Sir — The discovery of the purple orpignose frog Nasikabatrachus sahyadrensiswas recently reported by two groups (seeNature 425, 711–714; 2003, and CurrentScience 86, 211–216; 2004). The solemember of the family Nasikabatrachidae,this creature evolved some 50 millionyears earlier than any other known frog in India.

Remarkably, the frog was well known tolocal people, suggesting that science doesnot pay enough attention to local knowledge.

This ‘new’ discovery was the culminationof many field studies on herpetofauna thatgained momentum during the 1990s in the

Western Ghats. In a News and Views article,“The coelacanth of frogs” (Nature 425,669–670; 2003), Blair Hedges decries thepolicy carried out by some governments of restricting foreigners’ access tobiodiversity hot spots, and considers this an impediment to the discovery ofrare and endangered species.

However, both of the groups whoarrived at these results relied minimally on Western expertise and infrastructure.There is still a need for dedicatedmolecular-genetics facilities for ecologyand evolutionary biology in developingcountries. Building local capacity and

correspondence

NATURE | VOL 428 | 1 APRIL 2004 | www.nature.com/nature 467

infrastructure may be the best way toaccelerate the discovery of new species inremote areas, and this is where responsiblescientists must focus their efforts.

The purple frog also has importantconservation implications. Inundation oflarge chunks of valley forests in the WesternGhats by dam projects could spell disasterto this ancient amphibian and many otherendemic taxa. Nasikabatrachus can be usedas a flagship to promote the conservationof important habitats in the region.Ramesh K. Aggarwal Centre For Cellular And Molecular Biology,Uppal Road, Tarnaka, Hyderabad 500 007, India

Diversity project takestime but reaps rewardsSir — Your News Feature on the HapMapproject (Nature 425, 758–759; 2003)characterizes the Human GenomeDiversity Project (HGDP) as an “ill-fatedexercise” that “never got off the ground”.This is not accurate. The birth of theHGDP required time and perseverancebecause of misunderstandings during itsdevelopment, which led to a 1997 reviewby the US National Research Council. Thisreviewing committee was persuaded of thescientific merit of human genome diversityprojects, while also recognizing the ethicaland legal challenges implicit in studies ofhuman variation.

Their faith in the HGDP has beenrewarded. Since April 2002 a collection of more than 1,000 DNA samples from 51 populations representing most ofthe world’s genome variation has beenavailable to non-profit research laboratoriesthrough a collaboration between theHGDP and the Fondation Jean Dausset-CEPH in Paris (see www.cephb.fr/HGDP-CEPH-Panel).

All samples used for this resource werecollected with proper informed consent;the privacy of the persons volunteeringthese samples remains protected. Since1997, the HGDP has developed andpromoted the best legal practices availablefor studying indigenous populations.

Within months of its public release, theHGDP–CEPH resource became the basis ofthe most comprehensive description of thegenetic structure of human populationsever undertaken (N. A. Rosenberg et al.Science 298, 2381–2385; 2002). Thispublication, which was not focused on any clinical outcome, was selected as thebest biomedical publication of 2002 by The Lancet.

An enlarged HGDP collection wouldenhance research on the history andstructure of human populations from allparts of the world, allowing researchers to characterize the global variation in anygenetic sequence of interest. This work isuseful to both evolutionary and medicalstudies. Identifying the genetic bases of complex diseases (the focus of theHapMap project) and of variation inresponse to environmental exposures and to drugs requires an understanding of genomic variation among unaffectedindividuals (controls) of similar ancestry to affected individuals.

Defining appropriate controlpopulations for modern genomic analysisis still in its infancy. It can be helped bycontinuing political and financial supportfor HGDP resources.Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza Department of Genetics,Stanford University School of Medicine,Stanford, California 94305, USA

Small changeSir — Changes to the way in which theMedical Research Council (MRC)distributes funds in the United Kingdomare indeed welcome, as is any increase inthe medical research budget (Nature 427,665; 2004). However, to put the latter pointinto perspective, the entire MRC budget isnot much more than the increase ofUS$729 million proposed by PresidentGeorge Bush for the US National Institutesof Health budget in fiscal year 2005. Onthis point, the best one can say is that avery small pie is now merely small.Stephen E. MossDivision of Cell Biology, Institute of Ophthalmology,University College London, Bath Street,London EC1V 9EL, UK

Irrelevance, buzzwords,coffee: it’s the virtual PISir — Several graduate students would like to suggest a modest proposal to theauthors of the recent article “Functionalgenomic hypothesis generation andexperimentation by a robot scientist”(Nature 427, 247–252; 2004).

We’ve been doing a little research ofour own and have generated an excitinghypothesis: we can build a Virtual Principal Investigator.

The software platform will consist ofa tiny amount of background knowledgeabout a completely different system fromthe one being actively investigated, abuzzword-invention engine, coffee-consumption apparatus, a grant-writingnode and a cat-o’-nine-tails that will tieeverything together.

For much less money than an actualinvestigator, we created a machine thatresides in an office, drinking coffee at asteady rate. At bi-monthly intervals, theVirtual Principal Investigator spits outgrants that are derivatives of highlysuccessful grants from the past. Betweenthese time points, it will play an endlessloop of inspirational messages and test the effectiveness of the whip as a methodof controlling subservient organisms.

Initial tests of our Virtual PrincipalInvestigator have revealed no differencesfrom our existing model of an investigativescientist, but we have yet to perform anexperiment that was not naive or random.We look forward to discussing our resultswith you.Several non-robot scientists (names supplied)Department of Biological Chemistry and MolecularPharmacology, Harvard Medical School,240 Longwood Avenue, Boston,Massachusetts 02115, USA

Ancient frog could spearhead conservation effortsNewly discovered, this unique creature is already under threat from dam projects.

1.4 corresp 467 MH 29/3/04 6:56 pm Page 467

© 2004 Nature Publishing Group

© 2004 Nature Publishing Group