USGS Science⌕ Search

Geology topics

Molly Elizabeth Huber

Publications and source records attributed to Molly Elizabeth Huber.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Quantifying post-colonial peat carbon loss from a drained forested peatland, Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge, USA

Peatland carbon storage is increasingly threatened by the combination of land-use change and climate variability, though carbon losses from land-use changes that span centuries are difficult to quantify, particularly in systems where little undisturbed area remains. Here we use a combination of vegetation change, fire history, and calculations of excess ash mass to quantify carbon loss in the Great Dismal Swamp National Wildlife Refuge (GDS NWR), USA, a highly impacted oligotrophic temperate peat swamp. Our results indicate that ditch construction that began in the Colonial Era in the late 1700s and continued into the mid-20th century across the swamp resulted in shifts from cypress-tupelo swamps to a combination of maple-gum and pine pocosin forests, consistent with drying surface conditions. Two large smoldering fires (2008, 2011) that were exacerbated by surface drainage, shifted vegetation from swamp to marsh, consumed peat over 25 km 2 , and caused losses of 1.05–1.34 Tg C due to peat burning. Across the Refuge as a whole, up to 48.2 Tg C has been lost to peat oxidation since ditch construction. Both stocks and rates of carbon loss remain higher than post-disturbance accumulation across most of GDS NWR, suggesting that existing efforts to block drainages to elevate water tables may not be enough to offset carbon losses. Rewetting heavily impacted surface peats may reduce peat oxidation and carbon loss, and shift vegetation toward hydrologic conditions preferred by pre-disturbance cypress-tupelo swamps.

North Carolina, Virginia↗

Connecting conservation practices to local stream health in the Chesapeake Bay watershed

The Chesapeake Bay Partnership is implementing conservation practices (CPs) throughout the Chesapeake Bay watershed to reduce nutrient and sediment delivery to the Bay. This study intends to provide an integrated and detailed understanding of how local streams respond to these CP-driven management efforts. Key issue: To what extent do CPs positively affect the health of local streams in the nontidal watershed (cobenefits)? Critical unknown: How do CPs change water quality and the stressors that affect stream aquatic life? Which CPs improve stream health more effectively? Critical knowledge to be delivered to stakeholders includes— the effects of CPs on local water-quality conditions, the degree to which these same CPs also provide local stream-ecosystem benefits, and a deeper understanding of local stream-ecosystems, including stressors and CPs, to guide the selection of management efforts that enhance both water quality and overall stream-ecosystem health.

Chesapeake Bay watershed↗