Information

Does anyone know if there is a term to describe the following process?

Does anyone know if there is a term to describe the following process?


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

I'm actually currently studying physics but this came up in my textbook (taken from Giancoli 7th edition section 16-10):

The random (thermal) velocities of molecules in a cell affect cloning. When a bacterial cell divides, the two new bacteria have nearly identical DNA. Even if the DNA were perfectly identical, the two new bacteria would not end up behaving in exactly the same way. Long protein, DNA, and RNA molecules get bumped into different shapes, and even the expression of genes can thus be different. Loosely held parts of large molecules such as a methyl group can also be knocked off by a strong collision with another molecule. Hence, cloned organisms are not identical, even if their DNA were identical. Indeed, there can not really be genetic determinism.

I'm aware of different biological processes that can affect gene expression but this is random kinetic motion! Would you call this one of the epigenetic mechanisms that can affect gene expression? If so it would underlie ALL epigenetic mechanisms because all molecules have random kinetic motion.


The two terms of main interest to you

Cellular noise

Cellular noise is random variability in quantities arising in cellular biology. For example, cells which are genetically identical, even within the same tissue, are often observed to have different expression levels of proteins, different sizes and structures. These apparently random differences can have important biological and medical consequences

Cellular noise was originally, and is still often, examined in the context of gene expression levels - either the concentration or copy number of the products of genes within and between cells. As gene expression levels are responsible for many fundamental properties in cellular biology, including cells' physical appearance, behaviour in response to stimuli, and ability to process information and control internal processes, the presence of noise in gene expression has profound implications for many processes in cellular biology.

There is also the term developmental noise.

Developmental noise is a concept within developmental biology in which the phenotype varies between individuals even though both the genotypes and the environmental factors are the same for all of them. Contributing factors include stochastic gene expression and other sources of cellular noise.

Developmental noise is often sounds like a synonym of cellular noise, but it is supposed to include more processes that are causing phenotypic variation then cellular noise. For example, it is common to consider "micro-environmental variation" as being part of developmental noise and not of cellular noise.

The way your phrased your question

In your question you describe only sources of cellular noise. However, you end up sayingHence, cloned organisms are not identical, even if their DNA were identical. I just want to highlight that, there are other reasons than cellular noise for which two clones differ. These include micro-environmental variance, physiological noise, epigenetic variance and macro-environmental variance (often just called environmental variance). Note that I had never encountered the term "physiological noise" before, I just made it up but I wanted to highlight that noise also happen in among cells processes, not only within cells processes.

Intro to quantitative genetics

For a short introduction to quantitative genetics and the different sources of phenotypic variance (genetic variance, environmental variance, developmental noise, etc… ) and how the concept of heritability fits into this discussion, please have a look at the post Why is a heritability coefficient not an index of how “genetic” something is?


Heterogeneous is the term you're looking for I believe.

From Wikipedia,

A material or image that is homogeneous is uniform in composition or character (i.e. color, shape, size, weight, height, distribution, texture, language, income, disease, temperature, radioactivity, architectural design, etc.); one that is heterogeneous is distinctly nonuniform in one of these qualities.


Phagocytosis Process

Cells need their daily share of food just like humans do. They do it through the phagocytosis process. This BiologyWise article explains this important process of cell biology with its examples.

Cells need their daily share of food just like humans do. They do it through the phagocytosis process. This BiologyWise article explains this important process of cell biology with its examples.

Phagocytosis is a process used by certain cells to absorb and ingest solid particles. The particles that are absorbed and ingested can be nutrient particles or bacteria. The cells capable of ingesting by the phagocytosis process are known as phagocytes.

Would you like to write for us? Well, we're looking for good writers who want to spread the word. Get in touch with us and we'll talk.

Phagocytes can be free-living unicellular organisms, such as amoeba, or they can be a part of the body cells of a multicellular organism. Phagocytes belong to the family of processes that are collectively referred to as ‘endocytosis’, consisting of all the processes that involve ingestion of material by cell.

Process of Phagocytosis

Other examples of phagocytosis include some immune system cells that engulf and kill certain harmful, infectious microorganisms, and other unwanted foreign materials. Mammalian immune system contains certain phagocytes that helps them destroy and get rid of pathogenic bacteria and other infectious organisms. In these cells, the engulfment of foreign material is facilitated by actin-myosin contractile system. It allows the cell membrane to expand in order to soak in the particle and then contract immediately, ingesting it.

Steps Involved

In case of unicellular organisms, the process of phagocytosis takes place when the organism comes in contact with nutrient particles. The phagocytes in the immune system are activated in the presence of certain bacterial cells, inflammatory cells, or other foreign bodies. Let us talk about the general steps involved in the process.

Step 1: The phagocyte gets actuated by the presence of certain particles around it. As soon as it detects a foreign particle, the phagocyte produces surface glycoprotein receptors that increase its ability to adhere to the surface of the particle.

Step 2: The phagocyte slowly attaches to the surface of the foreign particle. The cell membrane of the phagocyte begins to expand and forms a cone around the foreign particle.

Step 3: The cell membrane surrounds the foreign particle from all sides to create a vacuole, known as phagosome or food vacuole. The phagosome is then passed into the cell for absorption.

Would you like to write for us? Well, we're looking for good writers who want to spread the word. Get in touch with us and we'll talk.

Step 4: Now occurs the role of the lysosomes, which are cell structures specialized in digesting the particles that enter the cell through the cell membrane. The lysosomes break the food vacuole or phagosome into its component materials. The essential nutrients, if any, are absorbed in the cell, and the rest is expelled as waste matter. In case of the immune system, the cell creates a peroxisome, a special structure that helps the body to get rid of the toxins.

In unicellular organisms like amoeba, the process of phagocytosis is necessary for survival, as they are totally dependent on it for nutrients. Some of these organisms have adapted special traits which enable them to locate and keep a track of food particles.

Related Posts

Cell differentiation is the most common process in all growing organisms, and it starts as soon as the female egg is fertilized. So, what is that makes it so important?&hellip

Meiosis is a cell division process that occurs in two stages, resulting in the formation of four haploid gametes. The two stages of meiosis are meiosis I and meiosis II.&hellip

Of late, there has been great debate over the process of human cloning. Whether it is ethical or unethical, genetic cloning is always seen as the greatest challenge in genetic&hellip


Does anyone know if there is a term to describe the following process? - Biology

What is the difference between a living organism and a dead or inanimate organism? For example, what characteristics distinguish a living creature like a plant or animal from an inanimate object like a rock?

Over time, scientists have developed the following list of general characteristics that are used to determine whether or not an organism is "alive,"


1. Living Things are Composed of Cells
As is defined in Cell Theory, the cell is the unit of structure, physiology, and organization in living things.Every life form begins with one cell.


2. Living Things Have Different Levels of Cellular Organization
Through the process of cell division within organisms, the process of "differentiation" occurs. This means that cells will begin to change, or "differ." from one another and each cell type will perform different "jobs" such as skin cells, brain cells, nerve cells, etc.


3. Living Things Use Energy
All organisms must have a metabolic system which provides them with the energy to perform different tasks. Plants generally obtain energy from the sun through the process of photosynthesis, while animals ingest food for energy production.


4. Living Things Are Homeostatic
Homeostasis is the stable regulation of an organism's internal state. A living organism controls things like temperature, heartbeat, and hydration. Some scientists consider homeostasis to be a sub-characteristic to energy use.


5. Living Things Respond to Their Environment
Living organisms exhibit "behavior," which is in its most basic form a set of responses to various external stimuli. For example, certain plants may turn their leaves towards the sun to better obtain energy. Likewise, animals will contract away from a source of pain..


6. Living Things Grow
All living organisms grow and change. They increase in size through one of two methods - cell division and cell enlargement.Cell division is when cells divide to form new, identical cells. As the number of cells increases, the organism's overall size increases. Cell enlargement occurs when the size of the individual cells themselves increase.


7. Living Things Reproduce or Have DNA
All living organisms must be able to reproduce in order to ensure the survival of their respective species. Reproduction may be asexual (from a single parent organism) or sexual (from two parent organisms).

This characteristic used to state only that "living things reproduce." It became apparant, though, that there are exceptions to every rule. The most often cited exception to this rule was the mule! Mules are the sterile offspring of a donkey and a horse. Two mules, therefore, cannot mate and reproduce themseleves. However, mules are indeed living creatures. This characteristic therefore has been adapted to include the presence of DNA.


8. Living Things Move
All living things are capable of some degree of locomotion. This may be walking and running for animals, or the simple movement of a plant's leaves throughout the day. On the simplest level, this characteristic applies even to the movement of cells within a living organism.


9. Living Things Adapt to Their Environment
The ability of a species to survive and thrive is dependent upon organisms being able to adapt to changes in their environment. The process of evolution, in fact, can be boiled down simply to the process of change through time in response to environmental change.


10. Living Things Die
This is pretty self-explanatory. There comes a time in the lifecycle of all organisms when they die cease to exhibit the characteristics of life noted in Items 1 - 9 above.


What About Viruses?
There has been much debate about whether or not the virus should be considered a living organism. Viruses possess genes, evolve by natural selection (adapt to their environment), and can replicate themselves. On the other hand, viruses are not composed of cells, do not metabolize, and are unable to replicate without a host. At present, therefore, while viruses are generally talked about and referred to as living beings, scientists generally considered them to be in an entirely different category of their own.


Discuss this Article!
Please feel free to join the Biology forum discussion of this article here: Characteristics of Life - What is Life?

You can also follow this site on Facebook and Twitter:

Content copyright © 2021 by Deborah Watson-Novacek. All rights reserved.
This content was written by Deborah Watson-Novacek. If you wish to use this content in any manner, you need written permission. Contact BellaOnline Administration for details.


Levels of Organization of Living Things

The biological levels of organization range from a single organelle all the way up to the biosphere in a highly structured hierarchy.

Learning Objectives

Describe the biological levels of organization from the smallest to highest level

Key Takeaways

Key Points

  • The atom is the smallest and most fundamental unit of matter. The bonding of at least two atoms or more form molecules.
  • The simplest level of organization for living things is a single organelle, which is composed of aggregates of macromolecules.
  • The highest level of organization for living things is the biosphere it encompasses all other levels.
  • The biological levels of organization of living things arranged from the simplest to most complex are: organelle, cells, tissues, organs, organ systems, organisms, populations, communities, ecosystem, and biosphere.

Key Terms

  • molecule: The smallest particle of a specific compound that retains the chemical properties of that compound two or more atoms held together by chemical bonds.
  • macromolecule: a very large molecule, especially used in reference to large biological polymers (e.g. nucleic acids and proteins)
  • polymerization: The chemical process, normally with the aid of a catalyst, to form a polymer by bonding together multiple identical units (monomers).

Levels of Organization of Living Things

Living things are highly organized and structured, following a hierarchy that can be examined on a scale from small to large. The atom is the smallest and most fundamental unit of matter. It consists of a nucleus surrounded by electrons. Atoms form molecules which are chemical structures consisting of at least two atoms held together by one or more chemical bonds. Many molecules that are biologically important are macromolecules, large molecules that are typically formed by polymerization (a polymer is a large molecule that is made by combining smaller units called monomers, which are simpler than macromolecules). An example of a macromolecule is deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), which contains the instructions for the structure and functioning of all living organisms.

DNA: All molecules, including this DNA molecule, are composed of atoms.

From Organelles to Biospheres

Macromolecules can form aggregates within a cell that are surrounded by membranes these are called organelles. Organelles are small structures that exist within cells. Examples of these include: mitochondria and chloroplasts, which carry out indispensable functions. Mitochondria produce energy to power the cell while chloroplasts enable green plants to utilize the energy in sunlight to make sugars. All living things are made of cells, and the cell itself is the smallest fundamental unit of structure and function in living organisms. (This requirement is why viruses are not considered living: they are not made of cells. To make new viruses, they have to invade and hijack the reproductive mechanism of a living cell only then can they obtain the materials they need to reproduce. ) Some organisms consist of a single cell and others are multicellular. Cells are classified as prokaryotic or eukaryotic. Prokaryotes are single-celled or colonial organisms that do not have membrane-bound nuclei in contrast, the cells of eukaryotes do have membrane-bound organelles and a membrane-bound nucleus.

In larger organisms, cells combine to make tissues, which are groups of similar cells carrying out similar or related functions. Organs are collections of tissues grouped together performing a common function. Organs are present not only in animals but also in plants. An organ system is a higher level of organization that consists of functionally related organs. Mammals have many organ systems. For instance, the circulatory system transports blood through the body and to and from the lungs it includes organs such as the heart and blood vessels. Furthermore, organisms are individual living entities. For example, each tree in a forest is an organism. Single-celled prokaryotes and single-celled eukaryotes are also considered organisms and are typically referred to as microorganisms.

All the individuals of a species living within a specific area are collectively called a population. For example, a forest may include many pine trees. All of these pine trees represent the population of pine trees in this forest. Different populations may live in the same specific area. For example, the forest with the pine trees includes populations of flowering plants and also insects and microbial populations. A community is the sum of populations inhabiting a particular area. For instance, all of the trees, flowers, insects, and other populations in a forest form the forest’s community. The forest itself is an ecosystem. An ecosystem consists of all the living things in a particular area together with the abiotic, non-living parts of that environment such as nitrogen in the soil or rain water. At the highest level of organization, the biosphere is the collection of all ecosystems, and it represents the zones of life on earth. It includes land, water, and even the atmosphere to a certain extent. Taken together, all of these levels comprise the biological levels of organization, which range from organelles to the biosphere.

Biological Levels of Organization: The biological levels of organization of living things follow a hierarchy, such as the one shown. From a single organelle to the entire biosphere, living organisms are part of a highly structured hierarchy.


Websites

Teachers' Domain: Cell Transcription and Translation

Teachers' Domain is a free educational resource produced by WGBH with funding from the NSF, which houses thousands of media resources, support materials, and tools for classroom lessons.One of these resources focuses on the topics of transcription and translation.This resource is an interactive activity that starts with a general overview of the central dogma of molecular biology, and then goes into more specific details about the processes of transcription and translation.In addition to the interactive activity, the resource also includes a background narrative and discussion questions that could be used for assessment.Although the material is designated as appropriate content for grades, 9-12, it would serve as an excellent introduction to the topic for biology majors, or would be well suited for non-biology majors at the post-secondary level. See: Teachers' Domain: Cell Transcription and Translation

The DNA Learning Center's (DNALC) The Howard Hughes Medical Institute's DNA interactive (DNAi) The University of Utah's Genetic Science Learning Center

The DNA Learning Center's (DNALC) website, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's DNA interactive (DNAi) website, and the University of Utah's Genetic Science Learning Center website listed below contain excellent narrated animations describing transcription and translation. These animations are useful as a lecture supplement or for students to review on their own. The DNALC animations cover central dogma, transcription (basic and advanced), mRNA splicing, RNA splicing, triplet code and translation (basic and advanced). The DNAi modules," Reading the Code" and "Copying the Code," describe the history of the process, the scientists involved in the discovery, and the basics of the process, and also include an animation and interactive game. Particularly useful to students are the interactive animations from the University of Utah that allow one to, for example,"Transcribe/Translate a Gene"or examine the effects of gene mutation as they "Test Neurofibromin Activity in a Cell."

The DNA Learning Center's (DNALC): 3-D Animation Library
The Howard Hughes Medical Institute's DNA interactive: (DNAi): Code
The University of Utah's Genetic Science Learning Center: Transcribe and Translate a Gene

Scitable

The Nature Education website, Scitable, is a great study resource for students who want to learn more about, or are having difficulty understanding, transcription and translation. The site contains a searchable library, including many "overviews" of transcription, translation, and related topics. Students have access to a Genetics "Study Pack", which provides explanations, animations, and links to other resources.In addition, Scitable has an "Ask An Expert" feature that allows students to submit specific genetics-related questions. See: Scitable

NHGRI Talking Glossary of Genetics Terms iPhone App and Website

The Talking Glossary of Genetics Terms website and iPhone app provide an easily transportable and accessible reference for your students. Many times the unfamiliar vocabulary is the major stumbling block to student comprehension. This app/site gives them a handy reference to common terms used in describing the components involved on transcription and translation.
Talking Glossary of Genetics Terms
Talking Glossary of Genetics Terms iPhone App

University of Buffalo Case Study Collection: Decoding the Flu

This "clicker case" was designed to develop students' ability to read and interpret information stored in DNA. Making use of personal response systems ("clickers") along with a PowerPoint presentation, students follow the story of "Jason," a student intern at the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC). While working with a CDC team in Mexico, Jason is the only person who does not get sick from a new strain of flu. It is up to Jason to use molecular data collected from different local strains of flu to identify which one may be causing the illness. Although designed for an introductory biology course for science or non-science majors, the case could be adapted for upper-level courses by including more complex problems and aspects of gene expression, such as the excision of introns."
See: Decoding the Flu

Protein Synthesis Animation from Biology-Forums.com

Translation is the process of producing proteins from the mRNA. This YouTube video shows the molecular components involved in the process. It also animates how the peptide is elongated through interaction between mRNA, ribosome, tRNA, and residues. Protein Synthese Animation

The Central Dogma Animation by RIKEN Omics Science Center

The 'Central Dogma' of molecular biology is that 'DNA makes RNA makes protein'. This anime shows how molecular machines transcribe the genes in the DNA of every cell into portable RNA messages, how those messenger RNA are modified and exported from the nucleus, and finally how the RNA code is read to build proteins. Animation: The Central Dogma

A Prezi of this information can be found at: NHGRI Teacher Resouces-Central Dogma

Contributing Team of Educators:

Kari D. Loomis, Ph.D., Mars Hill College
Luisel Ricks, Ph.D., Howard University
Mark Bolt, Ph.D., University of Pikeville
Cathy Dobbs, Ph.D., Joliet Junior College
Changhui Yan, Ph.D., North Dakota State University
Solomon Adekunle, Ph.D., Southern University

Teachers' Domain: Cell Transcription and Translation

Teachers' Domain is a free educational resource produced by WGBH with funding from the NSF, which houses thousands of media resources, support materials, and tools for classroom lessons.One of these resources focuses on the topics of transcription and translation.This resource is an interactive activity that starts with a general overview of the central dogma of molecular biology, and then goes into more specific details about the processes of transcription and translation.In addition to the interactive activity, the resource also includes a background narrative and discussion questions that could be used for assessment.Although the material is designated as appropriate content for grades, 9-12, it would serve as an excellent introduction to the topic for biology majors, or would be well suited for non-biology majors at the post-secondary level. See: Teachers' Domain: Cell Transcription and Translation

The DNA Learning Center's (DNALC) The Howard Hughes Medical Institute's DNA interactive (DNAi) The University of Utah's Genetic Science Learning Center

The DNA Learning Center's (DNALC) website, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's DNA interactive (DNAi) website, and the University of Utah's Genetic Science Learning Center website listed below contain excellent narrated animations describing transcription and translation. These animations are useful as a lecture supplement or for students to review on their own. The DNALC animations cover central dogma, transcription (basic and advanced), mRNA splicing, RNA splicing, triplet code and translation (basic and advanced). The DNAi modules," Reading the Code" and "Copying the Code," describe the history of the process, the scientists involved in the discovery, and the basics of the process, and also include an animation and interactive game. Particularly useful to students are the interactive animations from the University of Utah that allow one to, for example,"Transcribe/Translate a Gene"or examine the effects of gene mutation as they "Test Neurofibromin Activity in a Cell."

The DNA Learning Center's (DNALC): 3-D Animation Library
The Howard Hughes Medical Institute's DNA interactive: (DNAi): Code
The University of Utah's Genetic Science Learning Center: Transcribe and Translate a Gene

Scitable

The Nature Education website, Scitable, is a great study resource for students who want to learn more about, or are having difficulty understanding, transcription and translation. The site contains a searchable library, including many "overviews" of transcription, translation, and related topics. Students have access to a Genetics "Study Pack", which provides explanations, animations, and links to other resources.In addition, Scitable has an "Ask An Expert" feature that allows students to submit specific genetics-related questions. See: Scitable

NHGRI Talking Glossary of Genetics Terms iPhone App and Website

The Talking Glossary of Genetics Terms website and iPhone app provide an easily transportable and accessible reference for your students. Many times the unfamiliar vocabulary is the major stumbling block to student comprehension. This app/site gives them a handy reference to common terms used in describing the components involved on transcription and translation.
Talking Glossary of Genetics Terms
Talking Glossary of Genetics Terms iPhone App

University of Buffalo Case Study Collection: Decoding the Flu

This "clicker case" was designed to develop students' ability to read and interpret information stored in DNA. Making use of personal response systems ("clickers") along with a PowerPoint presentation, students follow the story of "Jason," a student intern at the Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC). While working with a CDC team in Mexico, Jason is the only person who does not get sick from a new strain of flu. It is up to Jason to use molecular data collected from different local strains of flu to identify which one may be causing the illness. Although designed for an introductory biology course for science or non-science majors, the case could be adapted for upper-level courses by including more complex problems and aspects of gene expression, such as the excision of introns."
See: Decoding the Flu

Protein Synthesis Animation from Biology-Forums.com

Translation is the process of producing proteins from the mRNA. This YouTube video shows the molecular components involved in the process. It also animates how the peptide is elongated through interaction between mRNA, ribosome, tRNA, and residues. Protein Synthese Animation

The Central Dogma Animation by RIKEN Omics Science Center

The 'Central Dogma' of molecular biology is that 'DNA makes RNA makes protein'. This anime shows how molecular machines transcribe the genes in the DNA of every cell into portable RNA messages, how those messenger RNA are modified and exported from the nucleus, and finally how the RNA code is read to build proteins. Animation: The Central Dogma

A Prezi of this information can be found at: NHGRI Teacher Resouces-Central Dogma


Hardy survivors

In October 2000, a team of biologists claimed to have revived a bacterium that existed 250 million years ago, well before the age of the dinosaurs. They found the bacterium in a drop of fluid trapped in a crystal of rock salt that had been excavated from an air duct supplying a radioactive waste dump 1,850 feet (564 meters) below Earth's surface near Carlsbad, New Mexico. When the biologists drilled into the pocket of fluid in the crystal and mixed nutrients with the fluid, bacteria soon appeared. However, other scientists quickly suggested that the bacteria that grew was simply modern bacteria that had infected the crystal sample. The questioning scientists also pointed out that it would be impossible for the bacterium's DNA (a complex molecule that stores and transmits genetic information) to have survived more than a few thousand years, at best.

Regardless of the debate, bacteria have been around since the dawn of life on Earth, and they have continued to evolve. A major problem facing the medical community today is the ability of disease-causing bacteria to develop a resistance to antibiotics and other antibacterial drugs. These types of bacteria have been able to change their forms or have even been able to secrete enzymes that destroy the antibiotics. Since the

development and use of antibiotics in the 1940s, most known bacterial diseases have developed a resistance to at least one type of antibiotic.


Photosynthesis, Cellular Respiration, & Fermentation

You've already learned a little bit about photosynthesis thanks to our study of plant cells. You learned that photosynthesis happens in the chloroplasts that are found only in plant cells. Let's think about what else you've already learned.

You've already learned that there are two basic types of organisms when it comes to food: producers and consumers. Producers are able to make their own food. Consumers get the food they need by eating other organisms. You learned that only plants are producers, and that they make their own food by combining water (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2) and energy from the sun to produce sugar (C6H12O6) and oxygen (O2). This process, you learned, is called photosynthesis. In the process of making sugar, plant cells also lock some of the energy they collected from sunlight into the sugar molecule.

Okay, great. So how do cells (remember, both plant and animal cells need energy, and neither can directly use the energy provided by the sun) get the energy out of the sugar molecule? They do it with a process called cellular respiration. In cellular respiration, cells use oxygen to break the sugar molecule. That releases the energy which is then transferred to an ATP (adenosine triphosphate) molecule. ATP is the fuel that cells need for energy. And where does cellular respiration happen? As you've learned, it happens in those handy mitochondria.

So really, you already know all the basics. There are just a few details that you need to learn, and they are covered in Section 1 of Chapter 5 in your textbook and, of course, right here. Let's start with photosynthesis

Photosynthesis

If you were to look at plant cells under a microscope and compare them to animal cells, there are two things that you would notice immediately. First, you would notice the cell wall that surrounds the plant cell. You would notice it the same way that Robert Hooke noticed it. The second thing you would notice is that a plant cell is green and an animal cell is basically clear. If you were looking at a relatively large plant cell, and you were using a microscope like the ones we have at school, you would notice that not the entire plant cell was green. Instead, you would notice that there were large green objects inside of the plant cell. These large green objects, of course, are chloroplasts. And the reason that they are green is because they contain a green pigment called chlorophyll.

Have a look at this illustration from your book:

Do you notice how the chemical formula that defines photosynthesis looks a little different from the way you originally learned it? Instead of CO2 + H2O + light it shows 6CO2 + 6H2O + light. That's because chemical equations, just like math equations, have to balance. The original formula takes one carbon atom (that's how many carbon atoms are in CO2), 2 hydrogen atoms (that's how many hydrogen atoms there are in H2O), and 3 oxygen atoms (2 that are in CO2 and one that is in H2O) and turns it into glucose (which contains 6 carbon atoms, 12 hydrogen atoms, and 6 oxygen atoms) and an oxygen molecule (O2, which contains 2 oxygen atoms). That just doesn't add up! You can't magically turn 1 carbon atom from CO2 into 6 carbon atoms in C6H12O6. But if you do the math with the formula in the illustration above, you'll see that the number of atoms of carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen on both sides of the equation are correct. You will get way more practice balancing chemical equations when you study chemistry in 8th grade science.

Cellular Respiration

It is tempting to think of cellular respiration as the opposite of photosynthesis. If you look at the illustration from our book, below, you'll see why:

Do you see the way the chemical formula for cellular respiration is the reverse of the chemical formula for photosynthesis? The only real difference is that in one, the energy is sunlight and in the second, the energy is the ATP molecule. It's that reversal that makes many people think of photosynthesis and cellular respiration as being opposites. They are not! Rather, they are complementary to one another. Without photosynthesis, there would be no sugar, without which there could be no cellular respiration. On the other hand, cellular respiration produces the H2O and CO2 that are needed for photosynthesis. It's really important for you to remember that cellular respiration in eukaryotic cells takes place in the mitochondria. Both animal cells and plant cells depend on cellular respiration for their energy needs, because both animal cells and plant cells need ATP. Plant cells may be able to use the energy from the sun to make sugar, but they can't use the sun's energy as fuel. They need ATP the same way that animal cells do, and ATP can only be formed through cellular respiration. The illustration below from your book shows the way that photosynthesis and cellular respiration complement each other.

Do you see what I don't like about this illustration? Is it clear from this illustration that plant cells also have mitochondria? Not clear enough, in my opinion! So remember! Plant cells have mitochondria, too!

Fermentation

What happens when there is not enough oxygen to keep the cellular respiration reaction alive? Your book makes it seem like the answer is very simple. Let's start with the simple answer in your book. If there is not enough oxygen for cells to perform cellular respiration, they resort to another method of producing energy called fermentation. They still break down the sugar molecule to release the energy so that it can be transferred to an ATP molecule, but they do it without oxygen. In cellular respiration, CO2 and H2O are produced along with the energy. In fermentation, CO2 and something called lactic acid are produced. Just like your book explains, you've probably experienced fermentation yourself when you've had to run the Wednesday mile and you've really pushed yourself to get a good grade. You know that burning or stinging sensation that you feel in your muscles when you push yourself running? That's caused by a buildup of lactic acid in your muscles. No matter how hard your lungs and heart work to get oxygen to the cells in your leg muscles, they still aren't getting enough to produce all the energy they need through cellular respiration. So, they are forced to switch to fermentation, and lactic acid is produced.

There are some organisms that get all of their energy needs from fermentation. One common example is yeast. Yup. That same stuff that you drop into the bread maker. You should have noticed that there were lots of bubbles in the tubes containing the yeast and sugar water in our classroom. You've already seen live yeast cells in class that I projected from a microscope to the screen. A few classes got lucky and were able to see some yeast cells that were in the process of reproducing. I know you're going to be happy to hear this: yeast cells reproduce by budding! Just when you thought it was safe to forget all about budding and the pain it has caused you on past tests, it's back!

So how does yeast make bread rise? It's pretty simple, really. Bread is made mostly of flour. You probably already know that bread is "carbs", or carbohydrates. Do you remember what carbohydrates are? That's right, they are just long strings of sugar molecules. Yeast uses those sugar molecules to get the energy it needs, and in the process it creates CO2. That CO2 makes bubbles inside of the bread dough, and those bubbles make the dough get larger, or rise.

There is another way that fermentation caused by yeast is important. Grape juice also contains a lot of sugar. When yeast is added to grape juice, it uses the sugar for energy. Yes, it produces CO2, but it also produces alcohol. That's how grape juice is turned into wine!

The Global Warming Connection

Remember An Inconvenient Truth, the Al Gore documentary movie? One of the scenes in the movie showed the earth at night as photographed from space. Vice President Gore said that the large red areas were forests burning. There are plenty of naturally-occurring forest fires, but humans purposely set forests ablaze, too. In Brasil, for example, parts of the rainforest are burned to create more land for crops and housing. Think about what this means for global warming.

Global warming is caused by too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The carbon dioxide acts as a blanket. When sunlight hits the earth, it can't radiate back into space because of the carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that are present in the atmosphere. So, the earth gets hotter.

Burning forests is a double-whammy. First, removing trees means that they aren't there anymore to convert carbon dioxide into sugar and oxygen. Second, when we burn the trees, we are releasing all of the carbon dioxide that they have collected. When mitochondria combine glucose with oxygen to produce energy, they are "burning" the sugar through a process called oxidation. There are many examples of oxidation in real life. When a nail gets rusty, that's oxidation. And, of course, when something burns, that's oxidation, too. The only difference between rusting, burning, and the way that mitochondria release the energy from a glucose molecule is the speed of the reaction. Rusting is very slow oxidation and burning is very fast oxidation. So burning the sugar in the trees is just a very fast version of what mitochondria do: the sugar releases carbon dioxide and energy in the form of heat. Some trees have been alive for hundreds or even thousands of years! So when we burn them, we are releasing hundreds or thousands of years worth of "captured" carbon dioxide.

That's it, folks. If you can remember the chemical formula for both photosynthesis and cellular respiration, if you can explain how the two processes complement one another, and if you can explain what happens when there is not enough oxygen for cellular respiration, then you've learned what you need to have learned.

These videos will help you to understand photosynthesis and cellular respiration. Don't be afraid of the complicated scientific vocabulary! You will understand more than you think if you just stop once in a while and try to make a connection between what is going on in the video and what you have already learned.


Does anyone know if there is a term to describe the following process? - Biology

When writing a lab report, it is often a good idea to begin by writing the Materials and Methods section. This section is usually very straightforward, and writing it first helps many people establish the proper thought process and understanding of the work that will allow the rest of the report to flow more smoothly. Following this section, it is generally recommended to write the Results section, followed by the Discussion, and finally the Introduction. Although this strategy is only a recommendation, and although it may seem illogical at first, many have found this approach very effective for writing scientific papers.

The Materials and Methods section is a vital component of any formal lab report. This section of the report gives a detailed account of the procedure that was followed in completing the experiment(s) discussed in the report. Such an account is very important, not only so that the reader has a clear understanding of the experiment, but a well written Materials and Methods section also serves as a set of instructions for anyone desiring to replicate the study in the future. Considering the importance of "reproducible results" in science, it is quite obvious why this second application is so vital.

There are several common mistakes that are often found in the Materials and Methods section of a lab report. One major concern is deciding upon the correct level of detail. (Pechenik, p. 55) It is often very easy for a writer to get carried away and include every bit of information about the procedure, including extraneous information like the number of times heshe washed their hands during the experiment. A good guideline is to include only what is necessary for one recreating the experiment to know. Keeping this in mind will lead to a Materials and Methods section that is thoroughly written, but without the kind of unnecessary detail that breaks the flow of the writing. Another common mistake is listing all of the materials needed for the experiment at the beginning of the section. Instead, the materials and equipment utilized during the experiment should be mentioned throughout the procedure as they are used. Enough detail should be included in the description of the materials so that the experiment can be reproduced. Finally, it is generally recommended that the Materials and Methods section be written in past tense, in either active or passive voice. Many are written in third-person perspective but check with the professor to be certain what verb tense and perspective the report should use. This is demonstrated throughout the example of a well written Materials and Methods section.

Materials and Methods examples

Sample 1 : In preparing the catecholase extract, a potato was skinned, washed, and diced. 30.0 g of the diced potato and 150 ml of distilled water were added to a kitchen blender and blended for approximately two minutes. The resulting solution was filtered through four layers of cheese cloth. The extract was stored in a clean, capped container.

Four individually labeled spectrophotometer tubes were prepared using different amounts (as represented in Table 1) of the following reagents: a buffer of pH 7, a 0.1% catechol substrate, and distilled water. The wavelength of the Spectronic 20 spectrophotometer was set at 540 nm. To calibrate the specrophotometer at zero absorbance, a blank control tube prepared with no catechol substrate and labeled "tube 1" was inverted and inserted into the spectrophotometer.

It is important to note that the extract to be tested was added to each tube immediately before placing the tube into the spectrophotometer. 1.0 ml of catecholase extract was pipetted into tube 2. Tube 2 was immediately inverted and placed in the spectrophotometer. The absorbance was read and recorded for time zero (t0), the ten minute mark (t10), and each minute in between. Tube 2 was removed from the spectrophotometer and the same measurements were taken for tube 3 and tube 4 using the same protocol.

Sample 2 : A potato and a knife were obtained for this experiment. Also, distilled water, a blender, cheese cloth, a clean container with a cover, and eight spectrophotometer tubes were used. A Spectronic 20 spectrophotometer was used for this experiment, as were buffers of pHs 4, 6, 7, and 8. Catechol substrate, Parafilm coverings, KimWipes, a black pen, and pipettes were also obtained for this experiment. Finally, a pencil and pad were obtained for recording results.

Sample 3 : In preparing the catecholase extract, a potato was skinned, washed, and diced. A balance was used to obtain 30.0 g of the diced potato. 150 ml of distilled water was poured into a beaker. The water was added to the diced potato. The cover of a kitchen blender was removed. The potato and water were added to the blender. The solution smelled like potato. The cover was placed on the blender and the power button was depressed. The clock was observed until the second hand circled twice. The power button was pushed again to stop the blender. The resulting solution was filtered through four layers of cheese cloth. The extract was stored in a clean, capped container.

Explanations of the Example Links

Diced potato : In sample one the writer gives enough detail about the procedure so that is can be understood, but not so much that there is an excess of unecessary detail. (return to sample 1)

Calibrate : Calibration is a small but important detail to include in this section so that the experiment would be able to be repeated by anyone reading the report. Keep this in mind while deciding what to include in this section. (return to sample 1)

Distilled water : This example has a list of materials at the beginning which are not necessary in the materials and methods section. The body of the section should mention the materials and equipment used during the experiment so that it is not necessary to list them in order to know what was used for the procedure. (return to sample 2)

Extraneous detail : This is extraneous detail that is not needed to explain the procedure. The reader would know how to turn the blender on and off without being told that a button was pushed, and knowing that the solution smelled like potato is completely unrelated to knowing how to perform the experiment. (return to sample 3)

All citations from Pechenik, Jan A. A short guide to writing about Biology. pp. 54-102, Tufts University: Harper Collins College Publishers . 1993.


ICA Certificates are considered introductory level. This means that they are suitable for those with no experience or in an operational role and requiring some awareness level understanding of an area. They are designed for those who need to understand the fundamentals of the subject area and recognise key issues, particularly relating to risk.

Advanced certificate courses are considered Intermediate and are d esigned for those new to the discipline or in a junior role who want to enhance their knowledge & skills.

Advanced Certificates are a natural stepping stone between Certificate graduates before completing an ICA Diploma.


Long Term Research in Environmental Biology (LTREB)

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):

August 2, Annually Thereafter

IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTES

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the revised NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) (NSF 15-1). The PAPPG is consistent with, and, implements the new Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards (Uniform Guidance) (2 CFR § 200). NSF anticipates release of the PAPPG in the Fall of 2014 and it will be effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after December 26, 2014. Please be advised that proposers who opt to submit prior to December 26, 2014, must also follow the guidelines contained in NSF 15-1.

This revision makes the following changes:

  • Adds language describing review of international collaborations with NERC (UK) and BSF (Israel).
  • Clarifies requirements for exercising a preliminary proposal bypass or full proposal deferral.
  • Provides updated instructions for submission of Research in Undergraduate Institutions (RUI) proposals.
  • Clarifies requirements in the preliminary proposal related to: inclusion of results from prior support, project summary length, and format of the project description.
  • Clarifies guidance for making changes between invitation and full proposal submission
  • Updates instructions for the submission of a combined "Collaborators & Other Affiliations" document.
  • Updates instructions for the submission by email of a "Consolidated Personnel List."

SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

General Information

Long Term Research in Environmental Biology (LTREB)

Synopsis of Program:

The Long Term Research in Environmental Biology (LTREB) Program supports the generation of extended time series of data to address important questions in evolutionary biology, ecology, and ecosystem science. Research areas include, but are not limited to, the effects of natural selection or other evolutionary processes on populations, communities, or ecosystems the effects of interspecific interactions that vary over time and space population or community dynamics for organisms that have extended life spans and long turnover times feedbacks between ecological and evolutionary processes pools of materials such as nutrients in soils that turn over at intermediate to longer time scales and external forcing functions such as climatic cycles that operate over long return intervals.

The Program intends to support decadal projects. Funding for an initial, 5-year period requires submission of a preliminary proposal and, if invited, submission of a full proposal that includes a 15-page project description. Proposals for the second five years of support (renewal proposals) are limited to an eight-page project description and do not require a preliminary proposal.

Continuation of an LTREB project beyond an initial ten year award will require submission of a new preliminary proposal that presents a new decadal research plan.

Successful LTREB proposals address three essential components:

A Decadal Research Plan that clearly articulates important questions that cannot be addressed with data that have already been collected, but could be answered if ten additional years of data were collected. This plan is not a research timeline or management plan. It is a concise justification for ten additional years of support in order to advance understanding of key concepts, questions, or theories in environmental biology.

Core Data: LTREB proposals require that the author has studied a particular phenomenon or process for at least six years up to the present or for long enough to generate a contemporary time series that contains six data points. These data constitute Core Data on which the new project should be based, and analysis of these data should generate new questions, on the same phenomenon or process, that provide the focus of the LTREB project.

A Plan for Data Management and Dissemination that details information management and plans for data sharing with the broader research community and the interested public. Data from long-term research projects have value beyond the peer-reviewed and other publications generated by the investigators collecting the data.

Specific review criteria for LTREB proposals and renewals are explained in Section VI of the current program solicitation. Prospective applicants are advised to read this solicitation carefully.

All proposals submitted to the LTREB program are co-reviewed by participating Clusters in the Division of Environmental Biology: Ecosystem Science, Population and Community Ecology, and Evolutionary Processes. Proposals must address topics supported by these programs. Researchers who are uncertain about the suitability of their project for the LTREB Program are encouraged to contact the cognizant program director.

Beginning in January 2014, the Division of Integrative Organismal Systems (IOS) will no longer accept proposals submitted to the LTREB solicitation. Long-term projects that address questions of a) development, mechanisms, adaptive value, or evolutionary history of behavior, b) mechanisms and processes mediating antagonistic and beneficial symbioses, c) growth, development, stress adaptation mechanisms, energetics and metabolism, or other physiological processes, and d) structural and physiological traits that underlie organisms' capacities to live in various environments will no longer be supported through LTREB. Core IOS programs supporting all of these areas will entertain proposals based on long-term data http://nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=503623&org=IOS&from=home.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

Saran Twombly, Program Director, Division of Environmental Biology, telephone: (703) 292-8133, email: [email protected]

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Continuing Grant

Estimated Number of Awards: 6 to 8

Anticipated Funding Amount: $750,000 to $1,500,000

per year, pending availability of funds

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Who May Serve as PI:

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 2

All LTREB proposals are reviewed by one or more of the appropriate, participating core programs in the Division of Environmental Biology. The Division limits the number of preliminary proposals on which a given individual may participate, as PI, co-PI, or sub-award Lead, to no more than two in any year. "PI, co-PI, or lead senior investigator of a subaward" refer to the role an individual would play in a full proposal including all parts of a collaborative proposal. Exercised options to defer an Invited Full Proposal submission or bypass subsequent Preliminary Proposal submission count against this limit. Proposals submitted to the Division for joint consideration with the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) of the United Kingdom or the U.S.&ndashIsrael Binational Science Foundation (BSF) count against this limit. Participating in a proposal as other senior personnel does not count toward this limit.

Submission of an LTREB preliminary proposal in response to this solicitation will count toward the annual limit of 2 submissions per individual to the Division. An investigator who submits an LTREB preliminary proposal that is appropriate for review by one of the participating clusters in DEB will be allowed to participate, as PI co-PI, or sub-award Lead, in only one other preliminary proposal submitted to DEB.

LTREB renewal proposals for the second five years of funding do not count toward this limit, because preliminary proposals are not required for these renewals. If an individual is eligible to submit an LTREB renewal proposal, he or she may participate in up to 2 preliminary proposals submitted to the Division in the same year.

It is the responsibility of the submitters to confirm that the research team is within these eligibility guidelines. Changes to the team post-submission to meet eligibility limits will not be allowed.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

  • Letters of Intent: Not required
  • Preliminary Proposals: Submission of Preliminary Proposals is required. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
  • Full Proposals:
    • Full Proposals submitted via FastLane: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide, Part I: Grant Proposal Guide (GPG) Guidelines apply. The complete text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg.
    • Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov Guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide)

    B. Budgetary Information

    • Cost Sharing Requirements: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.
    • Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable
    • Other Budgetary Limitations: Other budgetary limitations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

    C. Due Dates

      Preliminary Proposal Due Date(s) (required)(due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):

    January 23, Annually Thereafter

    August 2, Annually Thereafter

    Proposal Review Information Criteria

    Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

    Award Administration Information

    Award Conditions: Standard NSF award conditions apply.

    Reporting Requirements: Standard NSF reporting requirements apply.

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    I. INTRODUCTION

    Many important questions in ecology, ecosystem science, and evolutionary biology can only be addressed with long-term data. Research areas include, but are not limited to, the effects of natural selection or other evolutionary processes on populations the effects of interspecific interactions that vary over time and space population and community dynamics for organisms that have extended life spans and long turnover times feedbacks between ecological and evolutionary processes pools of materials such as nutrients in soils that turn over at intermediate to longer time scales and external forcing functions such as climatic cycles that operate over long return intervals. Investigators often are constrained in addressing questions in these areas by the relatively short support periods associated with typical research awards. In recognition of this problem, the Division of Environmental Biology (DEB) encourages investigators to apply for LTREB awards. These awards are designed to provide the funding to maintain an ongoing, long-term research project for a period of a decade or longer.

    The usefulness of long-term data sets extends beyond typical scientific publications. Therefore, a means of sharing data with other investigators in order to stimulate synthesis and the generation of novel ideas is an important requirement of all proposals. The results also should be of interest to and available to the general public. To take advantage of the unique informational aspects of long-term projects, LTREB investigators will be required to implement mechanisms of data sharing in the broadest manner possible.

    II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

    The Long Term Research in Environmental Biology Program intends to support decadal projects. Funding for an initial, 5-year period requires submission of a preliminary proposal and, if invited, submission of a full proposal following the guidelines described in Section V and the additional review criteria in Section VI, below.

    Essential components of an LTREB proposal include:

    Decadal Research Plan: Proposals must address questions that require long-term data collection to be answered. Investigators must present a research plan that spans at least ten years. This plan should clearly articulate important questions that cannot be addressed with data that have already been collected, but could be answered if ten additional years of data were collected. It is not a research timeline or management plan, but rather is a concise justification for ten additional years of support in order to advance understanding of key concepts, questions, or theories in environmental biology. The decadal plan is a critical component of an initial 5-year proposal, and questions or hypotheses outlined in this framework must guide any subsequent renewal.

    Core Data: LTREB proposals require that the author has studied a particular phenomenon or process for at least six, recent years, or for long enough to generate a contemporary time series that contains six data points. Analysis of these data should generate new questions, focusing on the same phenomena or processes, that provide the justification for LTREB support.

    Plan for Data Management and Dissemination: Data from long-term research projects have value beyond the peer-reviewed and other publications generated by the investigators collecting the data. Other researchers may develop new perspectives on the same long-term data or new ideas may arise from a combination of long-term data sets. Also, long-term data are expected to be of special interest to the public. Therefore, all proposals must describe details of information management and plans for data sharing with the broader research community and the interested public. This plan should be submitted as a Supplementary Document, following guidelines in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide.

    LTREB Renewals: To implement the decadal time frame intended for LTREB projects, proposals for renewed support during a second, five-year period do not require submission of a preliminary proposal. Instructions for writing a renewal proposal are provided in Section V, below. Renewal proposals will be evaluated using review criteria described in Section VI of this solicitation. Renewal proposals should be submitted to the August full proposal deadline in the fourth year of the existing award.

    Continuation of LTREB projects beyond the initial ten years of support will require submission of a new preliminary proposal, based on a new decadal research plan. If a full proposal is invited, it will follow the same sequence of an initial proposal and a subsequent renewal.

    All proposals submitted to the LTREB Program are co-reviewed by participating Clusters in the Division of Environmental Biology (Ecosystem Science, Population and Community Ecology, and Evolutionary Processes). Proposals must address topics supported by these core programs. Researchers are strongly encouraged to contact cognizant program officers to ensure that their projects are appropriate for the LTREB program.

    Ecological research on marine populations, communities and ecosystems is not supported by LTREB and should be directed to the Biological Oceanography Program: (https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=11696&org=OCE). However, research that examines the evolutionary dynamics of marine populations or communities will be accepted. Investigators who are uncertain about the suitability of their research for LTREB are strongly encouraged to contact the managing program director listed in this solicitation.

    Beginning in January 2014, the Division of Integrative Organismal Systems (IOS) will no longer accept LTREB proposals. Long-term research that addresses questions of a) development, mechanisms, adaptive value, or evolutionary history of animal behavior, b) mechanisms and processes mediating symbiotic interactions, c) growth, development, stress adaptation, energetics, metabolism, or other physiological processes, and d) structural and physiological traits that underlie organisms' abilities to live in various environments should be submitted to appropriate core IOS programs, as noted above.

    Examples of current LTREB awards can be viewed at https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/ by including 'LTREB' in a title search.

    Special Categories

    Research in Undergraduate Institutions (RUI): Preliminary proposals for RUIs must be submitted to the core programs via this DEB solicitation by the listed deadlines. Invited full RUI proposals should comply with the instructions in this solicitation, include the required RUI documentation and be submitted to the current RUI solicitation. If the invited full proposal is a collaborative, only the undergraduate institution(s) should submit to the RUI solicitation, other institutions should submit to this DEB solicitation. Additional information on the scope of RUI projects and the format of those proposals can be found at (https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5518&org=NSF&sel_org=NSFW&from=fund).

    Review Process

    A two-stage review process will be used by all Division core programs:

    Preliminary Proposals: All proposers must submit a preliminary proposal that outlines the major goals of the project including the components described below. Preliminary proposals typically will be reviewed by a panel of outside experts. The Program Directors will communicate the decision to Invite/Do Not Invite full proposals via FastLane and those decisions will be based on the panel recommendations and additional portfolio considerations. Invite/Do not Invite decisions are binding.

    Full Proposals: Invited full proposals will receive panel review and ad hoc review at the discretion of the program as described in Section VI of this Solicitation. Full proposals that were not invited will be returned without review.

    Deferred Full Proposal Submission: An invitee who wishes to defer submission until the following year must contact the managing Program Officer to request permission prior to the full proposal deadline. A deferred full proposal counts as 1 against the limit of 2 preliminary proposal submissions for each PI, co-PI, or lead senior investigator of a subaward at the next preliminary proposal deadline. The lead PI must submit an updated Consolidated Personnel List, using the original preliminary proposal number, at the next preliminary proposal deadline. Deferred full proposals must follow the full proposal submission instructions in the most current version of this solicitation.

    Preliminary Proposal Bypass: A proposal that a panel ranks in the top category at the full proposal stage (e.g., High Priority), but that is not recommended by the program for funding may exercise a one-time bypass of the preliminary proposal stage of the next review cycle and be submitted as an invited full proposal at the next full proposal deadline, using the original preliminary proposal number. The bypass submission counts as 1 against the limit of 2 preliminary proposal submissions for each PI, co-PI, and lead senior investigator of a subaward at the bypassed stage. The lead PI must notify the managing program officer of intent to exercise the bypass before the next preliminary proposal deadline and confirm this by submission of a new Consolidated Personnel List, using the original preliminary proposal number, for the bypassed deadline. The option to exercise a bypass is limited to the preliminary proposal deadline immediately following the invited full proposal review and may not be deferred. Submitters exercising a bypass must follow the full proposal submission instructions in the most current version of this solicitation.

    III. AWARD INFORMATION

    LTREB awards are not to exceed $90,000 per year (direct and indirect costs) and $450,000 over a 5-year (60 month) effort. NSF anticipates making 6-8 new awards annually, pending availability of funds. Involvement of undergraduate and graduate students is encouraged. Researchers may request up to one month of salary per year. These requests must be justified carefully and proposers are encouraged to contact the cognizant program director prior to proposal development. Because data management is a key aspect of these research projects, the proposed budget can include the establishment or periodic upgrading of information technology to provide for data sharing with other researchers and the general public. In general, funds will not be provided to purchase major equipment. Under unusual circumstances, the purchase of major equipment (over $5,000) will be entertained if these expenses are well justified. Support from the LTREB Program does not preclude support from other NSF programs.

    The number of awards made through the LTREB program is subject to the availability of funds.

    IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

    Who May Submit Proposals:

    Who May Serve as PI:

    Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

    Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or Co-PI: 2

    All LTREB proposals are reviewed by one or more of the appropriate, participating core programs in the Division of Environmental Biology. The Division limits the number of preliminary proposals on which a given individual may participate, as PI, co-PI, or sub-award Lead, to no more than two in any year. "PI, co-PI, or lead senior investigator of a subaward" refer to the role an individual would play in a full proposal including all parts of a collaborative proposal. Exercised options to defer an Invited Full Proposal submission or bypass subsequent Preliminary Proposal submission count against this limit. Proposals submitted to the Division for joint consideration with the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) of the United Kingdom or the U.S.&ndashIsrael Binational Science Foundation (BSF) count against this limit. Participating in a proposal as other senior personnel does not count toward this limit.

    Submission of an LTREB preliminary proposal in response to this solicitation will count toward the annual limit of 2 submissions per individual to the Division. An investigator who submits an LTREB preliminary proposal that is appropriate for review by one of the participating clusters in DEB will be allowed to participate, as PI co-PI, or sub-award Lead, in only one other preliminary proposal submitted to DEB.

    LTREB renewal proposals for the second five years of funding do not count toward this limit, because preliminary proposals are not required for these renewals. If an individual is eligible to submit an LTREB renewal proposal, he or she may participate in up to 2 preliminary proposals submitted to the Division in the same year.

    It is the responsibility of the submitters to confirm that the research team is within these eligibility guidelines. Changes to the team post-submission to meet eligibility limits will not be allowed.

    V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

    A. Proposal Preparation Instructions

    Preliminary Proposals (required):Preliminary proposals are required and must be submitted via the NSF FastLane system, even if full proposals will be submitted via Grants.gov.

    The following exceptions and additions to the NSF GPG apply to preliminary proposals submitted to this solicitation:

    Submission of a Preliminary Proposal is required to be eligible for invitation for a Full Proposal. Preliminary proposals that are not compliant with NSF guidelines may be returned without review. It is the submitting organization's responsibility to ensure that the proposal is compliant with all applicable guidelines.

    For collaborative projects, a single preliminary proposal should be submitted by the lead institution ONLY. The collaborative partners should be indicated in the list of personnel in the project description, as described below.

    Preliminary proposals must contain the items listed below and adhere to the specified page limitations. No additional information, beyond that described below, may be provided as an appendix or by links to Web pages. Figures and tables must be included within the specified page limit. All elements of the proposal, including legends and tables, must meet the formatting requirements for font size, characters per inch, margins, etc., as specified in the current NSF GPG.

    Results from prior support and responses to prior reviewer comments are neither required in, nor excluded from preliminary proposals. It is up to the individual submitters to determine if either represents an efficient use of the limited Project Description space in support of their request.

    Preliminary proposals should contain a description of the proposed research in sufficient detail to allow reviewers to assess the major ideas presented, the feasibility of the approaches to be used, and the ability of the project to advance knowledge in evolutionary biology, ecology, or ecosystem studies. Preliminary proposals must include the following components:

    Cover Sheet: Select the LTREB program solicitation from the pull-down list, and check the box indicated for a preliminary proposal. Entries on the Cover Sheet are limited to the Principal Investigator and a maximum of four co-Principal Investigators. Beginning Investigators (individuals who have not been a Principal Investigator or a co-Principal Investigator on a Federally-funded award with the exception of doctoral dissertation, postdoctoral fellowship or research planning grants) must check the box for "Beginning Investigator" on the proposal Cover Sheet. Leave blank the fields for Requested Amount, Requested Duration, and Starting Date for the project. Additional FastLane instructions can be found below in section V.D.

    Project Title: The project title must begin with 'LTREB Preliminary Proposal:', followed by the substantive title.

    Project Summary (1 page): Provide an overview of the proposed research, addressing separately the intellectual merit and broader impacts. The summary should be written in the third person, informative to those working in the same or related field(s), and understandable to a scientifically or technically literate reader. Preliminary proposals that do not contain the Project Summary, including an overview and separate statements on intellectual merit and broader impacts will be returned without review. Note: Project Summaries entered in the FastLane form are displayed with standardized formatting and subject to a cumulative character limit for the three sections.

    Project Description: Maximum 5 pages total, containing the following two sections:

    I. Personnel (This section is limited to one page. Any remaining space should be left blank).Provide a list of project personnel plus each person's institutional affiliation, and a minimal description of that person's role(s) in the project. The description of role(s) may not exceed two lines per person and cannot include external links. Divide the list into two sections. The first section of the list must contain all PI(s), co-PI(s), and sub-award lead senior investigators, including those from all parts of a collaborative proposal. This constitutes the list of key personnel subject to the submission cap of no more than two preliminary proposals. The second section of the list should contain other senior personnel and may include post-doctoral scholars. Any individual for whom a biographical sketch is included in the preliminary proposal must be on one of these lists. You should not list undergraduate or graduate students, technicians, or other participants.

    II. Project (This section is limited to four pages and must address separately both the intellectual merit and broader impacts. We suggest the use of the sub-sections listed below, organized as appropriate. For the purposes of DEB programs, sub-sections 1 through 3 are equivalent to an explicit "intellectual merit" header.)

    1. Conceptual Framework
    2. Decadal Research Plan and rationale for 10 years of data collection
    3. Proposed Research, including questions or hypotheses and the research approach
    4. Broader Impacts

    References Cited are limited to 3 pages see the GPG for format.

    As a Supplementary Document no longer than 1 page, include a description of the long-term (6 or more years) core data that provide the basis for the proposed research. As described above, the proposer should have studied a particular process or phenomenon for at least six, recent years or for long enough to generate a contemporary time series that includes six data points. These data should be presented as a table that includes, for each measured variable, the location at which data were collected and the time period over which data were collected. Enough detail should be provided to allow reviewers to understand how these data provide the basis for the proposed research. For example, if the proposed research is to compare traits across four species, the table should indicate data available for each trait for each of the four species and the time frame over which these data have been collected. If the research questions address the role of fire on a biological process, the PI must demonstrate at least 6 years of data on fire at all proposed study sites.

    Although data management is an important aspect of LTREB proposals, a Data Management Plan is not required for preliminary proposals.

    Biographical Sketches (2-page limit per individual) should be included for each person listed on the Personnel page. It should follow the format described in the GPG with the exception that because they commonly present difficulties in adhering to the page limit "(e) Collaborators & Other Affiliations" may be left out of the biographical sketch. However, the information requested in "(e) Collaborators & Other Affiliations" must be listed in a separate document, described below: this separate document is in lieu of or in duplication of information included in the biographical sketches.

    No budget should be submitted. Please leave blank the Requested Amount box on the FastLane Cover Sheet.

    A combined Collaborators & Other Affiliations document. Provide as a Supplementary Document (under Other Supplementary Documents) a single document that includes the Biographical Sketch part "(e) Collaborators & Other Affiliations" for all persons including a biographical sketch in this preliminary proposal. This document is provided in lieu of or in duplication of information the GPG requests as part of the biographical sketches and is used to help identify potential conflicts or bias in the selection of reviewers. For each person include, as described in the GPG, (1) Collaborators and Co-Editors, (2) Graduate Advisors and Postdoctoral Sponsors, and (3) Thesis Advisor and Postgraduate-Scholar Sponsor. In addition, this document should list other potential conflicts including (4) spouse or other relative, and (5) any other individuals with whom or institutions with which the senior personnel (PI, co-PIs, and any named personnel) have financial ties, including advisory committees, boards of directors, or prospective employers (specify type). Note: Conflicts of interest involving junior authorship on a multi-authored papers (>5 authors) may be limited to the senior author. Note: This document may be organized in text or table forms as long as it is clear to which person the collaborators and other affiliations are linked.

    A Consolidated Personnel List. The template found at https://www.nsf.gov/bio/deb/debpersonnellist.xlsx, contains a single tab. Please read the instructions carefully and follow guidance. Using the template, compile an Excel Workbook that provides information for all persons listed on the Personnel page of the project description. The completed file must include the FastLane proposal ID (Not the Temporary ID #) assigned after submission of your proposal. The completed file should be submitted by email to [email protected] within three business days of proposal submission.

    Applicants must include the above documents, prepared in accordance with standard NSF formatting guidelines).

    Applicants must complete the Proposal Classification form. This form is required for all submissions to the BIO Directorate FastLane will not allow processing of your proposal without it.

    No other supplementary documents or appendices are permitted for preliminary proposals.

    Items that should NOT be included in a preliminary proposal:

    Budget, Budget Justification, Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources, Current and Pending Support, Letters of Collaboration, Data Management Plan, Postdoctoral Mentoring Plan, RUI Impact Statement, Certification of RUI Eligibility, or any additional Supplementary Documents.

    Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov or via the NSF FastLane system.

    • Full proposals submitted via FastLane: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The complete text of the GPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg. Paper copies of the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from [email protected] Proposers are reminded to identify this program solicitation number in the program solicitation block on the NSF Cover Sheet For Proposal to the National Science Foundation. Compliance with this requirement is critical to determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure to submit this information may delay processing.
    • Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov. The complete text of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: (https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from [email protected]

    In determining which method to utilize in the electronic preparation and submission of the proposal, please note the following:

    Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via the NSF FastLane system. Chapter II, Section D.5 of the Grant Proposal Guide provides additional information on collaborative proposals.

    See Chapter II.C.2 of the GPG for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the GPG instructions.

    For new LTREB projects, full proposals will be accepted only from PIs who have submitted Preliminary Proposals and have been invited to submit a full proposal. LTREB Renewal proposals requesting the second five years of funding are excepted from the required Preliminary Proposal. See "Special Categories" above for submission of invited, full Research in Undergraduate Institutions (RUI) proposals.

    The full proposal should not deviate substantially from the preliminary proposal in the scope of the project. But PIs may incorporate responses to the preliminary proposal panel summary.

    Changes to senior personnel (names and roles) from the preliminary proposal stage are generally not allowed except to remove a person, replace a person rendered incapable of participating, or recognize the promotion of a post-doctoral fellow to a faculty position. Any changes to senior personnel require approval from the cognizant PO. No changes are allowed that result in a person exceeding the individual submission limit on participation as PI, co-PI, or subaward lead established at the preliminary proposal stage. By making a request, the PI takes responsibility that all personnel remain within the eligibility guidelines. Proposals with unapproved changes and/or changes in excess of an individual's submission limit will be returned without review.

    Project Description (maximum 15 pages, including Results from Prior NSF Support for PI and all co-PIs): The proposal should address the following three themes in the Project Description or where otherwise indicated:

    Conceptual Framework. Proposals must address timely and important concepts in environmental biology. Clearly defined hypotheses must guide the research. These hypotheses must be motivated by at least 6 years of recently-collected data on the study system and must be grounded in appropriate concepts or theory.

    Decadal Research Plan: The Project Description must include a specific section, entitled 'Decadal Research Plan,' that identifies questions or hypotheses that require an additional 10 years of investigation to be answered. These questions or hypotheses should form the crux of the proposal. Investigators must demonstrate that the questions posed cannot be answered with data already in hand, or with data collected from typical three-to-five-year awards made by core programs. Clear justification must be provided for needing an additional 10 years of data to answer these questions. The decadal research plan should provide the overarching motivation for the initial 5-year investigation as well as for a 5-year renewal.

    Core Data Set. Central to all successful LTREB projects is a set of core data that are already being collected continually in the laboratory or at an existing site or sites. As described above, the proposer should have studied a particular process or phenomenon for at least six, recent years or for long enough to generate a time series that includes six data points. Analysis of these data should serve as the basis for new questions, focused on the same phenomena or processes, that motivate the current proposal. Proposals should clearly state the data that have been collected, the sites at which they have been collected, how long they have been collected, if they will continue to be collected, and how these data generate the new questions posed. These data can be documented in a table or as a narrative description.

    New research activities such as the addition of new sites or the initiation of a new manipulation can be proposed with the following conditions: these activities cannot compromise continued collection of the core data that form the basis for the research and must clearly improve the ability to answer questions that arise from analyses of the core data. An example is the initiation of a new, short-term experiment to reveal mechanisms responsible for observed, longer-term trends.

    Questions concerning the appropriateness of an existing data set as the basis for an LTREB proposal or of new research activities should be discussed with the cognizant NSF Program Director prior to proposal development. The LTREB Program does not provide support solely for monitoring or for the analysis of long-term historical data.

    Data Management and Dissemination (Supplementary Document, 2-page maximum):Long-term data are a valuable resource that can stimulate and support investigations well beyond the scope of the initial study. Data and metadata collected as part of an LTREB-funded project must be made available to other researchers and to the general public within a reasonable period of time after their collection. The required Data Management Plan should articulate how, where, and when the data will be archived how and when they will be made available to the broader scientific community and how future access to the data will be guaranteed. As data maintenance is an iterative process, the information technology used should have sufficient flexibility to allow periodic updates. Proposers may wish to consult with the cognizant program director on the best manner in which to achieve this component of the project.

    Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan: Each project that requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must include, as a supplementary document, a description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such individuals. FastLane will not permit submission of a proposal that is missing a Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan. See Chapter II.C.2.j of the GPG for further information about the implementation of this requirement. Multiple institutions involved in a collaborative project may submit only a single postdoctoral mentoring plan, and this must conform to the page length specified in the NSF GPG.

    Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU): Projects anticipating the inclusion of undergraduate research experiences are encouraged to include these as part of the research proposal itself, rather than seeking subsequent supplemental funds. Such requests should follow the guidelines for REU supplement requests (https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5517&from=fund). REU projects involve students in meaningful ways in ongoing research programs or in research projects specifically designed for or by the REU student. If the intent of the PI is to engage students as technicians, then REU funds are not appropriate. Salary support should be requested on the Undergraduate Students line of the proposal budget.

    REU, RET, and RAHSS Funds. If Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU), Research Experiences for Teachers (RET), or Research Assistantships for High School Students (RAHSS) funds are requested as part of the full proposal, descriptions of these activities should be included as a Supplementary Document. The description is limited to 3 pages in all circumstances. For example, if funds are requested for multiple categories of activity (REU, RET and RAHSS), or if multiple institutions on a collaborative proposal are requesting funds for one or more categories, the three page limit still applies. The entire budget for these activities should be included in Participant Support Costs, including stipends, travel, and supplies. A detailed breakdown of the budget for each separate category of request must be explained in the budget justification. Budgets for REU activities are generally under $7,500 per student. Budgets for RET activities are generally under $15,000 per teacher. Budgets for RAHS activities are generally under $6,000 per student. Funds requested for these educational supplements are in addition to the $90,000 per year funding limit for LTREB projects.

    Biographical Sketches and Current and Pending: Biographical sketches and Current and Pending Support Statements should be submitted for all senior personnel in the full proposal. Biographical sketches should follow the format described in the GPG with the exception that because they commonly present difficulties in adhering to the page limit "(e) Collaborators & Other Affiliations" may be left out of the biographical sketch. However, the information requested in "(e) Collaborators & Other Affiliations" must be listed in a separate document (see below): this separate document is in lieu of or in duplication of information included in the biographical sketches. Biographical sketches may also be included for post-doctoral fellows. Biographical sketches should not be included for anyone providing a "Letter of Collaboration".

    A combined Collaborators & Other Affiliations document. Provide as a Supplementary Document (under Other Supplementary Documents) a single document that includes the Biographical Sketch part "(e) Collaborators & Other Affiliations" for all persons including a biographical sketch in this proposal (including all parts of a multi-institutional collaborative proposal). This document is provided in lieu of or in duplication of information the GPG requests as part of the biographical sketches and is used to help identify potential conflicts or bias in the selection of reviewers. For each person include, as described in the GPG, (1) Collaborators and Co-Editors, (2) Graduate Advisors and Postdoctoral Sponsors, and (3) Thesis Advisor and Postgraduate-Scholar Sponsor. In addition, this document should list other potential conflicts including (4) spouse or other relative, and (5) any other individuals with whom or institutions with which the senior personnel (PI, co-PIs, and any named personnel) have financial ties, including advisory committees, boards of directors, or prospective employers (specify type). Note: Conflicts of interest involving junior authorship on a multi-authored papers (>5 authors) may be limited to the senior author. Note: This document may be organized in text or table formats as long as it is clear to which person the collaborators and other affiliations are linked.

    Letters of Collaboration. Supplementary Documents may include letters of collaboration from individuals whose participation is integral to the proposed project but who are neither senior personnel nor supported by subawards. This may include subsidiary involvement in some aspect of the project cooperation on outreach efforts or documentation of permission to access materials, data, or study sites. Letters of collaboration should focus solely on affirming that the individual or organization is willing to collaborate on the project as specified in the project description. No endorsements of the potential value or significance of the project may be included. The template that must be used for preparation of letters of collaboration is provided below.

    Each letter of collaboration must be signed by the designated collaborator. Requests for letters of collaboration should be made by the PI well in advance of the proposal submission deadline, because they must be included at the time of submission. Letters deviating from the following template will not be accepted and may be grounds for returning the proposal without review.

    Template for letters of collaboration:

    To: NSF _____________(Program Title)___________Program

    (Printed name of the individual collaborator or name of the organization and name and position of the official submitting this memo)

    By signing below (or transmitting electronically), I acknowledge that I am listed as a collaborator on this proposal, entitled "____(proposal title)_____," with ____(PI name)______ as the Principal Investigator. I agree to undertake the tasks assigned to me or my organization, as described in the project description of the proposal, and I commit to provide or make available the resources specified therein.

    A Consolidated Personnel List. The template found at https://www.nsf.gov/bio/deb/debpersonnellist.xlsx, contains a single tab. Please read the instructions carefully and follow guidance. Using the template, compile an Excel file that provides information for all persons identified as PI, co-PI, Other Senior Personnel, Post-doctoral fellow, or lead of any subaward in the full proposal, including all parts of multi-institutional collaborative proposals. The completed file must include the FastLane proposal ID (Not the Temporary ID #) assigned after submission of your proposal. The completed file should be submitted by email to [email protected] within three business days of proposal submission.

    PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS FOR LTREB RENEWAL PROPOSALS

    To implement the decadal time frame intended for LTREB projects, and following an initial 5-year LTREB award, renewal proposals for a second, five-year period will be accepted. Renewal proposals are exempt from the submission of a preliminary proposal, and should be submitted to the full proposal August deadline in the fourth year of the initial award. The project description of a renewal proposal is limited to 8 pages all other sections described above for a full proposal must be included. Renewal proposals will be evaluated using the standard NSF Merit Review Criteria and three additional criteria described in Section VI below. Titles for renewal proposals must begin with "LTREB Renewal:" followed by the substantive title.

    B. Budgetary Information

    Cost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited

    Other Budgetary Limitations: Proposals will be limited to $90,000 per year and a total of $450,000 over five years.

    C. Due Dates

    • Preliminary Proposal Due Date(s) (required)(due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):

    January 23, Annually Thereafter

    August 2, Annually Thereafter

    D. FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements

    For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane:

    To prepare and submit a proposal via FastLane, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane user support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail [email protected] The FastLane Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the FastLane system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

    For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:

    Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants.html. In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: [email protected] The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.

    Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to the NSF FastLane system for further processing.

    Proposers that submitted via FastLane are strongly encouraged to use FastLane to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via Grants.gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants.gov. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.gov should be used to check the status of an application.

    VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES

    Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in the GPG as Exhibit III-1.

    A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: http://nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/.

    Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Investing in Science, Engineering, and Education for the Nation's Future: NSF Strategic Plan for 2014-2018. These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.

    One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF&rsquos mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation&rsquos most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

    NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

    A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria

    The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare to secure the national defense and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.

    1. Merit Review Principles

    These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:

    • All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge.
    • NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.
    • Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project.

    With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.

    These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.

    All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

    The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (GPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i. contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal.) Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including GPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i., prior to the review of a proposal.

    When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:

    • Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge and
    • Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

    The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:

    1. What is the potential for the proposed activity to
      1. Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit) and
      2. Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?

      Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) improved STEM education and educator development at any level increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology improved well-being of individuals in society development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others improved national security increased economic competitiveness of the United States and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

      Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

      Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

      Preliminary and Full Proposals

      In addition to the two standard review criteria established by the National Science Board, reviewers will evaluate preliminary and full LTREB proposals for (1) A compelling, conceptually- or theoretically-motivated decadal research plan and (2) Core Data - at least 6 years of contemporary data collected up to the present by the investigator should be in hand at the time of submission, and should motivate or provide the foundation for the research questions proposed.

      Reviewers will evaluate full proposals for the additional criterion of (3) A plan for data management and dissemination to other researchers and the general public.

      LTREB Renewal Proposals

      Proposals submitted for a second, 5-year award to complete a decadal research plan will be evaluated using the standard NSF Merit Review Criteria and the following additional criteria:

      1. progress made toward the decadal research plan outlined in the initial proposal
      2. a description of planned research activities to complete this decadal plan
      3. evidence that previously-collected data are available to the broader research community, and
      4. a description of how results at the end of the ten years of funding will be integrated to resolve the original questions posed.

      B. Review and Selection Process

      Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review.

      Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and submitted by each reviewer. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.

      After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell applicants whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new awardees may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.

      After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.

      Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.

      VII. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

      A. Notification of the Award

      Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)

      B. Award Conditions

      An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures) (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)* or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.

      *These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF. Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from [email protected]

      More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.

      C. Reporting Requirements

      For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). Within 90 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.

      Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.

      PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.

      More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.

      VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS

      Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

      General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

      Saran Twombly, Program Director, Division of Environmental Biology, telephone: (703) 292-8133, email: [email protected]

      For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:

      For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:

      • Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, please contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726 e-mail: [email protected]

      IX. OTHER INFORMATION

      The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website at https://public.govdelivery.com/accounts/USNSF/subscriber/new?topic_id=USNSF_179.

      Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at http://www.grants.gov.

      ABOUT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

      The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."

      NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.

      NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.

      Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See Grant Proposal Guide Chapter II, Section D.2 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

      The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

      The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.

      The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering.


      Watch the video: The Roast of Tom Simons (May 2022).


Comments:

  1. Pomeroy

    This is a funny sentence

  2. Janus

    Talent, you won't say anything.

  3. Dokazahn

    Sorry for interrupting you, I also want to express the opinion.



Write a message