SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Applied Ecology and Environmental Research”

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 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

USGS2023

Landscape transcriptomics as a tool for addressing global change effects across diverse species

Landscape transcriptomics is an emerging field studying how genome-wide expression patterns reflect dynamic landscape-scale environmental drivers, including habitat, weather, climate, and contaminants, and the subsequent effects on organismal function. This field is benefitting from advancing and increasingly accessible molecular technologies, which in turn are allowing the necessary characterization of transcriptomes from wild individuals distributed across natural landscapes. This research is especially important given the rapid pace of anthropogenic environmental change and potential impacts that span levels of biological organization. We discuss three major themes in landscape transcriptomic research: connecting transcriptome variation across landscapes to environmental variation, generating and testing hypotheses about the mechanisms and evolution of transcriptomic responses to the environment, and applying this knowledge to species conservation and management. We discuss challenges associated with this approach and suggest potential solutions. We conclude that landscape transcriptomics has great promise for addressing fundamental questions in organismal biology, ecology, and evolution, while providing tools needed for conservation and management of species.

Molecular Ecology Resources↗

USGS2014

Ecoregions of Arizona (poster)

Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources; they are designed to serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and ecosystem components. By recognizing the spatial differences in the capacities and potentials of ecosystems, ecoregions stratify the environment by its probable response to disturbance. These general purpose regions are critical for structuring and implementing ecosystem management strategies across federal agencies, state agencies, and nongovernment organizations that are responsible for different types of resources within the same geographical areas. The Arizona ecoregion map was compiled at a scale of 1:250,000. It revises and subdivides an earlier national ecoregion map that was originally compiled at a smaller scale. The approach used to compile this map is based on the premise that ecological regions can be identified through the analysis of the spatial patterns and the composition of biotic and abiotic phenomena that affect or reflect differences in ecosystem quality and integrity. These phenomena include geology, physiography, vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology. The relative importance of each characteristic varies from one ecological region to another regardless of the hierarchical level. A Roman numeral hierarchical scheme has been adopted for different levels of ecological regions. Level I is the coarsest level, dividing North America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 50 regions. At level III, the continental United States contains 105 ecoregions and the conterminous United States has 85 ecoregions. Level IV is a further subdivision of level III ecoregions. Arizona contains arid deserts and canyonlands, semiarid shrub- and grass-covered plains, woodland- and shrubland-covered hills, lava fields and volcanic plateaus, forested mountains, glaciated peaks, and river alluvial floodplains. Ecological diversity is remarkably high. There are 7 level III ecoregions and 52 level IV ecoregions in Arizona and many continue into ecologically similar parts of adjacent states. This poster is part of a collaborative project primarily between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), USEPA National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (Corvallis, Oregon), USEPA Region IX, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)–Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), The Nature Conservancy, and several Arizona state agencies. The project is associated with an interagency effort to develop a common national framework of ecological regions. Reaching that objective requires recognition of the differences in the conceptual approaches and mapping methodologies applied to develop the most common ecoregion-type frameworks, including those developed by the USDA–Forest Service, the USEPA, and the NRCS. As each of these frameworks is further refined, their differences are becoming less discernible. Collaborative ecoregion projects, such as this one in Arizona, are a step toward attaining consensus and consistency in ecoregion frameworks for the entire nation.

Arizona↗

USGS2025

Supporting dryland restoration success with applied ecological forecasting of seeding outcomes

Introduction Ecological restoration is increasingly used to sustain biodiversity and ecosystem services. In drylands of the western United States (US), post-disturbance restoration often involves seeding treatments to promote the recovery of native plant communities. Spatial and temporal variability in environmental conditions influences plant establishment and contributes to low restoration success in certain locations and years. Objectives Here, we discuss how forecasts for plant establishment can be developed and delivered to help land managers anticipate the impacts of near-term (months to years) environmental conditions on restoration. Methods We developed an ecological forecast system that predicts the outcome of restoration seeding by integrating weather forecasts, an ecosystem water balance model, and plant establishment models. Results In this article, we focus on a conceptual approach to developing, delivering, and applying ecological forecasts for restoration. We illustrate the potential of this approach by adapting existing ecological models to build an initial version of a decision support tool that delivers a species-specific ecological forecast for big sagebrush ( Artemisia tridentata ) establishment. Integrating ecological forecasts into plans for restoration seeding presents opportunities to anticipate and account for environmental variability. Conclusions Finally, we discuss how connecting research, forecast delivery, and management can maximize the impact of ecological forecasts on restoration success.

Idaho, Nevada↗

USGS2019

Back from the brink: Sustainable management of the Lake Erie walleye fishery

This chapter describes management actions implemented after a large-scale population decline of the Walleye Sander vitreus population in Lake Erie, one of the Laurentian Great Lakes in North America. Intensive fishery exploitation during the 1950s combined with declining water quality conditions collapsed the Walleye stock during the early 1960s. The fishery persisted at low levels until 1970 when the fishery was closed (1970–1972) due to elevated mercury concentrations in Walleye tissue. Lake Erie fishery managers at the time recognized the need for a coordinated, multi-agency approach to protect this ecologically, economically, and socially important resource. The harvest ban was lifted in 1973 when mercury levels dropped below advisory levels. In 1976, an interagency management framework was established, which relied on a coordinated, science-based management philosophy consisting of estimating safe harvest levels, performing applied research, and conducting annual population assessments. The population rebounded during the 1980s in response to improving environmental conditions, regulated harvest, and a series of strong recruitment events. Declines in harvest and population size were again observed during the late 1990s and mid-2000s, likely due to variation in natural processes controlling recruitment, and fishery managers enacted harvest practices during this period to promote long-term sustainability. Today, Lake Erie Walleyes support one of the largest self-sustaining freshwater fisheries in North America. Throughout the years, Lake Erie managers have iteratively adopted changes to their population assessment model and altered harvest policies to avoid future fishery and population collapses. More than 40 years later, Lake Erie continues to support commercial and recreational fisheries lake wide. Lessons learned from the stock recovery and subsequent coordinated management for fishery sustainability include the importance of conducting routine population assessments, using science-based research to address key uncertainties, adopting modern stock assessment approaches, incorporating stakeholder input into the quota setting process, and addressing environmental concerns collaboratively at the lake level.

Book chapter↗

USGS2015

The Penobscot River and environmental contaminants: Assessment of tribal exposure through sustenance lifeways

EPA in collaboration with the Penobscot Indian Nation, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USF&WS) collectively embarked on a four year research study to evaluate the environmental health of the riverine system by targeting specific cultural practices and using traditional science to conduct a preliminary contaminant screening of the flora and fauna of the Penobscot River ecosystem. This study was designed as a preliminary screening to determine if contaminant concentrations in fish, eel, snapping turtle, wood ducks, and plants in Regions of the Penobscot River relevant to where PIN tribal members hunt, fish and gather plants were high enough to be a health concern. This study was not designed to be a statistically validated assessment of contaminant differences among study sites or among species. The traditional methodology for health risk assessment used by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is based on the use of exposure assumptions (e.g. exposure duration, food ingestion rate, body weight, etc.) that represent the entire American population, either as a central tendency exposure (e.g. average, median) or as a reasonable maximum exposure (e.g. 95% upper confidence limit). Unfortunately, EPA lacked exposure information for assessing health risks for New England regional tribes sustaining a tribal subsistence way of life. As a riverine tribe, the Penobscot culture and traditions are inextricably tied to the Penobscot River watershed. It is through hunting, fishing, trapping, gathering and making baskets, pottery, moccasins, birch-bark canoes and other traditional practices that the Penobscot culture and people are sustained. The Penobscot River receives a variety of pollutant discharges leaving the Penobscot Indian Nation (PIN) questioning the ecological health and water quality of the river and how this may affect the practices that sustain their way of life. The objectives of this Regional Applied Research Effort (RARE) study were to: Develop culturally sensitive methodologies for assessing the potential level of exposure tocontaminants that Penobscot Indian Nation tribal members may have from maintainingtribal sustenance practices. Conduct field surveys and laboratory analysis on targeted flora and fauna for chemicalexposure to dioxins/furans, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), total mercury and methyl-mercury. Assist the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) by providing thenecessary data to conduct a Public Health Assessment for the Penobscot Indian Nation. Establish protocols for assessing the level of exposure to PCBs, dioxins/furans and mercuryto PIN tribal members as a consequence of gathering tribal plants for medicinal andnutritional purposes; as well as consuming fish, wood duck, and snapping turtle as a primarysource of nutrition. Survey surface water, drinking water, and sediment from the Penobscot River and IndianIsland to assess the exposure of PIN tribal members to environmental genotoxicants thatcontinue cultural sustenance practices. This research initiative collected and analyzed sediment and biota to determine the level of contaminant exposure to Penobscot tribal members. Natural resource utilization patterns and exposure pathways were identified based on discussions with the Tribal elders. Identification of Tribal exposure factors (exposure pathways and contaminant concentrations) was essential for accurately assessing potential long-term Penobscot Indian Nation tribal members’ exposure. Based on this study, ATSDR’s Public Health Assessment (PHA) concluded that the Penobscot Indian Nation (PIN) tribal members who eat fish and snapping turtle at the ingestion levels suggested in the Wabanaki Traditional Cultural Lifeways Exposure Scenario Report (Wabanaki Exposure Scenario) may be exposed to harmful levels of mercury, dioxins/furans, dioxin-like PCBs, and ot

Maine↗

USGS2018

Synthesizing models useful for ecohydrology and ecohydraulic approaches: An emphasis on integrating models to address complex research questions

Ecohydrology combines empiricism, data analytics, and the integration of models to characterize linkages between ecological and hydrological processes. A challenge for practitioners is determining which models best generalizes heterogeneity in hydrological behaviour, including water fluxes across spatial and temporal scales, integrating environmental and socio‐economic activities to determine best watershed management practices and data requirements. We conducted a literature review and synthesis of hydrologic, hydraulic, water quality, and ecological models designed for solving interdisciplinary questions. We reviewed 1,275 papers and identified 178 models that have the capacity to answer an array of research questions about ecohydrology or ecohydraulics. Of these models, 43 were commonly applied due to their versatility, accessibility, user‐friendliness, and excellent user‐support. Forty‐one of 43 reviewed models were linked to at least 1 other model especially: Water Quality Analysis Simulation Program (linked to 21 other models), Soil and Water Assessment Tool (19), and Hydrologic Engineering Center's River Analysis System (15). However, model integration was still relatively infrequent. There was substantial variation in model applications, possibly an artefact of the regional focus of research questions, simplicity of use, quality of user‐support efforts, or a limited understanding of model applicability. Simply increasing the interoperability of model platforms, transformation of models to user‐friendly forms, increasing user‐support, defining the reliability and risk associated with model results, and increasing awareness of model applicability may promote increased use of models across subdisciplines. Nonetheless, the current availability of models allows an array of interdisciplinary questions to be addressed, and model choice relates to several factors including research objective, model complexity, ability to link to other models, and interface choice.

Ecohydrology↗

USGS2026

Tidal forested wetlands can be incorporated into blue carbon conservation and restoration strategies

Purpose of Review Blue carbon is an important concept for environmental policy. Blue carbon strategies (conservation and restoration for carbon gain) have been primarily implemented with mangroves, though are likely to be suitable for other tidal forested wetlands. Here, we discuss the expanding definition of blue carbon encompassing all tidal forested wetlands, synthesize ecological and carbon sink knowledge of tidal forested wetlands, and reflect on key actions in mangrove blue carbon research and implementation that could be applied to other tidal forested wetlands. Recent Findings Conceptually, the blue carbon concept has now expanded beyond traditional coastal vegetated ecosystems to include all tidal wetlands, including tidal forested wetlands. Emerging data on carbon sequestration, emissions, and budgets from around the world now show that many tidal forested wetland ecosystems are carbon sinks at a magnitude similar to mangroves. At the global scale, mangroves have become incorporated into blue carbon strategies rapidly compared to other tidal forested wetlands, facilitated by agenda-setting papers, adequate data addressing concerns on emissions and permanence, the availability of global maps, a clear ecosystem definition, clear accounting and policy frameworks, and international stakeholders who acted as high profile ecosystem advocates, alongside long-term capacity building efforts. This provides a roadmap for implementation in other tidal forested wetlands. Summary Tidal forested wetlands other than mangroves have high potential for blue carbon management. Many tidal forested wetlands share biophysical similarities with mangroves, carbon stocks can be similar, and methane emissions are often no higher. An increasing evidence base, challenging assumptions around greenhouse gas fluxes, and robust engagement with policy actors and frameworks, could increase the use of blue carbon for tidal forested wetland conservation and restoration.

Current Forestry Reports↗

USGS2016

A review and synthesis of recreation ecology research supporting carrying capacity and visitor use management decisionmaking

Resource and experiential impacts associated with visitation to wilderness and other similar backcountry settings have long been addressed by land managers under the context of “carrying capacity” decisionmaking. Determining a maximum level of allowable use, below which high-quality resource and experiential conditions would be sustained, was an early focus in the 1960s and 1970s. However, decades of recreation ecology research have shown that the severity and areal extent of visitor impact problems are influenced by an interrelated array of use-related, environmental, and managerial factors. This complexity, with similar findings from social science research, prompted scientists and managers to develop more comprehensive carrying capacity frameworks, including a new Visitor Use Management framework. These frameworks rely on a diverse array of management strategies and actions, often termed a “management toolbox,” for resolving visitor impact problems. This article reviews the most recent and relevant recreation ecology studies that have been applied in wildland settings to avoid or minimize resource impacts. The key findings and their management implications are highlighted to support the professional management of common trail, recreation site, and wildlife impact problems. These studies illustrate the need to select from a more diverse array of impact management strategies and actions based on an evaluation of problems to identify the most influential factors that can be manipulated.

Journal of Forestry↗

USGS1989

Use of experimental ecosystems in regulatory decision making

Tiered testing for the effects of chemicals on aquatic ecosystems has begun to include tests at the ecosystem level as a component in pesticide regristration. Because such tests are expensive, regulators and industry need to know what additional information they can gain from such tests relative to the costs of the simpler single-species toxicity bioassays. Requirements for ecosystem-level testing have developed because resource managers have not fully understood the implications of potential damage to resources without having evaluations of the predicted impacts under field conditions. We review approaches taken in the use of experimental ecosystems, discuss benefits and limitations of small- and large-scale ecosystem tests, and point to correlative approaches between laboratory and field toxicity testing. Laboratory experimental ecosystems (microcosms) have been successfully used to measure contaminant bioavailability, to determine routes of uptake in moderately complex aquatic systems, and to isolate factors modifying contaminant uptake into the biota. Such factors cannot be as readily studied in outdoor experimental ecosystems because direct cause-and-effect relations are often confounded and difficult to isolate. However, laboratory tests can be designed to quantify the relations among three variables: known concentrations of Stressors; specific sublethal behavioral, biochemical, and physiological effects displayed by organisms; and responses that have been observed in ecosystem-level analyses. For regulatory purposes, the specificity of test results determines how widely they can be applied. Ecotoxicological research should be directed at attempts to identify instances where single-species testing would be the appropriate level of analysis for identifying critical ecological endpoints and for clarifying relationships between ecosystem structure and function, and where it would be inadequate for a given level of analysis.

Environmental Management↗

USGS2016

Ecoregions of California

Ecoregions denote areas of general similarity in ecosystems and in the type, quality, and quantity of environmental resources. They are designed to serve as a spatial framework for the research, assessment, management, and monitoring of ecosystems and ecosystem components. By recognizing the spatial differences in the capacities and potentials of ecosystems, ecoregions stratify the environment by its probable response to disturbance (Bryce and others, 1999). These general purpose regions are critical for structuring and implementing ecosystem management strategies across Federal agencies, State agencies, and nongovernment organizations that are responsible for different types of resources in the same geographical areas (Omernik and others, 2000). The approach used to compile this map is based on the premise that ecological regions are hierarchical and can be identified through the analysis of the spatial patterns and the composition of biotic and abiotic phenomena that affect or reflect differences in ecosystem quality and integrity (Wiken, 1986; Omernik, 1987, 1995). These phenomena include geology, physiography, vegetation, climate, soils, land use, wildlife, and hydrology. The relative importance of each characteristic varies from one ecological region to another regardless of the hierarchical level. A Roman numeral hierarchical scheme has been adopted for different levels of ecological regions. Level I is the coarsest level, dividing North America into 15 ecological regions. Level II divides the continent into 50 regions (Commission for Environmental Cooperation Working Group, 1997, map revised 2006). At level III, the continental United States contains 105 ecoregions and the conterminous United States has 85 ecoregions (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2013). Level IV, depicted here for California, is a further refinement of level III ecoregions. Explanations of the methods used to define these ecoregions are given in Omernik (1995), Omernik and others (2000), and Omernik and Griffith (2014). California has great ecological and biological diversity. The State contains offshore islands and coastal lowlands, large alluvial valleys, forested mountain ranges, deserts, and various aquatic habitats. There are 13 level III ecoregions and 177 level IV ecoregions in California and most continue into ecologically similar parts of adjacent States of the United States or Mexico (Bryce and others, 2003; Thorson and others, 2003; Griffith and others, 2014). The California ecoregion map was compiled at a scale of 1:250,000. It revises and subdivides an earlier national ecoregion map that was originally compiled at a smaller scale (Omernik, 1987; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2013). This poster is the result of a collaborative project primarily between U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Region IX, USEPA National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (Corvallis, Oregon), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)–Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), U.S. Department of the Interior–Geological Survey (USGS), and other State of California agencies and universities. The project is associated with interagency efforts to develop a common framework of ecological regions (McMahon and others, 2001). Reaching that objective requires recognition of the differences in the conceptual approaches and mapping methodologies applied to develop the most common ecoregion-type frameworks, including those developed by the USDA–Forest Service (Bailey and others, 1994; Miles and Goudy, 1997; Cleland and others, 2007), the USEPA (Omernik 1987, 1995), and the NRCS (U.S. Department of Agriculture–Soil Conservation Service, 1981; U.S. Department of Agriculture–Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2006). As each of these frameworks is further refined, their differences are becoming less discernible. Regional collaborative projects such as this one in California, where some agreement has been reached among multiple resource-management agencies, are a step toward attaining consensus and consistency in ecoregion frameworks for the entire nation.

California↗

USGS2025

Leveraging artificial intelligence and machine learning to advance Chesapeake Bay research and management: A review of status, challenges, and opportunities

The Chesapeake Bay and its watershed (hereafter “Chesapeake Bay region”) have been the focus of extensive restoration efforts for several decades. These restoration efforts are guided by the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement (Chesapeake Executive Council 2014) which outlines 10 goals and 31 measurable outcomes. The Chesapeake Bay is globally recognized as a model for coastal restoration due to long-term investments in monitoring, modeling, implementation and research by the Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) partnership. These monitoring network spans tidal and non-tidal regions and provides data across multiple scales. Artificial intelligence (AI), particularly machine-learning (ML) and deep learning (DL), has emerged as a powerful tool for analyzing large, complex datasets. These techniques have gained widespread adoption across various disciplines, including ecology, hydrology, and environmental science. In the Bay context, AI/ML is increasingly being used to explore drivers of environmental change, analyze system dynamics, and predict conditions in areas with limited monitoring. The CBP partnership, particularly its Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC), has increasingly recognized the growing role of AI/ML in watershed and estuarine management. Recent Chesapeake Community Research Symposium sessions and initiatives such as the Chesapeake Global Collaboratory highlight increasing regional momentum to apply big data and AI/ML for environmental solutions. Together, these developments underscore the timely need to explore how AI/ML can help advance Chesapeake Bay restoration and management. This STAC workshop, titled “Leveraging Artificial Intelligence and Machine learning to Advance Chesapeake Bay Research and Management: A review of status, challenges, and opportunities,” was held from February 24-25, 2025, in Edgewater, Maryland to bring together over 50 federal, state, and academic scientists and partners to synthesize the current state of AI/ML applications and identify research gaps in Chesapeake Bay research and management. The workshop focused on three main objectives: 1. Summarize recent AI/ML applications and lessons learned in both tidal and nontidal areas of the Chesapeake Bay region. 2. Identify challenges and gaps in applying AI/ML approaches to Chesapeake Bay data. Such challenges and gaps may include data limitations, harmonization issues, ineffective communication of AI/ML insights, and a lack of coordination among research and management institutions. 3. Develop recommendations and identify opportunities for leveraging AI/ML to address issues across the Chesapeake Bay region. Key areas of focus may include generating new information to support watershed management, delivering AI/MLgenerated insights to managers in a clear and actionable way, and fostering greater collaboration among stakeholders within the CBP Partnership. Workshop participants engaged in science presentations and breakout sessions to develop recommendations for advancing the integration of AI/ML techniques into research and management across the Chesapeake Bay region. By synthesizing current applications, identifying challenges, and exploring new opportunities, the workshop has provided valuable insights and recommendations for better leveraging AI/ML approaches to support the success of Bay restoration efforts. Together, these recommendations provide a roadmap for enhancing data-driven, science-based decision making aligned with the goals and outcomes of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement.

Delaware, Maryland, Virginia↗

USGS2009

Regional estimates of reef carbonate dynamics and productivity Using Landsat 7 ETM+, and potential impacts from ocean acidification

Using imagery at 30 m spatial resolution from the most recent Landsat satellite, the Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM+), we scale up reef metabolic productivity and calcification from local habitat-scale (10 -1 to 10 0 km 2 ) measurements to regional scales (10 3 to 10 4 km 2 ). Distribution and spatial extent of the North Florida Reef Tract (NFRT) habitats come from supervised classification of the Landsat imagery within independent Landsat-derived Millennium Coral Reef Map geomorphologic classes. This system minimizes the depth range and variability of benthic habitat characteristics found in the area of supervised classification and limits misclassification. Classification of Landsat imagery into 5 biotopes (sand, dense live cover, sparse live cover, seagrass, and sparse seagrass) by geomorphologic class is >73% accurate at regional scales. Based on recently published habitat-scale in situ metabolic measurements, gross production (P = 3.01 ?? 10 9 kg C yr -1 ), excess production (E = -5.70 ?? 10 8 kg C yr -1 ), and calcification (G = -1.68 ?? 10 6 kg CaCO 3 yr -1 ) are estimated over 2711 km 2 of the NFRT. Simple models suggest sensitivity of these values to ocean acidification, which will increase local dissolution of carbonate sediments. Similar approaches could be applied over large areas with poorly constrained bathymetry or water column properties and minimal metabolic sampling. This tool has potential applications for modeling and monitoring large-scale environmental impacts on reef productivity, such as the influence of ocean acidification on coral reef environments. ?? Inter-Research 2009.

Marine Ecology Progress Series↗

USGS2017

Five-year external reviews of the eight Department of Interior Climate Science Centers: Southeast Climate Science Center

In 2008, the U.S. Congress authorized the establishment of the National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC) within the U.S. Department of Interior (DOI). Housed administratively within the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), NCCWSC is part of the DOI’s ongoing mission to meet the challenges of climate change and its effects on wildlife and aquatic resources. From 2010 through 2012, NCCWSC established eight regional DOI Climate Science Centers (CSCs). Each of these regional CSCs operated with the mission to “synthesize and integrate climate change impact data and develop tools that the Department’s managers and partners can use when managing the Department’s land, water, fish and wildlife, and cultural heritage resources” (Salazar 2009). The model developed by NCCWSC for the regional CSCs employed a dual approach of a federal USGS-staffed component and a parallel host-university component established competitively through a 5-year cooperative agreement with NCCWSC. At the conclusion of this 5-year agreement, a review of each CSC was undertaken, with the Southeast Climate Science Center (SE CSC) review in February 2016. The SE CSC is hosted by North Carolina State University (NCSU) in Raleigh, North Carolina, and is physically housed within the NCSU Department of Applied Ecology along with the Center for Applied Aquatic Ecology, the North Carolina Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit (CFWRU), and the North Carolina Agromedicine Institute. The U.S. Department of Agriculture Southeast Regional Climate Hub is based at NCSU as is the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Southeast Regional Climate Center, the North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies, the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, the NOAA National Weather Service, the State Climate Office of North Carolina, and the U.S. Forest Service Eastern Forest Environmental Threat Assessment Center. This creates a strong core of organizations operating in close proximity focused on climate issues. The geographic area covered by the SE CSC represents all or part of 16 states and the Caribbean Islands and has overlapping boundaries with seven Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs): Appalachian LCC, Eastern Tallgrass Prairie and Big Rivers LCC, Gulf Coast Prairie LCC, Gulf Coastal Plains and Ozarks LCC, Peninsular Florida LCC, South Atlantic LCC, and Caribbean LCC. The SE CSC region also encompasses 134 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service refuges and 89 National Park Service (NPS) units and is home to 11 federally recognized and 54 state recognized tribes.

Report↗

USGS2010

BRIDGES: Evolution of basic and applied linkages in benthic science

Growing awareness of environmental degradation resulted in stricter environmental regulations and laws for aquatic ecosystems. These regulations were followed by an increase in applied research and monitoring beginning in the early 1970s. The number of applied scientists who were members of the North American Benthological Society grew at a commensurate rate. The editors of J-NABS recognized that, despite these increases, submitted manuscripts mostly addressed basic science. In response, the BRIDGES section of J-NABS was created in 1994 to provide a forum for linking basic ecological principles to applied science problems and issues. We examined the emergence of applied science topics in J-NABS and its predecessor, Freshwater Invertebrate Biology , from their beginning in 1982 to 2009. We classified papers among 11 categories that included a basic/applied science linkage. In the 1980s, applied papers were predominantly on effects of eutrophication/pollution and landuse changes. When BRIDGES was established in 1994, papers were solicited by editors and BRIDGES sections usually included >1 paper on a common theme to express complementary or alternate viewpoints. Forty-two papers appeared in BRIDGES between 1994 and 2009, but the number per issue declined after 2001. The total number of applied science papers in J-NABS has increased since ∼1994. Citation analysis of BRIDGES papers illustrates how information is being cited, but applied papers often are used in ways that might not lead to citations. BRIDGES transitioned to a new format in September 2009 to address new types of complex, multifaceted linkages. All new BRIDGES articles will be open access, and authors will be encouraged to produce lay-language fact sheets and to post them on the web.

Journal of the North American Benthological Societ↗

USGS2021

Modeling areal measures of campsite impacts on the Appalachian National Scenic Trail to enhance ecological sustainability

Campsite impacts in protected natural areas are most effectively minimized by a containment strategy that focuses use on a limited number of sustainable campsites that spatially concentrate camping activities. This research employs spatial autoregressive (SAR) modeling to evaluate the relative influence of use-related, environmental, and managerial factors on two salient measures of campsite impact. Relational analyses examined numerous field-collected and GIS-derived indicators, including several new indicators calculated using high-resolution Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) topographic data to evaluate the influence of terrain characteristics on the dependent variables. Chosen variables in the best SAR models explained 35% and 30% of the variation in campsite size and area of vegetation loss on campsites. Results identified three key indicators that managers can manipulate to enhance the sustainability of campsites: campsite type, and terrain characteristics relating to landform slope and topographic roughness. Results support indirect management methods that rely on the location, design, construction, and maintenance of campsites, instead of direct regulations that restrict visitation or visitor freedoms. As visitation pressures continue to increase, this knowledge can be applied to select and promote the use of more ecologically sustainable campsites.

Connecticut, Georgia, Maine, Maryland, Massachuset↗

USGS2011

Detection biases yield misleading patterns of species persistence and colonization in fragmented landscapes

Species occurrence patterns, and related processes of persistence, colonization and turnover, are increasingly being used to infer habitat suitability, predict species distributions, and measure biodiversity potential. The majority of these studies do not account for observational error in their analyses despite growing evidence suggesting that the sampling process can significantly influence species detection and subsequently, estimates of occurrence. We examined the potential biases of species occurrence patterns that can result from differences in detectability across species and habitat types using hierarchical multispecies occupancy models applied to a tropical bird community in an agricultural fragmented landscape. Our results suggest that detection varies widely among species and habitat types. Not incorporating detectability severely biased occupancy dynamics for many species by overestimating turnover rates, producing misleading patterns of persistence and colonization of agricultural habitats, and misclassifying species into ecological categories (i.e., forest specialists and generalists). This is of serious concern, given that most research on the ability of agricultural lands to maintain current levels of biodiversity by and large does not correct for differences in detectability. We strongly urge researchers to apply an inferential framework which explicitly account for differences in detectability to fully characterize species-habitat relationships, correctly guide biodiversity conservation in human-modified landscapes, and generate more accurate predictions of species responses to future changes in environmental conditions.

Las Cruces Biological Station↗

USGS2021

Developing species-age cohorts from forest inventory and analysis data to parameterize a forest landscape model

Simulating long-term, landscape level changes in forest composition requires estimates of stand age to initialize succession models. Detailed stand ages are rarely available, and even general information on stand history often is lacking. We used data from USDA Forest Service Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) database to estimate broad age classes for a forested landscape to simulate changes in landscape composition and structure relative to climate change at Fort Drum, a 43,000 ha U.S. Army installation in northwestern New York. Using simple linear regression, we developed relationships between tree diameter and age for FIA site trees from the host and adjacent ecoregions and applied those relationships to forest stands at Fort Drum. We observed that approximately half of the variation in age was explained by diameter breast height (DBH) across all species studied ( r 2 = 0.42 for sugar maple Acer saccharum to 0.63 for white ash Fraxinus americana ). We then used age-diameter relationships from published research on northern hardwood species to calibrate results from the FIA-based analysis. With predicted stand age, we used tree species life histories and environmental conditions represented by ecological site types to parameterize a stochastic forest landscape model (LANDIS-II) to spatially and temporally model successional changes in forest communities at Fort Drum. Forest stands modeled over 100 years without significant disturbance appeared to reflect expected patterns of increasing dominance by shade-tolerant mesophytic tree species such as sugar maple, red maple ( Acer rubrum ), and eastern hemlock ( Tsuga canadensis ) where soil moisture was sufficient. On drier sandy soils, eastern white pine ( Pinus strobus ), red pine ( P. resinosa ), northern red oak ( Quercus rubra ), and white oak ( Q. alba ) continued to be important components throughout the modeling period with no net loss at the landscape scale. Our results suggest that despite abundant precipitation and relatively low evapotranspiration rates for the region, low soil water holding capacity and fertility may be limiting factors for the spread of mesophytic species on excessively drained soils in the region. Increasing atmospheric temperatures projected for the region could alter moisture regimes for many coarse-textured soils providing a possible mechanism for expansion of xerophytic tree species.

New York↗

USGS2026

Co-producing coastal bird research on the Gulf Coast through structured decision making (SDM) and constructed value of information (CVoI)

Conservation practitioners face the complex challenge of addressing global biodiversity threats within social-ecological systems with multiple jurisdictions, numerous interest groups, and changing environmental conditions. Bridging the research-to-implementation gap between scientists and managers, which integrates diverse perspectives that represent the variety of considerations impacting management outcomes can help to inform efficient and effective conservation. Avian conservation programs along the U.S. Gulf Coast exemplify these challenges, as management decisions must address diverse threats to declining coastal bird populations across large breeding, wintering, and migratory ranges while facing uncertainty surrounding the efficacy of large-scale strategies. This provides opportunities for improving management through co-produced research with structured decision making (SDM). We present a case study that demonstrates the application of co-production principles and SDM to collaboratively develop high-priority research questions informing effective avian conservation and management. Additionally, we applied a constructed value of information (CVoI) framework to identify and prioritize which uncertainties to reduce and better understand how research questions impact management actions. The integration of SDM’s five-step decision making framework ensured key principles of co-production were met, while co-production enhanced SDM outcomes by incorporating diverse perspectives and knowledge bases. CVoI further allowed participants to collectively determine final high-priority research questions in the face of complexity and uncertainty. Together, these approaches supported co-produced knowledge-generation, strategic hypothesis prioritization, and identification of research questions most likely to improve conservation decisions. This case study from the U.S. Gulf Coast demonstrates how co-produced research through SDM offers a broadly applicable approach for navigating ecological complexity and bridging the research-to-implementation gap in avian conservation.

Gulf Coast↗