Theoretical and methodological foundations and regional specifics of delineating foothill landscapes as independent geosystems
Abstract
Relevance. The article deals with the solving a fundamental problem in landscape science – substantiating the independent taxonomic status of foothill landscapes as a distinct class of geosystems, which remains a subject of scientific debate. Aim. A comprehensive analysis of the spatial and temporal organization of foothill landscapes based on the synthesis of classical and modern approaches to develop universal diagnostic criteria for their identification and assessment of their role in the sustainable development of mountainous and lowland territories. Methods. Based on the comparative geographical method, a comprehensive analysis of the evolution of theoretical concepts and regional specifics of foothill landscapes in various mountain systems of the world was conducted. The study covers the North Caucasus, the adyrs of the Tien Shan, the Japanese Satoyama, the Alps, the Carpathians, the Andes, the Himalayas, and other regions. Results. The universality of the triadic paradigm (“mountains-foothills-plains") for various physical-geographical conditions is proven. Diagnostic criteria for delineating foothill landscapes have been identified, including morphometric, lithologicalgeomorphological, climatic, and functional parameters. Based on the author’s original research, the spatiotemporal ecotone character of the foothill landscapes of the North-Eastern Caucasus is revealed. A system of diagnostic features has been developed for the objective identification of foothill landscapes. The applied significance of distinguishing foothill landscapes as independent taxonomic units is shown. The necessity of taking into account the ecotonic nature of foothills for landscape planning, rational use of natural resources and the development of adaptive strategies for managing mountainous and lowland territories in the context of global changes is substantiated.
References
Атаев З.В. Пространственно-временная экотонность предгорных ландшафтов Северо-Восточного Кавказа. // Материалы XIII Международной ландшафтной конференции: «Современное ландшафтно-экологическое состояние и проблемы оптимизации природной среды регионов». Воронеж: Истоки, 2018. – С. 84–86.
Гвоздецкий Н.А. Кавказ. М.: Мысль, 1963. – 262 с.
Забураева Х.Ш., Забураев Ч.Ш., Седиева М.Б., Шаипова А.А. Оптимизация рекреационного природопользования на Северо-Восточном Кавказе. // Геология и геофизика Юга России. – 2025. – Т. 15. No 3. – С. 162–173. DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2025.24.29.001.
Исаченко А.Г. Ландшафтоведение и физико-географическое районирование. М.: Высшая школа, 1991. – 366 с.
Коломыц Э.Г. Ландшафтные исследования в переходных зонах: методологический аспект. М.: Наука, 1987. – 115 с.
Костенко Н.П. Геоморфология. М.: МГУ, 1999. – 379 с.
Максютов Ф.А. Барьерные ландшафты СССР. Саратов: Изд-во Саратовского ун-та, 1981. – 140 с.
Мильков Ф.Н. Физическая география: учение о ландшафте и географическая зональность. Воронеж: Изд-во Воронежского ун-та, 1986. – 328 с.
Николаев В.А. Ландшафтные экотоны. // Вестник Московского университета. Серия 5. География. – 2003. – No 6. – С. 3–9.
Преображенский В.С., Александрова Т.Д., Куприянова Т.П. Основы ландшафтного анализа. М.: Наука, 1988. – 192 с.
Симонов Ю.Г. Морфометрический анализ рельефа. Смоленск: СГУ, 1998. – 270 с.
Сочава В.Б. Введение в учение о геосистемах. Новосибирск: Наука, 1978. – 319 с.
Спиридонов А.И. Основы общей методики полевых геоморфологических исследований. М.: Высшая школа, 1970. – 458 с.
Черкашин В.И., Заалишвили В.Б., Мамаев С.А. и др. Геоэкологическое состояние верховьев бассейна реки Аварское Койсу. // Геология и геофизика Юга России. – 2024. – Т. 14. No 4. – С. 100–112. DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2024.77.35.009.
Шальнев В.А. Ландшафты Северного Кавказа. Ставрополь: СГУ, 2004. – 264 с.
Batzing W. The Alps: A story of Europeʼs largest wilderness area. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. – 312 p.
Forman R.Т.Т. Land Mosaics: the ecology of landscapes and regions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. – 632 p.
Gansser A. Geology of the Himalayas. London: Interscience Publishers, 1964. – 289 p.
Hansen A.J., di Castri F. (eds.). Landscape Boundaries: Consequences for Biotic Diversity and Ecological Flows. New York: Springer-Verlag, 1992. – 452 p.
Huggett R.J. Fundamentals of geomorphology. 4th ed. London: Routledge, 2017. – 578 p.
Karpouzoglou T., Dewulf A., Perez K. et al. From present to future development pathways in fragile mountain landscapes. // Environmental Science & Policy. – 2020. – Vol. 114. – pp. 606–613. DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2020.09.016.
Ortiz-Colin P., Hulshof C.M. Ecotones as windows into organismal-to-biome scale responses across neotropical forests. // Plants. – 2024. – Vol. 13. No. 17. – p. 2396. DOI: 10.3390/plants13172396.
Takeuchi K., Brown R.D., Washitani I. et al. Satoyama: the traditional rural landscape of Japan. Tokyo: Springer, 2008. – 229 p.24. Troll C. Geo-ecology of the mountainous regions of the tropical Americas. Bonn: Dummler, 1968. – 321 p.
Walker S., Wilson J.B., Steel J.B. et al. Properties of ecotones: Evidence from five ecotones objectively determined from a coastal vegetation gradient. // Journal of Vegetation Science. – 2003. – Vol. 14. No. 4. – pp. 579–590.
English
Русский
