SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Biology”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 1,423 records · Page 79Linked to original sources

USGS1993

Selenium in soil, water, sediment, and biota of the lower Sun River area, West-Central Montana

A U.S. Department of the Interior study started in 1990 examined the source, movement, fate, and possible biological effects of selenium associated with irrigation drainage from the Sun River Irrigation Project in west-central Montana. Concentrations of total selenium in soil samples ranged from 0.1 to 8.5 micrograms per gram; the maximum concentrations were measured in nonirrigated areas overlying geologic formations containing seleniferous shale. In irrigated areas, concentrations of dissolved selenium in ground water flowing toward Freezeout Lake ranged from less than 1 to 18 micrograms per liter (??g/L) in terrace gravel and from 1 to 190 ??g/L in glacial deposits derived from seleniferous shale. Concentrations of total selenium ranged from less than 1 to 180 ??g/L in surface irrigation drainage, and from less than 1 to 1,000 ??g/L in natural flows from nonirrigated land. Selenium concentrations in water from lakes generally were less than the aquatic-life criterion for chronic toxicity. The range of selenium concentrations in bottom sediment of lakes was similar to that of local soils. However, biological samples indicate that selenium is accumulating through the aquatic food chain. Selenium concentrations indicative of biological risk were exceeded in at least 80 percent of the freshwater-invertebrate, bird-egg, and bird-liver samples collected from all wetland sites.

Conference Paper↗

USGS2003

Conservation assessment of current and proposed nature reserves of Tamaulipas State, Mexico

The Mexican state of Tamaulipas located in the northeastern portion of the country currently has five state nature reserves covering slightly less than 3% of its land area. These reserves were established for a variety of reasons, many unrelated to the protection of biological resources. In 2000 in response to a growing concern about the lack of organized conservation reserve planning to protect the important biological and physical features of Mexico, the Mexican Commission for Knowledge and Use of Biodiversity (CONABIO) proposed 13 new terrestrial reserves for Tamaulipas. If established these new reserves would increase the proportion of terrestrial protected lands in the state to over 21%. We compiled a geographic information system (GIS) using existing digital thematic maps of physical and biological features to examine how the existing and proposed reserves might serve to protect the biodiversity and physical features of the state. We found that most of the existing protected sites occur in areas with elevations > 1000-2000 m with temperate climate and dominated by pine forest, oak forest, and cloud forest vegetation cover types. The state's dominant biotic region - low elevation coastal plain with tropical and arid climate types and xeric scrub vegetation - is disproportionately underrepresented in the current reserve system. The creation of the proposed areas would substantially increase the protection of mid and high elevation lands. The largest gap in the protected lands network would be low elevation, level, coastal lands.

Tamaulipas↗

USGS2005

Hydrologic changes in urban streams and their ecological significance

Urban development modifies the production and delivery of runoff to streams and the resulting rate, volume, and timing of streamflow. Given that streamflow demonstrably influences the structure and composition of lotic communities, we have identified four hydrologic changes resulting from urban development that are potentially significant to stream ecosystems: increased frequency of high flows, redistribution of water from base flow to storm flow, increased daily variation in streamflow, and reduction in low flow. Previous investigations of streamflow patterns and biological assemblages provide a scale of ecological significance for each type of streamflow pattern. The scales establish the magnitude of changes in streamflow patterns that could be expected to produce biological responses in streams. Long-term streamflow records from eight streams in urbanizing areas of the United States and five additional reference streams, where land use has been relatively stable, were analyzed to assess if streamflow patterns were modified by urban development to an extent that a biological response could be expected and whether climate patterns could account for equivalent hydrologic variation in the reference streams. Changes in each type of streamflow pattern were evident in some but not all of the urban streams and were nearly absent in the reference streams. Given these results, hydrologic changes are likely significant to urban stream ecosystems, but the significance depends on the stream's physiographic context and spatial and temporal patterns of urban development. In urban streams with substantially altered hydrology, short-term goals for urban stream rehabilitation may be limited because of the difficulty and expense of restoring hydrologic processes in an urban landscape. The ecological benefits of improving physical habitat and water quality may be tempered by persistent effects of altered streamflow. In the end, the hydrologic effects of urban development must be addressed for restoration of urban streams. ?? 2005 by the American Fisheries Society.

American Fisheries Society Symposium↗

USGS2009

Applications of a broad-spectrum tool for conservation and fisheries analysis: Aquatic gap analysis

Natural resources support all of our social and economic activities, as well as our biological existence. Humans have little control over most of the physical, biological, and sociological conditions dictating the status and capacity of natural resources in any particular area. However, the most rapid and threatening influences on natural resources typically are anthropogenic overuse and degradation. In addition, living natural resources (i.e., organisms) do not respect political boundaries, but are aware of their optimal habitat and environmental conditions. Most organisms have wider spatial ranges than the jurisdictional boundaries of environmental agencies that deal with them; even within those jurisdictions, information is patchy and disconnected. Planning and projecting effects of ecological management are difficult, because many organisms, habitat conditions, and interactions are involved. Conservation and responsible resource use involves wise management and manipulation of the aspects of the environment and biological communities that can be effectively changed. Tools and data sets that provide new insights and analysis capabilities can enhance the ability of resource managers to make wise decisions and plan effective, long-term management strategies. Aquatic gap analysis has been developed to provide those benefits. Gap analysis is more than just the assessment of the match or mis-match (i.e., gaps) between habitats of ecological value and areas with an appropriate level of environmental protection (e.g., refuges, parks, preserves), as the name suggests. Rather, a Gap Analysis project is a process which leads to an organized database of georeferenced information and previously available tools to examine conservation and other ecological issues; it provides a geographic analysis platform that serves as a foundation for aquatic ecological studies. This analytical tool box allows one to conduct assessments of all habitat elements within an area of interest. Aquatic gap analysis naturally focuses on aquatic habitats. The analytical tools are largely based on specification of the species-habitat relations for the system and organism group of interest (Morrison et al. 2003; McKenna et al. 2006; Steen et al. 2006; Sowa et al. 2007). The Great Lakes Regional Aquatic Gap Analysis (GLGap) project focuses primarily on lotic habitat of the U.S. Great Lakes drainage basin and associated states and has been developed to address fish and fisheries issues. These tools are unique because they allow us to address problems at a range of scales from the region to the stream segment and include the ability to predict species specific occurrence or abundance for most of the fish species in the study area. The results and types of questions that can be addressed provide better global understanding of the ecological context within which specific natural resources fit (e.g., neighboring environments and resources, and large and small scale processes). The geographic analysis platform consists of broad and flexible geospatial tools (and associated data) with many potential applications. The objectives of this article are to provide a brief overview of GLGap methods and analysis tools, and demonstrate conservation and planning applications of those data and tools. Although there are many potential applications, we will highlight just three: (1) support for the Eastern Brook Trout Joint Venture (EBTJV), (2) Aquatic Life classification in Wisconsin, and (3) an educational tool that makes use of Google Earth (use of trade or product names does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government) and Internet accessibility.

Gap Analysis Bulletin↗

USGS2014

Tick control: Trapping, bio-control, host management and other alternative strategies

Biology of Ticks is the most comprehensive work on tick biology and tick-borne diseases. This second edition is a multi-authored work, featuring the research and analyses of renowned experts across the globe. Spanning two volumes, the book examines the systematics, biology, structure, ecological adaptations, evolution, genomics and the molecular processes that underpin the growth, development and survival of these important disease-transmitting parasites. Also discussed is the remarkable array of diseases transmitted (or caused) by ticks, as well as modern methods for their control. This book should serve as a modern reference for students, scientists, physicians, veterinarians and other specialists. Volume II includes chapters on the ecology of non-nidicolous and nidicolous ticks, genetics and genomics (including the genome of the Lyme disease vector Ixodes scapularis) and immunity, including host immune responses to tick feeding and tick-host interactions, as well as the tick's innate immune system that prevents and/or controls microbial infections. Six chapters cover in depth the many diseases caused by the major tick-borne pathogens, including tick-borne protozoa, viruses, rickettsiae of all types, other types of bacteria (e.g., the Lyme disease agent) and diseases related to tick paralytic agents and toxins. The remaining chapters are devoted to tick control using vaccines, acaricides, repellents, biocontrol, and, finally, techniques for breeding ticks in order to develop tick colonies for scientific study.

Book chapter↗

USGS1978

Statistical inference from capture data on closed animal populations

The estimation of animal abundance is an important problem in both the theoretical and applied biological sciences. Serious work to develop estimation methods began during the 1950s, with a few attempts before that time. The literature on estimation methods has increased tremendously during the past 25 years (Cormack 1968, Seber 1973). However, in large part, the problem remains unsolved. Past efforts toward comprehensive and systematic estimation of density (D) or population size (N) have been inadequate, in general. While more than 200 papers have been published on the subject, one is generally left without a unified approach to the estimation of abundance of an animal population This situation is unfortunate because a number of pressing research problems require such information. In addition, a wide array of environmental assessment studies and biological inventory programs require the estimation of animal abundance. These needs have been further emphasized by the requirement for the preparation of Environmental Impact Statements imposed by the National Environmental Protection Act in 1970. This publication treats inference procedures for certain types of capture data on closed animal populations. This includes multiple capture-recapture studies (variously called capture-mark-recapture, mark-recapture, or tag-recapture studies) involving livetrapping techniques and removal studies involving kill traps or at least temporary removal of captured individuals during the study. Animals do not necessarily need to be physically trapped; visual sightings of marked animals and electrofishing studies also produce data suitable for the methods described in this monograph. To provide a frame of reference for what follows, we give an exampled of a capture-recapture experiment to estimate population size of small animals using live traps. The general field experiment is similar for all capture-recapture studies (a removal study is, of course, slightly different). A typical field experiment is the following: a number of traps are positioned in the area to be studied, say 144 traps in a 12 X 12 grid, 7 m apart. At the beginning of the study (j=1) a sample size of n 1 is taken from the population, the animals are tagged and marked for future identification, and then returned to the population, usually at the same point where they were trapped. After allowing time of the marked and unmarked animals to mix, a second sample (j=2, often the following day) or n 2 animals is then taken.the second sample normally contains both marked and unmarked animals. The unmarked animals are marked and all captured animals are released back into the population. This procedure continues for t periods where t ≥ 2. The animals should be marked in such a way that the capture-recapture history of each animal caught during the study is known. In practice, toes are often clipped to uniquely identify individual animals (Taber and Cowan 1969) or serially numbered tags are sometimes used on larger animals. Such capture studies are classified by 2 schemes that are directly related to what class of models are appropriate and what parameters can be estimated. The first classification addresses the subject of closure. Closure usually means the size of the population is constant over the priod of investigation, i.e., no recruitment (birth or immigration) or losses (death or emigration). This is a strong assumption and, of course, never completely true in a natural biological population. For greater generality, we define closure to mean there are no unknown changes to the initial population. In practice, this means known losses (trap death), or deliberate removals) do not violate our definition of closure. If the study is properly designed, closure can be met at least approximately. Open or nonclosed populations explicitly allow for one or more types of recruitment or losses to operate during the course of the experiment (Jolly 1965, Seber 1965, Robson 1969, Pollock 1975). Only closed populations will be considered in this monograph. The second classification depends on the type of data collected with 2 possibilities occurring (Pollock 1974, unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York): (1) only information on the recovery of marked animals is available for each sampling occasion, j, j=1, 2, ... t. (2) information on both marked and unmarked animals is available for each sampling occasion, j, j=1, 2, ... t. In case (1), population size (N) is not identifiable, however, other parameters can be estimated (Brownie et al. 1978). In case (2), N can be estimated using a wide variety of approaches depending upon what we wish to assume. Only case (2) will be dealt with here.

Wildlife Monographs↗

USGS1997

Overview of USGS sediment research and monitoring capabilities

For more than a century the USGS, as its name implies, has been the leading federal earth science research organization for the Nation. With the recent addition to the USGS of the National Biological Service in October 1996, as the Biological Resources Division, the mission of the USGS has broadened and the Survey's research capabilities are strengthened considerably. The USGS is now in a position to provide objective and credible scientific information across the fields of geology, geophysics, hydrology, geography, and biology and to provide the science information in an integrated and truly multidisciplinary manner. The subject of sediment is one that is critical to nearly every activity in the USGS and is becoming increasingly important to society and protecting, sustaining, and restoring the Nation's natural resources. The purpose of this workshop is to focus on this common denominator, sedimentary research, and bring together investigators to examine areas of expertise and collaboration on existing studies and to explore potential for future scientific interaction across all four of the divisions. A brief summary of sediment research capability for each division follows.

Conference Paper↗

USGS1987

Modeling potential impacts of the Garrison Diversion Unit project on Sand Lake and Arrowwood National Wildlife Refuges: a feasibility analysis

The Garrison Diversion Unit (GDU) of the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin program was authorized in 1965, with the purpose of diverting Missouri River water to the James River for irrigation, municipal and industrial water supply, fish and wildlife habitat, recreation, and flood control. The project was reauthorized in 1986, with the specification that comprehensive studies be conducted to address a variety of issues. One of these ongoing studies addresses potential impacts of GDU construction and operation on lands of the National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) system, including Arrowwood and Sand Lake Refuges (the Refuges) on the James River. A number of concerns at these Refuges have been identified; the primary concerns addressed in this report include increased winter return flows, which would limit control of rough fish; increased turbidity during project construction, which would decrease production of sago pondweed; and increased water level fluctuations in the late spring and early summer, which would destroy the nests of some over-water nesting birds. The facilitated workshop described in this report was conducted February 18-20, 1987, under the joint sponsorship of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the North Dakota Game and Fish Department. The primary objectives of the workshop were to evaluate the feasibility of using simulation modeling techniques to estimate GDU impacts on Arrowwood and Sand Lake Refuges and to suggest enhancements to the James River Refuge monitoring program. The workshop was structured around the formulation of four submodels: a Hydrology and Water Quality submodel to simulate changes in Refuge pool elevations, turnover rates, and water quality parameters (e.g., total dissolved solids, turbidity, dissolved oxygen, nutrients, water temperature, pesticides) due to GDU construction and operation; a Vegetation submodel to simulate concomitant changes in wetland communities (e.g., sago pondweed, wet meadows, deep and shallow marsh); a Fish submodel to estimate changes in abundance or biomass of rough fish (carp, buffalo) and sportfish (northern pike); and a Wildlife submodel to calculate indices of waterfowl abundance or habitat suitability (e.g., for mallards, western grebes, migrating diving ducks, white-faced ibis, egrets, over-water nesters). Submodels considered weekly to monthly changes in pools within a Refuge over a time horizon of 30-50 years. Based on workshop discussions and past experience with impact analysis modeling, a phased modeling approach was recommended for the James River Refuges analysis. The first phase would involve two modeling efforts. The existing Sand Lake hydrology model, and a similar one developed for Arrowwood NWR, would be validated and used to predict changes on pool elevations and winter inflows to each pool for a variety of GDU alternatives. Outputs from simulations would then be evaluated in terms of potential fish and wildlife impacts. For example, the models could generate indices comparing the magnitude and timing of winter inflows for pre- and postproject conditions; fisheries biologists could then use these indices to better quantify their concerns relative to potential changes in the frequency of rough-fish control. The other modeling effort in the first phase would involve developing a sago pondweed growth model to integrate Refuge monitoring data and existing literature and perhaps to address some questions concerning turbidity impacts. A second phase of simulation modeling would be undertaken only if the initial analyses of hydrologic outputs indicated significant potential problems and if monitoring and research projects had clarified some of the biological and physical processes that cannot be modeled reliably at the present time (e.g., resuspension of sediments by carp, immigration and winter mortality of fish, loss of waterfowl nests due to wave action). The second phase would attempt to develop an integrated impact assessment model. In order to address some of the biological and physical processes that presently are not well understood, a number of studies and enhancements to the Refuge monitoring program were suggested. The Hydrology and Water Quality workgroup recommended increasing turbidity and dissolved oxygen sampling, dropping expensive analysis of some trace elements, adding more pesticide analysis (including some biological monitoring), and developing better area-capacity data for the Sand Lake hydrology model. The Vegetation workgroup suggested expanding the number of monitoring stations, monitoring photosynthetically active radiation by depth, and modifying the biomass sampling procedure and schedule. Also suggested were additional analyses of existing Refuge monitoring data and additional field studies concerning sago growth under a variety of environmental conditions and effects of rough fish density on sago. A careful examination of Refuge narrative reports was recommended by the Fish workgroup to characterize conditions that led to various rates of winter-kill. Monitoring enhancement related to a better understanding of fish population dynamics included increasing dissolved oxygen monitoring, continuing present monitoring of fish movement upstream from Jamestown Reservoir into Arrowwood NWR, initiating similar efforts for upstream movement into Sand Lake NWR and downstream movements into both Refuges, and augmenting the present gillnetting program (or replacing it) with sampling for population and age/size structure estimates. The Wildlife workgroup suggested estimating the relative density of mallard nests in over-water and wet meadow nesting areas, estimating the number of western grebe nests lost due to wave action, delineating wet meadows on the Refuge vegetation maps, estimating annual tuber consumption by birds, and monitoring insect/macroinvertebrate abundance. The workgroup also suggested research studies to better understand the relationships between food supplies and the growth and survival of ducklings and young grebes. the workshop discussions also helped identify some suggestions for modifying project features that, if feasible from an engineering and operational standpoint, would reduce impacts on Refuge lands. These suggestions included: designing drains with control structures or small "reregulation" reservoirs to hold winter return flows that might adversely affect rough fish control, spreading construction activities over a number of years to reduce potential impacts of turbidity on sago pondweed in any single year, scheduling construction to occur after the spring sprouting and elongation growth stages to reduce impacts on sago pondweed, and installing "quick acting" control structures at Arrowwood NWR to reduce pool level fluctuations that might destroy nests of some over-water nesting waterfowl.

Report↗

USGS1993

Proceedings of the fourth conference on research in California's National Parks

The papers in this proceedings were selected from the 63 presentations given at the Fourth Biennial Conference on Research in National Parks in California. The overall theme for this meeting was a recurring one: “The Integration of Research into National Park Service Resource Management Decisions.” The conference was held at the University of California, Davis, on 10-12 September 1991 and was sponsored by the National Park Service Cooperative Park Studies Unit and the Institute of Ecology at the University of California, Davis. This proceedings highlights a variety of research and resource management efforts to improve the stewardship of our most treasured landscapes. In the future, it will become increasingly more important for federal and state agencies, university scientists and students, and the public to cooperate fully to improve the quantity and quality of science and resource management programs in units of the National Park System. As many of the papers in this proceedings attest, we must look beyond the political boundaries of protected landscapes to incorporate entire ecosystems. Competing resource uses inside and outside parklands must be reexamined to weave a common thread of biological conservation. As scientists, our studies must bridge the gap from plots to landscapes and from landscapes to regions. Our studies must built on information from species and populations to ecosystems and the processes that influence them. The papers in this proceedings are modest but important contribution to those ideals. Each paper represents original research and has been peer-reviewed. Many agencies, institutions, and individuals contributed in the development of this product. In the planning stages, National Park Service Western Region scientists provided advice and assistance in structuring the conference format. University of California, Davis, graduate students, directed by Sharon Lynch, assisted with logistics at the meeting, and provided general assistance with the paper sessions. We thank the students, technicians, and support staff who labored unselfishly behind the scenes to collect data and transfer information important to the completion of each paper. Financial support for this publication was provided with funds from the Western Region Resource Management and Resource Program and the Washington Office Servicewide Publications Program of the National Park Service. We thank Denny Fenn, Stan Albright, Bruce Kilgore, Dave Cherry, Gene Hester, and Donna O'Leary of the National Park Service and Charles Goldman of the University of California, Davis, Institute of Ecology for their support throughout the development of the proceedings. Finally, we are entering into a new age of research in the U.S. Department of the Interior. Recently, plans were announced for the creation of the National Biological Survey, dedicated to improving the quantity and quality of research necessary for the wise stewardship of our natural resources and wildlands. We welcome our new partners and pledge our full support to both the new and old agencies. The papers presented here--and past research efforts in national parks--provide an important stepping stone to the future. While many of us will be transferred administratively to the National Biological Survey, our emotional ties to the National Park Service mission of preserving resources for future generations will remain with us forever.

California↗

USGS1995

Biodiversity: a new challenge

Resource managers at many state and federal agencies are in the middle of a fundamental change in the practice and objectives of conservation. Traditional management has been directed toward maintaining, usually for harvest purposes, populations of individual species such as ducks, deer, or salmon. Increasingly, however, resource managers are recognizing the critical important of conserving biological diversity, or biodiversity. In its simplest terms, biological diversity is the variety of life at all levels: it includes the array of plants and animals; the genetic differences among individuals; the communities, ecosystems, and landscapes in which they occur; and the variety of processes on which they depend. Conserving biological diversity poses dramatic new problems for comprehensive inventory and monitoring: what should be measured or monitored?

Book chapter↗

USGS2005

Coral disease and health workshop: Coral histopathology II, July 12-14, 2005

The health and continued existence of coral reef ecosystems are threatened by an increasing array of environmental and anthropogenic impacts. Coral disease is one of the prominent causes of increased mortality among reefs globally, particularly in the Caribbean. Although over 40 different coral diseases and syndromes have been reported worldwide, only a few etiological agents have been confirmed; most pathogens remain unknown and the dynamics of disease transmission, pathogenicity and mortality are not understood. Causal relationships have been documented for only a few of the coral diseases, while new syndromes continue to emerge. Extensive field observations by coral biologists have provided substantial documentation of a plethora of new pathologies, but our understanding, however, has been limited to descriptions of gross lesions with names reflecting these observations (e.g., black band, white band, dark spot). To determine etiology, we must equip coral diseases scientists with basic biomedical knowledge and specialized training in areas such as histology, cell biology and pathology. Only through combining descriptive science with mechanistic science and employing the synthesis epizootiology provides will we be able to gain insight into causation and become equipped to handle the pending crisis. One of the critical challenges faced by coral disease researchers is to establish a framework to systematically study coral pathologies drawing from the field of diagnostic medicine and pathology and using generally accepted nomenclature. This process began in April 2004, with a workshop titled Coral Disease and Health Workshop: Developing Diagnostic Criteria co-convened by the Coral Disease and Health Consortium (CDHC), a working group organized under the auspices of the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force, and the International Registry for Coral Pathology (IRCP). The workshop was hosted by the U.S. Geological Survey, National Wildlife Health Center (NWHC) in Madison, Wisconsin and was focused on gross morphology and disease signs observed in the field. A resounding recommendation from the histopathologists participating in the workshop was the urgent need to develop diagnostic criteria that are suitable to move from gross observations to morphological diagnoses based on evaluation of microscopic anatomy. As a continuation of building the foundation and framework for coral disease diagnostics, the CDHC convened the Coral Disease and Health Workshop: Coral Histopathology II in Charleston, South Carolina, July 11-14, 2005. The workshop was hosted by the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC which provided expertise, facilities and equipment in support of the workshop. All of the histological slides and related photographs used in the discussions were prepared and supplied by the IRCP. This workshop brought together 15 experts in veterinary and medical pathology and coral biology from national and international research institutes and government laboratories. The mission was to devise a standardized approach to examining microscopic anatomy and pathology of corals and a standardized nomenclature to facilitate accurate descriptions of the microscopic morphology of corals and enhance communication among specialists investigating causes of coral death. 2 The participants of this workshop deliberated for 3 days to refine the nomenclature for gross and microscopic anatomy of corals and systematically described microscopic changes associated with selected coral diseases. The findings and recommendations from the deliberations will be submitted to the research community for peer review. The standardized nomenclature and descriptions produced at this workshop will ultimately be made available to the scientific community through a variety of media including the World Wide Web. An exciting highlight of this meeting was provided by Professor Robert Ogilvie (MUSC Department of Cell Biology and Anatomy) when he introduced participants to a new digital technology that is revolutionizing histology and histopathology in the medical field. The Virtual Slide technology creates digital images of histological tissue sections by computer scanning actual slides in high definition and storing the images for retrieval and viewing. Virtual slides now allow any investigator with access to a computer and the web to view, search, annotate and comment on the same tissue sections in real time. Medical and veterinary slide libraries across the country are being converted into virtual slides to enhance biomedical education, research and diagnosis. The coral health and disease researchers at this workshop deem virtual slides as a significant way to increase capabilities in coral histology and a means for pathology consultations on coral disease cases on a global scale.

NOAA Technical Memorandum↗

USGS2004

Pattern detection in stream networks: Quantifying spatial variability in fish distribution

Biological and physical properties of rivers and streams are inherently difficult to sample and visualize at the resolution and extent necessary to detect fine-scale distributional patterns over large areas. Satellite imagery and broad-scale fish survey methods are effective for quantifying spatial variability in biological and physical variables over a range of scales in marine environments but are often too coarse in resolution to address conservation needs in inland fisheries management. We present methods for sampling and analyzing multiscale, spatially continuous patterns of stream fishes and physical habitat in small- to medium-size watersheds (500–1000 hectares). Geospatial tools, including geographic information system (GIS) software such as ArcInfo dynamic segmentation and ArcScene 3D analyst modules, were used to display complex biological and physical datasets. These tools also provided spatial referencing information (e.g. Cartesian and route-measure coordinates) necessary for conducting geostatistical analyses of spatial patterns (empirical semivariograms and wavelet analysis) in linear stream networks. Graphical depiction of fish distribution along a one-dimensional longitudinal profile and throughout the stream network (superimposed on a 10-metre digital elevation model) provided the spatial context necessary for describing and interpreting the relationship between landscape pattern and the distribution of coastal cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarki clarki ) in western Oregon, U.S.A. The distribution of coastal cutthroat trout was highly autocorrelated and exhibited a spherical semivariogram with a defined nugget, sill, and range. Wavelet analysis of the main-stem longitudinal profile revealed periodicity in trout distribution at three nested spatial scales corresponding ostensibly to landscape disturbances and the spacing of tributary junctions.

Oregon↗

USGS2005

Forestry practices and aquatic biodiversity: Fish

In the Pacific Northwest, fish communities are found in a diverse array of aquatic habitats ranging from the large coastal rivers of the temperate rainforests, to the fragmented and sometimes ephemeral streams of the xeric interior basins, and high-elevation streams and lakes in the mountainous areas (Rieman et al. 2003). Only high-elevation lakes and streams isolated above barriers to fish passage remained historically devoid of fish because they were never invaded following Pleistocene glaciation (Smith 1981). Despite this widespread distribution and once great population abundances, taxonomic diversity of fishes in these forested systems is naturally lower than in aquatic habitats in the eastern U.S. (Reeves, Bisson, and Dambacher 1998). Interactions among factors that influence species richness in aquatic systems (e.g., basin size, long-term stability of habitat, and barriers to colonization; Smith 1981) continue to influence the occurrence and persistence of fishes in these systems today. Consequently, the larger low-elevation rivers and estuaries support the greatest variety of fish species. In the high-elevation tributary streams, fish communities are less complex because these aquatic systems were less climatically and geologically stable, and fish populations were smaller and more prone to local extirpation. Furthermore, barriers to fish passage inhibited dispersal and colonization (Smith 1981). Streams in forested landscapes generally support salmon and trout, Oncorhynchus spp., whitefish Prosopium spp., sculpins Cottus spp., suckers Catostomus spp., and minnows (Cyprinidae), but in some of the colder streams, chars (e.g., Salvelinus confluentus and Salvelinus malma ) and lampreys (Petromyzontidae)may also occur (Rieman et al. 2003). Although biodiversity defined in terms of fish species richness is low in the Pacific Northwest, intraspecific variability is high, and polytypic fish species are common in the diverse aquatic habitats of the region. For example, the salmonids in the coastal rivers and streams, and the larger interconnected streams, rivers, and lakes of the interior exhibit a variety of ecotypes and migratory life histories (Healey 1986; Trotter 1989; Larson and McIntire 1993; Northcote 1997). This life-history variation appears to be associated with adaptation to spatial and temporal variation in environment (e.g., Schaffer and Elson 1975; Carl and Healey 1984; Beacham and Murray 1987), and there is some evidence of the genetic heritability of life-history traits (Carl and Healey 1984; Gharrett and Smoker 1993; Hankin, Nicholas, and Downey 1993). Persistence of any level of biological organization (e.g., life-history type, population, metapopulation, subspecies, species, community) is related to the interaction of environmental and biological components, and intraspecific diversity is a means of spreading risk ( sensu den Boer 1968) of extirpation in dynamic environments (Gresswell 1999). Unfortunately, despite the broad distribution and extensive intraspecific diversity, persistence of native fishes is uncertain in the Pacific Northwest. Many populations of anadromous salmonids, once synonymous with vigorous biological communities throughout the region, are threatened with extinction (Nehlsen, Williams, and Lichatowich 1991; Frissell 1993; Thurow, Lee, and Rieman 1997). Furthermore, over half of the native taxa in the Columbia River Basin are either listed under the Endangered Species Act, are being considered for listing, or are deemed sensitive by the management agencies (Lee et al. 1997; Thurow, Lee, and Rieman 1997). Potamodromous species like bull trout Salvelinus confluentus are estimated to occur as strong populations in less than 5% of their potential range (Rieman, Lee, and Thurow 1997). Although not currently listed under the endangered species list, the coastal cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarki is managed as a sensitive species in Oregon and California (Hall, Bisson, and Gresswell 1997). Native non-game fishes have rarely been monitored, but populations of species such as large-scale suckers ( Catostomus macrocheilus ), squawfish ( Ptychocheilus umpquae ), and Pacific lamprey ( Lampetra tridentata ) also are declining in some drainages (Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, unpublished data).

Pacific Northwest↗

USGS2000

Nutrient pollution of coastal rivers, bays, and seas

Over the past 40 years, antipollution laws have greatly reduced discharges of toxic substances into our coastal waters. This effort, however, has focused largely on point-source pollution of industrial and municipal effluent. No comparable effort has been made to restrict the input of nitrogen (N) from municipal effluent, nor to control the flows of N and phosphorus (P) that enter waterways from dispersed or nonpoint sources such as agricultural and urban runoff or as airborne pollutants. As a result, inputs of nonpoint pollutants, particularly N, have increased dramatically. Nonpoint pollution from N and P now represents the largest pollution problem facing the vital coastal waters of the United States. Nutrient pollution is the common thread that links an array of problems along the nations coastline, including eutrophication, harmful algal blooms, dead zones, fish kills, some shellfish poisonings, loss of seagrass and kelp beds, some coral reef destruction, and even some marine mammal and seabird deaths. More than 60 percent of our coastal rivers and bays in every coastal state of the continental United States are moderately to severely degraded by nutrient pollution. This degradation is particularly severe in the mid Atlantic states, in the southeast, and in the Gulf of Mexico. A recent report from the National Research Council entitled Clean Coastal Waters: Understanding and Reduc- ing the Effects of Nutrient Pollution concludes that: Nutrient over-enrichment of coastal ecosystems generally triggers ecological changes that decrease the biologi- cal diversity of bays and estuaries. While moderate N enrichment of some coastal waters may increase fish production, over-enrichment generally degrades the marine food web that supports commercially valuable fish. The marked increase in nutrient pollution of coastal waters has been accompanied by an increase in harmful algal blooms, and in at least some cases, pollution has triggered these blooms. High nutrient levels and the changes they cause in water quality and the makeup of the algal community are detrimental to the health of coral reefs and the diversity of animal life supported by seagrass and kelp communi- ties. Research during the past decade confirms that N is the chief culprit in eutrophication and other impacts of nutrient over-enrichment in temperate coastal waters, while P is most problematic in eutrophication of freshwa- ter lakes. Human conversion of atmospheric N into biologically useable forms, principally synthetic inorganic fertilizers, now matches the natural rate of biological N fixation from all the land surfaces of the earth. Both agriculture and the burning of fossil fuels contribute significantly to nonpoint flows of N to coastal waters, either as direct runoff or airborne pollutants. N from animal wastes that leaks directly to surface waters or is volatilized to the atmosphere as ammonia may be the largest single source of N that moves from agricultural operations into coastal waters. The National Research Council report recommended that, as a minimum goal, the nation should work to reverse nutrient should be taken to assure that the 40 percent of coastal areas now ranked as healthy do not develop symptoms of nutrient pollution in 10 percent of its degraded coastal systems by 2010 and 25 percent of them by 2020. Also, action should be taken to assure that the 40 percent of coastal areas now ranked as healthy do not develop symptoms of nutrient pollution. Meeting these goals will require an array of strategies and approaches tailored to specific regions and coastal ecosystems. There is an urgent need for development and testing of techniques that can reliably pinpoint the sources of N pollutants to an estuary. For some coastal systems, N removal during treatment of human sewage may be sufficient to reverse nutrient pollution. For most coastal systems, however, the solutions will be more complex and may involve controls on N compounds emitted during fossil fuel combustion as well as incentives to reduce over-fertilization of agricul- tural fields and nutrient pollution from animal wastes in livestock feedlot operations.

Alabama, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florid↗

USGS1994

San Francisco Bay/delta regional monitoring program plankton and water quality pilot study, 1993, in 1993 Annual Report, San Francisco Estuary Regional Monitoring Program for Trace Substances: San Francisco Estuary Institute

The pilot program described here is motivated by a fundamental principle of the Regional Monitoring Strategy, namely “...the development of data that will provide information on status and trends in the Estuary.” As pointed out in the Strategy, knowledge of status and trends serves two primary purposes: (1) to become aware of or anticipate deleterious conditions in the Estuary, and (2) to assess the effectiveness of management actions. This program addresses these two purposes by focusing on aquatic resources, one of the five key management issues identified by the Comprehensive Conservation and Management Plan and central to the Regional Monitoring Strategy. It also bears on at least two of the other management issues - pollutants and water use. A regional monitoring program must cover many types of resources, including pelagic and benthic channel habitat, shoal habitat, wetlands, river channels, sloughs, and small bays and harbors. This particular program centers on the pelagic channel habitat. However, because of the intimate connection between channel habitat and many or most of these other habitats, channel measurements reflect to some extent the status of and trends in other resource types as well. A primary aim of this program is to provide a high-resolution description of critical aspects of habitat quality, which can be used along with other information (1) to determine the suitability of habitat for aquatic resources; (2) to monitor responsiveness of the habitat to freshwater flow variability; and (3) to provide a context for understanding pollutant distributions. In a single transect, measurements are made throughout the water column at up to 37 stations to define physical (salinity, temperature, suspended particulate matter, and light penetration), chemical (dissolved oxygen) and biological (chlorophyll a ) characteristics that influence both chemical and biological reactions. A second aim of the program is to investigate planktonic indicators of ecosystem structure and function. Phytoplankton production is the major single source of energy for the San Francisco Bay food web. Our measurements of chlorophyll and light penetration can be used to provide an estimate of this production, and therefore the availability of food for organisms at higher trophic levels. Phytoplankton community composition at the species level, which can be a sensitive indicator of habitat change, is also a standard component of this program. Community composition data enable detection of species known to be responsible for harmful or nuisance algal blooms. In 1993, two other indicators were also evaluated, photosynthetic parameters and water column respiration . Photosynthetic parameters partially characterize the physiological state of the phytoplankton and may provide indirect evidence of nutrient deficiency or the effects of pollutants. Water column respiration serves as a simple integrated measure of organic matter metabolism by the plankton, including bacteria, phytoplankton, and microzooplankton. It therefore reflects the total supply of organic matter, whether from photosynthesis, tidal marsh efflux, point sources, or upstream in the Delta. These biological indicators therefore contain much information about the flow of energy into the food web.

California↗

USGS1997

Introduced species: A significant component of human-caused global change

Biological invasions are a widespread and significant component of human-caused global environmental change. The extent of invasions of oceanic islands, and their consequences for native biological diversity, have long been recognized. However, invasions of continental regions also are substantial. For example, more than 2,000 species of alien plants are established in the continental United States. These invasions represent a human-caused breakdown of the regional distinctiveness of Earth's flora and fauna—a substantial global change in and of itself. Moreover, there are well- documented examples of invading species that degrade human health and wealth, alter the structure and functioning of otherwise undisturbed ecosystems, and/or threaten native biological diversity. Invasions also interact synergistically with other components of global change. notably land use change. People and institutions working to understand, prevent, and control invasions are carrying out some of the most important—and potentially most effective—work on global environmental change.

New Zealand Journal of Ecology↗

USGS2016

Response of fish assemblages to decreasing acid deposition in Adirondack Mountain lakes

The CAA and other federal regulations have clearly reduced emissions of NOx and SOx, acidic deposition, and the acidity and toxicity of waters in the ALTM lakes, but these changes have not triggered widespread recovery of brook trout populations or fish communities. The lack of detectable biological recovery appears to result from relatively recent chemical recovery and an insufficient period for species populations to take advantage of improved water quality. Recovery of extirpated species’ populations may simply require more time for individuals to migrate to and repopulate formerly occupied lakes. Supplemental stocking of selected species may be required in some lakes with no remnant (or nearby) populations or with physical barriers between the recovered lake and source populations. The lack of detectable biological recovery could also be related to our inability to calculate measures of uncertainty or error and, thus, examine temporal changes or differences in populations and community metrics in more depth (e.g., within individual lakes) using existing datasets. Indeed, recovery of brook trout populations and partial recovery of fish communities are documented in several lakes of the region, both with and without human intervention. Multiple fish surveys (annually or within the same year) or the use of mark and recapture methods within individual lakes would help alleviate the issue (provide measures of error for key fishery metrics) within the context of a more focused sampling strategy. Efforts to evaluate and detect recovery in fish assemblages from streams may be more effective than in lakes because various life stages, species’ populations, and entire assemblages are easier to quantify, with known levels of error, in streams than in lakes. Such long-term monitoring efforts could increase our ability to detect and quantify biological recovery in recovering (neutralizing) surface waters throughout the Adirondack Region.

New York↗

USGS2019

Supporting the development and use of native plant materials for restoration on the Colorado Plateau (Fiscal Year 18 Report)

Introduction A primary focus of the Colorado Plateau Native Plant Program (CPNPP) is to identify and develop appropriate native plant materials (NPMs) for current and future restoration projects. Multiple efforts have characterized the myriad challenges inherent in providing appropriate seed resources to enable effective, widespread restoration and identified a broad suite of research activities to provide the information necessary to overcome those challenges (e.g., Plant Conservation Alliance 2015; Breed et al. 2018). Many of the most complex information needs relate to identifying the appropriate plant species and populations that can successfully establish in dryland environments, like the Colorado Plateau, where low and highly variable precipitation is standard. Providing this information requires synergistic research efforts in which results from earlier investigations inform the design of subsequent investigations. Southwest Biological Science Center’s (SBSC’s) research activities in FY18 followed the FY18 Statement of Work (“Research supporting native plant materials development for the Colorado Plateau Native Plant Program, FY18”) to support a research framework that is continually adapting based on the needs of the restoration community and results from previous investigations; the long-term research framework is now outlined in the 2019-2023 5-Year Research Strategy (discussed below; hereafter referred to as the 5-Year Research Strategy). This research framework provides support for the National Seed Strategy for Rehabilitation and Restoration (Plant Conservation Alliance, 2015), Department of Interior Secretarial Order #3347 (Conservation Stewardship and Outdoor Recreation), and Bureau of Land Management Leadership Priority #1 (Create a conservation stewardship legacy second only to Teddy Roosevelt). The overall focus of activities in FY18 centered on landscape genetics and planning for common garden and other research projects. These activities were supported by two biological technicians that were hired and trained by Dr. Rob Massatti and Dr. Daniel Winkler. Many of the field-related activities, including plant trait measurement and seed/tissue collecting, were assigned to these technicians, which freed Dr. Massatti to work on other research objectives, including the time-consuming activities of processing and analyzing genetic data. A major challenge to field work in FY18 was the drought conditions that pervaded the Plateau during the spring field season. Due to low winter and spring precipitation, many plant communities did not green up in the spring, which prevented the biological technicians from collecting plant trait data, tissues samples, and seeds in many areas. To cope with the dry conditions, the technicians searched sites across a wider range of environmental space and considered a broader suite of species from which to collect data (i.e., species that may be included in research projects in future years). Monsoonal precipitation starting in July supported a late summer/fall field season and allowed the technicians to follow a more normal work plan. While Dr. Massatti was the only scientist supported by the SBSC-CPNPP agreement in FY18, other scientists, including Drs. John Bradford, Seth Munson, Mike Duniway, Sasha Reed, Daniel Winkler, and Jayne Belnap, spent a considerable amount of time discussing individual projects and the newly developed 5-Year Research Strategy. Some of these discussions resulted in a publication by Dr. Winkler, in addition to a large group of researchers, practitioners, and others who work on the Colorado Plateau, concerning the restoration challenges facing the Plateau into the future and the types of efforts that may support successful restoration (Winkler et al., 2018).

Colorado↗