Content uploaded by Dmitry Konyushkov
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Dmitry Konyushkov on Mar 02, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е6
SOIL COVER OF THE NORTH OF CENTRAL SIBERIA
AS DISPLAYED ON THE SOIL MAP OF THE RUSSIAN
FEDERATION (1988) AND THE STATE SOIL MAP
T. V. Ananko, D. Ye. Konyushkov
V.V. Dokuchaev Soil Science Institute, 119017, Russia, Moscow,
Pyzhevskii 7, bld. 2
e-mail: tatyana@ananko.ru, dkonyushkov@yandex.ru
A brief history of the development of notions about the soil cover of the
north of Central Siberia and their cartographic representation is outlined.
The role of the Soil Map of the Russian Federation (SMRF) (1988) as
the document synthesizing knowledge about Russian soils accumulated
by the 1980s is shown. It is stressed that the work of I.P. Gerasimov
about the genetic specificity of Siberian soils was of fundamental signif-
icance as a clearly stated call for discovering new regularities of the gen-
esis and geography of soils in relation to the broadening factual base of
soil studies. For the territory of Central Siberia, soil cover patterns dis-
played on the SMRF require certain corrections. Such corrections have
been reflected on the corresponding sheets of the State Soil Map of Rus-
sia (SSMR). The most significant of them concern the representation of
cryohydromorphic nongley soils (cryozems) as modal soils of the con-
sidered region. On the SMRF, these soils were represented by a single
type of taiga high-humus nongley soils. On the SSMR, two different
types of cryozems (thixotropic and homogeneous cryozems) are distin-
guished, and their further subdivision with respect to the character of
organic horizons, manifestation of gleyic features, possible differentia-
tion of surface horizons, and the presence of residual carbonates is sug-
gested. A different picture of the soil cover is shown for the territories
composed of hard calcareous rocks. The area of metamorphic pale soils
developing from the carbonate-free substrates has been extended. The
major regularities of the soil cover patterns as displayed on the SSMR
are illustrated by a schematic small-scale map. Information about eco-
logical niches of the soils displayed on the SSMR and SMRF is presented
in a tabulated form.
Keywords: State Soil Map, thixotropic cryozems, peat cryozems, raw-
humus calcareous soils, pale metamorphic soils, soil cartography.
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е7
INTRODUCTION
The Soil Map of the Russian Federation (SMRF) scale 1:2.5 M
published under edition of V.M. Fridland in 1988 is the most important
document, synthesizing knowledge about the soils at the country’s
territory. The Program of this map (for the total area of the Soviet Union)
adopted in 1972 was subjected to insignificant correction, thus providing
the unity of classification and mapping positions on the map compiled
by specialists from different soil institutions [42]. This map served as a
basis for consequent compiling such maps as the soil erosion maps of
European and Asian Russia [9, 10], the soil salinity map of Russia [26],
the map of carbon pool in soils of Russia [43]. The digital version of the
SMRF [35] and a list of soils reflected on this map were a base for the
United State register of the soil resources in Russia [11] to be used later
for compiling different schematic maps including the “Soil Map of
Russia and Adjacent Countries” scale 1:4 M (1995), soil maps scale 1:15
M in National Atlas of Russia (2008) and the maps in National Atlas of
soils in the Russian Federation (2011), the map of soil-ecological
regionalization in the Russian Federation, scale 1:2.5 M edited by G.V.
Dobrovolskiy and I.S. Urusevskaya [41]. The SMRF represents the total
territory of Russia in Soil Atlas of Europe, the northern circumpolar soil
database as well as on the circumpolar soil map; it has been included into
the WRB system, FAO soil classification and Soil Taxonomy [48, 44,
45, 48, 49].
Thus, the SMRF predetermined the notions of the soil cover in
Russia in advance for several tens years. In this context, the following
questions are arisen now: May be these notions adequate from today’s
viewpoint? Is it possible to correct, specify and supplement them? How
will be changed the picture of Russian soils as based on the latest
substantive-genetic classification of soils, in which the soils are
classified according to data about the morphological characteristics of
profiles? (it is worth of note that the SMRF legend is based upon the
zonal principle). Is it feasible to show on the map a number of new soil
types included into the new soil classification? What regularities are in
the geography of newly recognized or specified soil types in Russia? In
other words, what is the new information on genesis and geography of
soils in Russia obtained for the last 40 years (since the time of the SMRF
program publication).
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е8
The answer to the question about the total territory of the country
is beyond this article. We should like to discuss the problem relating to
the soils in the North of Middle Siberia. However, it is evident to say
some words about the essence of this problem.
It is worth emphasizing that in the 1990s the large-scale surveying
the agricultural lands and field soil observations have been practically
discontinued in the country, being somewhat revived in the last years
only in regions of constructing the large infrastructure objects. What is
the basis for soil survey? What soil classification should be used? How
can be used the newly obtained data? There is no united answer to these
questions. It is impossible to apply the “Classification and Diagnostics
of Soils in Russia” published in 1977 because this system doesn’t
embrace the vast areas in the North and frozen regions of Siberia. There
are good reasons for using the State register of soil resources in Russia,
adopted by the Ministry of Agriculture. This register is not a soil
classification; it contains the characteristics of soil individuals in the
SMRF legend, substantiated by factual data about the representative soil
profiles. Under use can be also the indexation system of horizons in
natural soils; however it contains no data about the plough horizons and
different technogenically transformed soils.
The use of a set of pathways for describing the soils presented in
a new “Russian Soil Classification System” published in 2004 and the
Keys for identifying the diagnostic horizons, trunks and orders of soils
and technogenic superficial formations is more promising. In this case
the psychological moment is of importance because this new
classification makes it possible to give an objective description of the
studied soils. Its structure allows including new objects without
destruction of the system logics. The given classification aims to search
new ways for a better understanding the soils. The today’s situation is
identical to that happened in studying the soils of Middle and Eastern
Siberia at the end of the 1950s. The results of the first soil studies
generalized by K.D. Glinka in 1912 showed that the soil cover in the vast
taiga area of Yakutia was presented only by types of podzolic soils –
podzols on sandy bedrocks and weakly podzolic soils on loamy deposits.
The specific soil cover has been explained as developed under conditions
of the continental climate and the permafrost formation. Having studied
this very peculiar land, I.P. Gerasimov proposed to distinguish the
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е9
Eastern-Siberian “permafrost” “podzolic-solonetzic” soil-climatic facies
[4]. Although the specificity of Siberian soils was beyond doubt, the
“magic” of classical zonal soils studied in European Russia proved to be
very high. The newly described taiga soils in Siberia were shown as
podzolic ones on soil maps starting from the first soil map compiled by
K.D. Glinka in 1914 to the soil map of the USSR scale 1:4 M edited by
I.P. Gerasimov in 1954. During these 40 years the zone of podzolic taiga
soils was presented at the total territory of the country (the map
published in 1954 demonstrated its division into subzones including
gley-podzolic soils in the northern taiga, proper podzolic soils in middle
taiga and soddy-podzolic soils of the southern taiga). The distinctive soil
cover under taiga in Middle Siberia included solodic soils, solods and
solonetzes within the lowland of Central Yakutia. The zone of tundra
(tundra gley) soils in the North-Siberian lowland was shown practically
without changes. Some diversity was observed in recognizing the
mountain-tundra soils occupied the areas of Anabar plateau, Putoran
plateau, soddy- and humus-carbonate soils as well as the mountain-taiga
carbonate soils in the carbonate plateau. On theSoil map of the USSR,
scale 1:10 M compiled by N.N. Rozov under edition of I.P. Gerasimov
and Ye.N. Ivanova in 1960 the territory of frozen regions in Middle Si-
beria was already shown as the area covered by frozen-taiga and moun-
tain frozen-taiga soils subdivided into gley-frozen-taiga (northern taiga),
frozen-taiga acid soils (in the western part of taiga zone), frozen-taiga
pale (neutral), frozen-taiga pale solodic and frozen-taiga carbonate soils
[7, 17].
The notion of soil geography within the polar and boreal belts of
Siberia has been analyzed in detail by Ye.N. Ivanova [17]. It is
interesting to notice that on the soil map compiled in 1960 the Eastern-
Siberian frozen-taiga region has been outlined by rose coloring and
indexation of podzolic soils (the frozen-taiga soils in Eastern Siberia
were indicated in brackets).
At the end of the 1950s the soil studies have been intensively
carried out in different regions of Eastern Siberia with the view of
compiling the sheets of the State Soil Map, scale 1:1 M under edition of
I.P. Gerasimov. He could not take part in planning and discussion of
these studies (it has been done by Ye.N. Ivanova) but he considered it
necessary to revise the Program of the State Soil Map adopted in 1955
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е10
for the territory of Northern and Eastern Siberia. In 1963 I.P. Gerasimov
published his paper “Specificity of Siberian Genetic Soils” in which he
presented a critical analysis of soil studies carried out bySiberian scien-
tists, the results of own observations during the field excursion in the
southern part of the Middle-Siberian plateau, the regions near the Baikal
Lake, Eastern Sayany and along Kolyma route (new soil types were pro-
posed by him for the areas under consideration). But it is especially
important to indicate that he has formulated the thought that some
researchers in soils of Siberia can freely speak about Siberian peculiar
soils as new genetic types unknown in European Russia, although the
“provincial” interpretation of these soils as “continental” or “extremely
continental” variants of European genetic soil types cannot show their
specificity. He stressed the necessity to study the influence of dynamic
cryogenic phenomena and the permafrost on the soil formation. This
paper about the genetic specificity of Siberian soils was of fundamental
significance as a clearly stated call for discovering new regularities in
the genesis and geography of soils in relation to the broadening factual
base of soil studies. He wrote that “as always, the definite natural reality
is more rich and diverse as compared to schemes proposed by us” [6].
This call of I.P. Gerasimov as a leader of native soil mapping has
been heard. Shortly after, the studies of Siberian soils permitted to
substantiate new genetic soil types, to open discussion on the specific
soils in the frozen region for a better understanding the regularities of
soil geography. The data accumulated to the beginning of the 1970s were
included into the Program of the SMRF and found the reflection on this
map. Simultaneously, the work was continued to compile the sheets of
the State Soil Map. A new conception about the northern soils was
formulated in 10 years after the Program of the SMRF with consequent
more clear definition [39]. So, the new field materials made it feasible
to enlarge the idea of the soil formation on carbonate rocks and pale soils
in particular in the Middle-Siberian Subarctic as a basis for a new
program elaborated for scantly explored territories in the North, in
Siberia and the Far East [21, 40]. At the end-1980s and early-1990s the
field survey has being conducted with the view of compiling the author’s
map originals. In 2000 this work was finished to prepare the sheets for
publication. Unfortunately, the map hasn’t been published. In the last
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е11
years the attention was paid to preparing the explanatory notes on the
map sheets; latter on they were corrected using new materials obtained
by satellite images and digitized [35]. The authors of this article took
part in compiling the sheets of the map for the northern territory of
Middle Siberia. Under consideration are changes in the map sheets (Q-
47-51 and R-47-51) for Q and R from 64o to 72o N and und from 96o to
130o E as compared to the SMRF published in 1988.
BRIEF CHARACTERISTICS OF THE TERRITORY
The given territory is located in the north of Middle Siberia being
subordinated to the administrative authority of Krasnoyarsk region and
North-Western Yakutia.
Geology, relief and parent rocks. The territory location within the
northern part of Siberian platform prevailing by ascending tectonic
movements is conducive to the development of step-like dissected
denudation plateaus derived from hard rocks. Quaternary plates of
different genesis – lacustrine-alluvial, moraine, fluvioglacial – are
predominantly observed in relief depressions. The cold continental
climate promotes the physical weathering and the weakly expressed soil
formation process. In the soil cover dominant are soils with shallow
profiles and closely connected with hard bedrocks. The specificity of this
territory is also conditioned by the permafrost and intensive
development of cryogenic processes including cryogenic weathering,
sorting of grounds, solifluction, thermocarsts and cryogenic cracking.
The lithological composition of bedrocks is rather diverse. Carbonate
rocks of the Upper Proterozoic and Paleozoic prevail: limestone,
dolomite, marl, gypsum in such vast plateaus as Olenek-Anabar,
Markhin, Kotuy and a part of Vilyui. In their periphery there are the acid
sedimentary rocks of Jura and Cretaceous periods including sandstones,
slates, aleurites, argillites. Anabar plateau is underlying by acid
metamorphic rocks consisted of gneiss and quartzite with admixture of
granites. Such effusive rocks as basalt and tuff are inherent to Purotan
and the southern part of Syverma plateaus. Intrusive rocks of the
trappean complex including dolerites, gabbro-dolerites predominate in
the major part of Vilyui plateau, whereas the volcanogenic-sedimentary
(tuff, tuffite, tuff-sandstone are found to be in central and southern parts
of this plateau). The loose weathering products of carbonate rocks form
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е12
a shallow mantle with different content of rock debris and ground ice,
loamy-clayey carbonate (effervescent) deposits of eluvial, eluvial-
deluvial, solifluction and deluvial-alluvial genesis. The deposits of Jura
and Cretaceous periods are presented by loams and loamy sands, as a
rule, they are carbonate-free with middle and low ice content. The hard
magmatic and metamorphic rocks reveal shallow fine debris-blocky
deposits. Quaternary plates of glacial and water-glacial origin are loams
and seldom pebble loamy sands. In plains the glacial, old-alluvial and
lacustrine-alluvial loam-clayey deposits are dominant.
Climate. The great extent of the territory and the complicated
orography speak about changing climatic conditions from the cold arctic
climate in the north to the moderate-cold boreal climate in the south. The
sum of temperatures >10C is increasing from 0–400C in tundra to
800–1200C in the south of northern taiga; the frost-free period makes
up less than 50 days in the north and 70–90 days in the south. The mean
annual and average monthly temperatures in January and July are in-
creased from –12…–16 to –8…–12C and 4–8 to 12–16C respectively.
The snow cover gets decreasing southwards from 240–260 to 220 days.
The period of the intensive soil formation becomes shortened towards
the north; the soil moisture increases at the same annual precipitation
and decline in evaporation and thickness of the seasonally thawed layer.
From the east to the west the annual rainfall increases, the continental
climate gets decreasing. For instance, near Eyisk settlement in the east
of this territory the precipitation makes up 200–250 mm being increased
to 400 mm in the west and 600–800 mm on Putoran plateau exceeding
the evaporation. The depth of seasonal thawing is varying from 40–90
cm in heavy loamy-clayey frozen soils to 120–200 cm in loamy sandy-
loamy soils.
Vegetation. The territory under study embraces four vegetation
subzones including middle taiga, northern taiga, forest tundra and south-
ern tundra. In the subzone of middle taiga the larch and pine-larch forests
are dominated, in the northern taiga – thin larch and spruce-larch forests
with lichen and shrubs; in the forest tundra – thin larch forests with small
shrubbery; in southern tundra – stony dried lichen tundra on rock debris
and moss-lichen and mossy shrubby tundra on loose deposits. On
Putoran and Anabar plateaus there are three belts: taiga, tundra and
golets.
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е13
MATERIALS AND METHODS USED FOR COMPILING THE
SOIL MAP SHEETS
When compiling the author’s originals of the Soil map sheets for
the territory in the North of Middle Siberia it seemed possible to use the
materials permitting to specify the characteristics of the soil cover as
compared to the SMRF [12, 38, 39, 22, 14, 15]. The method of expert-
forecasting mapping based on the comparative-ecological approach was
used for the territory that hasn’t been provided by factual soil data. Under
study were the soils of different ecological niches outlined on the map
using the analysis of the soil-forming factors. The factual data about the
soils in the studied niches were extrapolated for the territory occupied
by these soils. The map sheets were edited by using the satellite images
obtained by Landsat combined with the analysis of factorial maps of
vegetation, bedrocks, Quaternary deposits and relief that allowed
specifying the boundaries of old and newly discovered soil contours.
THE SOIL COVER IN THE NORTH OF MIDDLE SIBERIA
The description of the soil cover using the materials of the State
soil map is beyond this article. However for a better understanding the
changes outlined on this map as compared to the SMRF it is purposeful
to consider the picture of the soil cover on the whole. Using the materials
of the State soil map a generalized map scale 1:16 M has been prepared
(Fig.). The major ecological niches of soils shown on sheets Q-47–51
and R-47–51 of the State soil map and the SMRF are presented in Table.
As compared to the SMRF the specific preparation of sheets of
the State soil map according to a new program is that the geocryological
conditions are indicated: the seasonally frozen soils and those developed
on the permafrost are outlined on this map, the latter being subdivided
into dry frozen and ice-frozen with shallow (<1 m) and deep (>1 m)
thawing.
CHANGES IN THE SOIL COVER IN SHEETS OF THE STATE
SOIL MAP AS COMPARED TO THE SMRF
As seen on the map and its legend the modal soils in the north of
Middle Siberian plateaus are represented by cryozems – cryohydromor-
phic nongley (or slightly gleyic) soils. On the SMRF a part of these soils
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е14
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е15
The generalized soil map of the north in Middle-Siberian plateau (the sheets of
the State soil map Q, R-37–41); components of the soil cover: 1 – thixotrophic
raw-humus and peat-humus residual carbonate cryozems, raw-humus carbonate,
pale raw-humus, gley peat-humus and peaty soils; 2 – thixotrophic humus and
peat-humus (including the residual-carbonate), pale cryozems, gley peat-huus and
peaty soils; 3 – peaty cryozems (homogenic), pale raw-humus, rock outcrops; 4 –
peat-crtozems (homogenic), podburs, ochrious podburs, pale raw-humus soils and
rock outcrops; 5 – thixotrophic raw-humus and humus differentiated cryozems,
typical (undifferentiated) cryozems, gley peaty-humus and peaty soils; 6 – thixo-
trophic raw-humus and humus cryozems, soils in cryogenic cracks (mottled-po-
lygonal complexes), gley peaty-humus and peaty soils; 7 – pale raw-humus, peaty
cryozems, podburs and rock outcrops, combined sometimes with raw-humus-car-
bonate soils and thixotrophic residual-carbonate cryozems; 8 – pale soils and rock
outcrops (stony polygons, stony deposits and talus), peaty cryozems (homogenic),
podburs; 8а – the same soils combined with soddy-and raw humus-carbonate
ones, thixotrophic residual-carbonate cryozems; 9 – ochrious podburs, peaty cry-
ozems (homogenic), rock outcrops; 10 – podburs and rock outcrops in stony pol-
ygons, primitive soils, stony deposits and talus; 11 – pale cryozemic, pale raw-
humus, pale podzolized, humus thixotrophic cryozems; 12 – pale podzolized, pale
raw-humus soils, podzols, pale cryozems; 13 – raw-humus carbonate soils, thix-
otrophic raw-humus, humus and residual-carbonate cryozems, rock outcrops;
14 – raw-humus carbonate weakly developed soils, humus-carbonate soils, soils
in cracks; 15 – carbonate soils, humus soils in cracks, raw-humus carbonate, rock
outcrops; 16 – carbonate-pale, carbonate-pale solodic, pale podzolized soil; soils
of meadow alases – gley raw-humus, humus and peaty-humus, gley peaty and
peat; 17 – carbonate-pale solodic, carbonate-pale gray, carbonate-pale soils; soils
of meadow alases – gley raw-humus, humus and peaty-humus, gley peaty and
peat; 18 – pdzols, pale podzolized, pale raw-humus soils; 19 – gley peaty-humus
and peaty, gley peat soils; thixotrophic humus gleyic residual-carbonate cryo-
zems; 19* – in tundra with soils of mottles; 20 – gley peaty and peat soils, gley
peaty-humus, peat soils;21 – peat, gley peaty and peat soils; 22 – alluvial;23 –
rock outcrops, peaty cryozems, pale, primitive soils.
was shown as taiga peaty-humus high-humus nongley ones. The
given soils have been recognized by I.A. Sokolov as homogenic cryo-
zems confined to slopes on shallow stony-loamy deposits of different
composition [37]. The peaty litter is underlying by the peculiar cryotur-
bated horizon 20–30 cm thick with the increased content of differently
decomposed residues of meso-and hydrophile vegetation (in a new clas-
sification this horizon can be presented as a raw-humus cryoturbated
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е16
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е17
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е18
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е19
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е20
AOcr horizon or humus-dark cryoturbated AHcr horizon, how-
ever its diagnostic properties require to be specified). Due to the
abundant plant residues this horizon reveals the low density (<1 g/cm3),
good water-holding and heat-isolating properties in the thawing state.
Under this horizon there is a cryoturbated mineral horizon as transitional
to the parent rock. The depth of seasonal thawing makes up 40–60 cm.
In spite of constant overmoistening there are no features of the gley
formation. These soils are developed under humid conditions of taiga
and tundra zones. The intensive surface accumulation of the organic
matter and decomposition of the plant residues are combined with
cryogenic turbation resulted in the formation of the mixture composing
of decomposition products of the surface litter and the mineral material.
Obviously, due to increasing the organogenic layer the permafrost
becomes close to the surface, the ice content is also increased; one should
assume that the given soils will be transformed into peaty frozen soils in
future. On the State soil map they were identified as peaty cryozems
(homogenic); as compared to the SMRF the area of their distribution is
rather small in the western humid part of the studied territory.
Widespread are icy-frozen soils that were included into the type
of cryohydromorphic nongley soils – thixotrophic cryozems being
absent on the SMRF [37]. They are developed on the medium-and heavy
loamy and clayey derivates of hard sedimentary rocks under thin larch
and birch-larch moss-lichen and shrubby forests. The microrelief is hum-
mocky; between the hummocks of 1–3 m in size there are cracks 30–40
cm wide with icy veins in their central part. Being differed from peaty
cryozems (homogenic) these soils display a clearly expressed boundary
between the organic and mineral parts of the profile; the transitional
AOcr horizon is shallow. In the upper soil horizons it is possible to
observe differences including the absence of the organogenic horizon on
bare hummocks or the presence of litter-peaty, peaty-humus and even
humus (gray-humus) horizons. This is conditioned by the composition
of vegetation prevailing there, the pattern of surface moistening,
drainage degree, slope exposition, the composition of parent rocks, etc.
They are underlying by the cryoturbated CR horizon; it is differently
colored in dependence on the soil-forming rock. The clearly expressed
features of gleying are absent; the gleyic features are sometimes met in
the kind of ochreous mottles. The cryoturbation is manifested through
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е21
the vertical picture of the soil mass and several mottles enriched with the
organic matter or plant residues in the mineral horizon. The thawing
depth varies from 50 to 90 cm. The horizon is water saturated and reveals
thixotrophic properties. Being formed on derivates of carbonate rocks
this horizon is effervescent, however the carbonate pedofeatures are
absent. In depressions between the hummocks the thickness of the or-
ganogenic (peaty or peaty-humus) horizon becomes increased to 20–40
cm but its lower part is constantly frozen. Thixotrophic cryozems have
a number of transitional subtypes of peaty, frozen, gley and pale soils.
The sheets of the State soil map contain the characteristics specifying the
prevailed type of organogenic horizons, the presence or absence of
gleying features, the amount of stones and carbonates. The areas covered
by these soils coincide partially with those outlined on the SMRF but
sometimes embrace the areas shown on the SMRF as gley peaty-humus,
humus-carbonate podburs (on acid sedimentary deposits) and tundra-
weakly gleyic humus soils. The thixotrophic cryozems are dominant
under cold semidry conditions in the north-eastern part of Middle
Siberian plateau on clay derivates of carbonate rocks of Palaozole,
carbonate-free loamy weathering products of Jura, loamy moraine and
fluvioglacial deposits. They are confined to dissected non-swamply or
slightly swampy watersheds, gentle slopes and ouvals of denudation
plains, being changed by gley peaty-humus and peaty soils on strongly
swampy flat surfaces destroyed by thermocarsts. On steep slopes derived
from carbonate deposits resistant to weathering and solifluction slopes
subjected to significant drying they are changed by the raw-humus
carbonate or primitive soils [23] and pale raw-humus soils on the shallow
dry-frozen eluvium as well as magmatic and metamorphic deposits on
slopes.
Significant changes in the soil geography of Middle Siberia are
presented on sheets of the State soil map. This is distribution of
carbonate-free pale soils on deposits of different chemical-mineralogical
composition in the semi-humid part of the Subarctic [40, 39, 14, 15]. On
the SMRF their area was limited by the middle-taiga subzone of Central
and Western Yakutia. These soils are confined to the Jura and Creta-
ceous sedimentary deposits and characterized by the presence of the per-
mafrost that is thown to the depth of 120–150 cm in the summer. On
sheets of the State soil map the carbonate-free pale raw-humus soils are
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е22
distinguished as derived from stony weathering products on acid
metamorphic deposits of Anabar plateau (gneiss, granitoides), the
deposits of trappean complex (dolerites, basalt, tuff) on Vilyui, Kotui
and Markhan plateaus. In the southern part of the northern taiga subzone
the western boundary of these soils is found to be at 104-105E being
changed by ochreous podburs on effusive deposits in Syverma plateau.
In the north their boundary was advanced to 99–100E. The morpholog-
ical profile of these soils is presented by the following diagnostic hori-
zons: O–AO–(A1)–Bm–BC–C(ca). They differ from podburs because
have no features of illuvial-humus migration and accumulation in middle
metamorphic Bm horizons, their pH is slightly acid or neutral, the soils
are weakly saturated with bases, the increased content of crystalline iron
forms. On the SMRF these territories were shown as covered by
ochreous podburs on trapps, podburs on acid crystalline and sedimentary
deposits and seldom by frozen-taiga high-humus nongley soils. With
increasing the climate humidity in the western part of this territory the
pale raw-humus soils are changed by ochreous podburs on base rocks,
dark-colored podburs and illuvial-humus burozems on acid rocks in the
middle taiga subzone. The distribution boundaries of carbonate-free pale
soils are conditioned by the climatic (the annual rainfall is 200-400 mm)
and lithological factors owing to widespread crystalline rocks combined
with carbonate ones in the north of Middle Siberia. It is worth
emphasizing that in a new soil classification of Russia the given soils are
not recognized (only the soils developed on carbonate loess-like loams
are referred to pale soils). The preliminary analysis showed that these
soils can be regarded to orders of cryometamorphic (pale-
metamorphized cryometamorphic), iron-metamorphic (pale-
metamorphized and iron-granulated pale-metamorphized pzhavozems)
as well as lithozemic soils in dependence on definite lithological
conditions and the peculiar features of the profile morphology.
This approach permits to outline the soils on the map. However,
the carbonate-free pale soils included into these orders make their
ecological niches more indefinite (with the exception of lithozems
developed on dense rocks in different climatic conditions). It requires
the further studies.
On sheets of the State soil map the soil cover of plateaus confined
to dense carbonate deposits is shown quite another as compared to the
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е23
SMRF. The stony carbonate tundra was presented by one type including
the tundra humus-carbonate soils in watersheds and gentle slopes as well
the rock outcrops – on steep slopes. The interpretation of satellite images
combined with description of the soil-vegetation cover showed that the
significant part of this territory is covered by scanty mottled sedge-dryad
stony tundra, the soil cover of which consists of cryogenic complexes of
soils in cracks (raw-humus, transitional into cryogenic complexes of
rock outcrops and primitive soils on slopes) and raw-humus carbonate
soils [22, 23]. The idea of the humus-carbonate soils on shallow mantle
of the weathering products predominated in northern taiga and tundra of
Middle Siberia needs to be further specified. These soils are
characterized by accumulation of humus enriched with mineral particles
and decomposed plant residues [22]. The landscapes of stony tundra are
dominated on stony plateaus in the north of Middle Siberia. The shrubby
moss-lichen tundra is distributed in watershed areas on loose Quaternary
deposits. The sheets of the State soil map demonstrate soddy-carbonate
incompletely developed or humus-raw-humus carbonate soils in lower
gentle parts of slopes, in weakly dissected watersheds and river valleys.
Thus, the soil cover in the North of Middle Siberia presented on
the State soil map differs from that on the SMRF. 1) The area of
hydromorphic non-and weakly gley soils – cryozems was extended
being divided into types of thixotrophic cryozems and peaty cryozems
(homogenic). 2) The area of pale soils on carbonate-free deposits was
also expanded. 3) The soil formation pattern on loose and dense
carbonate rocks in taiga and tundra zones has been specified. 4) The soil
recognition based upon different meso-relief elements has been studied
in detail. The soil names have no indication on their zonal location in the
legend of this map. The soil complexes have no independent reflection
in the legend but their composition is indicated on the map. The sheets
of the State soil map contain the geocryological information on the ice
content and the depth of the permafrost thawing.
REFERENCES
1. AnankoT.V., Gerasimova M. I., Konyushkov D.E. Pale soils on non-
calcareous deposits in the middle Siberia and their position in the soil classifi-
cation of Russia, Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva, 2015,
Vol. 77, pp. e23-e41.
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е24
2. Bystryakov G.M. Pochvy i pochvennyi pokrov kholodnykh poluzasushlivykh
oblasei severo-vostoka SSSR (Soils and the soil cover of cold semiarid regions
of the northeast of the Soviet Union), Extended abstract of candidate's thesis,
Moscow, 1979. 22 p.
3. Gerasimov I.P. Geneticheskie, geograficheskie i istoricheskier problemy
sovremennogo pochvovedeniya (Genetic, geographical, and historical problems
of modern pedology), Moscow, 1976, 298 p.
4. Gerasimov I.P. O pochvenno-klimaticheskikh fatsiyakh ravnin SSSR i pri-
legayushchikh stran (Soil-climatic facies of plains of the USSR and contiguous
countries), Tr. Pochven. inst. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 1933, Vol. 8, Iss. 5, 38 p.
5. Gerasimov I.P. Programma Gosudarstvennoi pochvennoi karty SSSR v
masshtabe 1 : 1 000 000 i proekt svodnoi shkaly uslovnykh obonachenii (Pro-
gram of the State Soil Map of the Soviet Union on a scale of 1 : 1 M and a draft
of a general system of conventional signs to it), Moscow, 1955, 20 p.
6. Gerasimov I.P. Samobytnost' geneticheskikh tipov pochv Sibiri (Genetic
specificity of Siberian soils), Sibirskii geograficheskii sbornik, Moscow, Iss. 2,
pp. 7–27.
7. Glikna K.D. O narushenii obshchei zonal'nosti pochv Evrazii v zapadnov
Zabaikal'e i Yakutskoi oblasti (On the disturbance of general soil zonality of
Eurasian in the western Trans-Baikal and Yakutsk regions), Pochvovedenie,
1912, No. 4, pp. 61–68.
8. Gosudarstvennaya pochvennaya karta masshtaba 1 : 1 mln. Listy R-47-51,
Q-47-51. Archieve of the Dokuchaev Soil Science Institute.
9. Gosudarstvennaya pochvenno-erozionnaya karta Rossii (aziatskaya chast'),
masshtab 1 : 2 500 000 (State Map of Soil Erosion in Russia (Asian part), scale
1 : 2.5 M), Moscow, 2004, 12 sheets.
10. Gosudarstvennaya pochvenno-erozionnaya karta Rossii i sopredel'nykh
stran (evropeiskaya chast'), masshtab 1 : 2 500 000 (State map of soil erosion
in Russia and contiguous countries (European part), scale 1 : 2.5 M), Moscow,
1999, 4 sheets.
11. Edinyi gosudarstvennyr reestr pochvennykh resursov Rossii. Versiya 1.0. (A
Unified State Registry of Soil Resources of Russia), Moscow, 2014, 768 p.
12. Elovskaya L.G. Klassifikatsiya i diagnostika merzlotnykh pochv Yakutii
(Classification and Diagnostics of Permafrost-Affected Soils of Yakutia), Ya-
kutsk, 1987, 172 p.
13. Elovskaya L.G., Petrova E.I., Teterina L.V. Pochvy severnoi Yakutii (Soils
of northern Yakutia), Novosibirsk, 1979, 301 p.
14. Ershov Yu.I. Zakonomerrnosti pochvoobrazovaniay v predelakh Sred-
nesibirskogo ploskogor'ya, Pochvovedenie, 1995, No. 7, pp. 805–810.
15. Ershov Yu.I. Mezomorfnoe pochvoobrazovanie v taezhno-merzlotnom semi-
gumidnom sektore Srednei Sibiri, Pochvovedenie, 1994, No. 10, pp. 10-18.
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е25
16. Ivanova E.N., Rozov N.N., Erokhina A.A., Nogina N.A., Nosin V.A.,
Ufimtseva K.A., Novye materialy po obschei geografii i klassifikatsii pochv pol-
yarnogo i boreal'nogo poyasa Sibiri, Pochvovedenie, 1961, No. 11, pp. 7–23.
17. Karta pochvenno-ekologicaheskogo raionirovaniya Rossiskoi Federatsii.
Masshtab 1 : 2 500 000, ed. by G.V. Dobrovol'skii, I.S. Urusevskaya, Moscow,
2013.
18. Klassifikatsiya i diagnostika pochv Rossii (Classification and Diagnostic
System of Russian Soils), Smolensk, 2004, 341 p.
19. Klassifikatsiya i diagnostika pochv SSSR (Classification and Diagnostics of
Soils of the USSR), Moscow, 1977, 224 p.
20. Konyushkov D.Ye., Pochvoobrazovanie na karbonatnykh porodakh v kon-
inental'noi Subarktike (Soil formation of calcareous rocks in continental Sub-
arctic region), Extended abstract of candidate's thesis, Moscow, 1991. 24 p.
21. Konyushkov D.Ye. Struktura pochvennogo pokrova severo-vostochnoi
chasti Sredensibirskogo ploskogor'ya (Soil cover patterns in the northeastern
part of the Central Siberian Plateau), Pochvovedenie, 1992, No. 1, pp. 61–73.
22. Lukicheva A.N. Severo-taezhnaya rastitel'nost Sibirskoi platformy v svayzi
s geologicaheskim stroeniem (Northern taiga vegetation of Siberian Platform as
related to the geological conditions), Leningrad, 1972, 52 p.
23. Natsional'nyi atlas pochv Rossiiskoi Federatsii (National Soil Atlas of the
Russian Federation), ed. by S.A. Shoba, Moscow, 2011, 632 p.
24. Natsional'nyi atlas Rossii. Vol. 1. Obshchaya kharakteristika territorii, Vol.
2. Priroda, ekologiya (National Atlas of Russia. Vol. 1. General Characteriza-
tion of the Territory. Vol. 2. Environment and Ecology), Moscow, 2004 (Vol.
1), 2006 (Vol. 2).
25. Pankova E.I., Novikova A.F. Maps of soil salinization in Russia, Eurasian
Soil Sci. 2002, Vol. 35, No. 7, pp. 724–736.
26. Polevoi opredelitel' pochv Rossii (Field Guide for Correlation of Russian
Soils), Moscow, 2008? 183 p.
27. Pochvennaya karta Rossii i sopredel'nykh gosudarstv. Masshtab 1 :
: 4 000 000 (Soil Map of Russia and Contiguous Countries, Scale 1 : 4 M), M.A.
Glazovskaya (ed.), Moscow, 1995, 4 sheets.
28. Pochvennaya karta Rossiiskoi imperii. Masshtab 1 : 12 600 000 (Soil Map
of the Russian Empire, Scale 1 : 12.6 M), compiled by K.D. Glinka, in Atlas
Aziatskoi Rossii, Sankt-Pterburg, 1914.
29. Pochvennaya karta RSFSR. Masshtab 1 : 2 500 000 (Soil map of the Russian
Federation, Scale 1 : 1 : 2.5 M), ed. by V.M. Fridland, Moscow, 1988.
30. Pochvennaya karta SSSR. Masshtab 1 : 10 000 000 (Soil Map of the USSR,
Scale 1 : 10 M), ed. by I.P. Gerasimov and E.N. Ivanova, Moscow, 1960.
31. Pochvennaya karta SSSR. Masshtab 1 : 4 000 000 (Soil Map of the USSR,
Scale 1 : 4 M), ed. by I.P. Gerasimov, Moscow, 1954, 1956.
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е26
32. Pochvenno-geograficheskoe raionirovanie SSSR (Soil-Geographical Divi-
sion of the USSR), Moscow, 1962, 422 pp.
33. Rukhovich D.I., Wagner V.B., Vil'hevskaya E.V., Kalinina N.V., Koroleva
P.V. Problems of using digitized thematic maps on the territory of the former
Soviet Union upon the creation of the “Soils of Russia” geographic information
system, Eurasian Soil Sci., 2011, Vol. 44, No. 9, pp. 957–968.
34. Rukhovich D.I., Koroleva P.V., Kalinina N.V., Vil'chevskaya E.V., Simakova
M.S., Dolinina E.A., Rukhovich S.V. State soil map of the Russian Federation:
An ArcInfo version, Eurasian Soil Sci., 2013, Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 225–240.
35. Sokolov I.A. Gidromorfnoe negleevoe pochvoobrazovanie, Pochvovedenie,
1980a, No. 1, pp. 21–33.
36. Sokolov I.A. O raznoobrazii proyavleniya gidromorfnogo negleevogo
pochvoobrazovaniya, Pochvovedenie, 1980b, No. 2, pp. 5–19.
37. Sokolov I.A. Palevye pochvy Srednesibirskogo ploskogor'ya,
Pochvovedenie, 1986a, No. 8, pp. 5–18.
38. Sokolov I.A. Rabochaya programma po sostavleniyu listov gosudarstvennoi
pochvennoi karty SSSR masshtaba 1 : 1 000 000 (Working program on compi-
lation of the State Soil Map of the USSR, 1 : 1 M scale), Moscow, 1986b (man-
uscript).
39. Sokolov I.A., Bystryakov G.M. Palevye pochy severnoi taigi Vostochnoi
Sibiri i Dal'nego Vostoka, Vestn. Mosk Gos Univ., Ser. 17: Pochvovedenie,
1980, No. 1, pp. 30–37.
40. Urusevskaya I.S., Alyabina I.O., Shoba S.A. Soil-geographical zoning as a
direction of science and as the basis for rational land use, Eurasian Soil Sci.,
2015, Vol. 48, No. 9, pp. 897–910.
41. Fridland V.M., Karavaeva N.A., Rudneva E.N., et al. Programma poch-
vennoi karty SSSR masshtaba 1 : 2 500 000 (Program of the soil map of the
USSR on a scale of 1 : 2.5 M), Moscow, 1972, 160 pp.
42. Shishov L.L., Pankova E.I. (eds). Zasolennye pochvy Rossii (Salt-Affected
Soils of Russia), Moscow, 2006, 854 pp.
43. Schepaschenko D.G., Mukhortova L.V., Shvidenko A.Z., Vedrova E.F. The
pool of organic carbon in the soils of Russia, Eurasian Soil Sci., 2013, Vol. 46,
No. 2, pp. 107–116.
44. Goryachkin S., Stolbovoi V., Tarnocai C., Kimble J., Broll G., Jakobsen B.,
Montanarella L., Naumov E., Arnoldussen A., Lacelle B., Waltman S. Northern
circumpolar soil database and derived soil maps in different classification sys-
tems, 17th WСSS. 14-21 August 2002, Bangkok, Thailand. Transactions. CD-
ROM, 2002. Vol. II. P. 838-1-9.
45. Jones A., Stolbovoy V., Tarnocai C., Broll G., Spaargaren O., Montanarella
L. (eds.), Soil Atlas of the Northern Circumpolar Region. Europ. Commission
Office of Official Publ., Luxembourg, 2010, 142 pp.
Byulleten Pochvennogo instituta im. V.V. Dokuchaeva. 2015. Vol. 81.
е27
46. Soil Atlas of Europe, European Soil Bureau Network, European Commis-
sion, 2005, 128 pp.
47. Stolbovoi V. and McCallum I. CD-ROM “Land Resources of Russia”, Int.
Inst. for Applied Systems Analysis and the Russian Academy of Sciences,
Laxenburg, Austria, 2002.
48. Stolbovoi V.S. Soils of Russia: Correlated with the revised legend of the
FAO soil map of the World and World Reference Base for soil resources. Re-
search Report RR-00-13, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis,
IIASA, Laxenburg, Austria, 2000. 112 p.
49. Tarnocai C., Kimble J., Swanson D., Goryachkin S., Naumov Y.M.,
Stolbovoi V., Jakobsen B., Broll G., Montanarella L., Arnoldussen A., Ar-
nalds O., Yli-Halla M. Northern Circumpolar Soils Map. Ottawa, Canada: Re-
search Branch, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 2002.
