Search

Prior research has established that undocumented immigrant experiences are dynamic, reflecting the complex web of immigration-related policies that create legal vulnerability. As such, undocumented college students' experiences must be situated in their current policy context. Drawing on descriptive analyses of a survey of 1,277 undocumented 4-year college students in California, we examine how undocumented students are faring in a relatively inclusive policy context. Results demonstrate the heterogeneity of undocumented student experiences and unpack the challenges they confront while also demonstrating the ways they thrive. We document how respondents are performing across a variety of academic, well-being, and civic and political engagement outcomes. We also show that undocumented students' perceptions of legal vulnerability are complex and varied, taking into account family-level legal vulnerability and individual protections. Further, students perceive campuses as fairly welcoming spaces, with some differences arising across the two university systems. Ultimately, we argue that undocumented college students' experiences merit more nuanced and contextualized analysis.

Undocumented students face considerable stressors due to their precarious legal status, economic disadvantages, and social exclusion. Building on a growing body of the literature that has examined the mental health and psychological wellbeing of undocumented students, we disentangle the effects of multiple dimensions of legal vulnerability. Specifically, we examine whether multiple dimensions of legal vulnerability are associated with increased emotional distress and whether social support moderates this relationship. Using a survey of 1,277 undocumented students in California, we conducted hierarchical regression analyses to determine the unique and combined effects of legal vulnerability and social support on anxiety and depression. We find that legal vulnerabilities, including discrimination, social exclusion, the threat of deportation, and economic insecurity, and social support have direct effects on depression and anxiety symptomatology. The moderating effects of social support are only partially supported. Our results demonstrate the move beyond the study of immigration status to examine the effects of legal vulnerabilities on mental health.

Molluscan shell debris is an under-exploited means of detecting, sourcing, and age-dating dredged sediments in open-shelf settings. Backscatter features on the Southern California shelf are suggestive of dredged sediment hauled from San Diego Bay but deposited significantly inshore of the EPA-designated ocean disposal site. We find that 36% of all identifiable bivalve shells > 2 mm (44% of shells > 4 mm) in sediment samples from this 'short dump' area are from species known to live exclusively in the Bay; such shells are absent at reference sites of comparable water depth, indicating that their presence in the short-dump area signals non-compliant disposal rather than natural offshore transport or sea level rise. These sediments lack the shells of species that invaded California bays in the 1970s, suggesting that disposal preceded federal regulations. This inexpensive, low-tech method, with its protocol for rejecting alternative hypotheses, will be easy to adapt in other settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The majority of articles in this issue draw on survey data collected in the spring of 2020 with 1,277 University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) undocumented students. The survey effort, led by Dr. Laura Enriquez, was initiated under UC PromISE as part of a larger study examining how immigration policies disrupt the educational experiences and wellbeing of UC college students from immigrant families. [Extracted from the article]

Abstract: To assess benthic macrofaunal community condition in Southern California, 838 sites were sampled using spatially random designs in 1994, 1998, or 2003. Benthic community condition was assessed on a four-category scale and the area in each category estimated. Overall, benthic macrofauna in Southern California were in good condition during 2003, with 98% of the area in reference condition or deviating only marginally. There was no evidence of disturbance near Channel Islands or small wastewater discharges, and virtually none on the mainland shelf. In contrast, bay and estuary macrofaunal communities were more frequently disturbed with nearly 13% of the area supporting disturbed benthos. The condition of the mainland shelf did not change substantially over the 9-year period, with 1.6–2.8% of the area in poor benthic condition. Southern California benthic condition evaluations may be improved by extending the depth and salinity ranges of assessment tools, and improving trend detection methods. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Many types of indices have been developed to assess benthic invertebrate community condition, but there have been few studies evaluating the relative performance of different index approaches. Here we calibrate and compare the performance of five indices: the Benthic Response Index (BRI), Benthic Quality Index (BQI), Relative Benthic Index (RBI), River Invertebrate Prediction and Classification System (RIVPACS), and the Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI). We also examine whether index performance improves when the different indices, which rely on measurement of different properties, are used in combination. The five indices were calibrated for two geographies using 238 samples from southern California marine bays and 125 samples from polyhaline San Francisco Bay. Index performance was evaluated by comparing index assessments of 35 sites to the best professional judgment of nine benthic experts. None of the individual indices performed as well as the average expert in ranking sample condition or evaluating whether benthic assemblages exhibited evidence of disturbance. However, several index combinations outperformed the average expert. When results from both habitats were combined, two four-index combinations and a three-index combination performed best. However, performance differences among several combinations were small enough that factors such as logistics can also become a consideration in index selection. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article presents the benthic response index for assessing the infaunal communities in the mainland shelf of Southern California. It states that the index is calculated as abundance-weighted average pollution tolerance of species in a sample. It notes that the reference condition was established as index value in samples taken distant from areas of anthropogenic activity. It mentions that the response levels were established as index values were lost.

Assesses the relationship of depth, sediment grain size and latitude with the distribution of benthic infaunal assemblages in the coastal shelf of southern California. Distinctive species in the shallow assemblage and in the mid-depth assemblage; Description of the benthic assemblages; Impact of upwelling waters and other oceanic regimes on benthic abundance and diversity.

Benthic infauna were sampled from 251 Southern California Bight (SCB) mainland shelf sites in the summer of 1994. Sample sites were selected using a stratified random design, with the primary strata being depth zone, geography, and proximity to point and non-point discharges. Benthic infaunal condition was assessed using the Benthic Response Index (BRI), and by comparing dominant taxa and community parameters (e.g., number of taxa) among strata. Ninety-one percent of sediments in the SCB were found to contain healthy benthic communities. Most stations with altered benthos were located near river mouths, in Santa Monica Bay, or on the Palos Verdes Shelf. Deviations at sites with altered benthic communities were mostly limited to minor changes in species composition, rather than to large declines in diversity or abundance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Benthic indices are useful indicators of sediment condition, but many indices are difficult to employ because they require large calibration datasets. The AZTI''s Marine Biotic Index (AMBI) requires minimal local calibration, but it was developed in Europe and the validity of its extension to distant regions is unclear. Here we compare its performance in Southern California''s marine bays with that of the Benthic Response Index (BRI), a locally derived data-intensive index. AMBI was calibrated in four ways: (1) using the original AMBI species’ classifications developed in Europe; (2) augmenting the original classifications with closely related taxa, following AMBI guidelines; (3) using local expertise to independently classify taxa; and (4) revision of the local expert classifications by European developers of the index. These approaches were applied to a 685 sample data set and assessed relative to the BRI by comparing samples’ classification from best to worst and by evaluating the level of agreement in assigning samples into four condition categories. The AMBI was validated against environmental proxies of disturbance and expert judgement, using consensus agreement about sample condition developed by nine benthic ecologists. The first AMBI approach did not work well, as only 24% of the 928 taxa were on the original AMBI species list, resulting in only 11% of the samples meeting the required 20% of classified individuals for AMBI application. The other approaches classified substantially more taxa, allowing application to 75–98% of the samples. Both of these approaches were significantly correlated with the BRI, though the correlations were lower than between the AMBI runs. None of the AMBI approaches, though, compared well with either the BRI or the validation data when placing samples into perturbation categories, with the AMBI having a greater central tendency. AMBI categorized less than 5% of the samples as reference compared to almost one-third of the samples by the experts or BRI, and substantially underestimating the number of severely affected samples. Species most responsible for disagreements between BRI and AMBI approaches were identified. Four modifications to enhance AMBI performance were identified: (1) incorporate local expertise in assigning ecological classifications, (2) use transformed abundance weighting to reduce the effect of dominant species, (3) calibrate the categorization scaling using expert judgement, and (4) use the AMBI in combination with other measures, such as the M-AMBI. The success of these modifications is specific to this study, but they are likely to enhance AMBI''s performance worldwide. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]