USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Environmental Research”

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 739 records · Page 41Linked to original sources
USGS2003

Establishing causality in the decline and deformity of amphibians: The amphibian research and monitoring initiative model

Research to date has indicated that a range of environmental variables such as disease, parasitism, predation, competition, environmental contamination, solar ultraviolet radiation, climate change, or habitat alteration may be responsible for declining amphibian populations and the appearance of deformed organisms, yet in many cases no definitive environmental variable stands out as a causal factor. Multiple Stressors are often present in the habitat, and interactions among these can magnify injury to biota. This raises the possibility that the additive or synergistic impact of these Stressors may be the underlying cause of amphibian declines. Effective management for the restoration of amphibian populations requires the identification of causal factors contributing to their declines. A systematic approach to determine causality is especially important because initial impressions may be misleading or ambiguous. In addition, the evaluation of amphibian populations requires consideration of a broader spatial scale than commonly used in regulatory monitoring. We describe a systematic three-tiered approach to determine causality in amphibian declines and deformities. Tier 1 includes an evaluation of historic databases and extant data and would involve a desktop synopsis of the status of various stressors as well as site visits. Tier 2 studies are iterative, hypothesis driven studies beginning with general tests and continuing with analyses of increasing complexity as certain stressors are identified for further investigation. Tier 3 applies information developed in Tier 2 as predictive indicators of habitats and species at risk over broad landscape scales and provides decision support for the adaptive management of amphibian recovery. This comprehensive, tiered program could provide a mechanistic approach to identifying and addressing specific stressors responsible for amphibian declines across various landscapes.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2019

Landsat: The cornerstone of global land imaging

Since 1972, the joint NASA/ U.S. Geological Survey Landsat series of Earth Observation satellites have provided an uninterrupted space-based data record of the Earth’s land surface to help advance scientific research towards the understanding of our planet and the environmental impact of its inhabitants. Early Landsat satellites offered a wealth of new data that improved mapping of remote areas and geologic features along with digital analysis of vegetation. The utility of Landsat’s spatial and spectral resolution has advanced its use for applications that benefit society such as global crop forecasting, forest monitoring, water use, carbon assessments, and the base for Google Maps. Landsat’s long-term data record provides an unrivaled resource for observing land cover and land-use change over a timescale of decades. The free and open Landsat data policy in 2008 was a paradigm shift for the world. Today, due to improved analytical and computing capabilities, the Landsat archive is poised to shift into a more real-time monitoring and understanding of the Earth.

GIM International↗
USGS2006

An integrated monitoring approach using multiple reference sites to assess sustainable restoration in coastal Louisiana

Achieving sustainable resource management in coastal Louisiana requires establishing reference conditions that incorporate the goals and objectives of restoration efforts. Since the reference condition is usually considered sustainable, it can be a gauge to assess the present condition of a (degraded) system or to evaluate progress of management actions toward some target system state (the reference or desired conditions). In 2003, the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) Task Force and the Louisiana State Wetlands Authority adopted the “Coastwide Reference Monitoring System -- Wetlands” (CRMS--Wetlands) for Louisiana. This system will provide data from multiple reference sites to explore the properties of a sustained reference condition. CRMS--Wetlands provides links between project-specific and system-wide objectives, criteria for selecting reference sites or conditions, a more robust statistical design, and critical monitoring variables. In addition, a system-wide assessment and monitoring plan (SWAMP) is being developed that incorporates and evaluates existing monitoring efforts (to the extent possible) within a system-wide experimental design. The SWAMP will integrate monitoring of biological, chemical, physical, and climatological variables in four modules: wetlands (CRMS--Wetlands), barrier islands, inshore waters and rivers, and nearshore coastal waters. Data and information collected under SWAMP will contribute to developing a systems-synthesis model for coastal Louisiana. Regional restoration project leaders in coastal Louisiana acknowledge the mutual dependence of monitoring and modeling the coastal landscape. For example, experiments or measurements should not be conducted independently of modeling and vice versa. Assessment should be directed at reducing scientific uncertainty to improve confidence in modeling and monitoring tools and ultimately to assist management actions. An adaptive environmental assessment and management process prescribes modeling, monitoring, and research activities to be conducted from initial stages of restoration planning to optimize the ability to assess and achieve sustainable restoration.

Louisiana↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey Energy and Minerals science strategy: A resource lifecycle approach

Executive Summary The economy, national security, and standard of living of the United States depend heavily on adequate and reliable supplies of energy and mineral resources. Based on population and consumption trends, the Nation’s use of energy and minerals can be expected to grow, driving the demand for ever broader scientific understanding of resource formation, location, and availability. In addition, the increasing importance of environmental stewardship, human health, and sustainable growth places further emphasis on energy and mineral resources research and understanding. Collectively, these trends in resource demand and the interconnectedness among resources will lead to new challenges and, in turn, require cutting-edge science for the next generation of societal decisions. The long and continuing history of U.S. Geological Survey contributions to energy and mineral resources science provide a solid foundation of core capabilities upon which new research directions can grow. This science strategy provides a framework for the coming decade that capitalizes on the growth of core capabilities and leverages their application toward new or emerging challenges in energy and mineral resources research, as reflected in five interrelated goals. Goal 1.—Understand fundamental Earth processes that form energy and mineral resources Goal 2.—Understand the environmental behavior of energy and mineral resources and their waste products Goal 3.—Provide inventories and assessments of energy and mineral resources Goal 4.—Understand the effects of energy and mineral development on natural resources and society Goal 5.—Understand the reliability and availability of energy and mineral supplies Within each goal, multiple actions are identified. The level of specificity and complexity of these actions varies, consistent with the reality that even a modest refocus can yield large payoffs in the near term whereas more ambitious plans may take years to reach fruition. As such, implementation of these actions is largely dependent on available resources and the sequencing of prerequisite steps. This science strategy places an emphasis on interdisciplinary collaboration and leveraging of expertise across the U.S. Geological Survey and with external partners.

Circular↗
USGS2025

Ranking river basins for stream temperature research and monitoring in the contiguous United States

There is a need to prioritize research and data collection in river basins by integrating information from environmental, ecological, and socioeconomic datasets to maintain acceptable water quality for human uses and ecosystem health. Multiple anthropogenic and natural stressors are responsible for driving changes in stream temperatures that can alter ecosystems and degrade water quality. These stressors are variable spatially and temporally, which can be challenging for prioritizing monitoring and research. In this study, an evaluation of variables related to stream temperature was performed for 163 candidate basins of the contiguous United States to highlight potential focal areas. Thirty variables were combined in six components: anthropogenic forcing, natural forcing, climate change, ecological sensitivity, socioeconomic sensitivity, and data availability. The components were incorporated into three themes: vulnerability of streams to thermal change, vulnerability of ecosystems, and vulnerability of communities. By evaluating each theme separately, patterns of vulnerability and potential resiliency were identified as well as consistency in ranks within the themes. For example, results of the national scale ranking indicated the Southern California Coastal basin (within California-Nevada region) was the highest-ranking priority in vulnerability of streams to thermal change and vulnerability of ecosystems. The analysis also identified vulnerable basins with gaps in monitoring. For example, the Missouri-Oahe basin (within the Northern High Plains region) was the highest-ranking priority for vulnerable communities with limitations in data availability. The ranking approach provides insight into basins that are resilient and are ideal candidates for monitoring and research.

Journal of Hydrology↗
USGS2024

Integrated science for the study of microplastics in the environment—A strategic science vision for the U.S. Geological Survey

Executive Summary Evidence of the widespread occurrence of microplastics throughout our environment and exposure to humans and other organisms over the past decade has led to questions about the possibility of health hazards and mitigation of exposures. This document discusses nanoplastics as well as microplastics (referred to solely as microplastics); the microplastics have a range from 1 micrometer to 5 millimeters (1 μm–5 mm) in length, whereas the nanoplastics are less than 1 μm in length (sidebar ES1). A myriad of environmental exposure pathways with microplastics to humans and wildlife, including ingestion, inhalation, and bodily absorption, are likely to exist. A growing body of evidence has documented bioaccumulation of microplastics in tissues and organs of humans and wildlife, benthic community effects, and potential nutritional and reproductive effects in some wildlife species. Understanding if or when environmental exposures pose a health risk is complicated by the diversity of microplastic sizes, morphologies, polymer types, and chemicals added during manufacturing or sorbed from the environment; ongoing challenges in analytical methods used to detect, quantify, and characterize microplastics and associated chemicals in our ecosystems; and the fact that ecotoxicological studies regarding microplastics are still in their infancy. Therefore, the study of environmental exposures and potential related health hazards of microplastics to the public and wildlife is a One Health (sidebar ES2) research topic that necessitates integrated science approaches. A better understanding of the sources, pathways, fate, and biological effects of microplastics has become a priority of the Federal Government, State governments, Tribes, stakeholders, and the public. Examples of Federal and State microplasticfocused legislation and programs to prioritize microplastic research and reduction include the Federal Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, California Senate Bills 1422 and 1263 (2018), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Trash Free Waters Program, the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Microplastic and Nanoplastic Metrology project, and Minnesota’s microplastic project. With its unique expertise and capabilities, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is well positioned to help fill some of the most important microplastic science gaps. This strategic science vision document for microplastics identifies current (2023) microplastic science gaps and prioritizes research relevant to the mission, expertise, and capabilities of the USGS. It is intended for USGS scientists and stakeholders to use as a starting point for planning, prioritizing, and designing collaborative environmental microplastic science. Many of the microplastic science gaps and priorities are scalable, from local to national, and thus, can be made commensurate with available funding and evolving analytical and field tools, laboratory capacity, and stakeholder needs. Current (2023) or future research by academia and other Federal or State agencies, and Tribes may be aimed at some of the same microplastic science gaps identified in this document. Therefore, this document can be used as an information resource to maximize strengths and capabilities and minimize redundancy in communication and collaboration.

Circular↗
USGS2015

Metallogeny, exploitation and environmental impact of the Mt. Amiata mercury ore district (Southern Tuscany, Italy)

The Mt. Amiata mining district (Southern Tuscany, Italy) is a world class Hg district, with a cumulate production of more than 100,000 tonnes of Hg, mostly occurring between 1870 and 1980. The Hg mineralization at Mt. Amiata is younger than 0.3 Ma, and is directly related to shallow hydrothermal systems similar to present-day geothermal fields of the region. There is likely a continuum of Hg deposition to present day, because Hg emission from geothermal power plants is on-going. In this sense, the Mt. Amiata deposits present some analogies with “hot-spring type” deposits of western USA, although an ore deposit model for the district has not been established. Specifically, the source of Hg remains highly speculative. The mineralizing hydrothermal fluids are of low temperature, and of essentially meteoric origin. Recent results by our research group indicate that, 30 years after mine closure, the environmental effects of Hg contamination related to mining are still recorded by the ecosystem, namely on waterways of the Paglia and Tiber River basins. In particular, the close spatial connection between the town of Abbadia San Salvatore, the Hg mine within its immediate neighborhood, and the drainage catchment of the Paglia River has an influence also on Hg speciation, transported mainly in the particulate form by the river system. The extent of Hg contamination has been identified at least 100 km from Abbadia San Salvatore along the Paglia-Tiber River system. Estimated annual Hg mass loads transported by the Paglia River to the Tiber River were about 11 kg yr −1 . However, there is evidence that flood events may enhance Hg mobilization in the Paglia River basin, increasing Hg concentrations in stream sediment. The high methyl-Hg/Hg ratio in water in this area is an additional factor of great concern due to the potential harmful effects on human and wildlife health. Results of our studies indicate that the Mt. Amiata region is at present a source of Hg of remarkable environmental concern at the local, regional (Tiber River), and Mediterranean scales. Ongoing studies are aimed to a more detailed quantification of the Hg mass load input to the Mediterranean Sea, and to unravel the processes concerning Hg transport and fluid dynamics.

Tuscany↗
USGS2004

Review of Results and Recommendations from the GCMRC 2000-2003 Remote-Sensing Initiative for Monitoring Environmental Resources Within the Colorado River Ecosystem

In mid-2000, the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center (GCMRC) began a remote-sensing initiative to evaluate all remote-sensing technologies and methods that had potential for providing improved data (capability) for its various programs that monitor the Colorado River ecosystem (CRE). The primary objective of the initiative was to determine the most cost-effective data collection protocols for GCMRC programs that (1) provide the accuracies required for currently measured parameters, (2) provide additional parameters for ecological monitoring, (3) reduce environmental impact by being less invasive than current methods, and (4) expand geographic extent of current ground approaches. The initial phase of the remote-sensing initiative determined the types of sampling parameters and their required accuracies for monitoring. This information was used to determine the most appropriate sensors for evaluation. The initiative evaluated 25 different data collections over a three-year period; many more remote-sensing instruments were considered, but were not evaluated because they could not meet the basic requirements on spatial resolution, wavelength, positional accuracy, or elevation accuracy. It was hoped that the evaluations would lead to a minimum set of technologies that would satisfy many program requirements. The results from all of our evaluations are reviewed in this report and are briefly summarized in this report.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2001

U.S. Geological Survey Activities Related to American Indians and Alaska Natives Fiscal Year 2001

Information is a resource that can help Native American governments and their people. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) makes available technical expertise, reports, and other impartial information sources that can benefit Native Americans interested in subsistence issues, water, land use, and the health of many parts of the environment. The USGS works in cooperation with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, conducting research on water and mineral resources, animals and plants of environmental, economic, or subsistence importance, natural hazards, and geologic resources. Digital data on cartography, mineral resources, stream flow, biota, and other topics are available to American Indian and Alaska Native individuals and institutions. The USGS recognizes the need to learn from and share knowledge with Native peoples. This report describes most of the activities that the USGS conducted with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, educational institutions, and individuals during Federal fiscal year 2001. Some of these USGS activities were carried out in concert with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Others were conducted by Tribes and the USGS. In 2001, the USGS began examining its activities related to American Indians and Alaska Natives to determine how it can better serve these customers within its mandates. A growing number of Tribal governments, educational institutions, and other Tribal organizations have begun using geographic information systems and other digital technologies in recent years. As Tribes become more interested in and more adept at managing digital information, they are seeking relevant data from the USGS more frequently. Using digital technologies provides Tribal governments with additional means of managing lands and resources for the benefit of current and future generations. The USGS recognizes the need to make its information available to Tribal governments, and to work with those governments and other institutions to advance data management capabilities. The USGS is responding to this need by increasing the transfer of scientific information to American Indian and Alaska Native governments and by training employees of those governments to conduct and improve scientific studies. The USGS is also encouraging American Indians and Alaska Natives to pursue careers in science, and seeking ways to hire Indian and Native students. By identifying, improving, and disseminating information about available hiring mechanisms, the USGS is working to make hiring such students easier, and therefore more likely, for USGS managers. The U.S. Geological Survey is the Federal science bureau within the Department of the Interior (DoI). The USGS is non-regulatory and is not a significant manager of Federal or Trust lands or assets. However, there are two types of USGS activities that do involve American Indians, Alaska Natives, and their lands. The first type of activity is the course of formal studies, conducted through existing USGS programs, that involves collection of specific types of data as well as investigative and research projects. These projects typically last 2 or 3 years, although a few are parts of longer-term activities. Some projects are funded through cooperative agreements, from monies provided to the USGS by individual Tribal governments or by the BIA. The USGS provides matching funds for cooperative projects. These formal projects may also receive funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Indian Health Service (part of the Department of Health and Human Services), or other Federal agencies. The USGS routinely works with its sister bureaus in the Department of the Interior to provide the scientific information and expertise needed to meet the Department's science priorities. Within this context, the USGS and the BIA are cooperating to use USGS information resources to benefit American Indian and Alaska Native peoples and their lands. The second type of USGS activity is less formal, based on initiatives designed and conducted by USGS employees. Frequently involving educational activities, these endeavors are prompted by employee interests, often as collateral issues, that result from one or more USGS employees identifying and responding to an observed need. In these activities, USGS employees help fulfill a mission of the USGS-to make science relevant-while helping their fellow citizens. USGS employees have also taken the initiative in assisting American Indians and Alaska Natives through participation in several organizations that were created to foster awareness of science among Native peoples and to help build support and communication networks. One such group is the American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES). This group sponsors an annual national meeting in which USGS employees participate. USGS employees join this organization on a voluntary basis, bringing the benefits of this expanded network to the USGS, as many employees do with other professional organizations. Each part of the USGS has identified an American Indian/Alaska Native liaison. Furthermore, the USGS has instituted a regional organizational structure, with Western, Central, and Eastern Regions. The regions work in concert with specific scientific disciplines to conduct the scientific mission of the USGS. The regional structure is intended to bring us closer to our customers; we hope that Native Americans and Alaska Natives will use the contacts listed at the end of this report.

Report↗
USGS2002

U.S. Geological Survey Activities Related to American Indians and Alaska Natives Fiscal Year 2002

Information is a resource for Native American governments, communities, organizations, and people. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provides technical expertise, reports, and other impartial information sources that benefit Native Americans interested in subsistence issues, water, land use, and the health of many parts of the environment. Native self-sufficiency, economic development, and conservation are cultivated through Native decisions informed with USGS data and analyses. The USGS works in cooperation with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, conducting research on water and mineral resources, animals and plants of environmental, economic, or subsistence importance, natural hazards, and geologic resources. Digital data on cartography, mineral resources, streamflow, biota, and other topics are available to American Indian and Alaska Native individuals and institutions. The USGS recognizes the need to learn from and share knowledge with Native peoples. This report describes most of the activities that the USGS conducted with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, educational institutions, and individuals during Federal Fiscal Year 2002. Some of these USGS activities were carried out in concert with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). Others were conducted by Tribes, Tribal organizations, professional societies, and the USGS. A growing number of Tribal governments, educational institutions, and other Tribal organizations have begun using geographic information systems and other digital technologies in recent years. As Tribes become more interested in and more adept at managing digital information, they are seeking relevant data from the USGS more frequently. Using digital technologies provides Tribal governments with additional means of managing lands and resources for the benefit of current and future generations. The USGS recognizes the need to make its information available to Tribal governments, and to work with those governments and other institutions to advance data management capabilities. The USGS also recognizes that Tribal institutions have varying needs, interests, and capacities. The USGS strives to be sensitive to the unique circumstances of each of these institutions while supporting their self-driven evolution. The USGS is responding to these needs by increasing the transfer of scientific information to American Indian and Alaska Native governments and by training employees of those governments to conduct scientific studies and improve scientific data management. The USGS is also encouraging American Indians and Alaska Natives to pursue careers in science and seeking ways to hire Indian and Native students. By identifying, improving, and disseminating information about available hiring mechanisms, the USGS is working to make hiring such students easier, and, therefore, more likely, for USGS managers. The U.S. Geological Survey is the Federal science bureau within the Department of the Interior (DoI). The USGS is non-regulatory and is not a significant manager of Federal or Trust lands or assets. However, as described in this report, there are several types of USGS activities that involve American Indians, Alaska Natives, and their lands. One type of activity is the course of formal studies, conducted through existing USGS programs, that involves collection of specific types of data as well as investigative and research projects. These projects typically last 2 or 3 years, although a few are parts of longer-term activities. Some projects are funded through cooperative agreements, from monies provided to the USGS by individual Tribal governments, or by the BIA. The USGS provides matching funds for cooperative projects. These formal projects may also receive funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Indian Health Service (part of the Department of Health and Human Services), or other Federal agencies. The USGS routinely works with its sister bureaus in the Department of the Interior to provide the scientific information and expertise needed to meet the Department's science priorities. Within this context, the USGS and the BIA are cooperating to use USGS information resources to benefit American Indian and Alaska Native peoples and their lands. The second type of USGS activity is less formal, based on initiatives designed and conducted by USGS employees. Frequently involving educational activities, these endeavors are prompted by employee interests, often as collateral issues, that result from one or more USGS employees identifying and responding to an observed need. In these activities, USGS employees help fulfill a mission of the USGS--to prove scientific relevance--while helping their fellow citizens. Increasingly, some of the educational activities are becoming parts of formal USGS projects. USGS employees have also taken the initiative in assisting American Indians and Alaska Natives through participation in several organizations that were created to foster awareness of science among Native peoples and to help build support and communication networks. One such group is the American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES). This group sponsors an annual national meeting in which USGS employees participate. USGS employees join this organization on a voluntary basis, bringing the benefits of this expanded network to the USGS, as many employees do with other professional organizations. Each part of the USGS has identified an American Indian/Alaska Native liaison. The USGS has a regional organizational structure, with Western, Central, and Eastern Regions. The regions work in concert with specific scientific disciplines to conduct the scientific mission of the USGS. The regional structure is intended to bring us closer to our customers; we hope that Native Americans and Alaska Natives will use the contacts listed at the end of this report.

Report↗
USGS2011

USGS global change science strategy: A framework for understanding and responding to climate and land-use change

This U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Global Change Science Strategy expands on the Climate Variability and Change science component of the USGS 2007 Science Strategy, “Facing Tomorrow’s Challenges: USGS Science in the Coming Decade” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007). Here we embrace the broad definition of global change provided in the U.S. Global Change Research Act of 1990 (Public Law 101–606,104 Stat. 3096–3104)—“Changes in the global environment (including alterations in climate, land productivity, oceans or other water resources, atmospheric chemistry, and ecological systems) that may alter the capacity of the Earth to sustain life”—with a focus on climate and land-use change. There are three major characteristics of this science strategy. First, it addresses the science required to broadly inform global change policy, while emphasizing the needs of natural-resource managers and reflecting the role of the USGS as the science provider for the Department of the Interior and other resource-management agencies. Second, the strategy identifies core competencies, noting 10 critical capabilities and strengths the USGS uses to overcome key problem areas. We highlight those areas in which the USGS is a science leader, recognizing the strong partnerships and effective collaboration that are essential to address complex global environmental challenges. Third, it uses a query-based approach listing key research questions that need to be addressed to create an agenda for hypothesis-driven global change science organized under six strategic goals. Overall, the strategy starts from where we are, provides a vision for where we want to go, and then describes high-priority strategic actions, including outcomes, products, and partnerships that can get us there. Global change science is a well-defined research field with strong linkages to the ecosystems, water, energy and minerals, natural hazards, and environmental health components of the USGS Science Strategy (2007). When science strategies that cover these other components are developed, coordinated implementation will be necessary to achieve Bureau-level synergies and optimize capabilities and expertise. In October 2010, USGS realigned its management and budget structure to implement its 2007 Science Strategy. The new organizational structure, in which “Global Change” is one of seven key mission areas, lends itself to the advancement of the established six strategic goals. USGS global change science is formally represented by the “Climate and Land-Use Change” Mission Area in the FY 2012 budget (USGS, 2011). This plan was developed by the USGS Global Change Science Strategy Planning Team (SSPT) appointed by the USGS Director on March 4, 2010 and charged with developing a Global Change Science Strategy for the coming decade (McNutt, 2010). USGS managers and science staff are the main audience for this science strategy. This document is also intended to serve as the foundation for consistent USGS collaboration and communication with partners and stakeholders.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2008

Thiamine Deficiency Complex Workshop final report: November 6-7, 2008, Ann Arbor, MI

Fry mortality which was first observed in the late 1960s in Great Lakes salmonines and in Baltic Sea salmon in 1974 has now been linked to thiamine deficiency (historically referred to as Early Mortality Syndrome, or EMS and M74, respectively). Over the past 14 years significant strides have been made in our understanding of this perplexing problem. It is now known that thiamine deficiency causes embryonic mortality in these salmonids. Both overt mortality and secondary effects of thiamine deficiency are observed in juvenile and adult animals. Collectively the morbidity and mortality (fry and adult mortality, secondary metabolic and behavior affects in juveniles and adult fish) are referred to as Thiamine Deficiency Complex (TDC). A workshop was held in Ann Arbor, MI on 6-7 November 2008 that brought together 38 federal, state, provincial, tribal and university scientists to share information, present data and discuss the latest observations on thiamine status of aquatic animals with thiamine deficiency and the causative agent, thiaminase. Twenty presentations (13 oral and 7 posters) detailed current knowledge. In Lake Huron, low alewife Alosa pseudoharengus abundance has persisted and egg thiamine concentrations in salmonines continue to increase, along with evidence of natural reproduction in lake trout Salvelinus namaycush. Lake Michigan Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha appear to have a lower thiamine requirement than other salmonids in the lake. Lake Ontario American eel Anguilla rostrata foraging on alewife have approximately one third the muscle thiamine compared to eels not feeding on alewife, suggesting that eels may be suffering from thiamine deficiency. Secondary effects of low thiamine exist in Great Lakes salmonines and should not be ignored. Thiaminase activity in dreissenid mussels is extremely high but a connection to TDC has not been made. Thiaminase in net plankton was found more consistently in lakes Michigan and Ontario than other lakes evaluated. The biological role of thiaminase I, associated with thiamine deficiency, remains to be determined whereas thiaminase II has been reported to be part of a salvage pathway leading to thiamine synthesis. The use of gene array technology and 3-dimensional histology is adding new understanding to the affects of thiamine deficiency. Research is needed to determine the thiamine status of species feeding on dreissenids, the environmental sources of thiaminase and the biological role of thiaminase I.

Research Status Report↗
USGS2025

Exploring management and environment effects on edge-of-field phosphorus losses with linear mixed models

Evaluating how weather, farm management, and soil conditions impact phosphorus (P) loss from agricultural sites is essential for improving our waterways in agricultural watersheds. In this study, rainfall characteristics, manure application timing, tillage, surface condition, and soil test phosphorus (STP) were analyzed to determine their effects on total phosphorus (TP) and dissolved phosphorus (DP) loss using 125 site-years of runoff data collected by the University of Wisconsin Discovery Farms and Discovery Farms Minnesota. Three linear mixed models (LMMs) were then used to evaluate the influence of those factors on TP and DP losses: (1) a model that included all runoff events, (2) manured sites only, and (3) precipitation events only. Results show that the timing of manure application relative to the timing of a runoff event only had a marginal association with P loads and concentrations, although the majority of the runoff events were collected after 10 days of manure application. Tillage was as influential factor, with greater DP loads and concentrations associated with no-till, especially during frozen conditions. Fields in this study had high STP values, but the model results only showed positive associations between DP load and DP flow-weighted mean concentration (FWMC) loss at the 0- to 15-cm depth. The precipitation event LMM (which included precipitation characteristics) was the model that resulted in the largest R 2 value. While the predictive capacity of the LMMs was low, they did illuminate the relative importance of management and environmental variables on P loss, and can be used to guide future research on P loss in this region.

Minnesota, Wisconsin↗
USGS2000

U.S. Geological Survey Activities Related to American Indians and Alaska Natives Fiscal Year 2000

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is an impartial scientific organization that strives to produce scientific results that are relevant to the people of the United States and their land and resource managers. USGS does not improve the quality of its customers' lives; it provides the informational tools for American Indians, Alaska Natives, and other customers to understand and improve their own lives. In cooperation with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, the USGS conducts research on water and mineral resources, animals and plants of environmental, economic, or subsistence importance, natural hazards, and geologic resources. Digital data on cartography, mineral resources, stream flows, biota, and other data sets are available to American Indian and Alaska Native institutions. The USGS recognizes the need to learn from and share knowledge with Native peoples. This report describes most of the activities that the USGS conducted with American Indian and Alaska Native governments, educational institutions, and individuals during Federal Fiscal Year 2000. Some of these USGS activities were conducted in concert with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Others were conducted by Tribes and the USGS. In the year 2000, the USGS began examining its activities related to American Indians and Native Alaskans to determine how it can better serve these customers within its mandates. More Tribal governments, educational institutions, and other Tribal organizations are using geographic information systems and other digital technologies in recent years. As Tribes become more interested and more adept at managing digital information, they are seeking such data from the USGS with greater frequency. The increasing use of such technologies allows Tribal governments additional means of managing lands and resources for the benefit of current and future generations. The USGS recognizes the need to make its information available to Tribal governments, and to work with those governments and other institutions to advance data management capabilities. The USGS is responding to this need by increasing the transfer of scientific information to American Indian and Alaska Native governments and by training employees of these governments to conduct and improve scientific studies. The USGS is also encouraging American Indians and Alaska Natives to pursue careers in science, and seeking ways to hire Indian and Native students. By identifying, improving, and disseminating information about available hiring mechanisms, the USGS is working to make hiring such students easier, and therefore more likely, for USGS managers. The U.S. Geological Survey is the Federal science bureau within the Department of the Interior (DoI). The USGS is non-regulatory and is not a significant manager of Federal or Trust lands or assets. However, there are two types of USGS activities that do involve American Indians, Alaska Natives, and their lands. The first type of activity is the course of formal studies, conducted through existing USGS programs, that involve collection of specific types of data as well as investigative and research projects. These projects have a duration of two or three years, although a few are parts of longer-term activities. Some are funded through cooperative agreements or reimbursable accounts, from monies provided to the USGS by individual Tribal governments or by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). The USGS provides matching funds for cooperative projects. These formal projects may also receive funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Indian Health Service (part of the Department of Health and Human Services), or other Federal agencies. The USGS routinely works with its sister bureaus in the Department of the Interior to provide the scientific information and expertise needed to meet the Department's science priorities. Within this context, the USGS and the Bureau of Indian Affairs are cooperating to use USGS knowledge for the benefit of American Indian and Native peoples and their lands. The second type of USGS activity is less formal, based on initiatives designed and conducted by USGS employees. Frequently involving educational activities, these endeavors are prompted by employee interests, often as collateral issues, that result from an individual or group of USGS employees identifying and responding to an observed need. In these activities, USGS employees help us fulfill a mission of the USGS, to make science relevant, while helping their fellow citizens. USGS employees have also taken the initiative to assist American Indians and Alaska Natives through participation in several organizations that were created to foster knowledge of science among Native peoples and to help build support and communication networks. One such group is the American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES). This group sponsors an annual national meeting in which USGS employees participate. USGS employees join this organization on a voluntary basis, paying the costs themselves, yet bringing the benefits of this expanded network to the USGS, as many employees do with other professional organizations. Each part of the USGS has identified an American Indian/Alaska Native liaison. As USGS moves to a more regional organizational structure, it will establish contacts in the Western, Central, and Eastern Regions. Within the USGS, this report will help in developing outreach, educational, and program documents for use in future years. It is hoped that USGS employees, American Indians, and Alaska Natives will adapt these activities in new areas and will use the USGS contacts to expand the relevance of the USGS to more Americans.

Report↗
USGS2011

Nutrient loadings to streams of the continental United States from municipal and industrial effluent?

Data from the United States Environmental Protection Agency Permit Compliance System national database were used to calculate annual total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) loads to surface waters from municipal and industrial facilities in six major regions of the United States for 1992, 1997, and 2002. Concentration and effluent flow data were examined for approximately 118,250 facilities in 45 states and the District of Columbia. Inconsistent and incomplete discharge locations, effluent flows, and effluent nutrient concentrations limited the use of these data for calculating nutrient loads. More concentrations were reported for major facilities, those discharging more than 1 million gallons per day, than for minor facilities, and more concentrations were reported for TP than for TN. Analytical methods to check and improve the quality of the Permit Compliance System data were used. Annual loads were calculated using "typical pollutant concentrations" to supplement missing concentrations based on the type and size of facilities. Annual nutrient loads for over 26,600 facilities were calculated for at least one of the three years. Sewage systems represented 74% of all TN loads and 58% of all TP loads. This work represents an initial set of data to develop a comprehensive and consistent national database of point-source nutrient loads. These loads can be used to inform a wide range of water-quality management, watershed modeling, and research efforts at multiple scales.

Journal of the American Water Resources Associatio↗
USGS2005

A comparative analysis of the Global Land Cover 2000 and MODIS land cover data sets

Accurate and up-to-date global land cover data sets are necessary for various global change research studies including climate change, biodiversity conservation, ecosystem assessment, and environmental modeling. In recent years, substantial advancement has been achieved in generating such data products. Yet, we are far from producing geospatially consistent high-quality data at an operational level. We compared the recently available Global Land Cover 2000 (GLC-2000) and MODerate resolution Imaging Spectrometer (MODIS) global land cover data to evaluate the similarities and differences in methodologies and results, and to identify areas of spatial agreement and disagreement. These two global land cover data sets were prepared using different data sources, classification systems, and methodologies, but using the same spatial resolution (i.e., 1 km) satellite data. Our analysis shows a general agreement at the class aggregate level except for savannas/shrublands, and wetlands. The disagreement, however, increases when comparing detailed land cover classes. Similarly, percent agreement between the two data sets was found to be highly variable among biomes. The identified areas of spatial agreement and disagreement will be useful for both data producers and users. Data producers may use the areas of spatial agreement for training area selection and pay special attention to areas of disagreement for further improvement in future land cover characterization and mapping. Users can conveniently use the findings in the areas of agreement, whereas users might need to verify the informaiton in the areas of disagreement with the help of secondary information. Learning from past experience and building on the existing infrastructure (e.g., regional networks), further research is necessary to (1) reduce ambiguity in land cover definitions, (2) increase availability of improved spatial, spectral, radiometric, and geometric resolution satellite data, and (3) develop advanced classification algorithms.

Remote Sensing of Environment↗
USGS2011

Treading lightly on shifting ground: The direction and motivation of future geological research

The future of the geosciences and geological research will involve complex scientific challenges, primarily concerning global and regional environmental issues, in the next 20-30 years. It is quite reasonable to suspect, based on current political and socioeconomic events, that young geoscientists will be faced with and involved in helping to resolve some well defined problems: water and energy security, the effects of anthropogenic climate change, coastal sea level rise and development, and the mitigation of geohazards. It is how we choose to approach these challenges that will define our future. Interdisciplinary applied research, improved modeling and prediction augmented with faster and more sophisticated computing, and a greater role in creating and guiding public policy, will help us achieve our goals of a cleaner and safer Earth environment in the next 30 years. In the far future, even grander possibilities for eliminating the risk of certain geohazards and finding sustainable solutions to our energy needs can be envisioned. Looking deeper into the future, the possibilities for geoscience research push the limits of the imagination.

Episodes↗
USGS1981

An evaluation of blood plasma for monitoring DDE in birds of prey

Laboratory and field studies show that DDE residues in blood plasma are highly correlated with DDE in the brain, the rate of DDE exposure and the amount of DDE in eggs of free-living birds of prey. A blood sampling approach is proposed to supplement existing environmental contaminant methods available for birds of prey. Residues (ΣDDT) in plasma provide some direct information; however, a method is proposed to adjust blood plasma residues from four species of birds of prey to the estimated residues in eggs for the purpose of residue interpretation. The blood plasma-egg relationship appears to be species-independent in the four raptors studied. Two predicting equations are presented for estimating egg residues, one for plasma samples collected prior to, or within a few days of, egg laying, and another for the post-laying period. Limitations and advantages of the blood plasma monitoring approach are discussed. The approach may be particularly suitable for endangered species research.

Environmental Pollution (Series A)↗