Using GIS for mapping the Great Eurasian Natural Backbone

DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2020-4-26-5-19

View or download the article (Rus)

About the Authors

Nikolay A. Sobolev

Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Staromonetniy lane, 29, 119017, Moscow, Russia,
E-mail: sobolev_nikolas@igras.ru

Arkady A. Tishkov

Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Staromonetniy lane, 29, 119017, Moscow, Russia,
E-mail: tishkov@igras.ru

Elena A. Belonovskaya

Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Staromonetniy lane, 29, 119017, Moscow, Russia,
E-mail: belena@igras.ru

Petr M. Glazov

Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Staromonetniy lane, 29, 119017, Moscow, Russia,
E-mail: glazpech@igras.ru

Konstantin N. Kobyakov

WWF Russia,
Nikoloyamskaya str., 19, bldg 3, 109240, Moscow, Russia,
E-mail: kkobyakov@wwf.ru

Dmitryi B. Koltsov

Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Staromonetniy lane, 29, 119017, Moscow, Russia,
E-mail: dmkoltsov@gmail.com

Alexander N. Krenke

Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Staromonetniy lane, 29, 119017, Moscow, Russia,
E-mail: krenke-igras@yandex.ru

Maria V. Sementsova

K.A. Timiryazev Institute of Plant Physiology, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Botanicheskaya str., 35, 127276, Moscow, Russia,
E-mail: guara2004@yandex.ru

Svetlana V. Titova

Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences,
Staromonetniy lane, 29, 119017, Moscow, Russia,
E-mail: canopuss@yandex.ru

Abstract

The article presents the results of the first two stages of the project on the assessment and mapping changes in the state of the Great Eurasian Natural Tract (GEANT) as a factor of global environmental stability and a source of ecosystem services carried out in the Laboratory for Biogeography of the Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences. We consider biomes or their integrated parts as units of ecosystem cover. An assessment of the state of the natural frame within each biome is given by a combination of losses in size and phytomass of natural ecosystems. GIS analysis of remote sensing data of the study area is carried out basing the concept of actual biogeography. Field verification is carried out by the method of rapid long-distance observations, which allows collecting data on large territories with an accuracy sufficient for the project. Key natural areas are mapped by summarizing data on specially protected and other natural areas for which their high conservation value is showed. The space between the key areas is considered as connecting areas (“corridors”), from which settlements, mining areas and other transformed landscapes are excluded.

GEANT is mapped as an integrated biome complex from Fennoscandia to the Pacific. Several biomes are included in the southern edge of the GEANT in only a small part. We identified biomes the most changed as a result of mining, logging, and fires. Biomes are noted with the most significant spread to the north of woody-shrubby vegetation and a rose up of the upper border of the forest distribution. By contrary, in the south of Primorye the lower border of the primary forest distribution rose up because of frequent fires.

The strategic principles of the territorial conservation are formulated for biomes depending on the stage of digression of the natural frame. A basis has established for the quantification of GEANT ecosystem services at the final stage of work.

Keywords

natural frame, natural ecosystems, biome, territorial conservation, human impact

References

  1. Aksenov D., Dobrynin D., Dubinin M., Egorov A., Isaev A., Karpachevsky M., Laestadius L., Potapov P., Purekhovsky A., Turubanova S., Yaroshenko A. Atlas of Russia’s intact forest landscapes. Moscow, 2002. 187 p. (English version).
  2. Aksenov D.E., Dubinin M.Yu., Karpachevsky M.L., Liksakova N.S., Skvortsov V.E., Smirnov D.Yu., Yanitskaya T.O. Idenifying high conservation value forests in Primorsky Krai. Categories important for the conservation of vegetation biodiversity. Moscow: Publishing House of International Socio-Ecological Union, 2006. 186 p. (in Russian).
  3. Biomes of Russia. Map in the scale 1 : 7 500 000. Moscow: Russian Geographical Society; Faculty of Geography of Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov. 2015. 1 p. (in Russian).
  4. Current state of forests in the Russian Far East and prospects for their use. Khabarovsk: FEFRI, 2009. 470 p. (in Russian).
  5. Dobrynin A.P. Oak forests of the Russian Far East (biology, geography, origin). Vladivostok: Dalnauka, 2000. 259 p. (in Russian).
  6. Fedorov A.N., Konstantinov P.Y., Vasilyev N.F., Shestakova A.A. The influence of boreal forest dynamics on the current state of permafrost in Central Yakutia. Polar Science, 2019. V. 22. P. 100483.
  7. Intact forest landscapes in Russia: current condition and losses over the last 13 years. Map in the scale 1 : 10 500 000. Moscow: World Wildlife Fund (WWF Russia), 2015. 1 p. (English version).
  8. Ivashkevich B.A. Far Eastern forests and their industrial future. Khabarovsk: Dalgiz, 1933. 168 p. (in Russian).
  9. Kurentsova G.E., Shemetova N.S. Post-fire changes in the forests of Primorsky Krai. Dynamics of vegetation in the south of the Far East. Vladivostok: Far Eastern Scientific Center, Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1985. P. 98–104 (in Russian).
  10. Latitudinal and altitudinal zones of vegetation of Russia and adjacent territories. Map in the scale 1 : 8 000 000. Explanatory text and map legend. Moscow: ECOR, 1999. 2 + 62 p. (in Russian).
  11. Rosenberg V.A., Kolesnikov B.P. Sprout tree-shrubbery thickets in forest poor regions of the Primorsky Krai. Transactions of the Far Eastern Branch of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR. Botanical series. Vladivostok, 1958. V. 4 (6). P. 5–46 (in Russian).
  12. Sidorova M., Chebyshev F., Trifonova P. Shortage of wood raw materials came in Russia. Forest industry, 2016. No 12 (104). 1 p. (in Russian).
  13. Sobolev N.A. Ecological backbone of Russia. Indicative scheme. Moscow: Publishing House of the Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2015. 16 p. (in Russian).
  14. Sobolev N.A., Rousseau B.Yu. Start position of the ECONET in Northern Eurasia. Ecological network in Northern Eurasia. Moscow: Biodiversity Conservation Center of the Socio-Ecological Union, 1998. P. 17–28 (English version).
  15. Tishkov A.A. Actual biogeography of Northern Eurasia. Actual issues of biogeography. Saint-Petersburg: Saint-Petersburg State University, 2018. P. 406–409 (in Russian).
  16. Yelsakov V.V. Spatial and interannual heterogeneity of changes in the vegetation cover of the tundra zone in Eurasia based on MODIS 2000–2016 survey data. Modern problems of remote sensing, 2017. V. 14. No 6. P. 56-72. DOI: 10.21046/2070-7401-2017-14-6-56-72 (in Russian).

For citation: Sobolev N.A., Tishkov A.A., Belonovskaya E.A., Glazov P.M., Kobyakov K.N., Koltsov D.B., Krenke A.N., Sementsova M.V., Titova S.V. Using GIS for mapping the Great Eurasian Natural Backbone. InterCarto. InterGIS. GI support of sustainable development of territories: Proceedings of the International conference. Moscow: Moscow University Press, 2020. V. 26. Part 4. P. 5–19. DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2020-4-26-5-19 (in Russian)