Michael J. Focazio

Algal blooms in water, soils, dusts, and the environment have captured national attention because of concerns associated with exposure to algal toxins for humans and animals. Algal blooms naturally occur in all surface-water types and are important primary producers for aquatic ecosystems. However, excessive algae growth can be associated with many harmful effects ranging from aesthetic to toxicity concerns, so this excessive growth is commonly called a harmful algal bloom (HAB).Ecological imbalances that can lead to excessive algal growth, such as increased nutrient availability to waterbodies from natural and anthropogenic sources, are well documented in scientific literature. On the other hand, fundamental scientific understandings of environmental causes and controls leading to algal toxin production, environmental exposures, and adverse health outcomes for humans and animals could benefit from more attention by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists. Understanding when, why, and how the toxin is produced by individual algal cells or communities and why the toxin is released to the surrounding waterbody requires fundamental research to determine a toxin’s role, whether it provides competitive advantage or if other potential reasons exist for toxin production and release, such as secretions from otherwise benign biological processes. This research will require groundbreaking scientific discovery about underlying biologic and abiotic (non-living) processes commonly complicated by local variation in land use, microbial species composition, and ecosystem structure of the surrounding watershed.Although underlying processes by which HABs form may be similar from one waterbody to another, individual waterbodies may be controlled by local factors for HAB development and toxin production that are unique to the watershed. Consequently, many fundamental science gaps exist that prevent informed mitigation and prevention of toxic HAB events. There are also gaps in understanding local conditions that control algal growth unique to specific watersheds. Addressing these science gaps is needed to inform evidence-based decisions that protect human and animal health and that reduce recreational and socioeconomic losses.

Evidence of the widespread occurrence of microplastics throughout our environment and exposure to humans and other organisms over the past decade has led to questions about the possibility of health hazards and mitigation of exposures. This document discusses nanoplastics as well as microplastics (referred to solely as microplastics); the microplastics have a range from 1 micrometer to 5 millimeters (1 μm–5 mm) in length, whereas the nanoplastics are less than 1 μm in length (sidebar ES1).A myriad of environmental exposure pathways with microplastics to humans and wildlife, including ingestion, inhalation, and bodily absorption, are likely to exist. A growing body of evidence has documented bioaccumulation of microplastics in tissues and organs of humans and wildlife, benthic community effects, and potential nutritional and reproductive effects in some wildlife species. Understanding if or when environmental exposures pose a health risk is complicated by the diversity of microplastic sizes, morphologies, polymer types, and chemicals added during manufacturing or sorbed from the environment; ongoing challenges in analytical methods used to detect, quantify, and characterize microplastics and associated chemicals in our ecosystems; and the fact that ecotoxicological studies regarding microplastics are still in their infancy. Therefore, the study of environmental exposures and potential related health hazards of microplastics to the public and wildlife is a One Health (sidebar ES2) research topic that necessitates integrated science approaches.A better understanding of the sources, pathways, fate, and biological effects of microplastics has become a priority of the Federal Government, State governments, Tribes, stakeholders, and the public. Examples of Federal and State microplasticfocused legislation and programs to prioritize microplastic research and reduction include the Federal Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, California Senate Bills 1422 and 1263 (2018), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Trash Free Waters Program, the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s Microplastic and Nanoplastic Metrology project, and Minnesota’s microplastic project. With its unique expertise and capabilities, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) is well positioned to help fill some of the most important microplastic science gaps.This strategic science vision document for microplastics identifies current (2023) microplastic science gaps and prioritizes research relevant to the mission, expertise, and capabilities of the USGS. It is intended for USGS scientists and stakeholders to use as a starting point for planning, prioritizing, and designing collaborative environmental microplastic science. Many of the microplastic science gaps and priorities are scalable, from local to national, and thus, can be made commensurate with available funding and evolving analytical and field tools, laboratory capacity, and stakeholder needs. Current (2023) or future research by academia and other Federal or State agencies, and Tribes may be aimed at some of the same microplastic science gaps identified in this document. Therefore, this document can be used as an information resource to maximize strengths and capabilities and minimize redundancy in communication and collaboration.

The protection and management of water resources continues to be challenged by multiple and ongoing factors such as shifts in demographic, social, economic, and public health requirements. Physical limitations placed on access to potable supplies include natural and human‐caused factors such as aquifer depletion, aging infrastructure, saltwater intrusion, floods, and drought. These factors, although varying in magnitude, spatial extent, and timing, can exacerbate the potential for contaminants of concern (CECs) to be present in sources of drinking water, infrastructure, premise plumbing and associated tap water. This monograph examines how current and emerging scientific efforts and technologies increase our understanding of the range of CECs and drinking water issues facing current and future populations. It is not intended to be read in one sitting, but is instead a starting point for scientists wanting to learn more about the issues surrounding CECs. This text discusses the topical evolution CECs over time (Section 1), improvements in measuring chemical and microbial CECs, through both analysis of concentration and toxicity (Section 2) and modeling CEC exposure and fate (Section 3), forms of treatment effective at removing chemical and microbial CECs (Section 4), and potential for human health impacts from exposure to CECs (Section 5). The paper concludes with how changes to water quantity, both scarcity and surpluses, could affect water quality (Section 6). Taken together, these sections document the past 25 years of CEC research and the regulatory response to these contaminants, the current work to identify and monitor CECs and mitigate exposure, and the challenges facing the future.

Concerns related to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in sources of drinking water and in natural and engineered environments have captured national attention over the last few decades. This report provides an overview of the science gaps that exist in the fields of study related to PFAS that are relevant to the U.S. Geological Survey mission and identifies opportunities where the U.S. Geological Survey can help address these gaps on the basis of the agency’s capabilities and expertise. The integrated science activities envisioned in this document can be designed to address science needs at local, regional, and national scales and varying timeframes as stakeholders are engaged and their needs evolve. This document is intended as an information resource for U.S. Geological Survey scientists who are prioritizing and planning research related to PFAS and may be useful for developing partnerships and collaborations with other scientists, agencies, and stakeholders.

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has a long history of advancing the traditional Earth science disciplines and identifying opportunities to integrate USGS science across disciplines to address complex societal problems. The USGS science strategy for 2007–2017 laid out key challenges in disciplinary and interdisciplinary arenas, culminating in a call for increased focus on a number of crosscutting science directions. Ten years on, to further the goal of integrated science and at the request of the Executive Leadership Team (ELT), a workshop with three dozen invited scientists spanning different disciplines and career stages in the Bureau convened on February 7–10, 2017, at the USGS John Wesley Powell Center for Analysis and Synthesis in Fort Collins, Colorado.The workshop focused on identifying “grand challenges” for integrated USGS science. Individual participants identified nearly 70 potential grand challenges before the workshop and through workshop discussions. After discussion, four overarching grand challenges emerged:Natural resource security,Societal risk from existing and emerging threats,Smart infrastructure development, andAnticipatory science for changing landscapes.Participants also identified a “comprehensive science challenge” that highlights the development of integrative science, data, models, and tools—all interacting in a modular framework—that can be used to address these and other future grand challenges:Earth Monitoring, Analyses, and Projections (EarthMAP)EarthMAP is our long-term vision for an integrated scientific framework that spans traditional scientific boundaries and disciplines, and integrates the full portfolio of USGS science: research, monitoring, assessment, analysis, and information delivery.The Department of Interior, and the Nation in general, have a vast array of information needs. The USGS meets these needs by having a broadly trained and agile scientific workforce. Encouraging and supporting cross-discipline engagement would position the USGS to tackle complex and multifaceted scientific and societal challenges in the 21st Century.

Drought poses a serious threat to the resilience of human communities and ecosystems in the United States (Easterling and others, 2000). Over the past several years, many regions have experienced extreme drought conditions, fueled by prolonged periods of reduced precipitation and exceptionally warm temperatures. Extreme drought has far-reaching impacts on water supplies, ecosystems, agricultural production, critical infrastructure, energy costs, human health, and local economies (Milly and others, 2005; Wihlite, 2005; Vörösmarty and others, 2010; Choat and others, 2012; Ledger and others, 2013). As global temperatures continue to increase, the frequency, severity, extent, and duration of droughts are expected to increase across North America, affecting both humans and natural ecosystems (Parry and others, 2007).The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has a long, proven history of delivering science and tools to help decision-makers manage and mitigate effects of drought. That said, there is substantial capacity for improved integration and coordination in the ways that the USGS provides drought science. A USGS Drought Team was formed in August 2016 to work across USGS Mission Areas to identify current USGS drought-related research and core capabilities. This information has been used to initiate the development of an integrated science effort that will bring the full USGS capacity to bear on this national crisis.

First posted October 26, 2015 U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology Program 12201 Sunrise Valley Drive Reston, Virginia 20192 http://www.usgs.gov/envirohealth/ Coastal communities are uniquely vulnerable to sea-level rise (SLR) and severe storms such as hurricanes. These events enhance the dispersion and concentration of natural and anthropogenic chemicals and pathogenic microorganisms that could adversely affect the health and resilience of coastal communities and ecosystems in coming years. The U.S. Geological Survey has developed a strategy to define baseline and post-event sediment-bound environmental health (EH) stressors (hereafter referred to as the Sediment-Bound Contaminant Resiliency and Response [SCoRR] strategy). A tiered, multimetric approach will be used to (1) identify and map contaminant sources and potential exposure pathways for human and ecological receptors, (2) define the baseline mixtures of EH stressors present in sediments and correlations of relevance, (3) document post-event changes in EH stressors present in sediments, and (4) establish and apply metrics to quantify changes in coastal resilience associated with sediment-bound contaminants. Integration of this information provides a means to improve assessment of the baseline status of a complex system and the significance of changes in contaminant hazards due to storm-induced (episodic) and SLR (incremental) disturbances. This report describes the purpose and design of the SCoRR strategy and the methods used to construct a decision support tool to identify candidate sampling stations vulnerable to contaminants that may be mobilized by coastal storms.