Zone Preference in the Visual Water Maze
June 26, 2025
No Comments
To be a successful candidate for a research grant, you need perfect budget formulation and justification. Here, we will help you plan the research budget for your grant proposal and give you handy tips to transform it into a convincible form.
Your budget is the skeleton of your grant proposal. It provides the estimated finance your research needs to be completed in a particular time range. It also gives the funders an exact knowledge about where their funds will be used and how will they be financed (Asya, 2008). It is your responsibility to postulate clearly how you will manage the funds if granted. An excellent budget plan will compel your funders to assume that you have thought about every financial detail concerning your project.
Certain wordings are preferred to convey your research budget information better. It is important to familiarize with them before constructing the budget section of the proposals. The lexis includes:
These are the expenses that are utilized solely for executing your research. For example, expenses on your research staff members, tools, materials, and travel finance.
These are the overhead charges reserved for institutional facilities that you avail yourself while conducting your research. For example, institutional laboratory, electricity, and water usage costs.
These are the additional benefits provided to the personnel, along with their basic salaries. Every institution has its own set of fringe benefits rates.
It is a group of institutions that apply for a grant together as one. They have reached a grant agreement, and one of the institutions represents them all. The budget is divided between them.
There are two budget designs used in the NIH grant applications. Specific points will decide the type of budget design form you have to use for your application. These are:
Your budget design is considered modular when your research fulfills the following criteria:
Your budget design should be in detailed form if your research project fulfills any of the below-mentioned criteria:
For the modular design, you have to fill out the PHS 398 modular budget application form, and for the detailed design budget, you have to use the R & R detailed budget application form.
Your budget planning starts when you find the research question and decide on a suitable study design. You should also be able to guess the unpredictable charges that can arise while conducting your research (Sudheesh, Devika & Nethra, 2016). There are five main points to keep in mind while planning your research budget:
Think about all the things that will affect your research budget. These are mainly the study design, testing procedures, sample collection methods, and research settings. The more complicated and unique these essentials will be, the higher will be your budget requirements. Also, observe the already present resources and will they benefit your research budget.
The next point to consider while planning your budget is to abide by the budget rules and limitations of your particular funding agency. Read each instruction carefully and remember not to deviate from it. It is expected of you to provide the exact list of items necessary for your project.
Thirdly, a breakdown of each item into its related category should be made along with its cost. A breakdown of the budget item-wise and year-wise with cost calculation should be done. Point out the recurring and nonrecurring items that are directly related to your research. All this planning is done beforehand to ensure proper budget management.
For every enlisted item, you should be able to provide a solid justification for its importance in your research. Only a well-justified budget document can win the confidence of the peer reviewers.
Reviewing is the most significant step for every document or proposal. You can ask your team members to review your budget document for you. Also, recalculate the cost of each item and the total items combined cost per annum. Keep in mind that too low or high budget will only raise suspicion in the mind of your reviewers. So, make sure you plan a research budget range, not more than the maximum limit set by your funding agency (Michael et al., 2019).
Projecting your finances into your application requires skills. When writing, we primarily divide our budget into two sub-sections. These include:
As mentioned before, these are the direct expenses on which your research is largely dependent. So, firstly, give the heading of direct costs and then further give the following subheadings with explanations.
Personnel Involved
If your research project involves resource team members, here is where you have to mention them. Your resource team includes the technicians, laboratory attendants, site caretakers, data entry personnel, junior researchers, and the senior researcher involved. Specify their allowances and salaries in an organized manner.
Recurring Expenditure
These expenses occur regularly and yet cannot be avoided. These include equipment usage, laboratory-conducted diagnostic tests, telecommunication charges, chemicals, and any other essential items. Fees for human subjects involved in your research are also stated here.
Non-recurring Expenditure
These are the costs of items for which you have to pay one-time charges, and then their use is free. These include buying charges for the printer, computer, or other electronic items. Once you buy them, they are charge-free. Thus, you have to specify all the non-recurring charges in your budget form.
Traveling Expenditure
In this subheading, specify the amount spent on your traveling for research purposes. Separately mention your traveling costs for attending research-related conferences, seminars, and training. Also, mention the travel expenses for the surveys and data collection. Visiting expenses to other institutions for the sake of a research study can also be mentioned here.
The second sub-section is indirect expenditure. It includes facilities that are indirectly related to your research project. These can be library facilities, electricity, and water usage for your experiments and test conduction. These are also called overhead charges that are paid specifically to the institution for providing such facilities (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2017).
In the final paragraph, write a short finalizing note relating your budget outlining the main point. This should be a 4 to 5-lined paragraph.
Most of the funding agencies separately require justification for each item that you specified in your above-mentioned budget form. This document is also known as the budget narrative page. It reasons the importance of that item for your research conduction. Each item is mentioned in the same order as in your budget form and should be justified respectively (Al-Jundi & Salah, 2016). It is best to make a three-columned table with the name of the item in the first column, the quantity and cost in the second column, and a justification statement in the third column.
In the last, you have to provide a summarized form of your budget for your proposed research. It is written at the end when you have completed writing your whole application. In this, you have to specify every item with its cost per annum. The non-recurring items will only be specified under the first-year heading as they have a one-time expense. Likewise, the recurring items will be mentioned in both years, along with their costs.
The following points will enhance the esthetics of your budget section:
Writing the budget items under a categorized heading will make it easy for the reviewers to retrieve the necessary points in your budget. You can use bullet marks or checklist signs to highlight your main points. This will show the reviewers that you have the budget representation skills and that your enlisted budget finance is authentic.
Try to write your budget essentials in a tabulated form with three main columns. The first column represents the item name. The second column specifies the cost of that particular essential. The third column signifies the importance of your particular essential in performing your research. This will save both time and effort of reviewers who have to scrutinize many applications at a time.
The pattern you follow for each essential specification in the budget form should be followed in the same manner while writing the budget justification document. There should be a flow in your budget data and which will further enhance its esthetics.
Your language should be simple enough to be understood by a common person. Complicated terms and phrases will only make it difficult for reviewers to reach your point of view.
Your budget prepares you for all the financial aids you need to conduct your research. It informs you about the expenses of each research item and method. In this way, you can choose an economical procedure for your research. The budget section is considered as the key factor of success or failure for your proposal. This section requires a skillful approach and should be handled delicately. Nowadays, research writers record their budget in the form of electronic spreadsheets. It is easy to manage the budget essentials and the expenses via these excel spreadsheets. You just need to point out and categorize the direct and indirect costs in the already drawn tabulated budget spreadsheet. Hence, you will be able to plan and compose a well-scripted budget by following the instructions given in this article.
In behavioral neuroscience, the Open Field Test (OFT) remains one of the most widely used assays to evaluate rodent models of affect, cognition, and motivation. It provides a non-invasive framework for examining how animals respond to novelty, stress, and pharmacological or environmental manipulations. Among the test’s core metrics, the percentage of time spent in the center zone offers a uniquely normalized and sensitive measure of an animal’s emotional reactivity and willingness to engage with a potentially risky environment.
This metric is calculated as the proportion of time spent in the central area of the arena—typically the inner 25%—relative to the entire session duration. By normalizing this value, researchers gain a behaviorally informative variable that is resilient to fluctuations in session length or overall movement levels. This makes it especially valuable in comparative analyses, longitudinal monitoring, and cross-model validation.
Unlike raw center duration, which can be affected by trial design inconsistencies, the percentage-based measure enables clearer comparisons across animals, treatments, and conditions. It plays a key role in identifying trait anxiety, avoidance behavior, risk-taking tendencies, and environmental adaptation, making it indispensable in both basic and translational research contexts.
Whereas simple center duration provides absolute time, the percentage-based metric introduces greater interpretability and reproducibility, especially when comparing different animal models, treatment conditions, or experimental setups. It is particularly effective for quantifying avoidance behaviors, risk assessment strategies, and trait anxiety profiles in both acute and longitudinal designs.
This metric reflects the relative amount of time an animal chooses to spend in the open, exposed portion of the arena—typically defined as the inner 25% of a square or circular enclosure. Because rodents innately prefer the periphery (thigmotaxis), time in the center is inversely associated with anxiety-like behavior. As such, this percentage is considered a sensitive, normalized index of:
Critically, because this metric is normalized by session duration, it accommodates variability in activity levels or testing conditions. This makes it especially suitable for comparing across individuals, treatment groups, or timepoints in longitudinal studies.
A high percentage of center time indicates reduced anxiety, increased novelty-seeking, or pharmacological modulation (e.g., anxiolysis). Conversely, a low percentage suggests emotional inhibition, behavioral avoidance, or contextual hypervigilance. reduced anxiety, increased novelty-seeking, or pharmacological modulation (e.g., anxiolysis). Conversely, a low percentage suggests emotional inhibition, behavioral avoidance, or contextual hypervigilance.
The percentage of center time is one of the most direct, unconditioned readouts of anxiety-like behavior in rodents. It is frequently reduced in models of PTSD, chronic stress, or early-life adversity, where animals exhibit persistent avoidance of the center due to heightened emotional reactivity. This metric can also distinguish between acute anxiety responses and enduring trait anxiety, especially in longitudinal or developmental studies. Its normalized nature makes it ideal for comparing across cohorts with variable locomotor profiles, helping researchers detect true affective changes rather than activity-based confounds.
Rodents that spend more time in the center zone typically exhibit broader and more flexible exploration strategies. This behavior reflects not only reduced anxiety but also cognitive engagement and environmental curiosity. High center percentage is associated with robust spatial learning, attentional scanning, and memory encoding functions, supported by coordinated activation in the prefrontal cortex, hippocampus, and basal forebrain. In contrast, reduced center engagement may signal spatial rigidity, attentional narrowing, or cognitive withdrawal, particularly in models of neurodegeneration or aging.
The open field test remains one of the most widely accepted platforms for testing anxiolytic and psychotropic drugs. The percentage of center time reliably increases following administration of anxiolytic agents such as benzodiazepines, SSRIs, and GABA-A receptor agonists. This metric serves as a sensitive and reproducible endpoint in preclinical dose-finding studies, mechanistic pharmacology, and compound screening pipelines. It also aids in differentiating true anxiolytic effects from sedation or motor suppression by integrating with other behavioral parameters like distance traveled and entry count (Prut & Belzung, 2003).
Sex-based differences in emotional regulation often manifest in open field behavior, with female rodents generally exhibiting higher variability in center zone metrics due to hormonal cycling. For example, estrogen has been shown to facilitate exploratory behavior and increase center occupancy, while progesterone and stress-induced corticosterone often reduce it. Studies involving gonadectomy, hormone replacement, or sex-specific genetic knockouts use this metric to quantify the impact of endocrine factors on anxiety and exploratory behavior. As such, it remains a vital tool for dissecting sex-dependent neurobehavioral dynamics.
The percentage of center time is one of the most direct, unconditioned readouts of anxiety-like behavior in rodents. It is frequently reduced in models of PTSD, chronic stress, or early-life adversity. Because it is normalized, this metric is especially helpful for distinguishing between genuine avoidance and low general activity.
Environmental Control: Uniformity in environmental conditions is essential. Lighting should be evenly diffused to avoid shadow bias, and noise should be minimized to prevent stress-induced variability. The arena must be cleaned between trials using odor-neutral solutions to eliminate scent trails or pheromone cues that may affect zone preference. Any variation in these conditions can introduce systematic bias in center zone behavior. Use consistent definitions of the center zone (commonly 25% of total area) to allow valid comparisons. Software-based segmentation enhances spatial precision.
Evaluating how center time evolves across the duration of a session—divided into early, middle, and late thirds—provides insight into behavioral transitions and adaptive responses. Animals may begin by avoiding the center, only to gradually increase center time as they habituate to the environment. Conversely, persistently low center time across the session can signal prolonged anxiety, fear generalization, or a trait-like avoidance phenotype.
To validate the significance of center time percentage, it should be examined alongside results from other anxiety-related tests such as the Elevated Plus Maze, Light-Dark Box, or Novelty Suppressed Feeding. Concordance across paradigms supports the reliability of center time as a trait marker, while discordance may indicate task-specific reactivity or behavioral dissociation.
When paired with high-resolution scoring of behavioral events such as rearing, grooming, defecation, or immobility, center time offers a richer view of the animal’s internal state. For example, an animal that spends substantial time in the center while grooming may be coping with mild stress, while another that remains immobile in the periphery may be experiencing more severe anxiety. Microstructure analysis aids in decoding the complexity behind spatial behavior.
Animals naturally vary in their exploratory style. By analyzing percentage of center time across subjects, researchers can identify behavioral subgroups—such as consistently bold individuals who frequently explore the center versus cautious animals that remain along the periphery. These classifications can be used to examine predictors of drug response, resilience to stress, or vulnerability to neuropsychiatric disorders.
In studies with large cohorts or multiple behavioral variables, machine learning techniques such as hierarchical clustering or principal component analysis can incorporate center time percentage to discover novel phenotypic groupings. These data-driven approaches help uncover latent dimensions of behavior that may not be visible through univariate analyses alone.
Total locomotion helps contextualize center time. Low percentage values in animals with minimal movement may reflect sedation or fatigue, while similar values in high-mobility subjects suggest deliberate avoidance. This metric helps distinguish emotional versus motor causes of low center engagement.
This measure indicates how often the animal initiates exploration of the center zone. When combined with percentage of time, it differentiates between frequent but brief visits (indicative of anxiety or impulsivity) versus fewer but sustained center engagements (suggesting comfort and behavioral confidence).
The delay before the first center entry reflects initial threat appraisal. Longer latencies may be associated with heightened fear or low motivation, while shorter latencies are typically linked to exploratory drive or low anxiety.
Time spent hugging the walls offers a spatial counterbalance to center metrics. High thigmotaxis and low center time jointly support an interpretation of strong avoidance behavior. This inverse relationship helps triangulate affective and motivational states.
By expressing center zone activity as a proportion of total trial time, researchers gain a metric that is resistant to session variability and more readily comparable across time, treatment, and model conditions. This normalized measure enhances reproducibility and statistical power, particularly in multi-cohort or cross-laboratory designs.
For experimental designs aimed at assessing anxiety, exploratory strategy, or affective state, the percentage of time spent in the center offers one of the most robust and interpretable measures available in the Open Field Test.
Written by researchers, for researchers — powered by Conduct Science.
Monday – Friday
9 AM – 5 PM EST
DISCLAIMER: ConductScience and affiliate products are NOT designed for human consumption, testing, or clinical utilization. They are designed for pre-clinical utilization only. Customers purchasing apparatus for the purposes of scientific research or veterinary care affirm adherence to applicable regulatory bodies for the country in which their research or care is conducted.
