English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

for not having the “little” things, like a reasonable budget justification or possible letters of support navigating the grant process seems like being a participant in one of those extreme endurance physical challenges. Just a few nights ago, I was thinking about the upcoming review of a submitted grant. My dreams took over where my thoughts left off, and I was quickly transported to my “ideal” review scenario. Each applicant goes before the review panel and orally defends his/her ideas. The catch: if you have inadvertently missed a key component of the application or if there is a fatal flaw in your experimental design have to face an unconventional challenge ... at 2am. The night before, one of the other applicants, who had not submitted a detailed description of how he was going to use mice, was throw into a basement filled with number of mice he had proposed to use His challenge was to ethically sacrifice the hungry mice before he was eaten himself, and without causing distress to his study subjects before that, someone wh was “descriptive, not mechanistic” had to figure out how her iPhone worked at the “molecular level.” Her designated tools were an ice pick and a spork Supplement):6

The rat race of getting funded