Transformation and retention of nutrients in rivermouths of the Great Lakes | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is the funding opportunity number for this USGS grant?

The Funding Opportunity Number is USGS 16 FA 0090.

Which federal agency is offering this opportunity?

This opportunity was offered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey (AgencyName: DOI-USGS1).

What type of funding mechanism is described?

The notice describes a discretionary, research-oriented cooperative agreement.

What is the main scientific focus of this grant?

The grant focuses on how Great Lakes rivermouths change, retain, or pass along nutrients right before river water enters the lakes, and why that matters for algal blooms and nearshore ecosystem health.

What problem is the opportunity trying to address?

Many nutrient loading estimates for the Great Lakes rely on models fed by USGS river gages located upstream of the zone where lake water starts influencing the river. This leaves an unmeasured stretch between the gage and the open lake, creating uncertainty about what nutrient loads, timing, ratios, and chemical forms actually reach nearshore waters.

Why are rivermouths important in this solicitation?

The program describes rivermouths as active mixing zones rather than simple pipelines. In these areas, nutrients can be transformed into different chemical forms, stored in sediments and wetlands, or released later, which can change nearshore exposure and impacts.

What are "rivermouths" in the context of this opportunity?

In this context, rivermouths are transition zones near where rivers meet the Great Lakes, including the portion downstream of upstream gaging stations and before full mixing with the open lake. They are areas where lake water can begin to influence river conditions.

What kinds of nutrient changes can occur in rivermouths?

The notice highlights that rivermouths can (1) transform nutrients into different chemical forms, (2) retain nutrients by storing them in sediments and wetlands, and (3) release nutrients later, potentially shifting the timing of delivery to the lake.

Why does nutrient timing matter for nearshore water quality?

The solicitation emphasizes that not only the amount of nutrients, but also the timing of when nutrients arrive, can shape algal bloom dynamics and nearshore ecosystem health.

Why do nutrient ratios matter (such as N:P)?

The opportunity notes that cyanobacterial abundance in rivermouths and embayments often depends on the balance (ratio) between nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P), not just the total amount of each nutrient.

Which nutrient form is specifically tied to harmful algal bloom concerns in the notice?

The notice specifically emphasizes dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP), stating that high DRP levels are associated with cyanobacterial growth and that increasing DRP loads have been implicated in re-eutrophication trends in Lake Erie over roughly the past 15 to 20 years.

How can nutrient "form" influence bloom outcomes?

The solicitation points out that the chemical form of nutrients can matter, such as whether nitrogen is present in organic versus inorganic forms. Different forms may favor different cyanobacterial types, including differences that may be related to toxic versus non-toxic strains.

Can two rivers with similar total nutrient loads still have different impacts?

Yes. The opportunity states that two rivers with similar total nutrient loads could still produce different nearshore impacts if rivermouth processing changes nutrient forms or alters N:P ratios before lake entry.

How do rivermouths relate to nearshore ecosystem services?

The notice describes rivermouths and nearshore zones as supporting key ecosystem services, including drinking water supply and fisheries (provisioning services), recreation and tourism (cultural services), and water quality regulation (regulating services).

What broader Great Lakes changes does the opportunity mention?

The solicitation mentions shifting land use, upgrades in wastewater management, and the spread of dreissenid mussels. It links these changes to lower productivity in offshore waters and stronger dependence of food webs on nearshore processes.

Why does repeated exposure to river plumes matter?

The notice indicates that nearshore areas can be repeatedly exposed to river plumes, so nutrient processing at rivermouths can strongly influence nearshore productivity and bloom-forming conditions over time.

Do all rivermouths retain and transform nutrients equally?

No. A central theme is that rivermouths vary widely in their capacity to retain and transform nutrients, and that human impacts can reduce that capacity.

What does the notice say about natural rivermouths versus heavily modified systems?

The notice states that natural rivermouths often include complex wetland networks that can retain substantial quantities of nitrogen and phosphorus, acting as nutrient filters or buffers. In contrast, heavily modified systems may show reduced retention; the Maumee rivermouth is mentioned as an example where buffering appears minimized.

Does the opportunity discuss habitat restoration?

Yes. The funding description suggests that habitat restoration in rivermouths and connected coastal wetlands could potentially improve nutrient retention or alter nutrient transformations in ways that reduce downstream impacts, while emphasizing that this restoration potential has not been fully explored.

Does the notice reference any restoration-related example work?

Yes. It references prior restoration-related work, including a Crane Creek project associated with K. Kowalski, as an example of applied context that could inform future efforts.

How is this work connected to the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI)?

The opportunity is positioned as supporting goals in the USGS GLRI Science Framework, specifically within the Nearshore Health and Watershed themes.

Who identified the needs this opportunity responds to?

The notice states the work is directly responsive to needs identified by a group of nearshore scientists referred to as the Rivermouth Collaboratory.

What is the practical intent or expected outcome described?

The practical intent is to close the monitoring and understanding gap between upstream gaging stations and lake conditions by improving science on how rivermouth processes mediate what nutrients ultimately become available to nearshore food webs and bloom-forming organisms.

What is the CFDA number listed for this opportunity?

The CFDA number listed is 15.808.

What is the activity category for this grant?

The activity category is "Science and Technology and other Research and Development."

Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was limited to public and state-controlled institutions of higher education.

When was the opportunity posted?

The opportunity was originally posted on March 23, 2016.

What was the application closing date?

The application closing date was April 11, 2016.

What was the award ceiling listed in the notice?

The listed award ceiling was $78,675.

Does the provided text specify how many awards were expected?

No. The notice states expected awards but does not clearly specify a number in the provided text.

Is this opportunity described as research-oriented?

Yes. The notice characterizes it as research-oriented and focused on generating better science about rivermouth nutrient processes and nearshore impacts.

Which Great Lakes issue is highlighted as a major motivation for this research?

The solicitation highlights harmful algal blooms, especially cyanobacteria, as a major motivation, including the relationship between bloom dynamics and nutrient load, timing, ratios, and chemical forms.

Which lake is specifically mentioned in relation to re-eutrophication trends?

Lake Erie is specifically mentioned, with re-eutrophication trends discussed over roughly the past 15 to 20 years in relation to increasing dissolved reactive phosphorus loads.