Anonymous

Item talk:Q57100: Difference between revisions

From geokb
Wrote fresh schema.org document to item wiki page
(Added abstract and other texts to publication item's discussion page for reference)
 
(Wrote fresh schema.org document to item wiki page)
Line 1: Line 1:
= The use of national datasets to produce an average annual water budget for the Mississippi Alluvial Plain, 2000–13 =
{"@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "CreativeWork", "additionalType": "USGS Numbered Series", "name": "The use of national datasets to produce an average annual water budget for the Mississippi Alluvial Plain, 2000\u201313", "identifier": [{"@type": "PropertyValue", "propertyID": "USGS Publications Warehouse IndexID", "value": "fs20193001", "url": "https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/fs20193001"}, {"@type": "PropertyValue", "propertyID": "USGS Publications Warehouse Internal ID", "value": 70202241}, {"@type": "PropertyValue", "propertyID": "DOI", "value": "10.3133/fs20193001", "url": "https://doi.org/10.3133/fs20193001"}], "inLanguage": "en", "isPartOf": [{"@type": "CreativeWorkSeries", "name": "Fact Sheet"}], "datePublished": "2019", "dateModified": "2019-05-07", "abstract": "OverviewWater is a critically important resource for the Mississippi Alluvial Plain (MAP) region, supporting a multibillion-dollar agricultural industry. There are concerns that continued withdrawals of groundwater for irrigation may decrease future water supplies. The U.S. Geological Survey has a history of conducting research in the MAP region and recently began an effort to integrate multiple monitoring analyses and modeling to characterize and project water availability for the region. Here, we utilize the data and results from existing national-scale datasets and refine them to create long-term steady state annual water budgets at a regional scale (the MAP) from 2000 to 2013. The water budget is described and mapped as the distribution of available water into three components: (1) evapotranspiration (65 percent); (2) quickflow runoff to streams (27 percent); and (3) groundwater recharge (8 percent). We also present a comparison of long-term recharge rates with groundwater extraction rates. These results will be useful as a starting point for the water budget and evaluations of future water availability in the MAP.", "description": "Report: 4 p.; Data Release", "publisher": {"@type": "Organization", "name": "U.S. Geological Survey"}, "author": [{"@type": "Person", "name": "Reitz, Meredith mreitz@usgs.gov", "givenName": "Meredith", "familyName": "Reitz", "email": "mreitz@usgs.gov", "identifier": {"@type": "PropertyValue", "propertyID": "ORCID", "value": "0000-0001-9519-6103", "url": "https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9519-6103"}, "affiliation": [{"@type": "Organization", "name": "National Research Program - Eastern Branch", "url": "https://www.usgs.gov/programs/national-geological-and-geophysical-data-preservation-program"}, {"@type": "Organization", "name": "WMA - Observing Systems Division", "url": "https://www.usgs.gov/mission-areas/water-resources"}]}, {"@type": "Person", "name": "Kress, Wade", "givenName": "Wade", "familyName": "Kress", "identifier": {"@type": "PropertyValue", "propertyID": "ORCID", "value": "0000-0002-6833-028X", "url": "https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6833-028X"}, "affiliation": [{"@type": "Organization", "name": "Lower Mississippi-Gulf Water Science Center", "url": "https://www.usgs.gov/centers/lower-mississippi-gulf-water-science-center"}]}], "funder": [{"@type": "Organization", "name": "Lower Mississippi-Gulf Water Science Center", "url": "https://www.usgs.gov/centers/lower-mississippi-gulf-water-science-center"}], "spatialCoverage": [{"@type": "Place", "additionalType": "country", "name": "United States", "url": "https://geonames.org/6252001"}, {"@type": "Place", "additionalType": "state", "name": "Arkansas", "url": "https://geonames.org/4099753"}, {"@type": "Place", "additionalType": "state", "name": "Kentucky", "url": "https://geonames.org/6254925"}, {"@type": "Place", "additionalType": "state", "name": "Louisiana", "url": "https://geonames.org/4331987"}, {"@type": "Place", "additionalType": "state", "name": "Mississippi", "url": "https://geonames.org/4436296"}, {"@type": "Place", "additionalType": "state", "name": "Missouri", "url": "https://geonames.org/4398678"}, {"@type": "Place", "additionalType": "state", "name": "Texas", "url": "https://geonames.org/4736286"}, {"@type": "Place", "additionalType": "unknown", "name": "Mississippi Alluvial Plain"}, {"@type": "Place", "geo": [{"@type": "GeoShape", "additionalProperty": {"@type": "PropertyValue", "name": "GeoJSON", "value": {"type": "FeatureCollection", "features": [{"type": "Feature", "properties": {}, "geometry": {"type": "Polygon", "coordinates": [[[-95.3173828125, 29.075375179558346], [-87.5830078125, 29.075375179558346], [-87.5830078125, 37.38761749978395], [-95.3173828125, 37.38761749978395], [-95.3173828125, 29.075375179558346]]]}}]}}}, {"@type": "GeoCoordinates", "latitude": 33.231496339671146, "longitude": -91.45019531250001}]}]}
<span id="overview"></span>
= Overview =
 
Water is a critically important resource for the Mississippi Alluvial Plain (MAP) region, supporting a multibillion-dollar agricultural industry. There are concerns that continued withdrawals of groundwater for irrigation may decrease future water supplies. The U.S. Geological Survey has a history of conducting research in the MAP region and recently began an effort to integrate multiple monitoring analyses and modeling to characterize and project water availability for the region. Here, we utilize the data and results from existing national-scale datasets and refine them to create long-term steady state annual water budgets at a regional scale (the MAP) from 2000 to 2013. The water budget is described and mapped as the distribution of available water into three components: (1) evapotranspiration (65 percent); (2) quickflow runoff to streams (27 percent); and (3) groundwater recharge (8 percent). We also present a comparison of long-term recharge rates with groundwater extraction rates. These results will be useful as a starting point for the water budget and evaluations of future water availability in the MAP.
 
== Table of Contents ==
* Overview
* Introduction
* Water Budget Estimates
* Water-Use Data
* Average Water Budgets for 2000–13
* Recharge to Extraction Rate Comparison
* Conclusions and Outlook
* Acknowledgments
* References