This foraminiferal census data was originally produced by USGS research Geologist Thomas G. Gibson in the 1960s through the early 2000s. The census data here documenst evidence of foraminifer populations found in sediment samples extracted from four cores from the Atlantic Coastal Plain and the Gulf Coastal Plain. These samples represent Pliocene, Middle Miocene and Paleocene-Eocene time intervals. Additionally in 2024 the taxonomy was updated to modern usage for convenient comparison to data produced in recent and ongoing research

Microfossil (benthic foraminifera) samples were obtained from surficial grab (denoted with “G”) and push core (denoted with “M”) sediments collected in Grand Bay estuary, Mississippi and Alabama, to aid in the paleoenvironmental understanding of Grand Bay estuary. The data presented here were collected as part of the U.S. Geological Survey’s Sea-level and Storm Impacts on Estuarine Environments and Shorelines (SSIEES) project, and Barrier Island Evolution Research (BIER) project. Sampling was conducted in May 2016 [field activity number (FAN) 2016-331-FA, alternate FAN 16CCT03]. In the field, 15 cores were collected in tidal creek mouths, proximal to tidal creek mouths, in protected coves, and in the open Grand Bay estuary. Surface samples were collected at each core site location. At the St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center (SPCMSC), 13 of the 15 cores were selectively subsampled for foraminifera, resulting in a total of 64 push core subsamples. Estuarine surface grab samples and push core subsamples were processed in the laboratory to three size fractions (63–125 micrometers (μm), 125–850 μm, and >850 μm), of which the 125–850 μm fraction was picked. The raw foraminiferal count data from the picked subsamples are provided below. For further information regarding foraminiferal collection and/or processing methods, refer to Ellis and others (2017a, https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1060). For information regarding 16CCT03 site locations, water quality parameters and sediment properties, refer to Marot and others (2019, https://doi.org/10.5066/P9FO8R3Y). For related datasets from the Mississippi Sound area, please refer to Haller and others (2018a, https://doi.org/10.5066/F7MC8X5F; and 2018b, https://doi.org/10.5066/F7445KSG), Ellis and others (2018, https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171165), Ellis and others (2017b, https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1046), and DeWitt and others (2017, https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1070). Downloadable data are available as Excel spreadsheets, comma-separated values text files, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee metadata.

Microfossil (benthic foraminifera) samples were obtained from surficial grab (denoted with “G”) and push core (denoted with “M”) sediments collected in Grand Bay estuary, Mississippi and Alabama, to aid in the paleoenvironmental understanding of Grand Bay estuary. The data presented here were collected as part of the U.S. Geological Survey’s Sea-level and Storm Impacts on Estuarine Environments and Shorelines (SSIEES) project, and Barrier Island Evolution Research (BIER) project. Sampling was conducted in May 2016 [field activity number (FAN) 2016-331-FA, alternate FAN 16CCT03]. In the field, 15 cores were collected in tidal creek mouths, proximal to tidal creek mouths, in protected coves, and in the open Grand Bay estuary. Surface samples were collected at each core site location. At the St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center (SPCMSC), 13 of the 15 cores were selectively subsampled for foraminifera, resulting in a total of 64 push core subsamples. Estuarine surface grab samples and push core subsamples were processed in the laboratory to three size fractions (63–125 micrometers (μm), 125–850 μm, and >850 μm), of which the 125–850 μm fraction was picked. The raw foraminiferal count data from the picked subsamples are provided below. For further information regarding foraminiferal collection and/or processing methods, refer to Ellis and others (2017a, https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1060). For information regarding 16CCT03 site locations, water quality parameters and sediment properties, refer to Marot and others (2019, https://doi.org/10.5066/P9FO8R3Y). For related datasets from the Mississippi Sound area, please refer to Haller and others (2018a, https://doi.org/10.5066/F7MC8X5F; and 2018b, https://doi.org/10.5066/F7445KSG), Ellis and others (2018, https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20171165), Ellis and others (2017b, https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1046), and DeWitt and others (2017, https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1070). Downloadable data are available as Excel spreadsheets, comma-separated values text files, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee metadata.

Planktic foraminiferal species distributions in the modern ocean track environmental features like latitudinal temperature gradients. Species shift their distributions as the marine environment changes, providing an analog for past behavior. Stationarity of species’ ecological tolerances is a first-order assumption of all paleoenvironmental reconstructions based upon modern analog methods. We are testing the hypothesis that planktic foraminifer species temperature preferences did not change between the Late Pliocene and present by comparing relative abundance of selected species to independent Pliocene sea surface temperature estimates. In this data release we provide faunal census data from 72 Piacenzian age samples.

Planktic foraminiferal species distributions in the modern ocean track environmental features like latitudinal temperature gradients. Species shift their distributions as the marine environment changes, providing an analog for past behavior. Stationarity of species’ ecological tolerances is a first-order assumption of all paleoenvironmental reconstructions based upon modern analog methods. We are testing the hypothesis that planktic foraminifer species temperature preferences did not change between the Late Pliocene and present by comparing relative abundance of selected species to independent Pliocene sea surface temperature estimates. In this data release we provide faunal census data from 72 Piacenzian age samples.

Variability in sediment properties with depth and the thickness of individual sedimentary layers are critical determinants of seabed acoustic response. The New England Mud Patch (NEMP), located south of Cape Cod, is an unusual feature on the U.S. Continental Shelf in that it is composed of fine-grained sediment layers containing a relatively-homogeneous mix of sand, silt, and clay-sized particles bounded by more typical sandy shelf sediments. The unique characteristics and nature of this deposit is due to a derivation of sediments that have been transported to, and deposited in, a basal bowl-shaped depression since the last glacial maximum. Ninety-two piston, vibra-, and gravity cores with a maximum length of 8.2 meters were collected from across the New England Mud Patch during a 2-leg, 10-day cruise aboard the R/V Endeavor in the spring of 2016. Geologic characterization and analysis of a subset of the cores including grain size, CaCO3, mineral composition, and bulk index properties (undrained shear strength, water content, density, and porosity) of discrete samples was carried out at the USGS Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center's (WHCMSC) Sediment Analysis Laboratory. This data release contains the results of these analyses, along with visual core descriptions and summary sheets for each core analyzed for this study.

Variability in sediment properties with depth and the thickness of individual sedimentary layers are critical determinants of seabed acoustic response. The New England Mud Patch (NEMP), located south of Cape Cod, is an unusual feature on the U.S. Continental Shelf in that it is composed of fine-grained sediment layers containing a relatively-homogeneous mix of sand, silt, and clay-sized particles bounded by more typical sandy shelf sediments. The unique characteristics and nature of this deposit is due to a derivation of sediments that have been transported to, and deposited in, a basal bowl-shaped depression since the last glacial maximum. Ninety-two piston, vibra-, and gravity cores with a maximum length of 8.2 meters were collected from across the New England Mud Patch during a 2-leg, 10-day cruise aboard the R/V Endeavor in the spring of 2016. Geologic characterization and analysis of a subset of the cores including grain size, CaCO3, mineral composition, and bulk index properties (undrained shear strength, water content, density, and porosity) of discrete samples was carried out at the USGS Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center's (WHCMSC) Sediment Analysis Laboratory. This data release contains the results of these analyses, along with visual core descriptions and summary sheets for each core analyzed for this study.

Foraminiferal samples were collected from Chincoteague Bay, Newport Bay, and Tom’s Cove as well as the marshes on the back-barrier side of Assateague Island and the Delmarva (Delaware-Maryland-Virginia) mainland by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) researchers from the St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center in March, April (14CTB01), and October (14CTB02) 2014. Samples were also collected by the Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center (WHCMSC) in July 2014 and shipped to the St. Petersburg office for processing. The dataset includes raw foraminiferal and normalized counts for the estuarine grab samples (G), terrestrial surface samples (S), and inner shelf grab samples (G). For further information regarding data collection and sample site coordinates, processing methods, or related datasets, please refer to USGS Data Series 1060 (https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1060), USGS Open-File Report 2015–1219 (https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151219), and USGS Open-File Report 2015-1169 (https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151169). Downloadable data are available as Excel spreadsheets, comma-separated values text files, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee metadata.

Foraminiferal samples were collected from Chincoteague Bay, Newport Bay, and Tom’s Cove as well as the marshes on the back-barrier side of Assateague Island and the Delmarva (Delaware-Maryland-Virginia) mainland by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) researchers from the St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center in March, April (14CTB01), and October (14CTB02) 2014. Samples were also collected by the Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center (WHCMSC) in July 2014 and shipped to the St. Petersburg office for processing. The dataset includes raw foraminiferal and normalized counts for the estuarine grab samples (G), terrestrial surface samples (S), and inner shelf grab samples (G). For further information regarding data collection and sample site coordinates, processing methods, or related datasets, please refer to USGS Data Series 1060 (https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1060), USGS Open-File Report 2015–1219 (https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151219), and USGS Open-File Report 2015-1169 (https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151169). Downloadable data are available as Excel spreadsheets, comma-separated values text files, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee metadata.

Foraminiferal samples were collected from Chincoteague Bay, Newport Bay, and Tom’s Cove as well as the marshes on the back-barrier side of Assateague Island and the Delmarva (Delaware-Maryland-Virginia) mainland by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) researchers from the St. Petersburg Coastal and Marine Science Center in March, April (14CTB01), and October (14CTB02) 2014. Samples were also collected by the Woods Hole Coastal and Marine Science Center (WHCMSC) in July 2014 and shipped to the St. Petersburg office for processing. The dataset includes raw foraminiferal and normalized counts for the estuarine grab samples (G), terrestrial surface samples (S), and inner shelf grab samples (G). For further information regarding data collection and sample site coordinates, processing methods, or related datasets, please refer to USGS Data Series 1060 (https://doi.org/10.3133/ds1060), USGS Open-File Report 2015–1219 (https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151219), and USGS Open-File Report 2015-1169 (https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20151169). Downloadable data are available as Excel spreadsheets, comma-separated values text files, and formal Federal Geographic Data Committee metadata.