Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Names”

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 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources

Summary of references to mineral occurrences (other than mineral fuels and construction materials) in the Afognak, Karluk, Kodiak, and Trinity Islands quadrangles, Alaska

These summaries of references are designed to aid in library research on metallic and nonmetallic (other than mineral fuels and construction materials) mineral occurrences in the Afognak, Karluk, Kodiak, and Trinity Islands quadrangle, Alaska. References to most reports of the Geological Survey, the U.S. Bureau of Mines, and the State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor State and Territorial agencies released before January 1, 1979, are summarized. Certain, mainly statistical, reports such as the annual Minerals Yearbook of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and biennial and annual reports of the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor State and Territorial agencies are not included. Also not included are data on many claims about which little more than their locations is known (for example, MacKevett and Holloway, 1977, p. 18). These omissions should not be interpreted as a judgement on my part that the claims are not valid mineral occurrences, but only that there are insufficient data to describe any mineral deposit that might be present. This report is divided into three parts: a section made up of summaries of references arranged alphabetically first by occurrence name; a section that lists synonyms for names in the first section, claim names, and the names of operators and owners of mines and prospects; and a section that lists, by author, all references in the first section and in these introductory paragraphs.

Alaska↗

Summary of references to mineral occurrences (other than mineral fuels and construction materials) in the Cordova Quadrangle, Alaska

This summary of references is designed to aid in library research on metallic and nonmetallic (other than mineral fuels and construction materials) mineral occurrences in the Cordova quadrangle, Alaska. References to most reports of the Geological Survey, U. S. Bureau of Mines, and State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor agencies released before January 1, 1979, are included. Certain, mainly statistical, reports such as the annual Minerals Yearbook of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the biennial and annual reports of the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor agencies are not included. Also not included are data on many prospects and claims about which little more than their locations is known (for example, many of those in Condon, 1965 (1-453) and some in MacKevett and Holloway, 1977 (OF-77-169A), p. 15). These omissions should not be interpreted as a judgement on my part that the prospects and claims are not valid mineral occurrences, but only that there are insufficient data to describe any mineral deposits that might be present. This report is divided into three parts: a section made up of summaries of references arranged alphabetically by occurrence name; a section that lists synonyms for names in the first section, claim names, and the names of operators and owners of mines and prospects; and a section that lists, by author, all references in the first section and in these introductory paragraphs.

Alaska↗

Summaries of data on and lists of references to metallic and selected nonmetallic mineral deposits in the Big Delta and Tanacross quadrangles, Alaska

These summaries of data on metallic and selected nonmetallic mineral occurrences and lists of selected references to them in Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (and predecessor State and Territorial agencies) reports and maps released before Jan. 1, 1980, are designed to aid in library research on the mineral resources of the Big Delta and Tanacross quadrangles, Alaska. The references are selected in the sense that mainly statistical reports such as the annual Minerals Yearbook of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and many annual and biennial reports of the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor agencies are not included. Also not included are data on many claims about which little more than their locations is known (for example, localities 16 to 22 in Menzie and Foster, 1979 (OF 78-529 D), p. 31). These omissions should not be interpreted as a judgement that the claims are not on valid mineral occurrences, but only that there are insufficient data to describe any mineral deposit that might be present. Geochemical anomalies determined by analysis of rock and stream—sediment samples in which no metallic mineral was identified are also omitted. This report is divided into three parts: a section made up of summaries of data and reference lists arranged alphabetically by occurrence name for each quadrangle; a second section that lists, by quadrangle, synonyms for names in the first section, the names of owners and operators of mines and prospects, and claim names; and a final section that for each quadrangle lists alphabetically by author all references mentioned in the first section and in these introductory paragraphs.

Alaska↗

Summary of references to mineral occurrences (other than mineral fuels and construction materials) in the Mount McKinley Quadrangle, Alaska

These summaries of references are designed to aid in library research on metallic and nonmetallic (other than mineral fuels and construction materials) mineral occurrences in the Mount McKinley quadrangle, Alaska. All references to most reports of the Geological Survey, the U.S. Bureau of Mines, and the State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor State and Territorial agencies released before November 1, 1979, are summarized. Certain, mainly statistical, reports such as the annual Mineral Yearbook of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the biennial and annual reports of the State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor State and Territorial agencies are not included. Also not included are data on many claims about which little more than their locations is known (for example, MacKevett and Holloway, 1977 (OF 77-169A), p. 48). These omissions should not be interpreted as a judgment on my part that the claims are not valid mineral occurrences, but only that there are insufficient data to describe any mineral deposit that might be present. This report is divided into three parts: a section made up of summaries of references arranged alphabetically by occurrence name; a section that lists synonyms for names in the first section, claim names, and the names of operators and owners of mines and prospects; and a section that lists, by author, all references summarized in the first section and in these introductory paragraphs.

Alaska↗

Summaries of data on and lists of references to metallic and selected nonmetallic mineral deposits in the Blying Sound and Seward quadrangles, Alaska

These summaries of data on metallic and selected nonmetallic mineral occurrences and lists of selected references to them in Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (and predecessor State and Territorial agencies) reports and maps and a very few journal articles are designed to aid in library research on the mineral resources of the Blying Sound and Seward quadrangles, Alaska. The references listed are selected in the sense that mainly statistical reports such as the annual Minerals Yearbook of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and many annual and biennial reports of the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor agencies are not included. Also not included are data on many claims about which little more than their locations is known (for example, localities 206 and 208 in Tysdal, 1978 (MF-880A)). These omissions should not be interpreted as a judgement that the claims are not on valid mineral occurrences, but only that there are insufficient data to describe any mineral deposit that might be present. Geochemical anomalies determined by analyses of rock and stream—sediment samples in which no metallic mineral was identified are also omitted. This report is divided into three parts: a section made up of summaries of data and reference lists arranged alphabetically by occurrence name for each quadrangle; a second section that lists, by quadrangle, synonyms for names in the first section, the names of owners and operators of mines and prospects, and claim names; and a final section that for each quadrangle lists alphabetically by author all references mentioned in the first section and in these introductory paragraphs.

Alaska↗

Summary of references to mineral occurrences (other than mineral fuels and construction materials) in the Kenai and Tyonek quadrangles, Alaska

This summary of references is designed to aid in library research on metallic and nonmetallic (other than mineral fuels and construction materials) mineral deposits in the Kenai and Tyonek quadrangles, Alaska. References to most reports of the Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and predecessor State and Territorial agencies released before September 1, 1979, are included. Certain, mainly statistical, reports such as the annual Minerals Yearbook of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the biennial and annual reports of the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor agencies are not included. Also not included are data on geochemical anomalies and on many prospects and claims about which little more than their locations is known (for example, some of those in MacKevett and Holloway, 1977 (OF 77169A)). These omissions should not be interpreted as a judgement on my part that the prospects and claims are not valid mineral occurrences, but only that there are insufficient data to describe any mineral deposits that might be present. This report is divided into three parts: a section made up of summaries of references arranged alphabetically by occurrence name; a section that lists synonyms for names in the first section, claim names, and the names of operators and owners of mines and prospects; and a section that lists, by author, all references in the first section and in these introductory paragraphs.

Alaska↗

Summary of references to mineral occurrences (other than mineral fuels and construction materials) in the Seldovia Quadrangle, Alaska

These summaries of references are designed to aid in library research on metallic and nonmetallic (other than mineral fuels and construction materials) mineral occurrences in the Seldovia quadrangle, Alaska. All references to most reports of the Geological Survey, the U.S. Bureau of Mines, and the State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor State and Territorial agencies released before September 1, 1979, are summarized. Certain, mainly statistical, reports such as the annual Mineral Yearbook of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and the biennial and annual reports of the State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor State and Territorial agencies are not included. Also not included are data on many claims about which little more than their locations is known (for example, MacKevett and Holloway, 1977 (OF 77-169A), p. 55). These omissions should not be interpreted as a judgment on my part that the claims are not valid mineral occurrences, but only that there are insufficient data to describe any mineral deposit that might be present. This report is divided into three parts: a section made up of summaries of references arranged alphabetically by occurrence name; a section that lists synonyms for names in the first section, claim names, and the names of operators and owners of mines and prospects; and a section that lists, by author, all references summarized in the first section and in these introductory paragraphs.

Alaska↗

Summaries of data on and lists of references to metallic and selected nonmetallic mineral deposits in the Nabesna Quadrangle, Alaska

These summaries of data on metallic and selected nonmetallic mineral occurrences and lists of selected references to them in Geological Survey, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and State of Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys (and predecessor State and Territorial agencies) reports and maps and in one Geological Survey of Canada report are designed to aid in library research on the mineral resources of the Nabesna quadrangle, Alaska. The references listed are selected in the sense that mainly statistical reports such as the annual Minerals Yearbook of the U.S. Bureau of Mines and many annual and biennial reports of the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys and its predecessor agencies are not included. The cut-off date for reports and maps cited in this report is December 31, 1979. Data on claims about which little more than their locations is known (for example, most of the localities on p. 53 in MacKevett and Holloway, 1977 (OF 77169A)) are not included. These omissions should not be interpreted as a judgement that the claims are not on valid mineral occurrences, but only that there are insufficient data to describe any mineral deposit that might be present. Geochemical anomalies determined by analyses of rock and stream-sediment samples in which no metallic mineral was identified are also omitted. This report is divided into three parts: a section made up of summaries of data and reference lists arranged alphabetically by occurrence name; a second section that lists synonyms for names in the first section, the names of owners and operators of mines and prospects, and claim names; and a final section that lists alphabetically by author all references mentioned in the first section and in these introductory paragraphs.

Alaska↗

Drainage areas in New Jersey; Delaware River basin and streams tributary to Delaware Bay

Drainage areas of New Jersey streams tributary to the Delaware River and Delaware Bay are listed for over 1,100 sites. Tables show the descriptive location of each site, the latitude and longitude, county, and National Topographic map name. For gaged sites established through 1980, the U.S. Geological Survey station name and number are also listed. The data are presented alphabetically by stream name and in downstream order. Drainage areas were tabulated for most named streams and unnamed streams with a drainage area greater than 5 square miles. The methods used to delineate the drainage divides, measure areas, and determine mouths of streams follow the guidelines developed by the U.S. Water Resources Council. (USGS)

Open-File Report↗

Drainage areas in New Jersey; Atlantic coastal basins, South Amboy to Cape May

Drainage areas of New Jersey streams in the coastal basin from South Amboy to Cape May are listed for more than 700 sites. Tables list the descriptive location of each site, the latitude and longitude, county, and National Topographic map name. For gaged sites established through 1982, the U.S. Geological Survey station name and site number are also shown. The data are presented alphabetically by stream name and in downstream order. Drainage areas were tabulated for named streams and unnamed streams with a drainage area greater than 5 square miles. The methods used to delineate the drainage divides, measure areas, and determine mouths of streams follow the guidelines developed by the U.S. Water Resources Council. (USGS)

Open-File Report↗

A comparison of the genera Metaplacenticeras Spath and Placenticeras Meek

In a recent examination of a considerable suite of specimens from the Western Interior of the United States belonging to the Cretaceous ammonite genus Placenticeras Meek the writer made comparisons of the species from the Interior with those from the Cretaceous of the Pacific coast ordinarily designated Placenticeras pacificum J. P. Smith, P. calijornicum Anderson, and P. sanctaemonicae Waring. The two groups of species differ widely in their characteristics, though each is a fairly homogeneous assemblage in itself. It was the writer's intention to propose a new name for the group of P. pacijicum - indeed, one was proposed and in type, when the publication by Spathof the name Metaplacenticeras met the need adequately, and that name is of course used here. Spath's name is based on the citation of Smith's original figure and a notation that Metaplacenticeras differs from Placenticeras in its falcoid ribbing and distinct suture line. Inasmuch as there has been some divergence of opinion as to the scope and probable derivation of the genus Placenticeras, based on the study by different writers of members of one or the other of the two groups, the writer has thought it worth while to record his observations and deductions and to give a fuller account of the new genus.

Professional Paper↗

Stratigraphic notes—Volume 2, 2025

This is the second volume in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) series of reports on stratigraphy entitled “Stratigraphic Notes,” which consists of short papers that highlight stratigraphic studies, changes in stratigraphic nomenclature, and explanations of stratigraphic names and concepts used on published geologic maps. “Stratigraphic Notes” is a long-term (multiyear), multivolume publication containing articles that address updates or revisions to stratigraphic nomenclature (and whose content ultimately will be incorporated by National Geologic Map Database personnel into Geolex, https://ngmdb.usgs.gov/Geolex/ ). We welcome papers for the “Stratigraphic Notes” series from geoscientists of the USGS, of State Geological Surveys, and from academicians. Papers can be submitted for publication in “Stratigraphic Notes” by contacting the USGS Geologic Names Committee ( gnc@usgs.gov ). As new “Stratigraphic Notes” volumes are published, links to the volumes will be posted at https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1879 .

Professional Paper↗

Geology and hydrostratigraphy of Guadalupe River State Park and Honey Creek State Natural Area, Kendall and Comal Counties, Texas

Hydrogeologic mapping and descriptions of the lithostratigraphy and hydrostratigraphy of Guadalupe River State Park and Honey Creek State Natural Area, Kendall and Comal Counties, Texas, are presented in this first detailed 1:24,000 geologic map, along with proposed names and descriptions of the hydrostratigraphic units in the study area. Variations in the amount and type of porosity of the lithostratigraphic unit, which vary depending on the depositional environment, lithology, structural history and diagenesis support the resulting hydrostratigraphy proposed herein. Rocks exposed in the study area consist of Early Cretaceous sedimentary rocks that are assigned to the Trinity Group. The lithostratigraphy includes the Hammett Shale, Cow Creek Limestone, Hensell Sand Members of the Pearsall Formation, and the lower member of the Glen Rose Limestone. These lithologic units contain shale, grainstone, sandstone, and fossiliferous limestone, alternating and interfingering with mudstone, wackestone, packstone, and grainstone. The Trinity aquifer hydrostratigraphic units shown on the map and described herein are characterized by their porosity types. Porosity types were first determined from an analysis of two boreholes conducted in comparison with 143 geophysical logs from northern Bexar County, Texas. The cores and geophysical log comparison resulted in division of the lower member of the Glen Rose Limestone into six hydrostratigraphic units, designated A through F. Of those six units, only three remain in the study area because of erosion. The proposed naming of these three hydrostratigraphic units is based on topographic or historical features that occur in the outcrop area of those units. Hydrostratigraphic units that correlate with the boundaries of the formation have been given formational names excluding the lithologic modifier. The Doeppenschmidt hydrostratigraphic unit is stratigraphically the highest interval in the study area, characterized by interparticle, moldic, burrowed, bedding plane, fracture, and cave porosity. The underlying Rust hydrostratigraphic unit appears to be a confining unit with springs/seeps issuing near the contact with the overlying Doeppenschmidt unit. The Rust unit has interparticle, fracture, and cave porosity with cave porosity primarily associated with faulting. The Honey Creek hydrostratigraphic unit is an aquifer in the subsurface and exhibits extremely, well developed porosity and permeability including— interparticle, moldic, burrowed, bedding plane, fracture, channel, and cave porosity. This unit is named for Honey Creek Cave, which discharges water into Honey Creek. The Hensell hydrostratigraphic unit contains primarily interparticle porosity, but also exhibits some moldic and cave porosity in its upper parts. The Cow Creek hydrostratigraphic unit contains interparticle, moldic, vug, burrowed, fracture, bedding plane, channel, and cave porosity. The Cow Creek hydrostratigraphic unit is an aquifer in the subsurface and is the primary target for water-well drillers in the area. The Hammett hydrostratigraphic unit is not exposed in the study area but is thought to underlie parts of the Guadalupe River, based on mapping of the overlying units and comparisons with subsurface thicknesses obtained from the geophysical log. The Hammett unit restricts the downward migration of groundwater, resulting in springs that discharge at the base of the Cow Creek unit. These springs also create some base flow to the Guadalupe River during periods of extreme drought. The faulting and fracturing in the study area are part of the Miocene Balcones Fault Zone, which is an extensional system of faults that generally trend southwest to northeast in south-central Texas. An igneous dike, containing aphanitic texture, cuts through the center of the study area near the confluence of Honey Creek and the Guadalupe River. The dike penetrates the Cow Creek Limestone and the lower part of the Hensell Sand, which outcrops at three locations.

Texas↗

Estimation of the groundwater resources of the bedrock aquifers at the Kettle Moraine Springs State Fish Hatchery, Sheboygan County, Wisconsin

Groundwater resources information was needed to understand regional aquifer systems and water available to wells and springs for rearing important Lake Michigan fish species at the Kettle Moraine Springs State Fish Hatchery in Sheboygan County, Wisconsin. As a basis for estimating the groundwater resources available, an existing groundwater-flow model was refined, and new groundwater-flow models were developed for the Kettle Moraine Springs State Fish Hatchery area using the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) finite-difference code MODFLOW. This report describes the origin and construction of these groundwater-flow models and their use in testing conceptual models and simulating the hydrogeologic system. The study area is in the Eastern Ridges and Lowlands geographical province of Wisconsin, and the hatchery property is situated on the southeastern edge of the Kettle Moraine, a north-south trending topographic high of glacial origin. The bedrock units underlying the study area consist of Cambrian, Ordovician, and Silurian units of carbonate and siliciclastic lithology. In the Sheboygan County area, the sedimentary bedrock sequence reaches a thickness of as much as about 1,600 feet (ft). Two aquifer systems are present at the Kettle Moraine Springs State Fish Hatchery. A shallow system is made up of Silurian bedrock, consisting chiefly of dolomite, overlain by unconsolidated Quaternary-age glacial deposits. The glacial deposits of this aquifer system are the typical source of water to local springs, including the springs that have historically supplied the hatchery. The shallow aquifer system, therefore, consists of the unconsolidated glacial aquifer and the underlying bedrock Silurian aquifer. Most residential wells in the area draw from the Silurian aquifer. A deeper confined aquifer system is made up of Cambrian- and Ordovician-age bedrock units including sandstone formations. Because of its depth, very few wells are completed in the Cambrian-Ordovician aquifer system (COAS) near the Kettle Moraine Springs State Fish Hatchery. Three groundwater-flow models were used to estimate the water resources available to the hatchery from bedrock aquifers under selected scenarios of well placement and seasonal water requirements and subject to constraints on the effects of pumping on neighboring wells, local springs, and creeks. Model input data (recharge, water withdrawal, and boundary conditions) for these models were compiled from a number of data and information sources. The first model, named the “KMS model,” (KMS stands for Kettle Moraine Springs) is an inset model derived from a published USGS regional Lake Michigan Basin model and was constructed to simulate groundwater pumping from the semiconfined Silurian aquifer. The second model, named the “Pumping Test model,” was constructed to evaluate an aquifer pumping test conducted in the COAS as part of this project. The Pumping Test model was also used to simulate the local effects of 20 years of groundwater pumping from this deep bedrock aquifer for future hatchery operations. The third model, named the “LMB modified model,” is a version of the published Lake Michigan Basin (LMB) model that was modified with aquifer parameters refined in an area around the hatchery (approximately a 5-mile radius circle, corresponding to the area stressed by the aquifer pumping test). This LMB modified model was applied to evaluate regional effects of pumping from the confined COAS. The available Silurian aquifer groundwater resource was estimated using the KMS model with three scenarios—named “AllConstraints,” “Constraints2,” and “Constraints3”—that specified local water-level and flow constraints such as drawdown at nearby household wells, water levels inside pumping well boreholes, and flow in local streams and springs. Each scenario utilized the MODFLOW Groundwater Management Process (GWM) to select three locations from six candidate locations that provided the greatest combined flow while satisfying the constraints. The three constraint scenarios provided estimates of 430 gallons per minute (gal/min), 480 gal/min, and 520 gal/min pumping from three wells—AllConstraints, Constraints2, and Constraints3, respectively. The same three wells were selected for the scenarios that estimated 480 gal/min and 520 gal/min; the scenario that estimated 430 gal/min shared two of these same wells, but the third selected well was different. The available COAS groundwater resource was estimated by two scenarios with each conducted over a period of 20 years with the Pumping Test model and the LMB modified model . The Pumping Test model was used to simulate local effects of pumping, and the LMB modified model was used to simulate regional effects of pumping. The scenarios simulate a range of total and seasonal pumping rates potentially linked to site activities. Scenario 1 simulates two wells completed in the Cambrian-Ordovician aquifer system, each pumping for 8 months at 300 gal/min, followed by pumping for 4 months at 600 gal/min. The average yearly pumping rate of Scenario 1 is 800 gal/min. Scenario 2 simulates three wells completed in the Cambrian-Ordovician aquifer system pumping for 8 months at 200 gal/min, followed by pumping for 4 months at 500 gal/min. The average yearly pumping rate of Scenario 2 is 900 gal/min. The Pumping Test model simulations confirmed that drawdown in the boreholes of the pumping wells at the selected 2-well or 3-well rates will meet the desired condition that the pumping water level remains at least 100 ft above the highest Cambrian-Ordovician unit open to the well. The LMB modified model was used to evaluate the regional drawdown of the pumping from the confined COAS under the same 2-well and 3-well scenarios. At the nearest known existing COAS well, Campbellsport production well #4, the simulated drawdown for Scenario 1 after 20 years of cyclical pumping with two pumping wells averaging a total of 800 gal/min is 16.9 ft, whereas the simulated drawdown for Scenario 2 after 20 years of pumping with three pumping wells averaging a total of 900 gal/min is 19.0 ft. The total deep aquifer thickness at the Campbellsport location is on the order of 620 ft, meaning that the simulated drawdown for either scenario is about 3 percent of the confined aquifer thickness. The models developed as part of this project are archived in the project data release. The archive includes the model input and output files as well as MODFLOW source code and executables. ( Haserodt and others, 2017 ).

Wisconsin↗

The dazed and confused identity of Agassiz's land tortoise, Gopherus agassizii (Testudines, Testudinidae) with the description of a new species, and its consequences for conservation

We investigate a cornucopia of problems associated with the identity of the desert tortoise, Gopherus agassizii Cooper. The date of publication is found to be 1861, rather than 1863. Only one of the three original cotypes exists, and it is designated as the lectotype of the species. Another cotype is found to have been destroyed in the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and subsequent fire. The third is lost. The lectotype is genetically confirmed to be from California, and not Arizona, USA as sometimes reported. Maternally, the holotype of G. lepidocephalus Ottley et Velázques Solis, 1989 from the Cape Region of Baja California Sur, Mexico is also from the Mojavian population of the desert tortoise, and not from Tiburon Island, Sonora, Mexico as previously proposed. A suite of characters serve to diagnose tortoises west and north of the Colorado River, the Mojavian population, from those east and south of the river in Arizona, USA and Sonora and Sinaloa, Mexico, the Sonoran population. Species recognition is warranted and because G. lepidocephalus is from the Mojavian population no names are available for the Sonoran species. Thus, a new species, Gopherus morafkai sp. n., is named and this action reduces the distribution of G. agassizii to only 30% of its former range. This reduction has important implications for the conservation and protection of G. agassizii , which may deserve a higher level of protection.

Arizona, Baja California Sur, California, Sinaloa,↗

The tullibee

Early explorers and settlers of the northeastern United States and southern Canada found lakes teeming with fish that had white flesh and were good to eat. The larger of these they called whitefish, differentiating two kinds- the lake whitefish and the round or menominee whitefish. These looked much alike, and each had the same appearance wherever it was found. The smaller fishes with white flesh had a variety of shapes, sizes, and colors in different lakes and areas, and were given several names; most common of these were 'cisco,' 'lake herring,' and 'tullibee.' Cisco subsequently became the common name for all of the small whitefishes, and lake herring was the name given to a single shallow-water species. The use of the name 'tullibee' became less common after ichthyologists concluded that it was a form of lake herring.

Minnesota Conservation Volunteer↗

The chrono- and lithostratigraphic significance of the type section of the Middendorf Formation, Chesterfield County, South Carolina

The name Middendorf Formation has been widely used in the Coastal Plain of South Carolina, eastern Georgia, and southern North Carolina since 1904, despite conflicting interpretations of the age and stratigraphic relations of the unit at its type locality. Between 1995 and 1998, the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, drilled three continuously cored holes to the south and to the east of the type section of the Middendorf Formation, which is located in Chesterfield County, South Carolina. In addition, two outcrops to the northeast of the type section were sampled for biostratigraphic control. The litho- and biostratigraphic relations of the units in these cores and outcrops provide significant insights into the age of the Middendorf Formation at its type locality, and how this age impacts regional correlations of the formation. A projection of formational contacts and thicknesses from downdip areas into the type locality of the Middendorf Formation indicates that the type section is most likely a facies of either the uppermost Bladen Formation (of the Black Creek Group), or the uppermost Bladen and the lowermost part of the Peedee Formations. This report documents the evidence that support this interpretation. The implication of this interpretation is that the name "Middendorf" has been applied to a variety of units throughout the southeastern United States, all of which display a similar lithology, but differ significantly in stratigraphic position and age. For these reasons, we recommend that the name Middendorf be restricted for use with strata that occur only in the vicinity of the type locality, and use of the name "Middendorf" for units elsewhere in the Coastal Plain be reconsidered.

Southeastern Geology↗

Thirty-seventh supplement to the American Ornithologists' Union Check-list of North American birds

This third supplement subsequent to the 6th edition (1983) of the A.O.U. "Check-list of North American Birds" consists of changes adopted by the Committee on Classification and Nomenclature as of 1 March 1989. The changes fall into nine categories: (1) six species are added to the main list ( Pterodroma longirostris, Larus crassirostris, Streptopelia decaocto, Cocccyzus julieni, Chrysolampis mosquitus, Emberiza aureola ) because of new distributional information; (2) five species ( Ara cubensis, Chlorostilbon bracei, Empidonax occidentalis, Polioptila californica, Pipilo crissalis ) are added to the main list because of the splitting of species already on the list; (3) one name ( Anthus rubescens ) is changed because of the splitting of a species from outside the Checklist area; (4) two names ( Morus bassanus, Nyctanassa violacea ) is removed from the main list to Appendix B because of re-evaluation of Northern Hemisphere records; (6) three species ( Pterodrama rostrata, P. alba, P. solandri ) are moved from Appendix A to Appendix B, and one ( P. defilippiana ) is added to Appendix B because of questionable sight records; (7)A.O.U. numbers are added to three species ( Ciccaba virgata, Myiopagis viridicata, Molothrus bonariensis ) on the basis on new distributional records or supporting data; (8) several corrections in spelling or citations are made; and (9) English names are changed for twelve species to accommodate worldwide usage of these names. No new distributional information is included except as indicated above (i.e. minor changes of distribution are not noted). These actions bring the number of species recognized as occurring in North America (main list) to 1,945.

The Auk↗