Search USGSSearch

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Marine and Freshwater Research”

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.

129 records · Page 8Linked to original sources

Chapter 24 Lateral variability of the estuarine turbidity maximum in a tidal strait

The behavior of the estuarine turbidity maximum (ETM) in response to freshwater flow, tidal forcing, and bed dynamics has been studied extensively by many researchers. However, the majority of investigations focus on the longitudinal position and strength of the ETM, which can vary over tidal, spring-neap, and seasonal timescales. ETMs may become longitudinally fixed due to bathymetric constraints, and thus the lateral position may vary significantly on differing timescales. Lateral dynamics of the ETM may affect contaminant uptake in biologically active regions, while local deposition patterns may be affected by the dominant lateral position. A longitudinally fixed ETM in Carquinez Strait, California, was studied to specifically investigate the dynamics of lateral ETM variability during April 2004. an abrupt topographical control on the north side restricts gravitational circulation resulting in convergence and particle trapping, creating the ETM. The cross-section was continuously monitored with two upward-looking velocity profilers and four optical backscatterance sensors. In addition, cross-sectional measurements over one tidal cycle were performed during a spring tide with boat-mounted velocity and water quality profilers. The lateral and vertical positions of the ETM center of mass varied by a maximum of 250 and 5 m, respectively (20% of width and 17% of depth) over the tidal timescale, while tidally averaged lateral and vertical positions varied substantially less (50 and 1 m, respectively). ETM position responded to tidal energy (Urms), with higher vertical position and a laterally centered position resulting from increased mixing during spring tides, and a northerly lateral position from decreased mixing during neap tides. Hydrodynamic and sediment transport modeling of this period reproduces the lateral and vertical movements of the ETM center of mass. Modeling results indicate increased gravitational circulation in the strait and enhanced particle trapping on the north side during neap tides, thus displacing the ETM center of mass to the north. The south side has no topographical control, and therefore no particle trapping mechanism exists on the south side. Secondary circulation is strengthened on spring tides, distributing near-bed sediment toward the south. The field and modeling results are in agreement with previous work in Carquinez Strait and further elucidate the strong lateral variation of the ETM, even in narrow, energetic tidal straits. ?? 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Proceedings in Marine Science

Does the Sverdrup critical depth model explain bloom dynamics in estuaries?

In this paper we use numerical models of coupled biological-hydrodynamic processes to search for general principles of bloom regulation in estuarine waters. We address three questions: what are the dynamics of stratification in coastal systems as influenced by variable freshwater input and tidal stirring? How does phytoplankton growth respond to these dynamics? Can the classical Sverdrup Critical Depth Model (SCDM) be used to predict the timing of bloom events in shallow coastal domains such as estuaries? We present results of simulation experiments which assume that vertical transport and net phytoplankton growth rates are horizontally homogeneous. In the present approach the temporally and spatially varying turbulent diffusivities for various stratification scenarios are calculated using a hydrodynamic code that includes the Mellor-Yamada 2.5 turbulence closure model. These diffusivities are then used in a time- and depth-dependent advection-diffusion equation, incorporating sources and sinks, for the phytoplankton biomass. Our modeling results show that, whereas persistent stratification greatly increases the probability of a bloom, semidiurnal periodic stratification does not increase the likelihood of a phytoplankton bloom over that of a constantly unstratified water column. Thus, for phytoplankton blooms, the physical regime of periodic stratification is closer to complete mixing than to persistent stratification. Furthermore, the details of persistent stratification are important: surface layer depth, thickness of the pycnocline, vertical density difference, and tidal current speed all weigh heavily in producing conditions which promote the onset of phytoplankton blooms. Our model results for shallow tidal systems do not conform to the classical concepts of stratification and blooms in deep pelagic systems. First, earlier studies (Riley, 1942, for example) suggest a monotonic increase in surface layer production as the surface layer shallows. Our model results suggest, however, a nonmonotonic relationship between phytoplankton population growth and surface layer depth, which results from a balance between several 'competing' processes, including the interaction of sinking with turbulent mixing and average net growth occurring within the surface layer. Second, we show that the traditional SCDM must be refined for application to energetic shallow systems or for systems in which surface layer mixing is not strong enough to counteract the sinking loss of phytoplankton. This need for refinement arises because of the leakage of phytoplankton from the surface layer by turbulent diffusion and sinking, processes not considered in the classical SCDM. Our model shows that, even for low sinking rates and small turbulent diffusivities, a significant % of the phytoplankton biomass produced in the surface layer can be lost by these processes.

Journal of Marine Research

Southern Salish Sea Habitat Map Series: Admiralty Inlet

In 2010 the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10 initiated the Puget Sound Scientific Studies and Technical Investigations Assistance Program, designed to support research in support of implementing the Puget Sound Action Agenda. The Action Agenda was created in response to Puget Sound having been designated as one of 28 estuaries of national significance under section 320 of the U.S. Clean Water Act, and its overall goal is to restore the Puget Sound Estuary's environment by 2020. The Southern Salish Sea Mapping Project was funded by the Assistance Program request for proposals process, which also supports a large number of coastal-zone- and ocean-management issues. The issues include the recommendations of the Marine Protected Areas Work Group to the Washington State Legislature (Van Cleve and others, 2009), which endorses a Puget Sound and coast-wide marine conservation needs assessment, gap analysis of existing Marine Protected Areas (MPA) and recommendations for action. This publication is the first of four U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigation Maps that make up the Southern Salish Sea Mapping Project. The remaining three map blocks to be published in the future, located south of Admiralty Inlet, are shown in figure 1. Puget Sound is a deep, fjord-type estuary covering an area of 2,330 km 2 in the Pacific Northwest region of the United States (fig. 1). It is connected to the ocean by the Strait of Juan de Fuca, a turbulent passage approximately 160 km in length and 22 km wide at its west end, expanding to over 40 km wide at its east end (Thomson, 1994). During the Pleistocene, the area was occupied several times by lobes of continental ice, resulting in a complex basin-fill of glacial and interglacial deposits that are locally as thick as 1100 m (Johnson and others, 2001). The last glaciation, called the Fraser glaciation, began after 28,800±740 14 C yr B.P. when ice started a slow expansion (Clague, 1981). At peak advance the westward Juan de Fuca lobe reached the edge of the continental shelf through the Juan de Fuca Strait shortly before 14,460±200 14 C yr B.P. (Herzer and Bornhold, 1982). The southward Puget lobe advanced to its terminal position in Puget Sound by around 14,150 14 C yr B.P. (Porter and Swanson, 1998). Ice retreated from its maximum to northern Whidbey Island by 13,650±350 14 C yr B.P. (Dethier and others, 1995). Retreating glaciers resulted in a thick sequence of ice-contact, glacial-marine sediment, and early post-glacial sediments (Linden and Schurrer, 1988). These deposits have experienced the effects of a marine transgression followed by regression, resulting in a sea-level several tens of meters lower than the present day (Linden and Schurrer, 1988). A second transgression brought sea level to about the present level by around 5,470±120 14 C yr B.P. (Clague and others, 1982) establishing the present oceanographic and geologic environment Puget Sound is separated into four interconnected basins; Whidbey, Central (Main), Hood Canal, and South (Thomson, 1994). The Whidbey, Central, and Hood Canal basins are the three main branches of the Puget Sound estuary and are separated from the Strait of Juan de Fuca by a double sill at Admiralty Inlet. The Admiralty Inlet map area includes the Inlet and a portion of the Whidbey Basin (fig. 1). The shallower South Basin is separated by a sill at Tacoma Narrows and is highly branched with numerous finger inlets. Flow within Puget Sound is dominated by tidal currents of as much as 1 m/s at Admiralty Inlet, reducing to approximately 0.5 m/s in the Central Basin (Lavelle and others, 1988). The lack of silt and clay-sized sediments in the Admiralty Inlet map area is likely a result of the strong currents (see Ground-Truth Studies for the Admiralty Inlet Map Area, sheet 3). The subtidal component of flow reaches approximately 0.1 m/s and is driven by density gradients arising from the contrast in salty ocean water at the entrance and freshwater inputs from stream flow (Lavelle and others, 1988). The total freshwater input to Puget Sound is approximately 3.4 x 10 6 m 3 /day, primarily from the Skagit River (Cannon, 1983). The subtidal circulation mostly consists of a two-layered flow in the basins with fresher water exiting at the surface and saltier water entering at depth (Ebbesmeyer and Cannon, 2001). In general, surface waters flow north and deeper waters flow south; variations arise from wind effects that can drive a surface current in the same direction as the wind, and a baroclinic response in the lower layer to about 100-m depth (Matsuura and Cannon, 1997). Oceanographic properties are influenced by temporal forcing parameters such as reduced stream flow during the 2000-01 drought that increased surface salinity and decreased differences between surface and bottom waters (Newton and others, 2003). On offshore seismic-reflection profiles, Pleistocene strata (excluding latest Pleistocene glacial and post-glacial deposits) form a distinct seismic unit, bounded below by pre-Tertiary or Tertiary basement and above by typically flat-lying latest Pleistocene to Holocene deposits that fill in erosional or depositional relief (Johnson and others, 2001). Cores from central Puget Sound have accumulation rates that range from 85 to 1200 mg/cm 2 /yr, or 0.12 to 2.4 cm/yr; the highest accumulation rates are near the southern end of central Puget Sound (Carpenter and others, 1985). Carpenter and others (1985) un-weighted arithmetic mean of accumulation rates for central Puget Sound deeper stations is 480±340 (± one standard deviation) mg/cm 2 /yr. Lavelle and others (1985) also found rates as high as 1200 mg/cm 2 /yr over the past approximately 70 years in cores in the Central Basin off of and north and south of Elliott Bay. Puget Sound basin rates are comparable to rates in midshelf silt deposits on the Washington coast north of the Columbia River (Nittrouer and others, 1979). The deep subtidal (in other words, below SCUBA depths) habitats of Puget Sound are relatively poorly known. A few subtidal surveys exist for several habitat types from the 1960s and 1970s (reviewed in Dethier, 1990), using grab and box core data. The Dethier (1990) review divides habitat up into Coast and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS) substrate, water column energy, and depth zones but does not attempt to map these habitats, rather it is an inventory of habitats found in the area and the flora and fauna associated with each habitat. The approach of the Southern Salish Sea Mapping project is to create highly detailed seafloor maps through collection, integration, interpretation, and visualization of swath sonar data (the undersea equivalent of satellite remote-sensing data in terrestrial mapping), acoustic backscatter, seafloor video, seafloor photography, and bottom-sediment sampling data. This approach is based in part on methods presented and data collection and product needs identified at the Washington State Seafloor Mapping Workshop (Washington State Seafloor Mapping Workshop Steering Committee, 2008), attended by coastal and marine managers and scientists. The map products display seafloor geomorphology and substrate, and identify potential marine benthic habitats. It is emphasized that the more interpretive habitat and geology maps rely on the integration of multiple, new high-resolution datasets and that mapping at small scales would not be possible without such data. Oceanographic current and wave data is not included in this analysis, however, the accompanying geographic information system (GIS) data set is designed and intended to be combined with oceanographic and biologic data sets assembled by others in the future and some of the GIS data has already been incorporated in the unpublished Nature Conservancy Benthic Habitats of Puget Sound database. This publication includes four map sheets, explanatory text, and a descriptive pamphlet. Each map sheet is published as a portable document format (PDF) file. ESRI ArcGIS compatible geotiffs (for example, bathymetry) and shapefiles (for example video observation points) will be available for download in the data catalog associated with this publication (Cochrane, 2015). An ArcGIS Project File with the symbology used to generate the map sheets is also provided. For those who do not own the full suite of ESRI GIS and mapping software, the data can be read using ESRI ArcReader, a free viewer that is available at http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcreader/index.html .

Washington