SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Current Research in Earth Sciences”

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.

84 records · Page 5Linked to original sources

USGS2008

Magnetic monitoring of earth and space

For centuries, navigators of the world’s oceans have been familiar with an effect of Earth’s magnetic field: It imparts a directional preference to the needle of a compass. Although in some settings magnetic orientation remains important, the modern science of geomagnetismhas emerged from its romantic nautical origins and developed into a subject of great depth and diversity. The geomagnetic field is used to explore the dynamics of Earth’s interior and its surrounding space environment, and geomagnetic data are used for geophysical mapping, mineral exploration, risk mitigation, and other practical applications. A global distribution of ground-based magnetic observatories supports those pursuits by providing accurate records of the magnetic-field direction and intensity at fixed locations and over long periods of time. Magnetic observatories were first established in the early 19th century in response to the influence of Alexander von Humboldt and Carl Friedrich Gauss. Since then, magnetic measurement has advanced significantly, progressing from simple visual readings of magnetic survey instruments to include automatic photographic measurement and modern electronic acquisition. To satisfy the needs of the scientific community, observatories are being upgraded to collect data that meet ever more stringent standards, to achieve higher acquisition frequencies, and to disseminate data in real time. To appreciate why data from magnetic observatories can be used for so many purposes, one needs only to recall that the geomagnetic field is a continuum, connecting the different parts of Earth to each other and to nearby space. Beneath our feet and above our heads, electric currents generate magnetic fields that contribute to the totality of the geomagnetic field measured at an observatory on Earth’s surface. The many physical processes that operate in each geophysical domain give rise to a complicated field that exhibits a wide variety of time-dependent behavior. In this article I review the status of the global community of magnetic observatories, show how Earth and space can be monitored for purposes of scientific understanding and practical application, and highlight the role played by magnetic observatories in the history of geomagnetism research.

Physics Today↗

USGS2025

USGS—An Unparalleled Scientific Asset

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) delivers information critical to powering our economy, managing our natural resources, and keeping Americans safe and healthy. 1 Mapping the Nation $21B Geologic maps save users an estimated 15% in annual costs: a value of between $14B and $21B. $25.6B in annual value to users of imagery from Landsat satellites, which were codeveloped by NASA and the USGS and operated through their lifespans by the USGS. $13.5B in annual benefits is generated by the USGS's 3D Elevation Program. Securing America’s Energy Independence 44% USGS-identified undiscovered geothermal energy is equal to 44% of current U.S. electricity generation. 29.4B barrels of oil and 391.6 trillion cubic feet of gas in recoverable resources are available on U.S. public lands based on USGS assessments. Protecting Americans’ Health and Safety $424B in recent wildland fire damages highlight the need for USGS fire science, which supports efforts to protect communities and reduce risk. USGS earthquake, volcano, landslide, and coastal hazard monitoring and information save lives and minimize costs; for example, $2.8M can be saved because of USGS enhanced information about a Mauna Loa eruption. $4.5B is the estimated cost of annual flooding. Through a network of over 11,885 streamgages, the USGS supports public safety and enables forecasts, early warning systems, and management actions that protect lives and property. Supporting National Security $3.1B The USGS identified a $3.1B risk to the American economy if China restricts gallium imports. This is one example underscoring the importance of the USGS mapping critical minerals, investigating supply chains, and producing the Nation’s critical minerals list. Enhancing Our Lands and Waters $21B in estimated annual costs results from invasive species. The USGS’s invasive species research informs approaches used to reduce their effects on agriculture, water infrastructure, disease transmission, fisheries, and outdoor recreation. USGS innovations support early warnings for harmful algal blooms—over $2M in yearly benefits are provided to Kansas alone. $45B USGS science informs the management of big game (such as deer and elk). The big-game hunting industry contributes $45B to the U.S. economy. Fostering American Prosperity $4.1T Mineral commodities are necessary for the $4.1T in value added to the GDP by major industries that consume processed mineral materials and employ 1 million workers. Because of this, USGS data on mineral supply, demand, and trade are highly valued. 45,000 metric tons Rare earths power the growing technology economy, including cell phones, electric vehicles, and medical devices. For over 70 years, USGS work has supported the discovery of rare earth resources in California’s Mountain Pass area, which produced 45,000 metric tons of rare earth concentrates in 2024—over 11% of the global supply. Guarding American Food Security $70.2B USGS science informs early warning systems and management strategies to mitigate disease outbreaks in agriculture—critical research on highly pathogenic avian influenza, for example, helps safeguard the $70B value in poultry and egg production. $11.8B USGS groundwater tools are vital for agriculture; for example, in the Mississippi Alluvial Plain, 65% of farming relies on groundwater to support its $11.8B annual industry. 1 Values throughout are given in billions (B), millions (M), and trillions (T) of U.S. dollars. GDP is “Gross Domestic Product.” Percentages are shown as %.

General Information Product↗

USGS2024

Atlas of microscopic images of biochar using reflected light microscopy in biochar characterization

Derived through the thermochemical conversion of biomass, biochar is a carbon-rich substance recognized for its significance in environmental applications and sustainable agriculture. As interest in its utilization continues to rise, it becomes crucial to comprehend how the source material and pyrolysis parameters influence the properties of biochar and, consequently, to research the suitability of various analytical methods for characterizing it. Despite the current utilization of numerous physical and chemical methods, the untapped potential of reflected light microscopy warrants further exploration. While a few recent studies suggest a correlation between certain microscopic characteristics and selected physical and chemical properties of biochar, the data are limited and difficult to compare. This is primarily due to variations in the types of original biomass used and lack of information about pyrolysis conditions. Moreover, because only a limited number of photographs taken under a reflected light microscope are publicly available to-date, it is difficult to evaluate morphological differences between various biochars and other organic materials such as inertinites from coal, charcoal, etc. To address limited availability of publicly available data, this “Atlas of Microscopic Images of Biochar” presents a collection of more than 300 images contributed by researchers from Poland, the United States, Canada, Australia, Brazil, and Denmark. These photomicrographs capture optical characteristics of a diverse array of biochar, demonstrating its unique morphological and structural features. This visual documentation can serve as a valuable resource for researchers, industry professionals, educators, and enthusiasts interested in investigating the complexities of biochar forms.

Indiana Journal of Earth Sciences↗

USGS2002

A bibliography of terrain modeling (geomorphometry), the quantitative representation of topography: Supplement 4.0

Terrain modeling, the practice of ground-surface quantification, is an amalgam of Earth science, mathematics, engineering, and computer science. The discipline is known variously as geomorphometry (or simply morphometry), terrain analysis, and quantitative geomorphology. It continues to grow through myriad applications to hydrology, geohazards mapping, tectonics, sea-floor and planetary exploration, and other fields. Dating nominally to the co-founders of academic geography, Alexander von Humboldt (1808, 1817) and Carl Ritter (1826, 1828), the field was revolutionized late in the 20th Century by the computer manipulation of spatial arrays of terrain heights, or digital elevation models (DEMs), which can quantify and portray ground-surface form over large areas (Maune, 2001). Morphometric procedures are implemented routinely by commercial geographic information systems (GIS) as well as specialized software (Harvey and Eash, 1996; Köthe and others, 1996; ESRI, 1997; Drzewiecki et al., 1999; Dikau and Saurer, 1999; Djokic and Maidment, 2000; Wilson and Gallant, 2000; Breuer, 2001; Guth, 2001; Eastman, 2002). The new Earth Surface edition of the Journal of Geophysical Research, specializing in surficial processes, is the latest of many publication venues for terrain modeling. This is the fourth update of a bibliography and introduction to terrain modeling (Pike, 1993, 1995, 1996, 1999) designed to collect the diverse, scattered literature on surface measurement as a resource for the research community. The use of DEMs in science and technology continues to accelerate and diversify (Pike, 2000a). New work appears so frequently that a sampling must suffice to represent the vast literature. This report adds 1636 entries to the 4374 in the four earlier publications1. Forty-eight additional entries correct dead Internet links and other errors found in the prior listings. Chronicling the history of terrain modeling, many entries in this report predate the 1999 supplement. Coverage is representative from about 1800 through early–mid 2002. Papers increasingly are published exclusively or in duplicate on the Internet's World Wide Web; the dates given here for Web addresses (URLs) that lack a print publication indicate a Web site's last update or my last access of it. The bibliography is arranged alphabetically and thus is not readily summarized. This introduction cites about 500 entries, a third of them grouped under 24 morphometric topics, as a guide to the listing's contents. Continuing the practice of previous bibliographies in the series to provide more information on a few applications (see summary of past topics in Pike, 2000a), this report elaborates further on topographic data, putative new parameters, tectonic geomorphology/neo-orometry, biogeography, ice-cap morphometry, results from the Mars Global DEM, landslide-hazard mapping, terrain modeling as physics, Hack's law, and broad-scale computer visualization. The literature of some of these subjects is large, and none of the summaries is intended to more than introduce the topic and comment on some of the current contributions of terrain modeling. Closing the essay is a discussion of pre-1900 papers that trace the evolution of ridge-line and watercourse quantification by descriptive geometry, as well as comments on some new books and an on-line bulletin board.

Open-File Report↗

USGS1993

Managing biological diversity

Biological diversity is the variety of life and accompanying ecological processes (Off. Technol. Assess. 1987, Wilcove and Samson 1987, Keystone 1991). Conservation of biological diversity is a major environmental issue (Wilson 1988, Counc. Environ. Quality 1991). The health and future of the earth's ecological systems (Lubchenco et al. 1991), global climate change (Botkin 1990), and an ever-increasing rate in loss of species, communities, and ecological systems (Myers 1990) are among issues drawing biological diversity to the mainstream of conservation worldwide (Int. Union Conserv. Nat. and Nat. Resour. [IUCN] et al. 1991). The legal mandate for conserving biological diversity is now in place (Carlson 1988, Doremus 1991). More than 19 federal laws govern the use of biological resources in the United States (Rein 1991). The proposed National Biological Diversity Conservation and Environmental Research Act (H.R. 585 and S.58) notes the need for a national biological diversity policy, would create a national center for biological diversity research, and recommends a federal interagency strategy for ecosystem conservation. There are, however, hard choices ahead for the conservation of biological diversity, and biologists are grappling with how to set priorities in research and management (Roberts 1988). We sense disillusion among field biologists and managers relative to how to operationally approach the seemingly overwhelming charge of conserving biological diversity. Biologists also need to respond to critics like Hunt (1991) who suggest a tree farm has more biological diversity than an equal area of old-growth forest. At present, science has played only a minor role in the conservation of biological diversity (Weston 1992) with no unified approach available to evaluate strategies and programs that address the quality and quantity of biological diversity (Murphy 1990, Erwin 1992). Although actions to conserve biological diversity need to be clearly defined by viewing issues across biological, spatial, and temporal scales (Knopf and Smith 1992), natural resource managers find much conflicting information in the literature on strategies and programs for the conservation of biological diversity (Ehrlich 1992). Moreover, recommendations provided in much of the published information available for planning or decisions not only can be debated but may prove counterproductive if implemented. Current operational efforts beg for clearer focus on fundamental concepts central to daily decisions that impact native biological diversity. Recognizing that many biologists would provide different council and at the risk of oversimplification, we offer the following 4 topical issues as fundamental guidance to wise conservation action. These recommendations are based on our collective experiences working within conservation agencies since our original, collaborative essay (Samson and Knopf 1982). They are offered as initial, rather than authoritative, steps to better align research and management decisions with what we perceive as the critical issues in conserving biological diversity at the landscape and ecosystem levels of resolution.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗

USGS2014

From hybrid swarms to swarms of hybrids

Science has shown that the introgression or hybridization of modern humans ( Homo sapiens ) with Neanderthals up to 40,000 YBP may have led to the swarm of modern humans on earth. However, there is little doubt that modern trade and transportation in support of the humans has continued to introduce additional species, genotypes, and hybrids to every country on the globe. We assessed the utility of species distributions modeling of genotypes to assess the risk of current and future invaders. We evaluated 93 locations of the genus Tamarix for which genetic data were available. Maxent models of habitat suitability showed that the hybrid, T. ramosissima x T. chinensis , was slightly greater than the parent taxa (AUCs > 0.83). General linear models of Africanized honey bees, a hybrid cross of Tanzanian Apis mellifera scutellata and a variety of European honey bee including A. m. ligustica , showed that the Africanized bees (AUC = 0.81) may be displacing European honey bees (AUC > 0.76) over large areas of the southwestern U.S. More important, Maxent modeling of sub-populations (A1 and A26 mitotypes based on mDNA) could be accurately modeled (AUC > 0.9), and they responded differently to environmental drivers. This suggests that rapid evolutionary change may be underway in the Africanized bees, allowing the bees to spread into new areas and extending their total range. Protecting native species and ecosystems may benefit from risk maps of harmful invasive species, hybrids, and genotypes.

Environment and Ecology Research↗

USGS2013

Current research issues related to post-wildfire runoff and erosion processes

Research into post-wildfire effects began in the United States more than 70 years ago and only later extended to other parts of the world. Post-wildfire responses are typically transient, episodic, variable in space and time, dependent on thresholds, and involve multiple processes measured by different methods. These characteristics tend to hinder research progress, but the large empirical knowledge base amassed in different regions of the world suggests that it should now be possible to synthesize the data and make a substantial improvement in the understanding of post-wildfire runoff and erosion response. Thus, it is important to identify and prioritize the research issues related to post-wildfire runoff and erosion. Priority research issues are the need to: (1) organize and synthesize similarities and differences in post-wildfire responses between different fire-prone regions of the world in order to determine common patterns and generalities that can explain cause and effect relations; (2) identify and quantify functional relations between metrics of fire effects and soil hydraulic properties that will better represent the dynamic and transient conditions after a wildfire; (3) determine the interaction between burned landscapes and temporally and spatially variable meso-scale precipitation, which is often the primary driver of post-wildfire runoff and erosion responses; (4) determine functional relations between precipitation, basin morphology, runoff connectivity, contributing area, surface roughness, depression storage, and soil characteristics required to predict the timing, magnitudes, and duration of floods and debris flows from ungaged burned basins; and (5) develop standard measurement methods that will ensure the collection of uniform and comparable runoff and erosion data. Resolution of these issues will help to improve conceptual and computer models of post-wildfire runoff and erosion processes.

Earth-Science Reviews↗

USGS2009

High-frequency Rayleigh-wave method

High-frequency (≥2 Hz) Rayleigh-wave data acquired with a multichannel recording system have been utilized to determine shear (S)-wave velocities in near-surface geophysics since the early 1980s. This overview article discusses the main research results of high-frequency surface-wave techniques achieved by research groups at the Kansas Geological Survey and China University of Geosciences in the last 15 years. The multichannel analysis of surface wave (MASW) method is a non-invasive acoustic approach to estimate near-surface S-wave velocity. The differences between MASW results and direct borehole measurements are approximately 15% or less and random. Studies show that simultaneous inversion with higher modes and the fundamental mode can increase model resolution and an investigation depth. The other important seismic property, quality factor ( Q ), can also be estimated with the MASW method by inverting attenuation coefficients of Rayleigh waves. An inverted model (S-wave velocity or Q ) obtained using a damped least-squares method can be assessed by an optimal damping vector in a vicinity of the inverted model determined by an objective function, which is the trace of a weighted sum of model-resolution and model-covariance matrices. Current developments include modeling high-frequency Rayleigh-waves in near-surface media, which builds a foundation for shallow seismic or Rayleigh-wave inversion in the time-offset domain; imaging dispersive energy with high resolution in the frequency-velocity domain and possibly with data in an arbitrary acquisition geometry, which opens a door for 3D surface-wave techniques; and successfully separating surface-wave modes, which provides a valuable tool to perform S-wave velocity profiling with high-horizontal resolution.

Earth Science↗

USGS2025

Land application of biosolid, livestock, and drilling wastes to US farmland: A potential pathway for the redistribution of contaminants in the environment

In the United States (U.S.), waste byproducts generated from the treatment of municipal waste (biosolids), production of livestock (livestock waste), and drilling of oil and gas wells (drilling waste) are commonly applied to agricultural lands. Although this can be a cost-effective reuse/disposal practice, there is limited research on the potential for contaminant exposures and effects on ecosystems, wildlife, and human health from such land applications. In this study, we conducted extensive chemical, microbial, and toxicity analyses of biosolid, livestock, and drilling wastes just prior to land application on agricultural lands at 34 sites across the U.S. Twenty-two analytical methods were used to determine potential contaminant exposures profiles for 452 organic and 114 inorganic chemicals, nine microbial groups, estrogenicity, and cytotoxicity. Analytical results document unique and substantial chemical, microbial, and toxicity profiles for these land-applied wastes. Of the three waste byproducts, biosolids contained the greatest concentrations of household chemicals, pesticides, pharmaceuticals, per-/polyfluoroalkyl substances, calcium, and phosphorus. Livestock waste contained the greatest concentrations of total and leachable dissolved organic carbon, biogenic hormones, mycotoxins, plant estrogens, total inorganic nitrogen, and potassium. Drilling waste contained the greatest concentrations of BTEX compounds (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, rare-earth elements, barium, strontium, and uranium–thorium series radioisotopes. Biosolid and livestock wastes had greater culturable heterotrophic bacteria, halophilic bacteria, Escherichia coli ( E. coli ), enterococci, and staphylococci concentrations, and greater microbial diversity than drilling waste. Bioassay analyses indicated that exposure to contaminants in livestock wastes and biosolids could result in estrogenic effects, whereas exposure to contaminants in drilling waste could result in cytotoxic effects. Our study documents that current reuse/disposal practices for biosolid, livestock, and drilling wastes on agricultural lands could provide a potential pathway for the redistribution of unique and complex contaminant mixtures into the environment that have bioactive, endocrine disrupting, and carcinogenic characteristics. Results of this study provide a snapshot of chemical compositions and concentrations that can be used to inform the development of best-management practices to help maximize beneficial reuse of these wastes and minimize risk to the environment and human health.

Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts↗

USGS2006

Proceedings of the U.S. Geological Survey Sixth Biennial Geographic Information Science Workshop, Denver, Colorado, April 24-28, 2006

The U.S. Geological Survey's (USGS) Sixth Biennial Geographic Information Science Workshop April 24 - 28, 2006, at the Denver Federal Center in Denver, Colorado, provides a unique opportunity for multi-disciplinary Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and associated scientific professionals to share, learn, present, and discuss a wide variety of geospatial-related topics. Information is exchanged through a series of plenary sessions, hands-on technical workshops, user and commercial vendor demonstrations, lecture and poster sessions, and specialty meetings. Workshop attendance is limited to Department of Interior (DOI) and USGS employees and contractors; however, plenary, hands-on, and lecture sessions have presenters from other Federal agencies, numerous commercial vendors, universities, and several consortia. Over 175 participants are expected to attend the Workshop. Several prominent speakers are featured at this Workshop. Monday evening Star Guest Speaker and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Astronaut Captain Dominic Gorie will talk about his experiences as a veteran of three space flights and over 32 days in space, including the NASA Space Shuttle Radar Topography Mission that mapped more than 47 million miles of the Earth's land surface. Selected as an astronaut candidate by NASA in December 1994, Captain Gorie is currently Chief of the Astronaut Shuttle Branch. Monday evening also features a town hall meeting with Geographic Information Office (GIO) leaders Karen Siderelis, Kevin Gallagher, Bob Pierce, Steve Guptill, Mark DeMulder, John Mahoney, and Mark Negri, who will discuss changes and activities within the GIO in an open discussion format. Tuesday plenary sessions feature keynote speaker Dr. P. Patrick Leahy, Acting USGS Director. Dr. Leahy holds undergraduate and graduate degrees in geology (1968) and geophysics (1970) from Boston College. In 1979, he received his doctorate in geology from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, where he specialized in regional ground-water studies and hydraulics. Dr. Leahy has been with the USGS since 1974, and has held various technical and managerial positions, including Associate Director for Geology and Chief of the National Water-Quality Assessment (NAWQA) Program. Dr. Leahy will be discussing a broad range of topics including Bureau accomplishments, initiatives, and budgets. The purpose of this proceedings volume is to serve as an activity reference for Workshop attendees as well as an archive of technical abstracts submitted, presented, and discussed at the Workshop. Author, co-author, and presenter names, affiliations, and contact information are listed with presentation titles along with submitted abstracts. Some hands-on sessions are offered twice. In these instances, abstracts submitted for publication are presented in the proceedings on both days they are offered. All acronyms used in these proceedings are explained in the text of each abstract. The term 'ArcGIS' refers to an integrated collection of GIS software products produced by Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI).

Scientific Investigations Report↗

USGS2018

Best practices for elevation-based assessments of sea-level rise and coastal flooding exposure

Elevation data are critical for assessments of sea-level rise (SLR) and coastal flooding exposure. Previous research has demonstrated that the quality of data used in elevation-based assessments must be well understood and applied to properly model potential impacts. The cumulative vertical uncertainty of the input elevation data substantially controls the minimum increments of SLR and the minimum planning horizons that can be effectively used in assessments. For regional, continental, or global assessments, several digital elevation models (DEMs) are available for the required topographic information to project potential impacts of increased coastal water levels, whether a simple inundation model is used or a more complex process-based or probabilistic model is employed. When properly characterized, the vertical accuracy of the DEM can be used to report assessment results with the uncertainty stated in terms of a specific confidence level or likelihood category. An accuracy evaluation has been conducted of global DEMs to quantify their inherent vertical uncertainty to demonstrate how accuracy information should be considered when planning and implementing a SLR or coastal flooding assessment. The evaluation approach includes comparison of the DEMs with high-accuracy geodetic control points as the independent reference data over a variety of coastal relief settings. The global DEMs evaluated include SRTM, ASTER GDEM, ALOS World 3D, TanDEM-X, NASADEM, and MERIT. High-resolution, high-accuracy DEM sources, such as airborne lidar and stereo imagery, are also included to give context to the results from the global DEMs. The accuracy characterization results show that current global DEMs are not adequate for high confidence mapping of exposure to fine increments (<1 m) of SLR or with shorter planning horizons (<100 years) and thus they should not be used for such mapping, but they are suitable for general delineation of low elevation coastal zones. In addition to the best practice of rigorous accounting for vertical uncertainty, other recommended procedures are presented for delineation of different types of impact areas (marine and groundwater inundation) and use of regional relative SLR scenarios. The requirement remains for a freely available, high-accuracy, high-resolution global elevation model that supports quantitative SLR and coastal inundation assessments at high confidence levels.

Frontiers in Earth Science↗

USGS2024

U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group proceedings, Nashville, Tennessee, October 22-24, 2024

Karst hydrogeologic systems represent challenging and unique conditions to scientists studying groundwater flow and contaminant transport. Karst terrains are characterized by distinct and beautiful landscapes, caverns, and springs, and many of the exceptional karst areas are designated as national or state parks. The range and complexity of landforms and groundwater flow systems associated with karst terrains are enormous, perhaps more than any other aquifer type. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Karst Interest Group (KIG), formed in 2000, is a loosely knit, grassroots organization of USGS and non-USGS scientists and researchers devoted to fostering better communication among scientists working on, or interested in, karst aquifers. The primary mission of the KIG is to encourage and support interdisciplinary collaboration and technology transfer among scientists working in karst areas. To accomplish its mission, the KIG has organized a series of workshops. To date (2024), nine KIG workshops, including the workshop documented in this report, have been held. The abstracts and extended abstracts provide a snapshot in time of past and current karst related studies. The USGS Water Availability and Use Science Program funded the workshop and proceedings. The planning committee for the ninth workshop includes Thomas D. Byl (USGS and Tennessee State University), Allan K. Clark (USGS), Laura M. DeMott (USGS), Eve L. Kuniansky (USGS, Emeritus), Benjamin V. Miller (USGS), and Lawrence E. Spangler (USGS, Emeritus). The workshop proceedings are edited by Eve L. Kuniansky and Lawrence E. Spangler. The field trip guide was produced by Benjamin V. Miller and Brian Ham (Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation) and included in the proceedings from the KIG’s 2021 virtual workshop to be used on the optional field trip held on Thursday, October 24, 2024.

Open-File Report↗