SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Ecosystems”

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 451 records · Page 25Linked to original sources

USGS2002

Comparative effects of climate on ecosystem nitrogen and soil biogeochemistry in U.S. national parks. FY 2001 Annual Report (Res. Rept. No. 94)

In 1998, the USGS Global Change program funded research for a network of Long-Term Reference Ecosystems initially established in national parks and funded by the National Park Service. The network included Noland Divide, Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee; Pine Canyon, Big Ben National park, Texas; West Twin Creek, Olympic National Park, Washingtona?? Wallace Lake, Isle Royale National Park, Michigan; and the Asik watershed, Noatak National Preserve, Alaska. The watershed ecosystem model was used since this approach permits additional statistical power in detection of trends among variables, and the watershed in increasingly a land unit used in resource management and planning. The ecosystems represent a major fraction of lands administered by the National Park Service, and were chosen generally for the contrasts among sites. For example, tow of the site, Noland and West Twin, are characterized by high precipitation amounts, but Noland receives some of the highest atmospheric nitrogen (N) inputs in North America. In contrast, Pine Canyon and Asik are warm and cold desert sites respectively. The Asik watershed receives <1% the atmospheric N inputs Noland receives. The Asik site is at the northern extent (treeline) of the boreal biome in the North America while Wallace is at the southern ecotone between boreal and northern hardwoods. The research goal for these sites is to gain a basic understanding of ecosystem structure and function, and the response to global change especially atmospheric inputs and climate.

Report↗

USGS2012

Threats and stressors to the health of the ecosystems of Lakes Mead and Mohave: Chapter 6 in A synthesis of aquatic science for management of Lakes Mead and Mohave

Ecosystem impacts from visitor activities or natural environmental change are important concerns in all units of the National Park system. Possible impacts to aquatic ecosystems at Lake Mead National Recreation Area (LMNRA) are of particular concern because of the designation of Lakes Mead and Mohave as critical habitat for the federally listed endangered razorback sucker (Xyrauchen texanus), the significance of the sport fishery, and the regional importance of its habitats to more than 90 documented species of waterbirds. Potential threats to shoreline habitats are of concern not only for their ecosystem values but also for maintaining the recreational setting. Many areas adjacent to the shorelines of Lakes Mead and Mohave are designated wilderness areas. For purposes of this document, stressors are any chemical, biological, or physical agent that has a detrimental effect on aquatic ecosystems at the organism, population, or community level. Human-made stressors at Lakes Mead and Mohave include direct effects of recreation on the lakes, like boating and fishing, as well as indirect effects of activities away from the lakes, such as growing population and increasing urbanization. Common natural environmental stressors include extended changes in climate (precipitation or temperature), or the erosion, transport, and loading of chemical constituents in rocks and sediments to aquatic environments. Human activity also can exacerbate natural stressors in a variety of ways.

Circular↗

USGS2017

Restoration handbook for sagebrush steppe ecosystems with emphasis on greater sage-grouse habitat—Part 3. Site level restoration decisions

Sagebrush steppe ecosystems in the United States currently (2016) occur on only about one-half of their historical land area because of changes in land use, urban growth, and degradation of land, including invasions of non-native plants. The existence of many animal species depends on the existence of sagebrush steppe habitat. The greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ) depends on large landscapes of intact habitat of sagebrush and perennial grasses for their existence. In addition, other sagebrush-obligate animals have similar requirements and restoration of landscapes for greater sage-grouse also will benefit these animals. Once sagebrush lands are degraded, they may require restoration actions to make those lands viable habitat for supporting sagebrush-obligate animals, livestock, and wild horses, and to provide ecosystem services for humans now and for future generations. When a decision is made on where restoration treatments should be applied, there are a number of site-specific decisions managers face before selecting the appropriate type of restoration. This site-level decision tool for restoration of sagebrush steppe ecosystems is organized in nine steps. Step 1 describes the process of defining site-level restoration objectives. Step 2 describes the ecological site characteristics of the restoration site. This covers soil chemistry and texture, soil moisture and temperature regimes, and the vegetation communities the site is capable of supporting. Step 3 compares the current vegetation to the plant communities associated with the site State and Transition models. Step 4 takes the manager through the process of current land uses and past disturbances that may influence restoration success. Step 5 is a brief discussion of how weather before and after treatments may impact restoration success. Step 6 addresses restoration treatment types and their potential positive and negative impacts on the ecosystem and on habitats, especially for greater sage-grouse. We discuss when passive restoration options may be sufficient and when active restoration may be necessary to achieve restoration objectives. Step 7 addresses decisions regarding post-restoration livestock grazing management. Step 8 addresses monitoring of the restoration; we discuss important aspects associated with implementation monitoring as well as effectiveness monitoring. Step 9 takes the information learned from monitoring to determine how restoration actions in the future might be adapted to improve restoration success.

Circular↗

USGS2000

Effects of climate variability and human activities on Chesapeake Bay and the implications for ecosystem restoration

Chesapeake Bay, the Nation’s largest and most productive estuary (fig. 1), faces complex environmental issues related to nutrients and oxygen, turbidity and sedimentation, toxic dinoflagellates, sea-level rise, and coastal erosion. The Chesapeake Bay Program (CBP) is a partnership among the Chesapeake Bay Commission, the Federal Government, the District of Columbia, and the States of Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. The CBP is working to preserve, restore, and protect the bay’s living resources, vital habitats, and water quality, to protect human health, and to promote sound land-use policies in the watershed. The CBP began to set restoration goals for the ecosystem in the mid-1980’s and is now refining current goals and setting new ones as part of a new bay agreement— Chesapeake 2000. As the CBP sets restoration goals for the next 10–20 years, it will be critical to understand the long-term changes of the bay ecosystem due to climate variability and the influence of past and future human activities. For the past 4 years, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has been engaged in research designed to provide objective scientific answers to questions about long-term changes in the bay ecosystem: What paleoecological and geochemical methods are best for documenting trends in the bay ecosystem? How does climate variability, including drought, affect the bay? What are historical trends in dissolved oxygen? What is the relationship between sedimentation and water clarity, and what is the effect of turbidity on living resources? How have past land-use changes affected bay habitats and living resources?

Chesapeake Bay Watershed↗

USGS2000

Ecosystem history of Biscayne Bay and the southeast coast

Overview The U.S. Geological Survey is participating in a multi-institutional effort to assess, monitor, and restore the ecosystem of South Florida. Federal, State and local agencies are collaborating to establish a firm scientific basis for land management and water policy issues. Historical changes in South Florida related to rapid population growth in the early to middle 1900's have led to significant alteration of the natural hydrocycles and water quality of Florida and Biscayne Bays. These changes have affected the salinity and nutrient supply and introduced toxic components into Biscayne Bay. The Biscayne Bay ecosystem shows increasing signs of distress: declines in fisheries, increased pollution, and dramatic changes in nearshore vegetation. Northern and central Biscayne Bay are strongly affected by the urban development associated with the growth of Miami. Southern Biscayne Bay is influenced by drainage from the Everglades, which has been altered by canals and agricultural activities. Restoration and preservation of Biscayne Bay and Biscayne National Park are dependent on a comprehensive understanding of the linkages between the hydrologic system and the bay ecosystem, and of natural versus human-induced variability of the ecosystem.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS1999

Color infrared digital orthophoto quadrangles for the South Florida ecosystem area

The South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Program is an intergovernmental effort to reestablish and maintain the ecosystems of south Florida. One element of the restoration effort is the development of a firm scientific basis for resource decision making. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is one of the agencies that provides scientific information as part of the South Florida Ecosystem Program (SFEP). The program, which was begun in fiscal year (FY) 1995, provides multidisciplinary hydrologic, cartographic, geologic, and biologic data that relate to the mainland of south Florida, the Florida Bay, and the Florida Keys and Reef ecosystems.

Florida↗

USGS1996

South Florida Ecosystem Program database development

Purpose The South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Program is an intergovernmental effort to reestablish and maintain the ecosystem of south Florida. One element of the restoration effort is the development of a firm scientific basis for resource decision making. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is one of the agencies that provides scientific information as part of the South Florida Ecosystem Program (SFEP). The program, which was begun in fiscal year 1995, provides multidisciplinary hydrologic, cartographic, geologic, and biologic data that relate to the mainland of south Florida, the Florida Bay, and the Florida Keys and Reef ecosystems. A database with established transfer formats, definitions, and spatial registration greatly promotes dissemination of scientific data and information in a cost-effective manner. Shared databases may help elevate the quality and quantity of available information. By acquiring data from the database, individual users can certify and evaluate data. With appropriate management oversight, this generally leads to improved consistency and increased reliability in the database.

Florida↗

USGS2009

Fort Collins Science Center Ecosystem Dynamics Branch

Complex natural resource issues require understanding a web of interactions among ecosystem components that are (1) interdisciplinary, encompassing physical, chemical, and biological processes; (2) spatially complex, involving movements of animals, water, and airborne materials across a range of landscapes and jurisdictions; and (3) temporally complex, occurring over days, weeks, or years, sometimes involving response lags to alteration or exhibiting large natural variation. Scientists in the Ecosystem Dynamics Branch of the U.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, investigate a diversity of these complex natural resource questions at the landscape and systems levels. This Fact Sheet describes the work of the Ecosystems Dynamics Branch, which is focused on energy and land use, climate change and long-term integrated assessments, herbivore-ecosystem interactions, fire and post-fire restoration, and environmental flows and river restoration.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2009

Gulf of Mexico Deep-Sea Coral Ecosystem Studies, 2008-2011

Most people are familiar with tropical coral reefs, located in warm, well-illuminated, shallow waters. However, corals also exist hundreds and even thousands of meters below the ocean surface, where it is cold and completely dark. These deep-sea corals, also known as cold-water corals, have become a topic of interest due to conservation concerns over the impacts of trawling, exploration for oil and gas, and climate change. Although the existence of these corals has been known since the 1800s, our understanding of their distribution, ecology, and biology is limited due to the technical difficulties of conducting deep-sea research. DISCOVRE (DIversity, Systematics, and COnnectivity of Vulnerable Reef Ecosystems) is a new U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) program focused on deep-water coral ecosystems in the Gulf of Mexico. This integrated, multidisciplinary, international effort investigates a variety of topics related to unique and fragile deep-sea coral ecosystems from the microscopic level to the ecosystem level, including components of microbiology, population genetics, paleoecology, food webs, taxonomy, community ecology, physical oceanography, and mapping.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2010

Assessment of goods and valuation of ecosystem services (AGAVES) San Pedro River Basin, United States and Mexico

A consortium of federal, academic, and nongovernment organization (NGO) partners have established a collaborative research enterprise in the San Pedro River Basin to develop methods, standards, and tools to assess and value ecosystem goods and services. The central premise of ecosystem services research is that human condition is intrinsically linked to the environment. Human health and well-being (including economic prosperity) depend on important supporting, regulating, provisioning, and cultural services that we derive from our surrounding ecosystems. The AGAVES project is intended as a demonstration study for incorporating ecosystem services information into resource management policy and decisionmaking. Accordingly, a nested, multiscale project design has been adopted to address a range of stakeholder information requirements. This design will further facilitate an evaluation of how well methods developed in this project can be transferred to other areas.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2014

Changing Arctic ecosystems: ecology of loons in a changing Arctic

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Changing Arctic Ecosystems (CAE) initiative informs key resource management decisions for Arctic Alaska by providing scientific information on current and future ecosystem response to a changing climate. From 2010 to 2014, a key study area for the USGS CAE initiative has been the Arctic Coastal Plain of northern Alaska. This region has experienced rapid warming during the past 30 years, leading to the thawing of permafrost and changes to lake and river systems. These changes, and projections of continued change, have raised questions about effects on wildlife populations that rely on northern lake ecosystems, such as loons. Loons rely on freshwater lakes for nesting habitat and the fish and invertebrates inhabiting the lakes for food. Loons live within the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A) on Alaska’s northern coast, where oil and gas development is expected to increase. Research by the USGS examines how breeding loons use the Arctic lake ecosystem and the capacity of loons to adapt to future landscape change.

Alaska↗

USGS2016

Ecosystem vulnerability to climate change in the southeastern United States

Two recent investigations of climate-change vulnerability for 19 terrestrial, aquatic, riparian, and coastal ecosystems of the southeastern United States have identified a number of important considerations, including potential for changes in hydrology, disturbance regimes, and interspecies interactions. Complementary approaches using geospatial analysis and literature synthesis integrated information on ecosystem biogeography and biodiversity, climate projections, vegetation dynamics, soil and water characteristics, anthropogenic threats, conservation status, sea-level rise, and coastal flooding impacts. Across a diverse set of ecosystems—ranging in size from dozens of square meters to thousands of square kilometers—quantitative and qualitative assessments identified types of climate-change exposure, evaluated sensitivity, and explored potential adaptive capacity. These analyses highlighted key gaps in scientific understanding and suggested priorities for future research. Together, these studies help create a foundation for ecosystem-level analysis of climate-change vulnerability to support effective biodiversity conservation in the southeastern United States.

Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Lou↗

USGS2001

Land use change and effects on water quality and ecosystem health in the Lake Tahoe basin, Nevada and California

Human activity in the Lake Tahoe Basin has increased substantially in the past four decades, causing significant impacts on the quality and clarity of the lake's famous deep, clear water. Protection of Lake Tahoe and the surrounding environment has become an important activity in recent years. A variety of agencies, including the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, Tahoe Research Group of the University of California at Davis, Desert Research Institute of the University and Community College System of Nevada, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and a host of State (both Nevada and California) and local agencies have been monitoring and conducting research in the Basin in order to understand how the lake functions and to what extent humans have affected its landscape and ecosystem processes. In spite of all of these activities, there remains a lack of comprehensive land use change data and analysis for the Basin. A project is underway that unites the land cover mapping expertise of the USGS National Mapping Discipline with the hydrologic expertise of the Water Resources Discipline to assess the impacts of urban growth and land use change in the Lake Tahoe Basin. Three activities are planned over the next 3 years: (1) mapping the current and historic state of the land surface, (2) conducting analysis to document patterns, rates, and trends in urbanization, land use change, and ecosystem health, and (3) assessing the causes and consequences of land use change with regard to water quality and ecosystem health. We hypothesize that changes in the extent of urban growth and the corresponding increases in impervious surfaces and decreases in natural vegetation have resulted in severe impacts on ecosystem health and integrity, riparian zones and water quality over time. We are acting on multiple fronts to test this hypothesis through the quantification of landscape disturbances and impacts.

California, Nevada↗

USGS2008

Methods and Sources of Data Used to Develop Selected Water-Quality Indicators for Streams and Ground Water for the 2007 Edition of The State of the Nation's Ecosystems Report with Comparisons to the 2002 Edition

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) was one of numerous governmental, private, and academic entities that provided input to the report The State of the Nation?s Ecosystems published periodically by the Heinz Center. This report describes the sources of data and methods used by the USGS to develop selected water?quality indicators for the 2007 edition of the Heinz Center report and documents modifications in the data sources and interpretations between the 2002 and 2007 editions of the Heinz Center report. Stream and ground?water quality data collected nationally as part of the USGS National Water-Quality Assessment Program were used to develop the ecosystem indicators for the Heinz Center report, including Core National indicators for the Movement of Nitrogen and Chemical Contamination and for selected ecosystems classified as Farmlands, Forest, Grasslands and Shrublands, Freshwater, and Urban and Suburban. In addition, the USGS provided water?quality and streamflow data collected as part of the National Stream Water Quality Accounting Network and the Federal?State Cooperative Program. The documentation provided herein serves not only as a reference for current and future editions of The State of the Nation?s Ecosystems but also provides critical information for future assessments of changes in contaminant occurrence in streams and ground water of the United States.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2013

Salton Sea ecosystem monitoring and assessment plan

The Salton Sea, California’s largest lake, provides essential habitat for several fish and wildlife species and is an important cultural and recreational resource. It has no outlet, and dissolved salts contained in the inflows concentrate in the Salton Sea through evaporation. The salinity of the Salton Sea, which is currently nearly one and a half times the salinity of ocean water, has been increasing as a result of evaporative processes and low freshwater inputs. Further reductions in inflows from water conservation, recycling, and transfers will lower the level of the Salton Sea and accelerate the rate of salinity increases, reduce the suitability of fish and wildlife habitat, and affect air quality by exposing lakebed playa that could generate dust. Legislation enacted in 2003 to implement the Quantification Settlement Agreement (QSA) stated the Legislature’s intent for the State of California to undertake the restoration of the Salton Sea ecosystem. As required by the legislation, the California Resources Agency (now California Natural Resources Agency) produced the Salton Sea Ecosystem Restoration Study and final Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (PEIR; California Resources Agency, 2007) with the stated purpose to “develop a preferred alternative by exploring alternative ways to restore important ecological functions of the Salton Sea that have existed for about 100 years.” A decision regarding a preferred alternative currently resides with the California State Legislature (Legislature), which has yet to take action. As part of efforts to identify an ecosystem restoration program for the Salton Sea, and in anticipation of direction from the Legislature, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) established a team to develop a monitoring and assessment plan (MAP). This plan is the product of that effort. The goal of the MAP is to provide a guide for data collection, analysis, management, and reporting to inform management actions for the Salton Sea ecosystem. Monitoring activities are directed at species and habitats that could be affected by or drive future restoration activities. The MAP is not intended to be a prescriptive document. Rather, it is envisioned to be a flexible, program-level guide that articulates high-level goals and objectives, and establishes broad sideboards within which future project-level investigations and studies will be evaluated and authorized. As such, the MAP, by design, does not, for example, include detailed protocols describing how investigations will be implemented. It is anticipated that detailed study proposals will be prepared as part of an implementation plan that will include such things as specific sampling objectives, sampling schemes, and statistical and spatial limits.

California↗

USGS2024

Knowledge gaps and opportunities in water-quality drivers of aquatic ecosystem health

This report identifies key scientific gaps that limit our ability to predict water quality effects on health of aquatic ecosystems and proposes approaches to address those gaps. Topics considered include (1) coupled nutrient-carbon cycle processes and related ecological-flow-regime drivers of ecosystem health, (2) anthropogenic and geogenic toxin bioexposure, (3) fine sediment drivers of aquatic ecosystem health, and (4) freshwater salinization. Each topic is addressed in terms of scientific gaps, approaches, and timelines to help guide portions of the U.S. Geological Survey Water Mission Area ( https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources ) research portfolio and other national research efforts. The report provides an assessment of several of the major challenges and opportunities concerning water quality impacts on aquatic ecosystem health. It will be important to maintain broad-based expertise and flexibility to address the full range of long-term water quality issues facing the Nation’s water resources.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2008

Monitoring ecosystem quality and function in arid settings of the Mojave Desert

Monitoring ecosystem quality and function in the Mojave Desert is both a requirement of state and Federal government agencies and a means for determining potential long-term changes induced by climatic fluctuations and land use. Because it is not feasible to measure every attribute and process in the desert ecosystem, the choice of what to measure and where to measure it is the most important starting point of any monitoring program. In the Mojave Desert, ecosystem function is strongly influenced by both abiotic and biotic factors, and an understanding of the temporal and spatial variability induced by climate and landform development is needed to determine where site-specific measurements should be made. We review a wide variety of techniques for sampling, assessing, and measuring climatic variables, desert soils, biological soil crusts, annual and perennial vegetation, reptiles, and small mammals. The complete array of ecosystem attributes and processes that we describe are unlikely to be measured or monitored at any given location, but the array of possibilities allows for the development of specific monitoring protocols, which can be tailored to suit the needs of land-management agencies.

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2016

Influence of glacier runoff on ecosystem structure in Gulf of Alaska fjords

To better understand the influence of glacier runoff on fjord ecosystems, we sampled oceanographic conditions, nutrients, zooplankton, forage fish and seabirds within 4 fjords in coastal areas of the Gulf Alaska. We used generalized additive models and geostatistics to identify the range of glacier runoff influence into coastal waters within fjords of varying estuarine influence and topographic complexity. We also modeled the response of depth-integrated chlorophyll a concentration, copepod biomass, fish and seabird abundance to physical, nutrient and biotic predictor variables. The effects of glacial runoff were traced at least 10 km into coastal fjords by cold, turbid, stratified and generally nutrient-rich near-surface conditions. Glacially modified physical gradients, nutrient availability and among-fjord differences explained 67% of the variation in phytoplankton abundance, which is a driver of ecosystem structure at higher trophic levels. Copepod, euphausiid, fish and seabird distribution and abundance were related to environmental gradients that could be traced to glacial freshwater input, particularly turbidity and temperature. Seabird density was predicted by prey availability and silicate concentrations, which may be a proxy for upwelling areas where this nutrient is in excess. Similarities in ecosystem structure among fjords were attributable to an influx of cold, fresh and sediment-laden water, whereas differences were likely related to fjord topography and local differences in estuarine vs. ocean influence. We anticipate that continued changes in the timing and volume of glacial runoff will ultimately alter coastal ecosystems in the future.

Alaska↗