USGS Science⌕ Search

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.

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

At least 379 records · Page 21Linked to original sources

Merging scientific silos: Integrating specialized approaches for thinking about and using spatial data that can provide new directions for persistent fisheries problems

By merging our specialization silos, fisheries professionals can expand the options that are available to them to address difficult fisheries and aquatic conservation problems, which require an understanding of spatial patterns in geographically large systems. Our purpose is to start a profession-wide conversation about additional ways to think about and use spatial data. We use case studies to illustrate how identifying and merging multiple specialized approaches (e.g., fish tracking, fish surveys, geomorphology, social science, jurisdictional viewpoints) can create an ensemble that has advantages over the use of any single approach alone. Thus, our perspective is not about solving a specific technical problem with a new tool, but about the benefits of identifying gaps in data from one specialized approach, and filling those gaps with data from other specialized approaches. If multiple approaches are coordinated through a larger, problem-specific planning strategy, the result can be better outcomes for difficult problems through creative integration. We encourage others to add constructive ideas to the views initiated here.

Fisheries Magazine↗

Laboratory assessment of alternative stream velocity measurement methods

Understanding streamflow in montane watersheds on regional scales is often incomplete due to a lack of data for small-order streams that link precipitation and snowmelt processes to main stem discharge. This data deficiency is attributed to the prohibitive cost of conventional streamflow measurement methods and the remote location of many small streams. Expedient and low-cost streamflow measurement methods used by resource professionals or citizen scientists can provide scientifically useful solutions to this data deficiency. To this end, four current velocity measurement methods were evaluated in a laboratory flume: the surface float, rising body, velocity head rod, and rising air bubble methods. The methods were tested under a range of stream velocities, cross-sectional depths, and streambed substrates. The resulting measurements provide estimates of precision and bias of each method, as well as method-specific insight and calibration formulas. The velocity head rod and surface float methods were the easiest methods to use, providing greater precision at large (>=0.6 m/s) and small (<0.6 m/s) velocities, respectively. However, the reliance on a velocity ratio for each of these methods can generate inaccuracy in their results. The rising body method is more challenging to execute and of lower precision than the former two methods but provides low bias measurements. The rising air bubble method has a complex instrument assembly that is considered impractical for potential field user groups.

PLoS ONE↗

The Sedimentary Geochemistry and Paleoenvironments Project Phase 2 data release: An open data resource for the study of Earth's environmental history

Geochemical data from sedimentary rocks are the primary source of information regarding Earth's surface evolution through time, including its air and water envelopes and interactions with life and deep Earth processes. The Sedimentary Geochemistry and Paleoenvironments Project (SGP) is a scientific consortium centered around open data and community-driven development of cyberinfrastructure tools and resources for sedimentary geochemistry and Earth history. Here we describe the SGP Phase 2 data release, which focused on incorporating Paleoproterozoic and Mesoproterozoic (2500–1000 million years ago) data and better accommodating carbonate data. This data release was built through the involvement of >200 researchers worldwide in academia, government, and industry, and provides the largest available public data resource for our user community in the academic fields of geochemistry, sedimentology, tectonics, paleontology, Earth history, and paleoclimate, as well as the petroleum and minerals industries. The dataset now encompasses 126,006 samples and 4,132,371 geochemical analyses. In addition to direct entry by SGP Team Members, we have ingested and incorporated datasets from the Geoscience Australia OZCHEM database, the Alberta Geological Survey, and the Deep-Time Marine Sedimentary Element Database (DM-SED) compilation. This paper details sampling in the Phase 2 dataset with respect to age, geography, lithology, and other geological characteristics, documents access via our search website and API, discusses possible issues and/or biases in the dataset that could impact analyses, describes plans for governance and stewardship of data from Indigenous lands, and serves as the citable reference paper for the data release.

Chemical Geology↗

Data from selected U.S. Geological Survey National Stream Water Quality Monitoring Networks

A nationally consistent and well-documented collection of water quality and quantity data compiled during the past 30 years for streams and rivers in the United States is now available on CD-ROM and accessible over the World Wide Web. The data include measurements from two U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) national networks for 122 physical, chemical, and biological properties of water collected at 680 monitoring stations from 1962 to 1995, quality assurance information that describes the sample collection agencies, laboratories, analytical methods, and estimates of laboratory measurement error (bias and variance), and information on selected cultural and natural characteristics of the station watersheds. The data are easily accessed via user-supplied software including Web browser, spreadsheet, and word processor, or may be queried and printed according to user-specified criteria using the supplied retrieval software on CD-ROM. The water quality data serve a variety of scientific uses including research and educational applications related to trend detection, flux estimation, investigations of the effects of the natural environment and cultural sources on water quality, and the development of statistical methods for designing efficient monitoring networks and interpreting water resources data.

Water Resources Research↗

AMAP Assessment 2013: Arctic Ocean acidification

This assessment report presents the results of the 2013 AMAP Assessment of Arctic Ocean Acidification (AOA). This is the first such assessment dealing with AOA from an Arctic-wide perspective, and complements several assessments that AMAP has delivered over the past ten years concerning the effects of climate change on Arctic ecosystems and people. The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) is a group working under the Arctic Council. The Arctic Council Ministers have requested AMAP to: - produce integrated assessment reports on the status and trends of the conditions of the Arctic ecosystems; - identify possible causes for the changing conditions; - detect emerging problems, their possible causes, and the potential risk to Arctic ecosystems including indigenous peoples and other Arctic residents; and to - recommend actions required to reduce risks to Arctic ecosystems. This report provides the accessible scientific basis and validation for the statements and recommendations made in the Arctic Ocean Acidification Assessment Summary for Policy-makers that was delivered to Arctic Council Ministers at their meeting in Kiruna, Sweden in May 2011 and the related AMAP State of the Arctic Environment report Arctic Ocean Acidification 2013: An Overview . It includes extensive background data and references to the scientific literature, and details the sources for figures reproduced in the overview report. Whereas the Summary for Policy-makers report contains recommendations that focus mainly on policy-relevant actions concerned with addressing the consequences of AOA, the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report also cover issues of a more scientific nature, such as proposals for filling gaps in knowledge, and recommendations relevant to future monitoring and research work. The AOA assessment was conducted between 2010 and 2013 by an international group of over 60 experts. Lead authors were selected based on an open nomination process coordinated by AMAP. A similar process was used to select international experts who independently reviewed this report. Information contained in this report is fully references and based on first and foremost peer-reviewed and published results of research and monitoring undertaken since 2006. It also incorporates some new (unpublished) information from monitoring and research conducted according to well-established and documented national and international standards of quality assurance/quality control protocols. Care has been taken to ensure that no critical probability statements are based on non-peer-reviewed materials. Access to reliable and up-to-date information is essential for the development of science-based decision-making regarding ongoing changes in the Arctic and their global implications. The AOA assessment summary reports and films have therefore been developed specifically for policy-makers, summarizing the main findings of the AOA assessment. The AOA lead authors have confirmed that both this report and its derivative products accurately and fully reflect their scientific assessment. The AOA reports and the films are freely available from the AMAP Secretariat and on the AMAP website: www.amap.no, and their use for educational purposes is encouraged. AMAP would like to express its appreciation to all experts who have contributed their time, efforts and data, in particular the lead authors who coordinated the production of this report. Thanks are also due to the reviewers who contributed to the AOA peer-review process and provided valuable comments that helped to ensure the quality of the report. A list of the main contributors is included at the start of each chapter. The list is not comprehensive. Specifically, it does not include the many national institutes, laboratories and organizations, and their staff, which have been involved in various countries in AOA-related monitoring and research. Apologies, and no lesser thanks are given to any individuals unintentionally omitted from the list. The support from the Arctic countries and non-Arctic countries implementing research and monitoring in the Arctic is vital to the success of AMAP. The AMAP work is essentially based on ongoing activities within these countries, and the countries that provide the necessary support for most the experts involved in the preparation of the AMAP assessments. In particular, AMAP would like to acknowledge Norway for taking the lead-country role in this assessment and thank Canada, Norway, Sweden, USA and the Nordic Council of Ministers for their financial support to the AOA work. The AMAP Working Group is pleased to present its assessment to the Arctic Council and the international science community. Richard Bellerby (AOA assessment Chair) Russel Shearer (AMAP Chair) Lars-Otto Reiersen (AMAP Executive Secretary) Oslo, May 2013

Report↗

Statistical summaries of streamflow in Montana and adjacent areas, water years 1900 through 2002

In response to the need to have more current information about streamflow characteristics in Montana, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Montana Department of Environmental Quality, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, and Bureau of Land Management, conducted a study to analyze streamflow data. Updated statistical summaries of streamflow characteristics are presented for 286 streamflow-gaging sites in Montana and adjacent areas having 10 or more years of record for water years 1900 through 2002. Data include the magnitude and probability of annual low and high flow, the magnitude and probability of low flow for three seasons (March-June, July-October, and November-February), flow duration of the daily mean discharge, and the monthly and annual mean discharges. For streamflow-gaging stations where 20 percent or more of the contributing drainage basin is affected by dams or other large-scale human modification, streamflow is considered regulated. Separate streamflow characteristics are presented for the unregulated and regulated periods of record for sites with sufficient data.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: January 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: February 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: March 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: April 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: May 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: June 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: July 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: August 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: September 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: October 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: November 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗

Preliminary geomagnetic data, College Observatory, Fairbanks, Alaska: December 1976

The preliminary geomagnetic data included here is made available to scientific personnel and organizations, as part of a cooperative effort and on a data exchange basis because of the early need by some users. To avoid delay, all of the data is copied from original forms processed at the observatory; therefore it should be regarded as preliminary.

Alaska↗