Structure, function and cross-scale properties of landscape boundaries – a case study of the Płock area

• Authors: Sylwia Kulczyk

Abstracts

EN

The paper describes features of landscape boundaries in the lowland landscape of Poland and verifies their cross-scale properties. The diversity of lithology, morphometry and land use was taken into account by delimitation of the boundaries. A scale of 1:50 000 was set as the basis. Three structural features (length, contrast and sinuosity) and two functional features (permeability and stability) were examined. The boundaries within the research area are typically of average length, low sinuosity, high permeability and low stability. A high correspondence between the diversity of abiotic components and land use is observed, resulting in a large number of high-contrast boundaries. However, this feature does not necessarily mean that these patterns are cross scale and can be applied at a higher level of landscape hierarchy. A geochemical/typological and regional order has been explored to describe properties of landscape boundaries for different spatial scales. Only the first of the listed orders corresponds to diversification of boundary features.

Keywords

EN

Landscape; boundary; structural features; functional features; spatial hierarchy

• Publisher: Wydział Geografii i Studiów Regionalnych Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego
• Journal: Miscellanea Geographica. Regional Studies on Development
• Year: 2013
• Volume: 17
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 21-27

Dates

published

2013

Contributors

author

Sylwia Kulczyk

• Institute of Socio-Economic Geography and Spatial Management, Faculty of Geography and Regional Studies, University of Warsaw

References

• Armand, DL 1980, Nauka o krajobrazie [The Science of Landscape], PWN, Warszawa.
• Cadenasso, ML, Pickett, STA, Weathers, KC & Jones, CG 2003, ‘A framework for a theory of ecological boundaries’, BioScience, vol. 53, pp.750–758.
• Desaigues, B 1990, ‘The socio-economic value of ecotones’ in The ecology and management of aquatic-terrestrial ecotones, eds RJ Naiman & H Décamps, MAB, UNESCO, Paris.
• Farina, A 1998, Principles and Methods in Landscape Ecology, Chapman&Hall, London.
• Forman, RTT & Moore, PN 1992, ‘Theoretical Foundations for Understanding Boundaries in Landscape Mosaics’ in Landscape Boundaries, eds AJ Hansen & F di Castri, Ecological Studies, vol. 92, Springer-Verlag, New York.
• Fortin, MJ, Olson, RJ, Ferson, S, Iverson, L, Hunsaker, C, Edwards, G, Levine, D, Butera, K & Klemas, V 2000, ‘Issues related to the detection of boundaries’, Landscape Ecology, vol. 15, pp. 453–466.
• Jacquer, GM, Maruca, S & Fortin, MJ 2000, ‘From fields to objects: A review of geographic boundary analysis’, Journal of Geographical Systems, vol. 2, pp. 221–241.
• Jagomagi, JE & Mander, JE 1982, ‘Poniatie ekotona i wozmożnosti jego uspołzowania pri ocenkie teritori’ in Issliedowanie i kartografirowanie landszafta, Acta et Comentationes Universitatis Tartuensis, Tartu.
• Kulczyk, S 2004, ‘Landscape Boundaries – Belts or Lines? Examples from Southern and Northern Poland’, Miscellanea Geographica, vol.10, pp. 19–27.
• Kulczyk, S 2005, ‘Funkcjonalne cechy granic krajobrazowych na przykładzie Wigierskiego Parku Narodowego’ [Functional Features of Landscape Boundaries – example of Wigierski National Park], Prace i Studia Geograficzne, vol. 36, pp. 48–64.
• Kulczyk, S 2006, ‘Caracterizacíon de los limites naturales: un caso del area de Chroberz’ [Characteristisc of natural boundaries: case study of Chroberz area], Revista Electronic@de Medioambiente UCM, vol. 2, pp. 104–119, Available from: http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/MARE/ article/view/MARE0606220104A/15259 [29.08.2013].
• Miller, GP, Petlin, WN & Galambosz, J 1982, ‘O dinamikie i ustojcziwosti prirodnych tierritorialnych kompleksow’ [On dynamic and stability of natural spatial complexes], Woprosy Gieografii, vol. 121.
• Pietrzak, M 1998, Syntezy krajobrazowe – założenia, problemy, zastosowania [Landscape Syntheses – Assumption, Problems, Applications], Bogucki Wydawnictwo Naukowe, Poznań.
• Pietrzak, M 2000, ‘Granice krajobrazowe – fikcja czy rzeczywistość?’ [Landscape boundaries – fiction of reality?], Problemy Ekologii Krajobrazu, vol. 7, pp.189–197.
• Richling, A 1974, Analiza struktury środowiska geograficznego i nowa metoda regionalizacji fizycznogeograficznej (na przykładzie województwa białostockiego), manuscript. Richling, A 1992, Kompleksowa geografia fizyczna, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
• Richling, A, Malinowska, E & Lechnio J 2005, ‘Typologia i regionalizacja krajobrazu terenów w strefie oddziaływania Płockiego Zespołu Miejsko-Przemysłowego’ [Typology and regionalisation of landscape within the zone of influence of Płock urban-industrial complex] in Z problematyki Funkcjonowania Krajobrazów Nizinnych, eds A Richling & J Lechnio, WGSR UW, Warszawa.
• Śleszyński, TP 1997, Ocena atrakcyjności wizualnej krajobrazu okolic Pińczowa, master thesis, Departament of Geoecology, WGSR UW.
• Soczawa, WB 1978, Wwiedienije w uczenije o gieosistemach, Nauka, Nowosybirsk.
• Weinstein, DA 1992, ‘Use of Simulation Models to Evaluate the Alteration of Ecotones by Global Carbon Dioxide Increases’, in Landscape Boundaries, eds AJ Hansen & F di Castri, Ecological Studies, vol. 92, Springer-Verlag, New York.
• Wiens, JA 1992, ‘Ecological Flows Across Landscape Boundaries: A Conceptual Overview’ in Landscape Boundaries, eds AJ Hansen & F di Castri, Ecological Studies, vol. 92, Springer-Verlag, New York.

Identifiers

Biblioteka Nauki

2036146