Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Biological Science Report”

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 289 records · Page 16Linked to original sources
USGS2017

The Wetland and Aquatic Research Center strategic science plan

Introduction The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Wetland and Aquatic Research Center (WARC) has two primary locations (Gainesville, Florida, and Lafayette, Louisiana) and field stations throughout the southeastern United States and Caribbean. WARC’s roots are in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Park Service research units that were brought into the USGS as the Biological Research Division in 1996. Founded in 2015, WARC was created from the merger of two long-standing USGS biology science Centers—the Southeast Ecological Science Center and the National Wetlands Research Center—to bring together expertise in biology, ecology, landscape science, geospatial applications, and decision support in order to address issues nationally and internationally. WARC scientists apply their expertise to a variety of wetland and aquatic research and monitoring issues that require coordinated, integrated efforts to better understand natural environments. By increasing basic understanding of the biology of important species and broader ecological and physiological processes, this research provides information to policymakers and aids managers in their stewardship of natural resources and in regulatory functions. This strategic science plan (SSP) was developed to guide WARC research during the next 5–10 years in support of Department of the Interior (DOI) partnering bureaus such as the USFWS, the National Park Service, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, as well as other Federal, State, and local natural resource management agencies. The SSP demonstrates the alignment of the WARC goals with the USGS mission areas, associated programs, and other DOI initiatives. The SSP is necessary for workforce planning and, as such, will be used as a guide for future needs for personnel. The SSP also will be instrumental in developing internal funding priorities and in promoting WARC’s capabilities to both external cooperators and other groups within the USGS.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2015

Science foundation Chapter 5 Appendix 5.1: Case study marsh macroinvertebrates

This case study includes representative macroinvertebrates that live in the marsh plain, its associated channels and pannes (ponds), and the marsh-upland transition zone. While less visible than animals such as birds, invertebrates play important roles in physical and biological processes (e.g., burrowing activity and channel bank erosion, and detritivores breaking down organic matter) and are important food resources for higher trophic animals. Common invertebrates in these habitats include plant-hopper ( Prokelisia marginata ), beach hopper ( Traskorchestia traskiana ), pygmy blue butterfly ( Brephidium exilis ), inchworm moth ( Perizoma custodiata ), western tanarthus beetle ( Tanarthus occidentalis ), salt marsh mosquitoes ( Aedes spp.; Maffei 2000a, Maffei 2000b, Maffei 2000c), crabs (native Hemigrapsus oregonensis and introduced Carcinus maenas ), copepods, snails (e.g. native California horn snail Cerithidea californica and introduced Ilyanassa obsoleta , Myosotella myosotis ), polychaetes (e.g. Capitella spp., Eteone californica , Neanthes brandti ), small clams ( Macoma petalum / M. balthica ), and corophiid amphipods (Cohen 2011, Race 1982, Robinson et al. 2011). Some common species were described in detail in the San Francisco Bay Goals Project Species and Community Profiles (Goals Project 2000).

California↗
USGS2017

The U.S. Geological Survey Flagstaff Science Campus—Providing expertise on planetary science, ecology, water resources, geologic processes, and human interactions with the Earth

T he U.S. Geological Survey’s Flagstaff Science Campus is focused on interdisciplinary study of the Earth and solar system, and has the scientific expertise to detect early environmental changes and provide strategies to minimize possible adverse effects on humanity. The Flagstaff Science Campus (FSC) is located in Flagstaff, Arizona, which is situated in the northern part of the State, home to a wide variety of landscapes and natural resources, including (1) young volcanoes in the San Francisco Volcanic Field, (2) the seven ecological life zones of the San Francisco Peaks, (3) the extensive geologic record of the Colorado Plateau and Grand Canyon, (4) the Colorado River and its perennial, ephemeral, and intermittent tributaries, and (5) a multitude of canyons, mountains, arroyos, and plains. More than 200 scientists, technicians, and support staff provide research, monitoring, and technical advancements in planetary geology and mapping, biology and ecology, Earth-based geology, hydrology, and changing climate and landscapes. Scientists at the FSC work in collaboration with multiple State, Federal, Tribal, municipal, and academic partners to address regional, national, and global environmental issues, and provide scientific outreach to the general public.

Arizona↗
USGS2006

Geologic map of the Peach Springs 30' x 60' quadrangle, Mohave and Coconino counties, northwestern Arizona

This map is a product of a cooperative project of the U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. National Park Service, and the Bureau of Land Management to provide geologic map coverage and regional geologic information for visitor services and resource management of Grand Canyon National Park, Lake Mead National Recreation Area, Grand Canyon-Parashant-National Monument, and adjacent lands in northwestern Arizona. This map is a synthesis of previous and new geologic mapping that encompasses the Peach Springs 30' x 60' quadrangle, Arizona. The geologic data will support future geologic, biologic, hydrologic, and other science resource studies of this area conducted by the National Park Service, the Hualapai Indian Tribe, the Bureau of Land Management, the State of Arizona, and private organizations. The Colorado River and its tributaries have dissected the southwestern Colorado Plateau into what is now the southwestern part of Grand Canyon. The erosion of Grand Canyon has exposed about 426 m (1,400 ft) of Proterozoic crystalline metamorphic rocks and granite, about 1,450 m (4,760 ft) of Paleozoic strata, and about 300 m (1,000 ft) of Tertiary sedimentary rocks. Outcrops of Proterozoic crystalline rocks are exposed at the bottom of Grand Canyon at Granite Park from Colorado River Mile 207 to 209, at Mile 212, and in the Lower Granite Gorge from Colorado River Mile 216 to 262, and along the Grand Wash Cliffs in the southwest corner of the map area.

Arizona↗
USGS2013

U.S. Geological Survey ecosystems science strategy—Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

Executive Summary Ecosystem science is critical to making informed decisions about natural resources that can sustain our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being. Resource managers and policymakers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, regional, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and nonrenewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decisionmaking is increasing dramatically as the world is being transformed at an unprecedented pace and in uncertain directions. Environmental changes are associated with natural hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing demands for water, land, food, energy, mineral, and living resources. At risk is the Nation’s environmental capital, the goods and services provided by resilient ecosystems that are vital to the health and wellbeing of human societies. Ecosystem science—the study of systems of organisms interacting with their environment and the consequences of natural and human-induced change on these systems—is necessary to inform decisionmakers as they develop policies to adapt to these changes. This Ecosystems Science Strategy is built on a framework that includes basic and applied science. It highlights the critical roles that U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decisionmakers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge, and it integrates ecosystem science and decisionmaking, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. We envision the USGS as a leader in integrating scientific information into decisionmaking processes that affect the Nation’s natural resources and human well-being. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play a pivotal role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the Bureau can bring holistic, cross-scale, interdisciplinary capabilities to the design and conduct of monitoring, research, and modeling and to new technologies for data collection, management, and visualization. Collectively, these capabilities can be used to reveal ecological patterns and processes, explain how and why ecosystems change, and forecast change over different spatial and temporal scales. USGS science can provide managers with options and decision-support tools to use resources sustainably. The USGS has long-standing, collaborative relationships with the Department of the Interior (DOI) and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and applying the results. The USGS engages these partners in cooperative investigations that otherwise would lack the necessary support or be too expensive for a single bureau to conduct. The heart of this strategy is a framework for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected components that reinforce our vision of the USGS providing science that is at the forefront of decisionmaking: Improve understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes. The focus for this goal is an understanding of how ecosystems work, including the dynamics of species, their populations, interactions, and genetics, and how they change across spatial and temporal scales. Advance understanding of how drivers influence ecosystem change. The challenges here are explaining the drivers of ecosystem change, their spatio-temporal patterns, their uncertainties and interactions, and their influence on ecosystem processes and dynamics. Improve understanding of the services that ecosystems provide to society. Here the emphasis is on the measurement of environmental capital and ecosystem services, and the identification of sources and patterns of change in space and time. Develop tools, technologies, and capacities to inform decisionmaking about ecosystems. This includes developing new technologies and approaches for conducting applications-oriented ecosystem science. A principal challenge will be how to quantify uncertainty and incorporate it in decision analysis. Apply science to enhance strategies for management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems. These challenges include development of novel approaches to monitoring, assessment, and restoration of ecosystems; new methods to address species of concern and communities at risk; and innovations in decision analysis and support to address imminent ecosystem changes or those that are underway. Closely integrated with the five goals are four strategic approaches that provide the path forward for the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. These approaches cross-cut all of the goals and are seen as essential to the implementation of this strategy: Assess information needs for ecosystem science through enhanced partnerships. Work with the DOI and other agencies and institutions to identify, design, and implement priority decision-driven ecological research. Promote the use of interdisciplinary ecosystem science. Design and conduct interdisciplinary process-oriented research in ecosystem science. Enhance modeling and forecasting. Build models to forecast ecosystem change, assess future management scenarios, and reduce uncertainties through an adaptive learning process. Support decisionmaking. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the four strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific USGS activities that align with this strategy and that address the Nation’s most pressing environmental needs. The strategy emphasizes coordination of activities across the USGS mission areas pursuant to these goals. Ecosystem science is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad perspective that incorporates the biological and physical sciences, climate science, information technology, and scientific capacity in mission areas across the Bureau. With its emphasis on coordination, this strategy can provide a critical underpinning for integrated science efforts with scientists from multiple mission areas of the USGS working together. Of course, the USGS will continue to conduct discipline-specific and interdisciplinary investigations, and both will continue to be vital parts of the ecosystem science portfolio. Finally, the strategy stresses the importance of coordination with other Federal agencies and organizations in the natural resources community. The USGS collaborates with resource agencies in the DOI and other organizations throughout the world to meet societal needs for species and ecosystem management. Working with these agencies and organizations, the USGS will play a key role in guiding sound decisionmaking during the next decade by advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Circular↗
USGS2012

The U.S. Geological Survey Ecosystem Science Strategy, 2012-2022 - Advancing discovery and application through collaboration

Ecosystem science is critical to making informed decisions about natural resources that can sustain our Nation’s economic and environmental well-being. Resource managers and policy-makers are faced with countless decisions each year at local, state, tribal, territorial, and national levels on issues as diverse as renewable and non-renewable energy development, agriculture, forestry, water supply, and resource allocations at the urban-rural interface. The urgency for sound decision-making is increasing dramatically as the world is being transformed at an unprecedented pace and in uncertain directions. Environmental changes are associated with natural hazards, greenhouse gas emissions, and increasing demands for water, land, food, energy, mineral, and living resources. At risk is the Nation’s environmental capital, the goods and services provided by resilient ecosystems that are vital to the health and well-being of human societies. Ecosystem science—the study of systems of organisms interacting with their environment and the consequences of natural and human-induced change on these systems—is necessary to inform decision-makers as they develop policies to adapt to these changes. This Ecosystems Science Strategy is built on a framework that includes basic and applied science. It highlights the critical roles that USGS scientists and partners can play in building scientific understanding and providing timely information to decision-makers. The strategy underscores the connection between scientific discoveries and the application of new knowledge. The strategy integrates ecosystem science and decision-making, producing new scientific outcomes to assist resource managers and providing public benefits. The USGS is uniquely positioned to play an important role in ecosystem science. With its wide range of expertise, the agency can bring holistic, cross-scale, interdisciplinary capabilities to the design and conduct of monitoring, research, and modeling and to new technologies for data collection, management, and visualization. Collectively, these capabilities can be used to reveal ecological patterns and processes, explain how and why ecosystems change, and forecast change over different spatial and temporal scales. USGS science can provide managers with options and decision-support tools to use resources sustainably. The USGS has long-standing, collaborative relationships with the DOI and other partners in the natural sciences, in both conducting science and its application. The USGS engages these partners in cooperative investigations that otherwise would lack the necessary support or be too expensive for a single bureau to conduct. The heart of this strategy is a framework and vision for USGS ecosystems science that focuses on five long-term goals, which are seen as interconnected and reinforcing components: • Improve understanding of ecosystem structure, function, and processes. The focus for this goal is an understanding of how ecosystems work, including the dynamics of species, their populations, interactions, and genetics, and how they change across spatial and temporal scales. • Advance understanding of how drivers influence ecosystem change. The challenges here are explaining the drivers of ecosystem change, their spatio-temporal patterns, their uncertainties and interactions, and their influence on ecosystem processes and dynamics. • Improve understanding of the services that ecosystems provide to society. Here the emphasis is on the measurement of environmental capital and ecosystem services, and the identification of sources and patterns of change in space and time. • Develop tools, technologies, and capacities to inform decision-making about ecosystems. This includes developing new technologies and approaches for conducting applications-oriented ecosystem science. A principal challenge will be how to quantify uncertainty and incorporate it in decision analysis. • Apply science to enhance strategies for management, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems. These challenges include development of novel approaches to monitoring, assessment, and restoration of ecosystems; new methods to address species of concern and communities at risk; and innovations in decision analysis and support to address imminent ecosystem changes or those that are underway. Closely integrated with the five goals are four strategic approaches that provide the path forward for the USGS Ecosystems Mission Area. These approaches cross-cut all of the goals and are seen as essential to the implementation of this strategy: • Assess information needs for ecosystem science through enhanced partnerships. Work with the DOI and other agencies and institutions to identify, design, and implement priority decision-driven ecological research. • Promote the use of interdisciplinary ecosystem science. Design and conduct interdisciplinary process-oriented research in ecosystem science. • Enhance modeling and forecasting. Build models to forecast ecosystem change, assess future management scenarios, and reduce uncertainties through an adaptive learning process. • Support decision-making. Use quantitative approaches to assess the vulnerabilities of ecosystems, habitats, and species, and evaluate strategies for adaptation, restoration, and sustainable management. Following the strategic approaches are a set of proposed actions that represent a sampling of specific activities that align with this strategy and that address the Nation’s most pressing environmental needs. The strategy emphasizes coordination of activities across the USGS mission areas pursuant to these goals. Ecosystem science is inherently interdisciplinary and requires a broad perspective that incorporates the biological and physical sciences, climate science, information technology, and scientific capacity in mission areas across the Bureau. With its emphasis on coordination, this strategy can provide a critical underpinning for integrated science efforts with scientists from multiple mission areas of the USGS working together. Of course, the USGS will continue to conduct both discipline-specific and interdisciplinary investigations, and both will continue to be vital parts of the ecosystem science portfolio. Finally, the strategy stresses the importance of coordination with other Federal agencies and organizations in the natural resources community. The USGS collaborates with resource agencies in the DOI and other organizations throughout the world to meet societal needs for species and ecosystem management. Working with these agencies and organizations, the USGS will play a key role over the next decade in advancing the scientific foundation for sustaining the natural resources that diverse, productive, resilient ecosystems provide.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2003

Atomic weights of the elements. Review 2000 (IUPAC Technical Report)

A consistent set of internationally accepted atomic weights has long been an essential aim of the scientific community because of the relevance of these values to science and technology, as well as to trade and commerce subject to ethical, legal, and international standards. The standard atomic weights of the elements are regularly evaluated, recommended, and published in updated tables by the Commission on Atomic Weights and Isotopic Abundances (CAWIA) of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC). These values are invariably associated with carefully evaluated uncertainties. Atomic weights were originally determined by mass ratio measurements coupled with an understanding of chemical stoichiometry, but are now based almost exclusively on knowledge of the isotopic composition (derived from isotope-abundance ratio measurements) and the atomic masses of the isotopes of the elements. Atomic weights and atomic masses are now scaled to a numerical value of exactly 12 for the mass of the carbon isotope of mass number 12. Technological advances in mass spectrometry and nuclear-reaction energies have enabled atomic masses to be determined with a relative uncertainty of better than 1 ×10−7 . Isotope abundances for an increasing number of elements can be measured to better than 1 ×10−3 . The excellent precision of such measurements led to the discovery that many elements, in different specimens, display significant variations in their isotope-abundance ratios, caused by a variety of natural and industrial physicochemical processes. While such variations increasingly place a constraint on the uncertainties with which some standard atomic weights can be stated, they provide numerous opportunities for investigating a range of important phenomena in physical, chemical, cosmological, biological, and industrial processes. This review reflects the current and increasing interest of science in the measured differences between source-specific and even sample-specific atomic weights. These relative comparisons can often be made with a smaller uncertainty than is achieved in the best calibrated “absolute ” (=SI-traceable) atomic-weight determinations. Accurate determinations of the atomic weights of certain elements also influence the values of fundamental constants such as the Avogadro, Faraday, and universal gas constants. This review is in two parts: the first summarizes the development of the science of atomic-weight determinations during the 20th century; the second summarizes the changes and variations that have been recognized in the values and uncertainties of atomic weights, on an element-by-element basis, in the latter part of the 20th century.

Pure and Applied Chemistry↗
USGS2007

Climate Change Research at USGS Center for Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS)

Research and development projects at EROS apply unique resources to support the USGS mission of developing understanding, monitoring, and modeling of climate variability and change and their human, physical, and biological impacts. Remote sensing resources, both new and archived, form the core of our ability to determine changes in the state or condition of the Earth’s surface and its dynamic landscape and ecosystem processes. This rich resource provides powerful biophysical information for local to global areas. Archival data form the basis for assessing human and climate impacts on the land surface, trends of land use, and an understanding of climate and management impacts. Biophysical information from satellite data is assimilated into quantitative models that allow all disciplines of the USGS to understand impacts on ecosystem processes. Major processes and problems we address include: carbon fluxes, hydrological processes, albedo changes and regional climates, mangroves and wetland protection of coastal environments, natural and manmade hazards (e.g., fire and drought), ecosystem change and succession, land use and land cover change, and more. The integration of remote sensing, modeling, and multidisciplinary approaches fosters international scientific leadership across all disciplines for the USGS.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2026

Recent scientific contributions by the U.S. Geological Survey in the San Francisco Bay and Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta Estuary

Introduction The San Francisco Bay and Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta Estuary (hereafter, Bay-Delta) is the largest estuary on the West Coast of the United States. The Bay-Delta covers more than 1,600 square miles and drains a watershed of more than 75,000 square miles, which is greater than 40 percent of California. The region surrounding the Bay-Delta is home to about 10 million people, and its habitats (fig. 1) support more than 800 plant and animal species. The waterways of the Bay-Delta are the central hub of California’s extensive freshwater delivery system, supplying water to more than 27 million Californians and 4 million acres of farmland in the Central Valley. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is the primary science agency of the U.S. Department of the Interior, providing a broad range of Earth, water, biological, and mapping data and expertise to inform natural resource management across the country. This fact sheet focuses on research conducted by the USGS in the Bay-Delta region, mostly within the past 5 years. The fact sheet is organized across five major themes: water flow and water quality, fish and wildlife, wetland restoration, invasive species, and hazards. In each of these areas, the USGS works closely with Federal, State, and local agencies; academia; and non-governmental organizations to provide objective, evidence-based science. The data and knowledge gained from USGS research and monitoring are publicly available and are routinely used by agencies, including the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Water Resources, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California State Water Resources Control Board, Delta Stewardship Council, and many additional organizations and stakeholders to inform management of the Bay-Delta region and its resources.

California↗
USGS2017

Archive of bathymetry data collected in South Florida from 1995 to 2015

Description Land development and alterations of the ecosystem in south Florida over the past 100 years have decreased freshwater and increased nutrient flows into many of Florida's estuaries, bays, and coastal regions. As a result, there has been a decrease in the water quality in many of these critical habitats, often prompting seagrass die-offs and reduced fish and aquatic life populations. Restoration of water quality in many of these habitats will depend partly upon using numerical-circulation and sediment-transport models to establish water-quality targets and to assess progress toward reaching restoration targets. Application of these models is often complicated because of complex sea floor topography and tidal flow regimes. Consequently, accurate and modern sea-floor or bathymetry maps are critical for numerical modeling research. Modern bathymetry data sets will also permit a comparison to historical data in order to help assess sea-floor changes within these critical habitats. New and detailed data sets also support marine biology studies to help understand migratory and feeding habitats of marine life. This data series is a compilation of 13 mapping projects conducted in south Florida between 1995 and 2015 and archives more than 45 million bathymetric soundings. Data were collected primarily with a single beam sound navigation and ranging (sonar) system called SANDS developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) in 1993. Bathymetry data for the Estero Bay project were supplemented with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Experimental Advanced Airborne Research Lidar (EAARL) system. Data from eight rivers in southwest Florida were collected with an interferometric swath bathymetry system. The projects represented in this data series were funded by the USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program (CMGP), the USGS South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Project- formally named Placed Based Studies, and other non-Federal agencies. The purpose of the data collection for all these projects was to support one or more of the following scientific aspects: numerical model applications, sea floor change analysis, or marine habitat investigations. This report serves as an archive of processed bathymetry sounding data, digital bathymetric contours, digital bathymetric maps, sea floor surface grids, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) metadata. Refer to the Abbreviations page for explanations of acronyms and abbreviations used in this report. Since 2006, the USGS St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center (SPCMSC) assigns a unique identifier or Field Activity Number (FAN) for each field data collection. Projects described in this report conducted prior to 2006 do not have a FAN. Data from the 13 projects presented in this report provided critical hydrographic information to support multiple science projects in south Florida. The projects and the types of sounding data collected are: Florida Bay (1995-1999) - single-beam Lake Okeechobee (2001) - single-beam Tampa Bay (2001-2004) - single-beam Caloosahatchee River (2002)- single-beam Estero Bay to Matlacha Pass and offshore to Wiggins Pass (2003) - single-beam and airborne lidar North and Northwest Forks of the Loxahatchee and Lower St. Lucie Rivers (2003) - single-beam South Charlotte Harbor and offshore Sanibel Island (2003-2004) - single-beam Shark River and Trout Creek (2004) - single-beam and interferometric swath Southwest Florida Rivers (2004) - interferometric swath Offshore from Wiggins Pass to Cape Romano (2005) - single-beam Ten Thousand Islands (2009) - single-beam Lemon Bay (2011) - single-beam Southwest Florida Rivers (2015) - interferometric swath

Florida↗
USGS2007

Southwest Exotic Mapping Program 2007: Occurrence summary and maps of select invasive, non-native plants in Arizona

An important aspect of management of invasive, non-native plants (invasive plants) is information on the type, location, and magnitude of infestations. Regional development of this information requires an integrated program of data collection, management, and delivery. The Southwest Exotic Plant Mapping Program (SWEMP), coordinated through the U.S. Geological Survey’s Southwest Biological Science Center, annually compiles occurrence records for infestations of invasive plants. Operating since 1998, the SWEMP team has accepted occurrence records contributed voluntarily by federal, tribal, state, and private collaborators and has compiled these contributions accumulatively with previous versions of SWEMP. The SWEMP 2007 regional database update, SWEMP07, contains 62,000 records for 221 plant species with records dating as far back as 1911 and up to December, 2006. Records include invasive plants in Arizona, eastern California, Colorado, New Mexico, and Utah. SWEMP07 is available through the Southwest Exotic Plant Information Clearinghouse ( http://sbsc.wr.usgs.gov/research/projects/swepic/swepic.asp , click SWEMP). Not all invasive plants are non-native and not all invasive plants are even invasive. The Arizona Invasive Species Advisory Council (2006) defined an invasive species as “a species that is (1) non-native to the ecosystem under consideration and, (2) whose introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm, or harm to human health”. SWEMP uses the U.S. Department of Agriculture PLANTS database ( http://plants.usda.gov/ ) to determine if a plant is native or not to Arizona. As SWEMP does not independently assess the current or potential impact of invasive plants, we include most non-native plant records contributed. We have not included agricultural crops that are non-native, for example apples, oranges, etc. In this open-file-report, we use the SWEMP07 update to summarize the occurrence of invasive plants in Arizona and present distribution maps for a select invasive plants in Arizona. We use the word occurrence purposefully instead of the word distribution. The SWEMP07 database only provides an estimate of the actual distribution of invasive plants in Arizona. The information provided is a first approximation of the state-wide extent of invasive plant distribution.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2013

U.S. Department of the Interior South Central Climate Science Center strategic science plan, 2013--18

The Department of the Interior (DOI) recognizes and embraces the unprecedented challenges of maintaining our Nation’s rich natural and cultural resources in the 21st century. The magnitude of these challenges demands that the conservation community work together to develop integrated adaptation and mitigation strategies that collectively address the impacts of climate change and other landscape-scale stressors. On September 14, 2009, DOI Secretary Ken Salazar signed Secretarial Order 3289 (amended February 22, 2010) entitled, “Addressing the Impacts of Climate Change on America’s Water, Land, and Other Natural and Cultural Resources.” The Order establishes the foundation for two partner-based conservation science entities to address these unprecedented challenges: Climate Science Centers (CSCs and Landscape Conservation Cooperatives (LCCs). CSCs and LCCs are the Department-wide approach for applying scientific tools to increase understanding of climate change and to coordinate an effective response to its impacts on tribes and the land, water, ocean, fish and wildlife, and cultural-heritage resources that DOI manages. Eight CSCs have been established and are managed through the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Climate Change and Wildlife Science Center (NCCWSC); each CSC works in close collaboration with their neighboring CSCs, as well as those across the Nation, to ensure the best and most efficient science is produced. The South Central CSC was established in 2012 through a cooperative agreement with the University of Oklahoma, Texas Tech University, Louisiana State University, the Chickasaw Nation, the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State University, and NOAA’s Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Lab; hereafter termed the ”Consortium” of the South Central CSC. The Consortium has a broad expertise in the physical, biological, natural, and social sciences to address impacts of climate change on land, water, fish and wildlife, ocean, coastal, and cultural resources. The South Central CSC will provide scientific information, tools, and techniques that managers and other parties interested in land, water, wildlife, and cultural resources can use to anticipate, monitor, and adapt to climate change, actively engaging LCCs and other partners in translating science into management decisions. This document is the first Strategic Science Plan for the South Central CSC (2013-18). Using the January 2011 DOI guidance as a model, this document (1) describes the role and interactions of the South Central CSC among partners and stakeholders including Federal, State, and non-governmental organizations throughout the region; (2) describes a concept of what the center will provide to its partners; (3) defines a context for climate impacts in the south central United States; and (4) establishes the science priorities the center will address through research. Science priorities are currently organized as immediate or future research needs; however, this document is intended to be reevaluated and modified as partner needs change and as scientific work progresses.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2007

International Polar Year: Science at the Ends of the Earth

In response to unprecedented changes in the fragile polar regions of our planet, the International Polar Year (IPY) 2007-2008 will encompass many scientific studies designed to improve our understanding of polar change and its effects on Earth's ecosystems and people. For 2 years, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) researchers will don arctic gear and join scientists from more than 60 countries to conduct coordinated research and analysis in the Arctic and Antarctic. Polar regions play a critical role in the global climate system-and changing conditions in these often remote areas greatly affect biological, atmospheric, and human systems around the world. In the 50 years since the last IPY, scientists have seen that Antarctic ice shelves and glaciers worldwide are thinning and retreating, permafrost is thawing, and Arctic sea-ice cover is decreasing. The loss of sea-ice cover adversely affects marine mammal populations and leaves coastal Alaskan villages vulnerable to winter storm erosion. Thawing permafrost threatens the integrity of roads, buildings, and other vulnerable infrastructure and affects the mobility of local populations.

Fact Sheet↗
USGS2010

Intra- and interspecific facilitation in mangroves may increase resilience to climate change threats

Mangroves are intertidal ecosystems that are particularly vulnerable to climate change. At the low tidal limits of their range, they face swamping by rising sea levels; at the high tidal limits, they face increasing stress from desiccation and high salinity. Facilitation theory may help guide mangrove management and restoration in the face of these threats by suggesting how and when positive intra- and interspecific effects may occur: such effects are predicted in stressed environments such as the intertidal, but have yet to be shown among mangroves. Here, we report the results of a series of experiments at low and high tidal sites examining the effects of mangrove density and species mix on seedling survival and recruitment, and on the ability of mangroves to trap sediment and cause surface elevation change. Increasing density significantly increased the survival of seedlings of two different species at both high and low tidal sites, and enhanced sediment accretion and elevation at the low tidal site. Including Avicennia marina in species mixes enhanced total biomass at a degraded high tidal site. Increasing biomass led to changed microenvironments that allowed the recruitment and survival of different mangrove species, particularly Ceriops tagal .

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B:↗
USGS2023

Range-wide trends in tiger conservation landscapes, 2001 - 2020

Of all the ways human beings have modified the planet over the last 10,000 years, habitat loss is the most important for other species. To address this most critical threat to biodiversity, governments, non-governmental actors, and the public need to know, in near real-time, where and when habitat loss is occurring. Here we present an integrated habitat modelling system at the range-wide scale for the tiger ( Panthera tigris ) to measure and monitor changes in tiger habitat at range-wide, national, biome, and landscape scales, as often as the underlying inputs change. We find that after nearly 150 years of decline, effective potential habitat for the tiger seems to have stabilized at around 16% of its indigenous extent (1.817 million km 2 ). As of the 1st of January 2020, there were 63 Tiger Conservation Landscapes in the world, covering 911,920 km 2 shared across ten of the 30 modern countries which once harbored tiger populations. Over the last 20 years, the total area of Tiger Conservation Landscapes (TCLs) declined from 1.025 million km 2 in 2001, a range-wide loss of 11%, with the greatest losses in Southeast Asia and southern China. Meanwhile, we documented expansions of modelled TCL area in India, Nepal, Bhutan, northern China, and southeastern Russia. We find significant potential for restoring tigers to existing habitats, identified here in 226 Restoration Landscapes. If these habitats had sufficient prey and were tigers able to find them, the occupied land base for tigers might increase by 50%. Our analytical system, incorporating Earth observations, in situ biological data, and a conservation-oriented modelling framework, provides the information the countries need to protect tigers and enhance habitat, including dynamic, spatially explicit maps and results, updated as often as the underlying data change. Our work builds on nearly 30 years of tiger conservation research and provides an accessible way for countries to measure progress and report outcomes. This work serves as a model for objective, range-wide, habitat monitoring as countries work to achieve the goals laid out in the Sustainable Development Goals, the 30×30 Agenda, and the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework.

Frontiers in Conservation Science↗
USGS2025

U.S. Geological Survey science strategy to address white-nose syndrome and bat health in 2025–2029

Since its discovery in 2006, the fungal disease known as white-nose syndrome (WNS) has killed millions of bats. Of the 47 bat species native to the conterminous United States, Alaska, Hawaii, and Canada, 12 have been affected by WNS, including 3 endangered species and 1 proposed endangered species. WNS has also been detected in 40 States and 9 Canadian Provinces. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists have been critical in identifying the causal fungus for WNS ( Pseudogymnoascus destructans [Pd]), characterizing the effects of WNS, and tracking the spread of Pd in many bat populations in North America. The mission of the USGS WNS and Bat Health Science Team is to deliver integrated science in order to build resiliency into free-ranging bat populations through more effective WNS management, build capacity for bat health science, and enhance bat health information sharing across USGS science centers and cooperative research units as well as with stakeholders. The USGS can play an important role in supporting regional and national capacity building by providing resources and guidance to local, State, and Tribal management entities and by providing tools to enhance disease management. The USGS Ecosystems Mission Area’s Biological Threats and Invasive Species Research Program is the lead Federal program for free-ranging wildlife disease research and surveillance. As of 2024, guided by the science priorities set by the WNS Steering Committee, USGS scientists are engaged in a nationwide response to WNS. This work is done in close coordination with our partners at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Defense, as well as State and Tribal agencies. In addition to conducting WNS research, the USGS is mapping the spread of WNS and coordinating the North American Bat Monitoring Program (NABat) to understand how WNS and other stressors affect the status and trends of native bats across their range. The USGS is supporting the national WNS response through four science goals: (1) provide situational awareness on the health of bat populations; (2) conduct ecological studies of bats along the gradient of disease vulnerability; (3) contribute actionable science to enhance the resiliency of bat populations; and (4) implement an adaptive, holistic approach to bat health.

Circular↗
USGS2003

The use of traditional Hawaiian knowledge in the contemporary management of marine resources

It is traditional for Hawaiians to "consult nature" so that fishing is practiced at times and places, and with gear that causes minimum disruption of natural biological and ecological processes. The Ho'olehua Hawaiian Homestead continues this tradition in and around Mo'omomi Bay on the northwest coast of the island of Moloka'i. This community relies heavily on inshore marine resources for subsistence and consequently, has an intimate knowledge of these resources. The shared knowledge, beliefs, and values of the community are culturally channeled to promote proper fishing behavior. This informal system brings more knowledge, experience, and moral commitment to fishery conservation than more centralized government management. Community-based management in the Mo'omomi area involves observational processes and problem-solving strategies for the purpose of conservation. The system is not articulated in the manner of Western science, but relies instead on mental models. These models foster a practical understanding of local inshore resource dynamics by the fishing community and, thus, lend credibility to unwritten standards for fishing conduct. The "code of conduct" is concerned with how people fish rather than how much they catch.

Hawai'i↗
USGS2014

Preliminary testing of flow-ecology hypotheses developed for the GCP LCC region

The Ecological Limits of Hydrological Alteration (ELOHA) framework calls for the development of flow-ecology hypotheses to support protection of the flow regime from ecologically harmful alteration due to human activities. As part of a larger instream flow project for the Gulf Coast Prairie Landscape Conservation Cooperative (GCP LCC), regional flow-ecology hypotheses were developed for fish, mussels, birds, and riparian vegetation (Davis and Brewer 20141 ). The objective of this study was to assess the usefulness of existing ecological and hydrological data to test these hypotheses or others that may be developed in the future. Several databases related to biological collections and hydrologic data from Oklahoma, Texas, and Louisiana were compiled. State fish-community data from Oklahoma and Louisiana were summarized and paired with existing USGS gage data having at least a 40-year period of record that could be separated into reference and current conditions for comparison. The objective of this study was not to conduct exhaustive analyses of these data, the hypotheses, or analyses interpretation, but rather to use these data to determine if existing data were adequate to statistically test the regional flow-ecology hypotheses. The regional flow-ecology hypotheses were developed for the GCP LCC by a committee chaired by Shannon Brewer and Mary Davis (Davis and Brewer 2014). Existing data were useful for informing the hypotheses and suggest support for some hypotheses, but also highlight the need for additional testing and development as some results contradicted hypotheses. Results presented here suggest existing data are adequate to support some flow-ecology hypotheses; however, lack of sampling effort reported with the fish collections and the need for ecoregion-specific analyses suggest more data would be beneficial to analyses in some ecoregions. Additional fish sampling data from Texas and Louisiana will be available for future analyses and may ameliorate some of the data concerns and improve hypothesis interpretation. If the regional hydrologic model currently under development by the U.S. Geological Survey for the South-Central Climate Science Center is improved to produce daily hydrographs, it will enable use of fish data at ungaged locations. In future efforts, exhaustive analyses using these data, in addition to the development of more complex multivariate hypotheses, would be beneficial to understanding data gaps, particularly as relevant to species of conservation concern.

Cooperator Science Series↗