. ' 

:. Summary Staqstics for Selenium. in Vege'£ation . ·: 

·_·Calculated from U.S~ GeQiogtcal'Sur:Vey it$~: >,, ~.; 

' . "';. ..... 

. .. . . . .._ ~· 

. . 

.. . .. . .: 

.. 

-· ' t •. . . ' ' 

.... )O'l ... ... • 

... . . : . 

. . .. .. 

' ,·•. 

~ .jo' ~. '' ~· ' ' • ·. '' /'-· ,. ~ :f( 

.·: 

. ...~ ' : . ' . .... . . .· . 

.. .,.. 

~ • . 
AVAILABILITY OF BOOKS AND MAPS OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Instructions on ordering publications of the U.S. Geological Survey, along with prices of the last offerings, are given in the currentyear issues of the monthly catalog "New Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey." Prices of available U.S. Geological Survey 

publications released prior to the current year are listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability List." Publications that are 

listed in various U.S. Geological Survey catalogs (see back inside cover) but not listed in the most recent annual "Price and Availability 

List" are no longer available. 

Reports released through the NTIS may be obtained by writing to the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of 

Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161; please include NTIS report number with inquiry. 

Order U.S. Geological Survey publications by mail or over the counter from the offices given below. 

BY MAIL 

Books 

Professional Papers, Bulletins, Water-Supply Papers, Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations, Circulars, publications 

of general interest (such as leaflets, pamphlets, booklets), single 

copies of Earthquakes & Volcanoes, Preliminary Determination of 

Epicenters, and some miscellaneous reports, including some of 

the foregoing series that have gone out of print at the Superintendent of Documents, are obtainable by mail from 

U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services 

Box 25286, Federal Center 

Denver, CO 80225 

Subscriptions to periodicals (Earthquakes & Volcanoes and 

Preliminary Determination of Epicenters) can be obtained ONLY 

from the 

Superintendent of Documents 

Government Printing Office 

Washington, DC 20402 

(Check or money order must be payable to Superintendent of 

Documents.) 

Maps 

For maps, address mail orders to 

U.S. Geological Survey, Map Distribution 

Box 25286, Bldg. 810, Federal Center 

Denver, CO 80225 

Residents of Alaska may order maps from 

U.S. Geological Survey, Earth Science Information Center 

101 Twelfth Ave., Box 12 

Fairbanks, AK 99701 

OVER THE COUNTER 

Books and Maps 

Books and maps of the U.S. Geological Survey are available 

over the counter at the following U.S. Geological Survey offices, 

all of which are authorized agents of tfie Superintendent of Documents. 

• ANCHORAGE, Alaska-4230 University Dr., Rm. 101 

• LAKEWOOD, Colorado-Federal Center, Bldg. 810 

• MENLO PARK, California-Bldg. 3, Rm. 3128, 345 Middlefield Rd. 

• RESTON, Virginia-National Center, Rm. 1C402, 12201 

Sunrise Valley Dr. 

• SALT LAKE CITY, Utah-Federal Bldg., Rm. 8105, 125 

South State St. 

• SPOKANE, Washington-U.S. Post Office Bldg., Rm. 135, 

W. 904 Riverside Ave. 

• WASIDNGTON, D.C.-Main Interior Bldg., Rm. 2650, 18th 

and C Sts., NW. 

Maps Only 

Maps may be purchased over the counter at the U.S. Geological Survey offices: 

• FAIRBANKS, Alaska-New Federal Building, 101 Twelfth 

Ave. 

• ROLLA, Missouri-1400 Independence Rd. 

• STENNIS SPACE CENTER, Mississippi-Bldg. 3101 
Summary Statistics for Selenium in Vegetation 

Calculated from U.S. Geological Survey Data 

By T.F. Harms 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 2117 

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1995 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

BRUCE BABBITT, Secretary 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Gordon P. Eaton, Director 

For sale by 

U.S. Geological Survey, Map Distribution 

Box 25286, MS 306, Federal Center 

Denver, CO 80225 

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only 

and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 

Text and illustrations edited by George A. Havach 

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data 

Harms, Thelma F. 

Summary statistics for selenium in vegetation calculated from U.S. Geological Survey data I by T.F. Harms 

p. em. - (U.S. Geological Survey bulletin; 21 17) 

Includes bibliographical references (p. 9-11) 

Supt. of Docs. no.: I 19.3:2117 

l. Selenium. 2. Plants-Composition. 3. Botany-West (U.S.). 4. Botanical chemistry. I. Title. II. Series. 

QE75.B9 no. 2117 

[QK898.S45] 

557.3 s-dc20 

[58l.l9'214] 95-23684 

CIP 
CONTENTS 

Abstract--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Introduction --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 

Study areas ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 

Missouri ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2 

Foods --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 

Western energy regions ------------------------------------------------------------------ 4 

Alaska -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 

Challis, Idaho------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5 

U.S. Department of the Interior irrigation-drainage program----------------------- 5 

Laboratory methods ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 

Quality control ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 

Analytical sensi ti vi ty ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 

Data transformations ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 

Description of data tables ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 

References cited ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 

FIGURES 

1. Map of Missouri, showing areas of major vegetation types --------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 

2. Map of Western United States, showing physiographic provinces sampled during a regional baseline study of big 

sagebrush------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 

3. Map of Western United States, showing locations of Challis 1 °-by-2° quadrangle, San Joaquin Valley, and selected 

parts of western energy regions (Powder River Basin, northern Great Plains, and San Juan Basin)----------------------- 4 

4. Frequency distributions of Se content in hard red spring wheat ---------------------------------------------------------------- 8 

TABLES 

[Tables 3 and 4 follow references] 

1. Se contents of standard reference materials --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 

2. Geometric errors associated with regional background studies----------------------------------------------------------------- 7 

3. Se contents of agricultural crops ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15 

4. Se contents of native plant species ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20 

III 

Summary Statistics for Selenium in Vegetation 

Calculated from U.S. Geological Survey Data 

By T.F. Harms 

ABSTRACT 

Summary statistics for selenium in vegetation have been 

compiled from data generated by field studies conducted by 

the U.S. Geological Survey during the past 22 years. The data 

base contains approximately 6,000 analyses on about 150 

species of plants and includes both cultivated crops and native species. Data were gathered both from studies designed 

to measure background or ordinary natural geochemical variations and from studies designed to measure the effects of potential point sources on local vegetation. The summary 

statistics presented here include means, deviations, and observed ranges, as well as references to published reports. The 

analyses of native vegetation should be of particular value 

because many studies of selenium in vegetation have focused 

more on species with agricultural importance. 

INTRODUCTION 

The Se content of vegetation has long been of interest, 

especially in the agricultural sector. Much of this interest stems 

from the element's role as an essential nutrient, as well as 

from its toxicity when present in excessive amounts. In the 

1930's, selenium poisoning was identified as the cause of alkali disease that had plagued both the U.S. Army and settlers 

in the western South Dakota-eastern Wyoming region 

(Francke, 1934; Francke and others, 1934). Early interest focused on selenium's toxic potential, and it was not until1957 

that selenium was reported to be essential for animal health 

(Schwarz and Foltz, 1957). Combs and Combs (1986) estimated di.~tary requirements of 0.10 to 0.20 ppm Se to prevent 

such deficiency problems as white-muscle disease and reproductive failure. The effects of selenium toxicity appear 

when diets contain more than 3 to 8 ppm Se, depending somewhat on species and individual differences. Thus, a relatively 

narrow window exists between deficiency levels and toxicity: Symptoms of toxicity appear at 30 to 80 times deficiency 

levels. Although acute toxicity occurs from ingesting highly 

seleniferous plants containing hundreds to thousands of parts 

Manuscript approved for publication, October 28, 1994. 

per million of selenium, the more common form of chronic 

toxicity comes from prolonged grazing on plants containing 

5 to 20 ppm Se (James and others, 1991). 

Several recent compilations of Se contents in plants 

have been made. Combs and Combs ( 1986) reported on the 

Se contents of grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts, and meats from 

about a dozen countries; they grouped data from the United 

States by their origin from areas with relatively low, moderate, and high soil Se contents. The excellent compilation by 

Ihnat ( 1989) contains chapters on the Se content of plants, 

foods, animal tissues, human tissues, geologic materials, freshwaters, marine environments, and the atmosphere, including 

an extensive listing of the concentrations in selenium-accumulator plants in a chapter on plants and agricultural materials. However, because most studies of selenium in vegetation 

have been agricultural or health based, fewer data are available on the Se contents of native or noncrop species. 

In the 1950's and 1960's, selenium analyses by the U.S. 

Geological Survey generally were completed only to study 

its role as a pathfinder or indicator element in geobotanic prospecting for uranium deposits on the Colorado Plateaus or to 

characterize these deposits. Cannon (1964) extensively studied rock, soil, and plant relations around the uranium-vanadium deposits in the Yellow Cat area near Thompson, Utah. 

Selected samples were analyzed for selenium to investigate 

selenium-vanadium-uranium relations and to determine the 

feasibility of using selenium-accumulator plants as indicator 

plants in uranium prospecting. Listings of the presence of 

plant species both over and away from mineralized areas were 

developed to determine the tolerance of species to high levels of uranium. The selenium-accumulator plants Astragalus 

pattersoni and A. preussi proved to be excellent indicator 

plants for geobotanic prospecting for uranium-vanadium deposits. The analytical method that was used for Se determination involved distillation of selenium as the bromide and 

subsequent titration with sodium thiosulfate solution. This 

method of analysis is complex and requires a skilled operator, and so relatively few determinations were completed. 

Beginning in the late 1960's, regional studies characterized by large numbers of samples were begun within the 

U.S. Geological Survey. Preliminary sampling for one of these 

studies (in Missouri) revealed that the distillation-titration 

method was not sensitive enough to measure theSe contents 

1 
2 SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR SELENIUM IN VEGETATION CALCULATED FROM U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DATA 

in these samples and that it was too laborious for the large 

number of samples which were to be collected. Instead, a 

fluorometric method was tested and accepted for use. During 

the past 22 years, U.S. Geological Survey laboratories have 

completed analyses for selenium on about 6,000 samples. 

About 22 percent of these data have never been published; 

the rest have been published in a wide variety of journals. A 

few of the studies that produced the data were specifically 

designed to determine Se contents; however, most were 

multielement biogeochemical studies in which selenium was 

included as one of several elements determined. Therefore, it 

is generally difficult to know that these selenium data are 

available. This report presents a compilation of the summary 

statistics for all species of plants for selenium determinations, 

both published and unpublished, that have been completed 

since 1970. 

Regional biogeochemical studies by the U.S. Geological Survey, which began in the late 1960's, had as their primary purpose the description of typical or ordinary variations 

in natural-landscape units. The fundamental goal was to measure geochemical variation as it occurs in nature. Because 

these were to be unbiased estimates of relatively large areas, 

formal, objective sampling plans had to be designed that would 

maintain unbiased sampling while minimizing the number of 

samples to be collected, so that both fieldwork and analytical 

efforts could be reduced. Samples were submitted to the laboratories in random sequence to minimize the effects of analytical drift and operator bias by converting systemic errors 

in the laboratory to random errors. The results were interpreted by using statistical methods. In addition to regional 

studies, small-scale geochemical studies that centered on specific problems were conducted. In the Western United States, 

typically, these were studies of point-source emissions from 

the stacks of coal-fired electric-generating plants, or studies 

of the geochemistry of revegetated lands affected by surface 

mining of coal. 

Various species of plants have been used in different 

parts ofthe United States for regional studies, and so baseline 

levels for Se contents have been developed for various plants. 

Sagebrush was used in the Western United States because 

sagebrush-grass vegetation constitutes one of the largest ecosystems in this region (Erdman, 1990). Trees and shrubs were 

used in Missouri, and small grains in the coal-bearing regions 

of the northern Great Plains. Data from all of these studies 

estimate the normal range of Se contents. For environmental 

surveys using plant geochemistry, these data provide a background against which immediate problems can be identified 

and against which potential long-term problems can be monitored. The data should also be useful in range and wildlife 

management. Many of the species listed in this report are 

browsed by wildlife. Shadscale and four-wing saltbush are 

listed as cool season browse for both livestock and deer in 

the Range Plant Handbook (U.S. Forest Service, 1937); willow and alder are important browse in Alaska. 

Acknowledgments.-J.J. Connor, J.A. Erdman, B.M. 

Erickson, L.P. Gough, T.K. Hinkley, H.T. Shacklette, and H.A. 

Tourtelot all furnished unpublished data for inclusion in this 

report. Chemists who performed the fluorometric analyses of 

the plants were W.L. Cary, B.L. Bolton, M.A. Mast, and the 

author. P.L. Hageman and E.P. Welsch performed the hydridegeneration/atomic-absorption-spectrometric analyses. 

STUDY AREAS 

The data in this report represent samples collected in 

the United States, with a few exceptions. A few lichen samples 

were collected in Great Britain by H.T. Shacklette, and some 

samples of wheat, oats, and barley were coiJected in southern 

Saskatchewan, Canada, by J.A. Erdman. Although samples 

from all regions of the United States are part of the data base, 

the data presented here are heavily weighted by samples collected in the west half of the United States and specific areas 

within the West. 

Most samples were collected during studies conducted 

under six major projects: geochemistry of Missouri, geochemistry of foods, geologic studies of the Western energy regions, 

geochemistry of Alaska, geologic studies of the Challis, Idaho, 

1 :250,000-scale quadrangle, and U.S. Department of the Interior irrigation-drainage studies. Each of these projects is 

described briefly below. 

MISSOURI 

The Missouri study was a multidisciplinary project in 

cooperation with the Environmental Health Surveillance Center of the University of Missouri; it was designed to investigate geochemical and health-disease relations throughout 

Missouri. The U.S. Geological Survey conducted an assessment of the geochemical variations of rocks, soils, waters, 

and vegetation across broad, geologically diverse subdivisions 

of the State. For first -phase, reconnaissance geochemical studies of vegetation, the State was divided into six areas on the 

basis of potential climax vegetation (fig. 1). One species, 

smooth sumac, was coJJected in aiJ six areas to measure biogeochemical variation throughout the State; a second species, buckbush, was collected in five areas but, because of 

limited availability, at only a few sites in the sixth area. In 

addition to sumac and buckbush, samples of one or more species of trees representative of each area were collected toestimate the species variation within each area and to determine 

the geochemical characteristics of each species. Corn and 

soybeans were collected as the crop plants from four of the 

six areas. Associated soils were collected at each vegetation 

site to investigate plant-soil relations. Formal sampling plans 

in the field and strict randomization procedures in the laboratories were used to ensure the reliability of the data. Results 
STUDY AREAS 3 

from a geochemical survey of the vegetation were reported 

by Erdman and others (1976a, b). 

FOODS 

The foods study assessed regional patterns in the chemical-element contents of fresh produce. Fruits and vegetables 

were collected from 11 areas of commercial production scattered across the United States. The objectives of this study 

were to evaluate the concentrations of elements with nutritional or environmental significance that occur in fruits and 

vegetables entering commercial channels, and to provide 

baseline or background levels of elements in the edible portions of fruits and vegetables as they are commercially grown 

in the United States. The study was designed to permit com0 

I 

50 

parisons among the types of produce, areas of production, 

and fields within an area. Produce was collected from 11 counties in 10 different States; 2 counties in California were 

sampled. Counties were chosen as the largest sampling unit 

because crop-production records are kept at this level. From 

2 to 12 types of produce were sampled at each area; each 

individual type was sampled in one to five areas. Duplicate 

samples were collected at 45 sites to measure sampling variance; analytical variance in the laboratory was measured by 

splitting 45 randomly selected samples. The samples of fruits 

and vegetables were collected from plants in the fields shortly 

before the crops were harvested. In the Northern States, produce was collected before the fall harvest; in the Southern 

States, winter produce was collected. The samples were prepared as for eating (washed, peeled, and so on) and then dried. 

Cultivars are not necessarily the same from each area because 

I 

100 KILOMETERS 

EXPlANATION 

t :' :~·.: :· :.·:j Glaciated prairie 

m Unglaciated prairie 

D Oak-hickory forest 

B:ZJ Oak-hickory-pine forest 

~ Cedar glade 

Rood-plain forest 

Figure 1. Missouri, showing areas of major vegetation types. Modified from Erdman and others 

(1976b). 
4 SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR SELENIUM IN VEGETATION CALCULATED FROM U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DATA 

they are adapted for specific regions of the country, but all 

were commercial varieties. The results were reported by 

Shacklette (1980). 

One of the counties selected for sampling in the foods 

study was Yakima County, Wash., where apples, pears, 

peaches, grapes, plums, tomatoes, and potatoes were collected. 

During the 1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens, volcanic ash 

fell in this area. In September 1980, the same types of produce were collected again, from the same farms and fields 

when possible. The results were reported by Gough and others (1986). 

WESTERN ENERGY REGIONS 

A large group of studies were designed to investigate 

the geochemistry of rocks, soils, plants, and waters at sites 

overlying major coal and oil-shale resources in the northern 

Great Plains and Rocky Mountain regions. Included in this 

group are baseline studies to determine the natural geochemical variations in materials in the region, as well as small-scale 

studies of the geochemistry of materials at existing coal mines 

and coal-fired electric-generating plants. 

Studies designed solely to estimate baseline values applicable to these regions include those on ( 1) sagebrush in 

eight western physiographic provinces (fig. 2); (2) grass, sage0 

I 

0 

I 

500 MILES 

I 

500 KILOMETERS 

I - -,__I ___ _ 

r---l 

I I 

I I 

I "-.... 

I 

Figure 2. Western United States, showing physiographic provinces 

sampled during a regional baseline study of big sagebrush. Modified 

from Ebens and Shacklette (1982). 

brush, and lichen in the Powder River Basin (fig. 3); (3) 

grasses and four-winged saltbush in the San Juan Basin (fig. 

3); and (4) various small grains in the northern Great Plains 

(fig. 3). The regional sagebrush study was designed to estimate the variations in elemental concentrations at geographic 

distances of from 0.1 to more than 200 km, as well as the 

variations in elemental concentration that are characteristic 

of sagebrush throughout the various provinces. In the northern Great Plains, where small-grain production is important 

agriculturally, baseline values have been derived for oats, 

barley, hard red spring wheat, hard red winter wheat, and 

durum wheat. Baseline values obtained from all of these studies were used to assess the possible effects from existing coal 

mines and coal-fired electric-generating plants. 

The geochemical effects of land-surface disturbance, 

stack emissions, fly ash, and so on were measured, and the 

probable effects of future operations were estimated from studies at representative areas where coal mines and powerplants 

currently operate. The effects of stack emissions at several 

powerplants were studied by using lichens, sagebrush, and 

Indian rice grass to determine whether measurable changes in 

the local environments could be attributed to the presence of 

"<~· 

•#'J> 

Figure 3. Western United States, showing locations of the Challis 

1 °-by-2° quadrangle, San Joaquin Valley, and selected parts of 

western energy regions (Powder River Basin, northern Great Plains, 

and San Juan Basin). Inset map of Alaska shows location of the 

Capps Coal Field. Same scale as in figure 2. 
LABORATORY METHODS 5 

the powerplants. Regulations governing the reclamation of 

surface coal mines require that the surface be restored to its 

original contours to an acceptable degree and revegetated. At 

mines where spoil material had been covered or mixed with 

topsoil and revegetated, studies compared both native and crop 

species growing on the rehabilitated sites and adjacent undisturbed areas to assess the effects of reclaimed spoils on elemental concentrations in plants. Alfalfa, wheat, four-winged 

saltbush, sweetclover, and several species of wheatgrass have 

all been collected for mine-rehabilitation studies. 

All of these studies followed well-designed sampling 

plans to identify the plants of interest and reduce sampling 

and analytical bias; the results were interpreted by using statistical techniques. Many of these studies, along with the data 

collected, were summarized by Ebens and Shacklette (1982). 

ALASKA 

The main objectives of the Alaska study were to estimate a central tendency and typical ranges for elemental concentrations in soils throughout the State and to make 

broad-scale concentration maps for several chemical elements 

in the soils (Gough and others, 1988). Although the major emphasis of this study was on the chemical characterization of 

soils, a plant sample was also collected at most sites. The 

sample sites were selected as representative of the typical landscape of Alaska in that particular area. Areas of known mineralization or contamination were avoided, and the samples were 

collected 100m from the nearest road to avoid roadside contamination. Because only the dominant vascular plant species 

was collected at each site, trees were sampled most frequently, 

followed by woody shrubs. Although the samples were collected over several years (partly by volunteer efforts of U.S. 

Geological Survey personnel as they traveled to field camps), 

the samples were analyzed as a single suite after all collecting 

had been completed. The data for plant samples were reported 

by Gough and others (1991). 

CHALLIS, IDAHO 

The Challis, Idaho, 1 :250,000-scale quadrangle ( 1 o -by20 sheet) (fig. 3) is part of an ongoing U.S. Geological Survey 

program to conduct mineral-resource assessments in selected 

1 :250,000-scale quadrangles throughout the United States. 

Geologic, geochemical, and geophysical investigations are 

conducted in each quadrangle. Biogeochemical studies, in 

addition to the more common stream-sediment sampling, were 

included in the study of the Challis quadrangle. The plants 

analyzed for selenium were commonly collected as preliminary "grab" samples to evaluate several species for their usefulness in biogeochemical exploration in the area, or were 

collected on traverses across faults or geologic units to study 

potential mineralization associated with the fault zone or geologic formation. Although selenium was not the metallic element of economic interest, it was determined to assess its 

usefulness as a pathfinder or indicator element for uranium, 

gold, and molybdenum deposits. Se contents were generally 

low and fairly uniform, and so its usefulness as an indicator 

element was limited; selenium determinations were dropped 

as the studies progressed. Although none of the selenium 

results have been published, preliminary results from all facets of the investigations of the Challis quadrangle were presented at the Northwest Mining Association convention in 

Spokane, Wash., on December 1-2, 1983 (Mcintyre, 1985). 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR'S 

IRRIGATION-DRAINAGE PROGRAM 

In response to congressional concern about the quality of drainage water in Federally funded irrigation projects, 

the U.S. Department of the Interior formed a multiagency 

workgroup (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Geological Survey) in 1985 to investigate the potential for damage to affected lands. The objective 

of these investigations is to determine whether irrigation practices may be harmful to human health, wildlife, fish, or other 

water users, or reduce water quality for beneficial uses. Fieldscreening studies of selected areas utilize limited sampling 

of water, sediment, and wildlife. The samples are analyzed 

by using multielement analytical techniques to screen areas 

for excessive amounts of metals. These studies are followed 

by more detailed investigations in areas deemed appropriate 

on the basis of anomalous concentrations of trace elements 

found during screening studies. Both sagebrush and alfalfa 

were included in detailed biogeochemical studies in the 

Kendrick Reclamation Project area, Natrona County, Wyo. 

(See and others, 1992), and alfalfa was used in followup studies in the Uncompahgre Reclamation Project area, Delta and 

Montrose Counties, Colo. (Crock and others, 1994 ). In each 

of these areas, samples of sagebrush (Kendrick) or alfalfa 

(Uncompahgre) growing on soils derived from specific geologic units were collected to assess the importance of each 

unit as a source of selenium in the area. 

LABORATORY METHODS 

All selenium analyses were completed on dried vegetation. Drying provided several advantages: It stopped the 

growth of bacteria, provided a sample that was easily stored, 

and provided a stable sample for weighing without the problems present in homogenized wet tissues. In studies of the 

losses of selenium during heated drying by Palmer and Olson 

( 1991 ), samples of Astragalus lost 0 to 5 percent of their Se 

content when heated at 75°C for 22 hours (Se content, >600 

ppm), whereas grains showed only small losses even when 

heated at 105°C (Se content, >10 ppm). Erdman and others 
6 SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR SELENIUM IN VEGETATION CALCULATED FROM U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DATA 

(1989) found no significant loss of selenium in alfalfa (Se 

content, <I ppm) when dried by (1) oven heating in forced air 

at I 00°C for 90 minutes followed by heating at 65°C for 30 

hours, (2) microwave heating for 15 minutes, or (3) freezedrying. 

Washed (if this was part of the study design) and unwashed samples were airdried or dried in an oven at 40°C for 

I to 2 days until the material was brittle. After drying, the 

samples were pulverized in Wiley or Christie-Norris mills, 

using 10-mesh (2 mm) or finer screens to control the particle 

size of the ground sample. Samples that were to be divided 

into two fractions for use as analytical duplicates were split 

after grinding by using a Jones splitter. 

Almost all the plant samples were analyzed by using a 

fluorometric method; the other samples were determined by 

using hydride-generation/atomic-absorption spectroscopy. The 

fluorometric method has been widely used for plants and many 

other types of material since the late 1960's. The 14th edition 

of the methods handbook of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists still uses fluorometric methods as the official methods for selenium determination in foods and plants 

(Williams, 1984 ). A brief description of this method as used 

by the U.S. Geological Survey is given below. 

At least 1 g of dried, ground vegetation was digested in 

nitric and perchloric acids; hydrogen peroxide was used to 

help break down resistant oils and waxes. The selenium in 

solution was complexed with 2,3-diaminonaphthalene to produce 4,5-benzopiazselenol; this complex fluoresces in proportion to its Se content. The selenium complex was extracted 

into cyclohexane both to isolate it and to improve the analytical sensitivity. The fluorescence was measured at 525 nm and 

the result compared with those produced by standards taken 

throughout the entire procedure (Harms and Ward, 1975). The 

lower limit of determination is 0.0 I ppm Se for a 1-g sample; 

such samples as food plants containing less than 0.01 ppm Se 

were analyzed by using 2 g or more of sample. 

Partly because the~method was sensitive and worked 

well, and partly because U.S. Geological Survey botanistsgeochemists wanted to maintain continuity of analytical methods between projects so that selenium values were directly 

comparable among studies, this method was used until 1989, 

when it was replaced by hydride-generation/atomic-absorption spectroscopy using an automated, continuous-flow system. The digestion procedure remained the same as for the 

fluorometric method, using nitric and perchloric acids to destroy the sample matrix. The selenium in the sample solution 

was reacted with sodium borohydride to form gaseous hydrogen selenide (H2

Se ), which was swept into a heated quartz 

furnace on an atomic-absorption spectrometer. The Se content was determined from an aqueous standard calibration 

curve (Crock and Lichte, 1982; Sanzolone and Chao, 1987). 

Two suites of the sample data in this report were determined by using this procedure: alfalfa from the Uncompahgre 

Reclamation Project area, Delta and Montrose Counties, Colo., 

and wheat from the San Joaquin Valley, Calif. All other reTable 1. Se contents of standard reference materials. 

[All values in parts per million dry weight, determined by fluorometry. NIST, U.S. 

National Institute of Standards and Technology; USGS. U.S. Geological Survey. n.d., 

not determined] 

NIST standard reference material 

No. Name 

1567 Wheat flour----------------

1570 Spinach --------------------

1571 Orchard leaves ------------

1572 Citrus leaves---------------

1575 Pine needles---------------

1

Based on 7 analyses. 2

Based on 36 analyses. 3

Uncertified value. 4

Based on 6 analyses. 5

Based on 3 analyses. 

NISTcertified 

value 

1.1±0.2 

n.d. 

.08±0.01 

3

.025 

n.d. 

Gladney 

(1980) 

1.12±0.01 

1

.039±0.015 

2

.08±0.009 

n.d. 

·'.049±0.004 

USGS 

value 

0.97, 0.99 

.032 

.075 4

.037±0.004 

.056 

suits were obtained by using the fluorometric method. Some 

analytical bias may exist between these two suites of samples 

and the rest of the data because two different methods were 

used to determine Se content. Even within the data obtained 

from fluorometric analyses, slight modifications to the method 

over the years, differing batches of chemical reagents, and 

different operators may have introduced minor biases. 

QUALITY CONTROL 

Botanic standard reference materials from the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST; formerly 

the U.S. National Bureau of Standards) have been purchased 

and analyzed for selenium to assess the accuracy of our analyses as the standards have become available, beginning with 

the original botanic material, orchard leaves, issued in 1971. 

Gladney (1980) compiled the results of analyses of standard 

reference materials from articles published between 1972 and 

1980 in 15 chemistry and geochemistry journals. Most of 

these results were generated by neutron-activation analyses, 

although other analytical methods also were included. From 

the original data in these articles, Gladney computed the mean 

± 1 a for chemical elements in 16 biologic and environmental 

standard reference materials. The close agreement among the 

NIST-certified values, the values calculated by Gladney, and 

the values determined by the U.S. Geological Survey on five 

botanic standard reference standards are listed in table I. 

Statistical techniques were used to assess the precision 

of selenium determinations. In most studies, 5 to 10 percent 

of the samples were selected to be split into two parts to obtain duplicate analyses of the sample. The samples from the 

study area plus the sample splits were arranged and analyzed 

in an order that was random as to both plant species (for 

sample sets with mixed species) and geographic location. 
ANALYTICAL SENSITIVITY 7 

Table 2. Geometric errors associated with regional background 

studies. 

Project 

Missouri: 

Native species ---------------------------------------

Crop species-----------------------------------------

Foods--------------------------------------------------------

Western energy regions: 

Sagebrush, Powder River Basin ------------------

Sagebrush, regional study: 

Columbia Plateaus, Colorado Plateaus, 

Basin and Range. 

Rocky Mountain provinces, Wyoming 

Basin. 

Lichen, Powder River Basin------------------------------

Galleta, San Juan Basin-----------------------------------

Snakeweed, San Juan Basin------------------------------

Wheat, hard red spring------------------------------------

Wheat, hard red winter------------------------------------

Wheat, durum ----------------------------------------------

Barley -------------------------------------------------------

Oats----------------------------------------------------------

Geometric 

error 

1.22 

1.09 

1.24 

1.13 

1.23 

1.37 

1.07 

1.05 

1.06 

1.11 

1.09 

1.12 

1.09 

1.05 

The analytical variance was estimated from these 

sample splits by using the equation 

n 

Icxli -X2)2 

s2 = _i=_I ____ _ 

(J 2n 

where s 2 is the error variance, X1. and X2. are the Se contents (J I I 

(or their logarithms) in the two splits of the ith sample, and n 

is the number of samples that were split. The standard error 

is the square root of the variance. If the variance has been 

estimated from logarithmic data, the square root is the logarithmic standard error, and the geometric error is the antilogarithm. For example, for native plants from Missouri, the 

variance attributed to laboratory procedures was 0.00687, on 

the basis of results from 50 pairs of samples (Erdman and 

others, 1976b), the logarithmic standard error was 0.08289, 

and the geometric error was 1.22. The geometric error gives 

confidence levels about the geometric mean. The analytical 

method is reproducible within a factor of the error (for Missouri, 1.22) at the 68-percent-confidence level and within a 

factor of the square of the error ( 1.49=( 1.22)2

) at the 95-percent-confidence level (Miesch, 1976). 

Geometric errors for several studies are listed in table 

2; the relatively small errors indicate that the data should be 

quite reproducible. For suites of data with large numbers of 

samples, such as the native species in Missouri (n=950) and 

the foods study (n=665), the analytical variance is a composite estimate across plant species and areas. This estimate was 

made both for economic reasons and because the analytical 

variance was not expected to differ· across areas or sample 

types. 

ANALYTICAL SENSITIVITY 

Every analytical method has both upper and lower limits of sensitivity beyond which it is ineffective. The upper 

limit can be extended either by decreasing the sample weight 

(within bounds that allow for accurate weighing and adequate 

subsampling of the material) or by diluting the sample solution and using only an fraction of it. This second procedure 

was the one normally used for samples with high Se contents. 

Although these procedures extend the upper limit, they are 

detrimental to the precision of the analysis because extra steps 

(each with its own error), multiplication factors, or both are 

introduced into the procedure. 

Very little can be done to improve the lower limit of 

sensitivity beyond increasing the sample weight. Thus, because of insufficient analytical sensitivity, Se contents may 

be reported as less than some specified lower limit; these values are said to be "censored" or "qualified." For studies that 

contain censored data, the geometric mean and geometric 

deviation were estimated by using the technique of Cohen 

(1959), as described by Miesch (1967). This technique includes all the data in the calculation of the mean, not just the 

uncensored data, and involves an adjustment of the summary 

statistics that have been computed for the uncensored data. In 

some studies, censoring is so severe (about half the data are 

censored) that such an adjustment is impossible or its results 

are questionable. 

The use of Cohen's (1959) technique to estimate the 

geometric mean can lead to values that are below the limit of 

determination. For example, the range of Se content in pears 

from Wayne County, N.Y., that were collected as part of the 

foods study is from less than 0.005 to 0.02 ppm. The geometric mean, as calculated by Cohen's procedure, is 0.0048 ppm. 

The statistical summaries presented here are accompanied by an indication of the degree to which the raw data are 

censored. For this purpose, a detection ratio is used, which is 

a fraction in which the numerator is the number of samples 

with uncensored values and the denominator is the total number of samples. The difference between the two numbers is 

the number of samples with censored values in the data set. 

For example, the detection ratio for the pears from New York 

is 7: 1 0; that is, 10 samples of pears, of which 7 samples had 

Se contents of at least 0.005 ppm or more and 3 samples had 

censored Se contents of less than 0.005 ppm. The detection 

ratio for alfalfa samples from the Kendrick Reclamation 

Project is 112:112 because all the measured values are greater 

than the lower limit of sensitivity (112 valid numbers, 112 

samples). 
8 SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR SELENIUM IN VEGETATION CALCULATED FROM U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DATA 

DATA TRANSFORMATIONS 

Frequency distributions for chemical elements in most 

geochemical studies are not normal (Gaussian) distributions. 

More commonly, they are asymmetric with a long tail toward 

high values (positive skewness), especially for minor or trace 

elements. For data that are unimodal and positively skewed, 

a transformation to logarithms (base 1 0) will result in a distribution that is closer to normal form, although even a frequency distribution oflogarithmic data may show positive or 

negative skewness (Miesch, 1967). 

Data from the analyses of 69 samples of hard red spring 

wheat from the northern Great Plains illustrate this trend. 

These samples were collected as part of a regional baseline 

study for grains, from storage bins on farms in North Dakota, 

South Dakota, Montana, and Saskatchewan, Canada, using a 

6-ft-long grain probe to provide a composite sample of grain 

that had been harvested from many acres (Erdman and Gough, 

1978). Se contents in these samples range from 0.15 to 2.2 

ppm. A frequency diagram of the original data (fig. 4A) exhibits a clear positive skewness, with a tail of data toward the 

right. Converting these data to logarithms and using the same 

class intervals as in the original data set results in frequency 

diagram (fig. 4B) that is closer to a normal distribution. 

The best measure of the central tendency of data with a 

log-normal distribution is not the arithmetic mean but the geometric mean, which is the antilogarithm of the mean of the 

logarithmic data. The calculations used to determine the geometric mean (GM) are summarized by the equations 

X= log 10 )', 

11 LX - i=l x=--, 

ll 

and GM = 10~'. 

For the 69 samples of wheat, the geometric mean is 0.64 ppm, 

the median is 0.60 ppm, and the arithmetic mean is 0.76 ppm. 

For log-normal distributions, the geometric mean will be 

closer to the median than the arithmetic mean, which in these 

distributions overestimates the median. If the distribution were 

symmetrical on a logarithmic scale, then the geometric mean 

would be the same as the median. 

A measure of the scatter or variation to be expected 

about the mean is given by the geometric deviation (GD), 

which is the antilogarithm of the standard deviation of the 

logarithmic data; it is calculated similarly to the geometric 

mean by first converting the data to logarithms. As with the 

standard deviation in a normal distribution, about 68 percent 

of the samples in a randomly selected suite with a log-normal 

distribution is estimated to fall between GM+GD and 

GMxGD, about 95 percent between GM+(GD) 2 and 

GMx(GD) 2

, and 99.7 percent between GM+(GD) 3 and 

GMx(GDY~. The wheat samples in the example above have a 

geometric mean of 0.64 ppm and a geometric deviation of 

1.85. Thus, for a randomly selected suite of samples of hard 

red spring wheat from the northern Great Plains, the typical 

or most common Se content is 0.64 ppm. Approximately 68 

percent of the samples should contain from 0.35 to 1.18 ppm 

Se, about 95 percent from 0.19 to 2.19 ppm Se, and more 

than 99 percent from 0.10 to 4.05 ppm Se. 

25 

20 

>- () 15 

z 

w 

:::) 

0 

~ 10 LL 

5 

0 

25 

20 

b 15 

z 

w 

::::> 

a 

w 

fE 10 

5 

0 

0.15 0.406 0.663 0.919 1.175 1.431 1.688 1.944 2.20 

Se CONTENT, IN PARTS PER MILLION 

B 

-0.83 -0.58 -0.33 -0.08 0.17 0.42 

LOGARITHM OF Se CONTENT 

(IN PARTS PER MILLION) 

Figure 4. Frequency distributions of Se content (A) and logarithm 

of Se content (B) in hard red spring wheat. 
REFERENCES CITED 9 

The central 95-percent range that is created from an 

unbiased sample set by calculating GM+(GD) 2 and 

GMx(GD)2 has been proposed as a "baseline" range to be 

used to define typical or commonly expected Se contents 

(Ebens and others, 1973; Tidball and Ebens, 1976). Se contents outside this range would be viewed as uncommon, outliers, or anomalous. Such Se contents need not reflect metal 

deficiency or pollution, but they would be worthy of further 

investigation. This range was arbitrarily chosen because, 

owing to chance alone, only 5 percent of all samples reflecting natural conditions would fall outside it. For example, any 

Se content above the upper limit of the central 95-percent 

range has only 21

/z chances in 100 of reflecting natural variation in the material within the study area. The central 99.7-

percent range also could be used to define anomalous values 

if a greater degree of certainty would be needed to judge a 

value anomalous. 

DESCRIPTION OF DATA TABLES 

The geochemical summaries from selenium analyses 

are listed in tables 3 and 4: The data on cultivated (agricultural) crops, such as alfalfa and tomatoes, followed by those 

for grains, vegetables, and fruits, are listed in table 3, and the 

data on native species in table 4. The plants in table 4 are 

grouped into broad categories of lichens, grasses, shrubs and 

herbs, and trees. Within these categories plants are grouped 

by families. Each plant species is identified by its common 

name, followed by the scientific name. Locations are listed 

by State and county except for studies oflarger physiographic 

provinces; approximate boundaries for these areas are shown 

in figures 1 through 3. Each entry in tables 3 and 4 also identifies the part of the plant that was sampled, because this item 

influences the data obtained. The rest of tables 3 and 4 contain the following information: the geometric mean, which 

estimates the most probable Se content to be expected in the 

material; the geometric deviation, which estimates the magnitude of scatter in the data; the range of values observed in 

each sample suite; and finally, a reference to a published report. The geometric means and observed ranges are all listed 

in parts per million (ppm) dry weight (I0--4 weight percent); 

the geometric deviation is a factor and has no unit of measure. 

REFERENCES CITED 

Anderson, B.M., 1982, Effects of processed oil shale on the element 

content of A triplex canescens: U.S. Geological Survey OpenFile Report 82-1051, 16 p. 

Anderson, B.M., and Keith, J.R., 1976, Soil and sagebrush chemistry near the Jim Bridger Powerplant, in U.S. Geological Survey, Geochemical survey of the western energy regions (formerly Geochemical survey of western coal regions), third 

annual progress report, July 1976: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 76-729, p. 37-47. 

---1977, A new multi-traverse study of soil and sagebrush chemistry around the Dave Johnston Powerplant, Wyoming, in U.S. 

Geological Survey, Geochemical survey of the western energy regions, fourth annual progress report, July 1977: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 77-872, p. 14-54. 

Cannon, H.L., 1964, Geochemistry of rocks and related soils and 

vegetation in the Yellow Cat area, Grand County, Utah: U.S. 

Geological Survey Bulletin 1176, 127 p. 

Cannon, H.L., and Swanson, V.E., 1979, Contributions of major and 

minor elements to soils and vegetation by the coal-fired Four 

Corners Power Plant, San Juan County, New Mexico: U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional Paper 1129-B, p. B1-B13. 

Cannon, H.L., Trimby, Sara, Harms, T.F., and Mosier, E.L., 1986, 

Some observations on plant assemblages and elemental content of plants in mineralized areas of the Walker Lake 1° by 

2° quadrangle, California-Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 86-409, 48 p. 

Cohen, A.C., Jr., 1959, Simplified estimators for the normal distribution when samples are singly censored or truncated: 

Technometrics, v. 1, no. 3, p. 217-237. 

Combs, G.F., Jr., and Combs, S.B., 1986, The role of selenium in 

nutrition: New York, Academic Press, 532 p. 

Connor, J.J., 1979, Geochemistry of ohia and soil lichen, Puhimau 

thermal area, Hawaii: Science of the Total Environment, v. 

12,no.3,p.241-250. 

Connor, J.J ., Anderson, B.M., Keith, J.R., and Boerngen, J.G., 1976a, 

Soil and grass chemistry near the Four Corners Powerplant, 

in U.S. Geological Survey, Geochemical survey of the western energy regions (formerly Geochemical survey ofthe western coal regions), third annual progress report, July 1976: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 76-729, p. 112-120. 

Connor, J.J., Keith, J.R., and Anderson, B.M., 1976b, Trace metal 

variation in soils and sagebrush in the Powder River Basin, 

Wyoming and Montana: U.S. Geological Survey Journal of 

Research, v. 4, no. 1, p. 49-59. 

Crock, J.G., and Lichte, F.E., 1982, An improved method for the 

determination of trace levels of arsenic and antimony in geological materials by automated hydride generation-atomic absorption spectroscopy: Analytica ChimicaActa, v. 144, p. 223-

233. 

Crock, J.G., Stewart, K.C., and Severson, R.C., 1994, Listing of 

geochemical data and assessment of variability for alfalfa and 

soils of the Uncompahgre Project Area, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 94-580, 83 p. 

Ebens, R.J., Erdman, J.A., Feder, G.L., Case, A.A., Selby, L.A., 1973, 

Geochemical anomalies of a claypit area, Callaway County, 

Missouri, and related metabolic imbalance in beef cattle: U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional Paper 807, 24 p. 

Ebens, R.J., and Shacklette, H.T., 1982, Geochemistry of some rocks, 

mine spoils, stream sediments, soils, plants, and waters in the 

Western Energy Region of the conterminous United States, 

with sections on Field studies, by B.M. Anderson, J.G. 

Boergen, J.J. Connor, W.E. Dean, J.A. Erdman, G.L. Feder, 

L.P. Gough, J.R. Herring, T.K. Hinkley, J.R. Keith, R.W. 

Klusman, J.M. McNeal, C.D. Ringrose, R.C. Severson, and 

R.R. Tidball: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1237, 

173 p. 

Erdman, J.A., 1990, Biogeochemical baselines and the importance 
10 SUMMARY STATISTICS FOR SELENIUM IN VEGETATION CALCULATED FROM U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DATA 

of species, plant parts, and season-the U.S. Geological 

Survey's studies of big sagebrush in the West, in Doe, B.R., 

ed., Proceedings of a U.S. Geological Survey workshop on 

environmental geochemistry: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1033, p. 45-46. 

Erdman, J.A., Cookro, T.M., O'Leary, R.M., and Harms, T.F., 1988, 

Gold and other metals in big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata 

Nutt.) as an exploration tool, Gold Run District, Humboldt 

County, Nevada: Journal of Geochemical Exploration, v. 30, 

no. 3, p. 287-308. 

Erdman, J.A., and Ebens, R.J., 1975, A variance analysis of the element composition of sweetclover and associated spoil materials from selected coal mines in the Northern Great Plains, 

in U.S. Geological Survey, Geochemical survey of the western coal regions, second annual progress report, July 1975: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 75-436, p. 29-35. 

---1979, Element content of crested wheatgrass grown on reclaimed coal spoils and on soils nearby: Journal of Range 

Management, v. 32, no. 2, p. 159-161. 

Erdman, J.A., and Gough, L.P., 1975, Trace elements in soil lichen 

and grama grass of the Powder River Basin, in U.S. Geological Survey, Geochemical survey of the western coal regions, 

second annual progress report, July 1975: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 75-436, p. 10-19. 

---1977, Variation in the element content of Parmelia 

chlorochroa from the Powder River Basin of Wyoming and 

Montana: Bryologist, v. 80, no. 2, p. 292-303. 

---1978, Mineral composition of wheat from coal-mine spoils 

and farms in the northern Great Plains, USA, in Mohan, K.W., 

ed., Ecology and coal resource development: New York, 

Pergamon, p. 878-886. 

Erdman, J.A., McNeal, J.M., Pierson, C.T., and Harms, T.F., 1979, 

The desert shrub, catclaw mimosa, as a possible indicator of 

uranium occurrences [abs.]: Exploration Geochemistry in the 

Basin and Range Province Conference, Tucson, Ariz., 1979, 

Program and abstracts, p. 16. 

Erdman, J.A., and Moul, R.C., 1982, Mineral composition of smallgrain cultivars from a uniform test plot in South Dakota: Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, v. 30, no. 1, p. 169-

174. 

Erdman, J.A., Severson, R.C., Crock, J.G., Hanns, T.F., and Mayland, 

H.F., 1989, Selenium in soils and plants from native and irrigated lands at the Kendrick Reclamation Project Area, Wyoming: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-628,28 

p. 

Erdman, J.A., Shacklette, H.T., and Keith, J.R., 1976a, Elemental 

composition of corn grains, soybean seeds, pasture grasses, 

and associated soils from selected areas in Missouri: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 954-D, p. D1-D23. 

---1976b, Elemental composition of selected native plants and 

associated soils from major vegetation-type areas in Missouri: 

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 954-C, p. C1-

C87. 

Erdman, J.A., and Tourtelot, H.A., 1976, Denver liquid sewage 

sludge; its agricultural benefits and its effect on the metal 

composition of wheat grown at the Watkins Test Site, Adams 

County, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

76-810, 29 p. 

Francke, K.W., 1934, A new toxicant occurring naturally in certain 

samples of plant foodstuffs, I. Results obtained in preliminary feeding trials: Journal of Nutrition, v. 8, p. 597-608. 

Francke, K.W., Rice, T.D., Johnson, A.G., and Schoening, H.W., 

1934, Report on a preliminary field survey of the so-called 

"alkali disease" of livestock: U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Circular 320, 9 p. 

Gladney, E.S., 1980, Elemental concentrations in NBS biological 

and environmental Standard Reference Materials: Analytica 

Chimica Acta, v. 118, no. 2, p. 385-396. 

Gough, L.P., and Erdman, J.A., 1977, Influence of a coal-fired 

powerplant on the element content of Parmelia chlorochroa: 

Bryologist, v. 80, no. 3, p. 492-501. 

---1978, Element content of lichens and soil near a new 

powerplant, Colstrip, Montana-preoperational levels, in U.S. 

Geological Survey, Geochemical survey of the western energy regions, fifth annual progress report, July 1978: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 78-1105, p. 72-86. 

---1980, Seasonal differences in the element content of Wyoming big sagebrush: Journal of Range Management, v. 33, 

no. 5, p. 374-378. 

---1983, Baseline elemental concentrations for big sagebrush 

from western U.S.A.: Journal of Range Management, v. 36, 

no. 6, p. 718-722. 

Gough, L.P., and Severson, R.C., 1981a, Biogeochemical variability of plants and native and altered sites, San Juan Basin, New 

Mexico: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1134-

D, p. D1-D26. 

---1981 b, Element concentrations in rehabilitation species from 

thirteen coal-stripmines in five Western States and Alaska: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 81-182, 118 p. 

---1983, Chemical analyses of native soil and vegetation 

samples, Capps Coal Field, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open-File Report 83-246, 54 p. 

Gough, L.P., Severson, R.C., Harms, T.F., Papp, C.S.E., and 

Shacklette, H.T., 1991, Biogeochemistry of selected plant 

materials, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 

91-292, 30 p. 

Gough, L.P., Severson, R.C., Lichte, F.E., Peard, J.L., Tuttle, M.L., 

Papp, C.S:E., Harms, T.F., and Smith, K.S., 1981, Ash-fall 

effects on the chemistry of wheat and the Ritzville soil series, 

eastern Washington, in Lipman, P.W., and Mullineaux, D.R., 

eds., The 1980 eruptions of Mount St. Helens, Washington: 

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1250, p. 761-782. 

Gough, L.P., Severson, R.C., and Shacklette, H.T., 1988, Element 

concentrations in soils and other surficial materials of Alaska: 

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1458, 53 p. 

Gough, L.P., Shacklette, H.T., Peard, J.L., and Papp, C.S.E., 1986, 

The chemistry of fruits and vegetables, Yakima River valley, 

Washington, and the influence of the 1980 Mount St. Helens 

ash-fall episodes: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1640, 13 

p. 

Harms, T.F., and Ward, F.N., 1975, Determination of selenium in 

vegetation, in Ward, F.N., ed., New and refined methods of 

trace analysis useful in geochemical exploration: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1408, p. 37-42. 

Ihnat, Milan, 1989, Occurrence and distribution of selenium: Boca 

Raton, Fla., CRC Press, 354 p. 

Izbicki, J.A., and Harms, T.F., 1986, Selenium concentrations in leaf 

material from Astragalus oxyphysus (Diablo locoweed) and 

Atriplex lentiformis (quail bush) in the interior Coast Ranges 

and the western San Joaquin Valley, California: U.S. Geo-
REFERENCES CITED 11 

logical Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 86-

4066, 14 p. 

James, L.F., Mayland, H.F., and Panter, K.E., 1991, Selenium poisoning in livestock, in Severson, R.C., Fisher, S.E., Jr., and 

Gough, L.P., eds., Proceedings of the 1990 Billings land reclamation symposium on selenium in arid and semiarid environments, Western United States: U.S. Geological Survey 

Circular 1064, p. 75-79. 

Mcintyre, D.H., ed., 1985, Symposium on the geology and mineral 

deposits of the Challis 1 °X2° quadrangle, Idaho: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1658, 227 p. 

Miesch, A.T., 1967, Methods of computation for estimating 

geochemical abundance: U.S. Geological Survey Professional 

Paper 574-B, p. B1-Bl5. 

---1976, Geochemical survey of Missouri-methods of sampling, laboratory analysis, and statistical reduction of data, 

with sections on Laboratory methods, by P.R. Barnett, A.J. 

Bartel, J.l. Dinnin, G.L. Feder, T.F. Harms, Claude Huffman, 

Jr., V.J. Janzer, H.T. Millard, Jr., H.G. Neiman, M.W. 

Skougstad, and J.S. Wahlberg: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 954-A, p. A1-A39. 

Palmer, I.S., and Olson, O.E., 1991, Selenium research at the South 

Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station, in Severson, R.C., 

Fisher, S.C., Jr., and Gough, L.P., eds., Proceeding of the 1990 

Billings land reclamation symposium on selenium in arid and 

semiarid environments, Western United States: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1064, p. 83-88. 

Raines, G.L., Erdman, J.A., McCarthy, J.H., and Reimer, G.M., 1985, 

Remotely sensed limonite anomaly on Lordsburg Mesa, New 

Mexico: possible implications for uranium deposits: Economic Geology, v. 80, no. 3, p. 575-590. 

Sanzolone, R.F., and Chao, T.T., 1987, Determination of selenium 

in thirty two geochemical reference materials by continuousflow hydride generation atomic absorption spectrophotometry: Geostandards Newsletter, v. 11, no. 1, p. 81-85. 

Schwarz, Klaus, and Foltz, C.M., 1957, Selenium as an integral part 

of factor 3 against dietary necrotic liver degeneration: American Chemical Society Journal, v. 79, p. 3292-3293. 

See, R.B., Naftz, D.L., Peterson, D.A., Crock, J.G., Erdman, J.A., 

Severson, R.C., Ramirez, Pedro, Jr., and Armstrong, J.A., 

1992, Detailed study of selenium in soil, representative plants, 

water, bottom sediment, and biota in the Kendrick Reclamation Project area, Wyoming, 1988-90: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 91-4131, 142 p. 

Severson, R.C., and Gough, L.P., 1976, Concentration and distribution of elements in plants and soils near phosphate processing factories, Pocatello, Idaho: Journal of Environmental 

Quality, v. 5, no. 4, p. 476-482. 

---1979, Environmental implications of element emissions from 

phosphate-processing operations in southeastern Idaho: U.S. 

Geological Survey Professional Paper 1083, 20 p. 

Severson, R.C., Gough, L.P., Crock, J.G., Fey, D.L., Hageman, P.L., 

Love, A. H., and Peacock, T.R., 1991, Uptake and physiological antagonism of selenium and sulfur in alfalfa and wheat 

under field conditions, San Joaquin Valley, California: U.S. 

Geological Survey Open-File Report 91-16, 42 p. 

Shacklette, H.T., 1980, Elements in fruits and vegetables from areas 

of commercial production in the conterminous United States: 

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1178, 149 p. 

Shacklette, H.T., Erdman, J.A., Harms, T.F., and Papp, C.S.E., 1978, 

Trace elements in plant foodstuffs, in Oehme, F.W., ed., Toxicity of heavy metals in the environment: New York, Marcel 

Dekker, v. 1, p. 25-68. 

Tidball, R.R., and Ebens, R.J., 1976, Regional geochemical baselines 

in soils of the Powder River Basin, Montana-Wyoming, in 

Laudon, R.B., ed., Geology and energy resources of the Powder River: Wyoming Geological Association Annual Field 

Conference, 28th, Guidebook, p. 299-310. 

Tidball, R.R., Erdman, J.A., and Ebens, R.J., 1974, Geochemical 

baselines for sagebrush and soil, Powder River Basin, Montana-Wyoming, in U.S. Geological Survey, Geochemical survey of the western coal regions-first annual progress report, 

July 1974: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 74-250, 

38 p. 

U.S. Forest Service, 1937, Range plant handbook: New York, Dover, 816 p. 

Williams, Sidney, ed., 1984, Official methods of analysis of the 

Association of Official Analytical Chemists (14th ed.): Washington, D.C., Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 

1,141 p. 

TABLES 3, 4 

Table 3. Se contents of agricultural crops. 

[All values in parts per million dry weight. Detection ratio is a fraction in which the numerator is the number of samples with uncensored values and the denominator is the total number of samples. GD, geometric deviation; GM, geometric 

mean. Do., ditto] 

Species sampled Plant part sampled 

Alfalfa (Medicago sativa): 

California: San Joaquin Valley-------------------------------------- Leaves and stems, washed----------------

Colorado: Jefferson County------------------------------------------ Leaves and stems --------------------------

Montana: Rosebud, Richland, and Big Horn Counties ---------Leaves and stems, washed----------------

North Dakota: Ward, Oliver, and Stark Counties--------------------------do ------------------------------------

Wyoming: Natrona County, Kendrick Reclamation Area----------------do ------------------------------------

Collected in association with coal-mine studies: 

Colorado: Routt County, Energy Fuels Mine---------------------Stems, leaves, fruit, washed--------------

Seneca No. 2 Mine --------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Montana: Richland County, Savage Mine------------------------- Terminal 10-15 em (stems, leaves) ----

Rosebud County, Big Sky Mine----------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------- Stems, leaves, fruits, washed ------------

New Mexico: San Juan County, Four Corners Powerplant -----Stems, leaves -------------------------------

North Dakota: Mercer County, Beulah North Mine-------------- Terminal 10-15 em (stems, leaves)----

0 liver County-----------------------------------------------------Leaves and stems --------------------------

Oliver County, Beulah South Mine--------------------------- Stems, leaves, fruits, washed ------------

Stark County, Husky Mine ----------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Ward County, Velva Mine--------------------------------------Terminal 10-15 em (stems, leaves)----

Do----------------------------------------------------------- Stems, leaves, fruits, washed ------------

Wyoming: Converse County, D. Johnston Mine-----------------Terminal 10-15 em (stems, leaves)----

Collected in association with the Uncomnahgre Reclamation Project: 

Colorado: Delta and Montrose Counties---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alluvium derived from Tertiary terraces and fans---------- Leaves and stems --------------------------

Quaternary alluvium derived from Dakota Sandstone-------------do------------------------------------

Quaternary alluvium derived from Mancos Shale-------------------do------------------------------------

Quaternary alluvium (flood plains of streams)---------------------- do ------------------------------------

Soil derived from Dakota Sandstone----------------------------------do------------------------------------

Soil derived from Mancos Shale----------------------------------------do------------------------------------

Barley (Hordeum vulgare): 

Northern Great Plains (North Dakota, Montana; 

Saskatchewan, Canada)--------------------------------------------- Grain, cleaned ------------------------------

South Dakota: Harding County, cultivar trial plot------------------------do ------------------------------------

Oats (Avena sativa): 

Northern Great Plains (North Dakota, South Dakota, 

Montana; Saskatchewan, Canada)----------------------------------------- do ------------------------------------

South Dakota: Harding County, cultivar trial plot------------------------do------------------------------------

Durum wheat (Triticum durum): 

Northern Great Plains (North Dakota, Montana; 

Saskatchewan, Canada)------------------------------------------------------ do ------------------------------------

South Dakota: Harding County, cultivar trial plot------------------------do ------------------------------------

Detection 

ratio 

49:49 

3:3 

5:5 

11:11 

112:112 

10:10 

10:10 

3:3 

3:3 

10:10 

3:3 

3:3 

6:6 

10:10 

10:10 

3:3 

10:10 

3:3 

118:129 

25:26 

1:1 

31:34 

21:22 

10:11 

31:35 

18:18 

7:7 

21:21 

23:23 

20:20 

7:7 

GM 

0.37 

. 093 

. 12 

. 50 

. 98 

.39 

. 32 

1.1 

.22 

. 20 

.26 

.18 

.35 

.12 

.17 

.33 

.37 

.34 

.33 

.25 

--

.56 

.48 

. 12 

.28 

.45 

.097 

.48 

.15 

.84 

. 16 

GO 

2.05 

2.24 

3.25 

1.65 

3.27 

1.81 

2.06 

2.09 

2.13 

1.61 

2.98 

2.66 

2.45 

1.37 

1.70 

1.18 

1.37 

2.11 

--

2.73 

--

4.06 

3.27 

2.73 

3.25 

1.88 

1.09 

1.60 

1.19 

1.60 

1.15 

Observed 

range 

0.04-1.1 

.04-0.20 

.03-0.65 

.15-0.90 

.10-40 

.20-1.4 

.10-0.90 

. 75-2.7 

.1 0-0.45 

.10-0.45 

. 08-0. 7 

. 06-0.35 

.08-1.0 

.08-0.20 

.10-0.45 

. 30-0.40 

.25-0.55 

. 20-0.80 

<.03-9.5 

<.03-1.8 

. 31 

<.03-8.4 

<.03-9.5 

<.03-0.69 

<.03-1.6 

. 20-1.8 

. 08-0.10 

.15-1.0 

. 10-0.20 

.40-2.2 

.15-0.20 

Reference 

Severson and others ( 1991 ). 

H.A. Tourtelot (unpub. data, 1978) . 

Gough and Severson ( 1981 b) . 

Do . 

See and others ( 1992) . 

Gough and Severson ( 1981 b). 

Do . 

Ebens and Shacklette ( 1982). 

Do. 

Gough and Severson ( 1981 b) . 

Cannon and Swanson ( 1979) . 

Ebens and Shacklette ( 1982 ) . 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1978). 

Gough and Severson ( 1981 b). 

Do. 

Ebens and Shack1ette (1982) . 

Gough and Severson ( 1981 b). 

Ebens and Shacklette ( 1982) . 

Crock and others ( 1994 ). 

Do. 

Do . 

Do. 

Do . 

Do . 

Do. 

Ebens and Shacklette (1982) . 

Erdman and Moul ( 1982) . 

Ebens and Shacklette ( 1982). 

Erdman and Moul (1982) . 

Ebens and Shacklette (1982). 

Erdman and Moul ( 1982) . 

~ t:C 

l' 

m 

en 

~w 

.j:::.. 

-

Vl 
Table 3. Se contents of agricultural crops-Continued. 

Species sampled Plant part sampled 

Wheat (Triticum aestivum): 

Hard red winter wheat 

Northern Great Plains (North Dakota, South Dakota, 

Montana; Saskatchewan, Canada)-------------------------------- Grain, cleaned ------------------------------

Montana: Rosebud County, Big Sky Mine---------------------------------do------------------------------------

South Dakota: Harding County, cultivar trial plot------------------------do------------------------------------

Hard red sprin€ wheat: 

Northern Great Plains (North Dakota, South Dakota, 

Montana; Saskatchewan, Canada)-----------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

North Dakota: Oliver County--------------------------------------------------do------------------------------------

South Dakota: Harding County. cultivar trial plot------------------------do------------------------------------

California: San Joaquin Valley -----------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------------- Straw, head removed ----------------------

Wheat, hard red winter (Triticum asetivum): 

Colorado: Adams County, soil amended with sewage sludge: 

Contro I samples --------------------------------------------------Grain, cleaned ------------------------------

Filter-cake application, 20 to 45 tons/acre---------------------------do------------------------------------

Sludge application, 20 tons/acre---------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

S I udge app I i cation, 40 tons/acre---------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

S I udge app I i cation, 55 tons/ acre---------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

S I udge application, 90 tons/ acre---------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Wheat, soft white club (Triticum compactum): 

Washington: Adams and Walla Walla Counties---------------------------do ------------------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------------- Immature grain head, washed------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------------- Sterns, I eaves (green), washed -----------

Rye (Secale cereale): 

Canada: southern Saskatchewan-------------------------------------Grain, cleaned ------------------------------

Soybeans (Glycine max): 

Missouri, flood-plain forest------------------------------------------ Seeds -----------------------------------------

Glaciated prairie -----------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Oak -hickory forest --------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

0 nglaciated prairie--------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Corn (Zea mays): 

Field corn: 

Missouri, flood-plain forest------------------------------------------ Grains, cut from cob-----------------------

Glaciated prairie -----------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Oak -hickory forest --------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

0 ng lac iated prairie--------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Sweet com: 

Florida: Palm Beach County---------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Detection 

ratio 

17:17 

3:3 

I9:I9 

54:54 

6:6 

19:19 

32:32 

8:8 

6:6 

6:6 

6:6 

6:6 

6:6 

1:1 

20:20 

18:18 

17:18 

1:1 

10:10 

10: IO 

9:9 

8:8 

8:8 

IO: IO 

10:IO 

10: I 0 

8: IO 

GM 

0.44 

.4I 

.17 

.64 

.24 

.17 

.I8 

. 15 

.29 

.40 

.31 

.26 

.42 

--

.029 

.025 

.017 

--

.17 

.098 

.077 

.097 

.062 

.on 

.040 

. 047 

.0048 

GD 

1.63 

1.56 

1.30 

1.85 

l.I7 

l.I6 

2.15 

1.86 

1.20 

1.23 

1.33 

1.21 

1.24 

--

1.80 

1.66 

1.58 

--

2.68 

1.83 

1.94 

2.28 

2.4I 

2.6I 

2.96 

1.88 

I.40 

Observed 

range 

0.15-1.0 

. 25-0.60 

.I 0-0.40 

.I5-2.2 

.20-0.30 

.15-0.20 

.03-0.56 

.05-0.20 

.25-0.40 

.30-0.50 

.20-0.45 

.20-0.35 

.35-0.60 

. 30 

.01-0.08 

.01-0.06 

<.01-0.04 

.80 

.06-1.25 

.04-0.25 

.04-0.40 

.04-0.35 

. OI-0.20 

.02-0.40 

.02-0.50 

.02-0.I5 

<.005-0.0I 

Reference 

Erdman and Gough (1978). 

Do . 

Erdman and Moul (1982). 

Ebens and Shacklette ( 1982). 

J .A. Erdman ( unpub. data, I978 ). 

Erdman and Moul ( 1982 ). 

Severson and others ( I991 ). 

Do . 

Erdman and Tourtelot (1976). 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do . 

Gough and others ( 1981 ). 

Do. 

Do. 

J.A. Erdman, unpub. data ( 1977). 

Erdman and others ( 1976a). 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do . 

Do. 

Do. 

Do . 

Shacklette ( 1980). 

....... 

0\ 

(/.) 

c:: 

~ 

~ 

> 

~ (/.) 

~ '-3 

r;; 

::j 

n 

(/.) 

~ (/.) 

; 

2 

~ 

z 

< tr1 

0 

tr1 

~ t:j 

0 

z 

n 

> r-' 

n 

c:: 

r-' 

~ tr1 

t:1 

;;g 

~ c:: 

0 

0 

~ 

5 

0 

n 

> r-' 

(/.) 

c:: 

~ tr1 

-< 

t:1 

~ ;J> 
Idaho: Twin Falls County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Michigan: Berrien County-----------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

New Jersey: Sal em County----------------------------------------------------- d o ------------------------------------

0. S.A., purchased in retail markets -------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Cabbage (Brassica oleracea): 

Arizona: Yuma County ------------------------------------------------Head, washed and sliced------------------

Michigan: Berrien County-----------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

New Jersey: Cum berland County---------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Texas: Hidalgo County---------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

0. S.A., purchased in retail markets -------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Chinese cabbage (Brassica pekinensis): 

Florida: Palm Beach County---------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Carrots (Daucus carota): 

California: Imperial County------------------------------------------Roots, washed and peeled----------------

Texas: Hidalgo County---------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

0. S .A., purchased in retail markets -------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Cucumber (Cucumis sativus): 

California: San Joaquin County------------------------------------- Fruit, washed and sliced------------------

Michigan: Berrien County-----------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

New York: Wayne County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

0. S.A., purchased in retail markets -------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Dry beans (Phaseolus vulgaris): 

California: San Joaquin County------------------------------------- Seeds, cleaned ------------------------------

Co I orado: Mesa County--------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

1 daho: Twin Falls County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

New York: Wayne County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

0. S.A., purchased in retail markets -------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Green beans (Phaseolus vulgaris): 

Florida: Palm Beach County------------------------------------------ Pods, washed and sliced------------------

Idaho: Twin Falls County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Michigan: Berrien County-----------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

New Jersey: Cumberland County---------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

New York: Wayne County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

0. S.A., purchased in retail markets -------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Lettuce (Lactuca sativa): 

California: Imperial County------------------------------------------ Head, washed and sliced------------------

Florida: Palm Beach County---------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

New Jersey: Cum berland County---------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Texas: Hidalgo County---------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

0. S.A., purchased in retail markets -------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum): 

Idaho: Twin Falls County---------------------------------------------Tubers, washed and peeled---------------

New Jersey: Cum berland County---------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

New York: Wayne County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Washington: Yakima County -------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

10:10 .010 

10:10 .014 

10:10 .026 

8:1 1 .025 

IO:IO .3I 

2:2 .I1 

2:2 .057 

10:10 .IO 

11:1 I .078 

2:2 .0071 

10:10 .I3 

10:10 .032 

I 1:11 .08 

I0:10 .098 

I0:10 . 034 

2:2 .069 

II:II .088 

IO: 10 .020 

10:10 .11 

10: IO .016 

10:IO .022 

1 I:1 1 .068 

10:10 .021 

10:10 .027 

2:2 .040 

IO: 10 .045 

10:10 .020 

I 1 : II .075 

IO:IO . 18 

8:9 .008 

IO: IO . 078 

10: IO .077 

1 I:1 I .057 

10:10 .010 

10:10 .02I 

I0:10 .009 

IO: IO .008 

1.59 .005-0.02 

1.44 . 01-0.02 

1.79 .01-0.04 

2.38 <.OI-0. 10 

1.45 .I5-0.45 

4.16 .04-0.30 

1.63 .04-0.08 

1.36 .08-0.20 

2.91 .02-0.50 

1.63 . 005-0.0 I 

1.50 .08-0.25 

1.40 .02-0.04 

2.38 .01-0.20 

1.50 .06-0.20 

1.66 .02-0.05 

1.23 .06-0.08 

2.23 .04-0.40 

-- .02-0.02 

1.65 . 04-0.20 

1.40 .01-0.02 

1.42 . 02-0.06 

3.07 . 02-0.35 

1.25 .02-0.04 

1.53 .02-0.06 

1.00 . 04-0.04 

1.27 . 04-0.08 

1.25 . 02-0.04 

2.66 . 02-0.30 

1.26 . 10-0.20 

1.77 <.OI-0.02 

1.54 .04-0.20 

1.36 .04-0.IO 

1.53 . 04-0.15 

1.48 . 005-0.02 

1.25 .02-0.04 

1.48 .005-0.02 

1.62 .005-0.02 

Do. 

Do . 

Do. 

Shacklette and others ( 1 978). 

Shacklette ( 1 980). 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Shacklette and others ( 1 978). 

Shacklette ( 1 980) . 

Do. 

Do. 

Shacklette and others ( 1 978). 

Shacklette ( 1 980). 

Do . 

Do. 

Shacklette and others ( I978). 

Shacklette ( I980). 

Do . 

Do. 

Do . 

Shacklette and others ( I978 ) . 

Shacklette ( I980). 

Do. 

Do . 

Do . 

Do . 

Shacklette and others ( I978) . 

Shacklette ( I980) . 

Do. 

Do . 

Do. 

Shacklette and others ( 1 978) . 

Shacklette ( I980) . 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

~ t:::C 

r 

tTl 

en 

~w 

+:>. 

-....._J 
Table 3. Se contents of agricultural crops-Continued. 

Species sampled Plant part sampled 

Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum )-Continued 

Washington: Yakima County ----------------------------------------Tubers, washed and peeled---------------

U.S.A., purchased in retail markets -------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Eggplant (Solanum melongena): 

Michigan: Berrien County-------------------------------------------- Fruit, pee led and sliced-------------------

Tomatoes (Lycopersicum esculentum): 

California: San Joaquin County------------------------------------- Fruit, washed and sliced------------------

Florida: Palm Beach County---------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Michigan: Berrien County-----------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

New Jersey: Cumber Ian d County --------------------------------------------- do ------------------------------------

Washington: Yakima County -------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Do--------------------------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

U.S.A., purchased in retail markets -------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Asparagus (Asparagus officina/is): 

California: San Joaquin County------------------------------------- Stalks, washed and sliced----------------

Colorado: Adams County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Endive (Cichorium endivia): 

Florida: Palm Beach County------------------------------------------ Leaves, washed -----------------------------

Onions (Allium cepa): 

Texas: Hidalgo County ------------------------------------------------ B u I b, sliced ---------------------------------

U.S.A., purchased in retail markets -------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Parsley (Petroselinum crispum): 

Florida: Palm Beach County------------------------------------------ Leaves, washed-----------------------------

Peppers (Capsicum frutescens): 

Michigan: Berrien County-------------------------------------------- Fruit, seeds removed----------------------

Pears (Pyrus communis): 

California: San Joaquin County------------------------------------- Fruit, peeled, core removed--------------

Colorado: Mesa County--------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Michigan: Berrien County--------------··-------------------------------------- do ------------------------------------

New York: Wayne County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Washington: Yakima County -------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Do--------------------------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Apples (Pyrus malus): 

Colorado: l\1esa County--------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Michigan: Berrien County-----------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

New Jersey: Gloucester County-----------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Detection 

ratio 

5:12 

11 : 11 

2:2 

10:10 

9:9 

10:10 

10:10 

10:10 

12:12 

1 1: 11 

10:10 

1:1 

2:2 

10:10 

1 1 : 11 

2:2 

2:2 

5:10 

10:10 

6:10 

7:10 

7:10 

1:12 

10:10 

0:10 

6:10 

GM 

0.003 

.065 

.014 

.16 

. 015 

.027 

.027 

.035 

.011 

.054 

.57 

--

.06 

.042 

.080 

.028 

.02 

.0035 

.012 

.0047 

.0048 

. 0035 

--

.014 

--

.0040 

GO 

-- 2.44 

1.63 

1.78 

2.71 

1.53 

1.53 

2.44 

2.06 

2.22 

1.12 

--

1.91 

1.38 

2.64 

1.63 

--

1.78 

1.60 

2.12 

2.04 

1.78 

--

1.63 

--

1.32 

Observed 

range 

<0.003-0.005 

.02-0.30 

. 01-0.02 

.08-0.35 

.01-0.02 

. 01-0.06 

.02-0.05 

.01-0.15 

.003-0.04 

.02-0.35 

.45-0.65 

2.5 

.04-0.10 

.02-0.06 

.02-0.35 

.02-0.04 

. 02-0.02 

<.005-0.01 

.005-0.02 

<.005-0.01 

<.005-0.02 

<.005-0.02 

<.003-0.003 

.01-0.04 

<.005 

<.005-0.005 

Reference 

Gough and others (1986). 

Shacklette and others ( 1978). 

Shacklette ( 1980) . 

Do. 

Do . 

Do . 

Do. 

Do. 

Gough and others ( 1986). 

Shacklette and others ( 1978). 

Shacklette ( 1980). 

H.A. Tourte1ot ( unpub. data, 1978). 

Shack1ette ( 1980). 

Do. 

Shack1ette and others ( 1978). 

Shack1ette ( 1980). 

Do . 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do . 

Gough and others (1986). 

Shack1ette ( 1980). 

Do. 

Do. 

-

00 

Cl) 

c::: 

3:: 

~ 

> 

~ Cl) 

~ t:j 

Cl) 

::j 

(j 

Cl) 

a 

~ 

Cl) 

tT.I 

~ 2 

3:: 

z 

< 

gs 

tT.I 

~ '-3 

a 

z 

(j 

> h 

c 

r 

2:3 

tT.I 

ti 

~ 0 

3:: 

c 

en 

a 

~ 

5 

a 

n 

> r 

Cl) 

c 

~ tT.I 

--< 

ti 

;p: ~ 
New York: Wayne County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Washington: Yakima County-------------------------------------------------do------------------------------------

Do--------------------------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

0 .S.A., purchased in retail markets-------------------------------------------do------------------------------------

Cantaloupe (Cucumis melo): 

Michigan: Berrien County-------------------------------------------- Fruit, peeled, seeds removed ------------

Grapes, American ( Vitis /abruscana): 

Michigan: Berrien County-------------------------------------------- Fruit plus seeds, stems removed--------

New York: Wayne County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Washington: Yakima County -------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Do--------------------------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Grapes, European ( Vitis vinifera): 

California: San Joaquin County------------------------------------- Fruit, washed, seeds removed -----------

Washington: Yakima County-------------------------------------------------do------------------------------------

Do--------------------------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Grapefruit (Citrus paradisi): 

Arizona: Yuma County ------------------------------------------------Fruit, peeled, seeds removed ------------

California: Riverside County -------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Florida: Palm Beach County---------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Texas: Hidalgo County---------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Oranges (Citrus sinensis): 

Arizona: Yuma County ---------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

California: Riverside County -------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Florida: Palm Beach County---------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Texas: Hidalgo County---------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

0. S.A., purchased in retail markets -------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Peaches (Prunus persica): 

California: San Joaquin County------------------------------------- Fruit, peeled, pit removed----------------

Colorado: Mesa County--------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

New York: Wayne County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Washington: Yakima County -------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Do--------------------------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Plums (Prunus domestica): 

Colorado: Mesa County----------------------------------------------- Fruit, pit removed -------------------------

Michigan: Berrien County ----------------------------------------------------- do ------------------------------------

New York: Wayne County------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Washington: Yakima County -------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

Do--------------------------------------------------------------------------do ------------------------------------

2:10 -- 2:10 -- 6:12 .003 

1:11 --

2:2 .028 

10:10 .011 

10:10 .0076 

10:10 .018 

10:12 . 0048 

0:10 -- 7:10 .0051 

8:12 .004 

10:10 .011 

9:10 .022 

4:9 .003 

9:10 .011 

10:10 .0075 

10:10 .020 

1:9 -- 8:9 .0089 

10:11 .020 

2:10 --

10:10 .012 

5:10 . 0036 

6:10 . 0044 

0:12 --

I 0:10 .011 

8:10 .0051 

6:10 .0042 

5:10 .0036 

6:12 --

-- <.005-0.01 Do. 

-- <.005-0.005 Do. 

-- <.003-0.005 Gough and others (1986). 

-- <.01-0.02 Shacklette and others ( 1978). 

1.63 .02-0.04 Shacklette ( 1980). 

1.48 .005-0.02 Shacklette ( 1980). 

1.43 .005-0.01 Do. 

5.20 .005-0.15 Do. 

1.97 <.003-0.005 Gough and others ( 1986) . 

-- <.005 Shacklette ( 1980). 

2.14 <.005-0.02 Do. 

-- <.003-0.0 15 Gough and others ( 1986). 

1.34 . 01-0.02 Shacklette ( 1980) . 

2.30 <.005-0.06 Do. 

2.32 <.005-0.01 Do. 

1.99 <.005-0.02 Do. 

~ tl::l 

1.43 . 005-0.01 Do . r 

1.39 .01-0.04 Do. tTJ 

(/) 

-- <.005-0.005 Do. ~w 

1.42 <.005-0.01 Do. +:-. 

1.91 <.01-0.06 Shacklette and others ( 1978). 

-- <.005-0.005 Shacklette ( 1980). 

1.40 .01-0.02 Do. 

1.90 <.005-0.02 Do . 

1.99 <.005-0.01 Do . 

-- <.003 Gough and others ( 1986). 

1.55 . 005-0.02 Shacklette ( 1980) . 

1.54 <.005-0.01 Do. 

1.83 <.005-0.01 Do. 

2.90 <.005-0.02 Do. 

-- <.003-0.005 Gough and others ( 1986). 

....... 

\0 
Table 4. Se contents of native plant species. 

[All values in parts per million dry weight. Detection ratio is a fraction in which the numerator is the number of samples with uncensored values and the denominator is the total number of samples. GD, geometric deviation; GM, geometric 

mean. Do., ditto] 

Species sampled Plant part sampled Detection 

ratio 

Soil moss (Tortula ruralis): 

Oregon: Malheur County ---------------------------------------------Whole plant-----------------------------------

Spanish moss (Til/andsia usneoides): 

Georgia: Chatham County-----------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Lichen ( Usnea hirta): 

Co I orado: Larimer County----------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Montana: Powder River and Meagher Counties---------------------------do --------------------------------------

New Mexico: Rio Arriba County ---------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Wyoming: Camp be II County ------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Lin co In County ------------------------------------------------------------ d o --------------------------------------

Lichen (Usnea cavernosa): 

Colorado: Baca and Larimer Counties---------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Lichen ( Usnea trichodea): 

Georgia: Emanuel County -----------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Mississippi: Cop iah County-------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Texas: Bastrop County --------------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Lichen ( Usnea sp.): 

Florida: Walton County--------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

North Carolina: Orange County----------------------------------------------do--------------------------------------

Washington: King County ----------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Lichen (Alectoria fremontii): 

Washington: Okanogan County----------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Lichen (Alectoria sarmentosa): 

Washington: Lewis, Pierce, and Okanogan Counties---------------------do --------------------------------------

Lichen (Alectoria sp.) 

Idaho: Idaho County------------------------------------------------------------ do --------------------------------------

Montana: Mineral and Missoula Counties---------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Washington: Okanogan County----------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Lichen (Ramalina farinacea): 

England: Devonshire ----------------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Lichen (Ramalina fastigiata): 

England: Devonshire -----------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

II: II 

80:80 

I :I 

6:6 

I : 1 

2:2 

4:4 

7:7 

1 : 1 

1 : 1 

1 :I 

1 : 1 

1 : 1 

1 : 1 

1: 1 

3:3 

1 : 1 

2:2 

1: 1 

2:2 

2:2 

GM 

O.II 

.26 

--

.69 

--

.90 

.82 

.64 

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

.068 

--

.19 

--

.85 

.87 

GD 

1.58 

1.29 

--

1.30 

--

--

1.15 

1.18 

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

1.61 

--

1.44 

--

--

1.23 

Observed 

range 

0.06-0.30 

. I5-0.40 

. 90 

.60-0.90 

.50 

. 90-0.90 

.70-1.0 

.50-0.75 

.25 

. 25 

.90 

.90 

.70 

.50 

. 20 

.04-0.10 

. 20 

.15-0.25 

.15 

.85 

.75-1.0 

Reference 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, I980). 

H.A. Tourtelot (unpub. data, I98I) . 

H.T. Shacklette (unpub. data, I979) . 

Do. 

H.T. Shacklette (unpub. data, I976). 

Do . 

H.T. Shacklette (unpub. data, I979). 

Do. 

H.T. Shacklette (unpub. data, 1976). 

Do . 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do . 

Do. 

Do . 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

N 

0 

Cl:l 

c 

?:: 

?:: 

> 

~ Cl:l 

~ ~ Cl:l 

:j 

(') 

Cl:l 

25 

~ 

Cl:l 

tTl 

L' 

tTl 

z 

2 

?:: 

z 

< tTl 

0 

tTl 

~ ~ 

0 

z 

(') 

> L' 

(') 

c 

L' 

~ 0 

;a 

0 

?:: 

c 

0 

0 

tTl 

0 

5 

0 

n 

> L' 

Cl:l 

c 

~ tTl 

>-<: 

0 

~ >= 
Lichen (Rama/ina menziesii): 

California: Sonoma County---------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Lichen (Rama/ina sp.): 

Texas: Kenedy County ---------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Lichen (Evernia mesomorpha): 

Michigan: Marquette County-------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Lichen (Pseudevernia intensa): 

Texas: Brewster County--------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Lichen (Letharia vulpina): 

Montana: Mineral County-----------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Washington: Okanogan County----------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soil lichen (Parmelia chlorochroa): 

Colorado: Montrose County-----------------------------------------Whole plant, washed------------------------

Idaho: Custer County----------------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

Montana: Rosebud and Powder River Counties---------------------------do --------------------------------------

Do--------------------------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Wyoming and Montana: Powder River Basin------------------------------do--------------------------------------

Wyoming: Campbell and Crook Counties---------------------------------do--------------------------------------

Converse County, D. Johnston Mine----------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soil lichen (Cladonia skottsbergii): 

Hawaii: Hawaii Volcanoes National Park-------------------------- Above ground, washed ---------------------

Joint-fir (Ephedra torreyana): 

New Mexico: San Juan County--------------------------------------Terminal branch tips------------------------

Sedge (Carex gymnoclada): 

Idaho: Valley and Lemhi Counties---------------------------------- Above ground --------------------------------

Bullrush (Scirpus sp.): 

California: Merced County------------------------------------------- Seeds-------------------------------------------

Do-----------------------------------------------------------------Tuber-------------------------------------------

Bluebunch wheatgrass (Agropyron spicatum): 

Idaho: Soda Springs--------------------------------------------------- Above ground, unwashed splits----------

Do----------------------------------------------------------------- Above ground, washed splits -------------

Soda Springs, near phosphate-processing plant -----------Above ground, washed ---------------------

Crested wheatgrass (Agropyron cristatum or A. desertorum): 

North Dakota: Adams, Morton, and Stark Counties--------------Above ground--------------------------------

0 liver County, on coal spoil--------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Wyoming: Carbon County, Seminoe No. 2 Coal Mine----------Above ground, washed ---------------------

Converse County, D. Johnston Coal Mine ---------------------------do --------------------------------------

Do-----------------------------------------------------------Above ground, on mine spoil -------------

Do-----------------------------------------------------------Above ground, on nearby soil ------------

Intermediate wheatgrass (Agropyron intermedium): 

Colorado: Routt County, Energy Fuels Mine---------------------Above ground, washed ---------------------

Routt County, Seneca No. 2 Mine--------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

I :I --

I:I --

3:3 1.07 

I:I --

I:I -- I:I --

I:I -- 5:5 .I4 

30:30 .27 

35:35 .26 

22:22 .35 

93:93 .34 

18:18 .76 

6:6 l.IO 

2:2 .I7 

9: II .016 

1 : 1 -- 1 : 1 --

12: I2 1.6 

12:12 1.3 

31:31 .20 

6:6 .14 

6:6 .19 

10:10 .054 

10: IO .2I 

20:20 .27 

20:20 .23 

IO: 10 .17 

10:10 .19 

-- .I5 Do. 

-- .65 Do. 

2.IO .65-2.5 Do. 

-- .60 Do. 

-- .IO Do. 

-- .I5 Do. 

-- . 30 L.P. Gough (unpub. data, I978) . 

1.20 .IO-O.I5 J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, I98I). 

I. II .25-0.35 Gough and Erdman ( I978). 

1.24 .20-0.40 L.P. Gough (unpub. data, I979). 

1.42 .20-0.70 Erdman and Gough ( I977). 

l.3I .I5-l.O R.R. Tidball (unpub. data, I98I). 

1.62 .35-1.4 Gough and Erdman ( 1977). 

~ ttl 

1.66 .70-2.0 Connor ( I979). r 

tTl 

en 

~ 

2.I7 . I0-0.30 Cannon and Swanson ( I979) . ~ 

2.12 <.01-0.IO J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

-- . 45 T.F. Harms (unpub. data, 1984) . 

-- 2.4 Do. 

1.20 1.2-2.0 Severson and Gough ( 1979). 

1.26 .80-1.6 Do. 

2.I7 . 06-1.2 Do . 

1.9I .06-0.30 J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1978). 

1.29 .15-0.25 Do. 

1.45 .04-0.10 Gough and Severson ( 1981 b). 

1. 78 .1 0-0.45 Do. 

1. 73 . 10-0.70 Erdman and Ebens ( 1979) . 

1.91 .10-0.60 Do. 

1.45 .10-0.25 Gough and Severson ( 1981 b). N 1.77 .06-0.45 Do. 
Table 4. Se contents of native plant species-Continued. 

Species sampled Plant part sampled Detection 

ratio 

Intermediate wheatgrass (Agropyron intermedium)-Continued 

North Dakota: Adams, Morton, and Stark Counties--------------Above ground--------------------------------

0 I i ver County, on coal spoi 1-------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Oliver County, South Beulah Mine---------------------------Above ground, washed---------------------

Stark County, Husky Mine----------------------------------------------do--------------------------------------

Ward County, Velva Mine -----------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Slender wheatgrass (Agropyron trachycaulum): 

Montana: Big Horn County, Decker Mine ----------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Big Horn County, Absaloka Mine--------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Rosebud County, Big Sky Mine----------------------------------------do--------------------------------------

Western wheat grass (Agropyron smithii): 

New Mexico: San Juan County------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Wheatgrass (Agropyron sp.): 

Washington: Stevens County, near uranium mills--------------- Whole plant-----------------------------------

Big bluestem grass (Andropogon gerardi): 

Missouri ------------------------------------------------------------------Above ground --------------------------------

Grama grass (Bouteloua gracilis): 

New Mexico: Valencia County, near uranium mills-------------- Whole uprooted plant----------------------

Montana and Wyoming: Powder River Basin--------------------- Whole plant, washed------------------------

Smooth brome grass (Bromus inermis): 

Wyoming: Converse County, D. Johnston Mine-----------------Above ground, washed---------------------

North Dakota: Adams, Morton, and Stark Counties-------------- Above ground--------------------------------

0 I i ver County, on coal spoi 1-------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum): 

Idaho: Pocatello, near phosphate-processing plant--------------Above ground, washed ---------------------

Bluejoint (Calamagrostis canadensis): 

Alaska: Tyonek B-5 quadrangle, Capps Coal Field -------------Above ground--------------------------------

Rough Fescue (Festuca scabrel/a): 

Washington: Stevens County, near uranium mill---------------- Whole p !ant-----------------------------------

Fescue (Festuca a/taica): 

Alaska: Tyonek B-5 quadrangle, Capps Coal Field -------------Above ground--------------------------------

Galleta grass (Hilaria jamesii): 

New Mexico: San Juan Basin----------------------------------------- Whole uprooted plant, washed------------

Indian rice grass (Oryzopsis hymenoides): 

New Mexico: San Juan County---------------------------------------Above ground --------------------------------

6:6 

6:6 

10: IO 

IO:IO 

I 0: I 0 

I 0:10 

IO: IO 

IO: IO 

30:30 

6:6 

5:5 

25:25 

46:46 

IO:IO 

6:6 

6:6 

27:27 

24:26 

3:8 

63:64 

25:25 

I4: I4 

GM 

O.I3 

.23 

.054 

.088 

.098 

. 057 

.025 

.I3 

.08I 

.OII 

.030 

.70 

.20 

.14 

.22 

. 23 

.088 

.073 

<.OI 

.14 

.I2 

.28 

GO 

1.53 

1.80 

1.31 

1.51 

1.50 

1.4I 

I.40 

I. 7I 

1.52 

1.37 

1.86 

5.84 

1.8I 

1.82 

1.92 

1.50 

2.08 

1.68 

--

1.53 

1.62 

1.72 

Observed 

range 

O.I0-0.30 

.10-0.55 

.06-0.I5 

.04-0.I5 

.06-0.20 

.04-0.IO 

.02-0.04 

.04-0.25 

.04-0.25 

.OI-0.02 

.02-0.08 

.02-9.0 

.08-1.4 

.06-0.50 

.I0-0.55 

.I5-0.40 

.02-0.45 

<.05-0.20 

<.OI-O.OI 

<.05-0.40 

.06-0.45 

. 08-0.55 

Reference 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, I978). 

Do. 

Gough and Severson ( I98I b). 

Do. 

Do. 

Do . 

Do. 

Do. 

T.F. Harms (unpub. data, 1979). 

T.K. Hinkley (unpub. data, I980). 

H. T. Shacklette ( unpub. data, I972 ). 

T.K. Hinkley (unpub. data, I980). 

Erdman and Gough ( I975). 

Gough and Severson ( I98I b). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, I978). 

Do . 

Severson and Gough ( I976). 

Gough and Severson ( I983 ). 

T.K. Hinkley (unpub. data, 1980). 

Gough and Severson ( 1983). 

Gough and Severson ( I98I a). 

Connor and others ( I976a) . 

N 

N 

en 

c 

~ 

~ 

> 

~ en 

~ ~ en 

:j 

n 

en 

6 

~ 

en 

tr:l 

r 

tr:l 

z 

2 

~ 

z 

< tr:l 

0 

tr:l 

~ t:j 

0 

z 

n 

> r 

n 

c 

r 

~ tr:l 

tj 

~ 0 

~ 

c 

0 

0 

~ r 

0 

0 

n 

> r 

en 

c 

~ tr:l 

--< 

tj 

~ :> 
Bluegrass (Poa sp.): 

Washington: Stevens County, near uranium mi 11----------------Whole plant-----------------------------------

Alkali sacaton grass (Sporobolus air·oides): 

New Mexico: rehabilitation site, San Juan Coal Mine-----------Above ground, washed ---------------------

Swamp timothy (Phleum sp.): 

California: Merced County------------------------------------------- Seeds-------------------------------------------

Cattail (Typha sp.): 

California: Merced County-------------------------------------------Tuber-------------------------------------------

Water parsnip (Berula erecta): 

New Mexico: San Juan County--------------------------------------- Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Snowberry (Symphoricarpos oreophilus): 

Idaho: Valley County--------------------------------------------------Above ground--------------------------------

Buckbush (Symphoricarpos orbiculatus): 

Missouri, cedar g Jade -------------------------------------------------- Sterns -------------------------------------------

G Jaciated prairie -----------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Oak-hickory forest --------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

0 ak-hickory-pine forest-------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

0 ng lac i a ted prairie -------------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

F i ood-pi ai n forest--------------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

Four-wing saltbush (Atriplex canescens): 

Colorado: Mesa County----------------------------------------------- Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Rio BIanco County-------------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

Montana: Big Horn County, Decker Coal Mine------------------- Leaves and woody stems-------------------

New Mexico: San Juan Basin-----------------------------------------Leaves and stems ----------------------------

San Juan County, San Juan Mine---------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Valencia County, near uranium mill-----------------------------------do--------------------------------------

Wyoming: Sweetwater County, Jim Bridger Mine--------------- Leaves and woody stems-------------------

Shadscale (Atriplex confertifolia): 

Arizona: Apache County----------------------------------------------Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Coconino County ---------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Co I or ado: De Ita County-------------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Mesa County -------------:--------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

New Mexico: San Juan County -----------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Do--------------------------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

0 tah: Emery County --------------------------------·----------------------------do --------------------------------------

Grand County --------------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Sanpete County------------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Sanpete County, summer collection--------------------------Leaves------------------------------------------

Sanpete County, winter collection---------------------------- Stems-------------------------------------------

Sanpete and U intah Counties ----------------------------------Above ground --------------------------------

Wyoming: Sweetwater County--------------------------------------- Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Mat saltbush (Atriplex corrugata): 

New Mexico: San Juan County--------------------------------------- Leaves and stems ----------------------------

I : I -- -- . OI 

6:6 .096 1.13 .08-0.IO 

1:I -- -- 1.0 

I:1 -- -- 2.2 

2:2 .063 1.39 . 05-0.075 

0:2 -- -- <.01 

49:49 . 023 1.33 .02-0.04 

47:47 .043 I.45 .02-0.08 

39:39 .031 1.47 .02-0.06 

50:50 .02I 1.36 .02-0.04 

46:46 .038 1.49 .02-0.08 

4:4 .047 1.97 . 02-0.10 

1:1 -- -- 2.2 

5:5 .IO 1.26 . 08-0.15 

IO:IO .32 l. 75 . 15-0.90 

I0:10 .81 3.07 . 15-4.5 

6:6 .22 2.10 .10-0.45 

II : 1 1 2.79 3.32 .5-30 

ro:ro--. To--r.rr---.23=T.L 

10:IO .44 2.41 .15-3.0 

I 0: I 0 .28 1.53 .I 5-0.50 

I0:10 2.30 6.72 .I0-28 

I 0: I 0 . 65 3.50 .I0-6.0 

IO: IO .23 2.3I .075-0.70 

20:20 .26 3.00 . 04-2.6 

9:9 1.52 2.93 .25-9.5 

I 0: I 0 1.03 2.58 .30-4.5 

20:20 .63 2.03 .20-4.5 

2I :2I 1.63 1.75 .50-6.0 

20:20 .38 1.5I .20-0.85 

I 0: I 0 . 13 1.90 .06-0.35 

20:20 .39 4.37 .04-I8 

3:3 . 79 5.25 .20-5.0 

T.K. Hinkley (unpub. data, 1980) . 

Gough and Severson (198I a). 

T.F. Harms (unpub. data, I984). 

Do. 

Cannon and Swanson ( 1979) . 

J .A. Erdman ( unpub. data, I980). 

Erdman and others ( 1976b ) . 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1972) . ....:l 

~ 

ttl 

l" 

tTl 

B.M. Erickson ( unpub. data, I981 ). C/:l 

Anderson ( 1982) . ~ 

Gough and Severson ( 198I b) . ~ 

Gough and Severson ( 1981 a) . 

Do. 

T.K. Hinkley (unpub. data, 1980). 

Gough and Severson ( 1981 b). 

B.M. Erickson (unpub. data, I98I). 

Do. 

Do. 

Do . 

Cannon and Swanson ( 1979). 

B.M. Erickson (unpub. data, I98I ) . 

Do. 

Do. 

B.M. Erickson (unpub. data, 1983). 

Do. 

Do. 

B.M. Erickson (unpub. data, 1982) . 

B.M. Erickson ( unpub. data, I98I ). 

Cannon and Swanson ( I979) . 

N 

Vol 
Table 4. Se contents of native plant species-Continued. 

Species sampled Plant part sampled Detection 

ratio 

Quailbush (Atriplex lentiformis): 

California: San Joaquin Valley --------------------------------------Leaves------------------------------------------

Nuttall's saltbush (Atriplex nuttalli): 

New Mexico: San Juan County--------------------------------------- Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Powell's saltbush (Atriplex powelli): 

New Mexico: San Juan County------------------------------------------------do--------------------------------------

Spiny hopsage (Atriplex spinosa): 

Idaho: Lemhi County--------------------------------------------------Above ground --------------------------------

Winterfat (Ceratoides lanata): 

New Mexico: Valencia County, near uranium mill---------------Leaves and stems----------------------------

Greasewood (Sarcobatus vermiculatus): 

Idaho: Custer County-------------------------------------------------- Above ground --------------------------------

Sand sagebrush (Artemisia filifolia): 

New Mexico: Valencia County, near uranium mill---------------Leaves and stems----------------------------

Silver sagebrush (Artemisia cana): 

Montana and Wyoming: Powder River Basin, paired 

samples with big sagebrush---------------------------------------------- do----------------------------------------

Wyoming: Converse, Platte, and Natrona Counties--------------------- do----------------------------------------

Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata): 

Idaho: Butte County---------------------------------------------------Current year's growth-----------------------

Custer County----------------------------------------------------- Leaves and stems ----------------------------

p ocate II o, su bsp. trident at a--------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

Soda Springs --------------------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

Valley County, subsp. vaseyana ---------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Montana and Wyoming: Powder River Basin------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Do--------------------------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Montona and Wyoming: Powder River Basin, paired 

samples with silver sage----------------------------------------------------do--------------------------------------

Nevada: Elko County--------------------------------------------------Wood-------------------------------------------

H urn bo ldt County---------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Do-----------------------------------------------------------Current year's growth -----------------------

New Mexico: San Juan County--------------------------------------- Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Oregon: Mal heur County---------------------------------------------- Wood -------------------------------------------

Utah: Carbon County, subsp. tridentata---------------------------Leaves------------------------------------------

Carbon County, subsp. vaseyana --------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Carbon County, subsp. wyomingens is --------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Washington: Adams, Franklin, and Lincoln Counties ----------Leaves and stems (washed)----------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------------- Leaves and stems (unwashed) -------------

17:17 

2:2 

3:3 

2:2 

1:1 

1:1 

2:2 

11:11 

77:77 

25:26 

13:13 

25:25 

27:27 

6:6 

41:41 

64:64 

11:11 

14:20 

5:24 

22:22 

3:3 

31:36 

9:9 

9:9 

9:9 

12:12 

12:12 

GM 

0.43 

.67 

. 87 

.10 

--

--

.26 

.52 

.49 

.068 

.038 

.10 

.14 

.024 

.43 

.31 

.27 

.011 

<.01 

.10 

.086 

.Oil 

.36 

.27 

.35 

.031 

.035 

GO 

3.73 

3.12 

5.08 

--

--

--

3.96 

2.17 

2.05 

3.21 

1.90 

1. 78 

2.15 

2.15 

2.63 

2.25 

2.44 

1.53 

--

2.70 

1.14 

1.44 

1.18 

1.37 

1.30 

2.59 

2.48 

Observed 

range 

0.08-7.5 

. 30-1.5 

.20-5.0 

.10-0.10 

.30 

1.0 

.10-0.70 

.15-2.2 

.10-2.0 

<.01-1.0 

.02-0.15 

.04-0.60 

.06-1.2 

.02-0.06 

.08-4.8 

.10-2.0 

.10-1.0 

<.01-0.02 

<.01-0.02 

.01-0.60 

. 080-0.10 

<.01-.02 

.25-0.40 

.15-0.45 

.20-0.45 

.01-0.10 

.01-0.10 

Reference 

lzbicki and Harms (1986). 

Cannon and Swanson ( 1979) . 

Do . 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

T.K. Hinkley (unpub. data, 1980). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1981). 

T.K. Hinkley (unpub. data, 1980). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1975). 

Anderson and Keith ( 1977). 

J .A. Erdman ( unpub. data, 1988). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1981). 

Severson and Gough ( 1976). 

Severson and Gough ( 1979). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

Connor and others ( 1976b ). 

Tidball and others (197 4 ). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1975). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1981). 

Do. 

Erdman and others ( 1988). 

Cannon and Swanson ( 1979) . 

J .A. Erdman ( unpub. data, 1980). 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

L.P. Gough (unpub. data, 1982). 

Do. 

N 

+:>. 

C/l 

e 

~ 

~ 

> 

~ C/l 

~ ~ C/l 

:j 

n 

C/l 

a 

:::0 

C/l 

tTl 

~ z 

a 

~ 

z 

< tTl 

Cl 

tTl 

~ t::j 

0 

z 

n 

> t""' 

n 

e 

t""' 

~ tTl 

0 

~ 0 

~ 

e 

0 

Cl 

~ 

5 

Cl 

n 

> t""' 

C/l 

e 

~ 

~ 0 

~ > 
Wyoming: Converse County, D. Johnston Mine-----------------Leaves and stems----------------------------

Converse County, subsp. wyom inge ns is--------------------- Stems-------------------------------------------

Sublette County, subsp. vaseyana ----------------------------Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Sub Jette County, subsp. wyom inge ns is-------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Sweetwater County--------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Do--------------------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Sweetwater County, soil derived from Lewis Shale-----------------do --------------------------------------

Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata): 

12:12 

11 : 11 

12:12 

12:12 

41:41 

24:24 

14:14 

Regional study---------------------------------------------------------- Leaves and stems (current year)----------- 190: 190 

Basin and Range Province-----------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 3 0:3 0 

Colorado Plateaus Province---------------------------------------------do-------------------------------------- 3 0:3 0 

Columbia Plateaus Province --------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 3 0:3 0 

Middle Rocky Mountains -----------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 2 0:2 0 

Northern Great Plains-----------------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 2 0:2 0 

Northern Rocky Mountains ---------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 2 0:2 0 

Southern Rocky Mountains---------------------------------------------do-------------------------------------- 2 0:20 

Wyoming Basin Province------------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 2 0:2 0 

Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata subsp. wyomingensis): 

Wyoming: Platte County, seasonal study: 

September 197 5 collection-------------------------------------Young stems, leaves, and 

inflorescences-----------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------- 0 lder woody stems and leaves ------------

January 1976 collection ----------------------------------------Young stems, leaves, and 

inflorescences-----------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------- 0 lder woody stems and leaves ------------

April 1976 collection-------------------------------------------- Young stems, leaves and 

inflorescences -----------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------- Older woody stems and leaves------------

July 1976 collection---------------------------------------------Young stems, leaves, and 

inflorescences -----------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------- 0 lder woody stems and leaves ------------

Big sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) 

Wyoming, Natrona County, Kendrick Reclamation Project: 

Growing in Quaternary alluvium------------------------------ Previous year's growth ---------------------

Growing in Quaternary sand dunes ------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soil derived from Cody Shale-------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soil derived from Fort Union Formation -----------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soil derived from Fox Hills Sandstone -------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soil derived from Frontier Formation---------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soil derived from Lance Formation------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soil derived from Meeteetse Formation-------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soi I derived from Mesa Verde Formation-----------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soil derived from Mowry and Thermopolis Shales-----------------do--------------------------------------

Soil derived from Steele Shale------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soil derived from White River Formation----------------------------do --------------------------------------

Soil derived from Wind River Formation-----------------------------do --------------------------------------

Rabbitbrush (Chrysothamnus nauseosus): 

Idaho: Lemhi County--------------------------------------------------Leaves and stems ----------------------------

New Mexico: San Juan County -----------------------------------------------do--------------------------------------

10:10 

10:10 

I 0:10 

10:10 

10:10 

10:10 

10:10 

10:10 

16:16 

4:4 

14:14 

7:7 

1 : 1 

1 1 : 11 

6:6 

6:6 

8:8 

8:8 

2:2 

8:8 

10:10 

1 : 1 

2:2 

.36 

.79 

.025 

.070 

.15 

.14 

.17 

.11 

.11 

.17 

. 063 

. 093 

.29 

.035 

.078 

.18 

2.48 

1.02 

1.70 

1.38 

1.51 

1.26 

1.26 

.86 

.22 

.25 

.96 

.52 

--

.39 

.79 

.53 

.32 

.36 

.50 

.24 

.41 

--

.14 

2.08 .15-1.6 

2.79 .20-10 

1.41 .02-0.04 

1.29 .04-0.10 

2.59 .04-5.0 

2.00 .04-0.50 

3.19 .04-2.5 

3.23 .01-7.0 

4.65 . 02-7.0 

3.05 . 04-4.0 

2.76 .01-0.3 

4.49 .02-1.8 

4.36 . 04-2.0 

2.54 .01-0.15 

3.15 .02-0.90 

4.13 .04-1.6 

1.26 1.8-3.6 

1.39 .60-1.8 

1.24 1.2-2.4 

1.32 .95-2.4 

1.31 1.0-2.4 

1.32 .85-2.2 

1.48 .75-2.4 

1.28 .60-1.2 

2.22 .06-1.2 

1.65 .15-0.45 

4.66 .10-9.5 

2.53 .10-2.2 

-- . 30 

1.81 .20-1.6 

2.33 .20-2.2 

1.20 .40-0.65 

1.78 .15-0.80 

2.14 .10-1.0 

1.15 .45-0.55 

1.68 .10-0.55 

2.44 .10-2.0 

-- . 08 

1.63 .10-0.20 

Connor and others ( 1976b ). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

L.P. Gough (unpub. data, 1975). 

Do. 

Anderson and Keith (1976). 

B.M. Erickson (unpub. data, 1979). 

Do. 

Gough and Erdman ( 1983 ). 

Do . 

Do . 

Do . 

Do . 

Do . 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Gough and Erdman ( 1980). 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

See and others ( 1992 ). 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do . 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

J .A. Erdman ( unpub. data, 1980) . 

Cannon and Swanson ( 1979). 

~ to 

I:""' 

m 

CZI 

~ 

+:-

N 

Vl 
Table 4. Se contents of native plant species-Continued. 

Species sampled Plant part sampled Detection 

ratio GM 

Broom snakeweed (Gutierrezia sarothrae): 

New Mexico: San Juan Basin-----------------------------------------Above ground-------------------------------- 18:18 0.27 

San Juan County----------------------------------------------------------- d o -------------------------------------- 27:27 .25 

Snakeweed ( Gutierrezia Iucida): 

New Mexico: San Juan County -----------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 2:2 .3 

Woody aster (Xylorrhiza glabriuscula): 

Wyoming: Natrona County----------------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 8:8 26 

Desert plume (Stanleya pinnata): 

Nevada: Miner:al County-------------------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 3:3 .90 

Prince's plume (Stanleya e/ata): 

Nevada: Mineral County ------------------------------------------------------- d o -------------------------------------- 2:2 .81 

Silverberry (Eiaeagnus commutata): 

Alaska--------------------------------------------------------------------- Leaves and stems ---------------------------- 1 : 1 --

Crowberry (Empetrum nigrum): 

Alaska------------------------------------------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 3:3 . 074 

Lapland cassiope (Cassiope tetragona): 

Alaska------------------------------------------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 1:1 --

Cassiope (Cassiope sp.): 

Alaska------------------------------------------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 1:1 -- Idaho: Valley County-------------------------------------------------- A hove ground -------------------------------- I :I --

Copperflower (Ciadothamnus pyrolaejlorus): 

Alaska--------------------------------------------------------------------- Leaves and stems ---------------------------- I : 1 --

Labrador Alaska-------------------------------------------------- tea (Ledum pa/ustre): -------------------Leaves and stems---------------------------- 4:4 .022 

Grouseberry (Vaccinium scoparium): 

Idaho: Custer and Valley Counties ---------------------------------Above ground -------------------------------- 5:5 .02I 

Bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus): 

Idaho: Valley County-------~--------------------------------------------------- do -------------------------------------- 2:2 .02 

Blueberry Alaska----------------------------------------- ( Vaccinium uliginosum ): ----------------------------Leaves and stems ---------------------------- 2:4 .011 

Two-grooved poisonvetch (Astragalus bisulcatus): 

Wyoming: Converse County-----------------------------------------Above ground -------------------------------- 2:2 49 

Natrona County------------------------------------------------------------do -------------------------------------- 11:II 227 

GO 

1.84 

1.55 

--

7.89 

14.2 

1.36 

--

3.25 

--

--

--

--

1.23 

2.56 

--

1.99 

1.33 

6.17 

Observed 

range 

0.08-1.2 

.10-0.45 

. 3-0.3 

.40-240 

. 06-12 

.65-1.0 

. 02 

.02-0.20 

.01 

.04 

. 02 

. 08 

.02-0.03 

.OI-0.10 

.02-0.02 

<.01-0.03 

40-60 

I5-l,800 

Reference 

Gough and Severson (1981 a). 

Do. 

Cannon and Swanson ( 1979) . 

J .A. Erdman ( unpub. data, 1988). 

Cannon and others ( 1986) . 

Do. 

Gough and others ( 1991 ) . 

Do . 

Do. 

Do. 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980) . 

Gough and others ( 1991 ) . 

Do. 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

Do. 

Gough and others ( 1991 ). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, I988). 

N 

0\ 

en 

c 

3:: 

3:: 

> 

~ en 

~ "'-3 

V1 

~ 

n 

en 

~ en 

tTl 

~ 2 

3:: 

z 

< tTl 

a 

tTl 

~ t"j 

0 

z 

n 

> t""' 

n 

c 

t""' 

~ tTl 

0 

~ 0 

3:: 

c 

0 

a 

~ 

5 

a 

n 

> t""' 

en 

c 

~ tTl 

...:: 

0 

;:p.: ~ 
Woolly loco (Astragalus mollissimus): 

Texas: Brewster, Presidio, and Jeff Davis Counties-----------------------do--------------------------------------

Nuttall milkvetch (Astragalus nuttallianus): 

Texas: Brewster County--------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Diablo locoweed (Astragalus oxyphysus): 

California: western San Joaquin Valley---------------------------- Leaves------------------------------------------

Patterson poisonvetch (Astragalus pattersonii): 

Wyoming: Converse County-----------------------------------------Above ground --------------------------------

Milkvetch (Astragalus sp.): 

Idaho: Custer County----------------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

South Dakota: Harding County-----------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Wyoming: Natrona County---------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Two-leafed senna (Cassia dumosa): 

Texas: Presidio County------------------------------------------------ Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Cassia (Cassia sp.): 

Texas: Presidio County--------------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

Japanese clover (Lespedeza striata): 

Missouri: Calloway County------------------------------------------Above ground--------------------------------

Lupine (Lupinus sp.): 

Idaho: Custer County-------------------------------------------------- Flowers and fruits ---------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------------- Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Yellow sweetclover (Melilotus officina/is): 

Co lorado: Jefferson County---------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

~4issouri: Gallo .. a) Count) ---~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~~-~-~~-~-~--------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Montana: Richland County, Savage Coal Mine---------------------------do --------------------------------------

Montana and North Dakota: paired samples with 

white sweetclover------------------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

North Dakota: Burke County, Kincaid Coal Mine-------------------------do--------------------------------------

Mercer County, Beulah North Mine------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Ward County, Velva Coal Mine-----------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Wyoming: Converse County, D. Johnston Mine--------------------------do--------------------------------------

Sheridan County, Hidden Valley Mine--------------------------------do --------------------------------------

White sweetclover (Melilotus alba): 

Co lorado: Jefferson County---------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Missouri: Calloway County------------------------------------------Current year's growth -----------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------------- Second year dead stems and seeds -------

Montana: Rosebud County, Big Sky Mine------------------------ Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Montona and North Dakota: paired samples with 

yellow sweetclover-----------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Canada: Saskatchewan, Utility Mine -----------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Catclaw mimosa (Mimosa biuncifera): 

Texas: Brewster and Presidio Counties----------------------------- Fruits (pods)----------------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------------- Leaves------------------------------------------

4:4 .12 

2:2 .069 

14:14 .33 

2:2 18 

1:1 -- 1:1 -- 4:4 9.5 

1:1 --

1:1 --

1:1 --

1:1 -- 4:4 .042 

2:2 .057 

-+:+---- -- 10: I 0 1.30 

12:12 .30 

10:10 .17 

10:10 .15 

10:10 .49 

10:10 .37 

10:10 .53 

2:2 .049 

3:3 .22 

3:3 .13 

10:10 .42 

12:12 .48 

10:10 .23 

25:25 . 28 

25:25 .15 

1.59 .08-0.20 

1.23 . 06-0.08 

2.68 .08-3.5 

1.94 11-28 

-- .04 

-- 1,200 

33.70 .25-600 

-- .65 

-- .25 

-- .20 

-- .02 

1.94 .02-0.10 

1.63 .04-0.08 

-- . 40 

2.50 .60-6.0 

2.50 . 04-1.2 

2.28 .06-0.55 

2.05 . 08-0.60 

2.07 .15-2.0 

2.73 . 10-3.0 

1.85 . 15-1.2 

1.33 .04-0.06 

1.54 . 15-.35 

1.60 .08-0.20 

2.26 .08-1.0 

3.12 . 04-1.8 

1.93 . 06-0.50 

2.90 .04-3.0 

2.72 .04-1.6 

Erdman and others ( 1979). 

Do . 

lzbicki and Harms (1986). 

B.M. Erickson (unpub. data, 1976). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1979). 

J .A. Erdman ( unpub. data, 1988). 

Erdman and others ( 1979). 

Do. 

Ebens and others ( 1973 ). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

Do. 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1972). 

Do . 

Erdman and Ebens (1975). 

Do . 

Do. 

Do . 

Do. 

Do . 

Do . 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1972). 

Ebens and others (1973) . 

Do. 

Erdman and Ebens (1975). 

Do . 

Do . 

Erdman and others ( 1979) . 

Do. 

~ t:J:I 

~ Vl 

~ 

+:-

N 

-.) 
Table 4. Se contents of native plant species-Continued. 

Species sampled Plant part sampled Detection 

ratio 

Sandfain (Onobrychis viciaefolia): 

Montana: Big Hom County, Absaloka Mine---------------------- Stems and fruits------------------------------

Beargrass (Xerophyllum tenax): 

Idaho: Valley County--------------------------------------------------Above ground --------------------------------

Fireweed (Epilobium alpinum): 

Idaho: Valley County ----------------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Eriogonum (Eriogonum leptophylum): 

New Mexico: San Juan County------------------------------------------------do--------------------------------------

Eriogonum (Eriogonum ovalifolium): 

Idaho: Custer County --------------------------------------------------C au dex -----------------------------------------

Ceanothus (Ceanothus velutinus): 

Idaho: Valley County-------------------------------------------------- Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Holodiscus (Holodiscus dumosus): 

Idaho: Valley County-----------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Cinquefoil (Potentilla sp.): 

Idaho: Valley County --------------------------------------------------Above ground --------------------------------

Bitterbrush (Purshia tridentata): 

Idaho: Lemhi County -----------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Raspberry (Rubus sp.): 

Idaho: Valley County-----------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Creosote bush (Larrea divaricata subsp. tridentata): 

Texas: Presidio County------------------------------------------------Leaves and stems ----------------------------

Cedar (Juniperus virginiana): 

Missouri: Calloway County------------------------------------------Terminal branch tips ------------------------

Cedar glade -----------------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Juniper (Juniperus communis): 

Idaho: Custer and Valley Counties-------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Juniper (Juniperus sp.): 

Texas: Brewster and Presidio Counties--------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Subalpine fir (Abies lasiocarpa): 

Idaho: Valley County --------------------------------------------------Needles ----------------------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------------- Sterns-------------------------------------------

Do-----------------------------------------------------------------Twigs-------------------------------------------

I 0: IO 

6:8 

0: I 

I :I 

I :I 

1:2 

1 : 1 

2:2 

3:3 

1:2 

2:2 

2:2 

50:50 

3:3 

8:8 

3:9 

3:8 

3:3 

GM 

0.029 

.OI4 

--

--

--

.012 

--

.01 

.013 

.012 

.50 

.10 

.021 

.018 

.034 

<.01 

<.01 

.01 

GD 

1.53 

2.06 

--

--

--

2.12 

--

--

1.49 

2.10 

1.63 

--

1.36 

2.81 

2.22 

--

--

--

Observed 

range 

0.02-0.06 

<.OI-0.04 

<.OI 

1.5 

.06 

<.01-0.02 

.01 

.01-0.01 

.01-0.02 

<.01-0.02 

.35-0.70 

.10-0.10 

.01-0.04 

.01-0.06 

.01-0.08 

<.01-0.02 

<.01-0.01 

.01-0.01 

Reference 

Gough and Severson ( I98I b). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, I980). 

Do. 

Cannon and Swanson ( I979). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Erdman and others ( 1979). 

R.R. Tidball (unpub. data, 1971). 

Erdman and others (1976b ). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

Erdman and others ( 1979). 

J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

Do. 

Do. 

N 

00 

rJ'} 

e 

:: 

:: 

:> 

~ rJ'} 

~ ::J 

rJ'} 

:j 

n 

rJ'} 

t5 

:::0 

rJ'} 

tTl 

~ z 

2 

:: 

z 

< tTl 

0 

tTl 

....., 

~ 

5 

z 

n 

:> 

r 

n 

e 

r 

~ 0 

~ 0 

:: 

e 

0 

0 

~ r 

0 

0 

n 

:> 

r 

rJ'} 

e 

~ 

~ 0 

~ ;1> 
White spruce (Pice a g/auca): -------------------sterns and leaves----------------------------- A Iaska --------------------------------------------------

Black spruce (Picea mariana): 

A Iaska ------------------------------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis): 

Alaska------------------------------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Engelmann spruce (Picea engelmanii): 

Idaho: Valley County--------------------------------------------------Needles ----------------------------------------

D 0----------------------------------------------------------------- Stems -------------------------------------------

Do-----------------------------------------------------------------Twigs-------------------------------------------

Lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta): 

Idaho: Valley, Lemhi, and Custer Counties------------------------Needles ----------------------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------------- Stems -------------------------------------------

Shortleaf pine (Pinus echinata): 

Missouri: oak -hickory-pine forest-------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Limber pine (Pinus jlexilis): 

Idaho: Custer County--------------------------------------------------Needles and stems ---------------------------

Valley County-----------------------------------------------------Need I es ----------------------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------- Sterns-------------------------------------------

Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa): 

Montana: Rosebud and Powder River Counties------------------Needles ----------------------------------------

Do-----------------------------------------------------------------Sterns-------------------------------------------

Do-----------------------------------------------------------------Current year's needles ----------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------------- 0 I der need I es ---------------------------------

Washington: Stevens County, near uranium mills---------------Needles ----------------------------------------

Douglas-fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii): 

Alaska---------------------------------------------------------------------Terminal branch tips ------------------------

Idaho: Lemhi and Custer Counties-------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Valley County-----------------------------------------------------Need I e s ----------------------------------------

Do-----------------------------------------------------------Sterns-------------------------------------------

Do----------------------------------------------------------- Twigs-------------------------------------------

Hemlock Alaska------------------------------------------------ ( Tsuga heterophylla): ---------------------Stems and leaves-----------------------------

Dwarf sumac (Rhus copal/ina): 

Missouri: flood-plain forest------------------------------------------ Sterns -------------------------------------------

Oak-hickory forest --------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Oak-hickory-pine forest-------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

0 ng1aciated prairie--------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Smooth sumac (Rhus g/abra): 

Missouri: cedar glade-----------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

F 1 ood-p 1 a in forest--------------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

0 1aciated prairie -----------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

46:76 .011 

12:22 .0096 

11:13 .017 

0:3 <.01 

I :3 <.01 

2:2 .01 

6:6 .041 

3:4 .019 

49:49 .062 

6:6 .078 

5:6 .057 

5:6 .034 

28:28 .068 

28:28 .075 

26:26 .050 

26:26 .12 

15:16 .012 

1 : 1 -- 6:6 .075 

5:6 .024 

5:6 .012 

3:3 .02 

I 1: 11 .026 

15:15 .024 

9:11 .Oil 

8:10 .014 

6:6 .016 

25:48 .0096 

47:48 .027 

49:50 .022 

1.66 <.01-0.04 Gough and others ( 1991 ). 

1.47 <.01-0.02 Do. 

1.85 <.01-0.04 Do. 

-- <.01 J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1980). 

-- <.01-0.01 Do. 

-- . 01-0.01 Do . 

2.81 . 01-0.25 Do . 

2.16 <.01-0.04 Do. 

1.71 . 02-0.20 Erdman and others ( 1976b ) . 

1.96 . 04-0.20 J .A. Erdman ( unpub. data, 1980) . 

4.19 <.01-0.30 Do. 

2.50 <.01-0.08 Do. ~ to 

t""' 

1.73 . 02-0.20 J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1978) . tTl 

(/) 

1.26 . 04-0.10 Do . ~ 

1.70 .04-0.15 J.A. Erdman (unpub. data, 1979). ~ 

1.77 .04-0.35 Do. 

1.52 <.01-0.04 T.K. Hinkley (unpub. data, 1980). 

-- . 03 Gough and others ( 1991 ) . 

1.82 . 04-0.15 J .A. Erdman ( unpub. data, 1980) . 

2.26 <.01-0.08 Do. 

1.60 <.01-0.02 Do. 

-- . 02-0.02 Do . 

1.85 . 01-0.06 Gough and others (1991) . 

1.94 .01-0.10 H.T. Shacklette (unpub. data, 1972). 

1.53 <.01-0.02 Do. 

1.86 <.01-0.04 Do. 

1.43 . 01-0.02 Do . 

1.51 <.01-0.04 Erdman and others (1976b ). 

1.98 <.01-0.25 Do. 

1.83 <.01-0.10 Do. N 

1.0 
Table 4. Se contents of native plant species-Continued. 

Species sampled Plant part sampled Detection 

ratio 

Smooth sumac (Rhus glabra)-Continued 

Missouri: cedar glade-Continued 

Oak-hickory forest ----------------------------------------------- Sterns-------------------------------------------

Oak-hickory-pine forest-------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

0 nglaciated prairie--------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Pennsylvania: Armstrong and Indiana Counties-----------------Leaves------------------------------------------

American green alder (Alnus crispa): 

Alaska--------------------------------------------------------------------- Stems or stems and leaves -----------------

0 sibelli Coal Mine----------------------------------------------- Stems and leaves-----------------------------

Sitka alder (Alnus ·crispa subsp. sinuata): 

Alaska--------------------------------------------------------------------- Stems or stems and leaves -----------------

Thinleaf alder (Alnus incana): 

A I as ka --------------------------------------------------------------------- Stems -------------------------------------------

Shrub birch (Betula glandulosa): _--------------Stems or stems and leaves----------------- Alaska----------------------------------------------------- -

Dwarf arctic birch (Betula nana): 

Alaska------------------------------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Paper birch (Betula papyrifera): 

Alaska---------------------------------------------------------------------Sterns-------------------------------------------

Dogwood (Comus florida): 

Pennsy I vania: Armstrong and Indiana Counties----------------- Leaves------------------------------------------

Do-----------------------------------------------------------------Twigs-------------------------------------------

Beech (Fagus grandifolia): 

Pennsylvania: Allegheny County-----------------------------------Wood-------------------------------------------

White oak (Quercus alba): 

Missouri: oak -hickory forest-----------------------------------------S terns-------------------------------------------

Oak-hickory-pine forest-------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Willow oak (Quercus phellos): 

Missouri: flood-plain forest--------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Post oak (Quercus stellata): 

Missouri: cedar glade-----------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Oak (Quercus sp.): 

Pennsylvania: Allegheny County-----------------------------------Wood-------------------------------------------

28:50 

34:49 

39:49 

9:9 

8:10 

6:6 

2:5 

2:3 

7:9 

9:9 

3:3 

79:79 

9:9 

8:12 

48:50 

48:49 

45:45 

46:49 

9:9 

GM 

0.0094 

.01 

.013 

.13 

.016 

.01 

--

.Oil 

.015 

.019 

.054 

.28 

.11 

.0094 

.018 

.019 

.032 

. 020 

.0086 

GO 

1.45 

1.42 

1.67 

1.37 

2.53 

--

--

I. 71 

1.97 

1.77 

1.70 

1.46 

1.50 

2.43 

1.43 

1.43 

2.02 

1.56 

1.36 

Observed 

range 

<0.01-0.04 

<.01-0.02 

<.01-0.04 

.08-0.20 

<.01-0.15 

.01-0.01 

<.01-0.04 

<.01-0.02 

<.01-0.04 

.01-0.05 

.04-0.10 

.10-0.55 

.06-0.20 

<.005-0.04 

<.01-0.04 

<.01-0.04 

.01-0.30 

<.01-0.04 

.005-0.01 

Reference 

Erdman and others ( 1976b ). 

Do. 

Do. 

H.A. Tourtelot (unpub. data, 1979). 

Gough and others ( 1991 ). 

Gough and Severson ( 1981 b). 

Gough and others ( 1991 ). 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

H.A. Tourtelot (unpub. data, 1979). 

Do. 

Do. 

Erdman and others ( 1976b ). 

Do. 

Do. 

Do . 

H.A. Tourtelot (unpub. data, 1979). 

Vol 

0 

en 

c 

~ 

~ 

> 

~ en 

~ ::J 

en 

:::3 

n 

en 

a 

:::0 

en 

tTl 

t;; 

z 

2 

~ 

z 

< tTl 

a 

tTl 

~ ::J 

0 

z 

n 

> t""' 

n 

c 

t""' 

~ tTl 

0 

::2 

0 

~ 

c 

0 

a 

gj 

5 

a 

n 

> t""' 

en 

c 

~ tTl 

-< 

0 

~ ;J> 
"' "'0 

0 

0'1 

co 

w 

I 

0 

~ 

co 

-

N 

0 

0 

0 

...... 

Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua): 

Missouri: flood-plain forest------------------------------------------ Sterns-------------------------------------------

Shagbark hickory (Carya ovata): 

Missouri: oak-hickory forest-------------------------------------------------- do --------------------------------------

Oak-hickory-pine forest-------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

Mesquite (Prosopis glandu/osa): 

New Mexico: Hidalgo County---------------------------------------- Leaves------------------------------------------

Luna County----------------------------------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Texas: Brewster and Presidio Counties--------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Ohia (Metrosideros col/ina): 

Hawaii: Hawaii Volcanoes National Park------------------------------------do --------------------------------------

Hawaii : Hawaii-------------------------------------------------------------------- d o --------------------------------------

Arctic willow (Salix arctica): 

Alaska--------------------------------------------------------------------- Stems-------------------------------------------

Diamondleaf willow (Salix pu/chra): 

Alaska--------------------------------------------------------------------- Stems or stems and leaves -----------------

Tyonik B-5 quadrangle, Capps Coal Field------------------ Stems-------------------------------------------

Usibelli Coal Mine----------------------------------------------- Stems and leaves-----------------------------

Feltleaf willow (Salix a/axensis): Stems or stems and leaves ----------------- Alaska---------------------------------------------------------------------

Littletree willow (Salix arbuscu/oides): 

A 1 as ka --------------------------------------------------------------------- Stem s -------------------------------------------

Gray Alaska--------------------------------------------- leaf willow (Salix g/auca): ------------------------Stems or stems and leaves -----------------

Planeleaf willow (Salix p/amfolia): 

Alaska--------------------------------------------------------------------- Stems-------------------------------------------

Willow Alaska-------------------------------------------------- (Salix sp.): -------------------Stems or stems and leaves -----------------

47:47 

19:19 

7:7 

80:80 

4:4 

6:6 

14:14 

35:35 

2:3 

4:6 

87:90 

6:6 

7:7 

I :3 

II: I2 

2:2 

I4: I7 

.065 2.36 .01-0.40 Erdman and others (1976b ). 

.022 1.52 .02-0.04 Do. 

.027 1.45 .02-0.04 Do. 

.38 1.97 . 04-1.2 Raines and others ( 1985) . 

.23 2.32 .10-0.70 Do. 

.17 2.81 .06-0.65 Erdman and others ( 1979). 

.053 1.67 .02-0.10 Connor ( 1979). 

.067 2.04 .02-0.25 J.J. Connor (unpub. data, 1979). 

.014 1.83 <.OI-0.02 Gough and others ( 1991 ). 

.OI5 2.13 <.OI-0.04 Do. 

.088 1.75 <.05-0.30 Gough and Severson ( 1983 ). 

.013 1.43 .OI-0.02 Gough and Severson ( I98I b). 

.038 3.79 . OI-0.64 Gough and others ( I991 ) . ~ t:J:j 

r 

trl 

C/) 

-- -- <.01-0.0I Do. ~ 

~ 

.025 3.IO <.01-0.25 Do. 

.014 1.63 .01-0.02 Do. 

.024 3.10 <.01-0.31 Do. 

w 

-

SELECTED SERIES OF U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PUBLICATIONS 

Periodicals 

Earthquakes & Volcanoes (issued bimonthly). 

Preliminary Determination of Epicenters (issued monthly). 

Technical Books and Reports 

Professional Papers are mainly comprehensive scientific reports 

of wide and lasting interest and importance to professional scientists 

and engineers. Included are reports on the results of resource studies 

and of topographic, hydrologic, and geologic investigations. They also 

include collections of related papers addressing different aspects of a 

single scientific topic. 

Bulletins contain significant data and interpretations that are of lasting scientific interest but are generally more limited in scope or geographic coverage than Professional Papers. They include the results of 

resource studies and of geologic and topographic investigations, as well 

as collections of short papers related to a specific topic. 

Water-Supply Papers are comprehensive reports that present significant interpretive results of hydrologic investigations of wide interest 

to professional geologists, hydrologists, and engineers. The series covers 

investigations in all phases of hydrology, including hydrogeology, availability of water, quality of water, and use of water. 

Circulars present administrative information or important scientific information of wide popular interest in a format designed for distribution at no cost to the public. Information is usually of short-term 

interest. 

Water-Resource Investigations Reports are papers of an 

interpretive nature made available to the public outside the formal 

USGS publications series. Copies are reproduced on request unlike 

formal USGS publications, and they are also available for public 

inspection at depositories indicated in USGS catalogs. 

Open-File Reports include unpublished manuscript reports, maps, 

and other material that are made available for public consultation at 

depositories. They are a nonpermanent form of publication that may 

be cited in other publications as sources of information. 

Maps 

Geologic Quadrangle Maps are multicolor geologic maps on topographic bases in 7 7'2- or 15-minute quadrangle formats (scales mainly 

1:24,000 or 1 :62,500) showing bedrock, surficial, or engineering geology. Maps generally include brief texts; some maps include structure 

and columnar sections only. 

Geophysical Investigations Maps are on topographic or planimetric bases at various scales; they show results of surveys using 

geophysical techniques, such as gravity, magnetic, seismic, or radioactivity, which reflect subsurface structures that are of economic or geologic significance. Many maps include correlations with the geology. 

Miscellaneous Investigations Series Maps are on planimetric or 

topographic bases of regular and irregular areas at various scales; they 

present a wide variety of format and subject matter. The series also 

includes 7 7'2-minute quadrangle photogeologic maps on planimetric 

bases that show geology as interpreted from aerial photographs. Series 

also includes maps of Mars and the Moon. 

Coal Investigations Maps are geologic maps on topographic or 

planimetric bases at various scales showing bedrock or surficial geology, stratigraphy, and structural relations in certain coal-resource 

areas. 

Oil and Gas Investigations Charts show stratigraphic information for certain oil and gas fields and other areas having petroleum 

potential. 

Miscellaneous Field Studies Maps are multicolor or black-andwhite maps on topographic or planimetric bases on quadrangle or irregular areas at various scales. Pre-1971 maps show bedrock geology 

in relation to specific mining or mineral-deposit problems; post-1971 

maps are primarily black-and-white maps on various subjects, such as 

environmental studies or wilderness mineral investigations. 

Hydrologic Investigations Atlases are multicolor or black-andwhite maps on topographic or planimetric bases presenting a wide range 

of geohydrologic data of both regular and irregular areas; principal 

scale is 1:24,000, and regional studies are at 1:250,000 scale or smaller. 

Catalogs 

Permanent catalogs, as well as some others, giving comprehensivelistings of U.S. Geological Survey publications are available under tbe 

conditions indicated below from the U.S. Geological Survey, Boob 

and Open-File Reports Sales, Federal Center, Box 25286, Denver, CO 

80225. (See latest Price and Availability List.) 

"Publications of the Geological Survey, 1879-1961" may be purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book form and as a 

set of microfiche. 

"Publications of the Geological Survey, 1962-1970" may be purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book form and as a 

set of microfiche. 

"Publications of the Geological Survey, 1971-1981" may be purchased by mail and over the counter in paperback book form (two 

volumes, publications listing and index) and as a set of microtiche. 

Supplements for 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1986, and for subsequent years since the last permanent catalog may be purchased by mail 

and over the counter in paperback book form. 

State catalogs, "List of U.S. Geological Survey Geologic and 

Water-Supply Reports and Maps For (State)," may be purchased by 

mail and over the counter in paperback booklet form only. 

"Price and Availability List of U.S. Geological Survey Pqblications," issued annually, is available free of charge in paperback booklet form only. 

Selected copies of a monthly catalog "New Publications of tbe 

U.S. Geological Survey" are available free of charge by mail or may 

be obtained over the counter in paperback booklet form only. Those 

wishing a free subscription to the monthly catalog "New Publications 

of the U.S. Geological Survey" should write to the U.S. Geological 

Survey, 582 National Center, Reston, VA 22092. 

Note.-Prices of Government publications listed in older catalogs, 

announcements, and publications may be incorrect. Therefore, the prices 

charged may differ from the prices in catalogs, announcements, and 

publications. 
...... 

,,,· 

. " 

·" 

·.-, -.<' -- ';- ..... .. ~· 

~·- ' 

·. 

..., '.~ '~ -~ ,..- "'!.~­

,. ...... ~..,. .... , 

. '*~ 

"' . :·~ 

:_:~ l. 

--·~ 

··~'.:: 

<r·:' 

· . .- . ·--