Spring freshet on East European plain: changes in drivers and conditions during last three decades

Author(s):  
Maxim Kharlamov ◽  
Maria Kireeva ◽  
Natalia Varentsova

<p>Over the past 20 years, the climate on the East European plain tends to be significantly warmer and drier. Winters became shorter and spring freshet’s conditions have been changed significantly. Maximum snow depth was the most important factor of spring freshet formation 30 years ago, but nowadays it has no significance at all and main factor today is melt water losses on infiltration and evaporation.</p><p>We registered a decrease in the period of stable snow accumulation (on average by 20% in the southern and southwestern parts of the East European Plain) because of the increase in winter temperatures. More often during first part of winter snow cover disappeared totally. The number of thaws and their duration at the end of the winter also increase and this leads to earlier and more prolonged melting of the snow pack. In these conditions, an extremely low spring freshet is formed. Our studies show that with the condition of an equal maximum snow depth the slow snowmelt forms the spring freshet up to 4 times less in volume than the fast melting.</p><p>Soil moisture also plays an important role in the melt water losses. The most part of the East European Plain is characterized by a decrease in soil moisture in late autumn, which indicates increased losses during snow melting period.</p><p>Still, the most significant changes in the structure of the factors of spring freshet formation are common to the southern and southwestern parts of the East European Plain. In the northern part, conservative factors still dominate, although this area is characterized by the significant increase in winter temperatures.</p><p>The study was supported by Russian Science Foundation Proj. №19-77-10032</p>

2017 ◽  
pp. 94-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yu. A. Semenishchenkov

Phytogeographical features of forest vegetation at the level of lower-rank syntaxa were being discussed in literature since the early 20th century (Cajander, 1903; Sukachev, 1926; Braun-Blanquet, 1964; Kral et al., 1975; Kleopov, 1990; Bulokhov, 2003; Ellenberg, 2009), however, phytocoenologists still have no uniform interpretation and geographical maintenance of lower classification units. Forest vegetation of the European part of Russia is well studied according to Braun-Blanquet approach with association as a system of geographical subassociations. The paper offers the approaches to the reflection of geographical variations of the natural forest vegetation in the basin of the Upper Dnieper (central part of the East European Plain) at the level of lower-rank syntaxa The xeromesophytic oak woods in the basin of the Upper Dnieper belong to the East European ass. Lathyro nigri–Quercetum roboris Bulokhov et Solomeshch 2003. Floristic differentiation of this association from the similar Central European ass. Potentillo-Quercetum is given. These two associations have large blocks of geographically significant differential species that does not allow to consider them as a part of one association. The suggested approach allows to define the chorological content of units of lower syntaxonomical ranks and make regional classification schemes comparable to each other.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Dinnis ◽  
A. Bessudnov ◽  
N. Reynolds ◽  
T. Devièse ◽  
A. Dudin ◽  
...  

AbstractThe Streletskian is central to understanding the onset of the Upper Palaeolithic on the East European Plain. Early Streletskian assemblages are frequently seen as marking the Neanderthal-anatomically modern human (AMH) anthropological transition, as well as the Middle-to-Upper Palaeolithic archaeological transition. The age of key Streletskian assemblages, however, remains unclear, and there are outstanding questions over how they relate to Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic facies. The three oldest Streletskian layers—Kostenki 1 Layer V, Kostenki 6 and Kostenki 12 Layer III—were excavated by A. N. Rogachev in the mid-20th century. Here, we re-examine these layers in light of problems noted during Rogachev’s campaigns and later excavations. Layer V in the northern part of Kostenki 1 is the most likely assemblage to be unmixed. A new radiocarbon date of 35,100 ± 500 BP (OxA- X-2717-21) for this assemblage agrees with Rogachev’s stratigraphic interpretation and contradicts later claims of a younger age. More ancient radiocarbon dates for Kostenki 1 Layer V are from areas lacking diagnostic Streletskian points. The Kostenki 6 assemblage’s stratigraphic context is extremely poor, but new radiocarbon dates are consistent with Rogachev’s view that the archaeological material was deposited prior to the CI tephra (i.e. >34.3 ka BP). Multiple lines of evidence indicate that Kostenki 12 Layer III contains material of different ages. Despite some uncertainty over the precise relationship between the dated sample and diagnostic lithic material, Kostenki 1 Layer V (North) therefore currently provides the best age estimate for an early Streletskian context. This age is younger than fully Upper Palaeolithic assemblages elsewhere at Kostenki. Other “Streletskian” assemblages and Streletskian points from younger contexts at Kostenki are briefly reviewed, with possible explanations for their chronostratigraphic distribution considered. We caution that the cultural taxon Streletskian should not be applied to assemblages based simply on the presence of bifacially worked artefacts.


2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. T. Barabanov ◽  
S. V. Dolgov ◽  
N. I. Koronkevich ◽  
V. I. Panov ◽  
A. I. Petel’ko

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document