1

Taxonomically Indeterminate and Data Deficient

Species Research Funding 2016/17

This is a request for proposals for systematic and taxonomic research to assist in establishing DOC’s threatened species management priorities and for work to assist in establishing the threat classification status of Data Deficient (DD) taxa. Particularly strong projects that would allow removal of the Data Poor (DP) qualifier from taxa listings may also be considered. We will also consider applications related to taxa which have not yet had their conservation status formally assessed if in the opinion of the assessment panel for these funds they clearly meet the criteria for listing as Taxonomically Indeterminate and/or Data Deficient. We are calling for formal proposals, per the instructions and deadlines below.

All definitions and criteria are provided by the New Zealand Threat Classification System manual (Townsend et al. 2008 - A total of $50000 is available for the 2016-17financial year. The funds maybe assigned to one or several projects. There is no minimum amount.

An assessment panel of relevant experts will meet to assess the applications received and assign the funds.

If more information is required, enquiries can be directed to .

1.Background information

Current NZTCS status information is available from several sources. Care is needed to ensure that the most recent listed status is cited – each group is regularly re-assessed. For most groups the current status can be found in a searchable on-line database at A few groups are not yet loaded onto that database but will be added very soon. Reports of all assessments completed since 2012 are available at table giving references for the previous(2008-11) cycle of published NZTCS lists is also provided below, but apart from mosses and some terrestrial invertebrate groups, most of these will now have been superseded.Marine fish, algae and fungi have not been re-assessed since 2005; information for those groups can be found at of Data Deficient taxa can be found in each of thesesources. Taxonomically indeterminate entities are usually listed separately in these reports; if not, they can be distinguished by having informal scientific names with an identifier in inverted commas, a number, or indicators such as “aff.” or “cf.” in the name.

These lists do not take into consideration work done since the last listing exercise, e.g., newly drafted lists which have not yet been published, or recently published research results. Therefore, some listedTaxonomically Indeterminate entities may now have names, or DD taxa may have already had work done which allows them to be moved to another category. There may also be taxa that have been newly added to DD lists. Please check with an assessment panel member (the authors of the reports for each group) if you suspect this may be the case.

2.Scope and Criteria

  • Projects on all taxonomic groups on the New Zealand Threat Classification System lists (freshwater, terrestrial and marine) will be considered. Please make sure you use the most current ranking for the group.
  • Research funded under this scheme must lead to tangible benefits to management. Thus, taxa should be threatened or potentially threatened by agents that are amenable to management intervention by DOC or its partners.
  • Projects should focus on species and entities believed to be endemic to New Zealand, or to be globally threatened with New Zealand being an important stronghold.
  • Student projects are acceptable, providing they are supervised by a reputable researcher.

Data Deficient projects:

  • As the primary outcome, projects must make a strong contribution to the goal of moving the taxon out of the Data Deficient category intoone of the otherconservation statuscategories in the New Zealand Threat Classification System (Townsend et al 2008). Official update of the Threat Classification List will occur during the standard update cycle of that List.
  • Projects should be based around survey and monitoring to identify distribution, size and health of populations and if possible population trend over time to the level required to obtain a threat ranking.Although population trend information is essential for a proper assessment, this funding cannot be committed beyond the current year, so if possible any previously surveyed sites should be revisited and their populations reassessed. If there are no previously studied sites, then an “educated guess” of rate of decline based on knowledge of ecosystem pressures and response of related species may be all that is possible.
  • Please be judicious in selection of DD species to include. There are nearly 4000 DD species on the List, and this is a limited pool of funds! Highest priority projects will be those on species thatare most likely to be in the ‘threatened’ categories (Nationally Critical, Nationally Endangered, Nationally Vulnerable), and the threats to them can be managed.

Taxonomic projects:

  • The intended outcome of funded research must be a formally published taxonomic revision in the peer-reviewed literature; i.e., any new species must be given a scientific name if the results confirm its distinct status. Projects which simply use genetic techniques to confirm the existence of an un-named entity are not usually acceptable unless there is a clear plan to follow up with formal description.
  • Often, this research will use genetic techniques, but the fund is not confined to genetics, and all techniques will be considered equally.
  • This funding is specifically for research aimed at clearly delineating formally named taxonomic units, as opposed to subpopulations or stocks, and is not for general research on species biology.

3.Process

Use the attached electronic form to create a proposal of a maximum of three pages. Send it electronically to Rod Hitchmough () by 10 October 2016. All proposers will receive individual feedback. Some general contracting advice follows in section 6. Successful proposers external to DOC will be required to complete a formal contract, usually using the “Government Lite” contract form (attached separately).

4.Timeline

10September 2016 / Call for proposals
20 October 2016 / Formal proposals due
Early November 2016 / Decisions made and feedback provided to proposers
30 November 2016 / Contract documentation completed
10 June 2017 / Final reports submitted

5.Assessment

Proposals will be assessed on the importance and urgency of the research, appropriateness of the methodology, strength of collaborators and contractors, a tangible connection to management action, and other criteria listed above. Applications may be peer-reviewed prior to approval. Taxonomic projects funded under this scheme must plan to publish a formal taxonomic description in the peer-reviewed literature (if results support this outcome) as well as more popular publications, and DD/DP research or survey results must be written up in a formal report provided before final payment is made.

Other assessment criteria are:

  • likelihood of achieving naming of species or the transfer of the species off the Data Deficient list, including expertise of the survey team
  • balance across the taxonomic groups
  • appropriateness of the methodology
  • cost
  • number of species included
  • likelihood that the species will be in the Threatened categories (Nationally Critical, Nationally Endangered, Nationally Vulnerable), and endemic or globally threatened
  • likelihood that the species will be threatened by agents that are amenable to management intervention.

6.Reporting

The report must cover at least: methods, findings and fully justified recommendations for threat rank changes if the results justify them. For Data Deficient species survey reports is important to include where you searched and found nothing too.

7.General advice for potential Contractors

Please ensure that:quotes are realistic and include overheads, insurance etc., and items such as subcontracting genetic testing where these are applicable. Work must be completed in time for final payment to be made before the end of the financial year (30 June 2017) and evidence of completion (usually a formal report or a draft scientific paper ready for submission to a peer-reviewed journal) must be provided before the final instalment of the allotted funds can be paid out.

Contract form

For all contracts for sums less than $20 000, the “Government Lite” standard contract form will be used and the Dept. of Conservation will not enter into any negotiation over the contract form to be used in 2016-17. This reflects the low dollar value and low risk nature of these contracts. Some institutions were unwilling to use this form in the past. If you/your institution are unwilling to use this simple and straightforward form, please do not apply for this funding. If your institution has a contracts office, please check that they are willing to use this form. It is anticipated that ALL contracts offered within these Funds will be low risk; even if over $20,000 they can be based on this “Government Lite” form.

A copy of the “Government Lite” standard contract form is attached separately.

Insurance

The Contractor may be required to hold current public liability insurance (including Forest and Rural Fire insurance), to the value of at least $1 million. The universities and Crown Research Institutes (CRI) have this. Individuals, partnerships or small companies should discuss this requirement with the panel and with Area Office staff in the places field work will be carried out. These requirements should not discourage smaller operators from applying.

Health and Safety

Contractors will require a current safety plan if carrying out field work. Again, this is not a problem for the Universities or CRIs; smaller operators should discuss with panel members and DOC Area staff.

Land access

The Contractor will be required on each occasion they undertake the work in an area to contact the DOC Area Manager(s) at least five working days before undertaking field work on DOC land.

Contractors

Note that employees of a University, CRI or other company undertaking the services in “their own time” (as a private contract) are rarely covered by their employer’s safety plan, insurances, animal ethics committee or other permits. In fact, most employees have restrictions on employees undertaking such work.

Animal Ethics Committee approvals

The Contractor will be responsible for arranging any Animal Ethics Committee approvals required for services that they undertake.

8. Papers in which 2008–11 listings are still the most current.

Groups are listed alphabetically by collective common name.

Taxonomic group / Reference
Beetles / Leschen, R.A.B.; Marris, J.W.M.; Emberson, R.M.; Nunn, J.; Hitchmough, R.A.; Stringer, I.A.N. 2012: The conservation status of New Zealand Coleoptera. New Zealand Entomologist 35: 91–98.
Bryophytes (moss component only) / Glenny, D.; Fife, A.J.; Brownsey, P.J.; Renner, M.A.M.; Braggins, J.E.; Beever, J.E.; Hitchmough, R. 2011: Threatened and uncommon bryophytes of New Zealand (2010 revision). New Zealand Journal of Botany 49: 305–327.
Bugs / Stringer, I.A.N.; Hitchmough, R.A.; Larivière, M-C.; Eyles, A.C.; Teulon, D.A.J.; Dale, P.J.; Henderson, R.C. 2012: The conservation status of New Zealand Hemiptera. New Zealand Entomologist 35: 110–115.
Flies / Andrew, I.G.; Macfarlane, R.P.; Johns, P.M.; Hitchmough, R.A.; Stringer, I.A.N. 2012: The conservation status of New Zealand Diptera. New Zealand Entomologist 35: 99–102.
Hymenopterans / Ward, D.F.; Early, J.W.; Schnitzler, F-R.; Hitchmough, R.A.; Stringer, I.A.N. 2012: The conservation status of New Zealand Hymenoptera. New Zealand Entomologist 35: 116–119.
Landsnails / Mahlfeld, K.; Brook, F.J.; Roscoe, D.J.; Hitchmough, R.A.; Stringer, I.A.N. 2012: The conservation status of New Zealand terrestrial Gastropoda excluding Powelliphanta. New Zealand Entomologist 35: 103–109.
Lepidopterans / Stringer, I.A.N.; Hitchmough, R.A.; Dugdale, J.S.; Edwards, E.; Hoare, R.J.B.; Patrick, B.H. 2012: The conservation status of New Zealand Lepidoptera. New Zealand Entomologist 35: 120–127.
Lichens / de Lange, P.J.; Galloway, D.J.; Blanchon, D.J.; Knight, A.; Rolfe, J.R.; Crowcroft, G.M.; Hitchmough, R. 2012: Conservation status of New Zealand lichens. New Zealand Journal of Botany 50: 303–363.
Nematodes / Yeates, G.W.; Zhao, Z.Q.; Hitchmough, R.A.; Stringer, I.A.N. 2012: The conservation status of New Zealand Nematoda. New Zealand Entomologist 35: 128–130.
Small and poorly known invertebrate groups, including earthworms and bird lice / Buckley, T.R.; Palma, R.L.; Johns, P.M.; Gleeson, D.M.; Heath, A.C.G.; Hitchmough, R.A.; Stringer, I.A.N. 2012: The conservation status of small or less well known groups of New Zealand terrestrial invertebrates. New Zealand Entomologist 35: 137–143.
Spiders / Sirvid, P.J.; Vink, C.J.; Wakelin, M.D.; Fitzgerald, B.M.; Hitchmough, R.A.; Stringer, I.A.N. 2012: The conservation status of New Zealand Araneae. New Zealand Entomologist 35: 85–90.
Terrestrial invertebrates introduction / Stringer, I.A.N.; Hitchmough, R.A.; 2012: Assessing the conservation status of New Zealand’s native terrestrial invertebrates. New Zealand Entomologist 35: 77–84.

For groups not reviewed more recently (algae, fungi, marine fish), see