Fairy tales

Local geosystems as the main objects of field research. The structure of the landscape shell. Examples of paragenetic geosystems

All objects studied by landscape science are united by the concept of "geosystem" or natural-territorial complex (NTC). The geosystem encompasses all natural geographical units, from the geographic envelope of the Earth to the simplest, elementary structures. A geosystem is not a simple combination of components, but a complex, integral material formation with a certain organization of the Earth's matter. A geosystem is a spatio-temporal system of geographic components that are interdependent in their location and develop as a whole. The object of study of landscape science is geosystems of different levels. The term "geosystem" implies a special systemic essence of an object, its belonging to systems expressed in a universal form of nature organization. All nature is a system organization, consisting of systems of different types and orders. The system concept reflects the general interconnection and interaction of objects and natural phenomena. Therefore, the geosystem should be considered as a system of a special class, a high level of organization, with a complex structure and mutual conditioning of components that obey common laws. If a landscape is understood as a real, diverse natural object, then a system is its structured, concise image. The relationship between landscape and geosystem is approximately the same as between a natural process and its mathematical description. Any geosystem has the following features: it consists of a set of interconnected elements; is part of another, larger system; consists of lower level subsystems.

The concept of "landscape"

In modern scientific practice of landscape science, landscape is the main unit in the hierarchy of natural territorial complexes. This category of geosystems is of great importance for ordering various factors in landscape science and in developing its theoretical foundations. As a unit of dimension, the landscape occupies a special place, as it is located at the junction of regional and local geosystems. In the system of physiographic zoning ordered from top to bottom, the landscape represents the limiting, lowest step in the system of regional differentiation of the epigeosphere. The combination of landscapes in accordance with regional laws forms regional units of higher ranks: landscape district, landscape province, landscape region, landscape country, landscape zone. The zonal and azonal homogeneity of the landscape is manifested in the unity of the geological foundation, the type of relief and climate. This homogeneity determines the genetic unity of the landscape.

In accordance with the regional interpretation, the landscape is understood as a specific individual and unique natural-territorial complex that has a geographical name and an exact position on the map.

In addition to the regional interpretation of the landscape, the theoretical concept of landscape science calls landscape a specific territorial unit, consisting of several elementary geographical units. The landscape is the main step in the hierarchy of local geosystems with a strictly limited set of simple natural territorial complexes: facies, substows, stows, localities, considered as morphological parts of the landscape.

Thus, on the one hand, any landscape, as a result of the development and differentiation of the geographical shell, is simultaneously an element of more complex regional unities of higher structural divisions. On the other hand, it represents a specific territorial combination of local features of nature. The unity of these two approaches (from above and below) to the landscape made it possible to solve the problem of the homogeneity and heterogeneity of the landscape.

The landscape is defined in the same way as a single genetic system, homogeneous in terms of zonal and azonal features and including a specific set of conjugated local geosystems.

To isolate an independent landscape, it is necessary to consider the following diagnostic features: the territory on which the landscape is formed must have a homogeneous geological foundation; after the formation of the geological foundation, the subsequent development of the landscape in its space should be homogeneous, as well as the composition of the rocks; the local climate throughout the landscape should be the same; the genetic type of relief must be kept alone. Under such conditions, a strictly defined set of landforms, local geosystems, is formed on the territory of each landscape, which are considered as morphological parts of the landscape.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

STATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION OF HIGHER PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION

"MORDOVA STATE UNIVERSITY

THEM. N.P. OGAREVA"

in the discipline "Landscape science"

on the topic: "The structure of the landscape shell"

Completed: student 302 gr.,

specialty "Geoecology" Roik I.V.

Checked by: Moskaleva S.A.

Saransk 2011

Introduction

3. Facies - an elementary natural geosystem

4. Tracts and geographical areas

6. Morphological structure of landscapes

9. Landscape catenas and their functional links

Conclusion

Introduction

The word "landscape", which gave the name to an entire branch of geographical science, was originally used to denote the general idea of an interconnected combination of various phenomena on the earth's surface, and for a long time the concept of landscape did not have an unambiguous scientific interpretation with a strictly limited scope. With the accumulation of data on the complexity of the territorial structure of the geographic envelope and the development of ideas about the different levels of its internal organization, the need to streamline the system of natural territorial complexes and, in connection with this, the very concept of landscape became increasingly urgent.

Landscape space envelops our entire planet. The landscape sphere is a place for the transformation of solar energy into various types of terrestrial energy, an environment most favorable for the development of life. The landscape shell, although it is a relatively small part of the geographic shell in terms of volume, is the most complexly organized, heterogeneous, energetically the most active and the most important in ecological terms. On the scale of the entire planet, the landscape shell looks like a thin living "skin" on the Earth's body - a contact film, the Earth's planetary ecotone.

The landscape shell in the course of its long evolution gave rise to mankind, for thousands of years it was the cradle of its civilization and now it is the sphere of human habitation and the object of its labor. Over time, the landscape shell became anthropogenic, technogenic, and, finally, as A. Humboldt believed, V.I. Vernadsky, P. Florensky, - intellectual and spiritual.

1. Hierarchical structure of the landscape shell

The structure of the landscape envelope involves natural geosystems of various spatio-temporal scales. From the largest and longest-lived formations of oceans and continents to small and highly variable ones, like a sandbank on a river bank. From small to large, they constitute a multistage system of taxa, called the hierarchy of natural geosystems.

According to the methodological "rule of the triad", each natural geosystem must be studied not only on its own, but necessarily as breaking down into subordinate structural elements and at the same time as part of a higher natural unity.

Several variants of taxonomic classification of natural geosystems are proposed. Of course, all of them are only an approximate reflection of reality. At the suggestion of E. Neef and V.B. Sochava, the multi-stage hierarchy of natural geosystems is usually divided into three large departments: planetary, regional and local.

At first glance, the hierarchy of geosystems is perceived as a model of the spatial organization of the landscape envelope. In fact, its essence is deeper. It sees the dialectical unity of landscape space-time. Each higher in the hierarchy natural geosystem is, in relation to the lower ones, embracing not only spatially, but also historically, evolutionarily, as older in age.

At the same time, hierarchical subordination develops into spatio-temporal, structural-evolutionary. For example, a zonal region (a natural zone within a physiographic country) is usually older than its constituent landscapes. And landscapes are more durable than their morphological units.

2. Geosystems of planetary, regional and local dimensions

In 1963, V.B.Sochava proposed to call objects studied by physical geography geosystems. The concept of "geosystem" covers the entire hierarchical range of natural geographical units - from the geographical shell to its elementary structural divisions.

The planetary level is represented on Earth in a single copy - a geographical shell. The shortest and most precise term is the epigeosphere.

Geosystems of the regional level include large and rather complex structural units of the epigeosphere - physical-geographical, or landscape, zones, sectors, countries, provinces, etc.

The systems of the local level are understood as relatively simple NTCs, from which regional geosystems are built - the so-called tracts, facies, and some others.

Thus, we can define landscape science as a branch of physical geography, the subject of which is the study of geosystems at the regional and local levels as structural parts of the epigeosphere (geographic envelope). The epigeosphere has both the properties of continuity (continuity) and discontinuity (discreteness). The continuity of the epigeosphere is due to the interpenetration of its components, the flows of energy and matter, their global circulations, i.e. integration processes. Discreteness is a manifestation of the processes of differentiation of matter and energy of the epigeosphere, a certain internal structuring of individual parts that perform their functions as part of the whole.

3. Facies as an elementary geosystem

geosystem chorion caten facies landscape

The elementary unit of the morphological structure of the landscape is considered to be the natural geosystem of the rank of facies. Of course, the recognition of its simplest component of the landscape is to a certain extent conditional. But the grounds for considering it a landscape "atom" are strong enough. They follow from the very concept of facies.

In the geographical literature, the term facies was introduced in the 30s by L. G. Ramensky. Facies they called a pack of sedimentary rock, characterized by the same lithology and similar organic remains. Facies often denoted not only relatively homogeneous geological bodies, but also the physical and geographical conditions in which they were formed. By analogy with the geological understanding of facies, L. G. Ramensky suggested using the term in landscape science. He considers facies as the smallest unit of the landscape, the entire territory of which is characterized by the same type of origin and ecological regime. Somewhat later, the term "facies" for use in the same sense was recommended by L. S. Berg. After N.A. Solntsev developed the theory of landscape morphology, the concept of facies as an elementary natural geosystem was universally recognized.

Facies is the only natural geosystem characterized by complete homogeneity. Throughout the area it occupies, the vertical structure of geohorizons is the same. In the characterization of the natural components that make up the facies, the refrain is a sign of homogeneity, uniformity. According to N.A. Solntsev, within the facies, the same lithology of surface rocks, the same nature of relief and moisture, and one biocenosis are preserved.

However, landscape space, according to the general systemic law of necessary diversity, is structurally differentiated. Complete natural uniformity is preserved on the ground only in very small areas. Therefore, the facies are small. Territorial connection of facies with nano- and microforms of relief is traced everywhere.

Facies connected with each other by horizontal material-energy flows form the surrounding geosystems. Unlike intercomponent vertical (radial) bonds, interfacial bonds are called lateral (or lateral). They can be caused by various factors - gravitational forces, the transfer of air masses, biogenic migration of matter, etc. As a result, facies are integrated into several environmental geosystems that are different in nature and genesis, which leads to the polystructurality of the landscape space. Theoretical ideas about landscape polystructurality were outlined in the works of K.G. Ramana and V.N. Solntseva. Their essence lies in the recognition of the possible coexistence in the same landscape space of several heterogeneous geosystem formations at once.

Distinctive features of a facies as an elementary geosystem are dynamism, relative instability and fragility. These properties follow from the openness of the facies, its dependence on the flows of matter and energy coming from adjacent facies and leaving for other facies. Within a facies, the impact of biota on the abiotic environment is much more tangible than on the scale of the entire landscape.

The mobility and relative fragility of the facies means that the connections between its components are subject to constant disruption.

The huge variety of facies determines the relevance of their systematization.

When classifying facies, it is necessary to proceed from such criteria that are of decisive importance in the formation of facies and are universal in nature, i.e. are applicable, if not to all, then to the vast majority of landscapes, moreover, these should be some stable features of the facies. These conditions are met by the location as an element of the orographic profile. As is known, the most important differences between facies are due to their position in a series of conjugate locations. Facies regularly replace each other along the profile of the relief against the general zonal-azonal background of this landscape. Therefore, it is important to establish the main types of deposits, which, in the conditions of each particular landscape, must correspond to certain types of facies.

4. Tracts and other morphological units of the landscape

The term tract was introduced into scientific use by L. G. Ramensky. It is borrowed from the vernacular, in which it denotes an area that is different in nature from the surrounding area.

A tract is a conjugated system of facies, united by a common direction of physical and geographical processes and confined to one mesoform of relief on a homogeneous substrate. They are most clearly expressed in the conditions of a dissected relief with alternation of convex ("positive") and concave ("negative") forms of mesorelief - hills and basins, ridges and hollows, interravine uplands and ravines, etc.

The tract is an important intermediate step in the geosystemic hierarchy between facies and landscape. It usually serves as the main subject of field landscape photography.

A suburochishche is an intermediate unit, a group of facies identified within the same tract on the slopes of different exposures, if exposure contrasts create different variants of the facies series.

Depending on the degree of their participation in the structure of the landscape, dominant, subdominant, rare and unique morphological units are distinguished. Most often, the landscape-forming role of tracts is assessed in this way. The dominant tracts, occupying most of the landscape area (60 - 80%), form its general background. The total area of subdominant tracts regularly repeating in space usually does not exceed 20-40% of the landscape area. Against the general background, they form a "drawing, pattern" of the landscape. Rare stows form particular details of this pattern, occur sporadically and occupy less than 10% of the landscape area. Unique tracts are rare.

If in the morphological structure of the landscape only one type of natural tracts plays the role of the dominant one, the landscape is defined as monodominant. An example is the steppe landscapes of the socle interfluve plains of the southern Trans-Urals. Their morphology is absolutely dominated by loess-loamy plains with forb-grass steppes on chernozems. The subdominant role here is played by solonetz-steppe lithogenic complexes of gently sloping near-valley slopes, on which kaolinite clays of the ancient weathering crust were exposed by denudation. Rare, but characteristic of this landscape are the stows of single shrub-steppe hills with outcrops of rocks of the Paleozoic basement.

If the morphological structure of the landscape is equally represented by two or more tracts - co-dominants, the landscape is defined as polydominant. The forest-steppe landscapes of the West Siberian Plain can be attributed to the number of polydominant ones. On the low-lying poorly drained interfluve areas, tracts of western birch and aspen-birch forests, called kolki, and meadow-steppe spaces between koloks naturally alternate here. The former account for up to 40% of the landscape area; the latter occupy about 50%. The rest of the area is occupied by marshy meadows, meadow solonchaks and salt licks.

The classification of tracts is developed on the basis of specific regional material in the process of compiling large- and medium-scale landscape maps. As a rule, the taxonomy of mesorelief forms is taken as the starting point, taking into account their genesis, morphographic type, and position in the local runoff system. Thus, the relief is taken into account in close connection with natural drainage and moisture.

As for the concept of "geographical locality", it has not yet received a sufficiently clear definition in the landscape literature. In the most general form, the largest morphological part of the landscape is considered as a geographical area, characterized by a special combination of the main tracts of this landscape.

Complementing the above definition, it should be emphasized that a geographic area is always associated not with one mesoform of relief, but with a morphogenetic combination of them. The most important integrating factors for the area are the positional unity within the framework of one or another element of the relief macroform and the associated paragenesis of the tracts that compose it. On the elevated plains of European Russia in the forest-steppe zone, the following areas are identified: upland meadow-steppe; slope near-valley with upland oak forests and ravine-beam network; floodplain-terraced pine forest; floodplain forest-meadow. Geographical area serves as a link between local geosystems of the rank of stows, substows and landscape. In the course of specific studies, it is not always possible to draw a clear line between the landscape itself and the geographical area.

5. Landscape - regional system

A landscape can be defined as a genetically unified geosystem that is homogeneous in terms of zonal and azonal features and contains a specific set of conjugated local geosystems.

There are other, but rather close, definitions that focus on certain features of the landscape. But due to the necessary brevity, any definition indicates only the most important distinguishing features of the object and does not reveal all its complexity. Therefore, landscape definition is usually accompanied by a list of additional diagnostic features or conditions that seem to be particularly significant.

So, according to N.A. Solntsev, the following basic conditions are necessary for the isolation of an independent landscape:

1) the territory on which the landscape is formed must have a homogeneous geological foundation;

2) after the formation of the foundation, the subsequent history of the development of the landscape throughout its entire space should have proceeded in the same way (in a single landscape, for example, it is impossible to combine two areas, one of which was covered by a glacier and the other was not, or one was subjected to marine transgression, while the other remained outside it );

3) the climate is the same throughout the landscape and under any change in climatic conditions it remains uniform (inside the landscape, only changes in local climates are observed - in tracts and microclimates - in facies).

Under such conditions, as N.A. Solntsev, a strictly limited set of sculptural landforms, reservoirs, soils, biocenoses and, ultimately, simple natural territorial complexes - tracts and facies, are created on the territory of each landscape, considered as morphological parts of the landscape.

In the definition of N.A. Solntsev emphasizes that the landscape is a regularly constructed system of local NTCs, and this is very important. However, on the other hand, any landscape is at the same time a part, or an element, of more complex regional unities, and it should be considered as the result of the development and differentiation of the geographical envelope and its higher structural divisions. The unity of these two features of the landscape determines its specific nodal position in the hierarchy of geosystems. The combination of two approaches to the landscape - "from below" and "from above" - allows us to solve the problem of landscape uniformity, which has long served as a stumbling block in its definition and isolation in nature. Since the landscape is divided into various facies and tracts, it is, of course, internally heterogeneous.

However, this does not exclude the homogeneity of the landscape in relation to certain strictly formulated criteria. These criteria are primarily zonal and azonal conditions, in respect of which the landscape must be homogeneous. The zonal-azonal homogeneity of the landscape finds its expression in the unity of the geological foundation, type of relief and climate; it also determines the genetic unity of the landscape, since the process of landscape development proceeds under the same external conditions. Finally, this implies a single plan for the internal structure of the landscape: the diversity of its morphological parts does not mean that this diversity is disordered; on the contrary, if all the above conditions are met, the set of facies and tracts of each particular landscape is regular and specific. Each landscape has a characteristic conjugated series of facies and tracts arranged in a certain order.

6. Morphological structure of the landscape

The landscape is considered as a complex organized system. Its morphological structure is understood as:

1. The composition of natural geosystems of local dimension that make up the landscape, called morphological units of the landscape.

2. mutual arrangement of morphological units in space, i.e. territorial organization of the landscape.

3. paragenetic conjugation of morphological units.

4. lateral energy-mass transfer between landscape units.

The role of morphological units is played by facies, sub-stows, stows, geographic areas. In connection with the varying degree of their participation in the structure of the landscape, dominant, subdominant, rare and unique landscapes are distinguished.

If in the morphological structure of the landscape only 1 type of natural tracts plays the role of the dominant landscape, the landscape is defined as monodominant.

In each landscape, the morphological units that compose it are spatially organized in a certain way. They naturally replace each other. As a result, the territorial (planned) arrangement of the landscape acquires one pattern or another. This property should be called landscape texture. In the vast majority of cases, the landscape texture depends on the features of its lithogenic base. The main factor that forms it is the relief. There are relatively few landscape textures: dendritic, pinnate, spotted, cellular, parallel-banded, fan-shaped, concentric, etc.

7. Nuclear geosystems - landscape chorions

When around powerful natural or anthropogenic bodies or geosystems, as specific matter-energy nuclei, systems of high-voltage fields are formed that significantly change adjacent landscapes, the so-called nuclear paragenetic geosystems are distinguished (according to A.Yu. Reteyum and V.A. Nikolaev). The nuclear geosystem consists of a landscape or anthropogenic core with a large material and energy potential and boundary layers (geographical fields) surrounding it, interconnected by lateral connections. The most striking examples of paragenetic systems of this type can be: a volcano and surrounding lava and ash fields with specific landscape complexes formed on them; ore bodies with fields of their geochemical anomalies; cities, industrial sites, quarries for the extraction of minerals with their fields of influence on adjacent natural and economic systems. If the core of nuclear geosystems has a particularly powerful anthropogenic impact on adjacent landscapes (for example, Magnitogorsk, Norilsk, powerful state district power plants, the emergency Chernobyl nuclear power plant), then such nuclear geotechnical systems are called impact geotechnical systems. (A typical example is the Chernobyl nuclear power plant with a zone of radioactive contamination) Systematic observations of the state of the natural environment in such zones of strong (shock - impact) impact are called impact monitoring.

Chorion is a geosystem that obeys nuclear laws. The nuclear laws are subject to: the solar system as a whole, the globe with its characteristic geoshells, the landscape sphere and its constituent structural elements - physical and geographical countries, provinces, landscapes, tracts, facies. The nucleus, as a rule, has an increased material-energy and informational potential, which allows it to create shells (fields) of lateral influence. The functions of the core can be performed by tectonic structures, landforms, reservoirs, strata of ground and underground ice, plant communities, animal colonies and other natural objects. Each natural geosystem, whether it be a facies, a tract, a landscape, and other physical and geographical units, also plays the role of the core of the chorion, forming a number of shells along the periphery - landscape and geographical fields.

8. Landscape - geographical fields

Landscape geofields - the spheres of material and energy influence of some geosystems on others, are a kind of paragenetic geosystems. Any bodies, including geosystems, have a greater or lesser area and intensity of influence on adjacent geosystems by the field (local, regional, global). For example, geofields have lake reservoirs, seas, oceans. They manifest themselves in breeze and monsoon circulation, temperature conditions in coastal areas, in groundwater levels, tidal phenomena, etc. The barrier effect of mountains on atmospheric circulation is manifested both at the windward foothills of the mountains and behind the mountain barrier, in the circulation shadow. There are landscape geofields of local dimensions near the ravine tract, which is manifested in the drainage of the adjacent NTCs. At the island broad-leaved forest or birch grove in the forest-steppe, the geofield is fixed in the accumulation of snow on the windward side, better moistening and cooling of the surface air of the adjacent territories, and seed dispersal. Fields can be of different nature: geophysical, geochemical, hydrogeological, biogenic. Examples: mountain barrier - geophysical field (barrier shadow or orographic sharpening of precipitation). A birch split and even a separate bush in the forest-steppe and steppe zones also create their own geophysical fields in the wind and solar shadow. The geochemical field has a solonchak or drained solonchak areas of the bottoms of salty reservoirs in arid zones (the Aral Sea, Lake Baskunchak), industrial enterprises with smoke emissions and ash dumps. Biogenic fields of natural forest “microreserves” among arable lands can manifest themselves in an increase in the number of pollinating insects, birds, and more intensive seed dispersal. When designing economic objects, it should be taken into account that different geofields overlap each other and affect adjacent geosystems. For example, the geofields of reservoirs and canals interact with the fields of hydrogeological flooding spaces at distances from hundreds of meters to tens of kilometers (the Karakum Canal is a field of up to 50 km). Cities and industrial enterprises create geochemical and geophysical fields around them. The geochemical fields of large cities are well traced within a radius of 15-20 km around cities, and for individual pollutants even in a much larger radius. The geochemical field of thermal power plants is fixed around them within a radius of 5 to 30 km or more. The thermal field of Moscow leads to earlier (by 1-2 weeks) snowmelt in the nearest suburbs of Moscow than in more remote areas. Taking into account the fields of influence, ecological zoning of industrial territories is carried out, ameliorative systems of field-protective forest plantations, drainage, drainage, watering, etc. are designed. Usually, the strength of the impact, and hence the strength of the fields, weakens inversely with the square of the distance from the geosystems that form these fields.

9. Landscape catenas

Landscape catenas are a series of natural complexes conjugated by relief elements from watersheds to local or regional erosion bases, united by unidirectional lateral connections into a single paragenetic system (Nikolaev V.A., 1990). For example, the conjugation of facies ranges from automorphic (eluvial) at the top of the hill to superaqueous and subaqueous (accumulative) in depressions at the foot of the hill, united by lateral connections. In landscape-geochemical terminology, this is a geochemical landscape (vector geosystem). In the landscape catena, the unifying system is the factors - surface, subsoil and ground liquid, solid and ionic runoff. In landscape catenas, heterogeneous geocomplexes are, as it were, strung with their parts on a single core of a material-energy flow. A conjugated series of elementary landscapes (according to 5.5. Polynov and M.A. Glazovskaya) or facies - landscape catena (according to V.A. Nikolaev): 1 - the flow of matter into the geosystem from the atmosphere, groundwater; 2 - the removal of matter from the geosystem into the atmosphere, groundwater with surface runoff. Each landscape or physiographic region is characterized by certain types of catenas. Within the catena, one can usually distinguish three links confined to different tiers or steps of the relief: eluvial-denudation (uppermost), transit intermediate, accumulative (lowermost). It is they who determine the cascade structure of catenas. So, the landscape catena as a vector, cascade geosystem is characterized by a certain direction of change in the properties of its constituent geosystem links. The upper links of the catenas are characterized by zonal solar energy, denudation (a set of processes of demolition and removal of rock weathering products from a hill with their subsequent accumulation in relief depressions), eluvial processes (in which weathering products remain in their place of formation), atmospheric humidification, and during agricultural erosion hazard and lack of fertility. The middle links of the catenas are transit, with solar-exposure and gravitational energy, atmospheric-sewage humidification. They are characterized by increased erosion hazard and soil depletion in plant nutrients. The lower links of the catenas are solar energy plus the energy of introduced biogens, atmospheric-sinter moisture, often groundwater, increased fertility and the danger of anthropogenic pollution. Conjugations from several tracts, localities, landscapes form landscape catenas of the regional level, for example, from the watersheds of the Greater Caucasus to the Black Sea or the watershed of the Volga Upland to the Volgograd reservoir. Under anthropogenic impacts, various links of landscape catenas react differently to anthropogenic loads. As a result, natural-anthropogenic landscape-ecological catenas of various types are formed in the zones of influence. For example, when landscapes are used for arable soil of the upper sections of the catena, especially of the slope (transit) link, soils can be intensively eroded, and in the lower (accumulative) link, on the contrary, fine earth transferred from the upper geocomplexes and elements of mineral plant nutrition, as well as pollutants, accumulate. This should be taken into account when planning economic activities and nature protection.

Conclusion

Having qualitatively characterized the landscape space and analyzed the topic of the essay, we came to understand a special earthly body - the landscape shell (sphere).

According to F.N. Milkov, the landscape sphere as part of the geographic shell forms a central, very thin layer, which, in terms of saturation with organic life, is the biological focus of the geographic shell of the Earth.

The landscape sphere is a set of landscape complexes lining the land, oceans and ice sheets. With the direct participation or under the control of living organisms, many processes of energy and mass transfer take place here, resulting in specific landscape bodies that cannot arise and exist in any other conditions. These are flora and fauna, soils, weathering crusts, sedimentary rocks (including many minerals of supergene origin), landscape waters and surface (landscape) air.

As a result, we come to the conclusion that the landscape shell, although it is a relatively small part of the geographic shell, is the most complexly organized, heterogeneous, energetically the most active and the most important in ecological terms. In a generalized form, its definition can be as follows: the landscape shell is a thin surface (near-surface) layer of the geographic shell, its "core", representing the zone of contact and active energy-mass exchange of the lithosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere and biosphere, fed by the radiant energy of the Sun and the energy of the intraterrestrial origin, the sphere of the highest concentration of life on Earth, the origin, development and modern existence of mankind and earthly civilization.

List of used literature

1. Armand D.L. Landscape science. M.: Thought, 1975.

2. Martsinkevich G.I., Klitsunova N.K., Motuzko A.N. Fundamentals of landscape science: Textbook. Minsk: Higher School, 1986.

3. Milkov F.N. Physical geography: The doctrine of the landscape and geographical zonality. Voronezh: Publishing House of Voronezh University, 1986.

4. Nikolaev V.A. Problems of regional landscape science. M.: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1979.

Hosted on Allbest.ru

The concept of landscape

The word "landscape", which gave the name to an entire branch of geographical science, was originally used to denote the general idea of an interconnected combination of various phenomena on the earth's surface, and for a long time the concept of landscape did not have an unambiguous scientific interpretation with a strictly limited scope. This long tradition is still reflected in the general understanding of the landscape, which is often found in literature (mainly in non-professional). The outdated "general" idea of the landscape, when one speaks of both the "landscape of a group of mushrooms in the forest" and the "landscape of the Russian Plain", is hardly acceptable for modern scientific use.

With the accumulation of data on the complexity of the territorial structure of the geographic envelope and the development of ideas about the different levels of its internal organization, the need to streamline the system of natural territorial complexes and, in connection with this, the very concept of landscape became increasingly urgent. The historical outline (see Chapter 1) has already described the main stages of this process. Recall that back in the 1930s, attempts to introduce a strict content into the term "landscape" led to two different interpretations of it - regional (or individual) and typological. According to the typological conception, a landscape is not a specific specific area of a territory, but a “type” or a set of some common typical properties inherent in different territories, i.e. essentially an abstract concept.

The typification of phenomena, the typological approach to their study is an indispensable condition for any scientific research, including landscape research. But in order to come to the concept of type, it is necessary to study a number of concrete objects. "Type" cannot appear as something given, or "ready-made", it is the result of a scientific generalization of a multitude of specific, or individual, situations that really exist in nature. Meanwhile, the so-called typological understanding of the landscape, as it were, does not leave

places for a specific geographical reality, it does not have a concept of those really existing natural territorial units, or divisions, from which it is only possible to derive the concept of type by comparison and scientific generalization. In addition, the typological understanding of the landscape does not take into account the hierarchy of geosystems, i.e. their different levels, the presence of different levels of territorial organization of natural complexes (facies, tracts, etc.), which should be typed separately. You can, of course, use the term "landscape" in a typological sense, but it is difficult to scientifically substantiate the need for such a use; moreover, it creates great terminological inconveniences. One way or another, we cannot avoid the constant need to resort to the concept of concrete, i.e. individual divisions that make up the types. But for their designation it would be necessary to invent some special term. Wouldn't it be easier to call specific territorial divisions landscapes, and their typological, i.e., classification, associations - landscape types, by analogy with how it is done in other sciences?

The regional, or individual, interpretation of the landscape is devoid of contradictions and terminological inconveniences inherent in "typological understanding". According to this interpretation, the landscape is, firstly, a specific territorial unit; secondly, a fairly complex geosystem, consisting of many elementary geographical units; thirdly, the landscape is the main step in the hierarchy of geosystems.

This idea of the landscape, outlined by L. S. Berg (in his later works), was clearly substantiated by L. G. Ramensky and developed by N. A. Solntsev, as well as A. A. Grigoriev, V. B. Sochava, S. V. Kalesnik and other geographers. It formed the basis of the most comprehensively developed theoretical concept of landscape science and was tested in the course of numerous landscape studies for applied purposes.

Landscape can be briefly defined as genetically unified geosystem,

homogeneous in terms of zonal and azonal features and containing a specific set of conjugated local geosystems. There are other, but rather close, definitions that focus on certain features of the landscape. But due to the necessary brevity, any definition indicates only the most important distinguishing features of the object and does not reveal all its complexity. Therefore, landscape definition is usually accompanied by a list of additional diagnostic features or conditions that seem to be particularly significant.

So, according to N. A. Solntsev, the following basic conditions are necessary for the isolation of an independent landscape: 1) the territory on which the landscape is formed must have a homogeneous geological foundation; 2) after the formation of the foundation, the subsequent history of the development of the landscape throughout its entire space

should have flowed in the same way (for example, two sections cannot be combined into a single landscape, one of which was covered by a glacier and the other was not, or one was subjected to marine transgression, while the other remained outside it); 3) the climate is the same throughout the landscape and under any changes in climatic conditions it remains uniform (inside the landscape, only changes in local climates are observed - in tracts and microclimates - in facies). Under such conditions, as N. A. Solntsev points out, a strictly limited set of sculptural landforms, reservoirs, soils, biocenoses and, ultimately, simple natural territorial complexes - tracts and facies, are created on the territory of each landscape, considered as morphological parts of the landscape.

N. A. Solntsev’s definition emphasizes that the landscape is a regularly constructed system of local NTCs, and this is very important. However, on the other hand, any landscape is at the same time a part, or an element, of more complex regional unities, and it should be considered as the result of the development and differentiation of the geographical envelope and its higher structural divisions. The unity of these two features of the landscape determines, as we shall see later, its specific nodal position in the hierarchy of geosystems. The combination of two approaches to the landscape - "from below" and "from above" - allows us to solve the problem of landscape homogeneity, which has long served as a stumbling block in its definition and isolation in nature.

Since the landscape is divided into various facies and tracts, it is, of course, internally heterogeneous. However, this does not exclude the homogeneity of the Landscape in relation to certain strictly formulated criteria. These criteria are primarily zonal and azonal conditions, in respect of which the landscape must be homogeneous. The zonal-zonal homogeneity of the landscape finds its expression in the unity of the geological foundation, type of relief and climate; it also determines the genetic unity of the landscape, since the process of landscape development proceeds under the same external conditions. Finally, this implies a single plan for the internal structure of the landscape: the diversity of its morphological parts does not mean that this diversity is disordered; on the contrary, if all the conditions listed above are met, the set of facies and tracts of each specific landscape is regular and specific. Each landscape has a characteristic conjugated series of facies and tracts arranged in a certain order. The topological facies series should be considered one of the main criteria of the landscape and one of the indicators of its homogeneity. Thus, the concept of "homogeneity" in relation to the landscape is determined by strictly specified criteria and is dialectically combined with the idea of its heterogeneity.

Let's turn to examples, for which we will use the fragment

landscape map (Fig. 26) from the Atlas of the Leningrad Region (1967). This fragment covers parts of the territory of five landscapes, with various conventional signs schematically (corresponding to the small scale of the map) showing the main morphological divisions of landscapes - the main types of tracts, and in some cases - the so-called localities. All landscapes are located in the taiga zone, in its southern subzone and within the Northwestern landscape province belonging to the country of the Russian Plain and the East European sector. Thus, all landscapes are homogeneous in terms of zonal and sectoral characteristics, which cannot be said about azonal ones. Therefore, in this case, the differences between landscapes are determined mainly by azonal factors.

The entire central part of Fig. 26 occupies the Luga-Oredezh landscape (I) 1 . It is located on the southern slope of the Baltic Shield, overlain by Proterozoic and Paleozoic sedimentary strata. The folded base lies at absolute levels of about - 400 m and deeper. The bedrocks that form the pre-Quaternary relief of the structural-denudation Devonian plain are represented by red sands and sandstones with interlayers of clays of the Stary Oskol Horizon of the Middle Devonian. In the interfluves, they are everywhere overlain by Quaternary deposits, mostly eroded (abraded) Upper Quaternary moraine (boulder loam) 5–8 m thick, which forms the modern relief and serves as the main soil-forming rock. Spots of lacustrine-glacial loams and clays occur over the moraine in places. By the nature of the relief, the landscape is a low-lying (prevailing heights are about 60-70 m above sea level) flat-wavy moraine plain, abraded by lacustrine-glacial reservoirs, with local morphological details (lacustrine-glacial depressions, terminal moraine ridges, eskers).

The climate of the landscape can be considered as typical southern taiga temperate continental (Table 4). All natural components are, in general, rather typical for the given landscape subzone and province. Components such as soils and vegetation are significantly differentiated by facies and tracts. The general plan of the internal (morphological) structure of the landscape is well displayed even on a schematic landscape map (see Fig. 26). Different geosystems of the local level naturally replace each other as the draining role of the valleys weakens, forming the following series:

1) drained riverine slopes on non-calcareous boulder-

1 Proper names of landscapes are given mainly for hydrographic and orographic objects.

loam with oxalis and oak-herb spruce forests 1 on medium podzolic soils;

2) flat-wavy interfluves with short-term excessive moisture

on the same deposits, but on top (0.3 - 0.8 m) lighter (two-membered), with bilberry spruce forests on strongly podzolic gleyic soils2;

3) flat interfluves with long-term excess moisture on the same deposits with long-moss spruce forests on peaty

1 This refers to the primary (primary) vegetation without taking into account derived communities. 2 In fig. 26 this type of tracts is combined with the first under number 5.

T a b l e 4. Comparative characteristics of the climate of five landscapes

Landscape	Nab-point	Temperature, ° С
	people and
	people and







			10°C)
I. Luzhsko-	Belogorka,
Oredezhsky
II. Tosno-
Volkhovsky	Luban, 36
III. Luzhsko-Plyussky
IV. Upper Luzhsk	Oredezh, 32
V. Izhorsky	Volosovo,

podzolic-gley soils, turning on the outskirts of swamps into sphagnum pine forests on peat-podzolic-gley and peat-gley soils (9 in Fig. 26); 4) raised bogs, occupying the inner parts of the interfluves with a constant

stagnant moisture (12 in Fig. 26).

In addition to the stows of this main series, some secondary (subordinate) geosystems (depressions with lacustrine-glacial sands and banded clays, valleys of rivers and streams, lakes) are found locally.

To the east of the Luga-Oredezh landscape is the Tosno-Volkhov landscape (II). It is timed to an ancient depression in the relief of the primary Devonian rocks, which are mainly

Rns. 26. Fragment of the landscape map of the Leningrad region.

Hilly-hollow And ridge-hollow areas with frequent changes in drainage conditions, source rocks and soils: 1 - hilly-moraine with a predominance of carbonate-free boulder loams, slightly podzolic soils, green moss spruce forests, 2 - kame sandy with a predominance of surface and slightly podzolic soils, green moss and lichen pine forests.

Interfluve drained tracts: 8 - on limestones covered with thin boulder loam, with karst, with soddy-calcareous soils and complex spruce forests, 4 - on carbonate boulder loam with soddy-calcareous and weakly podzolic soils, complex and oak-herb spruce forests, 5 - on carbonate-free boulder loams, with strongly podzolic gleyic and medium podzolic soils and oxalis, oak-grass and bilberry spruce forests, b - on lacustrine-glacial belt clays and loams with strongly podzolic gleyic soils and spruce forests of various types, 7 - on lacustrine-glacial sands and sandy loams with podzolic-illuvial-humus-ferruginous soils, with green moss pine forests.

Interfluve poorly drained tracts: 8 - on carbonate boulder and loam with soddy gley soils and grassy and waterlogged spruce forests, 9 - on carbonate-free boulder loam, 10 on

lacustrine-glacial belt clays and loams with peaty- and peat-podzolic-gley soils, long-moss spruce forests and sphagnum pine forests, 11 - on lacustrine-glacial sands and sandy loams with peaty-podzolic illuvial-humus soils and sphagnum pine forests.

Tracts with constant stagnant moisture; 12 - swamps (mainly upland

sphagnum ridge-hollow). Tracts with periodic flow waterlogging: l8 - river floodplains, 14 - lakes.

Landscapes: I - Luga-Oredezhsky, II - Tosnensko-Volkhovsky, III - Luga-Plyussky, IV - Upper Luga, V - Izhora

nom are represented by the Upper Devonian carbonate strata, overlain everywhere by Quaternary deposits. In the late glacial period, the depression was occupied by a vast near-glacial reservoir, which left a thick (up to 15 m in the central part) stratum of banded clays. The surface of the landscape is flat, slightly terraced, the prevailing heights above sea level are only 30 - 40 m. The more easterly position in comparison with the previous landscape affects the climate (see Table 4): summer is warmer; the total heat supply increases, but the frost-free period is reduced. The amount of precipitation does not change significantly.

Heavy impervious soils and flat relief cause poor drainage of watershed spaces and the development of waterlogging. The general plan of the morphological structure is similar to that described for the Luga-Oredezh landscape, but the stows are formed here on a different substrate and a somewhat different climatic "background". Ribbon clays are richer than moraine in primary minerals and microelements; in some places, the influence of the carbonate content of bedrocks affects. In the natural vegetation cover of drained tracts, broad-leaved trees are often found among the dominant spruce forests.

In the southwestern direction, the Luga-Oredezhsky landscape is replaced by the Luga-Plyussky (III) In terms of the basic foundation, it does not differ from the Luga-Oredezhsky, however, the Quaternary sequence and the modern relief have fundamentally different features. Here, ridges of kame hills up to 153 m above sea level alternate with depressions composed of glacial lacustrine sands and sandy loams. Characterized by great diversity and contrast of locations and morphological units of the landscape. Unlike the two previous landscapes, where spruce forests predominate in the natural cover, pine forests of various types dominate in Luga-Plyussky - from dry lichen to swampy sphagnum. Noteworthy is the presence of floristically enriched "Luga forests", in which even steppe species are found. The southern position of the landscape is clearly reflected in the climate: among the five landscapes considered, Luzhsko-Plyussky stands out for the highest heat supply and the longest frost-free period. In the nature of many facies, there are signs of a transition to the subtaiga.

The Upper Luga landscape (IV) is also rather specific. Like the Luga-Oredezhskoe, this is a typical low-lying (60-70 m above sea level) poorly drained moraine plain, abraded by lacustrine-glacial waters. However, the bedrocks here are not the sands and sandstones of the Middle Devonian, but the Upper Devonian carbonate rocks - limestones, dolomites, marls. Due to this circumstance, the moraine is enriched with carbonates and fertile sod-carbonate, 116

as well as slightly podzolic soils. Changes in the direction of increasing heat reserves are also traced in the climate. As a result, some features of nature are observed here, bringing this landscape closer to the subtaiga. Upland (drained) stows in the past were characterized by spruce forests with maple, linden, elm, ash, oak, and hazel. But due to poor drainage, interfluve tracts with swampy forests on dark-colored soddy-gley soils with high potential fertility predominate, and the deep parts of the interfluves are occupied by huge swamp systems.

Finally, the Izhora landscape (V), part of which falls within the boundaries of the site shown in Fig. 26 is perhaps the most distinctive. It is confined to the ancient pre-Quaternary plateau, armored by Ordovician limestones. The plateau-like surface worked out in limestones is elevated above the surrounding territories (mainly up to 120 - 150 m above sea level). Bedrock is usually overlain by thin carbonate boulder loam. The relatively higher hypsometric position compared to neighboring landscapes results in a rather significant decrease in heat supply, as well as in a reduction in the frost-free period and a slight increase in precipitation. However, the richness of the substrate in calcium gives the landscape a more southern, subtaiga appearance. Before development, rich coniferous-broad-leaved forests grew here on soddy-calcareous soils. Other characteristic individual features of the Izhora landscape are good drainage, the presence of karst landforms, the almost complete absence of a surface hydrographic network (surface waters are intensively absorbed by fractured limestones). The morphology of this landscape is relatively simple: wavy upland tracts dominate, now largely developed. A subordinate role is played by groups of moraine hills or ridges, small esker ridges, depressions filled with lacustrine-glacial sandy loam (sometimes with lakes), small marshes, as well as sinkholes and sinkholes.

Genetic, morphological and other differences between the described landscapes are reflected in the degree and nature of their economic use, which can serve as an additional, albeit indirect, diagnostic feature of a landscape, more precisely, its resource and ecological potential. Thus, the Izhora landscape is sharply distinguished by its high agricultural development (30% of the area is plowed). The second place is occupied by the Upper Luga landscape (17%), and the rest are far behind in this indicator (5 - 8%). These figures well reflect the unequal ratio across landscapes of the main natural factors of agriculture (soil fertility, heat supply, natural drainage of the territory, rugged relief, etc.).

Although in the examples under consideration, latitudinal climate changes

are not so significant as to cause a zonal change of landscapes, this change is nevertheless gradually being prepared. It is not difficult to notice quantitative changes in the main climatic parameters with respect to latitude (especially when comparing the data (in Table 4) for the Izhora, Luga-Oredezh, and Luga-Plus landscapes), so that in this case the influence of the zonal factor on the formation of landscapes cannot be completely excluded. If we continue our analysis beyond the southern frame of the fragment of the landscape map (see Fig. 26), then typically subtaiga landscapes will soon appear. In essence, the Luga-Plus and Upper Luga landscapes already have a transitional zonal character. The subtaiga features of the Izhora landscape are due to the peculiarity of its foundation, i.e., they have an azonal nature.

In the mountains, landscapes are distinguished within individual altitudinal tiers. As for the relationship between landscapes and altitudinal belts, in essence the belts should be considered as morphological parts of landscapes. As already mentioned in Chapter 2, altitudinal belts are by no means always expressed in the form of continuous bands; they cover areas that are genetically heterogeneous and often territorially separated. Fragments of different belts often form a complex mosaic, combined in one landscape at different exposures and landforms. In conditions of a relatively simple system of altitudinal belts (for example, in the tundra, taiga zones), landscapes often do not go beyond one altitudinal belt (mountain-tundra, mountain-taiga). But in more complex conditions, when contrasting elements of different belt rows are intertwined, the landscape can include parts of different belts. At the same time, one of them can be dominant, forming, as it were, the general background of the landscape, while others are represented only by more or less significant fragments; but in other cases, the same landscape includes conjugated areas of different belts within one or another altitudinal landscape tier (low, medium, or high mountains). Thus, here we see an analogy with flat landscapes, in which certain tracts can create a common background, or different tracts form conjugated rows or more complex territorial combinations.

Territorial relationships between landscapes and altitudinal zones on the example of the river basin. Teberda (the northern slope of the Greater Caucasus) is illustrated in fig. 27. The map legend is built in the form of a matrix, in which horizontal rows correspond to altitudinal zones (indicated by Arabic numerals), and vertical columns correspond to landscapes (indicated by Roman numerals). The diagram shows that some belts are continuous (at least within the boundaries of this map), but others are fragmentary. Thus, fragments of the belt of dark coniferous forests are confined to the most humid valleys and valley slopes of the middle mountains. Pine forest belts are distinguished by the most fragmented distribution.

Rice. 27. Landscape scheme of the river basin. Teberda (based on the materials of A. G. Isachenko and I. I.

Tumadzhanov). Mid-mountain landscapes of longitudinal depressions and transverse valleys: I -.

Nizhneteberda (on sandstone-argillaceous Jurassic deposits), II - Sredneteberda (on highly deformed Paleozoic deposits), III - Verkhneteberda (on Precambrian crystalline rocks). Alpine landscapesfold-block ranges: IV - Teberda-Aksautsky, V-

Teberda-Dautsky (on highly deformed Paleozoic deposits), VI - Dombaysky (on Precambrian crystalline rocks). Altitude zones: 1 - glacial (nival), 2 - subnival (rocky-scree), 8 - alpine (mountain meadow), 4 - subalpine (with crooked forest), 5 - mountain taiga (dark coniferous forest), b - belt of pine forests, 7 - belt of mountain steppes and upland xerophytes , 8 - broad-leaved forest. Solid lines are landscape boundaries, dotted lines are watershed ridges.

forests and mountain steppes: they are confined to dry southern slopes lying in the wind shadow. Plots of subalpine crooked forests, on the contrary, are found only on the northern slopes.

Parts of the same belt are found on different geological basements and in different landscapes. Most of the landscapes, as we can see, have a heterogeneous altitudinal belt structure, although one of the belts can play the dominant role. But the landscape should not go beyond one altitudinal tier. Belonging to a particular tier ensures the unity of the geological foundation, the main climate-forming processes and the genetic integrity of the landscape, as well as a certain uniformity of its altitudinal structure. Note that each stage is characterized by a special part of the altitudinal belt series, which includes genetically and structurally similar belts. This is clearly seen in Fig. 27. In the matrix legend, two groups of cells (cells) are clearly distinguished - in the upper right and lower left corners. The first covers the entire high-mountain group of geosystems - both landscapes and altitudinal belts, and the second - the mid-mountain one. It is easy to see that the mid-mountain tier is characterized by mountain-forest altitudinal belts (with exposure fragments of mountain-steppe), while in the high-mountain tier there is a special set of belts - from subalpine to nival. Thus, the specificity of mid- and high-mountain landscapes manifests itself quite clearly through their characteristic altitudinal-belt structures.

A complete series of tiers and belts - from bottom to top - serves as a diagnostic feature not of a landscape, but of regional systems of a higher rank, namely, landscape districts, which are discussed in Chapter 6, devoted to physical-geographical zoning.

The attention of landscape scientists has long been attracted by the question of main stage, or unit, in the hierarchy of natural territorial complexes (geosystems). Although some experts denied the need for such a “nodal” category, the experience of research work and practical activities of landscape scientists testifies to the reality of the basic unit and its importance for streamlining both the various facts related to landscape science and its theoretical foundations. Such a unit is the landscape, which occupies a nodal position at the junction of geosystems of regional and local dimensions.

Chapter 2 has already identified the fundamental differences between regional and local geosystems and established the place of the landscape as a lower region, completing the system of regional differentiation of the epigeosphere. To this we can add that the study of regional and local physical-geographical units requires the use of different methods: if local NTCs are necessarily studied in nature, that is, through field research, including stationary observations and landscape photography, then knowledge

higher physical-geographical unity is based mainly on the use of cameral methods of research, on the analysis and generalization of literary sources, maps, remote images. The peculiarity of the landscape is that its knowledge requires the use of the widest range of methods - both field and cameral.

A. A. Grigoriev came up with the idea that the landscape is the smallest territorial unit that retains all the features of the structure of the geographical environment typical for a given zone, region and, in general, larger than the landscape, regional unit. Similar considerations were expressed by V. B. Sochava. Comparing the landscape with regional systems of higher ranks, we see that the latter, representing more or less complex territorial combinations of heterogeneous landscapes, are heterogeneous in zonal and azonal respect. Therefore, none of the higher categories of physical-geographical zoning can serve as a physical-geographical standard, i.e., personify a specific territorial combination of both regional and local features of nature, and thereby represent a characteristic local complex of natural conditions for the life and activities of people, a specific local natural Wednesday.

On the other hand, as V. B. Sochava noted, individual tracts or other local geosystems do not give a complete picture of the local structure of the geographic environment and, therefore, cannot be considered as the main taxonomic units in the landscape hierarchy. In the mosaic of facies or tracts, one can find systems that are not typical for the given region and do not give a comprehensive idea of the originality of the local nature. In the taiga, for example, in favorable locations there are facies with broad-leaved forests, and in unfavorable locations there are “tundras”, as if taking us to the tundra. Even such typical and widespread tracts as swamps in the taiga or ravines in the steppe do not in themselves give a complete, integral picture of the local nature. Only everything tracts or facies, taken in aggregate, in characteristic territorial combinations, areal ratios and mutual relations, i.e. as a unified landscape create a holistic view of the physical and geographical specifics of a particular territory.

The study of local geosystems as such, outside the landscape as a whole, makes little sense, because they are much more open systems than the landscape, and exist only as parts of it in interaction with other, conjugated local geosystems. Any facies or any tract necessarily presupposes the presence of a certain other or several other tracts and facies. Indeed, the facies of the middle part of the slope exist only because there are facies of the lower and upper parts of the same slope. There are no peak facies without slope, ravine tracts - without

watersheds, hills suggest the presence of depressions, etc. Thus, the main object of landscape research should not be individual morphological parts of the landscape, but their conjugated systems within such a territory that is sufficient to identify their regular combinations, and this is the landscape.

Note that individual facies and tracts, according to N. A. Solntsev, are not original. Similar facies and tracts are repeated many times, their individual features recede into the background, and these geosystems are studied, as a rule, in a typological context. This means that the geographer does not have to study each specific facies, each specific tract, it is enough to select several representatives from each type. In the study of higher regional unities, on the contrary, it is necessary to apply an individual approach, and the typological approach plays a secondary role or practically loses its significance. When dealing with landscapes, one has to pay attention both to the individual specifics of each of them and to the typological features of various groups of landscapes, and it is difficult to say what is more important in this case. In the study of the landscape, therefore, both approaches to the study of geosystems are combined to the greatest extent.

Inside the landscape, there is a closer relationship between different geosystems than outside it. V. B. Sochava believes that the landscape is a system that has its own type of regional metabolism

Small, regional, circulation of matter and energy. This means that the integration processes in the landscape are more pronounced than in large regional systems - physical-geographical countries, sectors, etc. Therefore, no other geosystem, except for the landscape, offers better opportunities for studying the processes of geographic integration and differentiation.

The main properties of geosystems, their structure, functioning, dynamics, evolution are most fully revealed in the study of landscapes. In complexes of this rank one can trace the complex and diverse flows of matter and energy, and the relationship between vertical and horizontal systems of geographical links. If the primary cell for the analysis of vertical relationships is facies, then horizontal relationships can be revealed only when studying the landscape as a whole, i.e. conjugated facies series inherent in it. Such series, specific for different landscapes, serve as the basis for understanding the integration processes in geosystems.

A landscape is a much more autonomous and more stable system than a facies or tract. It is more difficult to transform than its morphological parts. This circumstance is of great practical importance in connection with optimization problems

growing economic impact on the natural complex (which is discussed in more detail in the last chapter of the book).

From a socio-economic point of view, the landscape is a grassroots natural resource and ecological region. Allocation of the landscape according to the principle of zonal-azonal homogeneity ensures the coverage of all natural resources in their characteristic, specific territorial combination. Each landscape contains an individual complex of natural resources - thermal, water, mineral, biological. Thus, it has a certain economic and environmental potential, for example, agricultural, energy, recreational, etc. On this basis, V. B. Sochava, V. B. Chetyrkin and other researchers came to the conclusion that the landscape is such a natural complex, in relation to which it is possible to raise the question of a single direction of economic development, that it “represents the smallest space in which uniform methods of economic use can be carried out” 1 and can be considered as “a basic category in ... developing recommendations for the integrated accounting of natural conditions in regional business planning” 2 .

Considering various landscapes, for example, from the point of view of the conditions for the development of agricultural production, we notice that each of them in this respect represents a kind of integrity, determined by a specific combination of regional and local conditions. Regional ("background") characteristics of the landscape include, in particular, general agro-climatic conditions - heat and moisture supply, which depend on the position of the landscape in the system of zones, subzones, sectors and altitudinal levels (tiers). Local conditions (more precisely, local diversity) are determined by landscape morphology and are expressed in a regular set of areas that differ in microclimates, surface slopes, natural drainage, soil differences, and other local features. These areas, corresponding to the morphological divisions of the landscape, from an agricultural point of view, are types of land, or natural lands, and together form the land fund of a given landscape. The agro-production significance of the landscape, therefore, lies in the fact that, on the one hand, it expresses a certain general regional specificity of natural conditions, and on the other

The characteristic structure of the land fund, which allows the development of specific differentiated recommendations for the rational use of land.

This can be illustrated by examples of several 1 Sochava VB Introduction to the doctrine of geosystems. Novosibirsk, 1978. S. 170.

2 Krauklis A. A., Snytko V. A. The study of functional relationships between geographical facies in the landscape / Structure, dynamics and development of landscapes. M., 1980. S. 110.

shafts, schematically displayed in fig. 26. Among them, the Izhora landscape stands out with the highest agricultural potential, which is determined primarily by the fertility of soddy calcareous soils. In addition, good drainage (absence of waterlogged lands), a plateau-like relief with slight slopes, which favors the creation of large field tracts, contribute to agricultural development here, although the overall (background) heat supply is somewhat lower compared to neighboring landscapes. In second place should be put the Upper Luga landscape. The soils here are also fertile, there is even more heat than in the Izhora landscape, the surface is flat, convenient for plowing, but vast areas of interfluve tracts are subject to prolonged waterlogging and cannot be developed without complex and expensive land reclamation measures.

The Luga-Plyussky landscape is significantly inferior to the previous one in terms of agricultural potential. It is characterized by a large diversity of the land fund, associated with the ruggedness of the kame relief, the presence of large areas of marshy tracts, as well as swamps. A common "background" disadvantage is the poverty of soils, predominantly sandy in texture. A positive natural factor is a relatively increased heat supply, but due to the peculiarities of the structure of the land fund, agricultural development is selective and arable land is scattered in small areas.

Without dwelling on the other two landscapes in detail, we only note that their agricultural potential is very low. According to the background characteristics of the climate and soils, these landscapes can be classified as "medium", i.e., typical for the northwest of the southern taiga and quite suitable for agricultural development. However, their morphological structure is such that they can only be used selectively. A significant part of the territory is occupied by swampy tracts, and the development of vast systems of watershed peatlands is practically impossible. As a result, agricultural development here has acquired a typically riverine character. The described differences between landscapes are well reflected in the indicators of their current plowed area, which have already been given earlier.

Thus, the need to single out the main, or nodal, unit in the hierarchy of geosystems is dictated not only by theoretical considerations, but also has a deep practical meaning. The landscape plays, as it were, an organizing role in the boundless diversity of geosystems of various levels and ranks. According to V. B. Sochava, all particular (sectoral) zoning systems are combined in the landscape, i.e. climatic, geomorphological, soil and other regions coincide with the landscape, and the idea of the landscape is thus of organizing importance not only for

3.1 The concept of "geosystem"

In 1963 V.B. Sochava suggested calling objects studied by physical geography geosystems. Geosystem- a spatio-temporal complex of all components of nature, interdependent in their location and developing as a whole. The concept of "geosystem" covers the entire hierarchical range of natural geographical units - from the geographical shell to its elementary structural divisions. The geosystem is a broader concept than the natural-territorial complex, because the latter is applicable only to individual parts of the geographic shell, its territorial subdivisions, but does not apply to the geographic shell as a whole. Thus, the concept of "geosystem" combines the objects of both general physical geography and landscape science, emphasizing the unity of these two branches of physical geography. We can say that geosystems serve as the object of study of physical geography.

In addition, the term "geosystem" contains a special emphasis on the system essence of an object, on its belonging to systems as a universal form of organization in nature.

To talk about a system, it is enough to have at least a couple of objects between which there are some kind of relationship. It is legitimate to speak, for example, of the systems "soil - vegetation", "atmosphere - hydrosphere", "lake - drainage basin".

Singling out geosystems as a qualitatively special level of organization of terrestrial nature, it should immediately be said that within the framework of the general concept of "geosystem" there is its own internal hierarchy, its own structural levels - from relatively simple to more complex. We refer to geosystems the upland bog massif, the Pripyat Polissya and the Taiga zone, and, finally, the entire geographical envelope. It is clear that these are formations of a different order, or rank, although they all have some common features that make it possible to consider them as geosystems. Establishing hierarchical relationships, natural subordination in a huge variety of geosystems is one of the important tasks of landscape science.

3.2 Geosystems at the planetary, regional and local levels

Before proceeding to a review of the basic concepts related to the properties of geosystems, it is necessary to distinguish three main levels of their organization: planetary, regional and local, or topical (local).

planetary level presented on Earth in a single copy - a geographical shell. The term “geographical shell” comes from the name of science and does not carry any meaningful load (the names of individual terrestrial spheres contain such a “load”: the atmosphere is translated as an air shell, the hydrosphere as a water shell, etc.). Therefore, various names of the geographic shell were proposed. The shortest and most accurate term is epigeosphere, which literally means “outer earthly shell”, as it was first defined back in 1910 by P.I. Brownov.

To geosystems regional level include large and rather complex structural units of the epigeosphere - physical-geographical or landscape zones, sectors, countries, provinces, etc.

Under systems local level relatively simple NTCs are implied, from which regional geosystems are built - the so-called tracts, facies, and others.

Regional and local geosystems, or natural territorial (geographical) complexes, are the direct objects of landscape research. Thus, we can define landscape science as a branch of physical geography, the subject of which is the study of geosystems of the regional and local levels as structural parts of the epigeosphere (geographical envelope).

3.3 Hierarchy of geosystems and their properties

The complexity of the structure of a geosystem is in direct proportion to its level (rank), therefore, all features and properties of geosystems need to be specified and considered separately in relation to different levels of the geosystem hierarchy. The three main levels of the geosystemic hierarchy have already been discussed. They cover the entire series of successive steps from facies as the ultimate lower (hereinafter as an indivisible, elementary geographical unit) to the epigeosphere as the upper limit of physical-geographical research.

According to many geographers, in this series, the main, or nodal, step should be distinguished: the landscape. If the entire hierarchical series of geosystems is represented as a ladder with many steps, the lower of which is the facies, and the upper one is the epigeosphere, then the landscape can be compared with a landing that separates the lower flight of stairs, corresponding to systems of typological dimensions, and the upper one, corresponding to systems of regional dimensions (Figure 1).

Figure 1 - Scheme of the hierarchy of geosystems (according to A.G. Isachenko)

The epigeosphere has both the properties of continuity (continuity) and discontinuity (discreteness). The continuity of the epigeosphere is due to the interpenetration of its components, the flows of energy and matter, their global circulations, i.e. integration processes. Discreteness is a manifestation of the processes of differentiation of matter and energy of the epigeosphere of a certain internal structuring of individual parts that perform their functions as part of the whole.

Soil is a kind of "product" of terrestrial geosystems and one of the clearest evidence of their reality and integrity. If solar heat, water, parent rock and organisms did not interact as a single complex mechanism, no soil could exist.

The integrity of the geosystem is manifested in its relative autonomy and resistance to external influences, in the presence of objective natural boundaries, orderliness of the structure, greater closeness of internal connections compared to external ones.

Geosystems belong to the category of open systems, which means that they are permeated with flows of energy and matter that connect them with the external environment. The environment of the geosystem is formed by enclosing systems of higher ranks, ultimately by the epigeosphere (the environment of the latter is outer space and the underlying deep parts of the globe).

In geosystems, there is a continuous exchange and transformation of matter and energy. A more complex question is about the presence and role of information exchange in geosystems. Information links are present in the geosystem, since one of its components is the biota, which is characterized by the exchange of information.

The whole set of processes of movement, exchange and transformation of energy, matter, and information in a geosystem can be called its functioning. The functioning of the geosystem is carried out according to the laws of mechanics, physics, chemistry and biology. From this point of view, the geosystem is a complex (integral) physical-chemical-biological system. The functioning of geosystems is composed of the transformation of solar energy, moisture circulation, geochemical circulation, biological metabolism and mechanical movement of material under the action of gravity.

The complex differentiation of the landscape sphere, expressed in a mosaic of geosystems of different ranks and different types, gradually smoothes out vertically - towards the outer boundaries of the epigeosphere (ie, in the atmosphere and lithosphere). Therefore, the boundaries of regional and local geosystems are practically impossible to extend to the upper and lower limits of the epigeosphere. In other words, one cannot simply divide the entire thickness of this shell into geosystems.