The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Element concentrations in soils and other surficial materials of the conterminous United States
Abstract
Samples of soils or other regoliths, taken at a depth of approximately 20 cm form locations about 80 km apart, throughout the conterminous United States, were analyzed for their content of elements. In this manner, 1,318 sampling sites were chosen, and the results of the sample analyses for 50 elements were plotted on maps. The arithmetic and geometric mean, the geometric deviation, and a histogram showing frequencies of analytical values are given for 47 elements. The lower concentrations of some elements (notable, aluminum, barium, calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, and strontium) in most samples of surficial materials from the Eastern United States, and the greater abundance of heavy metals in the same materials of the Western United States, indicates a regional geochemical pattern of the largest scale. The low concentrations of many elements in soils characterize the Atlantic Coastal Plain. Souls of the Pacific Northwest generally have high concentrations of aluminum, cobalt, iron, scandium, and vanadium, but are low in boron. Soils of the Rocky Mountain region tend to have high concentrations of copper, lead, and zinc. High mercury concentrations in surficial materials are characteristic of Gulf Coast sampling sites and the Atlantic coast sites of Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Maine. At the State level, Florida has the most striking geochemical pattern by having soils that are low in concentrations of most elements considered in this study. Some smaller patterns of element abundance can be noted, but the degree of confidence in the validity of these patterns decreases as the patterns become less extensive.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Simplified estimators for the normal distribution when samples are singly censored or truncated
Cohen, A. C. (1959) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1959.10489859 · Cited by 425
Cited by
Arsenic Exposure and Toxicology: A Historical Perspective
Hughes, M. F., Beck, B. D., Chen, Y., Lewis, A. S., & Thomas, D. J. (2011) · Toxicological Sciences · doi:10.1093/toxsci/kfr184 · Cited by 1,312
Arsenic in Ground Water of the United States: Occurrence and Geochemistry
Welch, A. H., Westjohn, D. B., Helsel, D. R., & Wanty, R. B. (2000) · Groundwater · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6584.2000.tb00251.x · Cited by 893
Hu, H.-W., Wang, J.-T., Li, J., Shi, X.-Z., Ma, Y.-B., Chen, D., & He, J.-Z. (2017) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.6b03383 · Cited by 312
Baseline Concentrations of 15 Trace Elements in Florida Surface Soils
Chen, M., Ma, L. Q., & Harris, W. G. (1999) · Journal of Environmental Quality · doi:10.2134/jeq1999.00472425002800040018x · Cited by 310
Fluorine in the environment, a review of its sources and geochemistry
Fuge, R. (2019) · Applied Geochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.apgeochem.2018.12.016 · Cited by 236
Metadata
- Authors
- Shacklette, H. T., & Boerngen, J. G.
- Venue
- Professional Paper
- Publisher
- US Geological Survey
- Published
- 1984
- ISSN
- 1044-9612 (ISSN-L)
- 2330-7102
- OpenAlex
- W1551851769
- Cited by
- 787
- References
- 1
- Type
- report
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.