Landscape Indication Of Permafrost Conditions For Geoecological Assessment & Mapping At Various Scales
Abstract
In this paper, the features of landscape indication of permafrost characteristics required for assessing the environmental state at various research scales are discussed. A number of permafrost characteristics affect the geoecological state and stability of natural landscapes, especially in the context of climate warming and technogenic surface disturbances. These include the distribution, temperature regime, thickness and cryogenic structure of permafrost, seasonal freezing and thawing, as well as the development of cryogenic processes. Their determination through the landscape view, however, is ambiguous. The choice of certain permafrost characteristics for geoecological assessment is based on many years of experience in creating cryo-ecological maps on a landscape basis by the school of Faculty of Geography, Moscow State University. The recent studies on the identification of regional cryoindicators are analyzed, including the issues of cryogenic landscapes classification and clarification of the boundaries of geocryological zones using the landscape structural method. The content of the two maps, «Permafrost Landscape Differentiation Map of the Russia Cryolithozone» at a scale of 1: 15,000,000 and «Permafrost Landscape Map of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia)» at a scale of 1: 1,500,000, is presented, as well as their use as a basis for environmental planning and geoecological assessment.
About the Author
Larisa I. Zotova
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Faculty of Geography
Moscow 119991
References
1. Baranov I. (1960). Geocryological Map of the USSR at a Scale of 1:10,000,000; Explanatory note; Obruchev Permafrost Institute: Moscow, Russia (in Russian).
2. Brown J., Ferrians O., Heginbottom J., Melnikov E. (2002). Circum-Arctic Map of Permafrost and Ground-Ice Conditions, Version 2.; NSIDC—National Snow and Ice Data Center: Boulder, CO, USA.
3. Brown J., Hinkel K., Nelson F. (2000). The circumpolar active layer monitoring (CALM) program: Research designs and initial results. Polar Geogr., 24, 166-258.
4. Chen M., Rowland J., Wilson C., Altmann G., Brumby S. (2013). The importance of natural variability in lake areas on the detection of permafrost degradation: A case study in the Yukon Flats, Alaska. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes, 24, 224-240, DOI: 10.1002/p.1783.
5. Drozdov D., Korostelev Y., Malkova G., Melnikov E. (2003). The set of eco-geologic digital maps of the Timan-Pechora province. In Proceedings of the Permafrost: 8th International Conference on Permafrost, ICOP, Zurich, 21 July–25 July 2003, 205-210.
6. Drozdov D., Malkova G., Romanovskij V., et al. (2018). Digital maps of permafrost zone and estimation of modern first name in the permafrost zone. In Actual Problems of Permafrost; Collection of Reports. 15-16 May 2018, 1. Part 4; KDU University Book: Moscow, Russia, 295-301.
7. Everett K., Webber P., Walker D., Parkinson R., Braun J. (1978). A geoecological mapping scheme for Alaskan coastal tundra. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference of Permafrost, Edmonton, AB, Canada, 10–13 July 1978, 359-365.
8. Fedorov A. (1991). Permafrost landscapes of Yakutia: a method of isolation and mapping issues / A.N. Fedorov. – Yakutsk, 140. (in Russian).
9. Fedorov A., Vasilyev N., Torgovkin Y., Shestakova A., Varlamov S., Zheleznyak M. et al. (2018). Permafrost-landscape map of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) at scale 1:1,500,000. Geosciences, 8, 465, DOI: 10.3390/geosciences8120465.
10. Geocryologic Map of the USSR. Scale 1:2, 500,000 (1997). Yershov E.D., Ed.; State Cartographic Factory: Vinnytsia, Ukraine. (in Russian).
11. Jones B., Grosse G., Arp M., Jones K., Walter A., Romanovsky V. (2011). Modern thermokarst lake dynamics in the continuous permafrost zone, northern Seward Peninsula, Alaska. J. Geophys. Res., 116, G00M03, DOI: 10.1029/2011JG001666.
12. Kizyakov A., Leibman M. (2016). Cryogenic relief formation processes: a Review of 2010-2015 Publications. Earth’s Cryosphere, XX(4), 40-52, DOI: 10.21782/KZ1560-7496-2016-4(45-58).
13. Kravtsova V. and Rodionova T. (2016). Investigation of the dynamics in area and number of thermokarst lakes in various regions of Russian cryolithozone, using satellite images. Earth’s Cryosphere, XX(1), 81-89 (in Russian with English summary).
14. Kravtsova V. and Tarasenko T. (2011). Thermokarst lakes dynamics in Central Yakutia under climate changes since 1950. Earth’s Cryosphere, XV(3), 31-42 (in Russian with English summary).
15. Kudryavtsev V. (1961). Permafrost survey as the main type of permafrost research. In Permafrost Research; MSU: Moscow, Russia, 3-10. (in Russian).
16. Makarycheva E. (2015). Thermokarst phenomenon typification approaches near the southern border of the permafrost zone. In: Engineering Geology for Society and Territory. Vol. 1. Springer International Publishing Switzerland, Torino, 331-334.
17. Maslakov A., Shabanova N., Zamolodchikov D., Volobuev V., Kraev G. (2019). Permafrost degradation within Eastern Chukotka CALM sites in the 21st century based on CMIP5 climate models. Geosciences, 9(5), 232, DOI: 10.3390/geosciences9050232
18. Maslakov A., Zotova L., Komova N., Grishchenko M., Zamolodchikov D., Zelensky G. (2021). Vulnerability of the Permafrost Landscapes in the Eastern Chukotka Coastal Plains to Human Impact and Climate Change. Land, 10, 445, DOI: 10.3390/land10050445.
19. Medvedkov A. (2018). Indication of the state of taiga permfrost landscapes on the southern periphery of cryolithozone under conditions of a changing climate. in: Bulletin of the Moscow Region State University. Series: Natural Sciences, 1, 18-28, DOI: 10.18384/2310-7189-2018-1-18-28.
20. Melnikov E. (1983). Landscapes of the permafrost zone of West-Siberian Gas-Bearing Province; Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia. (in Russian).
21. Melnikov E., Veisman L., Kritsuk L., Moskalenko N., Tagunova L., Todosiichuk I. (1974). Landscape indicators of engineering geocryological condition of the North of the Western Siberia and their interpretive signs. Nedra: Moscow, 132. (in Russian).
22. Moskalenko N. (1999). Anthropogenic dynamics of the plain vegetation within permafrost zone of Russia. Nauka: Novosibirsk, Russia, 280. (in Russian).
23. Osadchaya G. and Tumel N. (2012). Local landscapes as indicators of geocryological zoning (case study: European north-east) Earth’s Cryosphere, XVI(3), 62-71 (in Russian with English summary).
24. Osadchaya G. and Hohlova E. (2013). Optimisations of nature management during the industrial exploitation of territorial resources of Bolshezemelskaya Tundra southern cryolitozone. Earth’s Cryosphere, XVII(3), 35-43 (in Russian with English summary).
25. Osadchaya G., Tumel N., ZenginaT., Lapteva E. (2015). The development of the review Geocryologic Map of Bolshezemelskaya Tundra on the bases of landscape method. In Proceedings of the International Conference «Arctic, Subarctic: mosaic, contrast, variability of the Cryosphere»/V.P.Melnikov and D.S. Drozdov( ed) – Tyumen: Epoha publishing house, 2015, 287-290.
26. Osadchaya G., Tumel N., Koroleva A. (2016). Morphological structure of cryogenic landscapes of the Bolshezemelskaya Tundra. Earth’s Cryosphere, XX(3), 14-23. (in Russian with English summary).
27. Pupyrev M. (2013). Deciphering and indication of modern exogenous processes in permafrost geocryological monitoring // Vestn. Tyum. State University, 4. 67-75 (in Russian with English summary).
28. Rivkin F., Popova A. et al. (2008). Mesoscale and detailed geocryological mapping as a basis for carbon budget assessment (East European Russian Arctic, CARBO-North Project). 9th International Conference on Permafrost, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Volume 2,1493-1498
29. Shestakova A. (2011). Mapping of the permafrost landscapes taking into account vegetation succession. Ph.D. Thesis, Permafrost Institute, Yakutsk, Russia. (in Russian).
30. Shpolyanskaya N. and Zotova L. (1994). Map of potential landscapes stability of Western Siberia Cryolithozone; Moscow University Bulletin, Series 5. Geography; Moscow University Press: Moscow, Russia, 56-5. (in Russian with English summary).
31. Torgovkin Ya. (2005). Landscape indication and mapping of the river Lena permafrost conditions. Ph.D. Thesis, Permafrost Institute, Yakutsk, Russia. (in Russian).
32. Tumel N. and Koroleva N. (2008). Permafrost-landscape differentiation Russian permafrost zone as the basis of ecological and geological studies. Eng. Geol. 2, 11-14. (in Russian).
33. Tumel N. and Koroleva N. (2017). Ecological Atlas of Russia; LLC Feoriya: Moscow, Russia, 183-188, ISBN 978-5-91796-034-0. (in Russian).
34. Tumel N. and Zotova L. (2019). Diagnostics and Mapping of Geoecological Situations in the Permafrost Zone of Russia. Geosciences, 9, 353, DOI: 10.3390/geosciences9080353.
35. Tumel N. and Zotova L. (2017). Permafrost Geoecology: Training Aid for Bachelors and Masters, 2nd ed.; Yurite: Moscow, Russia, 2017, 220, ISBN 978-5-534-04227-6. (in Russian).
36. Tumel V. (1945). About permafrost survey. Izv. AN USSR Ser. Geogr. Geophys. 9, 135-144. (in Russian).
37. Tyrtikov A. (1969). Vegetation cover influence on freezing and thawing of soils Moscow: Moscow State University Publishing House, 192. (in Russian).
38. Ukraintseva N., Drozdov D., et al. (2011). Landscape indication of local variability of permafrost properties (Urengoyskoye field in Western Siberia). Earth,s Cryosphere, XV(4), 37-40. (in Russian).
39. Victorov A., Kapralova V., Trapeznikova O. (2015). Mathematical model of the thermokarst lake plain morphostructure under changing climatic conditions. Earth’s Cryosphere, XIX(2), 23-31.
40. Viktorov S. and Chikishev A. (1990). Landscape indication and its practical application. Moscow: Moscow State University Publishing House, 200. (in Russian).
41. Wu X., Nan Z., Cheng G., Zhao S. (2018). Spatial modeling of permafrost distribution and properties on the Qinghai-Tibet Platea. Permafr. Periglac. Process. 29, 86-99, DOI: 10.1002/ppp.1971.
42. Zou D., Zhao L., Sheng Y., Chen J., Wu T., Wu, J., Xie C., Wu X., Pang Q., Wang W., et al. (2017). A new map of permafrost distribution on the Tibetan Plateau. Cryosphere, 11, 2527-2542.
Review
Supporting agencies: This study was supported by State Assignment «The cryosphere evolution under climate change and anthropogenic impact» No. 121051100164-0 and Russian Foundation for Basic Research No. 18-05-60080. The author expresses deep gratitude to Nelly Tumel for ideas, guidance and many years of collaboration. Many thanks to editors and anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments that improved the manuscript.
For citation:
Zotova L.I. Landscape Indication Of Permafrost Conditions For Geoecological Assessment & Mapping At Various Scales. GEOGRAPHY, ENVIRONMENT, SUSTAINABILITY. 2021;14(4):33-40. https://doi.org/10.24057/2071-9388-2021-039
Views: 253
Email this article 