Surficial and Downcore Sedimentological and Foraminiferal Microfossil Data from St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida

Frequently anticipated questions:

• What does this data set describe?
  1. How might this data set be cited?
  2. What geographic area does the data set cover?
  3. What does it look like?
  4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?
  5. What is the general form of this data set?
  6. How does the data set represent geographic features?
  7. How does the data set describe geographic features?
• Who produced the data set?
  1. Who are the originators of the data set?
  2. Who also contributed to the data set?
  3. To whom should users address questions about the data?
• Why was the data set created?
• How was the data set created?
  1. From what previous works were the data drawn?
  2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?
  3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?
• How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?
  1. How well have the observations been checked?
  2. How accurate are the geographic locations?
  3. How accurate are the heights or depths?
  4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?
  5. How consistent are the relationships among the data, including topology?
• How can someone get a copy of the data set?
  1. Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?
  2. Who distributes the data?
  3. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set?
  4. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?
  5. How can I download or order the data?
• Who wrote the metadata?

What does this data set describe?

1. How might this data set be cited?
   Ellis, Alisha M., 20220331, Surficial and Downcore Sedimentological and Foraminiferal Microfossil Data from St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida:.

   This is part of the following larger work.
   Ellis, Alisha M., Smith, Christopher G., Vargas, Joseph M., and Everhart, Cheyenne, 20220331, Surficial and Downcore Sedimentological and Foraminiferal Microfossil Data from St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida: U.S. Geological Survey Data Release dos:10.5066/P97BQ2DT, U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg, FL.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.5066/P97BQ2DT

2. What geographic area does the data set cover?

   West_Bounding_Coordinate: -84.21682
   East_Bounding_Coordinate: -84.20008
   North_Bounding_Coordinate: 30.08901
   South_Bounding_Coordinate: 30.07754
   

3. What does it look like?
4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?

   Beginning_Date: 15-Oct-2019

   Ending_Date: 18-Oct-2019

   Currentness_Reference:

   Ground condition

5. What is the general form of this data set?

   Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: Multimedia presentation
   

6. How does the data set represent geographic features?
   1. How are geographic features stored in the data set?
      This is a Point data set.
   2. What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features?
      Horizontal positions are specified in geographic coordinates, that is, latitude and longitude. Latitudes are given to the nearest 0.0197459685. Longitudes are given to the nearest 0.0258684611. Latitude and longitude values are specified in Decimal Degrees. The horizontal datum used is WGS_1984.
      The ellipsoid used is WGS_84.
      The semi-major axis of the ellipsoid used is 6378137.0.
      The flattening of the ellipsoid used is 1/298.257223563.
      
7. How does the data set describe geographic features?

   19CCT05_SiteInformation.xlsx

   Microsoft Excel workbook defining the field sampling dates, site locations, elevations, water depths, core lengths and compaction, and water quality parameters for the push cores and surficial sediment samples collected from St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA, project ID 19CCT05). A value of a single dash indicates that there is no data for that core or sample. (Source: USGS)

   19CCT05_SiteInformation.csv

   Comma-separated values text file defining the field sampling dates, site locations, elevations, water depths, core lengths and compaction, and water quality parameters for the push cores and surficial sediment samples collected from St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA, project ID 19CCT05). A value of a single dash indicates that there is no data for that core or sample. (Source: USGS)

   Site ID

   Sample identifier assigned by USGS scientist consisting of STM to indicate St. Marks and a three-digit number. (Source: USGS) Character string

   Sampling Date(s)

   Date identifier (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	10/15/2019
   Maximum:	10/18/2019
   Units:	mm/dd/yyyy

   Type of Samples Collected

   Additional sample identifier designations appended to identify sample type collected at a single site: M, marsh push core; R, Russian peat auger; R50, single 50-cm section of Russian peat auger for microbial analyses; G, estuarine PONAR grab; S, marsh surface sample; F, foraminiferal surface sample. (Source: USGS) Character string

   Latitude (WGS84)

   Latitude of station location, in decimal degrees (World Geodetic System of 1984). (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	30.07754
   Maximum:	30.08901
   Units:	Decimal degrees
   Resolution:	0.00001

   Longitude (WGS84)

   Longitude of site location, in decimal degrees (World Geodetic System of 1984). (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	-84.21682
   Maximum:	-84.20008
   Units:	Decimal degrees
   Resolution:	0.00001

   Elevation (NAVD88 G12B; m)

   Elevation of site location, meters (North American Vertical Datum of 1988, Geoid 12B). (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.338
   Maximum:	0.844
   Units:	meters
   Resolution:	0.001

   Water Depth (m)

   The depth of the water recorded at each estuarine site, in meters. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.8
   Maximum:	2.3
   Units:	meters
   Resolution:	0.1

   Field Estimated Recovered Push Core Length (cm)

   The approximate length of the push core collected, in centimeters, as recorded in the field. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	36.0
   Maximum:	55.0
   Units:	centimeters
   Resolution:	0.5

   Compaction During Push Coring (cm)

   The approximate amount of compaction withstood by the push core, in centimeters, as recorded in the field. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	4.5
   Maximum:	8.0
   Units:	centimeters
   Resolution:	0.5

   Recovered Peat Auger Core Length (cm)

   The total length of the Russian Peat Auger collected at each site in centimeters, as recorded in the field. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	119.0
   Maximum:	150.0
   Units:	centimeters
   Resolution:	0.5

   Number of Peat Auger Sections (N)

   The total number of 50-centimeter sections of Russian Peat Augers collected at each station. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	3
   Maximum:	3
   Units:	The number of 50-centimeter sections
   Resolution:	1

   Depth to Base of Peat (cm)

   The estimated vertical extent/depth of the marsh unit, in centimeters. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	89
   Maximum:	125
   Units:	centimeters
   Resolution:	1.0

   Temperature (°C)

   Water temperature in degrees Celsius at each site. (Source: YSI)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	19.7
   Maximum:	28.1
   Units:	Degrees Celsius
   Resolution:	0.1

   Barometric Pressure (mmHg)

   Barometric pressure, in millimeters of mercury, at each site. (Source: YSI)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	756.6
   Maximum:	760.9
   Units:	Millimeters of mercury
   Resolution:	0.1

   Dissolved Oxygen (%)

   Percent dissolved oxygen at each core location. (Source: YSI)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	2.4
   Maximum:	117.0
   Units:	Percent
   Resolution:	0.1

   Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)

   Dissolved oxygen in milligrams per liter at each core location. (Source: YSI)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.17
   Maximum:	8.89
   Units:	Milligrams per liter
   Resolution:	0.1

   Specific Conductance (mS/cm)

   Specific conductance in millisiemens per centimeter at core location. (Source: YSI)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	17.5
   Maximum:	43.4
   Units:	Millisiemens per centimeter
   Resolution:	0.1

   Salinity

   Salinity at each core location. (Source: YSI)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	10.3
   Maximum:	27.9
   Units:	Practical salinity units
   Resolution:	0.1

   pH

   pH at each core location (Source: YSI)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	6.2
   Maximum:	7.8
   Units:	Hydrogen ion concentrations
   Resolution:	0.1

   pH (mV)

   pH in millivolts at each core location. (Source: YSI)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	-112.9
   Maximum:	88.6
   Units:	Millivolts
   Resolution:	0.1

   Oxidation-Reduction Potential (mV)

   Oxidation-reduction potential in millivolts at each core location. (Source: YSI)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	-340.9
   Maximum:	135.1
   Units:	Millivolts
   Resolution:	0.1

   19CCT05_SedimentPhysicalProperties.xlsx

   Microsoft Excel workbook listing water content, porosity, bulk density and loss-on-ignition data for sediment cores and surface samples collected from St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA). The results for each core are provided on its own tab. Surficial sediment samples are included in its own tab, named ‘Surface’. Values of N/D indicate no data was recorded for that sample. (Source: USGS)

   19CCT05_SedimentPhysicalProperties.csv

   Comma-separated values text file listing water content, porosity, bulk density and loss-on-ignition data for sediment cores and surface samples collected from St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA). Values of N/D indicate no data was recorded for that sample. (Source: USGS)

   Sample ID

   Sample identifier assigned by USGS scientist, S appended is for a marsh surface sample, G is for a petite PONAR grab sample, PP indicates physical parameters subsample, A, B, and C indicate laboratory replicates of a single sample. Attribute label only utilized in .xlsx surface samples tab. (Source: USGS) Character string

   Core ID

   Core identifier assigned by USGS scientist, M indicates the sample is a marsh push core, PP indicates physical parameters subsample, A, B, and C indicate laboratory replicates of a single sample. Attribute label only utilized in .xlsx core sample tabs. (Source: USGS) Character string

   Core/Sample ID

   Core or surface sample identifier assigned by USGS scientist, M indicates the sample is a marsh push core, S appended is for a marsh surface sample, G is for a petite PONAR grab sample, PP indicates physical parameters subsample, A, B, and C indicate laboratory replicates of a single sample. Attribute label only untilized in .csv file. (Source: USGS) Character string

   Depth (cm)

   Depth interval in centimeters measured below the core surface, A, B and C indicates laboratory replicate. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0-1
   Maximum:	71-72
   Units:	centimeters
   Resolution:	1

   Water Content 60°C (g-water/g-wet)

   The ratio of the mass of water to the mass of wet sediment when sample is dried to 60 degrees Celsius. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.17
   Maximum:	0.87
   Units:	Grams of water per grams of wet sediment
   Resolution:	0.01

   Dry Bulk Density (g/cm^3)

   Dry bulk density of the sediment interval. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.13
   Maximum:	1.58
   Units:	Grams per cubic centimeter
   Resolution:	0.01

   QA

   Quality Assurance indicator for bulk density data only; 0 indicates data meets all requirements. (Source: USGS) Character string

   Loss on Ignition (g-OM/g-dry)

   The ratio of the mass of organic matter combusted at 550 degrees Celsius, in grams, to the pre-combusted mass of dry sediment, in grams. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.00
   Maximum:	0.49
   Units:	Grams of organic matter per grams of dry sediment
   Resolution:	0.01

   QA

   Quality Assurance indicator for all loss on ignition data a bulk density data where a separate QA column is not present; 0 indicates data meets all requirements, C indicates minor deficiencies meeting QC requirements, but the overall data quality is judged to be reliable. (Source: USGS) Character string

   19CCT05_GammaSpectroscopy.xlsx

   Microsoft Excel workbook summarizing the total beryllium-7, cesium-137, lead-210, radium-226, thorium-234, and potassium-40, and their associated errors for each depth interval for the sediment cores and surface samples collected from the St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA). The results are provided for each core on its own tab. Values of ND indicate not detected, and values of a double dash indicate no reported value for that sample or core. Refer to the 19CCT05_Core_GammaSpectroscopy.csv and 19CCT05_Surface_GammaSpectroscopy.csv files and their associated attribute definitions below for more information about the fields included in this Microsoft Excel workbook. (Source: USGS)

   19CCT05_Core_GammaSpectroscopy.csv

   Comma-separated values text file summarizing the total beryllium-7, cesium-137, lead-210, radium-226, thorium-234, and potassium-40, and their associated errors for each depth interval for the sediment cores collected from the St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA). Values of ND indicate not detected, and values of a double dash indicate no reported value for that core. (Source: USGS)

   Sample ID

   Sample identifier assigned by USGS scientist; M indicates the sample is a marsh push core. The (A) and (B) following STM013M indicate replicate cores, with each core appened with its replicate identifier. Attribute label only utilized in .xlsx surface samples tabs. (Source: USGS) Character string

   Core ID

   Core identifier assigned by USGS scientist; M indicates the sample is a marsh push core. The (A) and (B) following STM013M indicate replicate cores, with each core appened with its replicate identifier. (Source: USGS) Character string

   Depth (cm)

   Depth interval in centimeters measured below the core surface. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0-1
   Maximum:	29-30
   Units:	centimeters
   Resolution:	1.0

   Be-7 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of beryllium-7 for each centimeter interval of every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	1.16
   Maximum:	1.16
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Be-7 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of beryllium-7 for each centimeter interval of every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.57
   Maximum:	0.57
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Cs-137 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of cesium-137 for each centimeter interval of every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.08
   Maximum:	0.77
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Cs-137 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of cesium-137 for each centimeter interval for every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.04
   Maximum:	0.11
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Pb-210 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of lead-210 for each centimeter interval of every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	1.16
   Maximum:	15.91
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Pb-210 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of lead-210 for each centimeter interval for every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.13
   Maximum:	0.63
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Ra-226 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of radium-226 for each centimeter interval of every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.8
   Maximum:	1.73
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Ra-226 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of radium-226 for each centimeter interval for every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.05
   Maximum:	0.14
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Th-234 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of thorium-234 for each centimeter interval of every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	1.76
   Maximum:	8.11
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Th-234 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of thorium-234 for each centimeter interval for every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.17
   Maximum:	0.56
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   K-40 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of potassium-40 for each centimeter interval of every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	8.96
   Maximum:	21.07
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   K-40 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of potassium-40 for each centimeter interval for every core (and surface samples in the .xlsx workbook) in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.64
   Maximum:	1.98
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   QA

   Quality Assurance indicator, 0 indicates data meets all requirements, C indicates minor deficiencies meeting QC requirements, but the overall data quality is judged to be reliable. (Source: USGS) Character string

   19CCT05_Surface_GammaSpectroscopy.csv

   Comma-separated values text file summarizing the total cesium-137, lead-210, radium-226, thorium-234, and potassium-40, and their associated errors for each depth interval for the sediment surface samples collected from the St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA). Values of ND indicate not detected, and values of a double dash indicate no reported value for that sample. (Source: USGS)

   Sample ID

   Sample identifier assigned by USGS scientist; S indicates the sample is a marsh surface sample and G indicates the sample is an estuarine PONAR grab sample. (Source: USGS) Character string

   Depth (cm)

   Depth interval in centimeters for the surface sample. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0-1
   Maximum:	0-1
   Units:	centimeters
   Resolution:	1.0

   Date Collected

   Date surface sample was collected in the field. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	10/16/2019
   Maximum:	10/18/2019
   Units:	MM/DD/YYYY

   Date Counted

   Date surface sample was counted on the gamma spectrometer. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	10/28/2019
   Maximum:	05/18/2020
   Units:	MM/DD/YYYY

   Run Number

   Surface samples were run multiple times, indicates which run the presented data represents. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	1
   Maximum:	3
   Units:	whole number

   Be-7 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of beryllium-7 for each centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.37
   Maximum:	3.00
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Be-7 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of beryllium-7 for each centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.15
   Maximum:	0.88
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Cs-137 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of cesium-137 for each centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.06
   Maximum:	0.32
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Cs-137 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of cesium-137 for each centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.02
   Maximum:	0.10
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Pb-210 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of lead-210 for each centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.24
   Maximum:	16.71
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Pb-210 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of lead-210 each centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.06
   Maximum:	0.58
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Ra-226 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of radium-226 each centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.18
   Maximum:	1.50
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Ra-226 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of radium-226 for eeach centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.02
   Maximum:	0.14
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Th-234 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of thorium-234 for each centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.11
   Maximum:	4.45
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   Th-234 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of thorium-234 for each centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.07
   Maximum:	0.51
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   K-40 (dpm/g)

   The total activity of potassium-40 for each centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	1.17
   Maximum:	19.87
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   K-40 Error (+/- dpm/g)

   The counting error associated with the total activity of potassium-40 for each centimeter interval of every surface sample in disintegrations per minute per gram of sediment. (Source: USGS)

   Range of values
   Minimum:	0.20
   Maximum:	2.03
   Units:	Disintegrations per minute per gram
   Resolution:	0.01

   QA

   Quality Assurance indicator, 0 indicates data meets all requirements. (Source: USGS) Character string

   19CCT05_GrainSize.xlsx

   Microsoft Excel workbook summarizing grain-size parameters for each surface sample and centimeter depth interval from the sediment cores collected on the St. Marks marshes and the surrounding estuary (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA). The averaged results for each sample, including the number of runs used, the standard deviation of the averaged results, and graphical class-size distributions, are provided. (Source: USGS)

   19CCT05_GrainSize.csv

   Comma separated values text file summarizing grain-size parameters for each surface sample and centimeter depth interval from the sediment cores collected on the St. Marks marshes and the surrounding estuary (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA). The averaged results for each sample, including the number of runs used, the standard deviation of the averaged results, and graphical class-size distributions, are provided. (Source: USGS)

   19CCT05_Foraminifera.xlsx

   Microsoft Excel workbook containing stained (live) and unstained (dead) foraminiferal count data for each surface sample from the sediment collected on the St. Marks marshes and the surrounding estuary (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA). The wet sediment volume, fraction of the sample picked, and size range picked are included in addition to the species counts for each sample. Some specimens could only be identified to the genus level and open nomenclature was utilized according to Bengtson (1988). Sample replicates are indicated with an A or B appended to the end of the sample identifier. (Source: USGS)

   19CCT05_Foraminifera.csv

   Comma separated value text file containing stained (live) and unstained (dead) foraminiferal count data for each surface sample from the sediment collected on the St. Marks marshes and the surrounding estuary (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA). The wet sediment volume, fraction of the sample picked, and size range picked are included in addition to the species counts for each sample. Some specimens could only be identified to the genus level and open nomenclature was utilized according to Bengtson (1988). Sample replicates are indicated with an A or B appended to the end of the sample identifier. (Source: USGS)

   Entity_and_Attribute_Overview:

   The detailed attribute descriptions for the grain size workbooks are provided in the included data dictionary (19CCT05_GrainSize_DataDictionary.pdf). These metadata are not complete without this file.

   Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation:

   Data Dictionary for Grain-Size Data Tables in: Ellis, A.M., Smith, C.G., Vargas, J., and Everhart, C., 2022: Surficial and downcore sedimentological and foraminifera microfossil data from St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/P97BQ2DT.

   Entity_and_Attribute_Overview:

   Detailed attribute descriptions for the foraminiferal counts workbook are provided in the included data dictionary (19CCT05_Foraminiferal_Data_Dictionary.pdf). These metadata are not complete without this file. Supplemental information includes a taxonomic reference list which may be used for visual and descriptive purposes and species name changes (19CCT05_Taxonomic_Reference_List.pdf).

   Entity_and_Attribute_Detail_Citation:

   Data Dictionary for Foraminiferal Count Data, in: Ellis, A.M., Smith, C.G., Vargas, J., and Everhart, C., 2022: Surficial and downcore sedimentological and foraminifera microfossil data from St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge, Florida: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/P97BQ2DT.

Who produced the data set?

1. Who are the originators of the data set? (may include formal authors, digital compilers, and editors)
   • Alisha M. Ellis
2. Who also contributed to the data set?
   U.S. Geological Survey, Coastal and Marine Geology Program, St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center
3. To whom should users address questions about the data?
   U.S. Geological Survey

   Attn: Alisha M. Ellis

   Geologist

   600 4th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   USA

   727-502-8000 (voice)

   aellis@usgs.gov

Why was the data set created?

How was the data set created?

1. From what previous works were the data drawn?
2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?

   Date: 2019 (process 1 of 9)

   Estuarine surface grab samples for sedimentological analyses (denoted with G, STM044G-STM053G) and foraminiferal census data (denoted with F) were collected using a petite PONAR grab sampler, deployed according to manufacturer specifications. The sediment recovered in the grab sampler was inspected for an undisturbed (for example, free of slumping, washout, scouring, cracking, and/or other disturbance features) sediment-water interface to ensure the bulk sample collected was representative of the surface and material was not lost. If the sediment was disturbed, the sediment was discarded, and a new grab sample was collected and assessed. If the sediment surface was intact, the overlying water and the mesh screens were slowly removed in accordance with the product manual, and the uppermost one centimeter of sediment was subsampled with a spoon or scoopula for sediment characterization and foraminiferal census, as described in Osbourne and DeLaune (2013), and for consistency with related products from the northern Gulf of Mexico (Ellis and Smith, 2021; Haller and others, 2019) and as is standard and recommended for recent surficial sediment and microfossil analyses (Schönfeld and others, 2012). Water quality properties at each estuarine site were measured with a YSI Pro-DSS and values were recorded. At nine sites in the St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge marsh, sediment surface samples (top 0-1 cm of sediment, denoted with a S, samples STM001S-STM014MS) were collected by hand using a spoon and/or scoopula and transferred and stored in a labeled and sealed baggie on ice for sedimentological analyses (for example, organic matter content, grain-size) for surface sediment characterization. At each surface sample marsh site, a surface sediment sample (0-1 cm) was collected separately for foraminiferal microfossil analyses (denoted with F), consistent with related products from the northern Gulf of Mexico (Ellis and Smith, 2021; Haller and others, 2019), and as is standard and recommended for recent surficial sediment and microfossil analyses (Schönfeld and others, 2012) to characterize the modern foraminiferal distribution. All estuarine grab and marsh surface foraminiferal samples, collected in duplicate at each site, were preserved in ethanol and stained with rose Bengal for the determination of live (stained) and dead (unstained) foraminifera (Schönfeld and others, 2012). At four of the marsh sites, five marsh push cores were collected with 10.16-cm diameter polycarbonate barrels. Upon retrieval, similar to methods described in Osbourne and DeLaune (2013; with the exception of not adding water for extraction when sediments were already saturated) and calculation of compaction due to coring, the cores were visually inspected for disturbances (for example, slumping, washout, scouring, cracking, bubbling, and/or discontinuities) to ensure the core was intact and representative of the site. If the core appeared disturbed, it was discarded, and a new core was collected and inspected. Core lengths ranged between 36 and 55 cm. The cores were transported upright, in order to avoid slumping and preserve the natural sediment orientation, to SPCMSC for sectioning. At each marsh site, Russian peat augers were collected in agreement with the methods described in Osbourne and DeLaune (2013) and manufacturer recommendations. Visual characteristics of the peat augers were described (for example, general color; visual organic matter texture and type such as roots, bivalves, and level of decomposition; and sediment texture such as sandy silt or clayey silt) and thickness of the upper organic-bearing unit (peat) was recorded in field forms, in centimeters. Once described and photographed horizontally with a scale bar and label, peat augers were discarded in the field. The field forms associated with those peat augers include handwritten notes visible on the scanned field forms for each site and are available upon request. Select single 50-cm peat auger segments were collected in the field and immediately stored in halved acrylic tubes and sealed for microbial analyses. Sample identifiers consist of the USGS project ID (19CCT05), a site-specific identifier (for example, STM014), and appended with an alphabetic identifier to differentiate the sediment collection method (S for marsh surface sample, M for marsh push core, G for estuarine grab sample, R for Russian peat auger, R50 for 50-cm section of peat auger for microbial analyses, F for foraminiferal sample). Estuarine site coordinates and water depth were recorded with a Garmin boat GPS and depth sounder; marsh site coordinates were recorded using a handheld GPS in addition to an RTK antenna in the WGS84 datum. Site location information includes sample type, date collected, location relative to the shoreline, latitude, longitude, elevation, core lengths, and YSI measurements which are reported in an Excel spreadsheet. Comma-separated values data files containing the tabular data in plain text are included in the download files. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   U.S. Geological Survey

   Attn: Alisha M. Ellis

   Geologist

   600 4th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   USA

   (727) 502-8000 (voice)

   aellis@usgs.gov

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • 19CCT05_SiteInformation.zip

   Date: 2019 (process 2 of 9)

   Upon return from the field, all marsh push cores were X-rayed vertically using a stand, to avoid sediment slumping, onto an iCRco 11 x 14-inch cassette using an Ecotron EPX-F2800 X-ray unit at a distance of 79 cm for a 1:1.015 ratio. The cassette was inserted into and scanned using an iCR3600+ cassette scanner and processed using iCRco QPC XSCAN32 version 2.10. Images were then exported as .tiff files and edited in accordance with a standard operating procedure developed by staff at the SPCMSC in Adobe Photoshop and Illustrator. Image alterations and edits include using grayscale color inversion, inserting a reference scale bar, and image cropping. X-ray images were exported as Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) images and used as visual aids prior to extraction and subsampling to assess peat thickness in comparison with peat augers, presence of macrofossils which may impede sectioning, and to ensure cores are intact for the length of the core. Following image processing, a second individual assessed the images for visual anomalies, workflow consistency, precision and accuracy, and quality. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   U.S. Geological Survey St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center

   Attn: Alisha M. Ellis

   Geologist

   600 4th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   U.S.

   (727) 502-8000 (voice)

   aellis@usgs.gov

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • 19CCT05_Xrays.zip

   Date: 2019 (process 3 of 9)

   Following x-raying, all cores were vertically extruded and sectioned into 1-cm intervals using a serrated knife, pre-measured polycarbonate ring, and extruder (in accordance with methods described in Osbourne and DeLaune, 2013 and in 1-cm intervals as is standard for sediment and radiochemical analyses; Nittrouer and others, 1979) at the USGS SPCMSC sediment core laboratory. The outer circumference of each sample interval was removed to avoid use of sediment that was in contact with the polycarbonate barrel, which could result in contamination by sediment from other depths due to movement within the barrel both during collection and extruding. Each sediment interval was bagged in a zipped baggie, homogenized, and refrigerated (Osbourne and DeLaune, 2013). Person who carried out this activity:
   

   U.S. Geological Survey St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center

   Attn: Alisha M. Ellis

   Geologist

   600 4th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   U.S.

   (727) 502-8000 (voice)

   aellis@usgs.gov

   Date: 2019 (process 4 of 9)

   In the laboratory, marsh core samples were homogenized in the sample bag to ensure a representative subsample from the 1-cm interval, and the subsample for sediment parameters was extracted and processed for basic sediment characteristics: dry bulk density and porosity. Water content, and dry bulk density were calculated by determining water mass lost during drying using the same methods as outlined in Osterman and Smith (2012). To calculate, known volumes of each wet subsample, usually 30-60 milliliters (mL), were packed into a graduated syringe with 0.5 cubic centimeter (cm^3) resolution. The wet sediment sample was then extruded into a pre-weighed aluminum tray/weigh boat, and the weight was recorded. The wet sediment sample and tray were placed in a drying oven for 48 hours at 60 °Celsius to remove water content. A 1 mL split from the original wet sample was also taken for diatom analysis and was dried using the same procedure. Water content (θ) was determined as the mass of water (lost when dried) relative to the initial wet sediment mass. Dry bulk density (g/cm^3), also referred to as sediment bulk density, was determined by the ratio of dry sediment to the known volume of wet sediment packed into the syringe, resulting in a mass/volume ratio. Water content, porosity and dry bulk density are reported in the Excel spreadsheet. A comma-separated values data file containing the tabular data in plain text is included in the download file. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   U.S. Geological Survey St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center

   Attn: Alisha M. Ellis

   Geologist

   600 4th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   U.S.

   (727) 502-8000 (voice)

   aellis@usgs.gov

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • 19CCT05_SedimentPhysicalProperties.zip

   Date: 2021 (process 5 of 9)

   Organic matter (OM) content was determined with a mass loss technique referred to as loss on ignition (LOI). The dry sediment subsample from the previous process step, measuring dry bulk density, was homogenized with a porcelain mortar and pestle. Approximately 2 to 6 grams (g) of the dry sediment was placed into a pre-weighed porcelain crucible. The mass of the dried sediment was recorded with a precision of 0.01 g on an analytical balance. The sample was then placed inside a laboratory muffle furnace with stabilizing temperature control. The furnace was heated to 110 °C for a minimum of 6 hours to remove hygroscopic water adsorbed onto the sediment particles. The furnace temperature was then lowered to 60 °C, at which point the sediments could be reweighed safely (modified from Dean, 1974 who heated the furnace to 100 °C for 1 hour). The dried sediment was returned to the muffle furnace and heated to 550 °C over a period of 30 minutes and kept at 550 °C (Galle and Runnels, 1960) for 6 hours (optimal exposure times for complete combustion of organic carbon are reported ranging between 1–12 hours; Dean, 1974; Wang and others, 2011; Heiri and others, 2001; Santisteban and others, 2004). Following the 6-hour burn time for removal of organic carbon, the furnace temperature was lowered to 60 °C, at which point the sediments could be reweighed safely while preventing the absorption of moisture, which can affect the measurement. The mass lost during the 6-hour baking period relative to the 110 °C-dried mass is used as a metric of OM content (Dean, 1974); OM content for core GB541M may be overestimated due to the increased furnace temperature. Approximately 15.5% percent of the field samples were run in triplicate and 1.4% percent of the field samples were run in replicate LOI to assess precision. Data are reported as a ratio of mass (g) of organic matter to mass (g) of dry sediment (post-110 °C drying). Replicate analyses of loss on ignition are reported for quality assurance in the Excel spreadsheet. A comma-separated values data file containing the tabular data in plain text is included in the download file. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   U.S. Geological Survey St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center

   Attn: Alisha M. Ellis

   Geologist

   600 4th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   U.S.

   (727) 502-8000 (voice)

   aellis@usgs.gov

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • 19CCT05_SedimentPhysicalProperties.zip

   Date: 2021 (process 6 of 9)

   Down-core particle size analysis was performed on 43% of the 1-cm depth intervals for the five marsh push cores based on dry bulk density variations, and on all 18 surficial sediment samples. Prior to analyses, sediment samples were digested with 8 mL of 30 percent hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) overnight to remove excess organics. The H2O2 was then evaporated slowly on a hot plate, and the sediment was washed and centrifuged twice with deionized water. Grain-size analyses on the sediment cores were performed using a Coulter LS 13 320 (https://www.beckmancoulter.com/) particle-size analyzer (PSA), which uses laser diffraction to measure the size distribution of sediments ranging in size from 0.4 microns to 2 millimeters (mm; clay to very coarse-grained sand). To prevent shell fragments from damaging the Coulter instrument, particles greater than 1 mm in diameter were separated from all samples prior to analysis using a number 18 (1000 microns, or 1 mm) U.S. standard sieve, which meets the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) E11 standard specifications for determining particle size using woven-wire test sieves. Two subsamples from each depth interval were processed through the instrument a minimum of three runs each. The sediment slurry made from the digested sample and deionized water was sonicated with a wand sonicator for 1 minute before being introduced into the Coulter PSA to breakdown aggregated particles. The Coulter PSA measured the particle-size distribution of each sample by passing sediment suspended in solution between two narrow panes of glass in front of a laser. Light is scattered by the particles into characteristic refraction patterns measured by an array of photodetectors as intensity per unit area and recorded as relative volume for 92 size-related channels (bins). The bin boundaries are determined by the manufacturer, and GRADISTAT groups the data from the bins into sediment-size classifications. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   U.S. Geological Survey

   Attn: Alisha M. Ellis

   Geologist

   600 4th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   USA

   (727) 502-8000 (voice)

   aellis@usgs.gov

   Date: 2021 (process 7 of 9)

   The raw grain-size data were processed with the free software program, GRADISTAT version 8, (Blott and Pye, 2001), which calculated the mean, median, sorting, skewness, and kurtosis of each sample geometrically in metric units and logarithmically in phi units (Φ) (Krumbien, 1934) using a modified Folk and Ward (1957) scale. GRADISTAT also calculated the fraction of sediment from each sample by size category (for example, clay, coarse silt, fine sand) based on Friedman and Saunders (1978), a modified Wentworth (1922) size scale. A macro function in Microsoft Excel, developed by the USGS SPCMSC, was applied to the data to calculate the average and standard deviation for each sample set (6-8 runs per sample), and highlight runs that varied from the set average by more than ± 1.5 standard deviations. Excessive deviations from the mean are likely the result of equipment error or extraneous organic material in the sample and are not considered representative of the sample. The highlighted runs were removed from the results, and the sample average was recalculated using the remaining runs. The averaged results for all samples, including the number of averaged runs and the standard deviation of the averaged results were summarized in an of Excel workbook with each core on its own tab. A comma-separated values data file containing the tabular data in plain text is included in the download file. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   U.S. Geological Survey

   Attn: Alisha M. Ellis

   Geologist

   600 4th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   USA

   (727) 502-8000 (voice)

   aellis@usgs.gov

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • 19CCT05_GrainSize.zip

   Date: 2021 (process 8 of 9)

   Dried, ground sediment from the 1-cm depth intervals of the 5 push cores were analyzed for the detection of radionuclides by standard gamma-ray spectrometry (Cutshall and Larsen, 1986) at the USGS SPCMSC radioisotope lab. Intervals from the uppermost 30 cm were analyzed from each core with alternating intervals analyzed from lower depths in the cores. The sediments were sealed in airtight polypropylene containers with plumbers' tape around the threads for the planar detectors or polystyrene test tubes for the well detector. Sediments placed in the test tubes were sealed with a layer of epoxy. To assess the airtightness of the polypropylene jars used on the planar detectors, core STM002M was run a second time with electrical tape around the outside of the jar where the cap screws on; this core is identified as STM002M-taped. The sample weights and counting container geometries were matched to pre-determined calibration standards. The sealed samples were stored for a minimum of 3 weeks prior to analysis to allow radium-226 (Ra-226) to come into secular equilibrium with its progeny isotopes lead-214 (Pb-214) and bismuth-214 (Bi-214). The sealed samples were then counted for 24-200 hours on a 16 x 40-millimeter well or 50-millimeter diameter planar-style, low energy, high-purity germanium, gamma-ray spectrometer. The suite of naturally occurring and anthropogenic radioisotopes measured along with their corresponding photopeak energies in kiloelectron volts (keV) are lead-210 (Pb-210, 46.5 keV), thorium-234 (Th-234, 63.3 keV), Pb-214 (295.7 and 352.5 keV; proxies for Ra-226), beryllium-7 (477.6 keV), Bi-214 (609.3 keV; proxy for Ra-226), cesium-137 (Cs-137, 661.6 keV), and potassium-40 (K-40, 1640.8 keV). Sample count rates were corrected for detector efficiency determined with International Atomic Energy Agency RGU-1 reference material, standard photopeak intensity, and self-absorption using an uranium-238 (U-238) sealed source (planar detectors only, Cutshall and others, 1983). All activities, with the exception of short-lived Pb-214 and Bi-214, were decay-corrected to the date of field collection. The radioisotopic activities reported in the Excel spreadsheet include the counting error for all samples, and results from each core are on its own tab. The critical level is reported for each core. A comma-separated values data file containing the tabular data in plain text is aslo included in the download file. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   U.S. Geological Survey St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center

   Attn: Marci E. Marot

   Geologist

   600 4th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   U.S.

   (727) 502-8000 (voice)

   mmarot@usgs.gov

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • 19CCT05_GammaSpectroscopy.zip

   Date: 2021 (process 9 of 9)

   Following collection, foraminiferal sample centrifuge tubes were gently shaken twice a day for two weeks to ensure thorough staining with the rose Bengal (Schönfeld and others, 2012). Following staining, wet sample volumes were recorded using a marked syringe. Once recorded, samples were washed over a 63-, 125- and 850-micron (µm) sieve to remove clay material, and to separate out large organics (Schönfeld and others, 2012). All samples were wet sieved once and subsequently dried in an oven at 40 °C for a minimum of 24 hours. The 125–850 size fraction of each sample was picked to obtain census data (Schönfeld and others, 2012). Dry samples were split into equal parts using a microsplitter and spread evenly over a gridded picking tray. Entire splits were picked until at least 200 identifiable foraminiferal specimens were acquired to enable the calculation of foraminiferal densities (number of specimens per milliliter). Separate counts were made for stained (live) and unstained (dead) specimens to calculate the ratio and percentage of live to dead specimens. Specimens were identified using previously published literature (Brönnimann, 1979; Buzas and others, 1985; Loeblich and Tappan, 1988; Edwards and Wright, 2015; Haller and others, 2019; Rabien and others, 2015; World Register of Marine Species) and open nomenclature was utilized according to Bengtson (1988). Broken specimens were only counted if the umbilicus was preserved; chamber fragments were not counted. A species abbreviation and taxonomic reference table is available for reference. Live and dead foraminiferal census data are reported in the Excel spreadsheet. A comma-separated values data file containing the tabular data in plain text is included in the download file. Person who carried out this activity:
   

   U.S. Geological Survey St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center

   Attn: Alisha M. Ellis

   Geologist

   600 4th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   U.S.

   (727) 502-8000 (voice)

   aellis@usgs.gov

   Data sources produced in this process:

   • 19CCT05_Foraminifera.zip

3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?
   Blott, S.J., and Pye, K., 20010928, Gradistat: A grain size distribution and statistics package for the analysis of unconsolidated sediments: Earth Surface Processes and Landforms Volume 26, Issue 11.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.261

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 1237-1248
   

   Bengtson, P., 1988, Open nomenclature: Paleontology Volume 31, Part 1.

   Online Links:

   • https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260135569_Open_nomenclature

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 223-227
   

   Brönnimann, P., 197906, Recent benthonic foraminifera from Brasil Morphology and ecology Part IV: Trochamminids from the Campos shelf with description of Paratrochammina n. gen.: Paläontologische Zeitschrift Volume 53.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02987785

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 5-25
   

   Cutshall, N.H., and Larsen, I.L., 198607, Calibration of a portable intrinsic Ge gamma-ray detector using point sources and testing for field applications: Health Physics Volume 51, Issue 1.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1097/00004032-198607000-00004

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 53-59
   

   Osbourne, T.Z., and DeLaune R.D., 20131018, Soil and Sediment sampling of Inundated Environments: Methods in Biogeochemistry of Wetlands Volume 10.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser10.c2

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 21-41
   

   Cutshall, N.H., Larsen, I.L., and Olsen, C.R., 19830215, Direct analysis of Pb-210 in sediment samples: a self-absorption corrections: Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Volume 206, Issues 1-2.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-5087(83)91273-5

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 309-312
   

   Loeblich, A.R., and Tappan, H., 1988, Foraminiferal Genera and their classification: First edition 2 volumes, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, USA.

   Other_Citation_Details: 970 pages
   

   Edwards, R.J., and Wright, A.J., 20150217, Foraminifera: Chapter 13 First Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, United Kingdom.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118452547.ch13

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 191-217
   

   This is part of the following larger work.
   Shennan, I., Long, A.J., and Horton, B.P. (Editors), 20150217, Handbook of Sea-Level Research: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, United Kingdom.

   Folk, R.L, and Ward, W.C., 19570301, Brazos River bar: a study in the significance of grain size parameters: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology Volume 27, No. 1.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1306/74D70646-2B21-11D7-8648000102C1865D

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 3-26
   

   Krumbien, W.C., 19340801, Size frequency distributions of sediments: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology Volume 4, No. 2.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1306/D4268EB9-2B26-11D7-8648000102C1865D

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 65-77
   

   Wentworth, C.K., 1922, A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments: Journal of Geology Volume 30, No. 5.

   Online Links:

   • https://www.jstor.org/stable/30063207

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 377-392
   

   Dean, W.E., 19740301, Determination of carbonate and organic matter in calcareous sediments and sediment rocks by loss on ignition: comparison with other methods: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology Volume 44, No. 1.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1306/74D729D2-2B21-11D7-8648000102C1865D

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 242-248
   

   Friedman, G.M., and Saunders, J.E., 1978, Principles of Sedimentology.

   Other_Citation_Details: 792 pages
   

   Ellis, A.M., and Smith, C.G., 20210705, Emerging dominance of Paratrochammina simplissima (Cushman and McCulloch) in the northern Gulf of Mexico following hydrologic and geomorphic changes: Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science Volume 255.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2021.107312

   Other_Citation_Details: 15 pages
   

   Haller, C., Smith, C.G., Hallock, P., Hine, A.C., Osterman, L.E., and McCloskey, T., 20190111, Distribution of modern salt-marsh foraminifera from the eastern Mississippi Sound, U.S.A.: Journal of Foraminiferal Research Volume 49.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.2113/gsjfr.49.1.29

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 29-47
   

   Osterman, L., and Smith, C.G., 20121017, Over 100 years of environmental change recorded by foraminifers and sediments in Mobile Bay, Alabama, Gulf of Mexico, USA: Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science Volume 115.

   Online Links:

   • http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2012.10.001

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 345-358
   

   Schönfeld, J., Alve, E., Geslin, E., Jorissen, F., Korsun, S., Spezzaferri, S., and Members of the FOBIMO group, 201210, The FOBIMO (FOraminiferal BIo-MOnitoring) initiative—Towards a standardised protocol for soft-bottom benthic foraminiferal monitoring studies: Marine Micropaleontology Volume 94-95.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marmicro.2012.06.001

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 1-13
   

   Nittrouer, C.A., Sternberg, R.W., Carpenter, R., and Bennett, J.T., 1979, The use of Pb-210 geochronology as a sedimentological tool: application to the Washington continental shelf: Marine Geology Volume 31, Issues 3-4.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-3227(79)90039-2

   Other_Citation_Details: pages 297-316
   

   Galle, O.K., and Runnels, R.T., 19601201, Determination of CO2 in carbonate rocks by controlled loss on ignition: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology Volume 30, No. 4.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1306/74D70ABF-2B21-11D7-8648000102C1865D

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 613-618
   

   Santisteban, J.I., Mediavilla, R., Lopez-Pamo, E., Dabrio, C.J., Blanca Ruiz Zapata, M., Garcia, M.J.G., Castano, S., and Martinez-Alfaro, P.E., 200410, Loss on ignition: a qualitative or quantitative method for organic matter and carbonate mineral content in sediments?: Journal of Paleolimnology Volume 32.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JOPL.0000042999.30131.5b

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 287-299
   

   Wang, Q., Li, Y., and Wang, Y., 201103, Optimizing the weight loss-on-ignition methodology to quantify organic and carbonate carbon of sediments from diverse sources: Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Volume 174.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1454-z

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 241-257
   

   Heiri, O., Lotter, A.F., and Lemcke, G., 200101, Loss on ignition as a method for estimating organic and carbonate content in sediments: reproducibility and comparability of results: Journal of Paleolimnology Volume 25.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008119611481

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 101-110
   

   Board, WoRMS Editorial, 2022, World Register of Marine Species.

   Online Links:

   • https://www.marinespecies.org

   Other_Citation_Details: doi:10.14284/170
   

   Buzas, M.A., Culver, S.J., and Isham, L.B., 198509, A comparison of fourteen Elphidiid (Foraminiferida) Taxa: Journal of Paleontology Volume 59, No. 5.

   Online Links:

   • https://www.jstor.org/stable/1305004

   Other_Citation_Details: pages 1075-1090
   

   Rabien, K.A., Culver, S.J., Buzas, M.A., Corbett, D.R., Walsh, J.P., and Tichenor, H.R., 20150101, The foraminiferal signature of recent Gulf of Mexico hurricanes: Journal of Foraminiferal Research Volume 45, No. 1.

   Online Links:

   • https://doi.org/10.2113/gsjfr.45.1.82

   Other_Citation_Details: Pages 82-105
   

How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?

1. How well have the observations been checked?
   The positional accuracy of the sample locations is determined by the accuracy of the raw position data recorded by the GPS antenna, in the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84) and National Geodetic Survey 12B (GEOID12B) datum, during data collection. Real time kinematic (RTK) positioning used reference station Florida Permanent Reference Network (FPRN) TALH. Replicate analyses of loss on ignition and foraminiferal counts are reported for quality assurance. The grain-size data represent the sample averages for a subset of the statistical parameters calculated by GRADISTAT (a particle size analysis software). The number of runs included in the averaged results are reported, and the standard deviation of the averaged results are reported for most parameters. The gamma spectroscopic radioisotope activities reported include the counting error for all samples. The critical level for gamma spectroscopy is reported for each core set.
2. How accurate are the geographic locations?
   Real time kinematic (RTK) positioning recorded latitude, longitude, and ellipsoid height in the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84) and National Geodetic Survey 12B (GEOID12B) datum at each site using reference station Florida Permanent Reference Network (FPRN) TALH, port number 31300 using an Ashtech Handheld MobileMapper10 with an SP80 antenna. Location data was collected for 15 or 60 minutes at each site, referencing between 10-15 satellites. Maximum positional dilution of signal was 1.6 and maximum horizontal dilution of signal was 0.9. The maximum horizontal standard deviation of the sample locations was 0.009 meters (m).
3. How accurate are the heights or depths?
   Real time kinematic (RTK) positioning recorded latitude, longitude, and ellipsoid height in the World Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84) and National Geodetic Survey (NGS) 12B (GEOID12B) datum at each site using reference station Florida Permanent Reference Network (FPRN) TALH, port number 31300 using an Ashtech Handheld MobileMapper10 with an SP80 antenna. Location data was collected for 15 or 60 minutes at each site, referencing between 10-15 satellites. Maximum positional dilution of signal was 1.6 and maximum vertical dilution of signal was 1.4. The maximum vertical standard deviation of the sample locations was 0.015 meters (m).
4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?
   This data release doi:10.5066/P97BQ2DT contains all sediment data associated with with USGS FAN (2019-366-FA) and includes the geographic site location, water quality parameters, sediment physical properties, grain-size statistics, foraminiferal microfossil counts, and sediment radiochemistry activities for cores and surface samples collected from St. Marks National Wildlife Refuge marsh in October 2019.
5. How consistent are the relationships among the observations, including topology?
   The grain-size sample runs in the GRADISTAT output files for which the mean Folk and Ward (1957) grain-size varied from the set average by more than 1.5 standard deviations are highlighted in yellow and were not included in final averaged results. No formal logical accuracy tests were conducted on the remaining datasets.

How can someone get a copy of the data set?

1. Who distributes the data set? (Distributor 1 of 1)
   
   U.S. Geological Survey, St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center

   Attn: Alisha M. Ellis

   Geologist

   600 4th Street South

   St. Petersburg, FL
   

   USA

   727-502-8000 (voice)

   aellis@usgs.gov
2. What's the catalog number I need to order this data set? Downloadable data
3. What legal disclaimers am I supposed to read?
   This publication was prepared by an agency of the United States Government. Although these data have been processed successfully on a computer system at the U.S. Geological Survey, no warranty expressed or implied is made regarding the display or utility of the data on any other system, or for general or scientific purposes, nor shall the act of distribution imply any such warranty. The U.S. Geological Survey shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of the data described and (or) contained herein. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof.
4. How can I download or order the data?
   • Availability in digital form:

     Data format:

     This zip archive includes Microsoft Excel spreadsheets (.xlsx), comma-separated values text files (.csv), Portable Document Format (PDF) files, Joint Photographic Experts Group files (JPEG) and accompanying metadata for sediment data from surface samples and cores collected from the St. Marks marsh and surrounding estuary (USGS FAN 2019-366-FA). in format .zip WinZip, 7-Zip

     Network links:

     https://coastal.er.usgs.gov/data-release/doi-P97BQ2DT/data/19CCT05_SiteInformation.zip https://coastal.er.usgs.gov/data-release/doi-P97BQ2DT/data/19CCT05_SedimentPhysicalProperties.zip https://coastal.er.usgs.gov/data-release/doi-P97BQ2DT/data/19CCT05_GrainSize.zip https://coastal.er.usgs.gov/data-release/doi-P97BQ2DT/data/19CCT05_GammaSpectroscopy.zip https://coastal.er.usgs.gov/data-release/doi-P97BQ2DT/data/19CCT05_Foraminifera.zip https://coastal.er.usgs.gov/data-release/doi-P97BQ2DT/data/19CCT05_Xrays.zip

   • Cost to order the data: None, if obtained online

5. What hardware or software do I need in order to use the data set?
   The data tables for USGS FAN 2019-366-FA were created in Microsoft Excel for Mac version 16.37 and can be opened using Microsoft Excel 2007 or higher; these data may also be viewed using the free Microsoft Excel Viewer (http://office.microsoft.com/). The data tables are also provided as comma-separated values text files (.csv). The .csv data files contain the tabular data in plain text and may be viewed with a standard text editor. Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPG) files can be viewed using the free software Photos.

Who wrote the metadata?

Dates:

Last modified: 31-Mar-2022

Metadata author:

U.S. Geological Survey

Attn: Alisha M. Ellis

Geologist

600 4th Street South

St. Petersburg, FL

USA

727-502-8000 (voice)

aellis@usgs.gov

Metadata standard:

Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (FGDC-STD-001-1998)