U.S. Geological Survey approved inorganic and organic methods for the analysis of water and fluvial sediment, 1954-94

Abstract

All inorganic and organic methods for analyzing samples of water and fluvial sediment, which have been approved for use by the U.S. Geological Survey from 1954 to the present (1994), are listed. Descriptive method names include references to published reports for easy retrieval of methodology. The year each method was approved is listed as well as the year the method was discontinued. Inorganic and organic methods are listed separately by sample type (dissolved, whole water, bottom material, suspended sediment, or fish tissue) and by mode of analysis (manual or automated, or both). mation provided in this Open-File Report. In addition, the years of start-up and discontinued use of a method are listed in both tables. These dates are approximate and may vary by 1 or 2 years for many of the older methods. However, all new methodology published in the Open-File Report series gives both the month and year of start-up. Methods are listed in alphabetical order in table 1 and in numerical order in table 2. In both tables, the Abstract inorganic methods are listed first and then followed by deleted in favor of listing only those methods in use in the organic methods. The data base for both tables was 1994. The information also could be sorted by analytcreated using Ingres software, which makes it easy to ical technique. To meet these needs, the data base can manipulate the information to serve the needs of most be shared electronically by contacting the chief of the users. For example, discontinued methods could be Laboratory Operations Program at NWQL.

NUTRIENT LOAD CHARACTERIZATION FROM INTEGRATED SOURCE DATA FOR THE LOWER MISSISSIPPI RWER1

“…JWW and USGS data were found to be equivalent, but both agencies report significantly lower phosphate concentrations than those reported by OWW. Although the analytical methods used by these agencies are similar (Fishman et al, 1994;Eaton et al, 1995), sampling methods for the two equivalent agencies differ considerably: JWW data consist of both weekly temporal composites and surface grab samples, whereas USGS data are primarily collected as depth/width-integrated composites. OWW data are derived from surface grab sampling.…”

“…Historical data differed slightly in segments C and D between LADEQ and USGS (LADEQ > USGS by 5 percent and 9 percent, respectively). Although chemical analysis and sample preservation methods have remained similar between these agencies (Friedman and Fishman, 1986;Fishman et al, 1994;USEPA, 1971USEPA, , 1983Eaton et al, 1995), sample collection procedures differed. A normalizing factor was applied to LADEQ data from segments C and D to account for agency bias in segment comparisons of historical data.…”

Comparative Environmental Assessment in the Studies of Benthic Diatom, Macroinvertebrate, and Fish Communities

“…Water chemistry analyses, including pH, Cl -, SO 4 2-, SiO 2 , Al, specific conductance, NH 4 + , NO 3 -, and dissolved P (Table 1) were conducted following national water quality assessment protocols (FISHMAN et al, 1994;LAWRENCE et al, 1995). Pesticide data were obtained from PHILLIPS and BODE (2002).…”

Phosphorus losses from agricultural watersheds in the Mississippi Delta

“…Water samples were transported to the USGS laboratories and analyzed for suspended sediment, TP (total P), and ortho-P (orthophosphate, PO 4 eP) (Murphy and Riley, 1962). Colorimetry methods were used for ortho-P analysis (Fishman et al, 1994), and micro-Kjeldahl digestion methods were used for TP analysis (Patton and Truitt, 1992). All measurements followed USGS quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures.…”