Grants & Awards
- Warder Clyde Allee Competition
- Founders Memorial Poster Paper Award
- Genesis Award for Undergraduate Research
- Diversity Fund Student Registration Fee Award
- Charles H. Turner Award
Genesis Award for the Outstanding Undergraduate Poster Presentation
First presented at the 2000 ABS Annual Meeting the Genesis Award honors the best undergraduate poster presentation at the meeting. To encourage quality presentations the following guidelines and suggestions are available for viewing. Further information, if needed, can be obtained from the chair of the Genesis Sub-committee, Matthew Wund, E-mail: email@example.com.
The applications is the last day of abstract submissions.
THE ROLE OF JUDGES
- Each poster presentation should be judged on its own merits.
- Judges should identify the strengths and weaknesses to determine "the best" student poster presentation.
- To offer encouragement and constructive criticism.
- It is important to give student presenters encouragement and constructive criticism to students to help them develop their research and presentation skills.
- Written comments for the student can be made on the lower half of your presentation evaluation sheet.
To judge each project.
While judging is often a subjective process, these criteria are offered as a common starting point for judges to begin evaluating presentations. Please, evaluate each presentation using the point values for each category. Judges may add items they feel are appropriate within a category.
- Is the study an original research question?
- Does the study add to the pool of knowledge of the subject?
- Does the rigor match the ability of the student (high school, college freshman, senior)?
Significance of the research topic (5 points):
- Did the study use the scientific method (observation, hypothesis, test, results, conclusion)?
- Was a good experimental design used?
- Did the student work independently from the supervising faculty or graduate student?
- Did the student bring a new approach to solving the problem?
Research methodology (10 points):
- Was there sufficient sampling to address the question?
- Were statistics used appropriately?
- Do the conclusions drawn by the student agree with the data?
- Appropriate use of graphs and/or tables illustrating the results?
Research results (10 points)
- Does the poster contain sections necessary for a good presentation? (abstract, methods, results,conclusion, literature cited)
- Is the study question stated clearly and completely?
- Are materials presently in an organized and visually pleasing fashion?
- Appropriate grammar, spelling, and English usage? (Can not exceed 5 points.)
- Is the literature review adequate and is the literature cited complete?
- Does the student demonstrate a mastery of the subject material?
- Did the student improve their understanding of conducting research?
- Does the student use good speaking skills and avoid distracting mannerisms?
- Prospects for future studies discussed or applications of the conclusions discussed?
- Was the presentation self-explanatory to someone with no background on the topic?
Poster presentation (15 points):
|2018||Chris Edomwande||1st Place||Lake Forest College||"The influence of predation risk on mate choice in the waxmoth Achroia grisella”click here to view poster|
|2018||Ivonne Arriola Mendietta||1st Runner-up||Florida State University||"Does courtship behavior of male lance-tailed manakins affect offspring survivability?”|
|2018||Brandi Pessman & Rosaria Rae||Honorable Mention||North Central College||"Juvenile social environment results in alternative mating strategies in Acheta domesticus males”|
|2018||Rachel Ruiz||Allee Honorable Mention||Colorado State University Pueblo||"The impact of multiple stressors on behavioral and immunological response in vinegar flies”|
|2017||Colby Behrens||1st Place||Iowa State University||"Do paper wasps have personalities? Physiological and genomic mechanisms of personality in Polistes fuscatus”|
|2017||Alexandra Dorison||Honarable Mention||University of Toronto Scarborough||“Behavioural and developmental responses of invasive Japanese redback spiders to new temperature challenges”|
|2017||Cora Anne Romanow||Honarable Mention||Lingle Lab, University of Winnipeg||“Designed to attract: ontogenetic transitions from infant distress to male courtship calls in elk”|
|2017||Veronica Gerios||Honarable Mention||University of Michigan Dearborn||“Flubs that function: an analysis of sperm removal behavior in an orb weaving spider”|
|2017||Archchana Rajmohan||Honarable Mention||University of Toronto Scarborough||“Heterospecific matings in widow spiders:
Do males use different sperm allocation strategies?”
|2016||Lauren Poon||1st Place||University of California, Davis||"Of noise and nests: Effects of anthropogenic noise on settlement patterns in Tachycineta bicolour”|
|2016||Timothy Boycott||Honaorable Mention||Vassar College||"Effects of deer browsing on sound propagation in northeastern temperate forests”|
|2015||Hailey Shannon||1st Place||Susquehanna University||“The Effects of Prenatal Predator Cue Exposure on Offspring Substrate Preferences in Wolf Spiders”|
|2015||Ciara Main||Honorable Mention||University of California at Davis||“Seasonal Changes in Male Display Performance in Response to a Robotic Female Stimulus”|
|2015||Mykell Reifer||Honorable Mention||Carleton University||“Do fight winners produce higher quality offspring?”|
|2015||David Vazques||Honorable Mention||Virginia Tech||“Examining the Relationship Between Dominance Status and Disease Transmission in House Finches”|