Geology topics

Karen A. Blocksom

Publications and source records attributed to Karen A. Blocksom.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

USGS2025

Missing data in ecology: Syntheses, clarifications, and considerations

In ecology and related sciences, missing data are common and occur in a variety of different contexts. When missing data are not handled properly, subsequent statistical estimates tend to be biased, inefficient, and lack proper confidence interval coverage. Missing data are often grouped into three categories: missing completely at random (MCAR), missing at random (MAR), and missing not at random (MNAR). We review each category and compare their benefits and drawbacks. We review several approaches to handling missing data including complete case analysis, imputation, inverse probability weighting, and data augmentation. We clarify what types of variables should accompany imputation methods and how those variables are influenced by the analysis methods. Additionally, we discuss missing data that lack a formal basis for measurement and hence are fundamentally different from MCAR, MAR, and MNAR missing data. Throughout, we introduce concepts and numeric examples using both simulated data and data from the United States Environmental Protection Agency's 2016 National Wetland Condition Assessment. We conclude by providing five considerations for ecologists and other scientists handling missing data.

Ecological Monographs↗

USGS2024

A data exchange standard for wadeable stream habitat monitoring data

Data from wadeable streams collected by monitoring programs are used to assess watershed condition status and trends. Federally managed programs collect a suite of similar habitat measurements using compatible methods and produce individual program datasets for their prescribed geographic and temporal range. We identified four programs that produce similar data: the Bureau of Land Management Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring lotic division, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Aquatic Resource Surveys National Rivers and Streams Assessment survey section, the Federal interagency Aquatic and Riparian Effectiveness Monitoring Program, and the PacFish/InFish Biological Opinion Monitoring Program. Their datasets answer agency-specific management questions and fulfill reporting requirements, but the datasets are not released in full, or at all, and in some cases, there was no method to integrate data from the four programs to provide data at a larger spatial scale. The Pacific Northwest Aquatic Monitoring Partnership (PNAMP) led a working group of experts from the four monitoring programs to determine data compatibility, develop a Stream Habitat Metrics Integration (SHMI) data exchange standard, and integrate compatible wadeable stream data. The resulting SHMI data exchange standard contains a data mapping file used to transform data from the source program data to a conformed format based on a controlled vocabulary. After extensive discussions assessing and comparing program collection and analyses methods, the working group found 26 stream habitat metrics to be sufficiently comparable to be integrated into a meaningful dataset. Furthermore, a subset of PIBO MP data previously available only by request and AREMP data available only as a proprietary ESRI ArcGIS geodatabase were made publicly available in non-proprietary formats via the integrated SHMI dataset. A selection of data from the four programs determined to be compatible among 14 datasets were filtered, transformed, standardized, and combined using R code to create the integrated SHMI dataset containing about 12,000 locations, 19,000 events, and 200,000 measurements from 2000 to 2022. This report describes the SHMI data exchange standard and its development, the metric compatibility assessment, and the data integration process, so that others may reuse the SHMI data exchange standard and its components as well as the data integration processes.

Techniques and Methods↗

USGS2011

An assessment of stressor extent and biological condition in the North American mid-continent great rivers (USA)

We assessed the North American mid-continent great rivers (Upper Mississippi, Missouri, and Ohio). We estimated the extent of each river in most- (MDC) or least-disturbed condition (LDC) based on multiple biological response indicators: fish and macroinvertebrate, trophic state based on chlorophyll a, macrophyte cover, and exposure of fish-eating wildlife to toxic contaminants in fish tissue (Hg, total chlordane, total DDT, PCBs). We estimated the extent of stressors on each river including nutrients, suspended solids, sediment toxicity, invasive species, and land use (agriculture and impervious surface). All three rivers had a greater percent of their river length in MDC than in LDC based on fish assemblages. The Upper Mississippi River had the greatest percent of river length with eutrophic status. The Ohio River had the greatest percent of river length with fish with tissue contaminant levels toxic to wildlife. Overall, condition indices based on fish assemblages were more sensitive to stress than macroinvertebrate indices. Compared to the streams in its basin, more of the Upper Mississippi and Missouri Rivers were in MDC for nutrients than the Ohio River. Invasive species (Asian carp and Dreissenid mussels) were less widespread and less abundant on the Missouri River than on the other great rivers. The Ohio River had the most urbanized floodplains (greatest percent impervious surface). The Missouri River had the most floodplain agriculture. The effect of large urban areas on river condition was apparent for several indicators. Ecosystem condition based in fish assemblages, trophic state, and fish tissue contamination was related to land use on the floodplain and at the subcatchment scale. This is the first unbiased bioassessment of the mid-continent great rivers in the United States. The indicators, condition thresholds, results, and recommendations from this program are a starting point for improved future great river assessments.

River Systems↗