COMMENTS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MS THESIS PROPOSAL OF EZEKIEL
SALINAS
Comments during the previous proposal defense held on 17 July 2023
Item
No.
Summarized Comments
Comments
made by
Actions
Undertaken
1
The proposal seems
vague. What do you want
to assess? Do note that a
watershed is a relatively
larger patch of ecosystem.
The scope of your
proposal is too broad.
Please narrow down your
title and objectives
trickling down to an
original and doable study.
Sir Deign
The topic was
narrowed down
to the
distribution/diver
sity of
macroinvertebrat
es along the
Bued River.
Referring to the comment
of Deign, have you read
some related studies that
will support your proposal
of using selected
parameters (of a
watershed) to frame
refugia/refuge?
Also, please reconsider
your selection of sampling
stations.
Looking at the 19 stations
would too much (re:
geographical
interspersions)
Sir Rom
2
Other underlying
parameters
(external,
abiotic) shall
support the
macroinvertebrat
e study.
Already removed
the term refugia
as it is deemed
too broad. The
use of refugia
can be barely
supported by the
limited studies
on
macroinvertebrat
es of montane
stream
environment.
There shall only
be 5 sampling
stations to be
considered, with
site accessibility
and
considerable
substrate as
Remarks from
the Adviser / the
Reader
criteria of
selection.
3
Why did you use the term
refugia? What are you
trying to imply with it on
watersheds? Establishing
refugia varies per
taxonomic group
(example: caves are
refuge/refugia of selected
native bats) Please be
specific.
Sir Don/ Ma’am
Liezel
You may reconsider if the
inclusion of socioeconomic
survey is still necessary.
The study will
only account the
river system
water quality
using
macroinvertebrat
e assemblages
as a primary
parameter
(complementary
with the
established
secondary
datasets from
public sources).
The study shall
be conducted
not to establish
areas of
ecosystem
refugia but to be
able to
determine
refuges
(functional
ecosystem that
can
accommodate
the subsistence
of
macroinvertebrat
es).
Omitted the
inclusion of
ecosystem
valuation in the
assessment of
Bued
Ecosystem.
4
Are you proposing a study
which is already being
implemented by the
DENR? Do you intend to
Ma’am Rose
Clarified the
scope and
delimitations of
the study.
adopt only secondary
datasets?
5
There shall be a closed
discussion by the Thesis
Committee regarding the
approval of his proposal. It
is up to Ma’am Zen and Sir
Aris.
Primary
observation and
data collection
will only be
applied for
macroinvertebrat
es assemblage’
whereas, abiotic
factors (other
environmental
variables)
derived from
secondary
sources will only
support the
inferences (on
macroinvertebrat
es of Bued
River).
Ma’am Meijei
Major revision of
the proposal:
After the proposal (in the period of consultations for the revision of the proposal)
The topic was changed by the proponent to “Understanding the Longitudinal Distribution
Patterns of Macroinvertebrates along the WQMA- Bued River System”
6
The intention of selecting a
study site has to be well
discussed in the
Introduction. Also, avoid
pre-emptive statements
especially if not
accompanied by proper
citations.
Please revise by removing
WQMA in the topic/title.
The proposal must be
properly packaged in such
a way that the essence of
research novelty is
conspicuously stated.
Please ensure that you are
Ma’am Zen
The introduction
has been
revised to
discuss the
macroinvertebrat
es along Bued
River as the
main subject of
the study;
WQMA is
clarified in the
(intro) discussion
as an existing
clearcut
mechanism of
conserving/reha
proposing a study that is
not a repetition of
mandated functions of the
government.
Change the title to
“MACROINVERTEBRATE
ASSEMBLAGES AS
INDICATOR OF WATER
QUALITY ALONG
SELECTED SITES IN
BUED RIVER, BENGUET,
PHILIPPINES”.
Consider reading the study
of Azis & Abas (2021)
bilitating the
Bued River. The
intention of
proposing the
study is to
support the
effective
implementation
of WQMA.
If ever approved
and successfully
implemented,
the study on
macroinvertebrat
e assemblage
along Bued
River will provide
essential
baseline on
up-to-date status
of the Bued
River Ecosystem
vis-a-vis (or in
relationship) to
its prevailing
ambient
environmental
conditions.
The study of
Azis & Abas
(2021) has been
considered in
the conceptual
framework of the
proposed study.
Azis & Abas
(2021) solely
assessed an
entire river
ecosystem/a
protected
watershed area
in Malaysia by
deriving
macroinvertebrat
es distribution
and diversity.
External abiotic
and
environmental
factors were only
used as
determinants or
supporting
parameters to
understand
ecological
status.
7
Again, the research matrix Sir Aris
has to be properly filled out
so to be able to present a
clear direction of your
proposal.
You had presented a very
broad scope of thesis. I
would like to remind you
that hypothesis testing has
to be doable and distinct.
The research
matrix has been
revised to state
the central
ecological
concept to be
employed in the
study.
The classic
River Continuum
Concept
(Vannote et al.,
1980) will be
considered in
the study of
diversity and
distribution of
macroinvertebrat
es along the
Bued River.
Standard
abundance/
diversity metrics
shall be carefully
studied using the
framework of
partitioned
biological
aggregation/distr
ibution along a
river continuum.
Further,
discussion on
river continuity
and patch
dynamics shall
be included to
characterize
spatial/ecologica
l heterogeneity.