HIGH MOUNTAINS OF THE UKRAINIAN CARPATHIANS: STATE AND PROBLEMS OF CONCEPTS AND TERMINOLOGY

Abstract

The problems of misreading and use of the term "high mountains" in science are considered. Under the conceptual and terminological apparatus is understood the scientific language of a particular field of knowledge. Instead of the term conceptual and terminological apparatus as equivalent use terminology, understanding them as a set of terms of a particular field of science, technology, or art, associated with the relevant system of concepts. The problem of terminology has occupied and continues to occupy an important place in geographical science, in particular in landscape science. Much of the terms and concepts are not always used successfully and expediently in a given context. Landscape science operates with a powerful terminological apparatus, which is constantly improving and evolving. On the example of the Ukrainian Carpathians, possible ways of organizing the conceptual apparatus, its optimal application for the description of high-altitude PTCs are proposed. The high mountains of the Ukrainian Carpathians are mountain PTC (high-altitude areas: peneplenized alpine-subalpine high mountains, ancient glacial-erosive subalpine high mountains) that rise above the natural upper limit of the forest (1240–2061 m; represented by peneplen and forms of Pleistocene glaciation; covered with alpine-subalpine vegetation on mountain-meadow-brown soil and mountain-peat-brown soils. This is a cold climate zone, which is divided into two subzones: colder and less cold. Colder subzone (from 1500 to 2000 m above sea level) is characterized by the sum of active temperatures less than 600° С, hydrothermal coefficient exceeds 5. Less cold subzone is limited by isolines of sums of temperatures 600–1000° С, and also hydrothermal coefficient respectively 5 and 4 (altitude 1250–1500 m asl). Scientific approaches in the study of alpine PTC are considered. The advantages of the landscape approach in the study of high mountains are presented. There is a false statement about the imaginary identity of objects of biogeocenology, ecology and landscape science. Solntsev M. (1967), Isachenko A. (1980) in their works showed the erroneousness of these views. The concept of biocenosis was first introduced by V. Sukachev in 1964. In its classical formulation it is a system of biocenosis and ecotope to which the microclimate in interaction with soil and lithology belongs. Thus, the main feature of the concept of biogeocenosis is that, in addition to the relationship between the biocenter of the system and the elements of the natural environment, there is a relationship between these elements. This allows the biogeocenologist to trace a slightly different path in the study of the high mountains. Changes in microclimatic features in the forest biocenosis can cause deviations in the water regime of the soil, which will weaken the stability of root systems and lead to the formation of windbreaks, windbreaks, dryness and other processes. The landscape approach provides an effective comprehensive assessment of the natural conditions of the territory. The concept of natural territorial complex put forward as a result of formation of landscape science gives the chance to study any natural phenomenon in system of direct and inverse interrelations between equal, though not equivalent components of PTC where the bioelement is taken to level of other elements of systems. In this article we want to address the problems of misreading and use of the term "high mountains" in natural science, on the example of the Ukrainian Carpathians. Keywords: foresttimber – line (TL); polonynas; high mountains; mountain range; Ukrainian Carpathians.