U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Cover Story

https://soundwaves.usgs.gov/

U.S. Department of the InteriorU.S. Geological Survey

Cover Story

Sound Waves Volume FY 2017, Issue No. 169April 2017

Seafloor Erosion in Coral Reef Ecosystems Leaves Coastal Communities at RiskBy Kimberly Yates and Heather Dewar

In the first ecosystem-wide study of changing sea depths at five large coral reef tracts in Florida, the Caribbean, and Hawai’i, USGS researchers found the sea-floor is eroding in all five places, and the reefs cannot keep pace with sea-level rise. As a result, coastal communities protected by the reefs are facing increased risks from storms, waves, and erosion.

In the Florida Keys, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Maui, coral reef degradation has caused seafloor depths to increase as sand and other seafloor materials have eroded over the past few decades, the USGS study found. In the waters around Maui, the seafloor losses amounted to 81 million cubic meters of sand, rock, and other material—about what it would take to fill up the Empire State Building 81 times, the researchers calculated.

As sea levels rise worldwide due to climate change, each of these ecologi-cally and economically important reef ecosystems is projected to be affected by

Elkhorn corals (Acropora palmata) on the seafloor along the northeastern coast of Buck Island, U.S. Virgin Islands, have died and collapsed into rubble. As coral reef structure degrades, habitat for marine life is lost and nearby coastlines become more susceptible to storms, waves, and ero-sion. Photo credit: Curt Storlazzi, USGS.

USGS Science Makes an Impact

This research has been featured in 25 major stories published in various news-papers, newsletters, and magazines since the paper was published on April 20, 2017. The research was featured in the Washington Post and Tampa Bay Times; made front-page news in the Miami Herald and Honolulu Star Advertiser; and prompted two stories in Energy and Environment News, among others.

The article was viewed and/or downloaded over 1,934 times in the first three weeks it was available online. The authors have received an outpouring of thanks from both the scientific community and concerned citizens for the work and for getting the information out to the public.

Resource managers in both Hawai’i and the U.S. Virgin Islands have requested the paper and results to include in their regional assessments of coral reefs; the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has also requested data.

(Seafloor Erosion continued on page 2)

Healthy elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata) on the seafloor along the south-eastern coast of Buck Island, U.S. Virgin Islands. Elkhorn coral is one of many important reef-building species that create 3D structure on the sea-floor. Coral reef structure provides habitat for marine life and helps break up waves as they approach the coastline. Photo credit: Curt Storlazzi, USGS.

increasing water depths. The question of whether coral colonies can grow fast enough to keep up with rising seas is the subject of intense scientific research.

But the USGS study, published April 20, 2017, in the journal Biogeosci-ences, found the combined effect of ris-

ing seas and seafloor erosion has already increased water depths more than what most scientists expected to occur many decades from now. Other studies that do not factor in seafloor erosion have pre-dicted seas will rise by between 0.5 and

2April 2017 Sound Waves Cover Story

Cover Story, continued

1 meter, or between 19 inches and 3 feet 3 inches, by 2100.

“Our measurements show that seafloor erosion has already caused water depths to increase to levels not predicted to occur until near the year 2100,” said biogeo-chemist Kimberly Yates of the USGS St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center, the study’s lead author. “At current rates, by 2100 seafloor erosion could in-crease water depths by two to eight times more than what has been predicted from sea-level rise alone.”

The study included areas of the reef tract in Florida’s Upper Keys and Lower Keys; looked at two reef ecosystems, St. Thomas and Buck Island, in the U.S. Virgin Islands; and also included the waters surrounding Maui. The researchers did not determine specific causes for the seafloor erosion in these coral reef ecosystems. But the authors pointed out that coral reefs worldwide are declining due to a combination of forces, including natural processes, coastal de-velopment, overfishing, pollution, coral bleaching, diseases, and ocean acidification (a change in seawater chemistry linked to the oceans’ absorption of more carbon di-oxide from the atmosphere).

For each of the five coral reef ecosys-tems, the team gathered detailed seafloor measurements from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) taken between 1934 and 1982, and also used surveys done from the late 1990s to the 2000s by the USGS Lidar Program and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Until about the 1960s, seafloor measurements were done by hand, using lead-weighted lines or sounding poles with depth mark-ings. From approximately the 1960s on, most measurements were based on the time it takes an acoustic pulse to reach the seafloor and return. The USGS researchers converted the old measurements to a for-mat comparable to recent lidar data.

They compared the old and new sets of measurements to find the mean eleva-tion changes at each site. The method has been used by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to track other kinds of sea-floor changes, such as shifts in shipping channels. This is the first time it has been applied to whole coral reef ecosystems.

Next the researchers developed a com-puter model that used the elevation chang-es to calculate the volume of seafloor material lost.

They found that overall, seafloor el-evation has decreased at all five sites, in amounts ranging from 0.09 meters (about 3.5 inches) to 0.8 meters (more than 2.5 feet). All five reef tracts also lost large amounts of coral, sand, and other seafloor materials to erosion.

“We saw lower rates of erosion—and even some localized increases in seafloor elevation—in areas that were protected, near refuges, or distant from human popu-lation centers,” Yates said. “But these were not significant enough to offset the ecosys-tem-wide pattern of erosion at each of our study sites.”

Worldwide, more than 200 million peo-ple live in coastal communities protected by coral reefs, which serve as natural bar-riers against storms, waves, and erosion. These ecosystems also support jobs, pro-vide about one-quarter of all fish harvests in the tropical oceans, and are important recreation and tourism sites.

“Coral reef systems have long been recognized for their important economic and ecological value,” said John Haines, Program Coordinator of the USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program. “This study tells us that they have a critical role in building and sustaining the physical struc-ture of the coastal seafloor, which supports healthy ecosystems and protects coastal communities. These important ecosystem services may be lost by the end of this cen-tury, and nearby communities may need to find ways to compensate for these losses.”

The study brought together ecosystem scientists and coastal engineers, who plan to use the results to assess the risks to coast-al communities that rely on coral reefs for protection from storms and other hazards.

The study is available at https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-1739-2017. The full citation for the article is:•  Yates, K.K., Zawada, D.G., Smiley, N.A.,

and Tiling-Range, G., 2017, Divergence of seafloor elevation and sea level rise in coral reef ecosystems: Biogeosciences, 14, 1739-1772, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-1739-2017.

(Seafloor Erosion continued from page 1)

ContentsCover Story 1News Briefs 3Research 5Fieldwork 7Meetings 8Staff and Center News 9Publications 13

Sound Waves

Editor Jolene Gittens

St. Petersburg, Florida Telephone: 727-502-8038

E-mail: jgittens@usgs.gov Fax: 727-502-8182

Assistant Editor Laura Torresan

Santa Cruz, California Telephone: 831-460-7468

E-mail: ltorresan@usgs.gov Fax: 831-427-4748

Print & Web Layout Editor Betsy Boynton

St. Petersburg, Florida Telephone: 727-502-8118

E-mail: bboynton@usgs.gov Fax: (727) 502-8182

SOUND WAVES (WITH ADDITIONAL LINKS) IS AVAILABLE ONLINE AT URL

https://soundwaves.usgs.gov/

Submission Guidelines

Deadline: The deadline for news items and publication lists for the 170th issue of Sound Waves is Wednesday, May 17, 2017.Publications: When new publications or products are released, please notify the editor with a full reference and a bulleted summary or description.Images: Please submit all images at publica-tion size (column, 2-column, or page width). Resolution of 200 to 300 dpi (dots per inch) is best. Adobe Illustrator© files or EPS files work well with vector files (such as graphs or dia-grams). TIFF and JPEG files work well with ras-ter files (photographs or rasterized vector files).

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

U.S. Geological Survey Earth Science Information Sources:

Need to find natural-science data or information? Visit the USGS Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ’s) at URL https://www2.usgs.gov/faq/Can’t find the answer to your question on the Web? Call 1-888-ASK-USGSWant to e-mail your question to the USGS? Send it to this address: ask@usgs.gov

3 Sound Waves April 2017News Briefs

News Briefs, continued

April 6—USGS scientists mapped the bottom of Alviso Slough in San Francisco Bay March 27–29 to measure scour caused by heavy storms. In the largest wetland-restoration project on the U.S. West Coast, the South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project is breaching levees to restore tidal flow to former commercial salt ponds. Managers worry that strong water flows—from levee breaches, storm runoff, or opening gates that route water into restored ponds—could stir up bot-tom sediment and re-mobilize mercury washed downriver from a now-closed mine. River flows in January and Febru-ary were the highest since 1998. USGS, which maps the slough regularly to moni-tor effects of levee breaches and seasonal variability, conducted the extra survey to capture impacts of the high flows. USGS scientists will use the data to improve computer simulations developed to fore-cast the effects of continued restoration and sea-level rise. For more informa-tion: https://marine.usgs.gov/news/archive.php#1078

} Bogoslof Volcano, Alaska: Ongoing Eruption through the Bering Sea

March 30—Hawaiʻi is not the only island in the United States with an ongo-ing eruption involving hot lava and cold water. Let’s go north to Alaska where scientists have been tracking an intermit-tent eruption of lava through water sur-rounding a small island volcano in the southern Bering Sea. On December 21, 2016, the volcano burst to life sending clouds of ash and water vapor tower-ing into the sky. Pilots were the first to see the eruption, calling in reports to air

traffic control. Soon, scientists with the Alaska Volcano Observatory and the National Weather Service saw the erup-tion cloud on satellite imagery. Using information about winds aloft, warn-ings of the forecast ash cloud path went out to airlines. For more information: https://hvo.wr.usgs.gov/volcanowatch/view.php?id=956

} Brown Bears, Sea Otters, and Seals, Oh My!—Unexpected Interactions on the Katmai Coast

March 30—Grant Hilderbrand, Chief of the Marine Ecosystems Office, USGS Alaska Science Center, gave a public lec-ture on March 30, 2017, at the USGS of-fices in Menlo Park, California. He high-lighted ongoing research on brown bears on the coast of the Katmai National Park in Alaska, including observations from video collars deployed on brown bears and implications for population health and species adaptability. The 90-minute video of the lecture is available at https://www.usgs.gov/media/videos/2017-march-public-lecture-brown-bears-sea-otters-and-seals-oh-my

} Florida Manatees Likely to Persist for At Least 100 Years

April 11—Florida’s iconic manatee population is highly likely to endure for the next 100 years, so long as wildlife managers continue to protect the marine mammals and their habitat, a new study by the USGS and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Research Institute has found. The study, conducted by a team of veteran manatee scientists, estimated there is less than a one-half of one percent chance that either Florida’s Atlantic or its Gulf of Mexico manatee population could fall to as few as 500 adults—the level that could imperil Florida manatees’ long-term sur-vival. “Today the Florida manatees’ num-bers are high. Adult manatees’ longevity is good, and the state has available habitat to support a population that is continuing to grow,” said USGS research ecologist Michael C. Runge. For more informa-tion: https://www.usgs.gov/news/florida-manatees-likely-persist-least-100-years-us-geological-survey

} Mapping the Effects of Storm Flow on a Wetland-Restoration Site in South San Francisco Bay

3

News Briefs

Sound Waves News BriefsEdited by Rex Sanders • April 2017

(News Briefs continued on page 4)

4April 2017 Sound Waves

News Briefs, continued

News Briefs

} Sex-Shifting Fish: Growth Rate Could Determine Sea Lamprey Sex

March 28—Unlike most animals, sea lampreys, an invasive, parasitic species of fish damaging the Great Lakes, could become male or female depending on how quickly they grow, according to a USGS study published today. Scientists with the USGS and Michigan State University, funded by the Great Lakes Fishery Com-mission, found that slower sea lamprey growth rates during the larval phase of development may increase the odds of sea lampreys becoming male. This discovery could be a critical step in developing ad-vanced technologies to control sea lam-prey. “Remarkably, we didn’t set out to study sex determination in sea lampreys—we were planning to study environmental effects on growth rates only,” said Nick Johnson, a USGS scientist and the lead author of the study. “We were startled when we discovered that these data may also reveal how sex is determined be-cause mechanisms of sex determination in lamprey are considered a holy grail for researchers.” For more information: https://www.usgs.gov/news/sex-shifting-fish-growth-rate-could-determine-sea-lamprey-sex

} Disappearing Beaches: Modeling Shoreline Change in Southern California

March 27—Using a newly-developed computer model called “CoSMoS-COAST” (Coastal Storm Modeling Sys-tem – Coastal One-line Assimilated Simu-lation Tool) scientists predict that with limited human intervention, 31 to 67 per-cent of Southern California beaches may become completely eroded (up to existing coastal infrastructure or sea-cliffs) by the year 2100 under scenarios of sea-level rise of 1 to 2 meters. “Beaches are perhaps the most iconic feature of California, and the potential for losing this identity is real. The effect of California losing its beaches is not just a matter of affecting the tourism economy. Losing the protecting swath of beach sand between us and the pounding surf exposes critical infrastructure, busi-nesses, and homes to damage,” said lead author of the study, Sean Vitousek, who was a post-doctoral fellow at the U.S. Geological Survey when he conducted this study. For more information: https://www.usgs.gov/news/disappearing-beaches-modeling-shoreline-change-southern-california

Related: Study Forecasting Erosion of Southern California Beaches Draws Wide-spread Media Attention https://marine.usgs.gov/news/archive.php#1077

} History of Abrupt Sinking of the Seal Beach Wetlands: New Study Reveals Past Quakes along Fault and Offers Glimpse into the Future

March 20—A new collaborative study shows evidence of prior abrupt sinking of the wetlands near Seal Beach, Califor-nia, caused by ancient earthquakes that shook the area at least three times in the past 2,000 years, according to research-ers. “Imagine a large earthquake—and it can happen again—causing the Seal

Beach wetlands to sink abruptly by up to 3 feet. This would be significant, especially since the area already is at sea level,” said Matthew Kirby, California State Univer-sity Fullerton (CSUF) professor of geo-logical sciences. Former USGS geologist and CSUF alumnus Robert Leeper led the study with Kirby and Brady Rhodes, CSUF professor emeritus of geological sciences. Leeper’s master’s thesis is based on the research findings. “These research findings have important implications in terms of seismic hazard and risk assess-ment in coastal Southern California and are relevant to municipal, industrial, and military infrastructure in the region,” said Leeper. For more information: https://www.usgs.gov/news/history-abrupt-sinking-seal-beach-wetlands-new-study-reveals-past-quakes-along-fault-and-offers

} USGS Scientists Offer Career Advice to Students at University of California, Santa

CruzMarch 20—Students considering ca-

reers in Earth and ocean sciences gained valuable information from USGS research scientists Amy East and Melissa Foley at a March 8 event at the University of Cali-fornia, Santa Cruz. East, Foley, and eight more scientists on the GEODES (Geosci-entists Encouraging Openness and Diver-sity in the Earth Sciences) Career Panel briefly described their career paths and then joined small groups of students for lively conversations that lasted more than 2 hours. Both graduate and undergraduate students attended the event, sponsored by the student organization GEODES. For more information: https://marine.usgs.gov/news/archive.php#1072

(News Briefs continued from page 3)

(News Briefs continued on page 5)

5 Sound Waves April 2017News Briefs / Research

News Briefs, continued

(News Briefs continued from page 4)

} More Headlines

• April 13: USGS Releases 2016 Lidar-Derived Topobathymetric Data for Assateague Island, Maryland and Vir-ginia • https://marine.usgs.gov/news/archive.php#1081

• April 6: USGS Center Director Inter-viewed by Channel 13 Fox News—Tampa • https://marine.usgs.gov/news/

archive.php#1080

• March 30: USGS Releases Sediment Data From Around Breton Island, Loui-siana • https://marine.usgs.gov/news/archive.php#1075

• March 30: USGS Oceanographer Attends One Gulf Summit and Gulf of Mexico Alliance All Hands • https://marine.usgs.gov/news/archive.php#1076

• March 22: USGS Researcher Ad-vises European-Union Coastal Hazard Project: Risc-kit • https://marine.usgs.gov/news/archive.php#1073

• March 20: USGS Seafloor-Mapping Expert Sam Johnson is Keynote Speaker at Geological Conference in South Af-rica • https://marine.usgs.gov/news/archive.php#1071

For all USGS Coastal and Marine Geol-ogy Program news, see: https://marine.usgs.gov/news/.

For all USGS news, see: https://www.usgs.gov/news.

Research

Subsea Permafrost and Associated Methane Hydrate on the U.S. Arctic Ocean MarginBy Carolyn Ruppel, Laura Brothers, and Patrick Hart

A collaboration between USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program research-ers and Bruce Herman, now retired from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) in Anchorage, Alaska, has pro-duced the most complete information to date about the seaward extent of remain-ing subsea permafrost and possible relict gas hydrate beneath the U.S. Beaufort Sea margin at the edge of the Arctic Ocean. Using industry seismic reflection data (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/wol1/doi/10.1002/2016GC006584/full) and legacy borehole logs (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016GC006582/full), the recent publications provide criti-cal insights about the contemporary state of subsea permafrost and establish a base-line for tracking continued degradation of the permafrost as the oceans warm.

Permafrost, which is ground that has been at temperatures colder than 32°F (0°C) for more than two years, forms when average air temperatures are cold enough to cause sustained freezing of water trapped in sediments. On the Alas-kan North Slope, permafrost that retains ice in sediment pore spaces (ice-bearing permafrost) is more than 1800 feet (550 meters) thick near Prudhoe Bay, based on studies led by USGS geologist Timothy Collett in the 1980s. Most of the con-tinuous permafrost that remains at high

northern latitudes in North America and Siberia formed during Ice Ages (global cooling events) in the late Pleistocene (between 2.6 million years ago and 11,700 years ago).

Despite its name, subsea permafrost does not form under the ocean. Instead, subsea permafrost refers to permafrost that formed on land and that was subsequently

inundated as sea level rose up to 390 feet (120 meters) starting ~18,000 years ago. On an annual basis, Arctic Ocean coastal waters are warmer than ambient air tem-peratures by at least 18°F (10°C), meaning that permafrost usually starts to thaw once flooded. The contemporary distribution of subsea permafrost beneath an Arctic

(Subsea Permafrost continued on page 6)

Map of subsea permafrost distributions on the U.S. and Canadian Arctic Ocean margin. The inset map shows the location of the larger map. Subsea permafrost on the Canadian margin was delin-eated in the 1980s (blue curve). The red curve on the U.S. margin was determined using over 62,000 miles (100,000 line kilometers) of industry seismic reflection data and marks the seaward extent of subsea permafrost that can be readily detected with seismic methods. The green circles denote boreholes that have geophysical data useful for constraining the occurrence of subsea permafrost or relict gas hydrate. The white curve marks the seaward extent of subsea permafrost as assumed since the 1990s.

6April 2017 Sound Waves

Research, continued

Research

Ocean continental shelf has implications for the initial state of the permafrost, the timing of sea-level rise, and the intensity of millennial-scale warming.

The new research challenges long-held assumptions about the offshore extent of subsea permafrost on the U.S. Arctic Ocean continental margin. Past maps have placed the seaward extent of subsea permafrost at the approximate edge of the continental shelf, in water depths of about 330 feet (100 meters). Based on the analysis of geophysical data sets, USGS and BOEM researchers conclude that most of the remaining subsea permafrost on the U.S. Arctic Ocean margin lies close to the present-day shoreline and in water less than 66 feet (20 meters) deep.

Aimee Devaris, the USGS Regional Director for the Alaska Region, notes that, “These collaborative studies have been ef-fective in advancing our understanding of the present and future state of the Arctic Ocean on the Alaskan margin. The work is useful for the U.S. government, as well as being relevant internationally to the research interests of Arctic Council coun-tries” (http://www.arctic-council.org/index.php/en/).

The limited extent of subsea permafrost on the U.S. margin contrasts with much better preservation of such permafrost on the Canadian part of the margin. Recent research on the offshore extent of subsea

permafrost on the Kara Sea margin is more consistent with the findings in the U.S. Arctic Ocean. The reasons for dif-ferent patterns of subsea permafrost pres-ervation on Arctic Ocean margins are a topic of active research. The persistence of subsea permafrost on the Canadian Beau-fort margin compared to the U.S. Beaufort Sea and Kara Sea margins may reflect the development of thicker or more widely distributed permafrost offshore Canada at the Last Glacial Maximum (~18,000 years ago), slower inundation during sea-level rise since that time, the effect of freshwa-ter discharge from the Mackenzie River, or other processes.

Subsea permafrost degradation also has implications for the potential release of methane from the seafloor into the ocean and/or atmosphere. Gas hydrate (http://woodshole.er.usgs.gov/project-pages/hydrates/primer.html), an icelike form of water and concentrated gas that is stable at low temperatures and moderate pres-sures, often occurs within and beneath permafrost. Methane is the most common gas sequestered in hydrate deposits, and sediment warming that leads to permafrost thaw may also cause the breakdown of gas hydrate and the release of methane. Even when no gas hydrate is present, carbon that has long been frozen in sediments may be transformed into methane by microbes after permafrost thaws. Nearly 99 percent of global gas hydrate deposits

(Subsea Permafrost continued from page 5) outside of Antarctica occur in deep wa-ter settings, but the remaining fraction (http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/je500770m) is associated with permafrost (including subsea permafrost) at high northern latitudes.

In a recent USGS-led review pa-per (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016RG000534/pdf), Arctic Ocean continental shelf sediments that presently host subsea permafrost were identified as one of the few gas hydrate settings in which long-term (millennial-scale) climate change processes could be driving contemporary breakdown of the methane hydrate. Methane released at the seafloor is often transformed into carbon dioxide due to microbial activity in the water column, a process that makes ocean waters more acidic. Some fraction of methane may also travel through the water column and reach the atmosphere on shallow continental shelves. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas, and the escape of methane to the atmosphere can exacerbate global warming.

The recently published subsea perma-frost papers show that relict gas hydrate that originally formed in or beneath perma-frost may still be present on the east-cen-tral part of the U.S. Arctic Ocean continen-tal shelf. When these new findings about relict hydrates are combined with data collected on USGS Gas Hydrates Project

(Subsea Permafrost continued on page 7)

Eroding permafrost on Alaska’s Arctic Coast. Inundation of permafrost like this produced subsea permafrost. Photo credit: Christopher Arp, USGS.

Gas hydrate (white material) binding together coarse-grained sediments made up of pebble-sized rocks. This sample was recovered during a project to explore permafrost-associated gas hydrates in Canada’s Mackenzie Delta.

7 Sound Waves April 2017

Research, continued

Research / Fieldwork

(Subsea Permafrost continued from page 6)

field expeditions (http://netl.doe.gov/File Library/Research/Oil-Gas/methane hydrates/MHNews_2012_June-pg7.pdf) that acquired geophysical (https://soundwaves.usgs.gov/2010/11/) and geochemical (http://marineemlab.ucsd.edu/steve/bio/Prudhoe1.pdf) data on the U.S. Beaufort continental shelf, it is clear that several factors control the distribution of different populations of methane with depth below the seafloor and with distance from the shoreline.

The recently completed studies use all the publicly available seismic and borehole logging data to constrain sub-sea permafrost distribution beneath the U.S. Arctic Ocean continental shelf. To develop more detailed maps of subsea permafrost and relict gas hydrate deposits will require the acquisition of new data or access to privately held datasets. Recent surveys conducted by the Scripps Institute

of Oceanography use electrical methods (http://marineemlab.ucsd.edu/steve/bio/Prudhoe1.pdf) to infer the distribution of frozen sea floor sediments offshore Prud-hoe Bay, Alaska, and represent an impor-tant first step in acquiring data to comple-ment the USGS and BOEM studies.

This research was partially supported by USGS-DOE Interagency agreements DE-FE0023495 and DE-FE0002911, by a 2010-2012 DOE NETL/NRC Methane Hy-drate Postdoctoral Fellowship to L.B. un-der DE-FC26-05NT42248, and by BOEM.

The full citations for the papers are:•  Brothers, L.L., Herman, B.M., Hart,

P.E., and Ruppel, C.D., 2016, Subsea ice-bearing permafrost on the U.S. Beaufort Margin—1. Minimum seaward extent defined from multichannel seismic reflection data: Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 17, 4354–4365, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GC006584.

•  Ruppel, C.D., Herman, B.M., Brothers, L.L., and Hart, P.E., 2016, Subsea ice-bearing permafrost on the U.S. Beaufort Margin—2. Borehole constraints: Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 17, 4333–4353, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GC006582.

•  Ruppel, C.D., and Kessler, J.D., 2017, The interaction of climate change and methane hydrates: Reviews of Geophysics, 55, 126-168, https://doi.org/10.1002/2016RG000534.

•  Brothers, L.L., Hart, P.E., and Ruppel, C.D., 2012, Minimum distribution of subsea ice-bearing permafrost on the U.S. Beaufort Sea continental shelf: Geophysical Research Letters, 39, L15501, https://doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052222.

Fieldwork

Recent FieldworkBy Rex Sanders • April 2017

USGS scientists studied eight locations in California, Florida, Massachusetts, and Panama in the past month, investi-gating wetland changes after a winter storm, coral reefs, peat cores, and much more. Here’s a quick overview of some coastal and offshore fieldwork by our researchers.

• St. Teresa, Florida: Tested the capa-bilities of the new Florida State Uni-versity research vessel Apalachee with a vibracoring rig, April 11–13. Details at: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2017-317-FA

• Panama: Collected data from six coral reefs in the Gulf of Chiriqui and Gulf of Panama to monitor coral abun-dance, coral calcification, and bioero-sion in relation to oceanographic vari-ability, February 27–April 6. Details at: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2017-301-FA

• San Francisco, California: Monitored changes in Ocean Beach sand volume and distribution, April 4. Details at: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2017-633-FA

• Cape Cod Bay, Massachusetts: Re-trieved current, wave, and pressure data from a nanopod mooring off Sandwich Town Neck Beach, April 3. Details at: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2017-017-FA

• Dry Tortugas National Park, Flor-ida: Retrieved oceanographic and geochemical data for coral reef stud-ies, March 1–31. Details at: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2017-310-FA

• South San Francisco Bay, California: Collected detailed post-storm bathym-etry in Alviso Slough, Coyote Creek, and Guadalupe Slough for a wetlands

restoration project, March 27–29. De-tails at: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2017-628-FA

• Ten Thousand Islands National Wildlife Refuge, Florida: Collected peat cores to examine rates of Holo-

Approximate locations of some recent USGS coastal and offshore fieldwork. Map base: NOAA.

(Recent Fieldwork continued on page 8)

8April 2017 Sound Waves

Fieldwork, continued

Fieldwork / Meetings

cene carbon burial and sea-level rise, March 26–29. Details at: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2017-314-FA

(Recent Fieldwork continued from page 7) • Monterey Bay, California: Final recovery of Coordinated Canyon Ex-periment oceanographic moorings in upper Monterey Canyon, March 21–23. Details at: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/fan_info.php?fan=2017-617-FA

For a complete list of USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program fieldwork, see: https://cmgds.marine.usgs.gov/data_search.php.

Meetings

Coastal and Marine Geology is Airborne!By Chris Sherwood, Jon Warrick, and Nathaniel Plant

The first two classes of USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program (CMGP) pilots have graduated from drone camp! Several Coastal and Marine Geology folks have completed the Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS; also known as “drones”) certification classes held by the Department of Interior Office of Aviation Safety and the USGS Unmanned Aerial Systems program. The first class was held February 27–March 3 at the USGS Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center (PCMSC) in Santa Cruz, California, and facilitated by local host Josh Logan. In addition to Josh, other newly minted pilots from the USGS Pacific Coastal and Ma-rine Science Center include Shawn Har-rison, Ferdinand Oberle, and Alex Sny-der. Jon Borden and Sandy Brosnahan, both from the USGS Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center (WHCMSC)

in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, became the first USGS East Coast pilots. All pilots have also passed a written exam offered by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and are commercially certified small UAS operators under the recent FAA Part 107 guidelines. The second drone camp was held April 17–21 in Gainesville, Florida, and produced more pilots, including Brad Bickford (Columbia River Research Lab-oratory), Joel Smith (Geologic Hazards Science Center), William Jones (Wetland and Aquatic Research Center [WARC]), Bradley Stith (WARC), Andrew Ritchie (PCMSC), Emily Sturdivant (WHC-MSC), Jenna Brown (St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center [SPC-MSC]), Karen Morgan (SPCMSC), and Christine Kranenburg (SPCMSC).

The UAS operators can now fly 3DR Solos, which are small quadcopters that can be equipped with a high-quality Ricoh camera for mapping, a GoPro camera for videos and wide-angle stills, or a five-

band multispectral MicaSense camera for imaging vegetation. Flight operations are permitted below 400 feet in daytime in unrestricted airspace more than five miles from airports. Federal law allows flights over private property; USGS policy is to give notice and obtain permission whenever possible. Flights over National Park Service or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service property require permits from those agencies.

UAS provide a fast and inexpensive way to make highly accurate three-dimensional maps (digital surface models and orthophoto mosaics with errors of less than 10 centimeters) of relatively small ar-eas (a few square kilometers). At present, ground-control points are required to pro-duce highly accurate maps, so UAS map-ping operations include a ground survey crew. In the future, advances in airborne GPS and inertial navigation will allow similar accuracies without ground control points. Other uses for UAS in coastal en-vironments include habitat mapping, ani-mal (e.g., bird or marine mammal) counts, and shallow bathymetric mapping. Future developments will allow measurement of waves and currents.

The 3DR Solo with GoPro Hero4 camera and gimbal. Coming to a survey area near you soon. Photo credit: Shawn Harrison, USGS.

Sandy Brosnahan (left) and Jon Borden at Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) training in Santa Cruz, California. Photo credit: Cian Daw-son, USGS.

Shawn Harrison uses his new skills to check out the surf at Santa Cruz, California. Photo credit: Shawn Harrison, USGS.

9 Sound Waves April 2017

Sound Waves April 2017

Staff and Center News Staff and Center News

Awards, continuedStaff and Center News

New Director of Pacific Coastal and Marine Science CenterBy Rex Sanders

On January 9, 2017, Guy Gelfenbaum took over as director of the USGS Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center in Santa Cruz and Menlo Park, California. Gelfenbaum replaced Robert (Bob) Rosenbauer, who led the center for more than six years until his retirement.

Gelfenbaum went to high school in the Midwest, playing water polo with a team that won the state championship. During his undergraduate geology and geophysics studies at the University of Wisconsin in Madison, he got a summer job with an oceanographer working on Lake Michigan.

Gelfenbaum pursued his master’s degree at the University of Washington (UW), studying the Columbia River estu-ary. He stayed at UW for his Ph.D. thesis on the fluid mechanics of turbidity cur-rents—which contains pages and pages of equations “that I couldn’t even pretend to understand now,” he says.

A chance encounter with USGS re-searchers during a fun run at a confer-ence led to a 1989 post-doc position, working on Monterey Canyon sediments offshore of California. Gelfenbaum’s next move took him to a permanent position at the USGS science center in St. Petersburg, Florida, for nine years, studying hydrodynamics and sediment transport in Mobile Bay, Alabama, and other locations.

Then the State of Washington contacted the USGS about starting a coastal ero-sion study. Gelfenbaum’s master’s degree work there led to a multi-year partner-ship—and another cross-country move back to what is now the USGS Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center.

Since then, Gelfenbaum has led many successful multi-partner research projects. Those include: a long-running collabora-tion with the Deltares Research Institute for computer modeling of ocean currents and sediment transport; investigating tsunami deposits to characterize coastal hazards; measuring and computer model-ing sediment transport in estuaries to im-prove estuarine health and protect coastal

communities; and a large project in Puget Sound, Washington, supporting deci-sion makers for restoration and recovery of ecosystems.

In the first edited interview, Gelfen-baum details his early days as Science Center Director, and part of his vision for the future. Then Mark Sogge, Gelfen-baum’s supervisor as the USGS Pacific Region Director, describes the impor-tance of selecting excellent science cen-ter directors.

Why did you apply for the center di-rector job?

I’ve felt for a long time that this is some-thing that I would be willing to do, and I thought I could do a good job. I’ve thought a lot about strategic planning and science leadership. There were certain aspects to the leadership that I brought to [research] proj-ects that would be useful, in terms of under-standing partner needs.

How’s it going so far?There’s an enormous amount of things

that come to the center director’s desk: interacting with the USGS programs and mission areas, interacting with the

region, interacting with the management staff, IT, admin, outreach, and our marine facility. And all the budgeting and per-sonnel issues.

On top of that, we have a change of [presidential] administration. There’s a lot of data calls, a lot of requests for informa-tion on the science that we do and the pri-orities and how much things cost.

Do you plan on any changes in direc-tion for the science center?

I did not feel like this team needed an overhaul by any means. What I’ll start off doing is looking at those opportunities that are coming down the road.

For example, there is an effort to bring together many different programs from the USGS to work together on subduction zones. The USGS is responsible for the subduction zones in the Aleutian Islands, Cascadia, and the Caribbean. There’s a real lack of basic information in terms of how often they rupture, and how long are the faults.

Other areas potentially include more work in the Arctic associated with coastal change.

What do you enjoy doing when you’re not working?

I’m very thankful that I get to commute to and from work on my bicycle, and so I can enjoy the beauty of the ride to the of-fice and enjoy the fact that we live here in Santa Cruz. I play soccer once or twice a week, and I still love to go snowboarding.

Last thoughts?I think the most important thing is that

we have a great staff—from science sup-port, to our senior researchers, to all our management teams for all the different groups. I’m really proud of what people do and the high level of motivation. I feel fortunate to be able to help lead a team that’s so productive.

Mark Sogge is director of the USGS Pacific Region, responsible for nine

Guy Gelfenbaum, new director of the Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center. Photo credit: Helen Gibbons, USGS.

(New Director continued on page 10)

10April 2017 Sound Waves Staff and Center News

Awards, continuedStaff and Center News, continued

science centers in California, Nevada, Hawai‘i, and other Pacific islands.

Why is hiring a science center direc-tor so critical?

Because a science center is where the rubber meets the road, in terms of accom-plishing our mission. On top of that, center director is a very challenging job. They have to meet the expectations of the re-gional director, the program coordinators, the mission area, reimbursable partners, and their own employees.

We did a survey of about 40 new sci-ence center directors a couple of years ago. When we asked what USGS job they found the most challenging, the majority of them identified center director. Interest-ingly, when asked what they considered their most enjoyable role in USGS, most again said center director.

Describe the recruitment and selec-tion process for a science center director.

I’ve always felt it very worthwhile to take the time needed to get as many good candidates as you can to apply. You want to end up getting the absolute best person that you can sitting in that chair.

We did an advertisement through USAJOBS, putting out recruitment no-tices by email, and we had people beating

the bushes to make sure that pools of people were aware of the recruitment. After reviewing a couple dozen applica-tions and selecting the top group, the first panel went through an initial phone interview. Then they made recommenda-tions on who to bring forward for face-to-face interviews.

We also had a second panel for those interviews, and a candidate seminar that everyone was invited to. That provides a chance to see how people present to a group, and how they connect with a larger group of people.

We also have the feedback panels, which are an opportunity for the candidate to interact with some of the employees from the center. The feedback panels do not rank candidates, they do not make recommendations on who to hire. They are literally just an opportunity to in-teract with the person, for the person to ask questions about the job, and for the panelists to give me feedback on their experience.

Then I have a one-on-one interview and conversation with each candidate, and often another follow-up discussion. Ul-timately, as selecting official, I make the final decision.

What are some of the most important attributes you look for?

I won’t go into all of them, but they are things such as communication skills, in-tegrity, the ability to generate a vision, and to make that be a foundation for action. Entrepreneurship, meaning the ability to articulate what is going on within a pro-gram or a center, and to be able to pursue new opportunities. Resilience is important, which I see as the ability to stay positive, and keep pushing for things in the face of challenges.

Bob Rosenbauer was center director for about six years. What did you like about working with him?

Bob was upfront, and you didn’t have to wonder what he was thinking. You didn’t have to worry that if he told you one thing he was going to do another. He was very personable, had a huge breadth of experi-ence, a lot of wisdom in how to deal with

people, and knew what it takes for a center to operate. Bob had a lot of integrity, was well liked and well respected. Those are great ingredients for the recipe for a suc-cessful center.

What are your thoughts on Guy Gelf-enbaum as center director?

I’m very excited that Guy accepted this position. He brings a tremendous amount of energy, and he has a breadth of knowl-edge about the kinds of things that go on in the USGS. Guy has great strength with partners, and with other parts of the organization. I have absolute confidence that Guy is the kind of leader who speaks his mind, and that isn’t afraid to ask hard questions. He also recognizes that some-times you have to make hard decisions.

What’s your take on the future of the USGS?

The USGS is a very robust organiza-tion. We do things that make a difference in so many ways, within the science realm, within the policy realm, and with, literally, people’s lives. What we do matters, and what we do has a constituency, and what we do is valued. The question I have is, “How will we adjust and change to what-ever new priorities and funding realities are coming in the future?” I don’t have a crystal ball. I think we stand in a very strong position to do fine, as long as we are willing to be nimble and help people understand the value of what we do.

(New Director continued from page 9)

Guy Gelfenbaum (center, wearing red bandana) collected eyewitness accounts of the Decem-ber 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. Photo credit: USGS.

Mark Sogge, USGS Pacific Region Director. Photo credit: USGS.

11 Sound Waves April 2017Staff and Center News

Awards, continuedStaff and Center News, continued

Bob Rosenbauer Retires as Science Center DirectorBy Rex Sanders

On January 7, 2017, Robert (Bob) Rosenbauer retired from the USGS after more than 42 years of public service. His last position was director of the Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center in Santa Cruz, California. As an emeritus scientist, he continues to advise the new director, Guy Gelfenbaum.

Before serving as science center direc-tor, Rosenbauer had a long career as a geochemist. In recent years, his research included: reconstructing past geologic en-vironments and changes in nearshore eco-system processes using chemical markers; storing carbon dioxide (the main cause of global warming) in deep reservoirs on land and beneath the seafloor; investigating the sources of tar balls found on California beaches; tracking the extent and fate of oil spilled in the Gulf of Mexico and San Francisco Bay; and mixing of groundwater and seawater near different shorelines.

In this edited interview, Bob reflects on his challenges and successes managing a science center, and the highlights of his USGS career.

In 2010, you volunteered to be the fourth temporary science center di-rector in less than a year, which got off to a rocky start.

We had gotten our budget really late in the year, and [USGS budget analyst] Paulette [Zamora] looked at it and told me, “Okay, where are you going to start making cuts?” And I’m going, “What? Is this the first thing I have to do?” But I was really impressed with how well everybody responded. Sadly, our budget from Congress has continued to decline but folks are incredibly entrepreneurial and accomplish some amazing things with limited resources.

How did you decide to stay on as per-manent science center director?

As I started to interact with the folks that would become my peers, it gradually dawned on me that I could do this job, and there are aspects of it that I think I would actually enjoy and places I could contribute. I had some reservations about

making a permanent change, but I was getting more knowledgeable about the breadth of science within the center, see-ing some opportunities, and feeling I could provide some long-needed stability to cen-ter management. So, I acquiesced. It was not a position to which I had ever aspired, but I cannot think of a better way to have capped my career with the USGS.

At one of our first meetings, I was surprised when you asked me what I wanted to do here.

Actually, I’ve asked other people that same question, as they’re going through transitions. As projects end you could eas-ily say, “You’re now assigned to this proj-ect, and you’ve got to support it.” I don’t think that’s the best way to go. At least I want to find out what a person’s prefer-ences are, where they think their skills and expertise are, and where they would want to maybe improve on that expertise, and what it is they would want to do. Matching existing staff expertise with center needs was often challenging, but accommodat-ing an individual’s preference was always a factor as long as it fit into our overall staffing structure. On the other hand, folks needed to know that they were being held

accountable and that there were conse-quences for not performing.

What was a typical day like?From the night before and on my com-

mute to the office, I would think and plan out my day. But the moment I walked in the door, within that hour, there’s usually something that needs immediate attention and just turns your whole day sideways. So it’s hard to plan short term. You have to respond often and quickly with a high de-gree of uncertainty, which is very disquiet-ing coming from a science background, where you want to do things in a very systematic, logical way. Well you try and do that, but you often don’t have all the in-formation you need to either respond or to make some decision, so you get as much as you can, and you make a decision and move forward.

What were your major accomplish-ments as science center director?

I came in with the goal of rebuilding the marine geology part of the center. So I made a big effort to recruit [USGS geophysicist] Danny Brothers to be the centerpiece of that. When I’d go out to the

Bob Rosenbauer (right) congratulates Guy Gelfenbaum as the new director of the USGS Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center. Photo credit: Rex Sanders, USGS.

Tar found on a California beach. Photo credit: USGS.

(Rosenbauer Retires continued on page 12)

12April 2017 Sound Waves Staff and Center News

Awards, continuedStaff and Center News, continued

[USGS Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center], I always made a point of touching base with Danny. It wasn’t that much of a tough sell, because there are many large and interesting problems out here on the West Coast.

Another accomplishment is nurturing along the climate change impact work, the great work that [USGS geologist] Patrick Barnard and others are doing. We’ve tried to really make that grow. He has taken it and made it even bigger than I thought it would ever be, in high demand and largely funded [from non-USGS sources].

The third thing is adding some stability to the support side of the staff. I felt like there should be permanency to some of the support staff, a tier level that would have the corporate knowledge on how we acquire data, and then beneath that level would be rotational [short-term positions].

What unfinished items did you leave for Guy?

“Where are the next research directions going to be?” The dilemma is anytime you start anything new, you’ve got to wind something else down. It’s tough to start new work, unless you somehow have new funding come in to do that work.

Any advice for Guy?Communication is key. And that’s of

course both ways. Make sure that he lis-tens to staff, actually really listens at all different levels, and really absorb that. Take in that information. And then com-municate back to appropriate levels. I’ve said this many times, but I was always amazed at what people knew, and then I was surprised at what they did not know. Those communications, that transparency, whenever possible, of what you’re doing and what decisions you’re making.

What’s your background?I’m from the East Coast, from a town

called Hackensack in New Jersey. Went to prep school in New York City at Ford-ham Prep, went to Holy Cross for my undergraduate work, and then went to the University of Southern California and Stanford for graduate work.

Your degrees were in geochemistry.They were initially in chemistry, and

then geochemistry.

How did you start working at the USGS?

I was accompanying a fellow gradu-ate student going to the USGS for an interview. I was just going along for the ride, actually. While he was sitting there, I ended up talking to [USGS then-branch chief] Dave Scholl. Then Dave called [USGS geochemist] Jim Bischoff, [previ-ously one of Rosenbauers’s professors at USC,] and said, “There’s a guy down here that says he knows you. Do you want to hire him?” And Jim said, “Sure.” That was back in 1974.

Jim and I worked together for close to 30 years, initially working on deep-sea hy-drothermal systems, and the possibility of mining manganese nodules. Then I ended up building these experimental laborato-ries with unique capabilities to mix rock and fluids and gases, and take samples of the fluid and gas, with time to monitor the chemical reactions. We made a lot of neat discoveries about hydrothermal systems over the years. Later, I went to work with Keith Kvenvolden, and learned some or-ganic geochemistry. Over the years, I be-

came increasingly independent and picked up other flavors of geochemistry and isotope geochemistry, as all of it applies to geologic processes.What’s next for you?

I’m trying to help Guy with the transi-tion as much as possible. He’s got a lot of questions, and it’s just a lot of informa-tion that I still need to hand off to him.

Once he feels confident that he doesn’t need my support anymore, I intend to disappear for about six months or so, then return as an emeritus. Then find something to do in combination with the experimental lab in Menlo Park and our new organic geochemistry lab in Santa Cruz.

Personally, I have a little baby grand piano that I have dismantled and am re-building, and hopefully will get back to actually playing. Then there is building my model train empire. I first have to fin-ish off the room, about 1,000 square feet in the basement. It’s going to be modeled after the old Hinton Division of the Chesa-peake and Ohio Railway. And there is five years of deferred maintenance around the house to keep me busy until my wife re-tires in another year or so when we intend to travel a bit.

(Rosenbauer Retires continued from page 11)

Bob Rosenbauer, recently retired Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center director. Photo credit: Leslie Gordon, USGS.

13 Sound Waves April 2017

Publications

Publications

Recent Publications

•  Alpert, A.E., Cohen, A.L., Oppo, D.W., DeCarlo, T.M., Gaetani, G.A., Hernandez-Delgado, E.A., Winter, A., and Gonneea, M., 2017, Twentieth century warming of the tropical Atlantic captured by Sr-U paleothermometry: Paleoceanography, v. 32, p. 146–160. [https://doi.org/10.1002/2016PA002976]

•  Aretxabaleta, A., Ganju, N.K., Butman, B., and Signell, R., 2017, Observations and a linear model of water level in an interconnected inlet-bay system: Journal of Geophysical Research: Oceans. [https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JC012318]

•  Barnard, P., Hoover, D.J., Hubbard, D.M., Snyder, A., Ludka, B.C., Allan, J., Kaminsky, G.M., Ruggiero Peter, Gallien, T.W., Gabel, L., McCandless, D., Weiner, H.M., Cohn, N., Anderson, D.L., et al., 2017, Extreme oceanographic forcing and coastal response due to the 2015–2016 El Niño: Nature Communications, v. 8. [https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14365]

•  Barrera, K. and Robbins L.L., 2017, Acidification and Increasing CO2 Flux Associated with Five, Springs Coast, Florida Springs (1991-2014): U.S. Geological Survey data release. [https://doi.org/10.5066/F7WW7FVW]

•  Baustian, M.M., Stagg, C.L., Perry, C.L., Moss, L.C., Carruthers, T.J.B., and Allison, M., 2017, Relationships between salinity and short-term soil carbon accumulation rates form marsh types across a landscape in the Mississippi River Delta: Wetlands, v. 37, p. 313–324. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s13157-016-0871-3]

•  Bernier, J.C., Kelso, K.W., Tuten, T.M., Stalk, C.A., and Flocks, J.G., 2017, Sediment data collected in 2014 and 2015 from around Breton and Gosier Islands, Breton National Wildlife Refuge, Louisiana: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1037. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1037]

•  Bjorndal, K.A., Bolten, A.B., Chaloupka, M., Saba, V.S., Bellini, C., Marcovaldi,

M.A.G., Santos, A.J.B., Bortolon, L.F.W., Meylan, A.B., Meylan, P.A., Gray, J., Hardy, R., Brost, B., Bresette, M., et al., 2017, Ecological regime shift drives declining growth rates of sea turtles throughout the West Atlantic: Global Change Biology. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13712]

•  Bosse, S.T., Flocks, J.G., and Forde, A.S., 2017, Digitized analog boomer seismic-reflection data collected during U.S. Geological Survey cruises Erda 90-1_HC, Erda 90-1_PBP, and Erda 91-3 in Mississippi Sound, June 1990 and September 1991: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1047. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1047]

•  Briggs, M., Campbell, S., Nolan, J., Walvoord, M.A., Ntarlagiannis, D., Day-Lewis, F.D., and Lane, J., 2017, Surface geophysical methods for characterising frozen ground in transitional permafrost landscapes: Permafrost and Periglacial Processes, v. 28, p. 52–65. [https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp.1893]

•  Butman, Bradford, Danforth, W.W., Clarke, J.E.H., and Signell, R.P., 2017, Bathymetry and backscatter intensity of the sea floor of the Historic Area Remediation Site in 1996, 1998, and 2000: U.S. Geological Survey data release. [https://doi.org/10.5066/F74B2ZGX]

•  Cloern, J.E., Jassby, A.D., Schraga, T., Kress, E.S., and Martin, C.A., 2017, Ecosystem variability along the estuarine salinity gradient: Examples from long-term study of San Francisco Bay: Limnology and Oceanography. [https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.10537]

•  Fregoso, T.A., Wang, R-F, Alteljevich, E., and Jaffe, B.E., 2017, San Francisco Bay-Delta bathymetric/topographic digital elevation model (DEM): U.S. Geological Survey data release. [https://doi.org/10.5066/F7GH9G27]

•  Gelfenbaum, G.R., Carlson, E.M., Stevens, A.W., and Rubin, D.M., 2017, Digital seafloor images and sediment grain size from the mouth of the Columbia River, Oregon and Washington, 2014: U.S. Geological Survey data release. [https://doi.org/10.5066/F7K64G8V]

•  Johnson, S.Y., Cochrane, G.R., Golden, N., Dartnell, P., Hartwell, S., Cochran, S., and Watt, J., 2017, The California Seafloor and Coastal Mapping Program–Providing science and geospatial data for California’s State Waters: Ocean and Coastal Management, v. 140, p. 88–104. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.02.004]

•  Johnson, N., Swink, W.D., and Brenden, T.O., 2017, Field study suggests that sex determination in sea lamprey is directly influenced by larval growth rate: Proceedings of the Royal Society: Biological Sciences, v. 284. [https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.0262]

•  Kayen, R., 2017, Seismic displacement of gently-sloping coastal and marine sediment under multidirectional earthquake loading: Engineering Geology. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enggeo.2016.12.009]

•  Kellogg, C.A., Goldsmith, D., and Gray, M.A., 2017, Biogeographic comparison of Lophelia-associated bacterial communities in the Western Atlantic reveals conserved core microbiome: Frontiers in Microbiology, v. 8. [https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.00796]

•  Krauss, K.W., Cormier, N., Osland, M.J., Kirwan, M.L., Stagg, C.L., Nestlerode, J.A., Russell, M.J., in A., Spivak, A.C., Dantin, D.D., Harvey, J.E., and Almario, A.E., 2017, Created mangrove wetlands store belowground carbon and surface elevation change enables them to adjust to sea-level rise: Scientific Reports, v. 7. [https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-01224-2]

(Recent Publications continued on page 14)

14April 2017 Sound Waves

Publications, continued

Publications

•  Locker, S.D., Miselis, J.L., Buster, N.A., Hapke, C.J., Wadman, H.M., McNinch, J.E., Forde, A.S., and Stalk, C.A., 2017, Nearshore sediment thickness, Fire Island, New York: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2017–1024, 29 p. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171024]

•  Marot, M.E., Smith, C.G., Adams, C.S., and Richwine, K.A., 2017, Sediment lithology and radiochemistry from the back-barrier environments along the northern Chandeleur Islands, Louisiana—March 2012: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1045. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1045]

•  Mickey, R.C., Long, J.W., Plant, N.G., Thompson, D.M., and Dalyander, P.S., 2017, A methodology for modeling barrier island storm-impact scenarios: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2017–1009. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171009]

•  Mickey, R.C., Long, J.W., Thompson, D., Plant, N., Dalyander, P.S., 2017, Storm-Impact Scenario XBeach Model Inputs and Results: U.S. Geological Survey data release. [http://dx.doi.org/10.5066/F72F7KJK]

•  Morgan, K.L.M., 2017, Baseline coastal oblique aerial photographs collected from Dauphin Island, Alabama, to Breton Island, Louisiana, June 9, 2011: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1044. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1044]

•  Morgan, K.L.M., 2017, Winter 2016, part A—Coastal oblique aerial photographs collected from the South Carolina/North Carolina border to Assateague Island, Virginia, February 18–19, 2016: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1029. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1029]

•  Morgan, K.L.M., 2017, Winter 2016, part B—Coastal oblique aerial photographs collected from Assateague Island, Virginia, to Montauk Point, New York, March 8–9, 2016: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1030, [https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1030]

•  Morgan, K.L.M., and DeWitt, N.T., 2017, Post-Hurricane Katrina coastal oblique aerial photographs collected from Panama City, Florida, to Lakeshore, Mississippi, and the Chandeleur Islands, Louisiana, August 31, 2005: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1033. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1033]

•  Nelson, T.R., Miselis, J.L., Hapke, C.J., Brenner, O.T., Henderson, R.E., Reynolds, B.J., and Wilson, K.E., 2017, Bathymetry data collected in October 2014 from Fire Island, New York—The wilderness breach, shoreface, and bay: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1034. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1034]

•  Paxton, S.T., Pitman, J.K., Kinney, S.A., Gianoutsos, N.J., Pearson, O.N., Whidden, K.J., Dubiel, R.F., Schenk, C.J., Burke, L.A., Klett, T.R., Leathers-Miller, H.M., Mercier, T.J., Haines, S.S., Varela, B.A., et al., 2017, Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources in the Bossier Formation, U.S. Gulf Coast, 2016: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2017–3015. [https://doi.org/10.3133/fs20173015]

•  Paxton, S.T., Pitman, J.K., Kinney, S.A., Gianoutsos, N.J., Pearson, O.N., Whidden, K.J., Dubiel, R.F., Schenk, C.J., Burke, L.A., Klett, T.R., Leathers-Miller, H.M., Mercier, T.J., Haines, S.S., Varela, B.A., et al., 2017, Assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources in the Haynesville Formation, U.S. Gulf Coast, 2016: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2017–3016. [https://doi.org/10.3133/fs20173016]

•  Phillips, S.W., Hyer, K., and Goldbaum, E., 2017, U.S. Geological Survey Science—Improving the value of the Chesapeake Bay watershed: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2017–3031. [https://doi.org/10.3133/fs20173031]

•  Reich, K.J., López-Castro, M.C., Shaver, D.J., Iseton, C., Hart, K.M., Hooper, M.J., and Schmitt, C.J., 2017, δ13C and δ15N in

the endangered Kemp’s ridley sea turtle Lepidochelys kempii after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill: Endangered Species Research, v. 33, p. 281–289. [https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00819]

•  Runge, M.C., Sanders-Reed, C.A., Langtimm, C.A., Hostetler, J.A., Martin, Julien, Deutsch, C.J., Ward-Geiger, L.I., and Mahon, G.L., 2017, Status and threats analysis for the Florida manatee (Trichechus manatus latirostris), 2016: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigation Report 2017–5030, 40 p., [https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20175030]

•  Ruppel, C.D., and Kessler, J.D., 2017, The interaction of climate change and methane hydrates: Reviews of Geophysics, v. 55, p. 126–168. [https://doi.org/10.1002/2016RG000534]

•  Safak, I., List, J., Warner, J.C., and Kumar, N., 2017, Observations and 3D hydrodynamics-based modeling of decadal-scale shoreline change along the Outer Banks, North Carolina: Coastal Engineering, v. 120, p. 78–92. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2016.11.014]

•  Schill, W.B., Benzel, W.M., Fisher, S.C., Griffin, D.W., Jones, D.K., Loftin, K.A., Iwanowicz, L.R., and Reilly, T.J., 2017, Matrix inhibition PCR and Microtox® 81.9% screening assay analytical results for samples collected for the Sediment-Bound Contaminant Resiliency and Response Strategy pilot study, northeastern United States, 2015: U.S. Geological Survey data release. [https://doi.org/10.5066/F7F47MBM]

•  Serafin, K.A., Ruggiero, P., and Stockdon, H.F., 2017, The relative contribution of waves, tides, and nontidal residuals to extreme total water levels on U.S. West Coast sandy beaches: Geophysical Research Letters, v. 44, p. 1839–1847. [https://doi.org/10.1002/2016GL071020]

•  Sliter, R.W., Conrad, J.E., Ryan, H.F., and Triezenberg, P.J., 2017, Chirp

(Recent Publications continued from page 13)

(Recent Publications continued on page 15)

15 Sound Waves April 2017

Publications, continued

Publications

seismic-reflection data of field activity S-5-09-SC: San Pedro Basin, offshore southern California from 2009-07-06 to 2009-07-10: U.S. Geological Survey data release. [https://doi.org/10.5066/F75Q4T8F]

•  Sliter, R.W., Conrad, J.E., Ryan, H.F., and Triezenberg, P.J., 2017, Minisparker seismic-reflection data of field activity S-5-09-SC: San Pedro Basin, offshore southern California from 2009-07-06 to 2009-07-10: U.S. Geological Survey data release. [https://doi.org/10.5066/F7F769QG]

•  Stalk, C.A., DeWitt, N.T., Kindinger, J.L., Flocks, J.G., Reynolds, B.J., Kelso, K.W., Fredericks, J.J., and Tuten, T.M., 2017, Coastal single-beam bathymetry data collected in 2015 from Raccoon Point to Point Au Fer Island, Louisiana: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 1041. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1041]

•  Takesue, R.K., and Storlazzi, C., 2017, Sources and dispersal of land-based runoff from small Hawaiian drainages to a coral reef: Insights from geochemical signatures: Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, v. 188, p. 69–80. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2017.02.013]

•  Thompson, D.M., Dalyander, P.S., Long, J.W., and Plant, N.G., 2017, Correction of elevation offsets in multiple co-located lidar datasets: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2017–1031, 10 p. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171031]

•  Thorne, K.M., Elliott-Fisk, D.L., Freeman, C., Bui, T.-V.D., Powelson,

K., Janousek, C., Buffington, K.J., and Takekawa, J.Y., 2017, Are coastal managers ready for climate change? A case study from estuaries along the Pacific coast of the United States: Ocean and Coastal Management. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.02.010]

•  Vitousek, S., Barnard, P., Limber, P.W., Erikson, L., and Cole, B., 2017, A model integrating longshore and cross-shore processes for predicting long-term shoreline response to climate change: Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface. [https://doi.org/10.1002/2016JF004065]

•  Wang, H., Chen, Q., Hu, K., Snedden, G.A., Hartig, E.K., Couvillion, B.R., Johnson, C.L., and Orton, P.M., 2017, Numerical modeling of the effects of Hurricane Sandy and potential future hurricanes on spatial patterns of salt marsh morphology in Jamaica Bay, New York City: Open-File Report Report 2017–1016, 56 p. [https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171016]

•  Wang, H., Chen, Q., La Peyre, M.K., Hu, K., and La Peyre, J.F., 2017, Predicting the impacts of Mississippi River diversions and sea-level rise on spatial patterns of eastern oyster growth rate and production: Ecological Modelling, v. 352, p. 40–53. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.02.028]

•  Warner, J.C., Schwab, W.C., List, J., Safak, I., Liste, M., and Baldwin, W.E., 2017, Inner-shelf ocean dynamics and seafloor morphologic changes during Hurricane Sandy: Continental Shelf

Research, v. 138, p. 1–18. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2017.02.003]

•  Weil, E., Rogers, C.S., and Croquer, A., 2017, Octocoral diseases in a changing ocean, in Marine animal forests—The ecology of benthic biodiversity hotspots: Springer, p. 1–55. [https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17001-5_43-1]

•  Witt, Verena, Ayris, P.M., Damby, D.E., Cimarelli, Corrado, Kueppers, Ulrich, Dingwell, D.B., and Wörheide, Gert, 2017, Volcanic ash supports a diverse bacterial community in a marine mesocosm: Geobiology, v. 15, p. 453–463. [https://doi.org/10.1111/gbi.12231]

•  Wood, N.J. and Jones, J.M., 2017, Tsunami Travel Time Maps for Del Norte and Humboldt Counties, CA, reference year 2010: U.S. Geological Survey data release. [https://doi.org/10.5066/F7CC0XWN]

•  Wood, N.J., Wilson, R.I., Ratliff, J.L., Peters, J., MacMullan, E., Krebs, T., Shoaf, K., and Miller, K., 2017, Community disruptions and business costs for distant tsunami evacuations using maximum versus scenario-based zones: Natural Hazards, v. 86, p. 619–643. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2709-y]

•  Yates, K.K., Zawada, D.G., Smiley, N.A., and Tiling-Range, G., 2017, Divergence of seafloor elevation and sea level rise in coral reef ecosystems: Biogeosciences, 14, 1739–1772, [https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-14-1739-2017].

(Recent Publications continued from page 14)