SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Scientific Data”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources

USGS2014

Monitoring rationale, strategy, issues, and methods: UMRR-EMP LTRMP fish component

The Long Term Resource Monitoring Program (LTRMP), an element of the multiagency partnership Upper Mississippi River Restoration-Environmental Management Program, has been monitoring fishes in the Upper Mississippi River System (UMRS) for over two decades, using scientific and highly standardized methods. Today, the LTRMP’s data assets represent one of the world’s largest and most extensive datasets on a great river. Methods and procedures used over the past two decades have been documented and have proven a key tool towards gaining data that are (a) scientifically valid, (b) comparable over time, and (c) comparable over space. These procedures manuals coordinate and standardize methods, procedures, and field behaviors in the execution of long-term monitoring, permitting the informed management and control of important sources of error actually under program control. As LTRMP databases have matured in scope and accumulated more years' worth of data, their utility in research and management in the UMRS basin has increased notably. To maximize their utility, data users need not only be aware of “how the data were collected,” as portrayed in the procedures manuals, but also “why the data were collected in the way they were, at the scales they were, and in the manner that they were.” Whereas the procedures manuals contribute information as to the “how” the data were gained, this document seeks to contribute information as to the “why.” As such, this document is intended to be a companion document to the procedures manuals. Herein, we present information on the rationale for monitoring nearly one-fifth of the entire North American freshwater fish fauna (representing the greatest freshwater fish diversity on the planet at temperate latitudes); strategies employed and their reasoning; and discussions on issues associated with the sampling design itself, data arising therefrom, and uses of those data in different contexts.

Illinois;Iowa;Minnesota;Montana;Wisconsin↗

USGS2010

USGS Cold-Water Coral Geographic Database-Gulf of Mexico and western North Atlantic Ocean, version 1.0

The USGS Cold-Water Coral Geographic Database (CoWCoG) provides a tool for researchers and managers interested in studying, protecting, and/or utilizing cold-water coral habitats in the Gulf of Mexico and western North Atlantic Ocean. The database makes information about the locations and taxonomy of cold-water corals available to the public in an easy-to-access form while preserving the scientific integrity of the data. The database includes over 1700 entries, mostly from published scientific literature, museum collections, and other databases. The CoWCoG database is easy to search in a variety of ways, and data can be quickly displayed in table form and on a map by using only the software included with this publication. Subsets of the database can be selected on the basis of geographic location, taxonomy, or other criteria and exported to one of several available file formats. Future versions of the database are being planned to cover a larger geographic area and additional taxa.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1996

EDC DAAC: Serving the land processes science community

The primary objective of the Earth Resources Observation System (EROS) Data Center (EDC) Distributed Active Archive Center (DAAC) for land processes data is to promote the interdisciplinary study and understanding of the integrated Earth system by providing remotely sensed and related ancillary data for the study, characterization, and monitoring of natural and anthropogenic conditions and processes existing and operating at or near the land surface. Generating, distributing, and preserving data and products from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) earth observing system (EOS) are primary functions of the DAAC. To that end, the EDC DAAC is using existing data sets in developing capabilities to efficiently and effectively ingest, process, manage, distribute, and archive for future generations land-related data collected by EOS sensors. Capabilities also are being developed to help users search for and acquire data and products, as well as to support their scientific application of those data and products. EDC DAAC programs and capability development activities address DAAC-defined science support requirements that relate to a broad spectrum of services and capabilities needed by science users.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2016

Overview with methods and procedures of the U.S. Geological Survey mineral-resource assessment of the Sagebrush Focal Areas of Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming: Chapter A in Mineral resources of the Sagebrush Focal Areas of Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, and Wyoming

This report, chapter A of Scientific Investigations Report 2016–5089, provides an overview of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Sagebrush Mineral-Resource Assessment (SaMiRA). The report also describes the methods, procedures, and voluminous fundamental reference information used throughout the assessment. Data from several major publicly available databases and other published sources were used to develop an understanding of the locatable, leaseable, and salable mineral resources of this vast area. This report describes the geologic, mineral-occurrence, geochemical, geophysical, remote-sensing, and Bureau of Land Management mineral-case-status data used for the assessment, along with the methods for evaluating locatable mineral-resource potential. The report also discusses energy-resource data (oil and gas, coal, and geothermal) used in the assessment. Appendixes include summary descriptive mineral-deposit models that provide the criteria necessary to assess for the pertinent locatable minerals and market-demand commodity profiles for locatable mineral commodities relevant to the project. Datasets used in the assessment are available as USGS data releases.

Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Wyoming↗

USGS2023

Annotated bibliography of scientific research on greater sage-grouse published from October 2019 to July 2022

Integrating recent scientific knowledge into management decisions supports effective natural resource management and can lead to better resource outcomes. However, finding and accessing scientific knowledge can be time consuming and costly. To assist in this process, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) created a series of annotated bibliographies on topics of management concern for western lands. Previously published reports introduced a methodology for preparing annotated bibliographies to facilitate integration of recent, peer-reviewed science into resource management decisions. Therefore, relevant text from those efforts is reproduced here and built on to incorporate new information. The greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus; hereafter “GRSG”) has been a focus of scientific investigation and management action for the past two decades. The 2015 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listing determination of “not warranted” under the Endangered Species Act was in part a result of a large-scale collaborative effort to develop strategies to conserve GRSG populations and their habitat and to reduce threats to both. New scientific information augments existing knowledge and can help inform updates or modifications to existing plans for managing GRSG and sagebrush ecosystems. However, the sheer number of scientific publications can be a challenge for managers tasked with evaluating and determining the need for potential updates to existing planning documents. To assist in this process, the USGS has reviewed and summarized the scientific literature published since January 1, 2015. Our most recent GRSG literature summary was published in 2020 (Carter and others, 2020) and included products published through October 2, 2019. Here, we consider products published between October 2, 2019, and July 21, 2022. We compiled and summarized peer-reviewed journal articles, data products, and formal technical reports (such as U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Reports and USGS Open-File Reports) on greater sage-grouse. We first systematically searched three reference databases and three government databases using the search phrase “greater sage-grouse.” We refined the initial list of products by removing (1) duplicates, (2) publications not published as research, data products, or scientific review articles in peer-reviewed journals or as formal technical reports, and (3) products for which greater sage-grouse was not a research focus or the study did not present new data or findings about greater sage-grouse. We summarized each product using a consistent structure (background, objectives, methods, location, findings, and implications) and identified management topics addressed by each product; for example, species and population characteristics. We also identified projects that provided new geospatial data. The review process for this annotated bibliography included two initial internal colleague reviews of each summary, requesting input on each summary from an author of the original publication, and formal peer review. Our initial searches resulted in 221 total products, of which 147 met our criteria for inclusion. Across products summarized in the annotated bibliography, broad-scale habitat characteristics, behavior or demographics, site-scale habitat characteristics, habitat selection, and population estimates or targets were the most commonly addressed management topics. The online version of this bibliography, which will be available on the Science for Resource Managers tool ( https://apps.usgs.gov/science-for-resource-managers ), will be searchable by topic, location, and year, and will include links to each original publication. The studies compiled and summarized here may inform planning and management actions that seek to maintain and restore sagebrush landscapes and GRSG populations across the GRSG range.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2004

Seedling growth of Wisconsin fast plants (Brassica rapa) in field environments

In this 3-week laboratory, students investigate the effects of an abiotic or biotic ecological factor on the growth or reproduction of rapid-cycling brassica ( Brassica rapa L. : Wisconsin Fast Plants) seedlings in the field. Measurable treatments include light, wind, herbivory, chemical or organic fertilizer, insecticides, and growth regulators (i.e., gibberellic acid spray, auxin paste). Students learn how to develop an hypothesis and apply the scientific method in a field setting. Students work in pairs and set up their experiments using previously prepared Wisconsin Fast Plant seedlings. One week later students harvest their plants during a return field trip after which they collect their data, write individual scientific reports, and present their findings in-class. This experiment is unique because Wisconsin Fast Plants are used in a field experiment instead of the usual laboratory setting.

Teaching Issues and Experiments in Ecology (TIEE)↗

USGS2003

The challenge of archiving and preserving remotely sensed data

Few would question the need to archive the scientific and technical (S&T) data generated by researchers. At a minimum, the data are needed for change analysis. Likewise, most people would value efforts to ensure the preservation of the archived S&T data. Future generations will use analysis techniques not even considered today. Until recently, archiving and preserving these data were usually accomplished within existing infrastructures and budgets. As the volume of archived data increases, however, organizations charged with archiving S&T data will be increasingly challenged (U.S. General Accounting Office, 2002). The U.S. Geological Survey has had experience in this area and has developed strategies to deal with the mountain of land remote sensing data currently being managed and the tidal wave of expected new data. The Agency has dealt with archiving issues, such as selection criteria, purging, advisory panels, and data access, and has met with preservation challenges involving photographic and digital media. That experience has allowed the USGS to develop management approaches, which this paper outlines.

Data Science Journal↗

USGS2014

Volcanology: Lessons learned from Synthetic Aperture Radar imagery

Twenty years of continuous Earth observation by satellite SAR have resulted in numerous new insights into active volcanism, including a better understanding of subsurface magma storage and transport, deposition of volcanic materials on the surface, and the structure and development of volcanic edifices. This massive archive of data has resulted in fundamental leaps in our understanding of how volcanoes work – for example, identifying magma accumulation at supposedly quiescent volcanoes, even in remote areas or in the absence of ground-based data. In addition, global compilations of volcanic activity facilitate comparison of deformation behavior between different volcanic arcs and statistical evaluation of the strong link between deformation and eruption. SAR data are also increasingly used in timely hazard evaluation thanks to decreases in data latency and growth in processing and analysis techniques. The existing archive of SAR imagery is on the cusp of being enhanced by a new generation of satellite SAR missions, in addition to ground-based and airborne SAR systems, which will provide enhanced temporal and spatial resolution, broader geographic coverage, and improved availability of data to the scientific community. Now is therefore an opportune time to review the contributions of SAR imagery to volcano science, monitoring, and hazard mitigation, and to explore the future potential for SAR in volcanology. Provided that the ever-growing volume of SAR data can be managed effectively, we expect the future application of SAR data to expand from being a research tool for analyzing volcanic activity after the fact, to being a monitoring and research tool capable of imaging a wide variety of processes on different temporal and spatial scales as those processes are occurring. These data can then be used to develop new models of how volcanoes work and to improve quantitative forecasts of volcanic activity as a means of mitigating risk from future eruptions.

Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research↗

USGS2019

Making Recursive Bayesian inference accessible

Bayesian models provide recursive inference naturally because they can formally reconcile new data and existing scientific information. However, popular use of Bayesian methods often avoids priors that are based on exact posterior distributions resulting from former studies. Two existing Recursive Bayesian methods are: Prior- and Proposal-Recursive Bayes. Prior-Recursive Bayes uses Bayesian updating, fitting models to partitions of data sequentially, and provides a way to accommodate new data as they become available using the posterior from the previous stage as the prior in the new stage based on the latest data. ProposalRecursive Bayes is intended for use with hierarchical Bayesian models and uses a set of transient priors in first stage independent analyses of the data partitions. The second stage of Proposal-Recursive Bayes uses the posteriors from the first stage as proposals in an MCMC algorithm to fit the full model. We combine Prior- and Proposal-Recursive concepts to fit any Bayesian model, and often with computational improvements. We demonstrate our method with two case studies. Our approach has implications for big data, streaming data, and optimal adaptive design situations.

American Statistician↗

USGS2021

Navigating the science-policy interface

As a wildlife population ecologist who wants to conduct useful science, I find the Endangered Species Act (ESA), like other federal wildlife statutes, an intriguing read. The topic is in my wheelhouse—fish, wildlife, and plants, with a focus at the population and species levels. There is an emphasis on science, in fact, the “best scientific and commercial data available.” And there are intriguing questions: what threats does a species face? What habitat would be critical for its survival? Could any federal actions put the species or critical habitat in greater peril? I am not alone in this attraction. Hundreds of scientists continue to consider the types of scientific analysis suggested by the ESA. The enthusiasm is palpable. If the first cursory read of the ESA is intriguing to me as a scientist, the second close read is tantalizing—I realize that something very attractive is just out of reach. I know how to estimate the probability of extinction, but I do not know what “in danger of extinction” means. I know how to evaluate the incremental change in status that might arise from some level of proposed take, but I do not know what “is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence” of a species means. The standards expressed in the statute are not stated in purely scientific terms. Thus, ESA decisions cannot be based solely on science, and require additional policy interpretation. Clarity about these policy interpretations—even awareness that they are needed—can be hard to find, leaving a gap between what I can provide as a scientist and what an ESA decision maker needs. This awareness of the interaction between science and policy is also occurring in the larger field of conservation science, where there has been an increasing recognition of a research-implementation gap, the need for actionable science, and the promise of translational ecology. All of these terms emphasize that science alone does not result in action; instead, action arises out of decisions that are informed both by science and by values. At the interface of science and policy, a scientist can deliver relevant knowledge, and a decision maker can explain the policy context in which that science is needed. As a scientist wanting to conduct useful science, I crave this two-way conversation. But how can this conversation be structured in a meaningful and appropriate way? In this chapter, I explore how decision analysis can be used to navigate the science-policy interface for ESA decisions. Decision analysis is a large, well-established field that studies how decisions are made and how they could be made, with explicit attention given to clarifying and separating the values-based and science-based elements of a decision; identifying the impediments that make a decision difficult; and providing tools to overcome those impediments. There have been concerted efforts to apply formal decision analysis to ESA decisions, but the practice is not yet widespread across both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service (the Services). The chapter begins with an introduction to decision analysis and how it seeks to bridge the science-policy interface. In subsequent sections, I explore how a decision analyst might frame listing and reclassification decisions, recovery planning, section 7 consultation, budget allocations, and a few other ESA decisions, with an emphasis on two questions: for each type of decision, what policy clarifications does the decision maker need to make; and knowing the policy context, what type of scientific assessment is needed. In the final discussion, I identify common themes among the types of decisions, and offer thoughts on how decision analysis could be more widely used to integrate science into ESA decisions.

Book chapter↗

USGS2012

A science plan for a comprehensive assessment of water supply in the region underlain by fractured rock in Maryland

The fractured rock region of Maryland, which includes land areas north and west of the Interstate 95 corridor, is the source of water supply for approximately 4.4 million Marylanders, or approximately 76 percent of the State's population. Whereas hundreds of thousands of residents rely on wells (both domestic and community), millions rely on surface-water sources. In this region, land use, geology, topography, water withdrawals, impoundments, and other factors affect water-flow characteristics. The unconfined groundwater systems are closely interconnected with rivers and streams, and are affected by seasonal and climatic variations. During droughts, groundwater levels drop, thereby decreasing well yields, and in some cases, wells have gone dry. Low ground-water levels contribute to reduced streamflows, which in turn, can lead to reduced habitat for aquatic life. Increased demand, over-allocation, population growth, and climate change can affect the future sustainability of water supplies in the region of Maryland underlain by fractured rock. In response to recommendations of the 2008 Advisory Committee on the Management and Protection of the State's Water Resources report, the Maryland Department of the Environment's Water Supply Program, the Maryland Geological Survey, the Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Monitoring and Non-Tidal Assessment (MANTA) Division, and the U.S. Geological Survey have developed a science plan for a comprehensive assessment that will provide new scientific information, new data analysis, and new tools for the State to better manage water resources in the fractured rock region of Maryland. The science plan lays out five goals for the comprehensive assessment: (1) develop tools for the improved management and investigation of groundwater and surface-water resources; (2) characterize factors affecting reliable yields of individual groundwater and surface-water supplies; (3) investigate impacts on nearby water withdrawal users caused by groundwater and surface-water withdrawals; (4) assess the role of streamflow and water withdrawals on the ecological integrity of streams; and (5) improve understanding of the distribution of water-quality conditions in fractured rock aquifers. To accomplish these goals, accurate data collection, review, and analysis are needed, including the study of "Research Watersheds" that can provide detailed information about the potential effects that climate change and water withdrawals may have on groundwater, streamflow, and aquatic life. The assessment planning started in 2009 and is being conducted with close interagency coordination. A Fractured Rock Aquifer Information System is currently (2012) undergoing initial development. Other major tasks that will be performed include the development of work plans for each science goal, the estimation of daily streamflow at ungaged streams, and the design and implementation of Research Watersheds. Finally, scenarios will be modeled to evaluate current water allocation permitting methodologies, investigate effects on nearby water withdrawal users caused by groundwater and surface-water withdrawals, and assess the potential impacts of climate change on water resources. Desktop and Web-based tools will be developed in order to meet the diverse research needs of the assessment. These tools, including the Fractured Rock Aquifer Information System will be continuously improved during the assessment to store relevant groundwater and surface-water data in spatially referenced databases, estimate streamflows, locate higher-yielding wells, estimate the impacts of withdrawals on nearby users, and assess the cumulative impacts of withdrawals on the aquatic resource. Tools will be developed to serve the needs of many audiences, including water resource managers, water suppliers, planners, policymakers, and other scientific investigators.

Maryl↗

USGS2013

Tools and data for meeting America's conservation challenges

The Gap Analysis Project (GAP) produces data and tools that help meet critical national challenges such as biodiversity conservation, renewable energy development, climate change adaptation, and infrastructure investment. The GAP is managed by the U.S. Geological Survey, Department of the Interior. GAP supports a wide range of national, State, and local agencies as well as nongovernmental organizations and businesses with scientific tools and data. GAP uses a collaborative approach to do research, analysis, and data development, resulting in a history of cooperation with more than 500 agencies and organizations nationally.

General Information Product↗

USGS2011

MercNet: A national monitoring network to assess responses to changing mercury emissions in the United States

A partnership of federal and state agencies, tribes, industry, and scientists from academic research and environmental organizations is establishing a national, policy-relevant mercury monitoring network, called MercNet, to address key questions concerning changes in anthropogenic mercury emissions and deposition, associated linkages to ecosystem effects, and recovery from mercury contamination. This network would quantify mercury in the atmosphere, land, water, and biota in terrestrial, freshwater, and coastal ecosystems to provide a national scientific capability for evaluating the benefits and effectiveness of emission controls. Program development began with two workshops, convened to establish network goals, to select key indicators for monitoring, to propose a geographic network of monitoring sites, and to design a monitoring plan. MercNet relies strongly on multi-institutional partnerships to secure the capabilities and comprehensive data that are needed to develop, calibrate, and refine predictive mercury models and to guide effective management. Ongoing collaborative efforts include the: (1) development of regional multi-media databases on mercury in the Laurentian Great Lakes, northeastern United States, and eastern Canada; (2) syntheses and reporting of these data for the scientific and policy communities; and (3) evaluation of potential monitoring sites. The MercNet approach could be applied to the development of other monitoring programs, such as emerging efforts to monitor and assess global mercury emission controls.

Ecotoxicology↗

USGS2015

The Centennial Trends Greater Horn of Africa precipitation dataset

East Africa is a drought prone, food and water insecure region with a highly variable climate. This complexity makes rainfall estimation challenging, and this challenge is compounded by low rain gauge densities and inhomogeneous monitoring networks. The dearth of observations is particularly problematic over the past decade, since the number of records in globally accessible archives has fallen precipitously. This lack of data coincides with an increasing scientific and humanitarian need to place recent seasonal and multi-annual East African precipitation extremes in a deep historic context. To serve this need, scientists from the UC Santa Barbara Climate Hazards Group and Florida State University have pooled their station archives and expertise to produce a high quality gridded ‘Centennial Trends’ precipitation dataset. Additional observations have been acquired from the national meteorological agencies and augmented with data provided by other universities. Extensive quality control of the data was carried out and seasonal anomalies interpolated using kriging. This paper documents the CenTrends methodology and data.

Scientific Data↗

USGS2023

Annotated bibliography of scientific research on Gunnison sage-grouse published from January 2005 to September 2022

Integrating recent scientific knowledge into management decisions supports effective natural resource management and can lead to better resource outcomes. However, finding and accessing scientific knowledge can be time consuming and costly. To assist in this process, the U.S. Geological Survey is creating a series of annotated bibliographies on topics of management concern for western lands. Previously published reports introduced a methodology for preparing annotated bibliographies to facilitate the integration of recent, peer-reviewed science into resource management decisions. Therefore, relevant text from those efforts is reproduced here to frame the presentation. Centrocercus minimus (Gunnison sage-grouse; hereafter GUSG) has been a focus of scientific investigation since the early 2000s. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed GUSG as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 2014 because of declining populations and increasing habitat loss. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Colorado Parks and Wildlife have sought to increase the conservation of this species by adapting management and recovery plans to reduce threats and increase population resiliency. GUSG are studied less than the closely related Centrocercus urophasianus (greater sage-grouse); however, research efforts have recently increased to understand the life history, genetics, and habitat suitability of this sagebrush-obligate species. We compiled and summarized peer-reviewed journal articles, data products, and formal technical reports (such as U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service General Technical Reports and U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Reports) on GUSG, published between January 2005 and September 2022. We first systematically searched three reference databases and three government databases using the following search phrases: “Gunnison sage-grouse” or “lesser sage-grouse” or “Gunnison grouse” or “Gunnison sage grouse” or “lesser sage grouse” or “ Centrocercus minimus .” We refined the initial list of products by removing (1) duplicates, (2) publications that were not published as research, data products, or scientific review articles in peer-reviewed journals or as formal technical reports, and (3) products that did not have GUSG as a research focus or products that did not present new data or findings about GUSG. We summarized each product using a consistent structure (background, objectives, methods, location, findings, and implications) and identified the management topics (for example, population estimates or targets, habitat, and management efforts) addressed by each product. We also noted which publications included new geospatial data. The review process for this annotated bibliography included two initial internal colleague reviews of each summary, requesting input on each summary from an author of the original publication, and a formal peer review. Our initial searches resulted in 80 total products, of which 63 met our criteria for inclusion of which 53 were products that had not been summarized before. Across products summarized in the annotated bibliography, broad-scale habitat characteristics; population estimates or targets; behavior or demographics; and genetics were the most commonly addressed management topics. The bibliographies are available on the Science for Resource Managers tool ( https://apps.usgs.gov/science-for-resource-managers ) and are searchable by topic, location, and year, and the search tool includes links to each original publication. The studies compiled and summarized in this annotated bibliography may inform planning and management actions that seek to maintain and restore sagebrush landscapes and GUSG populations across the GUSG range.

Colorado↗

USGS1978

Water resources data for Iowa, water year 1977

This report was prepared by personnel of the Iowa district of the Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey under the supervision of S. W. Wiitala, District Chief, and Alfred Clebsch, Jr., Regional Hydrologist, Central Region. It was done in cooperation with the State of Iowa and with other agencies. This report is one of a series issued by Iowa. General direction for the series is by J. S. Cragwall, Jr., Chief Hydrologist, U.S. Geological Survey, and G. W. Whetstone, Assistant Chief Hydrologist for Scientific Publications and Data Management. .

Iowa↗

USGS1979

Water resources data for Iowa, water year 1978

Iowa↗

USGS1981

Water resources data for Iowa, water year 1980

This report was prepared by personnel of the Iowa district of the Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey under the supervision of D. K. Leifeste, District Chief, and Alfred Clebsch Jr., Regional Hydrologist, Central Region. It was done in cooperation with the State of Iowa and with other agencies. This report is one of a series issued by Iowa. General direction for the series is by Philip Cohen, Jr., Chief Hydrologist, U. S. Geological Survey, and R. J. Dingman, Assistant Chief Hydrologist for Scientific Publications and Data Management.

Iowa↗