Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Technical Paper”

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.

At least 163 records · Page 9Linked to original sources
USGS1999

Water Resources Data for Massachusetts and Rhode Island, 1998

INTRODUCTION The Water Resources Division of the U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with State agencies, obtains a large amount of data pertaining to the water resources of Massachusetts and Rhode Island each water year. These data, accumulated during many water years, constitute a valuable data base for developing an improved understanding of the water resources of the States. To make these data readily available to interested parties outside the Geological Survey, the data are published annually in this report series entitled 'Water Resources Data-Massachusetts and Rhode Island.' Hydrologic data are also available through the Massachusetts-Rhode Island District Home Page on the world-wide web (http://ma.water.usgs.gov). Historical data and real-time data (for sites equipped with satellite gageheight telemeter) are also available. The home page also contains a link to the U.S. Geological Survey National Home Page where streamflow data from locations throughout the United States can be retrieved. This report series includes records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; contents of lakes and reservoirs; and water levels of ground-water wells. This volume contains discharge records at 93 gaging stations; monthend contents of 4 lakes and reservoirs; water quality at 22 gaging stations; and water levels for 139 observation wells. Locations of these sites are shown in figures 1 and 2. Miscellaneous hydrologic data were collected at various sites that were not involved in the systematic data-collection program and are published as miscellaneous discharge measurements. The data in this report represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating State and Federal agencies in Massachusetts and Rhode Island. This series of annual reports for Massachusetts and Rhode Island began with the 1961 water year with a report that contained only data relating to the quantities of surface water. For the 1964 water year, a similar report was introduced that contained only data relating to water quality. Beginning with the 1975 water year, the report format was changed to present, in one volume, data on quantities of surface water, quality of surface and ground water, and ground-water levels. Prior to introduction of this series and for several water years concurrent with it, water-resources data for Massachusetts and Rhode Island were published in U.S. Geological Survey Water-Supply Papers. Data on stream discharge and stage and on lake or reservoir contents and stage, through September 1960, were published annually under the title 'Surface-Water Supply of the United States, Parts 1A and 1B.' For the 1961 through 1970 water years, the data were published in two 5-year reports. Data on chemical quality, temperature, and suspended sediment for the 1941 through 1970 water years were published annually under the title 'Quality of Surface Waters of the United States,' and water levels for the 1939 through 1974 water years were published under the title 'Ground-Water Levels in the United States.' The above mentioned Water-Supply Papers may be consulted in the libraries of the principal cities of the United States and may be purchased from U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services, Box 25286, Denver Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225-0286. Publications similar to this report are published annually by the Geological Survey for all States. These official Survey reports have an identification number consisting of the two-letter State abbreviation, the last two digits of the water year, and the volume number. For example, this volume is identified as 'U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data Report MARI-98-1.' For archiving and general distribution, the reports for 1971-74 water years also are identified as water-data reports. These water-data reports are for sale in paper copy or in microfiche by the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Comme

Water Data Report↗
USGS1997

Water resources data, New York, water year 1996; Volume 1. Eastern New York; excluding Long Island

Introduction Water-resources data for the 1996 water year for New York consist of records of stage, discharge, and water quality of streams; stage, contents, and water quality of lakes and reservoirs; ground-water levels; and precipitation quality. This volume contains records for water discharge at 122 gaging stations; stage only at 7 gaging stations; stage and contents at 4 gaging stations, and 18 other lakes and reservoirs; water quality at 28 gaging stations and 1 precipitation-quality station; and water levels at 3 observation wells. Also included are data for 33 crest-stage partial-record stations. Additional water data were collected at various sites not involved in the systematic data-collection program, and are published as miscellaneous measurements and analyses in this volume. These data together with the data in Volumes 2 and 3 represent that part of the National Water Data System operated by the U.S. Geological Survey in cooperation with State, Municipal, and Federal agencies in New York. Records of discharge and stage of streams, and contents and stage of lakes and reservoirs, were first published in a series of U.S. Geological Survey water-supply papers entitled, “Surface Water Supply of the United States.” Through September 30, 1960, these water-supply papers were in an annual series and then in a 5-year series for 1961-65 and 1966-70. Records of water quality, water temperatures, and suspended sediment were published from 1941 to 1970 in an annual series of water-supply papers entitled “Quality of Surface Waters of the United States.” Records of ground-water levels were published from 1935 to 1974 in a series of water-supply papers entitled “Ground-Water Levels in the United States.” Water-supply papers may be consulted in the libraries of the principal cities and universities in the United States or may be purchased from the U.S. Geological Survey, Branch of Distribution, 604 South Pickett Street, Alexandria, VA 22304. Since the 1961 water year, streamflow data and since the 1964 water year, water-quality data have been released by the Geological Survey in annual reports on a State-boundary basis. These reports provided rapid release of water data in each state shortly after the end of the water year. Through 1970 the data were also released in the water-supply paper series mentioned above. Streamflow and water-quality data beginning with the 1971 water year, and ground-water data beginning with the 1975 water year are published only in reports on a State-boundary basis. Beginning with the 1975 water year, these Survey reports carry an identification number consisting of the two-letter State abbreviation, the last two digits of the water year, and the volume number. For example, this volume is identified as “U.S. Geological Survey Water-Data Report NY-96-1.” Water-data reports are for sale in paper copy or in microfiche by the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161. Additional information, including current prices for ordering specific reports, may be obtained from the District Office at the address given on the back of the title page or by telephone (518) 285-5600.

New York↗
USGS2021

ShakeMap operations, policies, and procedures

The US Geological Survey’s ShakeMap is used domestically and globally for post-earthquake emergency management and response, engineering analyses, financial instruments, and other decision-making activities. Recent developments in the insurance, reinsurance, and catastrophe bond sectors link payouts of potentially hundreds of millions of dollars to ShakeMap products. Similarly, building codes, post-earthquake building damage forensic evaluations, and geotechnical evaluations often rely on estimated peak response-spectral values for site-specific evaluations that may lead to costly analyses, retrofits, or other expenditures. Given such activities, financial, engineering, and other technical users demand processing specifications and a metadata trail for actuarial, escrow, and forensic purposes for each significant earthquake. Recent inquiries include how and why maps change with time, how to interpret metadata, and how to obtain the creation and update history of various map layers. Similarly, the collection of ShakeMap scenarios and historical ShakeMaps—either created in earlier versions or rerun as part of the latest version of the ShakeMap Atlas—warrant a full explanation of the inputs, processing, and archiving given their contribution to fragility curve development and loss model calibration. For these reasons, in addition to event-specific ShakeMap metadata and a comprehensive online ShakeMap Manual, we have crafted this practice paper to answer several of the most frequently asked technical questions. We also describe an application programming interface (API) for accessing site-specific shaking metrics and their uncertainties for earthquake forensic purposes in a consistent fashion. In all, we describe the advantages of employing ShakeMaps for these critical purposes as well as describe their limitations and uncertainties, offering an extensive set of instructions and disclaimers that can be referenced by ShakeMap users.

California↗
USGS2009

Afraid to Start Because the Outcome is Uncertain?: Social Site Characterization as a Tool for Informing Public Engagement Efforts

This paper introduces the concept of social site characterization as a parallel effort to technical site characterization to be used in evaluating and planning carbon dioxides capture and storage (CCS) projects. Social site characterization, much like technical site characterization, relies on a series of iterative investigations into public attitudes towards a CCS project and the factors that will shape those views. This paper also suggests ways it can be used to design approaches for actively engaging stakeholders and communities in the deployment of CCS projects. This work is informed by observing the site selection process for FutureGen and the implementation of research projects under the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership Program. ?? 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2002

Vulnerability assessment of a port and harbor community to earthquake and tsunami hazards: Integrating technical expert and stakeholder input

Research suggests that the Pacific Northwest could experience catastrophic earthquakes and tsunamis in the near future, posing a significant threat to the numerous ports and harbors along the coast. A collaborative, multiagency initiative is underway to increase the resiliency of Pacific Northwest ports and harbors to these hazards, involving Oregon Sea Grant, Washington Sea Grant, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center, and the U.S. Geological Survey Center for Science Policy. One element of this research, planning, and outreach initiative is a natural hazard mitigation and emergency preparedness planning process that combines technical expertise with local stakeholder values and perceptions. This paper summarizes and examines one component of the process, the vulnerability assessment methodology, used in the pilot port and harbor community of Yaquina River, Oregon, as a case study of assessing vulnerability at the local level. In this community, stakeholders were most concerned with potential life loss and other nonstructural vulnerability issues, such as inadequate hazard awareness, communication, and response logistics, rather than structural issues, such as damage to specific buildings or infrastructure.

Oregon↗
USGS2018

UZIG research: Measurement and characterization of unsaturated zone processes under wide-ranging climates and changing conditions

Unsaturated zone properties and processes are central to understanding the interacting effects of land-use change, contamination, and hydroclimate on our ability to grow food, sustain clean water supplies, and minimize loss of life and property. Advances in unsaturated zone science are being achieved through collaborations across traditional boundaries where information from biological, physical, and chemical disciplines is combined for new insights. The Unsaturated Zone Interest Group (UZIG) is an organization that exists principally to promote multidisciplinary collaborations and the sharing of ideas, expertise, and technical assets. Here we summarize key findings from 14 papers, several of which originated from a meeting convened by UZIG in 2017 at the University of Florida in Gainesville titled “Land-Use Change, Climate Change, and Hydrologic Extremes: Unsaturated Zone Responses and Feedbacks.” This special section of Vadose Zone Journal contains multidisciplinary research in three general categories relevant to measuring and understanding unsaturated zone responses to changing land uses and climate: (i) unsaturated zone properties and processes; (ii) soil–plant–atmosphere interactions; and (iii) novel field sampling devices. A strong cross-cutting theme in these papers is the value of continuous monitoring data and ways of utilizing them to discover novel hydrologic, biologic, and pedologic information. As climatic and land-use conditions change and demands for resources and stresses on ecosystems continue to intensify, it is vital to improve our fundamental understanding of the processes at work in the unsaturated zone. Toward that goal, we discuss the need for improved ground-based unsaturated zone monitoring networks.

Vadose Zone Journal↗
USGS1996

Ecosystem management: A decision support GIS approach

This paper describes a new approach using decision support GIS for handling information in ecosystem management. Technical research efforts resulted in specialized spatial decision support systems for wetland restoration planning, wetland permit analysis, and wildlife research and management. These applications are briefly presented to illustrate the usage of the methodology. With its powerful capabilities in information synthesis, analytical visualization, and spatial simulation and modeling, the decision support GIS provided cost-effective technical tools and a conceptual framework for integrating natural resource management with an ecosystem approach.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2008

The imaging performance of the SRC on Mars Express

The Mars Express spacecraft carries the pushbroom scanner high-resolution stereo camera (HRSC) and its added imaging subsystem super resolution channel (SRC). The SRC is equipped with its own optical system and a 1024×1024 framing sensor. SRC produces snapshots with 2.3 m ground pixel size from the nominal spacecraft pericenter height of 250 km, which are typically embedded in the central part of the large HRSC scenes. The salient features of the SRC are its light-weight optics, a reliable CCD detector, and high-speed read-out electronics. The quality and effective visibility of details in the SRC images unfortunately falls short of what has been expected. In cases where thermal balance cannot be reached, artifacts, such as blurring and “ghost features” are observed in the images. In addition, images show large numbers of blemish pixels and are plagued by electronic noise. As a consequence, we have developed various image improving algorithms, which are discussed in this paper. While results are encouraging, further studies of image restoration by dedicated processing appear worthwhile. The SRC has obtained more than 6940 images at the time of writing (1 September 2007), which often show fascinating details in surface morphology. SRC images are highly useful for a variety of applications in planetary geology, for studies of the Mars atmosphere, and for astrometric observations of the Martian satellites. This paper will give a full account of the design philosophy, technical concept, calibration, operation, integration with HRSC, and performance, as well as science accomplishments of the SRC.

Planetary and Space Science↗
USGS1955

U.S. Geological Survey Trace Elements and related reports through 1954

This report supersedes TEI-400, "U.S. Geological Survey Trace Elements and related reports through 1953." Part I is a numerical list of U.S. Geological Survey Trace Elements Investigations and Memorandum reports. This part lists not only reports (followed by a date) that have been transmitted to the U.S> Atomic Energy Commission, but also reports in preparation (followed by an asterisk) for which tentative titles were available on December 31, 1954. If a report, or portion of a report, has been published, the fact is indicated by the abbreviation of the medium of publication. (See also Part II.) Part II is a reference guide to Trace Elements and related reports that are available to the public (this part supersedes Part I of Bulletin 1019-B). These reports are grouped according to the type of publication or release. If a report, or portion of the report, has been published in more than one form, appropriate cross-references are given to indicate the other forms of publication. Abstracts published in Nuclear Science Abstracts are not included in Part II; however, if the abstract of a Trace Elements report has been published in NSA, the fact is indicated in Part I. Publications in process on December 31, 1954, are designated by an asterisk. Part III is a finding list of states, areas, and subjects and supersedes Part II of Bulletin 1019-B. It is based on information derived mostly from the titles of reports and, where titles are of general nature, from a cursory review of the reports. This list is not a complete index of the information given in Trace Elements and related reports, but is designed to find subjects of major interest, Because of the numerous entries for Colorado and Utah, information has been listed by counties and, where possible, by subject under these states. Other states have county listings only if a county is included in the title of a report; otherwise, area may be listed separately under the state. Major subjects are listed separately in the index and also, where appropriate under states. Analytical methods and subjects related to analytical research are listed under Analytical Methods and Research, but not separately throughout the index. Most mineralogic studies are included under the heading Mineralogy, but are not necessarily listed according to location. Part IV is an author index. The words “with” and “and” are used to indicate seniority of authorship. For example, a listing of Smith and Brown indicated that Smith is the senior author. A listing of Smith with Brown indicates that Brown is the senior author. In both parts III and IV all Trace Elements reports are listed, as well as other related reports that have not been issued as Trace Elements reports. The following abbreviations have been used: TEI, Trace Elements Investigations report; TEM, Trace Elements Memorandum report; OF, open file; TIS, Technical Information Service release; C, Circular; B, Bulletin; P, Professional Paper; MC, Maps and Charts; J, Journal; and NSA, Nuclear Science Abstracts.

Trace Elements Investigations↗
USGS2024

An introduction to Criteria for Reporting and Evaluating Exposure Datasets (CREED) for use in environmental assessments

Risks posed by environmental exposure to chemicals are routinely assessed to inform activities ranging from environmental status reporting to authorization and registration of chemicals for commercial uses. Environmental risk assessment generally relies on two key values generated from exposure data and ecotoxicity data. Data sets of measured concentrations of chemicals in environmental matrices, referred to here as exposure data, are widely used to support environmental risk management, decision-making, and reporting, such as for chemical screening, ecological or human health risk assessments, and establishment of guidelines. Practitioners have developed schemes to determine the suitability of ecotoxicity data for specific purposes, focused on evaluating reliability and relevance, but analogous schemes are not available for exposure data. Moreover, regulatory guidance arguably provides less resolution on reporting and evaluating exposure data sets compared to ecotoxicity data. The evaluation of exposure data sets is subject to limitations from variable or unreported data quality objectives and/or from differences in expert judgments, potentially introducing bias and leading to decisions based on flawed and/or inconsistent information. Exposure data sets should be evaluated for reliability and relevance prior to use in environmental assessments. This paper is the first of a four-paper series detailing the outcomes of a Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry technical workshop that has developed Criteria for Reporting and Evaluating Exposure Datasets (CREED). The workshop participants developed practical, systematic criteria for consistent and transparent evaluation of the reliability (quality) and relevance (fitness for purpose) of exposure data. This guidance should apply to many different (unspecified) purposes of assessment. CREED can be used to evaluate existing data sets, but can also inform data generators interested in improving their data collection and reporting to maximize data utility to other users. This first paper details existing frameworks for the evaluation of exposure data sets and demonstrates the need for CREED, drawing from different regulatory assessments, and describes the technical workshop.

Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management↗
USGS2007

Economic decision making and the application of nonparametric prediction models

Sustained increases in energy prices have focused attention on gas resources in low permeability shale or in coals that were previously considered economically marginal. Daily well deliverability is often relatively small, although the estimates of the total volumes of recoverable resources in these settings are large. Planning and development decisions for extraction of such resources must be area-wide because profitable extraction requires optimization of scale economies to minimize costs and reduce risk. For an individual firm the decision to enter such plays depends on reconnaissance level estimates of regional recoverable resources and on cost estimates to develop untested areas. This paper shows how simple nonparametric local regression models, used to predict technically recoverable resources at untested sites, can be combined with economic models to compute regional scale cost functions. The context of the worked example is the Devonian Antrim shale gas play, Michigan Basin. One finding relates to selection of the resource prediction model to be used with economic models. Models which can best predict aggregate volume over larger areas (many hundreds of sites) may lose granularity in the distribution of predicted volumes at individual sites. This loss of detail affects the representation of economic cost functions and may affect economic decisions. Second, because some analysts consider unconventional resources to be ubiquitous, the selection and order of specific drilling sites may, in practice, be determined by extraneous factors. The paper also shows that when these simple prediction models are used to strategically order drilling prospects, the gain in gas volume over volumes associated with simple random site selection amounts to 15 to 20 percent. It also discusses why the observed benefit of updating predictions from results of new drilling, as opposed to following static predictions, is somewhat smaller. Copyright 2007, Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Conference Paper↗
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↗
USGS2018

The map as knowledge base

This paper examines the concept and implementation of a map as a knowledge base. A map as a knowledge base means that the visual map is not only the descriptive compilation of data and design principles, but also involves a compilation of semantic propositions and logical predicates that create a body of knowledge organized as a map. The digital product of a map as knowledge base can be interpreted by machines, as well as humans, and can provide access to the knowledge base through interfaces to select features and other information from the map. The design of maps as a knowledge base involves technical approaches and a system architecture to support a knowledge base. This paper clarifies how a map as a knowledge base differs from earlier map theory models by investigating the knowledge-based concepts of implementation through logical modelling, a knowledge repository, user interfaces for information access, and cartographic visualization. The paper ends with proof of concepts for two types of cartographic data query.

International Journal of Cartography↗
USGS2011

The role of remote sensing observations and models in hydrology: The science of evapotranspiration

Over 15 years ago, Morton (1994) summarized the state of evapotranspiration (ET) research pessimistically: ‘There have been few significant advances in our knowledge of evaporation on an environmental scale over the past four decades, a state of affairs linked to the current sterility of hydrology and related environmental sciences. Furthermore, almost none of the advances have been used successfully in practice.’ He did not foresee the rapid progress in the ensuing years. These advances can be attributed largely to three convergent themes: 1) technical innovation; 2) synergy between disciplines; and 3) expressed need. The papers in this special issue address all of these three themes on remote sensing methods for ET estimation.

Hydrological Processes↗
USGS2009

Measurement of soil carbon oxidation state and oxidative ratio by 13 C nuclear magnetic resonance

The oxidative ratio (OR) of the net ecosystem carbon balance is the ratio of net O 2 and CO 2 fluxes resulting from photosynthesis, respiration, decomposition, and other lateral and vertical carbon flows. The OR of the terrestrial biosphere must be well characterized to accurately estimate the terrestrial CO 2 sink using atmospheric measurements of changing O 2 and CO 2 levels. To estimate the OR of the terrestrial biosphere, measurements are needed of changes in the OR of aboveground and belowground carbon pools associated with decadal timescale disturbances (e.g., land use change and fire). The OR of aboveground pools can be measured using conventional approaches including elemental analysis. However, measuring the OR of soil carbon pools is technically challenging, and few soil OR data are available. In this paper we test three solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) techniques for measuring soil OR, all based on measurements of the closely related parameter, organic carbon oxidation state (C ox ). Two of the three techniques make use of a molecular mixing model which converts NMR spectra into concentrations of a standard suite of biological molecules of known C ox . The third technique assigns C ox values to each peak in the NMR spectrum. We assess error associated with each technique using pure chemical compounds and plant biomass standards whose C ox and OR values can be directly measured by elemental analyses. The most accurate technique, direct polarization solid-state 13 C NMR with the molecular mixing model, agrees with elemental analyses to ??0.036 C ox units (??0.009 OR units). Using this technique, we show a large natural variability in soil C ox and OR values. Soil C ox values have a mean of -0.26 and a range from -0.45 to 0.30, corresponding to OR values of 1.08 ?? 0.06 and a range from 0.96 to 1.22. We also estimate the OR of the carbon flux from a boreal forest fire. Analysis of soils from nearby intact soil profiles imply that soil carbon losses associated with the fire had an OR of 1.09 1 (??0.00 3 ). Fire appears to be a major factor driving the soil C pool to higher oxidation states and lower OR values. Episodic fluxes caused by disturbances like fire may have substantially different ORs from ecosystem respiration fluxes and therefore should be better quantified to reduce uncertainties associated with our understanding of the global atmospheric carbon budget. Copyright 2009 by the American Geophysical Union.

Journal of Geophysical Research G: Biogeosciences↗