USGS Home
Contact USGS
Search USGS

About USGS /  Science Topics /  Maps, Products & Publications /  Education / Publication: FAQ

Tennessee
Subcontractors for the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL) collected at least 3,309 stream-sediment, 1,584 surface-water, and 3,574 ground-water samples within 58 counties from the eastern half and the northwestern corner of Tennessee as part of the NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program. The samples were collected during June - December, 1976 and March - November, 1978 and included portions of the Blytheville, Chattanooga, Columbia, Corbin, Dyersburg, Gadsden, Johnson City, Knoxville, Nashville, Rome, and Winston-Salem 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. (A total of 381 stream-sediment, 166 surface-water, and 550 ground-water samples were collected within the Dyersburg quadrangle.) These samples were sent to SRL for analysis of uranium and additional elements (16 in sediments and 9 in waters). SRL was able to analyze 2,450 sediments and 5,149 waters from Tennessee; this includes 381 sediment and 716 water samples from the Dyersburg quadrangle. The analytical and site location data for all Tennessee samples were released in the Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio Data Report [GJBX-105(82)].

SRL sent 248 sediment samples from Tennessee to an unnamed contract laboratory for "Supplemental Analyses." Supplemental analytical determinations for up to 23 elements were reported for 247 of these samples in the Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio Data Report [GJBX-105(82)]. The digital data file accompanying this report does not include Supplemental Analyses for any Tennessee sediment samples within the Dyersburg quadrangle.

Kentucky
Subcontractors for the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL) collected at least 4,901 stream-sediment, 3,966 surface-water, and 6,408 ground-water samples within 90 counties from the state of Kentucky as part of the NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program. The sediment samples were collected during May - November, 1978; August, 1979 - January, 1980; and April 1980 and water samples were collected during May - June, 1978; September, 1978 - March, 1979; August - November 1979; and May - June 1980. Sample coverage included portions of the Corbin, Dyersburg, Evansville, Huntington, Jenkins, Johnson City, Louisville, Nashville, Paducah, Vincennes, and Winchester 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. (A total of 329 stream-sediment, 63 surface-water, and 389 ground-water samples were collected within the Dyersburg quadrangle.) These samples were sent to SRL for analysis of uranium and additional elements (16 in sediments and 9 in waters). SRL was able to analyze 982 sediments and 10,365 waters from Kentucky; this includes all 329 sediment and all 452 water samples from the Dyersburg quadrangle. The analytical and site location data for all Kentucky samples were released in the Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio Data Report [GJBX-105(82)].

Missouri
Subcontractors for the SRL collected at least 2,162 stream-sediment, 1,340 surface-water, and 3,423 ground-water samples within 30 counties from the southeast and southwest corners of Missouri as part of the NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program. The samples were collected during May - August, 1978, October - December, 1978, and May - June, 1979 and included portions of the Dyersburg, Harrison, Joplin, Paducah, Poplar Bluff, Rolla, St. Louis, Springfield, and Tulsa 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. (A total of 196 stream-sediment, 101 surface-water, and 404 ground-water samples were collected within the Dyersburg quadrangle.) These samples were sent to SRL for analysis of uranium and 16 additional elements. SRL was able to analyze only 1,669 Missouri stream-sediment samples and 4,762 Missouri water samples; this includes all 196 stream-sediment and all 505 water samples from the Dyersburg quadrangle. The analytical and site location data for all Missouri samples were released in the Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas Data Report [GJBX-104(82)].

Illinois
Subcontractors for the Savannah River Laboratory (SRL) collected at least 716 stream-sediment, 337 surface-water, and 1,046 ground-water samples within 16 counties from southern Illinois as part of the NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream Sediment Reconnaissance (HSSR) program. The samples were collected during November - December, 1978 and included portions of the Paducah, Saint Louis, Belleville, and Vincennes 1:250,000-scale quadrangles. (No samples were collected within the Illinois portion of the Dyersburg quadrangle.) These samples were sent to SRL for analysis of uranium and additional elements (16 in sediments and 9 in waters). SRL was able to analyze 716 sediments and 1288 waters from Illinois. The analytical and site location data for all Illinois samples were released in the Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio Data Report [GJBX-105(82)].

SRL: Dyersburg Quadrangle
SRL released a separate quadrangle report for the Dyersburg NTMS quadrangle, which includes data for 905 stream-sediment, 1,342 ground-water, and 329 surface-water samples. With some differences, the data for these samples are the same data found in the state reports with corresponding record numbers. SRL released the analytical data as the Dyersburg Quadrangle GJBX-58(79) Data Report. The site coding information for this data set is summarized within the text of this report.

Gold Analyses
Data for gold analyses of sediments by SRL neutron activation were released in the GJBX-135(82) summary report. The introduction of that report states:

"This report contains previously unreported neutron-activation analyses of gold in sediment samples determined at SRL. These data were not included in the standard SRL NURE data reports because the gold spectrum was not measured in the original analytical procedure and the report format was designed without the gold analyses being included. Gold analyses became available as the analytical procedure was refined, but the report format was not modified to incorporate these data."

Only those sediment samples that had detectable concentrations of gold by neutron activation analysis were given in the GJBX-135(82) report. Sediment samples with concentrations below detection limits were not reported and can only be ascertained by identifying which samples were actually analyzed by neutron activation at SRL.

Summary Tables
Because of the various laboratories and analytical methods used, some SRL samples may have been analyzed once, twice, or not at all. The following table summarizes the analysis of Dyersburg quadrangle samples.

The following is a list of all sample types collected and reported for NURE studies in the Dyersburg quadrangle.

These Dyersburg quadrangle samples were analyzed by one or more of the following methods:

Sediment Samples

• SR1: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis - Neutron Counting of sediments for U.
• SR2: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis of sediments for Al, Ce, Dy, Eu, Fe, Hf, La, Lu, Mn, Na, Sc, Sm, Th, Ti, V, and Yb. (Note: Au values were reported later for this method.)

Water Samples

• SR4: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis - Neutron Counting of waters for U.
• SR5: Savannah River Neutron Activation Analysis of waters for Al, Br, Cl, Dy, F, Mn, Na, and V. (Note: Mg may also be reported by this method.)

Discussion of the Reformatting Process for Dyersburg Quadrangle

Sediment Records
The Dyersburg quadrangle sediment data consist of reformatted records from the Dyersburg Quadrangle GJBX-58(79) Data Report. These records were compared with corresponding sample records from the Missouri portion of the Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas GJBX-104(82) Data Report and the Tennessee and Kentucky portions of the Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio GJBX-105(82) Data Report. The following problems were found and addressed during the comparison and reformatting stages for the Dyersburg Quadrangle sediment data:

1. For 6 sediment samples from Tennessee and 6 sediment samples from Missouri, the comparison process revealed major differences for analytical values reported for one or more elements determined by Neutron Activation. It could not be determined whether these alternate values represent a second analytical determination or a different interpretation of the data from the same Neutron Activation Analysis. For each of these samples, it was necessary to keep a second record containing the alternate analytical values. These records are identified by a comment in the REFORMAT field.
2. The analytical values for many U, Dy, Fe, Hf, Lu, and V determinations differed slightly between the Dyersburg Quadrangle files and the various Kentucky, Missouri, and Tennessee State files. These variations are apparently due only to differences in rounding versus truncation of reported values or to differences in the number of recorded significant digits. Since the variation was insignificant, only one set of the values was retained for the affected elements.
3. For some records, analytical values for U, Dy, Eu, La. Lu, Sc, Sm, and Yb were found in the Kentucky, Missouri, and Tennessee State files but were missing in the corresponding records from the Dyersburg quadrangle files. These values were added and that change was noted for each affected record in the REFORMAT comment field.
4. Occasionally, analytical values for Al, Ce, Fe, Sc, or U were found in the Dyersburg Quadrangle files but were missing in the corresponding records from the Kentucky, Missouri, and Tennessee State files. These values were kept but the difference was noted for each affected record in the REFORMAT comment field.
5. The date on which a sample was analyzed by Neutron Activation Analysis was only recorded in the State digital data files from the Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas GJBX-104(82) Data Report and Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio GJBX-105(82) Data Report. This information was added to each of combined sediment data records.
6. During reformatting, contamination codes for "residential" and "recreation" were found to be missing from the State file CONTAMC field. These codes were present in the quadrangle format and were added to the final digital data file.
7. An unlikely sample collection date was found for one sample. This date was removed from the SAMPDAT field and the original SAMPDAT value with the most likely correct value was added as a comment to the REFORMAT field.
8. The latitude and longitude coordinates for 1 stream-sediment sample collected within Weakley County, Tennessee were not found in the data during the reformatting process. The record for this sample cannot be retrieved on a geographical basis.
9. Gold concentrations from the GJBX-135(82) report were added to the appropriate sediment records. A value of -0.01 (<0.01 ppm Au) was added to all other sediment samples determined to have been analyzed by SRL neutron activation. This value was chosen because 0.01 is the lowest reported gold concentration in the entire report.

Water Records
The Dyersburg quadrangle water data consist of reformatted records from the Dyersburg Quadrangle GJBX-58(79) Data Report. These records were compared with corresponding sample records from the Missouri portion of the Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas GJBX-104(82) Data Report and the Tennessee and Kentucky portions of the Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio GJBX-105(82) Data Report. The following problems were found and addressed during the comparison and reformatting stages for the Dyersburg Quadrangle water data:

1. The analytical values for many Al, Br, Dy, and Mn determinations differed slightly between the Dyersburg Quadrangle files and the various Kentucky, Missouri, and Tennessee State files. These variations are apparently due only to differences in rounding versus truncation of reported values or to differences in the number of recorded significant digits. Since the variation was insignificant, only one set of the values was retained for the affected elements.
2. For 3 records, analytical values for Br or Mg were found in the Dyersburg quadrangle file but were missing in the corresponding records from the State files. These missing values were noted for each affected record in the REFORMAT comment field.
3. For several records, analytical values for Al, Br, Cl, Dy, F, Mg, Mn, Na, and V were found in the State files but were missing in the corresponding records from the Dyersburg quadrangle files. These values were added and that change was noted for each affected record in the REFORMAT comment field.
4. The original NURE format for surface-water files did not include much information about the character of the sample location. This missing information includes observations taken at each site on the stream width, depth, and flow, water color, surrounding vegetation, local relief, weather, and possible contaminants. This information is given in records for stream-sediment samples that were collected at the same locations. The available site descriptive information for stream-water sites were compared with the corresponding stream-sediment site records. The missing site descriptive data were then added to stream-water records from the corresponding stream-sediment sample records. Sources of data and any problems found are described in the REFORMAT comment field.
5. An unlikely sample collection date was found for one sample. This date was removed from the SAMPDAT field and the original SAMPDAT value with the most likely correct value was added as a comment to the REFORMAT field.
6. An analysis of latitude-longitude site coordinates identified several ground-water samples that were missing coordinates, did not plot within expected state, county, or map boundaries, or had differing coordinates in corresponding records. To correct or confirm sample coordinates, the original field collection maps for Graves and McCracken Counties, Kentucky were obtained and re-digitized. The newly re-digitized coordinates were added to the database and the coordinates from the original file(s) were recorded in the COORDPRB comment field. When the newly re-digitized coordinates were not significantly different, that confirmation of the site location was also noted in the COORDPRB comment field.
7. The latitude and longitude coordinates for 2 water samples collected within Henry(1) and Weakley(1) Counties in Tennessee were not found in the data during the reformatting process. The records for these 2 samples cannot be retrieved on a geographical basis.

Download The Data

The NURE HSSR data are now available online in two databases: The sediment database (also includes data for soils and some rocks) at http://tin.er.usgs.gov/nure/sediment/ and the water database at http://tin.er.usgs.gov/nure/water/. From these two web sites, NURE HSSR data can be selected, examined, summarized, and downloaded by political boundaries (State and County), by quadrangle (1:250,000-scale, 1:100,000-scale, and 1:63,360-scale for Alaska or 1:24,000-scale for the Lower 48 States), and by hydrologic unit (drainage region, subregion, river basin, or sub-basin). Selected data can be downloaded as a dBase file, a shapefile, an HTML table, or ASCII text (tab- or comma-delimited).

Dyersburg Quadrangle Sediment Data - 917 records
Dyersburg Quadrangle Water Data - 1,671 records

Notes for Data Users

In the eastern United States, SRL collected samples primarily by county. Often, not all counties within a quadrangle were completely sampled. The laboratory and analytical methods used also may vary by county such that adjacent counties often have very different analytical coverage. Samples were collected throughout the Dyersburg quadrangle. The sampled Kentucky counties include Ballard, Calloway, Carlisle, Fulton, Graves, Hickman, Lyon, McCracken, Marshall, and Trigg. The sampled Missouri counties include Dunklin, Mississippi, New Madrid, Perry, Stoddard, and Scott. The sampled Tennessee counties include Benton, Carroll, Dyer, Gibson, Henry, Lake, Obion, and Weakley. The laboratory and analytical methods used also may vary by county such that adjacent counties often have very different analytical coverages.

Other NURE Geochemical Data for the Dyersburg Quadrangle

Dyersburg Quadrangle NURE Summary
Geochemex, a subcontractor for the Bendix Field Engineering Corporation, produced a summary report for the Dyersburg quadrangle NURE program (PGJ/F-103(82)). As part of this study an additional 31 rock, 25 ground-water, 220 soil, and 194 well-cuttings samples were collected and analyzed for uranium by fluorometry. The rock, well-cuttings, and soil samples were also analyzed for an additional 29 elements, the ground-water samples were analyzed for an additional 4 elements. Two areas of uranium favorability were delineated within the quadrangle. These areas lie in the fluvial to deltaic facies of the Cretaceous McNairy Sand. Data tables were only found on the microfiche accompanying the report.

Dyersburg Quadrangle NURE Bibliography

• Fay, W.M., and Cook, J.R., 1982, Gold analyses by neutron activation from SRL NURE samples: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-141-38, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-135(82), 45 p.
• Fay, W.M., Sargent, K.A., and Cook, J.R., 1982, Data report: Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Texas: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-146-24, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-104(82), 37 p.
• Fay, W.M., Sargent, K.A., and Cook, J.R., 1982, Data report: Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-81-146-25, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-105(82), 41 p.
• Gustovson, J.B., 1982, National Uranium Resource Evaluation, Dyersburg Quadrangle, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, and Tennessee: Geochemex, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., PGJ/F-103(82), 30 p.
• Jones, P.L., 1979, Dyersburg 1° X 2° NTMS area, Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee, and Illinois, data release, National Uranium Resource Evaluation Program, hydrogeochemical and stream sediment reconnaissance: E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory, Aiken, S.C., SRL Internal Doc. DPST-79-146-5, U.S. Department of Energy, Grand Junction, Colo., GJBX-58(79), 202 p.

Links Within Open-File Report 97-492

Back to Tennessee NURE data
Back to Kentucky NURE data
Back to Missouri NURE data
Back to Illinois NURE data
Back to Arkansas NURE data
Frequently Asked Questions Concerning NURE Data
Home Page: USGS National Geochemical Database - NURE HSSR data

Page written by Bryan G. Moravec and Steven M. Smith.
Contact: Steven M. Smith (smsmith@usgs.gov)
Version 1.30: September 11, 2001
Version 1.41: February 23, 2006

AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices
U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey URL: https://pubsdata.usgs.gov/pubs/of/1997/492/quad/q_dyerbg.htm Questions or Assistance: USGS Web Contact Page Last Modified: Wed Dec 7 16:26 EST 2016