TENSION OF GEOMORPHOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN THE MARGINAL MOUNTAIN BELTS OF THE PACIFIC RIM
https://doi.org/10.15356/2071-9388_03v09_2016_02
Abstract
The maps of naturally determined geomorphologic tension, scale 1:8 million, for the territory of the Russian Far East and the central fragment of the mountain system of the Andes (between 5°S – 19°S) were compiled. We are using the term “tension” to define predisposition of the territory for the development of catastrophic processes. Tension was
evaluated in nominal scores accordingly to the regional level of generalization. Assessment was based on the analysis of seismicity, amount of precipitation, the depth of the relief dissection and the spectrum of the dominant geomorphologic processes. The value of geomorphologic tension in the Russian Far East region ranges from 3 to 16 conventional points: in the Western Okhotsk Sea coast area it was estimated at 7–10 points, in the Sakhalin – 10–12, in the Eastern Kamchatka – 13–15 and in separate Kuril Islands – 16 points. Thus, the study results confirmed the formerly stated supposition about the increase of nature-defined geomorphologic tension of the NW Pacific Ocean sector from the west to the east. The zone of maximum potential development of catastrophic processes in the SE sector of the Pacific Rim is situated at the western mega slope of the Peruvian Andes between 9°S and 13°30’S and in the band width of 100 km along the Pacific coast. The geomorphologic tension of this area reaches 15–16 points due to natural causes. The tension on the eastern mega slope of the Andes ranges from 9 to 12 points, except for some areas where it increases to 13–14; on the Altiplano it decreases to 6–10 points. An important feature of the study area is the asymmetric distribution of geomorphologic processes, so the geomorphologic tension, which significantly different at the oceanic and the inland (continental) slopes of the mountain chain. Comparison of data obtained for the two segments (NW and SE) of the Pacific Rim allows reaching a conclusion about the general regularities of the distribution of geomorphologic tension in the territory of marginal mountain belts around the Pacific Ocean with more confidence. The areas of potential catastrophic processes are located near the edge of the continent in either case.
evaluated in nominal scores accordingly to the regional level of generalization. Assessment was based on the analysis of seismicity, amount of precipitation, the depth of the relief dissection and the spectrum of the dominant geomorphologic processes. The value of geomorphologic tension in the Russian Far East region ranges from 3 to 16 conventional points: in the Western Okhotsk Sea coast area it was estimated at 7–10 points, in the Sakhalin – 10–12, in the Eastern Kamchatka – 13–15 and in separate Kuril Islands – 16 points. Thus, the study results confirmed the formerly stated supposition about the increase of nature-defined geomorphologic tension of the NW Pacific Ocean sector from the west to the east. The zone of maximum potential development of catastrophic processes in the SE sector of the Pacific Rim is situated at the western mega slope of the Peruvian Andes between 9°S and 13°30’S and in the band width of 100 km along the Pacific coast. The geomorphologic tension of this area reaches 15–16 points due to natural causes. The tension on the eastern mega slope of the Andes ranges from 9 to 12 points, except for some areas where it increases to 13–14; on the Altiplano it decreases to 6–10 points. An important feature of the study area is the asymmetric distribution of geomorphologic processes, so the geomorphologic tension, which significantly different at the oceanic and the inland (continental) slopes of the mountain chain. Comparison of data obtained for the two segments (NW and SE) of the Pacific Rim allows reaching a conclusion about the general regularities of the distribution of geomorphologic tension in the territory of marginal mountain belts around the Pacific Ocean with more confidence. The areas of potential catastrophic processes are located near the edge of the continent in either case.
About the Authors
Ekaterina V. Lebedeva
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dmitry V. Mikhalev
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Faculty of Geography
Russian Federation
Faculty of Geography
Sergey V. Shvarev
Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Veniamin I. Gotvansky
Russian Geographical Society
Russian Federation
Member of Russian Geographical Society,
Russian Federation
Member of Russian Geographical Society,
References
1. Alizade E.K. and Tarikhazer S.A. (2015) Ekogeomorfologicheskii risk i opasnosti territorii Bol’shogo Kavkaza (v predelah Azerbaidzhana) (Ecogeomorphologic danger and hazards at Major Caucasus (in the limits of Azerbaijan). Moscow: MAKS Press, 208 p. (in Russian).
2. Ananyev G.S. (1998) Katastroficheskie protsessy reliefoobrazovanija (Catastrophic relief forming processes). Moscow: MGU. 100 p. (in Russian).
3. Bolysov S.I., Bredikhin A.V., Eremenko E.A. (2015) Geomorfologicheskaya bezopasnost’ Rossii (Geomorphologic safety of Russia). Geomorfologicheskie resursy i geomorfologicheskaya bezopasnost’: ot teorii k practike / Materialy Vserossi’skoi konferentsii “VII Schukinskie chtenija” (Geomorphologic resources and geomorphologic safety: from theory to practice. VII Schukin Conference: Extended abstracts) M.: MAKS Press. 11–16 pp. (in Russian)
4. Conozcamos los peligros geologicos en la region Andina/ Servicio Nacional de Geologia y Mineria. (2007) Publication Geologica Multinacional. N 5. 78 p.
5. Corominas J. (2008) Guidelines for landslide susceptibility hazard and use planning / Engineering Geology. DOI: 10.1016/j.enggeo.2008.03.022
6. Gorelov S.K. (2008) O probleme ecologo-geomorfologicheskogo kartirovanija (na primere territorii Severnoi Evrazii) (On the problem of ecologic-geomorphologic mapping (the Northern Eurasia as an example)) // Geomorfologiya, N 2: 61–66. (in Russian with English summary).
7. Gotvansky V.I. and Lebedeva E.V. (2010) Vlijanie prirodnyh i antropogennyh faktorov na napriazhionnost’ geomorfologicheskih protsessov na Dal’nem Vostoke (Natural and anthropogenic factors influence on geomorphologic processes intensity in the Far East) // Geomorfologiya, N 2: 26–36. (in Russian with English summary)
8. Kozlova A.E., Lokshin G.P., and Chesnokova I.V. (2005) Karta rajonirovanija territorii Rossii po stepeni ekstremal’nosti razvitija ecologo-geomorfologicheskih protsessov (Map of zoning of the territory of Russia on the degree of extreme ecologic-geomorphologic situation). Scale 1:9 000 000. M.: IG RAN.
9. Lebedeva E.V. (2013a) Prirodnye i tehnogennye predposylki napriazhionnosti geomorfologicheskih protsessov And (Natural and anthropogenic basis of geomorphologic processes intensity in the Andes) // Geomorfologiya, N 4: 48–61 (in Russian with English summary)
10. Lebedeva E.V. (2013b) Printsypy sostavlenia karty napriazhionnosti geomorfologicheskih protsessov okrainno-kontinental’nyh gornyh system Dal’nego Vostoka (The foundation of the map on intensity of geomorphologic processes of the Far East continental margin mountain belts). // Geomorfologiya i kartografija. Materialy ХХХШ plenuma Geomorfologicheskoi Komissii RAN (Geomorphology and Cartography: Proceed. of ХХХIII plenum of Geomorphological Commission RAS). Saratov: SGU. 507–511 pp. (in Russian)
11. Lebedeva E.V. (2015) Napriazhionnost’ geomorfologicheskih obstanovok okrainnokontinental’nyh gornyh system Pritihookeanija (Tension of geomorphologic conditions of the marginal -continental mountain belts of the Pacific Ocean coast). Geomorfologicheskie resursy i geomorfologicheskaya bezopasnost’: ot teorii k practike / Materialy Vserossi’skoi konferentsii “VII Schukinskie chtenija” (Geomorphologic resources and geomorphologic safety: from theory to practice. VII Schukin Conference: Extended abstracts) M.: MAKS Press. 129–132 pp. (in Russian)
12. Lebedeva E.V., Mikhalev D.V., Novoa J.E., and Kladovschikova M.E. (2014a) Geomorphological hazard and disasters in the South American Andes” /Geography. Environment. Sustainability, N 1: 80–98.
13. Lebedeva E.V., Mikhalev D.V., and Shvarev S.V. (2015) Geomorfologicheskaya napriazhionnost’ tsentral’nogo sektora gornoi sistemy And (Geomorphologic tension of the Central Andes) // Geomorfologiya, N 2:77–88. (in Russian with English summary)
14. Lebedeva E.V., Shvarev S.V., and Gotvansky V.I. (2014b) Prirodno-obuslovlennaja napriazhionnost’ geomorfologicheskih protsessov territorii Dal’nego Vostoka Rossii (Naturally determined geomorphologic processes tension of the Russian Far East territory) / Geomorfologiya, N 4: 48–59 (in Russian with English summary)
15. Liang W.J., Zhuang D.F., Jiang D., Pan J.J., and Ren H.Y. (2012) Assessment of debris flow hazard using a Bayesian Network. Geomorphology, v. 171–172: 94–100.
16. Simonov Y.G. (1997) Ball’nye otsenki v prikladnyh geograficheskih issledovanijah I puti ih sovershenstvovanija (Scoring in applied geographical studies and its development). Vestnik MGU, ser. 5. geogr., N 4: 7–10 (in Russian with English summary).
17. Karta sovremennoi dinamiki reliefa Severnoi Evrazii (The map of current relief dynamics of North Eurasia). (2003) Scale 1:5 000 000. М.: IG RAN.
18. Karta “Stepen’ ecologo-geomorfologicheskoi opasnosti sovremennyh reliefoobrazujuschih protsessov” (The map “The ecologic-geomorphologic hazard level of contemporary relief-forming processes”) (2006) Scale 1:8 000 000. М.: IG RAN.
19. Timofeev D.А. and Bylinskaya L.N. (1987) Karta otsenki erosionnoi opasnosti territorii SSSR (USSR map of erosion hazard evaluation)/ Erosionnye I ruslovye protsessy v razlichnyh prirodnyh uslovijah (Erosion and river bed processes in different natural conditions). Moscow: MGU. 24–25 pp. (in Russian).
20. Ulomov V.I. (2013) Obschee seismicheskoe zonirovanie territorii Rossiiskoi Federatsii (The General Seismic Zoning of the territory of Russian Federation) // Problemy ingenernoi seismologii, v. 4, N 4: 5–20 (in Russian)
21. http://eros.usgs.gov
22. http:// gmo.gfz-potsdam.de
23. http://www.esrl.noaa.gov
Review
For citations:
Lebedeva E.V., Mikhalev D.V., Shvarev S.V., Gotvansky V.I. TENSION OF GEOMORPHOLOGIC CONDITIONS IN THE MARGINAL MOUNTAIN BELTS OF THE PACIFIC RIM. GEOGRAPHY, ENVIRONMENT, SUSTAINABILITY. 2016;9(3):25-38. https://doi.org/10.15356/2071-9388_03v09_2016_02
Views:
1206
Email this article 