308
Land-Ocean Systems in the Siberian Arctic: Dynamics and History
Field descriptions comprised absolute elevation, ground composition, geological
stmcture,relief, micro- and nanorelief and vegetation type. Soil characteristics were determined
using basic soil trenches, which are described in each landscape unit. Dominant species were
identified and plant cover (total and by species for dominants) was measured. A complete list of
species is given in the landscape-geobotanical descriptions. In arctic landscapes the interrelation
of all natural components is displayed in heaviest measure. Of central importance to all
components is the permafrost and processes related to it, which create cryogenic relief forms.
The complex landscape map therefore reflects the distribution of vegetation, soil and other
ecosystem components more accurately and completely than individual thematic maps,
constmcted on the basis of hierarchical classifications of each component of the environment.
These classifications frequently do not correlate with each other. Much experience has been
amassed creating similar maps for the Taimyrsky Reserve territory (Pospelov, 1996), although
the methods employed in their creation are constantly improving. The bases for the selection of
territorial units are assumed to be geological stmcture and relief. The various forms of microand nanorelief, generally cryogenic in origin, are used to differentiate units and determine the
spatial distribution of vegetation and soil types.
In the creation of the map we have consciously resisted the application of current Russian
landscape taxonomy because it has no practical analogues abroad, where such units as "facia" -
a minimal natural territorial complex - and "landscape" - a large taxonomic unit - are accepted.
There exists a difference of opinions on the treatment of terms. So, in the territory of the
Levinson-Lessing Lake basin, by using the different criteria (Isaczenco, 1965; Armand, 1975,
Michailov, 1971), it was possible to allocate from one to four regional units to a landscape
(described in the section on physico-geographical landscape characteristics). These cartographic
units should not be understood on the basis of landscape-terminology (by Russian classification
the majority of them have a rank of "uroczishje", sometimes treated as analogous to "stow";
Unsread, 1935). In the explanatory text, we define the term "unit" as some spatially and
originally homogeneous territory. In the majority of cases it is possible to speak of their genetic
complexity when, to all appearances, the geosystem was formed by spatially uniform
processes. Sometimes, however, the structural elements of a unit are irregular, as with, for
example, occasional rock outcrops on the background of a spotty tundral plain. A geologicgeomorphologic principle was applied as the basis for numbering landscape units. Watersheds,
slopes, valleys, terraces and bogs are identified. Within these categories, landscape units are
classified and numbered in order of: decrease in elevation, increase of the degree of ground
patterning, decrease of the angle (for slopes), and stage of development and age of the relief
forms (for terraces and bogs). Hence, we refer to all the units representing different landscape
types in the following order: denudational (watersheds), transitional (slopes and valleys),
accumulative-denudational (terraces) and accumulative (bogs). Attention was given to the
geological structure and genesis of micro- and nanorelief for each unit. In the physicogeographical description of the lake basin, the analysis of the cryogenic relief forms and
indicators for the developmental dynamics of cryomorphogenetic processes are given; as
mentioned, this factor is determining for structures of geosystems. Communities were given
names based on dominant species (for example, "herbaceous-dwarf shrub-moss tundra"); in
each description, dominants and the most common species were indicated. In some cases
indicator species were noted (for example, on limestone there were ca1ciphilous species
indicative of such). The names of vascular plants are given as per Arctic Flora USSR (19601987); the names of mosses as per Ignatov, Afonina (1992). In practically all units, the
heterogeneity of the vegetative cover at the community level was too great to allow classification
of vegetation for the entire unit as a whole phytocoenoses. In our opinion, neither of the
existing approaches to classification of vegetation for the Arctic, especially Arctic/alpine
regions, is acceptable. The vegetation is, in many cases, characterized not by developed
Land-Ocean Systems in the Siberian Arctic: Dynamics and History
Field descriptions comprised absolute elevation, ground composition, geological
stmcture,relief, micro- and nanorelief and vegetation type. Soil characteristics were determined
using basic soil trenches, which are described in each landscape unit. Dominant species were
identified and plant cover (total and by species for dominants) was measured. A complete list of
species is given in the landscape-geobotanical descriptions. In arctic landscapes the interrelation
of all natural components is displayed in heaviest measure. Of central importance to all
components is the permafrost and processes related to it, which create cryogenic relief forms.
The complex landscape map therefore reflects the distribution of vegetation, soil and other
ecosystem components more accurately and completely than individual thematic maps,
constmcted on the basis of hierarchical classifications of each component of the environment.
These classifications frequently do not correlate with each other. Much experience has been
amassed creating similar maps for the Taimyrsky Reserve territory (Pospelov, 1996), although
the methods employed in their creation are constantly improving. The bases for the selection of
territorial units are assumed to be geological stmcture and relief. The various forms of microand nanorelief, generally cryogenic in origin, are used to differentiate units and determine the
spatial distribution of vegetation and soil types.
In the creation of the map we have consciously resisted the application of current Russian
landscape taxonomy because it has no practical analogues abroad, where such units as "facia" -
a minimal natural territorial complex - and "landscape" - a large taxonomic unit - are accepted.
There exists a difference of opinions on the treatment of terms. So, in the territory of the
Levinson-Lessing Lake basin, by using the different criteria (Isaczenco, 1965; Armand, 1975,
Michailov, 1971), it was possible to allocate from one to four regional units to a landscape
(described in the section on physico-geographical landscape characteristics). These cartographic
units should not be understood on the basis of landscape-terminology (by Russian classification
the majority of them have a rank of "uroczishje", sometimes treated as analogous to "stow";
Unsread, 1935). In the explanatory text, we define the term "unit" as some spatially and
originally homogeneous territory. In the majority of cases it is possible to speak of their genetic
complexity when, to all appearances, the geosystem was formed by spatially uniform
processes. Sometimes, however, the structural elements of a unit are irregular, as with, for
example, occasional rock outcrops on the background of a spotty tundral plain. A geologicgeomorphologic principle was applied as the basis for numbering landscape units. Watersheds,
slopes, valleys, terraces and bogs are identified. Within these categories, landscape units are
classified and numbered in order of: decrease in elevation, increase of the degree of ground
patterning, decrease of the angle (for slopes), and stage of development and age of the relief
forms (for terraces and bogs). Hence, we refer to all the units representing different landscape
types in the following order: denudational (watersheds), transitional (slopes and valleys),
accumulative-denudational (terraces) and accumulative (bogs). Attention was given to the
geological structure and genesis of micro- and nanorelief for each unit. In the physicogeographical description of the lake basin, the analysis of the cryogenic relief forms and
indicators for the developmental dynamics of cryomorphogenetic processes are given; as
mentioned, this factor is determining for structures of geosystems. Communities were given
names based on dominant species (for example, "herbaceous-dwarf shrub-moss tundra"); in
each description, dominants and the most common species were indicated. In some cases
indicator species were noted (for example, on limestone there were ca1ciphilous species
indicative of such). The names of vascular plants are given as per Arctic Flora USSR (19601987); the names of mosses as per Ignatov, Afonina (1992). In practically all units, the
heterogeneity of the vegetative cover at the community level was too great to allow classification
of vegetation for the entire unit as a whole phytocoenoses. In our opinion, neither of the
existing approaches to classification of vegetation for the Arctic, especially Arctic/alpine
regions, is acceptable. The vegetation is, in many cases, characterized not by developed