FY 2000 proposal 20044
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Endocrine Control of Ovarian Development in Salmonids |
| Proposal ID | 20044 |
| Organization | University of Idaho (UI) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Dr. James J. Nagler |
| Mailing address | Moscow, ID 83844-3051 |
| Phone / email | 2088854382 / jamesn@novell.uidaho.edu |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Mainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide |
| Short description | Study key intra-ovarian endocrine pathways in salmonids as a means to address reproductive problems in captive broodstock programs. Provide basis for technological development to diagnose sub-fertility and increase embryo viability. |
| Target species | Oncorhynchus mykiss (steelhead/rainbow trout) |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
|
Intracytoplasmic sperm injection: genetic retrieval from single sperm |
Fish Reproduction Program participant |
|
Analyzing genetic and behavioral changes during salmonid domestication |
Fish Reproduction Program participant |
|
Induction of precocious sexual maturity and enhanced egg production in fish |
Fish Reproduction Program participant |
|
Enhancement of salmonid gamete quality by manipulation of intracellular ATP |
Fish Reproduction Program participant; co-investigator |
|
Viral vaccines and effects on reproductive status |
Fish Reproduction Program participant |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
salaries: PI (2 mo); research technician and postdoctoral fellow (12 mo) |
$73,560 |
| Fringe |
28.5% for PI and professional staff |
$20,965 |
| Supplies |
consumables, reagents, plumbing supplies, fish |
$13,000 |
| Operating |
equipment repair and maintenance |
$5,000 |
| Capital |
water chillers, recirculating pumps, experimental tanks |
$10,000 |
| Travel |
annual professional meeting |
$2,000 |
| Indirect |
UI rate of 44.7% on total direct costs |
$68,625 |
| Other |
aquaculture core facility; hormone core facility; administrative core facility |
$29,000 |
| $222,150 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $222,150 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $222,150 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: None
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Do not fund.
Comments:
The proposal does not convince the reviewers that fecundity is a limiting factor in broodstock programs. It lacks convincing arguments related to its contribution to the recovery program. Reviewers are surprised that only steelhead will be used as experimental animal. It is a persuasive, well-argued proposal, and Nagler appears to be one of the "leading edges" on this topic and publishes accordingly.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Criteria all: Met? yes - Question the applicability of this research.
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Sounds like pure theoretical research. Unclear what the application is for the recovery of listed species.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
Comment:
[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting];