Biological Influence on Ocean Carbon: 2026 Archived NERC-NASA Modelling Call

The Natural Environment Research Council (NERC), with support from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), ran this UK-US research call to improve how global models represent the biological processes that regulate ocean carbon storage. The official UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) page now marks the opportunity Closed. Its NERC application deadline was 14 July 2026 at 4:00pm UK time, so this page is a historical reference rather than an open grant listing.

There is no successor round or replacement deadline announced on the official opportunity page. Researchers should not treat the archived deadline as a future submission date, and they should not assume that a later BIO-Carbon or NASA EXPORTS call will use the same rules. Anyone looking for a new opportunity should check the current NERC and NASA funding pages directly.

At a glance

The archive retains 2026-07-14 as the metadata deadline because it is the real closing date for the completed round. The historicalReference = true field distinguishes that date from a live application deadline and prevents the page from presenting an expired call as if applicants could still submit.

What the call was designed to support

The scientific problem was the relationship between marine life and the ocean’s carbon store. The ocean absorbs carbon dioxide, and marine organisms influence what happens to that carbon after it enters the ocean. Biological activity affects production, export, transformation, respiration, and the movement of organic matter below the well-lit surface layer. These processes operate across scales, while global coupled ocean-atmosphere models need representations that are computationally practical and scientifically defensible.

The call sought novel modelling approaches for the BIO-Carbon research programme and NASA’s EXPORTS programme. UKRI described the goal as developing new representations of key processes regulating ocean carbon storage for use in global models. The official scope included questions such as how marine life affects future seawater carbon uptake, how the conversion of dissolved carbon dioxide into organic carbon may change, how upper-ocean ecosystem characteristics influence vertical transfer, and what controls the efficiency of transfer below the surface ocean.

The call also highlighted the need to reduce uncertainty in estimates of the export and fate of net primary production. Proposals were expected to build on information from earlier BIO-Carbon opportunities, EXPORTS, and relevant international work. The emphasis was therefore on modelling that could connect biological understanding with global prediction, rather than a general marine biology project with no route into model development.

The geographic and physical scope was specific. Projects had to address processes that were globally relevant, occur in the open-ocean water column beyond the continental shelf break, and generally concern areas where the seafloor is deeper than 1,000 metres. The official page gave examples of eligible modelling work including new representations of key processes, quantitative methods for assessing and comparing model performance, and new approaches to modelling the ocean biological carbon system.

Funding details from the closed opportunity

The UK component could have a full economic cost of up to £312,500, with NERC funding 80% of the full economic cost. The official page gave an award range of £50,000 to £312,500 and a total fund of £1,000,000. Those figures describe the completed 2026 call; they are not a promise of funding for a future round.

The page also stated that the maximum cost of the US component, across this opportunity and the linked “Biological influence on ocean carbon: multiple model assessments” opportunity, could be up to $1 million, subject to funding availability. US applicants were directed to contact NASA for details about eligible costs. The UK application’s resources and cost justification was not supposed to include costs for the US team; those costs belonged in the international collaboration section as directed by the Funding Service guidance.

NERC would fund facilities costs where eligible. The page also identified costs that UKRI would not fund, including PhD studentship costs and equipment requests of £25,000 or more. Smaller equipment items were to be requested under the relevant consumables category. Researchers needing UKRI facilities were expected to discuss the work with the facility in advance, obtain agreement, and cost the service within the funding limits. These instructions are useful for understanding the archived call, but they should not be copied into a future application without checking the new call guidance.

Eligibility for the completed cycle

The project lead and UK researchers had to be based at a UK research organisation eligible to apply for UKRI funding. Applicants at any career stage could apply, subject to the standard eligibility criteria. A project lead based outside the UK was not permitted. Project co-leads could be based in the UK or the US, and a US co-lead had to be affiliated with a US institution when the application was submitted.

Other international collaborators, as well as UK partners that were not based at approved organisations, had to be included as project partners. The official page said that project partners could include organisations from business or financial sectors. Project partners were not to fund their own involvement through the award; only minor incidental expenses, such as some travel where needed, could be funded for partners under the stated rules.

There was also a demand-management rule for the completed cycle: an individual could be involved in no more than two submitted applications, and only one of those could list that person as project lead. Most importantly, an applicant was ineligible if they had not submitted the required notification of intent (NoI). NASA support also had its own eligibility and funding considerations, so US applicants were told to contact the named NASA contact for further details.

How the closed cycle was structured

The 2026 call had two stages. First, the proposed team had to submit a mandatory NoI. The official page required the BIO-Carbon NoI form by 8 May 2026 at 4:00pm UK time. The form requested the proposed team and a summary of the research project. UKRI said that the NoI would inform assessment-panel planning, would not itself be assessed, and did not lock the team or project into a final form. Additional partners and co-leads could be added later, and the full application could change as it was developed.

Second, an eligible team could prepare a full application through the new UKRI Funding Service. The page explicitly said that applicants could not use the Joint Electronic Submissions (Je-S) system. The project lead was responsible for completing the application, but the team and partners were expected to contribute. Only the lead research organisation could submit the completed application to UKRI.

The full application was organised around sections including a summary, vision, approach, team capability, ethics and responsible research and innovation, resources and cost justification, project partners, data management and sharing, facilities, trusted research and innovation, and international collaboration. The approach section was to include the US collaborators’ affiliations and expertise where applicable. Applications involving NASA funding also had to explain the proposed international collaboration, including the lead US applicant, institute, role, email address, and requested NASA budget.

The deadline for the full application was 14 July 2026 at 4:00pm UK time. UKRI warned that applications could not be submitted after that time and that internal university or research-organisation deadlines might be earlier. Once submitted, an application could not be changed. The official page stated that successful applications had to start in January 2027 and last no more than 24 months.

What a strong proposal would have needed

Although the opportunity is closed, its scope gives a useful record of the scientific standard it sought. A credible proposal would have identified a specific weakness or uncertainty in the treatment of biological carbon processes and explained why that weakness affects global projections. It would then have connected the biological mechanism to a modelling method, a validation strategy, and a path toward use in global models.

The question needed to be globally relevant without becoming unmanageably broad. The call covered a large system, but it did not ask a team to model every marine process. A focused problem—such as the representation of vertical organic-matter transfer, a biological control on carbon uptake, or a parameterisation that can be tested across models—would have been easier to connect to a feasible work plan.

The proposal also needed to show how it would build on existing evidence. UKRI specifically pointed applicants toward previous BIO-Carbon funding, EXPORTS data, and international projects. A good case would have explained what was already known, what current model structures missed, and what new representation or comparison method the project would deliver.

The UK-US partnership had to be substantive. The official guidance encouraged one joint application for a collaboration, with both UK and US contributions described. A US participant could bring relevant observations, remote-sensing expertise, data, modelling, or evaluation capability, but the contribution needed a clear scientific purpose. The page also required a contingency plan in case NASA could not fund the US involvement, while encouraging in-kind contributions where appropriate.

Data and reproducibility were part of the expected delivery plan. Applicants had to explain how data would be managed and shared under UKRI and NERC policy, which NERC data centre would archive data, whether the volume might exceed 1 TB, and what digital research infrastructure the work would require. A proposal using model output, observations, or new parameterisations would therefore have needed a credible route for documentation, archiving, and access.

What applicants should do now

There is no remaining application route for this cycle. The NoI date and the full-application date have passed, and the official page does not announce a new round. Do not email the listed contacts as though a late application could be accepted, and do not reuse the archived dates as a schedule for a future call.

Researchers who want to pursue similar work can use this page to understand the previous scope, then monitor current NERC and NASA funding announcements. Before relying on the award range, eligibility rules, NoI requirement, application service, or start date for any new call, confirm that the new official guidance repeats them. A successor could change the science, co-funder, budget, application stages, or eligible institutions.

The official archived opportunity remains available here:

UKRI: Biological influence on ocean carbon: novel modelling approaches

For the closed cycle, the named contacts included [email protected] for sensitive information, [email protected] for data-management questions, [email protected] for Funding Service support, and [email protected] for relevant US collaboration questions. Those contacts are reproduced as historical page information; they should not be read as confirmation that a new opportunity is open.

Frequently asked questions

Can I still apply?

No. UKRI marks the opportunity Closed, and the application deadline was 14 July 2026 at 4:00pm UK time.

Is there a new deadline?

No successor deadline is announced on the verified official page. The archived metadata retains 2026-07-14 as the completed cycle’s real closing date.

What was the maximum UK award?

The UK component could have a full economic cost up to £312,500, with NERC funding 80% of that cost. The official award range was £50,000 to £312,500.

Who could lead the project?

The project lead had to be based at a UK research organisation eligible for UKRI funding. US researchers could participate under the stated UK-US and NASA conditions, but a project lead based outside the UK was not permitted.

Was the NoI optional?

No. The NoI was mandatory for the completed cycle. A full application without a prior NoI by the stated deadline was to be rejected.

Is this page an active listing?

No. It is a historical reference to a closed 2026 NERC/NASA call. Check the official NERC, UKRI, and NASA pages for any future funding opportunity.