SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Names”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

USGS1978

Water resources of No Name Valley, Colville Indian Reservation, Washington

No Name Creek valley is a trough cut in granitic bedrock in north-central Washington. A low topographic divide in the northern third of the valley separates it into the No Name Creek basin on the south and Omak Creek basin on the north. Omak Creek is the larger stream and enters the valley through a narrow gorge in the eastern granite wall. Partly filled with unconsolidated sand, gravel, and silt to depths as great as 163 feet, the valley contains a ground-water reservoir which supplies four irrigation wells and several domestic-supply wells. The ground-water reservoir also feeds springs which give rise to No Name Creek, and it contributes some water to Omak Creek to the north. Under conditions of the pre-1976 development the ground-water divide was naturally about 3,000 feet north of Omak Creek gorge, and about 580 acre-feet of leakage from Omak Creek recharges the No Name Creek ground-water reservoir. By 1977, ground-water withdrawal of 994 acre-feet per year in No Name Creek basin had caused the ground-water divide to shift to a position about 4,000 feet north of the topographic divide. This increased the drainage area contributing to the No Name Creek ground-water reservoir for about three months so that during a year of normal flow a total of about 600 acre-feet of leakage from Omak Creek can be captured. It is postulated that as much as 1,100 acre-feet per year can be pumped in the central part of the reservoir. This pumpage would cause the ground-water divide to shift farther north, resulting in the capture of additional recharge from Omak Creek; the total leakage would be about 700 acre-feet per year. (Woodard-USGS)

Open-File Report↗

USGS1980

The Vermilion Granitic Complex — A new name for old rocks in northern Minnesota

The name Vermilion Granitic Complex is introduced for the heterogeneous granitic and migmatitic rocks of Archean (formerly called Precambrian W) age that occur north of the Vermilion district and south of the Kabetogama peninsula in northern Minnesota. The complex consists of the following subdivisions: Lac La Croix Granite, granite-rich migmatite, schist-rich migmatite, quartz-feldspar gneiss, hornblende quartz diorite and diorite, granodiorite and trondhjemite, amphibolite and amphibolite migmatite, older migmatite, biotite schist, Burntside Gneiss, and pegmatite. Because the name Vermilion Granitic Complex is proposed as a more inclusive group term, the more restricted name Vermilion Granite (Grout, 1923) is hereby abandoned. The new name Lac La Croix Granite is proposed for the uniform, light-pink biotite granite that occurs widely in the eastern and central parts of the complex. It is denned as having less than 5 percent of schistose or gneissic inclusions and is therefore more restricted than the Vermilion Granite of Grout (1926), which included substantial amounts of migmatitic rocks. The name Burntside Gneiss is adopted as a replacement for the older term Burntside Granite Gneiss, originally named by Grout (1926). This change is required by the conclusion that the rock is a metamorphosed dacite and not a metamorphosed granite, as formerly interpreted.

Minnesota↗

USGS2008

Geographic Names of Iceland's Glaciers: Historic and Modern

Climatic changes and resulting glacier fluctuations alter landscapes. In the past, such changes were noted by local residents who often documented them in historic annals; eventually, glacier variations were recorded on maps and scientific reports. In Iceland, 10 glacier place-names are to be found in Icelandic sagas, and one of Iceland's ice caps, Snaefellsjokull, appeared on maps of Iceland published in the 16th century. In the late 17th century, the first description of eight of Iceland's glaciers was written. Therefore, Iceland distinguishes itself in having a more than 300-year history of observations by Icelanders on its glaciers. A long-term collaboration between Oddur Sigurdsson and Richard S. Williams, Jr., led to the authorship of three books on the glaciers of Iceland. Much effort has been devoted to documenting historical glacier research and related nomenclature and to physical descriptions of Icelandic glaciers by Icelanders and other scientists from as far back as the Saga Age to recent (2008) times. The first book, Icelandic Ice Mountains, was published by the Icelandic Literary Society in 2004 in cooperation with the Icelandic Glaciological Society and the International Glaciological Society. Icelandic Ice Mountains was a glacier treatise written by Sveinn Palsson in 1795 and is the first English translation of this important scientific document. Icelandic Ice Mountains includes a Preface, including a summary of the history and facsimiles of page(s) from the original manuscript, a handwritten copy, and an 1815 manuscript (without maps and drawings) by Sveinn Palsson on the same subject which he wrote for Rev. Ebenezer Henderson; an Editor's Introduction; 82 figures, including facsimiles of Sveinn Palsson's original maps and perspective drawings, maps, and photographs to illustrate the text; a comprehensive Index of Geographic Place-Names and Other Names in the treatise; References, and 415 Endnotes. Professional Paper 1746 (this book) is the second of the three books; it is being published in both English and Icelandic editions. This book provides information about all named glaciers in Iceland, historic and modern. Descriptions, with geographic coordinates, and bibliographic citations to all glacier place-names on published maps, books, and scientific articles are included. Maps, oblique aerial photographs, ground photographs, and satellite images document each of the 269 modern named glaciers of Iceland. The third book, Glaciers of Iceland, is Chapter D of the 11-chapter [volume] U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1386-A-K. Chapter D includes a 1:500,000-scale Map of the Glaciers of Iceland; it is a comprehensive historical and modern review and assessment of what is currently known about glaciers in Iceland's eight Regional Glacier Groups from a review of the scientific literature and from analysis of maps and remotely sensed data (ground, airborne, and satellite); topics include geology and geography, climate and climate variability, types of glaciers, history of glacier variation (including the 21 surge-type glaciers), and frequency and magnitude of volcanic and lacustrine jokulhlaups.

Professional Paper↗

USGS1956

Geographic names of Antarctica

The geographic nomenclature of Antarctica was long in need of an overall systematic treatment, objective in approach and based upon thorough examination of all the evidence. The results of such treatment over a period of about three years were presented in Geographical Names of Antarctica, Special Publication No. 86 of the Board on Geographical Names, in May 1947, two supplements to which were issued in 1949 and 1951. The continuing program since that publication has now covered most of the geographic naming in Antarctica. As research has filled in many of the previous gaps in knowledge, a number of names have been modified and minor amendments have been made in the policies. This revised publication brings together the greatly enlarged body of names officially standardized for use by the United States Government, together with new pertinent background information.

Gazetteer↗

USGS2023

Guidance on geologic names usage for authors and peer reviewers of geologic maps and reports—A primer on stratigraphic nomenclature

Introduction Consistent and effective communication is essential for scientific publications. Scientific communication requires clear explanations and precise discussion of data and interpretations. “Authors must strive for clarity, consistency, and correct usage of both formal and informal terminology because of the complex interactions between time and space interpreted from the presently existing stratigraphic record” (Owen, 2009). The importance of consistent stratigraphic nomenclature as a means of effective geologic communication has been recognized since the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) established the Geologic Names Committee (GNC) in 1899 to evaluate and address issues of stratigraphic nomenclature. The GNC currently consists of geologists from the USGS and the Association of American State Geologists. In an effort towards codifying stratigraphic nomenclature, the North American Commission on Stratigraphic Nomenclature developed the North American Stratigraphic Code (referred to hereafter as “the Code”; North American Commission on Stratigraphic Nomenclature [NACSN], 2021) in 1983 by revising and updating preexisting codes that were then in use, such as the International Stratigraphic Guide [ISG] (International Subcommission on Stratigraphic Classification [ISSC], 1976; see also, ISSC, 1994). Consistency in geologic names usage increases accuracy and quality of scientific publications. All formal USGS publications require a geologic names review (GNR) if any stratigraphic, lithodemic, geochronologic, or chronostratigraphic terminology is used. This review of, and guidance for, geologic names usage and stratigraphic principles should be referred to by authors and peer reviewers, not just those who conduct GNRs, and its guidance should be incorporated into their publications to improve geoscience communication. The notes and guidance in the sections that follow should be considered by USGS geologists and editors while writing or reviewing manuscripts that include geologic names and stratigraphic concepts. This primer may also be used by geologists and editors outside of the USGS for consistency with their publications.

Professional Paper↗

USGS2016

Possibility and challenges of conversion of current virus species names to Linnaean binomials

Botanical, mycological, zoological, and prokaryotic species names follow the Linnaean format, consisting of an italicized Latinized binomen with a capitalized genus name and a lower case species epithet (e.g., Homo sapiens ). Virus species names, however, do not follow a uniform format, and, even when binomial, are not Linnaean in style. In this thought exercise, we attempted to convert all currently official names of species included in the virus family Arenaviridae and the virus order Mononegavirales to Linnaean binomials, and to identify and address associated challenges and concerns. Surprisingly, this endeavor was not as complicated or time-consuming as even the authors of this article expected when conceiving the experiment.

Systematic Biology↗

USGS1998

History and tradition, or contemporary ornithology? Why ornithological journals should not have bird names

Ask any non-ornithologist to predict the prestige of the following journals, based on the name alone: American Birds, Auk, Bluebird, Condor, Emu, Forktail, Gerfaut, Ibis, Journal of Avian Biology, and Journal of Field Ornithology . The results always will be that the first one and the last two are placed in one category, and the blizzard of bird-named journals in another, lower category. When that same non-ornithologist is called upon to evaluate the publication records of ornithologists, those with important papers in bird-named journals likely will suffer lower rankings. If lucky, an ornithologist under review will receive support from an internationally distinguished ornithological colleague who will take explicit pains to argue that publication in The Auk is a meritorious professional accomplishment. Such arguments, however, may not counteract the damage of a single referee's sneering at the names of the journals in which a bird biologist has chosen to publish. One cannot overstate the importance of the serendipitous collection of peer reviews that determines whether ornithologists get and then keep their first academic jobs, receive tenure, are promoted, are evaluated fairly, and, most important, achieve and maintain the respect of colleagues in other biological disciplines.

The Auk↗

USGS1993

The U.S. Board on Geographic Names publications catalog

This catalog highlights the various publications produced by the BGN and summarizes their contents. Some of these publications are free; others are reasonably priced. All publications and their prices are on a separate price list included with this catalog. This price list will be updated as needed to reflect new and revised editions, as well as changes in prices. For further information about the BGN or on geographic names in the United States or Antarctica, please refer to page 12 for the address and phone number of the BGN Executive Secretary for Domestic Names. For further information on geographic names in foreign countries and areas, please refer to page 12 for the address and phone number of the BGN Executive Secretary for Foreign Names.

Monograph↗

USGS1989

Authorities and organizations involved with geographic names - 1989: United States, Canada, Mexico

There is a need for accurate and standard geographic names usage in all levels of government, industry, commerce, communications, education, and research. There is also a growing number of organizations in North America that are, fully or partly, involved in the scholarly study of geographic names. This report is a list of official national, State/Provincial, and regional provincial authorities concerned with name standardization, and of organizations involved with the study of geographic names, in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The appendixes are copies of documents that provide additional information about the organization, policies, procedures, and publications of some of these organizations.

Report↗

USGS1995

Comments on the status of revived old names for some North American birds

We discuss 44 instances of the use of generic, specific, or subspecific names that differ from those generally in use for North American (sensu AOU 1957) birds. These names are generally older than the names presently used and have been revived on the basis of priority. We examine the basis for the proposed changes and make recommendations as to which names should properly be used in an effort to promote nomenclatural stability in accordance with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature.

The Auk↗

USGS2015

A further note on the scientific name of Bullocks’ Oriole

Chesser (2013) intended to introduce a justified emendation to Icterus bullockii under Article 32.5.1 of the Code (ICZN 1999), because the name honors both William Bullock, Sr., and William Bullock, Jr. However, the correction bullockorum is "incorrect" and therefore is an unjustified emendation (Article 33.2.3). Under the assumption that the name Bullock was latinized (cf. Article 31.1.1) to Bullockius (bullocki– + the nominative case ending –us) and therefore that the name bullockii comprises the stem bullocki– + the genitive case ending –i, the justified correction bullockiorum is required.

Zootaxa↗

USGS2014

The valid generic name for red-backed voles (Muroidea: Cricetidae: Arvicolinae): Restatement of the case for Myodes Pallas, 1811

In view of contradictions in the recent literature, the valid genus-group name to be applied to northern red-backed voles— Myodes Pallas, 1811, or Clethrionomys Tilesius, 1850—is reviewed. To develop the thesis that Myodes (type species, Mus rutilus Pallas, 1779) is the correct name, our discussion explores the 19th-century taxonomic works that bear on the relevant taxa, the transition in zoological codes apropos the identification of type species, and past nomenclatural habits in cases where no type species was originally indicated. We conclude that Myodes is the senior name to use for the genus-group taxon that includes the Holarctic species rutilus and frame this conclusion within a synonymy of the genus.

Journal of Mammalogy↗

USGS1996

The proper name of the neotropical tree boa often referred to as Corallus enhydris (Serpentes: Boidae)

Confusion regarding the application of the proper scientific name for the common Neotropical tree boa has existed since Linnaeus described Boa enydris and Boa hortulana in 1758. We review the nomenclatural history of the species and point out the misapplication of scientific names that have characterized this form. Our review indicates that the proper scientific name for this highly variable, wide-ranging arboreal boid is Corallus hortulanus, not Corallus enydris, as has been used so frequently in recent years.

Journal of Herpetology↗

USGS1984

Geographic Names Information System

The Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) is an automated data system developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to standardize and disseminate information on geographic names. GNIS provides primary information for all known places, features, and areas in the United States identified by a proper name. The information in the system can be manipulated to meet varied needs. You can incorporate information from GNIS into your own data base for special applications.

Report↗

USGS1987

Geographic names information system

This Data Users Guide is the result of the efforts of a number of people who have contributed to the research, development, and implementation of the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS). Roger L. Payne prepared and wrote this Data Users Guide, which is designed to provide a description of the data in each of the data elements of the four data bases of GNIS. The GNIS program, which includes the automated names system and the National Gazetteer program, is a coordinated effort under the direction of Donald J. Orth, Chief of the Branch of Geographic Names. The automated system was initially developed by Sam Stulberg and Roger L. Payne. System enhancement and software development is coordinated by Judy J. Stella, head programmer for GNIS, and special projects coordinator is Louis A. Yost IV. Coordination of the research and compilation of certain gazetteers is directed by Robin D. Worcester with research assistance and support from Jon Campbell, Linda S. Davis, and Nancy Engel.

Data Users Guide↗

USGS1986

Subspecies of the greater scaup and their names

The name Fuligula mariloides Vigors, presently used by many authors for a subspecies of the Greater Scaup, Aythya marila, was originally proposed for the Lesser Scaup, A. afinis, and may not be used in combination with the name marila. The name mariloides has been applied to a population of Greater Scaup in Kamchatka and the Commander Islands, supposedly distinguished by small size and dark dorsal color, or for that population and the one in North America, otherwise known as A. m. nearctica. Evidence for a subspecifically distinct population in eastern Asia is lacking, and A. marila is best considered to consist of only the Eurasian A. m. marila and the American A. m. nearctica. There is some interchange of the two subspecies in migration.

The Wilson Bulletin↗

USGS2009

Response to the Point of View of Gregory B. Pauly, David M. Hillis, and David C. Cannatella, by the Anuran Subcommittee of the SSAR/HL/ASIH Scientific and Standard English Names List

The Point of View by Gregory Pauly, David Hillis, and David Cannatella misrepresents the motives and activities of the anuran subcommittee of the Scientific and Standard English Names Committee, contains a number of misleading statements, omits evidence and references to critical literature that have already rejected or superseded their positions, and cloaks the limitations of their nomenclatural approach in ambiguous language. Their Point of View is not about promoting transparency in the process of constructing the English Names list, assuring that its taxonomy is adequately reviewed, or promoting nomenclatural stability in any global sense. Rather, their Point of View focuses in large part on a single publication, The Amphibian Tree of Life , which is formally unrelated to the Standard English Names List , and promotes an approach to nomenclature mistakenly asserted by them to be compatible with both the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature and one of its competitors, the PhyloCode .

Herpetologica↗

USGS2015

Comment on Spracklandus Hoser, 2009 (Reptilia, Serpentes, ELAPIDAE): request for confirmation of availability of the generic name and for the nomenclatural validation of the journal in which it was published (Case 3601; BZN 70:234–237; 71:30–38; 133-135,181-182 ,252-253)

In Case 3601 Raymond Hoser has asked the Commission to validate for the purposes of nomenclature the name Spracklandus Hoser, 2009, and ‘the journal in which it was published,’ issue 7 of the Australasian Journal of Herpetology (AJH). We note that the entire run of AJH has been written, edited, and published solely by Hoser. Although his requests to the Commission were presented as narrow and, in his words, ‘routine matters,’ we are convinced that they represent an important tipping-point with broad implications of major concern for zoological taxonomy and nomenclature as a whole and, by extension, the greater scientific community. Since Hoser’s actions and works have failed to follow scientific best practices (e.g. Turtle Taxonomy Working Group, 2007, 2014; Kaiser et al., 2013; Kaiser, 2014) and both the Commission’s general Recommendations and Code of Ethics in Appendix A, the global herpetological community has widely rejected his taxonomic decisions and resultant nomenclature. This has unfortunately caused a confusing dual nomenclature to develop in the herpetological community, with most boycotting or ignoring Hoser’s 700+ new names coined in the AJH, while he and a few personal followers actively promote their usage. We believe that suppression of the name Spracklandus , and all issues of AJH, is the only effective way to bring this contentious and confusing issue to resolution. The plenary power available under Article 81.1 of the Code exist specifically to allow the Commission to make rulings in individual cases that disturb stability and cause confusion, whether the works are Code-compliant or not. We maintain that it is in the interest of nomenclatural stability, not only for herpetology, but for all of zoological taxonomy, that the plenary power be invoked to declare the works in AJH unavailable, regardless of any narrow interpretation of their technical Code-compliance. We present our arguments for rejection of the validity of AJH in the following commentary. In view of the wide-reaching implications of this case for all of zoology, and reflecting the deep and broad-based community concern over these issues, our contributing authors include 70 global scientific leaders and accomplished amateurs from a wide variety of zoological disciplines.

Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature↗