Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Research about Ohio River basin

Source-linked reports with geographic coverage including Ohio River basin.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2025

A first look at river discharge estimation from SWOT satellite observations

The Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT) satellite has the potential to transform global hydrologic science by offering simultaneous and synoptic estimates of river discharge and other hydraulic variables. Discharge is estimated from SWOT observations of water surface elevation, width, and slope. A first assessment using just the highest quality SWOT measurements, over the first 15 months (March 2023–July 2024) of the mission evaluated at 65 gauged reaches shows results consistent with pre-launch expectations. SWOT estimates track discharge dynamics without relying on any gauge information: median correlation is 0.73, with a correlation interquartile range of 0.51–0.89. SWOT estimates capture discharge magnitude correctly in some cases but are biased (median bias is 50%) in others. There are already a total of 11,274 ungauged global locations with highest quality SWOT measurements where SWOT discharge is expected to accurately track discharge variations: this value will increase as SWOT data record length grows, algorithms are refined and SWOT measurements are reprocessed. This first look indicates that SWOT discharge is performing as expected for SWOT data that achieve performance requirements, providing observed information on discharge variations in ungauged basins globally.

Ohio River basin↗
USGS2011

A preliminary assessment of the spatial sources of contemporary suspended sediment in the Ohio River basin, United States, using water quality data from the NASQAN programme in a source tracing procedure

Reliable information on catchment scale suspended sediment sources is required to inform the design of management strategies for helping abate the numerous environmental issues associated with enhanced sediment mobilization and off‐site loadings. Since sediment fingerprinting techniques avoid many of the logistical constraints associated with using more traditional indirect measurement methods at catchment scale, such approaches have been increasingly reported in the international literature and typically use data sets collected specifically for sediment source apportionment purposes. There remains scope for investigating the potential for using geochemical data sets assembled by routine monitoring programmes to fingerprint sediment provenance. In the United States, routine water quality samples are collected as part of the US Geological Survey's revised National Stream Quality Accounting Network programme. Accordingly, the geochemistry data generated from these samples over a 10‐year period (1996–2006) were used as the basis for a fingerprinting exercise to assess the key tributary sub‐catchment spatial sources of contemporary suspended sediment transported by the Ohio River. Uncertainty associated with the spatial source estimates was quantified using a Monte Carlo approach in conjunction with mass balance modelling. Relative frequency weighted means were used as an alternative way of summarizing the spatial source contributions, thereby avoiding the need to use confidence limits. The results should be interpreted in the context of the routine, but infrequent nature, of the suspended sediment samples used to assemble geochemistry as a basis for the sourcing exercise. Nonetheless, the study demonstrates how routine monitoring samples can be used to provide some preliminary information on sediment provenance in large drainage basins.

Tennessee, Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Indi↗
USGS1994

Water resources data, Ohio, water year 1993. Volume 1. Ohio River basin excluding project data

Water-resources data for the 1993 water year for Ohio consist of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; stage and contents of lakes and reservoirs; and water levels and water quality of ground-water wells. This report, in two volumes, contains records for water discharge at 121 gaging stations, 335 wells, and 8 partial-record sites; and water levels at 365 observation wells. Also included are data from miscellaneous sites. Additional water data were collected at various sites not involved in the systematic data-collection program and are published as miscellaneous measurements and analyses. These data represent that part of the National Water Data System collected by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating State and Federal agencies in Ohio.

Ohio↗