Skip to main navigation
Skip to search
Skip to main content
Northern Arizona University Home
Home
Profiles
Departments and Centers
Scholarly Works
Activities
Grants
Datasets
Prizes
Search by expertise, name or affiliation
Can smart growth save the chesapeake bay?
Claire A. Jantz,
Scott J. Goetz
Research output
:
Contribution to journal
›
Article
›
peer-review
3
Scopus citations
Overview
Fingerprint
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Can smart growth save the chesapeake bay?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.
Sort by
Weight
Alphabetically
Agriculture & Biology
Chesapeake Bay
85%
sustainable development
69%
oysters
64%
estuaries
63%
geospatial technology
37%
pollution
35%
shad
32%
urban development
29%
dredging
27%
pollution load
27%
ecological restoration
26%
herring
25%
waterfowl
24%
habitat destruction
22%
anthropogenic activities
21%
pollutants
19%
crabs
19%
sediments
18%
Medicine & Life Sciences
Estuaries
100%
Ostreidae
87%
Sustainable Development
86%
Bays
79%
Ecosystem
45%
Urban Renewal
35%
Brachyura
33%
Environmental Pollutants
23%
Human Activities
20%
Technology
13%
Health
10%
Population
8%
Earth & Environmental Sciences
estuary
47%
pollutant level
27%
pollution
26%
waterfowl
25%
crab
21%
dredging
21%
urban development
19%
sediment
19%
harvest
18%
land surface
17%
human activity
15%
restoration
15%
watershed
14%
productivity
14%
health
14%
decision
12%
habitat
12%
ecosystem
12%
loss
10%
Engineering & Materials Science
Estuaries
92%
Sediments
50%
Pollution
37%
Dredging
27%
Watersheds
25%
Ecosystems
21%
Restoration
20%
Productivity
16%
Health
14%
Chemical Compounds
Ecosystem
73%
Environmental Pollutant
50%
Blue
44%
Surface
19%
Social Sciences
pollutant
23%
habitat
22%
restoration
21%
urban development
20%
sustainable development
17%
productivity
16%
migrant
15%
resident
14%
health
9%