USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography”

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.

1,615 records · Page 86Linked to original sources
USGS2026

Earthquake rupture arrest from depth‐dependent frictional stability on the Pütürge segment of the East Anatolian Fault Zone, Türkiye (Turkey)

Determining why earthquake ruptures stop is a central challenge in earthquake science and seismic hazard assessment. The Pütürge segment of the East Anatolian Fault Zone, Türkiye, exhibits shallow creep (<∼3 km depth) yet hosts M > 6.5 earthquake ruptures at greater depth. Here, we evaluate whether variations in frictional stability along this segment aided arrest of the 2020 M 6.7 Elaziğ and 2023 M 7.8 Pazarcık earthquake ruptures. Analysis of Sentinel‐1 Synthetic Aperture Radar imagery indicates the 2023 M 7.8 rupture propagated laterally into a metamorphic massif within the Pütürge segment, where slip rapidly decayed below detection limits. Creepmeters along this segment recorded no significant surface afterslip (<3 mm) in the following year. To investigate this fault‐slip behavior, we conducted triaxial friction experiments on Pütürge fault gouge sampled from an outcrop exposure. The gouge, composed primarily of muscovite, quartz, and calcite, is velocity strengthening at conditions approximating 0–2.5 km depth and velocity weakening at 4–5 km depth. This transition to velocity‐weakening friction is associated with enhanced comminution and shear localization observed microstructurally. Our results suggest that depth‐dependent frictional stability of the Pütürge fault segment facilitates rupture nucleation and propagation at depth while maintaining rupture‐arresting behavior near Earth’s surface.

Pütürge segment of the East Anatolian Fault Zone↗
USGS2025

New constraints on location and timing of the Great Lakes tectonic zone, central Upper Peninsula, Michigan, USA

The Great Lakes tectonic zone (GLTZ) forms the boundary between the Wawa–Abitibi and Minnesota River Valley subprovinces within the Archean Superior Province. The GLTZ is concealed for all of its 1100 km length, except for a segment in the central Upper Peninsula of Michigan. There, it is exposed as a northwest-striking mylonite zone along a 11 km segment, extending to the onlap of Paleozoic rocks to the east. Farther east, its location has been unknown. Here, we use aeromagnetic and gravity data to develop interpretations of the expression of the GLTZ and to define its extent under cover. Aeromagnetic gradients over the mylonite zone are interpreted to be produced by structurally juxtaposed rocks with varying magnetizations. Gravity data show a regional gradient along the GLTZ, produced by the juxtaposition of a dense greenstone belt on the north against lower-density gneisses and granites on the south. The GLTZ is interpreted to extend ∼55 km under cover to the east. The GLTZ is terminated on the east by the buried eastern arm of the ca. 1100 Ma Midcontinent Rift. An undeformed granitic dike that cuts the mylonitic foliation produces a U–Pb apatite age of 2523 ± 33 Ma, implying no major post-Archean shearing occurred, and is at odds with previous interpretations of major Proterozoic reactivation. A granite intrusion in the Minnesota River Valley subprovince produces a Pb–Pb zircon age of 2606.9 ± 3.6/7.4 Ma. This suggests that magmatism related to the Sacred Heart orogeny, previously known in Minnesota, extended to Michigan.

Michigan↗
USGS2025

Structural controls on splay fault rupture dynamics during Cascadia megathrust earthquakes

Great subduction earthquakes ( M w ≥ 8.0) can generate devastating tsunamis by rapidly displacing the seafloor and overlying water column. These potentially tsunamigenic seafloor offsets result from coseismic fault slip and deformation beneath or within the accretionary wedge. The mechanics of these shallow rupture phenomena and their dependence on subduction zone properties remain unresolved, partly due to the sparsity of offshore observations of shallow megathrust earthquake deformation. Here, we analyze how offshore structure influences shallow rupture mechanics and slip partitioning using 3D dynamic earthquake simulations of the Cascadia subduction zone (CSZ) megathrust with and without variably dipping seaward- or landward-vergent splay faults in the wedge that sole into the megathrust. Resulting tradeoffs between splay and megathrust slip reveal structural controls on rupture partitioning, with greater splay slip leading to less shallow megathrust slip updip. Gently dipping and seaward-vergent splays host more slip than those with steeper, landward-vergent splays. To isolate the underlying mechanisms, we compare models with Andersonian and plunging principal stresses. Results suggest distinct static and dynamic processes control the dip- and vergence-dependence of splay rupture: static (mis)alignment relative to far-field tectonic loading favors slip on more optimally oriented, shallowly dipping splay faults. In contrast, dynamic stress interactions of an updip-propagating megathrust rupture front with the free surface and potential branch faults favor forward branching onto seaward-vergent splays and inhibit backward branching onto landward-vergent splays. Resulting seafloor displacements suggest splay fault structure may influence coseismic tsunami source processes, highlighting the importance of dynamically viable rupture scenarios in subduction hazard assessments.

Cascadia subduction zone↗
USGS2025

A framework for understanding the effects of subsurface agricultural drainage on downstream flows

Understanding controls on streamflow volume and magnitude is important to water resource management applications, such as critical water and transportation structure design and floodplain mapping. Changes in land use and agricultural practices, such as subsurface agricultural drainage, may be contributing to changes in streamflow characteristics. Subsurface agricultural drainage, also known as tile drainage, is the practice of installing drains in the subsurface of agricultural fields to improve productivity. Because of the complex interactions between subsurface drainage systems, precipitation, local soil conditions, and land management practices, it is difficult to determine how subsurface agricultural drainage affects downstream flow. Previously developed subsurface agricultural drainage conceptual models under dry, saturated, and winter conditions are summarized, and current literature on the effects of subsurface agricultural drainage on downstream flows, focusing on peak flow, non-event flow, and total flow to develop frameworks for discussing these systems is compiled. The effects that subsurface drainage has on hydrologic systems are expected to vary by site and are seasonally based on system design, soil type, moisture conditions, precipitation characteristics, and land conditions. Subsurface drainage can affect the magnitude of peak flow by converting surface runoff from a storm event to subsurface runoff. By increasing hydrologic connectivity of a catchment, subsurface drainage can increase non-event flow or the flow between two storm events, typically dependent on lateral flow through the subsurface and groundwater. Theoretically, by diverting water from groundwater recharge or by reducing water available for evapotranspiration, subsurface drainage may increase the total volume of flow. Precipitation changes may increase infiltration, excess overland flow, and flood risk regardless of the presence or absence of subsurface drainage.

Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Mon↗
USGS2026

Cajon Pass and the southern San Andreas Fault System: Earthquake cycle stress accumulation and present-day loading

With over a century since the last major rupture affecting the wider Los Angeles region, tectonic stress has steadily built along the southern San Andreas and San Jacinto fault systems, raising concerns of an imminent large earthquake. Cajon Pass, located at the junction of these faults, represents a critical site for potential through-going ruptures in Southern California. We constructed new 4D earthquake cycle simulations using a 1000-year paleoseismic rupture history of the San Andreas Fault System (SAFS) to assess spatial and temporal variations in stress. A semi-analytic Fourier transform model was used to compute stress from 3D dislocations in an elastic plate overlying a Maxwell viscoelastic half-space, assuming a complete coseismic reset of resolved shear stress on ruptured elements. Results show highest stress accumulation north of Cajon Pass (∼1.8 MPa/100 years) due to greater slip rates, and lower rates south of Cajon Pass (∼1.0–1.5 MPa/100 years). By 2025, Coulomb stress is estimated at 2.8 MPa on the Mojave South (MOS) segment, 1.8 MPa on the North San Bernardino (NSB1) segment and 3.6 MPa on the San Jacinto Bernardino (SJB) segment. Segments accumulate stresses with characteristic ranges of pre-event stress interpreted as failure thresholds: 1.2–2.7 MPa for MOS, 0.4–1.6 MPa for NSB1, and 1.2–2.9 MPa for SJB. When the stress disparity between segments SJB and MOS narrows, the faults appear to rupture jointly, suggesting that stress levels may control how Cajon Pass acts as an earthquake gate. These results may inform seismic hazard assessments by linking stress evolution to fault interactions.

California↗
USGS2026

Rupture into slow-slip fault regime during the 2018 Mw 6.9 Island of Hawaiʻi earthquake is followed by modest postseismic slip

On 4 May 2018, a M w 6.9 earthquake occurred on the south flank of Kīlauea, in the midst of an historic event that included a voluminous eruption from Kīlauea’s lower East Rift zone and caldera collapse at its summit. The earthquake was a consequence of both short‐ and long‐term stress buildup due to magmatic activity associated with the eruption and steady flank motion, respectively, and it revealed features of Kīlauea’s décollement fault that can inform understanding of future earthquake activity. We used geodetic data to determine the distributions of slip during the coseismic and postseismic periods and compared these with areas of known fault slip during past earthquakes and slow‐slip events (SSEs). The 2018 earthquake ruptured into an area of the décollement fault that was active during quasi‐regular SSEs that occurred in the two decades prior to 2018 but that have not been observed since. The coseismic slip model indicates that the amount of motion on the décollement fault was several times greater than what typically occurred during SSEs, suggesting that it may take decades for the fault to rebuild stress to the point at which SSEs will occur again. Postseismic afterslip also occurred in an area of the fault known to experience slow slip; however, unlike at other creeping faults, postseismic afterslip was rapid, being largely over within 2–3 days. The rapid nature and small magnitude of the postseismic afterslip may be due to the lack of a viscoelastic relaxation component, which is possibly a result of the shallow dip of the décollement fault not transferring stress efficiently into the lower crust.

Hawaii↗
USGS2026

Design and function of the Autonomous Benthic Imaging and Surveying System (ABISS) for remote sensing of lake and seabed environments

Lake and seabed environments are home to fisheries and other biota that are important to ecosystems and economies, yet these environments and the species that use them are difficult to accurately assess and monitor. Traditional benthic survey techniques, like bottom trawling used by the U.S. Geological Survey, are limited by substrate constraints, poor spatial resolution and precision, and operational depth limits, hindering accurate assessment of benthic species and habitats. In response to these limitations, the U.S. Geological Survey developed the Autonomous Benthic Imaging and Surveying System, a camera system integrated into underwater vehicles, to capture high-resolution images of the lakebed. The system uses color and stereo cameras to collect imagery, which can be analyzed using computational methods to detect organisms and (or) characterize habitat features, such as geologic substrate types. The system has been integrated into autonomous underwater vehicles and into an underwater housing used by self-contained underwater breathing apparatus (SCUBA) divers. Although the engineering of the system was motivated by the need for data collection in the Great Lakes, it has potential to collect high quality data in any aqueous setting with sufficient water clarity and safe operating conditions. The Autonomous Benthic Imaging and Surveying System can operate across diverse depths and light conditions to map and quantify ecological patterns that were difficult or impossible to assess using traditional methods. The Autonomous Benthic Imaging and Surveying System offers the potential for accurate and precise monitoring and assessment of native benthic biota, invasive species, and habitat, potentially providing natural resource managers with improved information to support decision making about benthic resource management.

Great Lakes↗
USGS2024

Imaging of seismic discontinuities using an adjoint method

For imaging of seismic discontinuities at depth, reverse time migration (RTM) is a powerful method to apply to recordings of seismic events. It is especially powerful when an extensive receiver array, numerous seismic sources, or both, permit adequate reconstruction of incident and scattered wavefields at depth. Reconstructing either the incident or scattered wavefield at depth becomes less accurate when relatively few recordings of seismic events are available. Here we explore an inverse scattering approach to imaging discontinuities based on an adjoint method, employing sensitivity kernels (Frechet derivatives) that represent jumps in material properties across seismic-discontinuity surfaces. When combined with ray-based requirements on scattering geometry, it constitutes a powerful approach to determining the locations and amplitudes of the discontinuities, recovering only those properties that can be resolved by a spatially limited source and/or receiver distribution. This is illustrated by synthetic examples with local sources followed by a field example in a subduction zone setting

Washington↗
USGS2025

Ultramafic float rocks at Jezero crater (Mars): Excavation of lower crustal rocks or mantle peridotites by impact cratering?

Based on observation and data from meteorites and in situ scientific missions, experiments as well as models, the Martian mantle is assumed to share some compositional and mineralogical affinity with the terrestrial mantle. However, there might be subtle differences like the Martian mantle being more ferroan. Yet, we do not have any direct analysis of a Martian mantle rock to confirm this assumption. NASA’s Perseverance rover found olivine-rich boulder-sized float rocks on the upper Jezero fan (Mars). These boulders have an ultramafic composition and their mineralogy is dominantly composed of Fo 73±3 olivine with high-Mg orthopyroxene, Cr-rich Ti-Fe oxides and minor plagioclase and high-Ca pyroxene. Microtextural and petrological analysis reveals that these minerals crystallized at equilibrium. In addition, these boulders are different from all the bedrocks analyzed by Perseverance along its traverse which are crustal igneous rocks and sediments. Comparing our data to Martian meteorites and available Mars bulk silicate models (BSM), we discuss that these boulders could represent primitive melts and/or lower crustal material, and we specifically hypothesize that they could be mantle peridotites. We propose that these putative mantle rocks could have been excavated by the succession of impacts from the shallow mantle or lower crust in the Isidis region where Jezero crater is located. These olivine-rich boulders could thereby constitute the first direct analysis of a Martian mantle rock.

Earth and Planetary Science Letters↗
USGS2025

Site-specific, extended ShakeMaps for earthquake engineering applications

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) routinely produces ShakeMaps of shaking intensity across the globe. Due to practical constraints, the number of response spectral periods was limited to three standard periods (0.3, 1.0, and 3.0 sec). We have recently developed the tools that are necessary to expand this functionality to include 22 periods (matching the current U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model periods) as well as the orientation-independent components (e.g., “RotD50”). We refer to ShakeMap products that include these extensions as “extended ShakeMaps.” The added level of complexity motivated us to also develop a user-friendly tool called the “ShakeMap Sampling Tool” (SST) that gives all the estimated shaking metrics for a specific location (or list of locations). Additionally, we develop a web application where users can input locations of interest and view/download the SST results. We further familiarize users with the concept of “Composite ShakeMaps.” For earthquakes sequences such as a mainshock and larger foreshocks and aftershocks, this provides a map of the maximum value of each shaking metric, which is useful for overall loss estimates, the full extent of ground failure triggering potential, and a better portrayal of the repeated shaking levels at a given point for a series of earthquakes. Such a site-specific shaking history facilitates earthquake forensics at building or infrastructure sites for which damage may be of concern, as described in the Disproportionate Damage Earthquake trigger specified in the IEBC (2018, Section 405.2.2) and in developing ATC-145 guidelines (Guidelines for Post-Earthquake Assessment, Repair, and Retrofit of Buildings). The composite ShakeMap can be combined with the SST for a variety of earthquake-hazard applications, such as systematically inferring triggering shaking estimates at specific sites of geotechnical interest for landsliding, liquefaction, and lateral-spreading hazards.

Kahramanmaraş↗
USGS2024

Case definitions for wildlife diseases

Welcome to the first manual of “Case Definitions for Wildlife Diseases,” a “living” electronic publication. The plan is to add and update this manual’s case definitions periodically as warranted; thus, this manual will never be completed, and readers should download the latest versions of specific chapters (that is, definitions) when available. Constructive suggestions from readers are welcome and will help guide adjustments as this project progresses. The purpose of this manual is to provide case definitions for selected diseases of importance to wildlife in Canada and the United States. Case definitions provide standard sets of criteria for classifying the degree of certainty of a particular diagnosis and help improve surveillance data quality and comparability. Better data and standardization allow for improved data sharing, which increases geographic and species surveillance coverage and permits more robust analyses. The definitions included in this manual have been developed by veterinary pathologists, epidemiologists, and wildlife biologists primarily from the U.S. Geological Survey National Wildlife Health Center (NWHC) and Canadian Wildlife Health Cooperative (CWHC). Pathologists from each organization reviewed and finalized the definitions. Each case definition has been peer reviewed by two scientific experts before publication. This manual begins with the case definition template. This generic template includes four sections: “Individual, Place, and Time Criteria for Diagnosis and Testing,” “Field Criteria for Diagnosis,” “Laboratory Criteria for Diagnosis,” and “Epidemiological Linkage Criteria for Diagnosis” and can be used to guide development of new case definitions. Information in each section is then combined to provide an overall case classification. Disease diagnoses are classified as “Confirmed,” “Presumptive,” or “Suspected;” and evidence of a pathogen or toxin is classified as “Exposed” or “Present/Detected.” Each subsequent chapter is then a case definition for a specific disease of wildlife, and infectious and non-infectious diseases are included.

Techniques and Methods↗
USGS2025

Macroseismology

In this chapter I discuss the use of so-called macroseismic data, i.e., reports of damage and other effects of shaking on humans and the built environment, to improve the characterization of earthquakes and the ground motions they produce. Macroseismic data are critical not only to investigate earthquakes that occurred before the start of the instrumental era in seismology, but are also, by virtue of the spatially rich nature of the data, of tremendous potential importance to investigate early instrumental and even recent earthquakes. Fueled by both the advent of on-line systems that now produce unprecedented volumes of macroseismic intensity data and by recognition of the importance of understanding key historical earthquakes, there has been a growing appreciation for the value of macroseismic data. It is, however, critical to understand both the unique challenges and the unique opportunities associated with these data. I review the evolution of thought and practices regarding analysis of macroseismic data, and the use of such data to improve the characterization of historic and early instrumental earthquakes.

Book chapter↗
USGS2026

Ground-motion aleatory-variability models for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands

I develop independent logic trees for aleatory variability for crustal and subduction-zone (interface and intraslab) earthquakes for seismic hazards analyses in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI) from existing suites of ground-motion models (GMMs) and from ground-motion datasets, including a regional PRVI dataset. The aleatory variability models are parameterized using a partially nonergodic partitioning of standard deviation that consists of independently developed between-event ( ), site-to-site ( ), and event-corrected single-station ( ) standard deviation components. The effects of nonlinear site response on aleatory variability are incorporated through additional terms that modify the standard deviation components. Because one goal of this work is to develop independent logic trees for aleatory variability that synthesize the aleatory variability models from GMMs, I make use of the functional forms of the input GMMs. The PRVI dataset contains a limited number of stations with high-quality site metadata and does not contain records from earthquakes with magnitudes greater than 6.1, so I choose not to develop the aleatory variability models from the regional dataset alone. Instead, the standard deviation components from regional ground-motion data are evaluated against the components derived from GMMs and from available global datasets, and regionalized standard deviation components are incorporated where there is evidence that regional effects exhibit substantial differences. The resulting logic trees for aleatory variability consist of models of and that are consistent with semiempirical GMMs for active crustal and subduction-zone regimes, and two alternative models of , including one model that exhibits site-to-site variability informed by PRVI data, with values that exceed global models. The aleatory variability models may be considered in future hazards assessments in PRVI to simplify the hazard calculations, to incorporate regional ground-motion variability effects, and to enable direct logic-tree weighs of aleatory variability.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗
USGS2023

The 2023 US 50-State National Seismic Hazard Model: Overview and implications

The US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was updated in 2023 for all 50 states using new science on seismicity, fault ruptures, ground motions, and probabilistic techniques to produce a standard of practice for public policy and other engineering applications (defined for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years). Changes in 2023 time-independent seismic hazard (both increases and decreases compared to previous NSHMs) are substantial because the new model considers more data and updated earthquake rupture forecasts and ground-motion components. In developing the 2023 model, we tried to apply best available or applicable science based on advice of co-authors, more than 50 reviewers, and hundreds of hazard scientists and end-users, who attended public workshops and provided technical inputs. The hazard assessment incorporates new catalogs, declustering algorithms, gridded seismicity models, magnitude-scaling equations, fault-based structural and deformation models, multi-fault earthquake rupture forecast models, semi-empirical and simulation-based ground-motion models, and site amplification models conditioned on shear-wave velocities of the upper 30 m of soil and deeper sedimentary basin structures. Seismic hazard calculations yield hazard curves at hundreds of thousands of sites, ground-motion maps, uniform-hazard response spectra, and disaggregations developed for pseudo-spectral accelerations at 21 oscillator periods and two peak parameters, Modified Mercalli Intensity, and 8 site classes required by building codes and other public policy applications. Tests show the new model is consistent with past ShakeMap intensity observations. Sensitivity and uncertainty assessments ensure resulting ground motions are compatible with known hazard information and highlight the range and causes of variability in ground motions. We produce several impact products including building seismic design criteria, intensity maps, planning scenarios, and engineering risk assessments showing the potential physical and social impacts. These applications provide a basis for assessing, planning, and mitigating the effects of future earthquakes.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2026

The Great Lakes Geologic Mapping Coalition—Working collaboratively to understand the geology of the Great Lakes Region

Introduction The Great Lakes Geologic Mapping Coalition (GLGMC), commonly referred to as the “Coalition,” is a partnership between the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the U.S. States of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin and the Canadian province of Ontario. The member States receive funding for geologic mapping work from the USGS National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program (NCGMP), whereas Ontario participates as a nonfunded partner. The mission of the GLGMC is to produce three-dimensional (3D) geologic maps that depict unconsolidated sediments and near-surface bedrock in the Great Lakes region of North America. Geologic maps are the basis of most earth science investigations and help support resource exploration (energy, minerals, groundwater), natural hazard mitigation, infrastructure development, and land-use planning, all of which can be used to advance economic development and strengthen national security in the Great Lakes region. During the last few million years, the Great Lakes region has experienced repeated glacial advances and retreats, leaving behind extensive sediments, abundant natural resources, and widespread effects on the underlying bedrock geology (Swezey and others, 2022). Linked by shared histories of past glaciations, industrial agriculture, and legacy automotive, coal, steel, and manufacturing industries, the GLGMC member States collaborate to improve the understanding of the 3D distribution of the sediments overlying the region’s bedrock (fig. 1). Developing a comprehensive subsurface 3D framework of this glaciated terrain can provide earth science data to policymakers at all levels. These insights facilitate informed decisions on the exploration, use, and protection of vital resources, such as critical minerals, industrial materials, and aquifers, thereby supporting economic prosperity and the well-being of the citizens of this region. Since its inception in 1998, the Coalition has completed more than 100 geologic mapping projects across the Great Lakes region. Each project aims to deliver geologic maps, 3D datasets, and other information that improves understanding of the geology of the Great Lakes region, with an emphasis on economic and water resources. Key deliverables include 3D geologic maps and models typically portraying sediment thickness, often derived from top-of-bedrock and borehole data. These products are developed through a combination of fieldwork, subsurface modeling, and the collection and analysis of rock and sediment cores. To support Coalition goals, member States collaborate with scientists working on related STATEMAP, EDMAP, and FEDMAP projects. Coalition scientists also engage with Tribal Nations in the Great Lakes region to ensure that Tribal interests pertaining to Coalition work are addressed. Through this collaboration, the Coalition unites the efforts of State, Federal, and Tribal Nation stakeholders to advance geologic data production and enhance understanding of the geologic resources of the Great Lakes region.

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, ↗
USGS2024

3-D mapping of the conterminous U.S. within the USGS National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program: Progress and future prospects

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Cooperative Mapping Program (NCGMP) is bringing together subsurface and three-dimensional information at multiple scales for the conterminous United States from data produced throughout the USGS and by federal and state partners. Components of this work include data inventory and catalog development, data integration and database development, and construction of subregional and basin-scale three-dimensional (3-D) geologic models. At small scales, the NCGMP is compiling subsurface data to create a limited number of subsurface layers that map the majority of the lower 48 States. At larger scales, 3-D models of stratigraphic units are intended to be the subsurface analog and extension of the surface geologic maps made within the Program. The Mapping Program is developing methods of storing, visualizing, and distributing 3-D models and subsurface data from multiple sources in easily shareable, queryable, non-proprietary format(s). We report on progress in 3-D mapping of the conterminous U.S. and on future prospects.

conterminous United States↗
USGS2026

Temperate wetlands lose climate-cooling capacity under warming

Temperate inland wetlands have long been viewed as climate regulators, with sustained CO₂ sequestration offsetting continuous CH₄ emissions over centennial–millennial timescales. However, the net climatic effect of these opposing fluxes remains uncertain under anthropogenic warming as they differ in both magnitude and atmospheric lifetime. We combine 19,000 CH₄ chamber measurements from 202 temperate inland wetlands with carbon burial rates from 16 dated sediment cores in North America’s Prairie Pothole Region to estimate greenhouse gas dynamics over two centuries. Here we show that CH₄ emissions rise by ~1.39 kg CH₄ ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹ over the historical period and are projected to approach 950 kg CH₄ ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹ under high-forcing scenarios by 2100, while CO₂ sequestration is expected to decline by ~0.3 kg CO₂ ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹, driving a shift toward persistent net CO₂-equivalent source behaviour and a weakening of the long-term cooling effect that wetlands have provided under natural conditions.

Prairie Pothole Region↗