USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Data Science in Science”

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 685 records · Page 38Linked to original sources
USGS2015

A global satellite assisted precipitation climatology

Accurate representations of mean climate conditions, especially in areas of complex terrain, are an important part of environmental monitoring systems. As high-resolution satellite monitoring information accumulates with the passage of time, it can be increasingly useful in efforts to better characterize the earth's mean climatology. Current state-of-the-science products rely on complex and sometimes unreliable relationships between elevation and station-based precipitation records, which can result in poor performance in food and water insecure regions with sparse observation networks. These vulnerable areas (like Ethiopia, Afghanistan, or Haiti) are often the critical regions for humanitarian drought monitoring. Here, we show that long period of record geo-synchronous and polar-orbiting satellite observations provide a unique new resource for producing high resolution (0.05°) global precipitation climatologies that perform reasonably well in data sparse regions. Traditionally, global climatologies have been produced by combining station observations and physiographic predictors like latitude, longitude, elevation, and slope. While such approaches can work well, especially in areas with reasonably dense observation networks, the fundamental relationship between physiographic variables and the target climate variables can often be indirect and spatially complex. Infrared and microwave satellite observations, on the other hand, directly monitor the earth's energy emissions. These emissions often correspond physically with the location and intensity of precipitation. We show that these relationships provide a good basis for building global climatologies. We also introduce a new geospatial modeling approach based on moving window regressions and inverse distance weighting interpolation. This approach combines satellite fields, gridded physiographic indicators, and in situ climate normals. The resulting global 0.05° monthly precipitation climatology, the Climate Hazards Group's Precipitation Climatology version 1 (CHPclim v.1.0, http://dx.doi.org/10.15780/G2159X ), is shown to compare favorably with similar global climatology products, especially in areas with complex terrain and low station densities.

Earth System Science Data↗
USGS2011

U.S. Geological Survey Fundamental Science Practices

The USGS has a long and proud tradition of objective, unbiased science in service to the Nation. A reputation for impartiality and excellence is one of our most important assets. To help preserve this vital asset, in 2004 the Executive Leadership Team (ELT) of the USGS was charged by the Director to develop a set of fundamental science practices, philosophical premises, and operational principles as the foundation for all USGS research and monitoring activities. In a concept document, 'Fundamental Science Practices of the U.S. Geological Survey', the ELT proposed 'a set of fundamental principles to underlie USGS science practices.' The document noted that protecting the reputation of USGS science for quality and objectivity requires the following key elements: - Clearly articulated, Bureau-wide fundamental science practices. - A shared understanding at all levels of the organization that the health and future of the USGS depend on following these practices. - The investment of budget, time, and people to ensure that the USGS reputation and high-quality standards are maintained. The USGS Fundamental Science Practices (FSP) encompass all elements of research investigations, including data collection, experimentation, analysis, writing results, peer review, management review, and Bureau approval and publication of information products. The focus of FSP is on how science is carried out and how products are produced and disseminated. FSP is not designed to address the question of what work the USGS should do; that is addressed in USGS science planning handbooks and other documents. Building from longstanding existing USGS policies and the ELT concept document, in May 2006, FSP policies were developed with input from all parts of the organization and were subsequently incorporated into the Bureau's Survey Manual. In developing an implementation plan for FSP policy, the intent was to recognize and incorporate the best of USGS current practices to obtain the optimum overall program for our science. In January 2009, the USGS moved to full implementation of FSP. The FSP Advisory Committee (FSPAC) was formed to serve as the Bureau's working and standing committee to ensure the objectivity and quality of the Bureau's science information products and to provide support for the full implementation of FSP.

Circular↗
USGS2013

Quality-assurance plan for groundwater activities, U.S. Geological Survey, Washington Water Science Center

This report documents the standard procedures, policies, and field methods used by the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Washington Water Science Center staff for activities related to the collection, processing, analysis, storage, and publication of groundwater data. This groundwater quality-assurance plan changes through time to accommodate new methods and requirements developed by the Washington Water Science Center and the USGS Office of Groundwater. The plan is based largely on requirements and guidelines provided by the USGS Office of Groundwater, or the USGS Water Mission Area. Regular updates to this plan represent an integral part of the quality-assurance process. Because numerous policy memoranda have been issued by the Office of Groundwater since the previous groundwater quality assurance plan was written, this report is a substantial revision of the previous report, supplants it, and contains significant additional policies not covered in the previous report. This updated plan includes information related to the organization and responsibilities of USGS Washington Water Science Center staff, training, safety, project proposal development, project review procedures, data collection activities, data processing activities, report review procedures, and archiving of field data and interpretative information pertaining to groundwater flow models, borehole aquifer tests, and aquifer tests. Important updates from the previous groundwater quality assurance plan include: (1) procedures for documenting and archiving of groundwater flow models; (2) revisions to procedures and policies for the creation of sites in the Groundwater Site Inventory database; (3) adoption of new water-level forms to be used within the USGS Washington Water Science Center; (4) procedures for future creation of borehole geophysics, surface geophysics, and aquifer-test archives; and (5) use of the USGS Multi Optional Network Key Entry System software for entry of routine water-level data collected as part of long-term water-level monitoring networks.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2024

Joint Agency Commercial Imagery Evaluation (JACIE)

The Joint Agency Commercial Imagery Evaluation (JACIE) was formed to leverage resources from several Federal agencies for the characterization of remote sensing data and to share those results across the remote sensing community (U.S. Geological Survey, 2024). Remote sensing data and the quality of that data are vital to (1) understanding the physical world and (2) supporting the science and engineering applications that strive to advance that understanding. The growing number of remotely sensed data sources offers users more choices. Understanding the characteristics and capabilities of current and new data sources, along with the quality of data they provide, is an important function of the multi-agency JACIE team. By performing data-quality analysis of civil and commercial remote sensing data and information products, the JACIE team provides the remote sensing community with awareness and independent verification of image data quality.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2008

Towards monitoring land-cover and land-use changes at a global scale: the global land survey 2005

Land cover is a critical component of the Earth system, infl uencing land-atmosphere interactions, greenhouse gas fl uxes, ecosystem health, and availability of food, fi ber, and energy for human populations. The recent Integrated Global Observations of Land (IGOL) report calls for the generation of maps documenting global land cover at resolutions between 10m and 30m at least every fi ve years (Townshend et al., in press). Moreover, despite 35 years of Landsat observations, there has not been a unifi ed global analysis of land-cover trends nor has there been a global assessment of land-cover change at Landsat-like resolution. Since the 1990s, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) have supported development of data sets based on global Landsat observations (Tucker et al., 2004). These land survey data sets, usually referred to as GeoCover ™, provide global, orthorectifi ed, typically cloud-free Landsat imagery centered on the years 1975, 1990, and 2000, with a preference for leaf-on conditions. Collectively, these data sets provided a consistent set of observations to assess land-cover changes at a decadal scale. These data are freely available via the Internet from the USGS Center for Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) (see http://earthexplorer.usgs.gov or http://glovis.usgs.gov). This has resulted in unprecedented downloads of data, which are widely used in scientifi c studies of land-cover change (e.g., Boone et al., 2007; Harris et al., 2005; Hilbert, 2006; Huang et al. 2007; Jantz et al., 2005, Kim et al., 2007; Leimgruber, 2005; Masek et al., 2006). NASA and USGS are continuing to support land-cover change research through the development of GLS2005 - an additional global Landsat assessment circa 20051 . Going beyond the earlier initiatives, this data set will establish a baseline for monitoring changes on a 5-year interval and will pave the way toward continuous global land-cover monitoring at Landsat-like resolution in the next decade.

Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing↗
USGS2011

Gravity data from the San Pedro River Basin, Cochise County, Arizona

The U.S. Geological Survey, Arizona Water Science Center in cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Geodetic Survey has collected relative and absolute gravity data at 321 stations in the San Pedro River Basin of southeastern Arizona since 2000. Data are of three types: observed gravity values and associated free-air, simple Bouguer, and complete Bouguer anomaly values, useful for subsurface-density modeling; high-precision relative-gravity surveys repeated over time, useful for aquifer-storage-change monitoring; and absolute-gravity values, useful as base stations for relative-gravity surveys and for monitoring gravity change over time. The data are compiled, without interpretation, in three spreadsheet files. Gravity values, GPS locations, and driving directions for absolute-gravity base stations are presented as National Geodetic Survey site descriptions.

Arizona↗
USGS2023

Coordinating science during an eruption: Lessons from the 2020–2021 Kīlauea volcanic eruption

Data collected during well-observed eruptions can lead to dramatic increases in our understanding of volcanic processes. However, the necessary prioritization of public safety and hazard mitigation during a crisis means that scientific opportunities may be sacrificed. Thus, maximizing the scientific gains from eruptions requires improved planning and coordinating science activities among governmental organizations and academia before and during volcanic eruptions. One tool to facilitate this coordination is a Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC). In the USA, the Community Network for Volcanic Eruption Response (CONVERSE) has been developing and testing this concept during workshops and scenario-based activities. The December 2020 eruption of Kīlauea volcano, Hawaii, provided an opportunity to test and refine this model in real-time and in a real-world setting. We present here the working model of a SAC developed during this eruption. Successes of the Kīlauea SAC (K-SAC) included broadening the pool of scientists involved in eruption response and developing and codifying procedures that may form the basis of operation for future SACs. Challenges encountered by the K-SAC included a process of review and facilitation of research proposals that was too slow to include outside participation in the early parts of the eruption and a decision process that fell on a small number of individuals at the responding volcano observatory. Possible ways to address these challenges include (1) supporting community-building activities between eruptions that make connections among scientists within and outside formal observatories, (2) identifying key science questions and pre-planning science activities, which would facilitate more rapid implementation across a broader scientific group, and (3) continued dialog among observatory scientists, emergency responders, and non-observatory scientists about the role of SACs. The SAC model holds promise to become an integral part of future efforts, leading in the short and longer term to more effective hazard response and greater scientific discovery and understanding.

Hawaii↗
USGS2007

Assessment of Data for Use in the Development of Nutrient Criteria for Massachusetts Rivers and Streams

The U.S. Geological Survey synthesized, reviewed, and assessed Massachusetts water-quality data for use in the development of either numerical nutrient criteria for rivers and streams or a science-based framework for interpreting narrative criterial for nutrients. Water-quality data collected from 65 Massachusetts locations were selected to represent a wide range, but not a statistical selection, of drainage basins and high-, intermediate-, and low-nutrient ecoregions. Additional sites were selected at some locations to provide data to compare open- and closed-canopy effects on periphyton chlorophyll a concentrations. Nutrient and chlorophyll a concentrations are the primary focus of this study. Data for turbidity, color, dissolved oxygen, specific conductance, pH, and measures of aquatic-plant density also were examined. Water-quality data were analyzed by categories of year, ecoregion, drainage-basin size, Massachusetts nutrient ecoregion, presence of upstream wastewater dischargers, and canopy openness. Graphs and statistical analyses were used to evaluate data. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recommends the 25th-percentile value of a water-quality constituent as the numerical nutrient criterion when using all available data for the constituent. In this study of Massachusetts waters, the 25th percentiles of median values at all sampling stations were: total phosphorus, 0.019 milligram per liter (mg/L); total nitrogen, 0.44 (mg/L); and turbidity, 1.2 nephelometric turbidity units (NTU). When the data are sorted by the two USEPA nutrient ecoregions in Massachusetts (VIII and XIV), the new values are: for Ecoregion VIII, total phosphorus, 0.009 (mg/L); total nitrogen, 0.289 (mg/L); and turbidity, 1.7 NTU; for Ecoregion XIV, total phosphorus, 0.028 (mg/L); total nitrogen, 0.583 (mg/L); and turbidity, 3.1 NTU. For the three Massachusetts lake-based nutrient ecoregions, the values are: high-nutrient ecoregion, total phosphorus, 0.030 (mg/L); total nitrogen, 0.642 (mg/L); and turbidity, 1.5 NTU; intermediate-nutrient ecoregion, total phosphorus, 0.016 (mg/L); total nitrogen, 0.419 (mg/L); and turbidity, 1.1 NTU; and low-nutrient ecoregion, total phosphorus, 0.011 (mg/L); total nitrogen, 0.289 (mg/L); and turbidity, 0.7 NTU. In general, median nutrient concentrations were found to be higher in the three following categories of analysis than in their complementary groups: sites in USEPA nutrient Ecoregion XIV, sites downstream from major National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System-permitted wastewater dischargers, and sites in the Massachusetts high-nutrient ecoregion. The largest drainage-basin size class had higher median nitrogen (total and dissolved) concentrations than the smallest, but total median phosphorus concentrations were not significantly different. Median chlorophyll a concentrations did not vary significantly among the categories analyzed. The effects of open and closed canopies on median chlorophyll a concentrations were greater within groups defined by the categories used in this study than between the groups; open-canopy sites generally had higher median chlorophyll a concentrations than closed-canopy sites. More than 40 percent of the sampling stations were located downstream from major wastewater dischargers, and these dischargers were disproportionately located in USEPA Ecoregion XIV and the Massachusetts high-nutrient ecoregion and thus may constitute the same effect on water quality. A number of expected relations among parameters analyzed did not materialize. chlorophyll a did not correlate well with any other parameters. No strong relations among the categories and nutrient concentrations or canopy openness were apparent. The occurrence of antecedent flows exceeding mean annual discharges by 300 percent within 28 days of sample collection did not correlate with decreases in chlorophyll a concentrations that might have resulted from scouring associated with increasing velocities. No rel

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2019

Improved automated detection of subpixel-scale inundation – Revised Dynamic Surface Water Extent (DSWE) partial surface water tests

In order to produce useful hydrologic and aquatic habitat data from the Landsat system, the U.S. Geological Survey has developed the “Dynamic Surface Water Extent” (DSWE) Landsat Science Product. DSWE will provide long-term, high-temporal resolution data on variations in inundation extent. The model used to generate DSWE is composed of five decision-rule based tests that do not require scene-based training. To allow its general application, required inputs are limited to the Landsat at-surface reflectance product and a digital elevation model. Unlike other Landsat-based water products, DSWE includes pixels that are only partially covered by water to increase inundation dynamics information content. Previously published DSWE model development included one wetland-focused test developed through visual inspection of field-collected Everglades spectra. A comparison of that test’s output against Everglades Depth Estimation Network (EDEN) in situ data confirmed the expectation that omission errors were a prime source of inaccuracy in vegetated environments. Further evaluation exposed a tendency toward commission error in coniferous forests. Improvements to the subpixel level “partial surface water” (PSW) component of DSWE was the focus of this research. Spectral mixture models were created from a variety of laboratory and image-derived endmembers. Based on the mixture modeling, a more “aggressive” PSW rule improved accuracy in herbaceous wetlands and reduced errors of commission elsewhere, while a second “conservative” test provides an alternative when commission errors must be minimized. Replication of the EDEN-based experiments using the revised PSW tests yielded a statistically significant increase in mean overall agreement (4%, p = 0.01, n = 50) and a statistically significant decrease (11%, p = 0.009, n = 50) in mean errors of omission. Because the developed spectral mixture models included image-derived vegetation endmembers and laboratory spectra for soil groups found across the US, simulations suggest where the revised DSWE PSW tests perform as they do in the Everglades and where they may prove problematic. Visual comparison of DSWE outputs with an unusual variety of coincidently collected images for locations spread throughout the US support conclusions drawn from Everglades quantitative analyses and highlight DSWE PSW component strengths and weaknesses.

Remote Sensing↗
USGS2017

Archive of bathymetry data collected in South Florida from 1995 to 2015

Description Land development and alterations of the ecosystem in south Florida over the past 100 years have decreased freshwater and increased nutrient flows into many of Florida's estuaries, bays, and coastal regions. As a result, there has been a decrease in the water quality in many of these critical habitats, often prompting seagrass die-offs and reduced fish and aquatic life populations. Restoration of water quality in many of these habitats will depend partly upon using numerical-circulation and sediment-transport models to establish water-quality targets and to assess progress toward reaching restoration targets. Application of these models is often complicated because of complex sea floor topography and tidal flow regimes. Consequently, accurate and modern sea-floor or bathymetry maps are critical for numerical modeling research. Modern bathymetry data sets will also permit a comparison to historical data in order to help assess sea-floor changes within these critical habitats. New and detailed data sets also support marine biology studies to help understand migratory and feeding habitats of marine life. This data series is a compilation of 13 mapping projects conducted in south Florida between 1995 and 2015 and archives more than 45 million bathymetric soundings. Data were collected primarily with a single beam sound navigation and ranging (sonar) system called SANDS developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in 1993. Bathymetry data for the Estero Bay project were supplemented with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Experimental Advanced Airborne Research Lidar (EAARL) system. Data from eight rivers in southwest Florida were collected with an interferometric swath bathymetry system. The projects represented in this data series were funded by the USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program (CMGP), the USGS South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Project- formally named Placed Based Studies, and other non-Federal agencies. The purpose of the data collection for all these projects was to support one or more of the following scientific aspects: numerical model applications, sea floor change analysis, or marine habitat investigations. This report serves as an archive of processed bathymetry sounding data, digital bathymetric contours, digital bathymetric maps, sea floor surface grids, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) metadata. Refer to the Abbreviations page for explanations of acronyms and abbreviations used in this report. Since 2006, the USGS St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center (SPCMSC) assigns a unique identifier or Field Activity Number (FAN) for each field data collection. Projects described in this report conducted prior to 2006 do not have a FAN. Data from the 13 projects presented in this report provided critical hydrographic information to support multiple science projects in south Florida. The projects and the types of sounding data collected are: Florida Bay (1995-1999) - single-beam Lake Okeechobee (2001) - single-beam Tampa Bay (2001-2004) - single-beam Caloosahatchee River (2002)- single-beam Estero Bay to Matlacha Pass and offshore to Wiggins Pass (2003) - single-beam and airborne lidar North and Northwest Forks of the Loxahatchee and Lower St. Lucie Rivers (2003) - single-beam South Charlotte Harbor and offshore Sanibel Island (2003-2004) - single-beam Shark River and Trout Creek (2004) - single-beam and interferometric swath Southwest Florida Rivers (2004) - interferometric swath Offshore from Wiggins Pass to Cape Romano (2005) - single-beam Ten Thousand Islands (2009) - single-beam Lemon Bay (2011) - single-beam Southwest Florida Rivers (2015) - interferometric swath

Florida↗
USGS2020

History of U.S. Geological Survey scientific peer review and approval, 1879–2019

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), a bureau within the U.S. Department of the Interior, has valued and used a scientific peer review and approval process since its creation in 1879. Bureau approval, formerly called Director’s approval, has been described in several USGS documents since 1900, and peer review has been codified in policy since 1959. Peer review of USGS manuscripts is intended to ensure the accuracy of data, the scientific validity of interpretations, and the consideration of alternative interpretations. This rigorous quality assurance process is considered deliberative because of the iterative exchange of ideas and opinions among the involved parties. Peer review practices differed between USGS organizational units until implementation of USGS Fundamental Science Practices (FSP) in 2006, which formalized Bureau-wide science practices, including peer review and approval, for all Bureau scientific information products released to the public or other Federal agencies. FSP policies also address review and approval requirements pertaining to the release of USGS-funded data and software and endorse quality-control standards for USGS laboratories. Bureau approval signifies the scientific excellence of information products, validates and ensures that all necessary reviews have been conducted, and confirms that information products meet USGS science quality standards and have the full backing of the Bureau. The extent, scope, and history of the peer review and approval process within the USGS are documented herein, so future USGS scientists and the public understand how consistent approaches in developing, reviewing, and publishing USGS scientific information have been and continue to be essential in maintaining the reputation of the Bureau for reliable and impartial Earth science research and data collection.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2025

Planting seeds for thriving data management

The volumes and varieties of data coming from all types of scientific instrumentation around the globe and beyond are rapidly growing. To reuse and capitalize on these data effectively, scientists must be able to share and access them efficiently, which requires the data to be well managed. Many scientists intuit that research data management (RDM) done well does not mean using dusty USB drives or aging laptops for storage. Yet the path to strong data management is not always clear. How is RDM done? Who does it? For science to advance, we need to bolster cyberinfrastructure and human capacity to ensure that the data being collected are reusable by both humans and machines.

Eos, American Geophysical Union↗
USGS2022

Opportunities to improve alignment with the FAIR Principles for U.S. Geological Survey data

In 2016, an interdisciplinary, international group of 53 scientists introduced a framework named “the FAIR Principles” for addressing 21st century scientific data challenges. The FAIR Principles are increasingly used as a guide for producing digital scientific products that are findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable (FAIR), especially to enable use of such products in automated systems. Data aligned with the FAIR Principles can increase the efficiency of science integration capabilities such as those envisioned for the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Monitoring, Analyses, and Projections (EarthMAP) initiative. The FAIR Principles clearly define the characteristics of reusable scientific products, but it is less clear how to facilitate consistency in achieving these characteristics across the Bureau. USGS data are produced by local research projects distributed over more than 100 centers in 7 regions. After data are approved for release, they could be managed in numerous repositories and online data systems. The diversity of USGS data is illustrated by the topical range of the USGS mission areas: Core Science Systems, Ecosystems, Energy and Minerals, Natural Hazards, and Water Resources. In the USGS context, realizing the EarthMAP vision for automated, predictive, integrated science that provides timely and actionable results involves providing knowledge and support services and developing the skills, infrastructure, and culture to enable Bureau-wide implementation of the FAIR Principles. In 2019, the USGS Community for Data Integration funded a project to convene a broadly representative workshop and produce recommendations to enable consistency with the FAIR Principles across the USGS. The workshop, held in Fort Collins, Colorado, in September 2019, brought together 28 participants for 3 days to engage with the FAIR Principles, analyze USGS use cases, and discuss the roles of data producers and managers, data storage and catalogs, value-added services, and policy makers in implementing the FAIR Principles. Workshop participants agreed that scientific reproducibility requires the extension of the FAIR Principles beyond measured data to include physical samples, research methods, software, and tools at the USGS. Workshop discussions focused on how the USGS can implement the FAIR Principles by supporting research teams in creating data, metadata, and other scientific products and also by supporting enterprise systems that maintain and leverage the products’ consistency with the FAIR Principles. The resulting FAIR roadmap of recommendations describes nine proposed interdependent strategies that could be achieved by coordinated actions taken by different parts of the USGS. A proposed early action would be the creation of a coordinating council that includes representatives from the groups engaged in activities consistent with better alignment with the FAIR Principles. The nine proposed strategies, which are presented in more detail in this roadmap report, focus on enabling improvements to individual data products, providing infrastructure, and structuring administrative activities to support an organizational culture that values the FAIR Principles.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

Defining a data management strategy for USGS Chesapeake Bay studies

The mission of U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Chesapeake Bay studies is to provide integrated science for improved understanding and management of the Chesapeake Bay ecosystem. Collective USGS efforts in the Chesapeake Bay watershed began in the 1980s, and by the mid-1990s the USGS adopted the watershed as one of its national place-based study areas. Great focus and effort by the USGS have been directed toward Chesapeake Bay studies for almost three decades. The USGS plays a key role in using “ecosystem-based adaptive management, which will provide science to improve the efficiency and accountability of Chesapeake Bay Program activities” (Phillips, 2011). Each year USGS Chesapeake Bay studies produce published research, monitoring data, and models addressing aspects of bay restoration such as, but not limited to, fish health, water quality, land-cover change, and habitat loss. The USGS is responsible for collaborating and sharing this information with other Federal agencies and partners as described under the President’s Executive Order 13508—Strategy for Protecting and Restoring the Chesapeake Bay Watershed signed by President Obama in 2009. Historically, the USGS Chesapeake Bay studies have relied on national USGS databases to store only major nationally available sources of data such as streamflow and water-quality data collected through local monitoring programs and projects, leaving a multitude of other important project data out of the data management process. This practice has led to inefficient methods of finding Chesapeake Bay studies data and underutilization of data resources. Data management by definition is “the business functions that develop and execute plans, policies, practices and projects that acquire, control, protect, deliver and enhance the value of data and information.” (Mosley, 2008a). In other words, data management is a way to preserve, integrate, and share data to address the needs of the Chesapeake Bay studies to better manage data resources, work more efficiently with partners, and facilitate holistic watershed science. It is now the goal of the USGS Chesapeake Bay studies to implement an enhanced and all-encompassing approach to data management. This report discusses preliminary efforts to implement a physical data management system for program data that is not replicated nationally through other USGS databases.

Chesapeake Bay↗
USGS2026

The path to FAIR research models: Lessons learned

Numerical modeling of Earth surface processes emerged as an important scientific tool in the late 1960s to mid-1970s, driven by the development of finite element methods in computer science. These advancements, initially applied in civil engineering, enabled scientists to simulate complex geological phenomena. At that time, models were often only described in publications, access was limited to researchers with direct connections to the developers, and the code was rarely documented for reuse, limiting their application beyond the original research context. The FAIR principles (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability) as applied to data began to take shape in the 21st century with the rise of open science, digital repositories, and standardized data sharing frameworks. In the late 2010s, grassroots movements began to apply some of the FAIRness goals to numerical models. Subsequently, more formalized FAIR model principles were developed that addressed the specific needs of the scientific modeling community, resulting in the formulation of the FAIR principles for research software (FAIR4RS). In this study, we examine the development and implementation of strategies by two geoscience research infrastructures – the CSDMS (Community Surface Dynamics Modeling System) Model Repository and the U.S. Geological Survey Model Catalog – to enhance the FAIRness of models guided by FAIR4RS. Some of the development and implementation efforts described predate the formalization of FAIR and FAIR4RS principles, making this an ongoing and adaptive process. We evaluate the temporal progression towards increased FAIR4RS alignment across three phases of research infrastructure development: prototype, refinement, and growth and iteration. Although certain principles were more straightforward to implement early in prototypes of the catalog infrastructures, others required broader community collaboration during refinement, and some continue to pose practical challenges in the growth and iteration phase. By tracing these dynamics, our aim is to provide insights that can guide other modeling initiatives in effectively adopting FAIR4RS principles within their communities.

Geoscientific Model Development↗
USGS2006

Water-Quality Data for Selected National Park Units within the Southern Colorado Plateau Network, Arizona, Utah, Colorado, and New Mexico, Water Years 2005 and 2006

The National Park Service initiated a Level 1 Water-Quality Inventory program to provide water-quality data to park managers so informed natural resource management decisions could be made. Level 1 water-quality data were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey Arizona Water Science Center at 57 sites in 13 National Park units located in the Southern Colorado Plateau Inventory and Monitoring network in water years 2005 and 2006. These data describe the current water-quality at selected sites within the park units and provide information for monitoring future trends. Water samples were collected three times at each type of site including wells, springs, seeps, tinajas, rivers, a lake, and an irrigation ditch. Field measurements were taken at each site and they included pH, specific conductance, temperature, barometric pressure, dissolved oxygen, alkalinity, turbidity, and discharge rates where applicable. Water samples collected were sent to the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory and analyzed for major ions, trace elements, and nutrients. The National Water Quality Laboratory also analyzed selected samples for mercury and petroleum hydrocarbons. Additional samples at selected sites were collected and analyzed for cyanide, radiochemistry, and suspended sediment by U.S. Geological Survey contract labs. Fecal-indicator bacteria (Escherichia coli) were sampled for at selected sites as another indicator of water quality. Quality control for this study was achieved through proper training of field personnel, use of standard U.S. Geological Survey field and laboratory protocols, collection of sample blanks and replicates, and a thorough review of the water-quality analyses. Measured field pH ranged from 6.0 to 8.8, within normal range for springs and rivers, at most sites. Concentrations of dissolved solids ranged from 48 to 8,680 mg/L and the majority of samples had concentrations of dissolved solids below 900 mg/L. Trace-element concentrations at most sites were at or near the laboratory reporting levels. The highest overall trace-element concentrations were found at U.S. Highway 160 Spring near Park Entrance to Mesa Verde National Park. Concentrations of uranium in samples at all sites ranged from below the detection limit to 55.7 ?g/L. Water samples from selected sites were analyzed for total petroleum hydrocarbons and concentrations of total petroleum hydrocarbons were at or above the laboratory detection limit in samples at six National Park units. Ten sites were sampled for Escherichia coli and positive counts were found at 9 out of the ten sites, the highest colony counts were found at Chinle Creek at Chinle, AZ in Canyon de Chelly National Monument. Measured concentrations of dissolved ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate were at or near laboratory reporting levels at most sites; nitrate concentrations ranged from below the reporting limit (0.047 mg/L) to 9.77 mg/L. Samples that were analyzed for mercury had concentrations below or at the laboratory reporting level. Concentrations of cyanide were less than the laboratory reporting level for all samples except two, Spruce Tree House Spring in Mesa Verde National Park and Pine Tree Canyon Tinaja in Canyon de Chelly National Monument, which had average concentrations of .042 and .011 ?g/L respectively. Gross alpha/beta radioactivity counts were below the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency maximum contaminant level except for samples from Casa Chiquita Well  Middle at Chaco Culture National Historical Park which averaged 35 pCi/L. Suspended-sediment concentrations were variable and ranged from 10 to 150,000 mg/L.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2022

Science mission requirements for a globally ranging, riserless drilling vessel for U.S. Scientific Ocean Drilling

Through the collection and analysis of shallow and deep subseafloor sediments, rocks, fluids, and life, scientific ocean drilling has enriched our understanding of the complex Earth system. Among other achievements, scientific ocean drilling has documented the history of Earth’s climate, the waxing and waning of polar ice sheets, the past changes in ocean and atmospheric circulation, the existence and function of microbial life in the subseafloor, the compositional variations in Earth’s crust and underlying mantle, and the physical and chemical processes acting at subduction zones, including those associated with tsunamigenic earthquakes. Over the decades, more than 12,000 articles that depend on analyses of scientific ocean drilling samples and geophysical data have been published, many detailing breakthrough contributions to global knowledge about the Earth system. Approximately 45% of these publications were led by U.S.-affiliated authors (International Ocean Discovery Program Publication Services, 2021). Since the mid-1980s, the workhorse of this multidisciplinary, international research effort has been the riserless D/V JOIDES Resolution, operated by Texas A&M University with funding from the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). D/V JOIDES Resolution has conducted the vast majority of scientific ocean drilling expeditions and collected most of the scientific cores over that period, including 82% of the expeditions and 93% of the cores in the last decade alone, despite being one of three platforms that is operated within the International Ocean Discovery Program. However, D/V JOIDES Resolution is approaching the end of its useful life. With a strong commitment to continue scientific ocean drilling beyond the end of the current phase, the community developed a document outlining the research frontiers that should be pursued. Exploring Earth by Scientific Ocean Drilling: 2050 Science Framework (Koppers and Coggon, 2020) describes seven scientific strategic objectives that focus on understanding interconnections within the Earth system and five flagship initiatives that integrate these objectives into long-term research efforts that address issues facing society. Additional elements in the 2050 Science Framework, including STEM education, workforce development, technology development, and innovative applications of data analytics, will advance the goals of scientific ocean drilling. Addressing the 2050 Science Framework also requires building partnerships with allied U.S. and international science programs and strengthening existing ones. To implement a significant portion of the 2050 Science Framework, the U.S. scientific community seeks to lease or acquire a newly built, globally ranging, state-of-the art, riserless drilling vessel. The many and varied technical and human resources requirements for successful accomplishment of scientific and educational goals summarized in this document and described in detail in the 2050 Science Framework require broad community input and careful consideration. Following receipt of NSF’s formal Request for Assistance to the United States Science Support Program (USSSP), the U.S. scientific ocean drilling community conducted a one-year exercise to identify its national scientific needs and priorities in order to determine the Science Mission Requirements (SMRs) presented here. This community effort included: (1) a U.S. community-wide survey to identify the specific operational and technical capabilities critical to addressing science in the 2050 Science Framework; (2) a series of online workshops focusing on critical capabilities identified by the survey; and (3) a large in-person workshop to synthesize the results of the survey and the virtual workshops (Appendix 1). The approach was designed to reach as many participants as possible. Overall, 278 survey responses were received from U.S. community members, representing 104 unique institutions from 39 states and the District of Columbia, and 137 unique individuals participated in the workshops (Appendix 2). The results of this effort comprise two classes of SMRs: Foundational Science Mission Requirements and Primary Science Mission Requirements. Foundational SMRs define minimum criteria for a new riserless drilling vessel that can address significant portions of the 2050 Science Framework. Primary SMRs build upon the Foundational SMRs and will create more robust science opportunities and data collection capabilities, will increase progress in addressing the 2050 Science Framework objectives, and will provide more real-time ship-to-shore interaction to improve science productivity, engagement, and outreach. Modern safety and environmental standards, including meeting standards to access protected waters such as exclusive economic zones, extended continental shelves, or high latitudes, while being cognizant of the vessel’s environmental footprint. Safe and efficient operations in global locations and in water depths from 70 m to 6000+ m, with total drill string length of at least 7000 m. High-quality core and data collection from a range of key subseafloor environments. Advanced heave compensation, dynamic positioning, and drill pipe stability. Modern mud and cement/casing systems. Critical onboard measurements for safety, operational decision-making, documentation of ephemeral properties, mission-specific science, and long-term science goals that extend beyond a single expedition. Designated and appropriate space for sample and data preservation. Highly skilled onboard personnel, including technical staff for curation and core handling; support for safety, time-sensitive, and critical shipboard measurements; computer support; equipment and instrument repair; application support; and data assurance. Primary Science Mission Requirements include: Flexible shipboard space for laboratories and on deck to ensure safe, successful implementation of diverse science objectives and operations. Minimizing contamination of recovered samples. Over-the-side capabilities for science-supporting technology (e.g., remotely operated vehicles, water- column sampling, sediment-water interface sampling). Downhole logging and measurements. Expanded borehole observatory capabilities. Reliable and consistent ship-to-shore communications. NSF’s investment in a new globally ranging, riserless drilling vessel will have a powerful economic multiplier effect, including the infusion of additional science support funds in the United States for training and research, the development of new technologies and tools, and the associated scientific and technical workforce development. The skills and knowledge gained through scientific ocean drilling are translatable to careers in fields such as sustainable energy development (e.g., geothermal and offshore wind), carbon sequestration, data management and cyberinfrastructure, biotechnology, communications, science education, policy, hazard mitigation, and environmental management. The United States is a leader in a well-established and internationally collaborative scientific ocean drilling community. A modern, globally ranging, riserless drilling vessel will allow the United States to expand its leadership position, address broad scientific questions that current capabilities preclude, and cultivate equitable international, multidisciplinary collaborations that will ensure scientific ocean drilling’s future success.

Report↗
USGS2009

A synthesis of Martian aqueous mineralogy after 1 Mars year of observations from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter

Martian aqueous mineral deposits have been examined and characterized using data acquired during Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter's (MRO) primary science phase, including Compact Reconnaissance Imaging Spectrometer for Mars hyperspectral images covering the 0.4-3.9 ??m wavelength range, coordinated with higher-spatial resolution HiRISE and Context Imager images. MRO's new high-resolution measurements, combined with earlier data from Thermal Emission Spectrometer; Thermal Emission Imaging System; and Observatoire pour la Min??ralogie, L'Eau, les Glaces et l'Activiti?? on Mars Express, indicate that aqueous minerals are both diverse and widespread on the Martian surface. The aqueous minerals occur in 9-10 classes of deposits characterized by distinct mineral assemblages, morphologies, and geologic settings. Phyllosilicates occur in several settings: in compositionally layered blankets hundreds of meters thick, superposed on eroded Noachian terrains; in lower layers of intracrater depositional fans; in layers with potential chlorides in sediments on intercrater plains; and as thousands of deep exposures in craters and escarpments. Carbonate-bearing rocks form a thin unit surrounding the Isidis basin. Hydrated silica occurs with hydrated sulfates in thin stratified deposits surrounding Valles Marineris. Hydrated sulfates also occur together with crystalline ferric minerals in thick, layered deposits in Terra Meridiani and in Valles Marineris and together with kaolinite in deposits that partially infill some highland craters. In this paper we describe each of the classes of deposits, review hypotheses for their origins, identify new questions posed by existing measurements, and consider their implications for ancient habitable environments. On the basis of current data, two to five classes of Noachian-aged deposits containing phyllosilicates and carbonates may have formed in aqueous environments with pH and water activities suitable for life. Copyright 2009 by the American Geophysical Union.

Journal of Geophysical Research E: Planets↗