Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Water Science and Application”

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.

511 records · Page 29Linked to original sources
USGS2022

A comparison of orbital-resolution, Late Pleistocene Alkenone and foraminiferal assemblage-based sea surface temperature reconstructions from the Southwest Pacific

Global and regional reconstructions of past climate conditions often incorporate sea surface temperature (SST) estimates from multiple proxies because not every paleotemperature proxy is applicable in all geographic locations. This practice of assimilating estimates from different proxies in global or regional temperature syntheses makes the implicit assumption that estimates derived from different proxies can be meaningfully intercompared. However, evidence to support the validity of this assumption is limited. Using paleotemperature data from sediments collected from ODP Site 1125 in the Southwest Pacific, we conduct a ∼1 Myr, orbital-scale SST proxy comparison of a recently published alkenone-derived SST record with a previously published foraminiferal assemblage-based SST record. These alkenone and foraminiferal assemblage SST datasets show strong structural similarity and yield remarkably similar estimates for basic climate metrics, including mean, median, standard deviation, and range. Statistical analysis indicates that the correlation between the two SST records is highly significant. In the spectral domain, the records share the same dominant 100 kyr beat, are coherent and in phase with each other at this frequency, and have the same coherence and phase relationship with benthic foraminiferal δ 18 O. Results from this work demonstrate that these two proxies would yield very similar estimates for the paleoclimate metrics most commonly used in empirical paleoclimate reconstructions that seek to document the evolution of climate over this interval. However, significant disparities between SST estimates derived from the two proxies exist for some time periods, particularly during glacial and interglacial extrema. This comparison suggests that treating estimates from these proxies as equivalent in studies that focus on short time windows (e.g. a few thousand to tens-of-thousands of years), particularly in investigations that seek to characterize glacial or interglacial extrema, could be potentially problematic. However, the sensitive location of Site 1125, just north of the Subtropical Front, likely accentuates the difference between temperature estimates from these proxies, which may be attenuated in other oceanographic settings. We attribute the discrepancies between the two SST records to two main causes: seasonal leakages of cold water across the Subtropical Front during glacial extrema and differential seasonality of maximum alkenone and foraminiferal production.

Quaternary Science Reviews↗
USGS2020

An open source database for the synthesis of soil radiocarbon data: ISRaD version 1.0

Radiocarbon is a critical constraint on our estimates of the timescales of soil carbon cycling that can aid in identifying mechanisms of carbon stabilization and destabilization and improve the forecast of soil carbon response to management or environmental change. Despite the wealth of soil radiocarbon data that have been reported over the past 75 years, the ability to apply these data to global-scale questions is limited by our capacity to synthesize and compare measurements generated using a variety of methods. Here, we present the International Soil Radiocarbon Database (ISRaD; http://soilradiocarbon.org , last access: 16 December 2019), an open-source archive of soil data that include reported measurements from bulk soils, distinct soil carbon pools isolated in the laboratory by a variety of soil fractionation methods, samples of soil gas or water collected interstitially from within an intact soil profile, CO 2 gas isolated from laboratory soil incubations, and fluxes collected in situ from a soil profile. The core of ISRaD is a relational database structured around individual datasets (entries) and organized hierarchically to report soil radiocarbon data, measured at different physical and temporal scales as well as other soil or environmental properties that may also be measured and may assist with interpretation and context. Anyone may contribute their own data to the database by entering it into the ISRaD template and subjecting it to quality assurance protocols. ISRaD can be accessed through (1) a web-based interface, (2) an R package (ISRaD), or (3) direct access to code and data through the GitHub repository, which hosts both code and data. The design of ISRaD allows for participants to become directly involved in the management, design, and application of ISRaD data. The synthesized dataset is available in two forms: the original data as reported by the authors of the datasets and an enhanced dataset that includes ancillary geospatial data calculated within the ISRaD framework. ISRaD also provides data management tools in the ISRaD-R package that provide a starting point for data analysis; as an open-source project, the broader soil community is invited and encouraged to add data, tools, and ideas for improvement. As a whole, ISRaD provides resources to aid our evaluation of soil dynamics across a range of spatial and temporal scales. The ISRaD v1.0 dataset is archived and freely available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2613911 (Lawrence et al., 2019).

Earth System Science Data↗
USGS2021

Capacity assessment for Earth Monitoring, Analysis, and Prediction (EarthMAP) and future integrated monitoring and predictive science at the U.S. Geological Survey

Executive Summary Managers of our Nation’s resources face unprecedented challenges driven by the convergence of increasing, competing societal demands and a changing climate that affects the stability, vulnerability, and predictability of those resources. To help meet these challenges, the scientific community must take advantage of all available technologies, data, and integrative Earth systems modeling capacity to better inform resource and risk management decisions. This is the overarching goal of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Monitoring, Analysis, and Prediction (EarthMAP) vision: “By 2030, the USGS will deliver well integrated observations and predictions of the future state of natural systems—water, ecosystems, energy, minerals, hazards—at regional and national scales, working primarily with federal, state, and academic partners to develop and operate the capability” (U.S. Geological Survey, 2021). Providing more integrated Earth systems science and actionable information to decision makers, stakeholders, and the public requires a better understanding of the depth and distribution of existing capacity (capabilities, tools, and techniques) across the Bureau. Identifying existing capacity is also a critical first step toward gap analysis and targeted investments to increase capacity over time. The USGS formed a Capacity Assessment Team (CAT) and charged it with (1) conducting a Request for Information (RFI) to identify existing USGS expertise and activities supportive of integrated and predictive science to inform decision making, (2) developing a strategy and proof-of-concept for a continuously updated capacity assessment capability, and (3) identifying lessons learned to inform development of best practices for future capacity assessment efforts. The RFI took the form of a survey, with content guided by the science and technology needs identified in a USGS report titled “Grand Challenges for Integrated U.S. Geological Survey Science—A Workshop Report” (Jenni and others, 2017). The 44-question survey provided respondents the ability to rate their level of experience with a suite of priority disciplines, analysis and modeling approaches, technologies, and stakeholder engagement strategies and to enter optional narrative text for supporting context. An introductory portion focused on general science capacity assessment, followed by three sections targeting capabilities related to the foundational components of EarthMAP: (1) data and information integration, (2) integrated predictive science, and (3) actionable information. The survey results provided a high-level snapshot of USGS capacity in the targeted areas. Respondents (1,035 individuals) represented approximately 13 percent of the USGS across all mission areas and regions. Seventy-four percent of the respondents held a science-focused position title and the remainder had position titles in information technology, computer science, management, administrative, or other (contractors, volunteers, emeritus, and unknown). To provide greater insight into respondent capabilities and activities, information from the U.S. Department of the Interior and USGS enterprise information systems were used to further characterize topical expertise and organizational associations of survey respondents. To address the ongoing need to assess the Bureau’s capacity to address integrated predictive science priorities, the CAT developed a software-based proof-of-concept called the Integrated Science Assessment Information Database (iSAID) for assembling various information sources together toward making the full extent of USGS capabilities and scientific assets available for routine capacity assessment. This proof-of-concept is intended to serve as a catalyst for further development. The process of implementing the EarthMAP capacity assessment survey, analyzing survey responses, and developing the proof-of-concept resulted in lessons learned, findings, and recommendations. Example scenarios throughout the report demonstrate how capacity assessment data can inform science planning. Three overarching findings and recommendations are: (1) Finding: Capacity is limited in some critical disciplines, skills, and technology applications, but “sufficient” depends on the question and the need relative to availability at a given point in time. Recommendation: Develop an on-demand capacity assessment framework that enables rapid identification and evaluation of existing and available expertise to support decision needs as they arise. (2) Finding: Institutional barriers and lack of awareness constrain the ability of USGS staff to adopt new technologies, collaborate across administrative boundaries, and deliver actionable information to stakeholders in a timely manner. However, these barriers are not universally experienced. Recommendation: Pursue more targeted inquiries to clarify which institutional barriers are obstructing the adoption of new technologies and approaches or the sharing of expertise and equipment across organizational and regional boundaries. These inquiries should inform USGS leadership, mission areas, and regions whether policies can be revised or whether a lack of understanding is creating perceived obstacles. Highlight cases when staff have successfully adopted new technologies and approaches to advance EarthMAP priorities and provide actionable information in a timely manner to spread awareness of how perceived obstacles can be navigated and overcome when appropriate. (3) Finding: Examples of people and projects integrating across disciplines and scales and applying advanced approaches to meet complex stakeholder needs exist. Such examples provide transfer value across the spectrum from approach to decision making. Many projects, already underway, appear to meet elements of the EarthMAP vision, and the USGS has people who can provide leadership in multiple types of specific integrated science efforts. Recommendation: Use these findings as a starting point for near-term strategic planning for integrated science. Highlight, incentivize, and build on existing interdisciplinary predictive science and information delivery activities across the USGS to advance toward further realization of an EarthMAP capacity. The CAT efforts to develop and assess existing USGS capacity to advance the EarthMAP vision revealed a fundamental challenge for not only this effort but any effort to assess existing capacity: A considerable amount of thought, time, and effort is required to survey and assess capabilities and tools available to support a given need, yet best results are still likely to provide an incomplete assessment. To better meet the frequent need to assess capabilities, tools, products, and projects that address an expressed strategic priority, the CAT proposes the concept of an on-demand capacity assessment framework supported by a software package that dynamically pulls and integrates information from existing USGS information systems and public domain registries. Although existing USGS enterprise information systems currently lack the structure, cross-system consistency, interoperability, and stability to support a continuously updated capacity assessment capability, we identify reasonable near-term steps to improve the utility of information gathered on expertise and project capacity and to improve the consistency and completeness of information and the ability of USGS systems to share that information. The ability to search and characterize this information will make future assessments of capacity faster, more complete, more efficient, and more targeted. This approach would grow the Bureau’s capacity knowledge over time, iteratively improving the ability to access, leverage, and synthesize existing capabilities and assets as well as identify and fill critical gaps. The greatest promise for developing integrated science could lie in linking across existing projects and expertise to create a multi-project capacity for addressing large, complex environmental issues.

Open-File Report↗
USGS2009

Changes in the chemistry of shallow groundwater related to the 2008 injection of CO2 at the ZERT field site, Bozeman, Montana

Approximately 300 kg/day of food-grade CO 2 was injected through a perforated pipe placed horizontally 2–2.3 m deep during July 9–August 7, 2008 at the MSU-ZERT field test to evaluate atmospheric and near-surface monitoring and detection techniques applicable to the subsurface storage and potential leakage of CO 2 . As part of this multidisciplinary research project, 80 samples of water were collected from 10 shallow monitoring wells (1.5 or 3.0 m deep) installed 1–6 m from the injection pipe, at the southwestern end of the slotted section (zone VI), and from two distant monitoring wells. The samples were collected before, during, and following CO 2 injection. The main objective of study was to investigate changes in the concentrations of major, minor, and trace inorganic and organic compounds during and following CO 2 injection. The ultimate goals were (1) to better understand the potential of groundwater quality impacts related to CO 2 leakage from deep storage operations, (2) to develop geochemical tools that could provide early detection of CO 2 intrusion into underground sources of drinking water (USDW), and (3) to test the predictive capabilities of geochemical codes against field data. Field determinations showed rapid and systematic changes in pH (7.0–5.6), alkalinity (400–1,330 mg/l as HCO 3 ), and electrical conductance (600–1,800 μS/cm) following CO 2 injection in samples collected from the 1.5 m-deep wells. Laboratory results show major increases in the concentrations of Ca (90–240 mg/l), Mg (25–70 mg/l), Fe (5–1,200 ppb), and Mn (5–1,400 ppb) following CO 2 injection. These chemical changes could provide early detection of CO 2 leakage into shallow groundwater from deep storage operations. Dissolution of observed carbonate minerals and desorption-ion exchange resulting from lowered pH values following CO 2 injection are the likely geochemical processes responsible for the observed increases in the concentrations of solutes; concentrations generally decreased temporarily following four significant precipitation events. The DOC values obtained are 5 ± 2 mg/l, and the variations do not correlate with CO 2 injection. CO 2 injection, however, is responsible for detection of BTEX (e.g. benzene, 0–0.8 ppb), mobilization of metals, the lowered pH values, and increases in the concentrations of other solutes in groundwater. The trace metal and BTEX concentrations are all significantly below the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs). Sequential leaching of core samples is being carried out to investigate the source of metals and other solutes.

Montana↗
USGS2024

Pilot framework for fish habitat assessments across tidal and non tidal waters in the Patuxent River Basin

As part of the 2014 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement, all Bay States and the District of Columbia have committed to improving the condition of the Bay, which includes a goal to achieve sustainable fisheries. One outcome under that broad goal is improved effectiveness of fish habitat conservation and preservation efforts. In support of that outcome, the U.S. Geological Survey Eastern Ecological Science Center (USGS-EESC) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NOAA-NCCOS) are actively developing datasets, methods, and analyses to conduct fish habitat assessments in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, guided by recommendations from a regional stakeholder workshop held by the Chesapeake Bay Program’s (CBP) Fish Habitat Action Team (FHAT) in 2018. The joint USGS and NOAA team has been collaborating on methods for conducting inland and estuarine assessments and exploring whether a seamless headwater to estuary assessment could be developed. The goals of this assessment are to benefit both State and Federal fisheries managers, help advance fisheries science, and provide beneficial information for the public. While past national and regional assessments (e.g. the National Fish Habitat Partnership National Assessment) treated inland and estuarine fish habitat conditions separately due to differences in environments, GIS data representation, and data availability, a seamless habitat assessment could be of value for a broad range of stakeholders as many fish species, several of which are invasive or under federal jurisdiction, use habitats across both inland and estuarine waters. This project developed a pilot framework, explored and tested methods necessary for a finer scale, seamless assessment across both inland and estuarine waters, and demonstrated its use. Although there was interest by the CBP FHAT for the generation of a Baywide fish habitat assessment that spanned tidal salt, tidal fresh, warm non-tidal and cold non-tidal waters, there are a myriad of implementation details and considerations around conducting a Baywide assessment across all four of these general habitat areas. Therefore, the practical need to conduct a tributary-specific pilot assessment arose. At the beginning of this pilot process, members of the FHAT were presented with a decision matrix to choose a study basin using factors such as data availability and tributary size. FHAT members chose the Patuxent River basin, which has been relatively well sampled and studied. Several spatial frameworks were considered before selection of an inclusive gridded framework for summary and analysis that represented inland drainage networks and landscape influences as well as estuarine bathymetry. A suite of landscape and in-water stressor variables were summarized into the framework and were largely generalized over time. In order to assess the viability of the framework, we chose to use species distribution modeling for each of the species to test the framework’s ability to predict habitat use of non-tidal resident, estuarine resident, and migratory species. Tessellated darter (Etheostoma olmstedi), American eel (Anguilla rostrata), and white perch (Morone americana) were chosen as illustrative fish species based on data availability, and differences in life history and habitat use. A nested modeling approach, which involved successive model runs at multiple scales (1000m, 100m, and 10m raster grids) was developed to examine differences in variable importance at different spatial scales and to enhance modeling efficiency. For white perch, a complementary modeling analysis was performed for variables available only in estuarine waters. For all testing, an ensemble modeling approach was conducted, using a suite of potential statistical techniques driven by model strength and variable predictive power. The statistical testing that we conducted was intended only to test the framework and modeling approach, and not to definitively predict all habitats where specific fish species might be present. The modeling we conducted to test the framework did have some limitations. For example, the spatial distribution of favorable habitat areas for white perch was likely influenced by the predominance of fish survey locations near the center channel of the river and the use of generalized in-water conditions. For all species, the use of juvenile and adult fish survey data limits the estimation of habitat use to those life stages. Despite such limitations of the data inputs and modeling approach, we found the framework could seamlessly predict fish habitat distribution across freshwater and tidal environments and integrate the influence of landscape stressors with local in-water factors. The developed framework presented to the Sustainable Fisheries Goal Implementation Team (GIT) and FHAT is informative and could potentially be used for other modeling applications in the Chesapeake Bay watershed and elsewhere. In particular the framework and modeling approach lend themselves to evaluating living resource distributions and underlying habitat conditions in shallow tidal waters and beyond, as recommended by the recent Comprehensive Evaluation of System Response (CESR) report from the Chesapeake Bay Program.

Maryland↗
USGS2021

Toward improved decision-support tools for Delta Smelt management actions

The Collaborative Science and Adaptive Management Program (CSAMP) has endorsed a goal of reversing the recent downward trajectory of the Delta Smelt population within 5-10 generations, with the long-term aim of establishing a self-sustaining population. An ambitious agenda of management actions is planned, and more management actions are being considered. This White Paper furthers one of the recommendations in the 2019 Delta Smelt Science Plan – the need to predict the potential ecological effects of taking a management action. Existing statistical models can be highly informative in assessing the response of Delta Smelt to changing system conditions and management actions. However, management actions can shift or alter conditions in ways that models based on analysis of historical data may not be able to represent, and short-term or localized effects may be missed with models designed to assess effects at the population level. Decision support tools (DSTs) are computer-based tools developed to assist decision-making, often combining computationally intensive analysis and spatial mapping of environmental relationships. DSTs can be used in planning processes that evaluate an array of actions, such as in Structured Decision Making (SDM), where DSTs are needed to compare among alternatives. DSTs can also be used to explore the potential effects of different approaches to implementing management actions. The goal of this White Paper is to identify plausible options for DSTs that could be developed for future use to evaluate management actions that seek to either reverse the decline of Delta Smelt or minimize or mitigate the effects of other water management actions. Different types of management actions lead to different needs for DSTs. This White Paper was developed using three types of actions currently being considered to enhance the Delta Smelt population: Supplementation with Hatchery Fish, Summer-Fall Habitat, and Food Enhancement actions. These three management actions target different parts of the estuary and different processes, with a variety of possible metrics to gauge performance. Three DSTs are proposed that collectively address management questions related to the management actions considered, with each requiring a slightly different set of processes to be included and producing an array of outputs at varying spatial and temporal scales: DST 1. Modeling Fish Movement, Survival, and Reproduction Across Their Range. This DST can address management questions that require information about Delta Smelt spatial distribution and movement. • DST 1 could be used to compare conditions with and without management actions in place, how the management action performs among different types of water years (with varied flow and associated abiotic conditions), and to assess relative change with different variations and strategies of the management actions. • DST 2. Changes in Habitat Conditions and Delta Smelt Response. This DST is intended to evaluate combinations of conditions that are considered to provide suitable habitat for Delta Smelt, and Delta Smelt response. Delta Smelt habitat is generally described as open water with low salinity (0 to 6), turbidity of at least 12 NTU, suitable temperature conditions, and sufficient food availability to support growth. • DST 3. Regional Effects of Food Subsidy. This DSTs seeks to evaluate effectiveness of food enhancement actions by providing information on responses of the immediate targets of the action (i.e., phytoplankton or zooplankton) and tracing those to projected growth responses of Delta Smelt. There is not a single DST that adequately addresses management questions relevant to all management actions, although there is some overlap in the management questions each of the three DSTs can address. For each of the DSTs a substantial foundation of models and approaches already exists and modeling has already been applied to several of the management actions described. However, a number of outstanding issues remain for further development of the proposed DSTs. These are summarized in this White Paper together with potential approaches that could be applied or tested. Some components for the DSTs are already available and thus development could be relatively easy. However, for several of the topics identified there are gaps in knowledge that currently limit formulation of model structure and process representations. This presents challenges to readily incorporate some needed mechanisms into the models. Eleven next steps, aligned with relevant DSTs, are outlined. The next steps vary in their complexity or technical ‘lift’ required. Many build on existing work, or methods and approaches that have already been developed or are underway, while others require additional thinking to establish a viable approach. Some interim utility for decisions could be gained during initial development of the DSTs with further features added over time. Development of a DST requires engagement of both managers and scientists. Identifying the outputs and resolution needed for management purposes early in development of any DST is essential for effective pursuit of next steps and suitable approaches to address challenges. Dialog between managers and technical experts also informs what process-based simulation can do, and what tradeoffs are acceptable to meet a given purpose. To further develop the DSTs outlined here for application in the estuary requires: - Engagement of a committed group of technical experts with appropriate expertise. - The development of a coordinated workplan including appropriate project management and tracking. - Dialog between potential users (i.e., managers and policy makers) and technical experts. - Resources to pursue DST development including personnel and computational resources. This White Paper demonstrates the potential for moving toward DSTs for a variety of management actions in support of Delta Smelt that include mechanistic representations of physical and biological processes. Through focused effort from technical experts, managers and policy makers, DSTs can be developed to provide quantitative predictions of management effects on the ecosystem, targeting the changes the management actions seek to achieve, how these effects compare to ambient conditions, and how the effects vary among water year types or with timing and location of actions. Importantly, solid foundations exist which can be leveraged, refined, and built upon to specifically inform current and future management decisions.

White Paper↗
USGS2022

Contaminants of emerging concern in the Great Lakes: Science to inform management practices for protecting the health and integrity of wildlife populations from adverse effects: GLRI action plan I, focus area 1, goal 5

Executive Summary: Under Action Plan I (2010-2014) of the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI), Federal and Academic partners began an investigation of the presence and distribution of contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) in the Great Lakes and potential impacts on fish and wildlife. The term CECs is applied to a broad range of chemicals that are currently in use but for which we currently lack good understanding of whether fish, wildlife, or humans are being exposed and/or whether negative health or environmental effects are expected if exposure occurs. Pharmaceuticals, personal care products, flame retardants, many current use pesticides, and poly- and perfluorinated chemicals are some well-known groups of CECs, but there is no definitive or comprehensive list that can be used to support the management of CECs to reduce impacts on the Great Lakes ecosystem. Four overarching goals were identified for this collaborative investigation: 1. Evaluate the sources, occurrence, and distribution of CECs across the Great Lakes Basin. 2. Examine associations between the distribution of CECs and land-use patterns. 3. Review both scientific literature and field-generated data to determine the potential for CECs to cause adverse effects on Great Lakes fish and wildlife populations. 4. Develop efficient strategies to survey and/or monitor for threats that CECs may pose in order to take effective management actions before those threats evolve into large scale impacts on Great Lakes ecosystems or the services they provide. Achievement of these goals ensures progress towards Focus Area 1: Toxic Substances and Areas of Concern from GLRI Action Plan I, Goal 5: “ The health and integrity of wildlife populations and habitat are protected from adverse chemical and biological effects associated with the presence of toxic substances in the Great Lakes Basin ”. This large-scale research effort was comprised of individual and collaborative projects from multiple federal agencies and academic institutions, involving over 85 investigators, and overseen by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 5, Great Lakes National Program Office. Partners include the United States Geological Survey, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Saint Cloud State University, the U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Key findings: 1. Contaminants of emerging concern were found throughout the monitored Great Lakes tributaries, but types and concentrations vary in association with regional land use. CECs were detected in nearly all samples collected. The type and concentration of the specific contaminants detected varied considerably among field sites and in association with land use type, such as urban, agricultural, wetland, 2 or forest. Contaminants were detected in the water column, sediment, and tissues of all species surveyed in the current work (mussels, aquatic insects, fish, and insect-eating birds). 2. There were over 20 contaminants for which CEC concentrations approached or exceeded those reported to cause toxicity in laboratory experiments. This was based on detection in water, sediments and or biota at one or more field sites. These contaminants represent compounds that warrant further investigation and monitoring with respect to potential impacts in certain areas of the Great Lakes basin. Based on the present investigation, compounds of greatest concern include: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, associated with oil-based products and combustion of organic matter; atrazine, an herbicide; dichlorvos, an insecticide; and ibuprofen and venlafaxine, both pharmaceuticals. 3. Results suggest that mixtures of CECs presently found in most Great Lakes tributary locations surveyed may elicit subtle biological effects, but likely are not, alone, causing obvious detriment to current communities of fish and wildlife. CECs detected in the Great Lakes were associated with subtle biological effects like changes in gene expression, altered circulating glucose, etc. in both wild-caught and laboratory-reared organisms. These effects were generally not indicative of reproductive failure or mortality. However, the effects may have more serious implications when combined with other sources of stress like habitat degradation, changing climate conditions, and competition with invasive species. Due to limited historical data, it is unknown whether severe CEC-related impacts have already affected aquatic communities in waterbodies that have received long-term inputs of these contaminants. Likewise, under Action Plan I, biological effects were not necessarily evaluated at the sites where CEC concentrations exceeding laboratory toxicity thresholds were detected. As a result, strategic, ongoing surveillance and monitoring of CECs is warranted. This collaborative investigation resulted in new tools, approaches, and data that can be used to inform and support the management of CECs to reduce their impacts on Great Lakes natural resources. The following products of this research effort are available through https://communities.geoplatform.gov/glri/ or by contacting the investigators (see technical chapters found in Appendices A-F): 1. Database of CEC occurrence and concentrations in US tributary streams. The database includes CEC detections in water, sediment, and fish and wildlife tissues, and represents the most comprehensive survey of CECs in the Great Lakes Region. 2. Synopses of results and key findings. Integrated summaries of results, conclusions, and management implications of the CEC research are available through reports, topical fact sheets, and presentations. 3. Technical publications: This collaborative research effort has resulted in over 50 peer-reviewed publications, agency reports, and data releases that can be of use to resource managers, the scientific community, and members of the public. 4. Innovative tools. Innovative monitoring devices, sampling equipment, conceptual frameworks, and software applications were developed over the course of this 3 research. These tools are transferable to stakeholders via internet accessibility or via specifications, instructions, and demonstration detailed in technical publications. Hypotheses to guide CECs research under Action Plan II. Findings from 2010-2014 were used to guide further research in 2015-2018 for basin-wide surveillance of CECs and for sites warranting further study of potential biological impacts of CECs. Additional surveillance included both evaluation of additional classes of contaminants and expanded lists for chemical classes shown to be of greatest concern. Mixtures of some of the most frequently detected contaminants were also tested in laboratory studies to understand whether long term exposures to multiple contaminants may result in effects not evident from uncontrolled, short-term field experiments.

Great Lakes↗