000 of each subcontract; graduate fees excluded | $29,650 |
| Capital | $0 | |
| PIT tags | $0 | |
| Subcontractor | # of tags: G. Thorgaard (WSU) and D. Dauble (Battelle) | $34,000 |
| Other | graduate fees; repairs and maintenance; publication costs | $7,000 |
| $99,736 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2001 cost | $99,736 |
| Total FY 2001 budget request | $99,736 |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
This is an innovative proposal because it addresses a newly recognized critical uncertainty in the Hanford Reach fall chinook stock and proposes to use a new genetic assay technique to do so. It is also a high priority project as it addresses a critical question about population genetic structure in the Hanford Reach and other chinook stocks. The authors' preliminary data show surprising evidence of sex-reversal (some genetic males are functional females) in Hanford-Reach-spawning wild chinook, apparently the result of some environmental insult (e.g., EDC's, exposure to pesticides). The data are intriguing and worrisome. Half the offspring of the sex-reversed fish will be normal males, but half will be YY males, capable of producing only sons, disproportionately increasing the ratio of males to females in the next generation, an accelerating increase if the sex-reversal continues in each generation. The effect would be a decreasing proportion of normal females and decreasing reproductive fitness, a serious barrier to recovery. It's clearly important to find out if other stocks of wild spawning chinook are affected, and it's important to find out if YY males are indeed present. The region needs to know the extent of the genetic sex reversal phenomenon.Comment:
Comment:
Comment:
Comment:
Comment: