Radiochemistry and Radionuclide Imaging Instrumentation Research | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What agency and office offered this grant opportunity?

This funding opportunity was offered by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science, through the Office of Biological and Environmental Research (BER).

What is the main purpose of this funding opportunity?

The opportunity was intended to support fundamental (basic) research that improves how scientists image and measure dynamic biological processes in living systems using radiochemistry and radionuclide-based imaging. The emphasis is on next-generation methods that enable real-time, high-resolution, quantitative measurements of chemical reactions and metabolism in vivo.

What kinds of scientific advances was BER trying to stimulate?

BER was looking for genuinely innovative, high-impact, early-stage work that pushes the state of the science in (1) radiotracer development and (2) radionuclide imaging instrumentation. Projects were expected to advance foundational methodology rather than incremental engineering improvements or routine application of established tools.

What is meant by "quantitative in vivo measurement" in this FOA?

In this announcement, quantitative in vivo measurement means more than producing images. Applicants were expected to propose innovations that can accurately and sensitively: (1) track site-specific chemical reactions, (2) map where those reactions occur in space, (3) follow how they change over time, and (4) connect those changes to downstream biological processes. The goal is reliable, quantitative data about biological function and chemistry in intact living systems and relevant in vivo models.

How does this opportunity align with DOE mission priorities?

The FOA was positioned as mission-relevant basic science for DOE priorities such as bioenergy and bioremediation. At the same time, it recognized that enabling methods and tools developed under this program could later translate to nuclear medicine research and applications typically supported by NIH and industry.

What are the two topic areas in the FOA?

The FOA was organized around two topic areas: (1) Radiochemistry and (2) Radionuclide Imaging Instrumentation.

What is the focus of the Radiochemistry topic area?

Radiochemistry focused on fundamental improvements in synthetic methods for incorporating radionuclides into a broad range of organic molecules quickly and efficiently. The FOA highlighted the need for faster, higher-yield, more versatile radiolabeling chemistry that can work across different molecular classes and accommodate the constraints of short-lived isotopes.

Did the FOA encourage dual or multiple labeling approaches?

Yes. BER specifically encouraged approaches that enable dual or multiple labeling of targeting molecules, including work that supports dual-energy or hybrid imaging strategies in intact living systems.

Was microfluidics considered relevant to the Radiochemistry topic area?

Yes. The announcement highlighted microfluidics as a relevant direction for synthesis and purification, reflecting interest in miniaturized, automated, and potentially higher-throughput radiochemistry workflows that improve reproducibility, speed, and handling of radioactive materials.

What is the focus of the Radionuclide Imaging Instrumentation topic area?

This topic area focused on designing and developing new or improved detectors and imaging systems for radionuclide studies, with the aim of substantially increasing the accuracy of quantitative assessments of radiotracer distributions in three dimensions and over time.

What types of instrumentation improvements were implied by the FOA?

The FOA signaled a need for improvements that affect quantitative reliability, including sensitivity, resolution, calibration, reconstruction methods, and overall accuracy for 3D and time-resolved measurements.

Did the FOA emphasize screening capabilities?

Yes. Screening was called out as a priority, including instrumentation that can handle large numbers of intact living systems (with plants given as a clear example) and instrumentation that can screen cells to identify desirable traits.

Were multimodality approaches encouraged?

Yes. The FOA encouraged multimodality approaches, meaning instruments or integrated systems that can examine biological systems simultaneously using different measurement modalities to deepen mechanistic understanding rather than relying on a single imaging channel.

What award mechanism was used?

This was a DOE Office of Science financial assistance opportunity using the grant mechanism.

What is the CFDA number for this opportunity?

The CFDA number listed for this opportunity was 81.049.

Was cost sharing required?

No. The announcement stated there was no cost-sharing requirement.

How much total funding was estimated for the program?

The estimated total funding for the opportunity was $6,000,000.

What were the anticipated individual award sizes?

Anticipated individual award sizes ranged from $250,000 to $400,000.

Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was broadly open to domestic entities, with specific exclusions described in the announcement.

Which organizations were explicitly excluded from eligibility?

The announcement explicitly excluded other federal agencies, Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC) contractors, and certain 501(c)(4) nonprofit organizations involved in lobbying activities after December 31, 1995.

What were the key dates for the opportunity?

The opportunity was posted on February 2, 2010. The application deadline was April 19, 2010. The archive date was September 30, 2010.

Which DOE office administered the opportunity?

The administering office was listed as the Chicago Service Center.

Who were the listed points of contact?

The announcement provided a grant analyst contact (Kimberlie J. Laing) and a technical scientific program contact (Prem C. Srivastava).

What kind of proposals would likely be viewed as non-responsive based on the stated expectations?

Based on the FOA language, proposals that focus primarily on incremental engineering changes, routine use of established imaging tools, or producing images without strong emphasis on quantitative, time-resolved, mechanistic measurement in intact living systems would not match the stated expectation to advance foundational methodology.

What is the overall "big picture" goal of this opportunity?

The overall goal was to create next-generation radiotracers and imaging platforms that make it possible to watch chemistry and metabolism unfold inside living systems with higher fidelity than existing methods, while aligning with DOE mission biology (especially bioenergy and environmental/bioremediation contexts) and building broadly enabling technology with potential future impact in nuclear medicine.