Geology Reports⌕ Search

SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Biological Bulletin”

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.

94 records · Page 6Linked to original sources
USGS1969

Distribution of oxygen and carbon isotopes in fossils of late cretaceous age, western interior region of North America

The oxygen isotope composition of both calcite and aragonite of the pelecypod Inoceramus is lighter than the composition of the aragonite of associated baculites and other cephalopods from the western interior region, the Gulf and Atlantic Coastal Plains, parts of Canada, and West Greenland. This difference cannot be explained by biotic and oceanographic factors or by postdepositional alteration of original isotopic compositions. Metabolic fractionation of oxygen isotopes by Inoceramus is strongly implied by the data and is not contradicted by what is known of the processes involved in the biologic deposition of shell carbonate. In addition, the oxygen isotope compositions of the inocerams and of some baculites are so light as to indicate temperatures greater than 30° C, which is too high for mollusks to tolerate. The unreasonable range of the indicated temperatures seems to be partly the result of metabolic fractionation of oxygen and partly the result of the Late Cretaceous sea in the western interior region having had a light oxygen isotope composition because of dilution with fresh water. The carbon isotope composition of the aragonite from Inoceramus is consistently heavier than that of the calcite in the same specimen by amounts ranging from 1 to 3 per mil. Metabolic fractionation of carbon isotopes within Inoceramus thus is indicated. The carbon isotope composition of the aragonite from baculites and other cephalopods is consistently lighter than that in either the aragonite or calcite in Inoceramus, indicating either that the cephalopods fractionated carbon isotopes from the dissolved carbonate in sea water differently than did inocerams or that the cephalopods utilized carbon of a different isotopic composition, probably from their food source, for their metabolic processes. While oxygen isotope data from the inocerams are not useful for paleotemperature interpretations, the oxygen isotope data from the baculites, if taken at face value, suggest either warmer temperatures for the western interior sea than around the periphery of Cretaceous North America, or water of oxygen isotope composition lighter than world oceans, or both. Data from British Columbia, southeastern Alaska, and West Greenland to the Gulf Coastal Plain do not indicate a well-developed latitudinal distribution of temperature in Late Cretaceous time. A general decline in temperatures during late Campanian and early Maestrichtian time is not evident. © 1969, The Geological Society of America, Inc.

Geological Society of America Bulletin↗
USGS2013

Data management challenges in species distribution modeling

An important component in the fields of ecology and conservation biology is understanding the environmental conditions and geographic areas that are suitable for a given species to inhabit. A common tool in determining such areas is species distribution modeling which uses computer algorithms to determine the spatial distribution of organisms. Most commonly the correlative relationships between the organism and environmental variables are the primary consideration. The data requirements for this type of modeling consist of known presence and possibly absence locations of the species as well as the values of environmental or climatic covariates thought to define the species habitat suitability at these locations. These covariate data are generally extracted from remotely sensed imagery, interpolated/gridded historical climate data, or downscaled climate model output. Traditionally, ecologists and biologists have constructed species distribution models using workflows and data that reside primarily on their local workstations or networks. This workflow is becoming challenging as scientists increasingly try to use these modeling techniques to inform management decisions under different climate change scenarios. This challenge stems from the fact that remote sensing products, gridded historical climate, and downscaled climate models are not only increasing in spatial and temporal resolution but proliferating as well. Any rigorous assessment of uncertainty requires a computationally intensive sensitivity analysis accounting for various sources of uncertainty. The scientists fitting these models generally do not have the background in computer science required to take advantage of recent advances in web-service based data acquisition, remote high-powered data processing, or scientific workflow systems. Ecologists in the field of modeling are in need of a tractable platform that abstracts the inherent computational complexity required to incorporate the burgeoning field of coupled climate and ecological response modeling. In this paper we describe the computational challenges in species distribution modeling and solutions using scientific workflow systems. We focus on the Software for Assisted Species Modeling (SAHM) a package within VisTrails, an open-source scientific workflow system.

Bulletin of the Technical Committee on Data Engine↗
USGS1969

Pre-nesting and nesting behavior of the Swainson's warbler

The Swainson?s Warbler is one of the least known of southern birds. Although fairly common in some parts of its summer range, observations of its breeding biology have been made by very few persons. The present study was conducted mostly at Macon, Georgia; Pendleton Ferry, Arkansas; and Dismal Swamp, Virginia....In central Georgia and east-central Arkansas, Swainson?s Warblers usually arrive on their territories during the first two weeks in April. Territories in several localities ranged in size from 0.3 to 4.8 acres. A color-marked Arkansas male occupied the same territory for at least four months. Hostile encounters between territorial male Swainson?s Warblers usually take place along the boundary of adjacent territories. Paired males were more aggressive than unpaired males. Toward the end of an encounter one of the two males would usually perform a display in which the wing and tail feathers were spread and the tail vibrated. Following boundary encounters males drifted back onto their territories and usually sang unbroken courses of songs for several minutes.....During pre-nesting at Macon, a mated pair spent the day mostly on the ground within 20 feet of each other, often foragin g 3 to 4 feet apart. What may have been a form of courtship display, in which the male flew from a perch down to the female and either pecked her rump or pounced on her, occurred about three times each hour throughout the day. During this period the male sang less than at other times during the breeding season.....First nests are usually built by the first week in May. Although other investigators reported finding nests of this species outside of the defended territory, all nests that I have found were within the territory. The large, bulky nest of this species usually is placed 2-6 feet above the ground. It is built by the female from materials gathered close to the nest site; and takes two or three days to complete.....Three and occasionally four white eggs are laid. The female incubates for 14-15 days. The Cowbird parasitizes nests in some parts of the breeding range of the Swainson?s Warbler.....During incubation the female spends about 78 per cent of daylight time on the nest. Both sexes feed young and clean nest. Young remain in nest from 10-12 days.

The Wilson Bulletin↗
USGS2009

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

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

Gap Analysis Bulletin↗