USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Wildlife Biology”

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 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
USGS1998

Suggestions for new and aspiring graduate students in wildlife science

The transition from an undergraduate to a graduate program can be a difficult experience for students. Many undergraduates are unfamiliar with the process of preparing for graduate school, especially the search for a graduate program. Once in graduate school, they may be unfamiliar with requirements (both written and unwritten) and expectations, and they may also lack the necessary knowledge or skills to complete a graduate program successfully. For students in wildlife science graduate programs, these problems can become major issues, especially for students with undergraduate degrees in fields other than wildlife science (e.g., biology programs). Although several authors have provided advice to graduate students (Stearns 1987, Hucy 1987, Witz 1994), their suggestions either did not provide sufficient information for undergraduate students, or did not apply to graduate students in wildlife science. We provide information for undergraduates and new graduate students in wildlife science that is often unavailable prior to and during the initial phases of a graduate program. Our objectives are: (1) to provide advice on how to prepare for graduate school; (2) to provide an approach to locating, evaluating, and selecting potential graduate schools and a graduate advisor; (3) to describe the fundamentals of graduate school; and (4) to familiarize students with available tools and techniques to enhance a graduate program. We hope that university professors will provide this paper to undergraduates to aid those interested in attending graduate school. In addition, graduate advisors may wish to provide this paper to new graduate students as they begin their programs.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗
USGS2020

Biological and habitat assessment of the Lower Rouge River, Michigan 2018

A key component of evaluating the success of habitat remediation projects is determining preremediation conditions, biotic and abiotic, to establish a baseline and compare with postproject conditions. The Rouge River, Michigan, is a Great Lakes Area of Concern with a listed Beneficial Use Impairment related to loss of fish and wildlife habitat. A biological and habitat assessment was completed in the lower Rouge River, focused along a nearly 7-kilometer stretch of river that includes a concrete channel anticipated to be removed by 2022, to determine prerestoration conditions. Surveys documented the presence and quality of physical habitat, presence of herpetofauna, and quantified macroinvertebrate and fish assemblages at 12 sites (3 upstream from the concrete channel, 6 within the concrete channel, and 3 downstream from the concrete channel). Macroinvertebrate assemblages were dominated by Chironomidae and Oligochaeta for June and September. The electrofishing catch per unit effort was driven by Notropis atherinoides (emerald shiner) catches in June and emerald shiner and Dorosoma cepedianum (gizzard shad) catches in September. Graptemys geographica (northern map turtle) was the most common reptile observed throughout the lower Rouge River. No submergent macrophytes were discovered, and riparian vegetation was sparse in the concrete channel section. No sites scored “excellent” (total score greater than 154), upstream control sites scored “good” for overall qualitative habitat assessments (total score 105–154), and all concrete channel and downstream control sites were ranked as “marginal” (total score 56–104) or “poor” habitat (total score 0–55). Results from this assessment can be used to compare with postremediation projects in the lower Rouge River.

Michigan↗
USGS2025

Exosomal micro RNA isolation in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) for diagnostic biomarker discovery

Molecular approaches are becoming more prevalent for the diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases in human medicine and can be extended to diagnosis of wildlife diseases such as chronic wasting disease and other prion diseases. These diseases have been associated with exosome-bound molecular biomarkers of disease progression, such as proteins and micro RNA molecules (miRNA). We tested and optimized a method for exosomal miRNA isolation from minimally invasive, small-volume serum samples obtained from white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ). We confirmed the isolation of exosomes and optimized a commercially available benchtop kit to obtain sufficient and pure RNA for miRNA sequencing. The selected method for RNA extraction combines two 500- m L serum aliquots into one elution column and re-eluting the final product of the column. We identified 137 miRNA present in healthy white-tailed deer that can be used as a baseline to identify putative miRNA biomarkers of disease progression and mechanisms of infection in future comparative disease studies. This approach to biomarker discovery may help to inform biological processes in wildlife populations and provide alternatives to invasive or postmortem samples.

Journal of Wildlife Diseases↗
USGS2025

Pesticide contamination detected across five wildlife refuges in the Sacramento Valley of California

An important goal for the applied ecological sciences is to understand the extent to which the biodiversity on conserved or managed lands is exposed to anthropogenic stressors. Among the various categories of conserved lands in the United States, the National Wildlife Refuge System is focused on the protection and management of native wildlife and plant populations. Refuge lands can be associated with wetlands and, especially in California, tend to be near areas of intense human use, including agriculture. The proximity of refuges to cultivated lands results in potential exposure to pesticide drift, which increases the possibility of non-target effects on plants and wildlife. We used a passive sampler approach to quantify aerial pesticide deposition during 28 days in spring of 2023, across five refuges in the Sacramento Valley of California. Pesticides were detected across all refuges and plots within the study area, with 36 individual compounds identified, including insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides, from 176 silicone bands from 49 plots. Distance to agriculture was not an important predictor in our models for most indices of contamination. However, our models revealed that the nearest crop type was an important mediator of the importance of distance to agriculture, as fungicide contamination decreased with distance to agriculture only when orchards were the nearest crop type. The overall lack of distance effects suggests that the interior of refuges in the study area do not necessarily provide more protection from pesticides than refuge edges, although larger refuges could offer more protection. We currently lack information on how the level of contamination found herein is biologically relevant to wildlife, and ongoing monitoring efforts have found productive communities of insects in the study area. The results of this study provide a foundation for future investigations on refuges to analyze impacts of specific pesticide compounds on plants and wildlife.

California↗
USGS2010

Fort Collins Science Center- Policy Analysis and Science Assistance Branch : Integrating social, behavioral, economic and biological sciences

The Fort Collins Science Center's Policy Analysis and Science Assistance (PASA) Branch is a team of approximately 22 scientists, technicians, and graduate student researchers. PASA provides unique capabilities in the U.S. Geological Survey by leading projects that integrate social, behavioral, economic, and biological analyses in the context of human-natural resource interactions. Resource planners, managers, and policymakers in the U.S. Departments of the Interior (DOI) and Agriculture (USDA), State and local agencies, as well as international agencies use information from PASA studies to make informed natural resource management and policy decisions. PASA scientists' primary functions are to conduct both theoretical and applied social science research, provide technical assistance, and offer training to advance performance in policy relevant research areas. Management and research issues associated with human-resource interactions typically occur in a unique context, involve difficult to access populations, require knowledge of both natural/biological science in addition to social science, and require the skill to integrate multiple science disciplines. In response to these difficult contexts, PASA researchers apply traditional and state-of-the-art social science methods drawing from the fields of sociology, demography, economics, political science, communications, social-psychology, and applied industrial organization psychology. Social science methods work in concert with our rangeland/agricultural management, wildlife, ecology, and biology capabilities. The goal of PASA's research is to enhance natural resource management, agency functions, policies, and decision-making. Our research is organized into four broad areas of study.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS1977

Coal: special report number 2

The Fish and Wildlife Service has extensive biological expertise within the Department of Interior and exerts national leadership in the management and protection of the nation's fish and wildlife resources, their habitat, and environment. Specifically, the Office of Biological Services obtains and assimilates biological and environmental data and identifies additional informational needs and means to provide environmental and biological input into major natural resource decisions. Coal Coordinators assist in carrying out Fish and Wildlife Service involvement in the Interior Department Coal Leasing Program through a multi-stage process designed to assemble existing fish and wildlife inventory data and to prioritize fish and wildlife values in areas subject to coal leasing and associated development. This report is designed to identify possible areas of concern for wildlife and its habitat in Wyoming in the development of coal and the associate implication of land use changes. This report summarizes past and present development of the coal resource in Wyoming in anticipation of future identification of data needs for making sound resource decisions in the development of coal.

FWS/OBS↗
USGS2015

Social and Economic Analysis Branch: integrating policy, social, economic, and natural science

The Fort Collins Science Center's Social and Economic Analysis Branch provides unique capabilities in the U.S. Geological Survey by leading projects that integrate social, behavioral, economic, and natural science in the context of human–natural resource interactions. Our research provides scientific understanding and support for the management and conservation of our natural resources in support of multiple agency missions. We focus on meeting the scientific needs of the Department of the Interior natural resource management bureaus in addition to fostering partnerships with other Federal and State managers to protect, restore, and enhance our environment. The Social and Economic Analysis Branch has an interdisciplinary group of scientists whose primary functions are to conduct both theoretical and applied social science research, provide technical assistance, and offer training to support the development of skills in natural resource management activities. Management and research issues associated with human-resource interactions typically occur in a unique context and require knowledge of both natural and social sciences, along with the skill to integrate multiple science disciplines. In response to these challenging contexts, Social and Economic Analysis Branch researchers apply a wide variety of social science concepts and methods which complement our rangeland/agricultural, wildlife, ecology, and biology capabilities. The goal of the Social and Economic Analysis Branch's research is to enhance natural-resource management, agency functions, policies, and decisionmaking.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2007

Proceedings of the Fourth Glacier Bay Science Symposium

Foreword Glacier Bay was established as a National Monument in 1925, in part to protect its unique character and natural beauty, but also to create a natural laboratory to examine evolution of the glacial landscape. Today, Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve is still a place of profound natural beauty and dynamic landscapes. It also remains a focal point for scientific research and includes continuing observations begun decades ago of glacial processes and terrestrial ecosystems. In recent years, research has focused on glacial-marine interactions and ecosystem processes that occur below the surface of the bay. In October 2004, Glacier Bay National Park convened the fourth in a series of science symposiums to provide an opportunity for researchers, managers, interpreters, educators, students and the general public to share knowledge about Glacier Bay. The Fourth Glacier Bay Science Symposium was held in Juneau, Alaska, rather than at the Park, reflecting a desire to maximize attendance and communication among a growing and diverse number of stakeholders interested in science in the park. More than 400 people attended the symposium. Participants provided 46 oral presentations and 41 posters covering a wide array of disciplines including geology, glaciology, oceanography, wildlife and fisheries biology, terrestrial and marine ecology, socio-cultural research and management issues. A panel discussion focused on the importance of connectivity in Glacier Bay research, and keynote speakers (Gary Davis and Terry Chapin) spoke of long-term monitoring and ecological processes. These proceedings include 56 papers from the symposium. A summary of the Glacier Bay Science Plan-itself a subject of a meeting during the symposium and the result of ongoing discussions between scientists and resource managers-also is provided. We hope these proceedings illustrate the diversity of completed and ongoing scientific studies, conducted within the Park. To this end, we invited all presenters to submit brief technical summaries of their work, to capture the gist of their study and its main findings without an overload of details and methodology. We also asked authors to include a few words on the management implications of their work to help bridge the gap between scientists and managers in understanding how specific research questions may translate to management practice. Papers in this volume are laid out by subject matter, from terrestrial and freshwater subjects to glacial-marine geology, to the ecology of marine animals and ending with risk assessment, human impacts and science-management considerations. In summary, we hope the proceedings will serve as a useful reference to completed and ongoing studies in Glacier Bay National Park, and thereby provide park enthusiasts, scientists, and managers with a road map of scientific progress.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2021

Engaging hunters in selecting duck season dates using decision science: Problem framing, objective setting, devising management alternatives

Waterfowl hunters have an important economic impact on local, state, and national economies, and are important stakeholders in decisions regarding waterfowl harvest season dates. Individual states are responsible for annually setting duck season dates that conform to the migratory game bird season frameworks as set by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The federal framework specifies season length and bag limits (i.e., number of birds allowed to be harvested in a day), and states have the authority to select specific season dates within the federal guidelines. The state agency decision is largely centered on social objectives related to hunter satisfaction because the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service incorporates biological objectives when establishing the federal framework to ensure sustainable waterfowl populations. This chapter describes the problem formulation, objectives, and alternatives steps of a decision analysis process used in New York. The authors demonstrate a process that allows for engagement by waterfowl hunters and incorporation of multiple stakeholder objectives, which can be used to evaluate tradeoffs to help guide decision making regarding selection of duck season dates. Engaging duck hunters through a task force and hunter survey provided opportunity for the regulated community to help shape season dates that quantitatively considered duck hunter satisfaction.

Book chapter↗
USGS1976

Wildlife importation into the United States, 1900-1972

Data from Bureau of Biological Survey and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service reports show an overall increase in the number of birds and mammals imported from 1900 to 1972. The trend was interrupted by World War I, the economic depression of the 1930's, and World War II. Data are lacking for the years after World War II until 1968. Until 1942, domesticated canaries and a few species of game birds made up most of the avian imports; the shell parakeet or budgerigar was the most commonly imported parrot. Although the total number ofbirds imported 1968-72 was-not greatly different from the pre-depression years, the proportion of canaries, game species, and parakeets declined greatly and the variety and number of cage birds including other parrot species greatly increased. Until 1930 most mammals imported were for laboratory use or fur farming. After 1930 the number of imported mammals increased with the growing importance of primates, especially rhesus macaques, in research. Since 1968 the number of mammals irnported annually has been at least 5 times greater than the previous peak of 1938, and primates have made up 87% of mammalian imports. Information on reptiles and amphibians imported into the United States is available only for 1970 and 1971. Turtles were the most commonly imported reptiles, frogs and toads the most commonly imported amphibians.

Special Scientific Report - Wildlife↗
USGS2024

A heuristic method to evaluate consequences for flight control and stability induced by attachment of biologging devices to birds and bats

Biologging is central to the study of wildlife, but questions remain about the minimization of effects of biologging devices. Rarely considered are changes biologging devices induce on an animal's centre of mass (COM) and resulting losses of flight control and stability. We applied established aeronautical principles to estimate how the COM of a flying bird or bat may be affected by the typical positioning of a biologging device on the neck, back, hips or tail. We then adopted modified thresholds from aerospace engineering to estimate limits beyond which changes to COM result in fitness-relevant alterations to flight control and stability. Generic models illustrate a trade-off between the placement and mass of a biologging device that influences flight control and stability. Seven species-specific examples show the substantial differences in consequences of changes to COM for animals of different sizes and body types. Placement of a device on the tail always resulted in the greatest shift in COM and placement in the centre of the back resulted in the smallest shift. The 5% weight threshold some use for a biologging device provides little room for error in terms of stability and can easily cause dangerous changes to COM. The 3% weight threshold others use causes considerably smaller changes in the COM, but when placed away from the natural COM, still can affect flight control and stability. Researchers interested in minimizing the effects to fitness of wildlife should consider weight, balance and COM when affixing biologging devices. The farther a device is from the natural COM, the smaller it should be relative to the mass of the animal.

Methods in Ecology and Evolution↗
USGS2012

A history of herpetologists and herpetology in the U.S. Department of the Interior

The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) has a long and distinguished history of employing herpetologists to conduct basic and applied research to better manage amphibian and reptile populations on public lands and even outside the boundaries of the United States. This history extends back over 125 years with roots in the U.S. Biological Survey, the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service and later, the National Biological Service. In more recent times, the DOI employed more professional herpetologists than any single organization in the world, especially in the U.S. Geological Survey. In 1938, Henry Fitch was the first Interior scientist hired who conducted substantial herpetological research. William and Lucille Stickel of the Fish and Wildlife Service conducted herpetological research throughout the period from the 1940s-1980s but most DOI herpetologists were hired from 1975-80 with another hiring spike from 2000-2005. The former spike was congruent with early versions of the Endangered Species Act while the latter reflected growing recognition of global amphibian decline and the creation of the Amphibian Research and Monitoring Initiative in DOI. Collectively, these herpetologists produced hundreds of books, scientific publications and other scholarly publications, many of which are classics in the literature. In addition, many have served as officers and on the boards of numerous scientific societies particularly those specializing in amphibian and reptile research. The DOI shows a continuing commitment to funding herpetological research by hiring young scientists to replace the aging ranks of herpetologists who started their careers in the 1970s. This commitment is critical given the global decline of both amphibians and reptiles, including those found on public lands in the United States.

Herpetological Conservation and Biology↗
USGS2006

History of the Fort Collins Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey

The U.S. Geological Survey’s Fort Collins Science Center ("the Center") has been a nucleus of research, technology development, and associated scientific activities within the Department of the Interior for more than 30 years. The Center’s historical activities are deeply rooted in federal biological resources research and its supporting disciplines, particularly as they relate to the needs of the U.S. Department of the Interior and its resource management agencies. The organizational framework and activities of the Center have changed and adapted over the years in response to shifts in the scientific issues and challenges facing the U.S. Department of the Interior and with the development of new strategies to meet these challenges. Thus, the history of the Center has been dynamic. The Center has been nested within the U.S. Geological Survey since 1996. From 1993 to 1996 the Center was a major unit of the National Biological Service (named the National Biological Survey at its inception). This was a period of great organizational flux. During that time the Center comprised multiple field stations and science functions that prior to 1993 had been scattered among the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the National Park Service, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. In 1993, certain biological research components of these agencies were assigned to join with the National Ecology Research Center, formerly one of the major research and development hubs of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This was the year when biological resources research in the U.S. Department of the Interior was consolidated by the Secretary of the Interior, who in an April 1993 memo explaining his intentions wrote, "Our Department has, without doubt, the best biologists in the world." Soon after formation of the new agency, the Center was re-named the Midcontinent Ecological Science Center, reflecting its geographic location within the new Midcontinent administrative region of the National Biological Service (the other three original administrative regions were the eastern, western, and southern). The change in name to the Fort Collins Science Center took place in 2002, soon after the center moved to new facilities on the Colorado State University Natural Resources Research Campus. At various times during the period when it was part of the National Biological Service (1993–96), the Center served as the administrative and programmatic home base for a wide number of science activities in numerous Western states (table 1). This reflected the previous fragmentation of biological and related science efforts across resource management agencies in the U.S. Department of the Interior. The organization of the 2 Center within the National Biological Service was a manifestation of the desire of the Secretary of the Interior to consolidate its biological science activities in administratively independent entities that would ensure that the science retained its objectivity. Congress later recognized the need to maintain a hierarchical independence between biological science and resource management in the Department. However, Congress also saw that the U.S. Geological Survey, with its long history of objective science support to the nation in geology, water resources, geography, and remote sensing, was a suitable alternative home for these biological science functions. Thus, in 1996 Congress transferred the biological resources functions of the National Biological Service to the U.S. Geological Survey. Detailed overviews and opinions about the history and policy issues surrounding the formation and subsequent fate of the National Biological Service can be found elsewhere (for example Cohn, 1993, 2005; Kaufman, 1993; Kreeger, 1994; Pulliam, 1995, 1998a,b; Reichhardt, 1994; Wagner, 1999)

Open-File Report↗
USGS2018

Incorporating road crossing data into vehicle collision risk models for moose (Alces americanus) in Massachusetts, USA

Wildlife–vehicle collisions are a human safety issue and may negatively impact wildlife populations. Most wildlife–vehicle collision studies predict high-risk road segments using only collision data. However, these data lack biologically relevant information such as wildlife population densities and successful road-crossing locations. We overcome this shortcoming with a new method that combines successful road crossings with vehicle collision data, to identify road segments that have both high biological relevance and high risk. We used moose ( Alces americanus ) road-crossing locations from 20 moose collared with Global Positioning Systems as well as moose–vehicle collision (MVC) data in the state of Massachusetts, USA, to create multi-scale resource selection functions. We predicted the probability of moose road crossings and MVCs across the road network and combined these surfaces to identify road segments that met the dual criteria of having high biological relevance and high risk for MVCs. These road segments occurred mostly on larger roadways in natural areas and were surrounded by forests, wetlands, and a heterogenous mix of land cover types. We found MVCs resulted in the mortality of 3% of the moose population in Massachusetts annually. Although there have been only three human fatalities related to MVCs in Massachusetts since 2003, the human fatality rate was one of the highest reported in the literature. The rate of MVCs relative to the size of the moose population and the risk to human safety suggest a need for road mitigation measures, such as fencing, animal detection systems, and large mammal-crossing structures on roadways in Massachusetts.

Massachusetts↗
USGS2016

Application of genetics and genomics to wildlife epidemiology

Wildlife diseases can have significant impacts on wildlife conservation and management. Many of the pathogens that affect wildlife also have important implications for domestic animal and human health. However, management interventions to prevent or control wildlife disease are hampered by uncertainties about the complex interactions between pathogens and free-ranging wildlife. We often lack crucial knowledge about host ecology, pathogen characteristics, and host–pathogen dynamics. The purpose of this review is to familiarize wildlife biologists and managers with the application of genetic and genomic methodologies for investigating pathogen and host biology to better understand and manage wildlife diseases. The genesis of this review was a symposium at the 2013 annual Wildlife Society Conference. We reviewed the scientific literature and used our personal experiences to identify studies that illustrate the application of genetic and genomic methods to advance our understanding of wildlife epidemiology, focusing on recent research, new techniques, and innovative approaches. Using examples from a variety of pathogen types and a broad array of vertebrate taxa, we describe how genetics and genomics can provide tools to detect and characterize pathogens, uncover routes of disease transmission and spread, shed light on the ways that disease susceptibility is influenced by both host and pathogen attributes, and elucidate the impacts of disease on wildlife populations. Genetic and increasingly genomic methodologies will continue to contribute important insights into pathogen and host biology that will aid efforts to assess and mitigate the impacts of wildlife diseases on global health and conservation of biodiversity.

Journal of Wildlife Management↗
USGS2025

Decision support tools for brown pelican management in the northern Gulf of America (Gulf of Mexico)

Management plans with clear priorities can help to achieve brown pelican Pelecanus occidentalis conservation objectives in the northern Gulf of America (Gulf of Mexico). Efforts to establish clear priorities can be hindered by information gaps, especially those related to the uncertainty associated with changing conditions that influence brown pelican populations. We addressed these gaps by creating a model that uses island-specific conditions (e.g., geomorphology; predator-related conditions; brown pelican terrestrial nesting, roosting, and loafing habitats) to predict the nest count as a proxy for breeding pairs on the island. We used the model and 2000–2015 brown pelican nest count data to estimate if breeding pair targets that we identified or estimated for 10 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Gulf Coast Biological Planning Units were met while accounting for uncertainty. Our results indicate that breeding pair targets were met in 7 of the 10 units by existing conditions. Our confidence in judging nest deficits tended to decrease from west to east because the model over-predicted total nests in the east Gulf Coast. Using an island from our data, we show how the model could be used to quantify the uncertainty of nest count outcomes under simulated changes in island conditions. The model indicated that the island's existing conditions most probably result in nests (probability = 0.51) and that increasing the area of nesting habitat (shrubs) could increase the probability of nests from 49% to 70%. Increasing shrub habitat in the model also increased nest count uncertainty by 60%, but this was due to a greater probability of larger nest counts. Our model suggests that nest count uncertainty could be reduced by improving data on island size, shrub area, and predator presence, depending on the unit and how isolated the island is from the mainland. These tools could help managers understand and incorporate the uncertainty associated with creating island conditions that are intended to help achieve brown pelican conservation objectives.

Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas↗