A comparison of results from geomorphological diversity evaluation methods in the Polish Lowland (Toruń Basin and Chełmno Lakeland)

References

• Benito-Calvo, A., Pérez-González, A., Magri, O., & Meza, P. (2009). Assessing regional geodiversity: The Iberian Peninsula. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 34, 1433–1445. doi:10.1002/esp.1840
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ber, A. (2005). The detailed geological map of Poland 1:50,000: The history, present and future. Przegląd Geologiczny, 53, 903–906.
   Google Scholar
• Birch, C. P. D., Oom, S. P., & Beecham, J. A. (2007). Rectangular and hexagonal grids used for observation, experiment and simulation in ecology. Ecological Modelling, 206, 347–359. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.03.041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Clercq, E. M., De Wulf, R. R., & Van Herzele, A. (2007). Relating spatial pattern of forest cover to accessibility. Landscape and Urban Planning, 80, 14–22. doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.04.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Sousa, L., Nery, F., Sousa, R., & Matos, J. (2006). Assessing the accuracy of hexagonal versus square tilled grids in preserving DEM surface flow directions. In M. Caetano & M. Painho (Eds.), 7th international symposium on spatial accuracy assessment in natural resources and environmental sciences (pp. 191–200). Retrieved from http://www.spatial-accuracy.org/deSousa2006accuracy
   Google Scholar
• Eastman, J. R. (2006). IDRISI Andes guide to GIS and image processing (Manual Version 15.00) (p. 327). Worcester: Clark University.
   Google Scholar
• EEA. (2006). Corine land cover 2006 (CLC2006). Retrieved October 8, 2014, from http://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/clc-2006-vector-data-version-2
   Google Scholar
• Evans, I. S. (1972). General geomorphometry, derivatives of altitude and descriptive statistics. In R. J. Chorley (Ed.), Spatial Analysis in Geomorphology (pp. 17–90). London: Methuen.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, I. S. (1980). An integrated system of terrain analysis and slope mapping. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie N.F, Supplementband, 36, 274–295.
   Google Scholar
• Fassoulas, Ch, Mouriki, D., Dimitriou-Nikolakis, P., & Iliopoulos, G. (2012). Quantitative assessment of geotopes as an effective tool for Geoheritage management. Geoheritage, 4, 177–193. doi:10.1007/s12371-011-0046-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galon, R. (1968). New facts and problems pertaining to the origin of the Noteć-Warta Pradolina and the valleys linked with it. Przegląd Geograficzny, 40, 307–315. Retrieved from http://rcin.org.pl/igipz/Content/8681/WA51_16383_r1968-t40-z2_Przeg-Geogr.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Gordon, J. E., & Barron, H. F. (2012). Valuing geodiversity and geoconservation: Developing a more strategic ecosystem approach. Scottish Geographical Journal, 128, 278–297. doi:10.1080/14702541.2012.725858
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graf, R., & Sobkowiak, L. (2012). Usefulness of hydrographic and sozological databases in ecological studies of rivers in Poland. Ecological Questions, 16, 109–117. doi:10.2478/v10090-012-0011-5
   Google Scholar
• Gravesen, P., Pedersen, S. A. S., Klint, K. E. S., & Jakobsen, P. R. (2006). Geologiske kort i Danmark – hvad viser de kvartærgeologiske kort. GeologiskNyt, 2, 10–14. Retrieved from http://ojs.statsbiblioteket.dk/index.php/gn/article/view/3552/3071
   Google Scholar
• Gray, M. (2004). Geodiversity: Valuing and conserving abiotic nature. Chichester: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, M. (2011). Other nature: Geodiversity and geosystem services. Environmental Conservation, 38, 271–274. doi:10.1017/S0376892911000117
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, M. (2012). Valuing geodiversity in an “ecosystem services” context. Scottish Geographical Journal, 128, 177–194. doi:10.1080/14702541.2012.725858.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray, M., Gordon, J. E., & Brown, E. J. (2013). Geodiversity and the ecosystem approach: The contribution of geoscience in delivering integrated environmental management. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 124, 659–673. doi:10.1016/j.pgeola.2013.01.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hengl, T., & Reuter, H. (Eds.). (2009). Geomorphometry: Concepts. Software, Applications, Elsevier, Developments in Soil Science, 33, 1–796. doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2005.11.008
   Google Scholar
• Hjort, L., & Luoto, M. (2010). Geodiversity of high-latitude landscapes in northern Finland. Geomorphology, 115, 109–116. doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.09.039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hjort, J., & Luoto, M. (2012). Can geodiversity be predicted from space? Geomorphology, 153–154, 74–80. doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2012.02.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hollander, M., Wolfe, D. A., & Chicken, E. (2014). Nonparametric statistical methods. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchinson, M. F. (1989). A new procedure for gridding elevation and stream line data with automatic removal of spurious pits. Journal of Hydrology, 106, 211–232. doi:10.1016/0022-1694(89)90073-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibáñez, J. J., De-Alba, S., Bermúdez, F. F., & García-Álvarez, A. (1995). Pedodiversity: Concepts and measures. Catena, 24, 215–232. doi:10.1016/0341-8162(95)00028-Q
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibáñez, J. J., Krasilikov, P. V., & Saldaña, A. (2012). Archive and refugia of soil organisms: Applying a pedodiversity framework for the conservation of biological and nonbiological heritages. Journal of Applied Ecology, 49, 1267–1277. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2012.02213.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Instruction to the Detailed Geomorphological Map of the Polish Lowland, scale 1:50,000. (1962). Polish Academy of Sciences, Geographical Institute, Department of Geomorphology and Hydrography of the Polish Lowland at Toruń, Toruń.
   Google Scholar
• Kondracki, J. (1998). Geografia regionalna Polski [Regional geography of Poland]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
   Google Scholar
• Kostrzewski, A. (2011). The role of relief geodiversity in geomorphology. In Z. Rączkowska & A. Kotarba (Eds.), Landform evolution climate change and Man, Geographia Polonica Special Issue (Vol. 2, pp. 69–74). Retrieved from https://www.geographiapolonica.pl/article/item/7644.html
   Google Scholar
• Kostrzewski, A., Starkel, L., & Zwoliński, Z. (1998). Georożnorodność rzeźby powierzchni ziemi [Relief geodiversity]. In Opracowanie systemu ochrony georóżnorodności w Polsce (pp. 1–36). Warszawa: Archiwum Państwowego Instytutu Geologicznego.
   Google Scholar
• Kot, R. (2012a). Zastosowanie indeksu georóżnorodności dla określenia zróżnicowania rzeźby terenu na przykładzie zlewni reprezentatywnej Strugi Toruńskiej, Pojezierze Chełmińskie [Application of the geodiversity index for defining the relief’s diversity based on the example of the Struga Toruńska representative basin, Chełmno Lakeland]. Problemy Ekologii Krajobrazu, 33, 87–96. Retrieved from http://agro.icm.edu.pl/agro/element/bwmeta1.element.agro-c9c296c3-b207-4ceb-bc43-3fdf5e6b5d1a?q=bwmeta1.element.agro-5a0318b5-f320-4397-bb2a-8ff97d145d1b;18&qt=CHILDREN-STATELESS
   Google Scholar
• Kot, R. (2012b). Zastosowanie kartograficznej metody określenia zróżnicowania rzeźby terenu w ocenie potencjału turystyczno-rekreacyjnego na przykładzie fragmentu zlewni reprezentatywnej Strugi Toruńskiej, Pojezierze Chełmińskie [Application of the cartographic method for defining the relief diversity in the evaluation of tourist-recreational potential based on the example of the Struga Toruńska representative basin, Chełmno Lakeland]. Problemy Ekologii Krajobrazu, 34, 95–102. Retrieved from http://agro.icm.edu.pl/agro/element/bwmeta1.element.agro-ad79a9e1-ea8e-449c-b557-d47ecb78ac65?q=bwmeta1.element.agro-a5510cf2-f62d-4c75-aa6e-97f52fcffa56;30&qt=CHILDREN-STATELESS
   Google Scholar
• Kot, R. (2014). Zastosowanie modelowania GIS w ocenie georóżnorodności [The application of GIS modeling for geodiversity evaluation]. Problemy Ekologii Krajobrazu, 38, 95–105. Retrieved from http://agro.icm.edu.pl/agro/element/bwmeta1.element.agro-9af85a02-fff5-474f-bfb5-62a81d7e6084?q=bwmeta1.element.agro-c1da61a7-fa9c-49c7-84f8-65d3528922eb;10&qt=CHILDREN-STATELESS
   Google Scholar
• Kot, R. (2015). The point bonitation method for evaluating geodiversity: A guide with examples (Polish Lowland). Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography, 97, 375–393. doi:10.1111/geoa.12079
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kot, R., & Leśniak, K. (2006). Ocena georożnorodności za pomocą miar krajobrazowych – podstawowe trudności metodyczne [Geodiversity valuation with the aid of landscape indices – basic methodological obstructions]. Przegląd Geograficzny, 78, 24–45. Retrieved from http://rcin.org.pl/igipz/Content/113/PrzG_1-2006-internet.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Kot, R., & Leśniak, K. (2017). Impact of different roughness coefficients applied to relief diversity evaluation: Chełmno Lakeland (Polish Lowland). Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography, 99, 102–114. doi:10.1080/04353676.2017.1286547
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kozłowski, S. (2004). Geodiversity. The concept and scope of geodiversity. Przegląd Geologiczny, 52, 833–837. Retrieved from https://www.pgi.gov.pl/images/stories/przeglad/pdf/pg_2004_08_2_22a.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Krasilnikov, P. V., Garcia-Calderon, N. E., & Ibañez, A. (2009). Pedodiversity in mountainous tropical semideciduous forests of Sierra Madre Del Sur, Mexico. Eurasian Soil Science, 42, 1435–1442. doi:10.1134/S106422930913002X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malczewski, J. (2000). On the use of weighted linear combination method in GIS: Common and best practice approaches. Transaction in GIS, 4, 5–22. doi:10.1111/1467-9671.00035
   Google Scholar
• Manosso, F. C., & Pellitero, R. (2012). Geodiversidade: Considerações Sorbe Quantificação e Avaliação da Distribuição Especial [Geodiversity: Some considerations about quantification and evaluation of spatial distribution]. Anuário do Instituto de Geociências – UFRJ, 35, 90–100. doi:10.11137/2012_1_90_100
   Google Scholar
• Martínez-Graña, A. M., Goy, J. L., & Cimarra, C. A. (2013). A virtual tour of geological heritage: Valourising geodiversity using Google Earth and R code. Computer & Geosciences, 61, 83–93. doi:10.1016/j.cageo.2013.07.020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGarigal, K., & Marks, B. J. (1995). FRAGSTATS: Spatial pattern analysis program for quantifying landscape structure ( General Technical Report PNW-GTR-351, USDA Forest Service). Portland, OR: Pacific Northwest Research Station, p. 122. Retrieved from http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr_351.pdf10.2737/PNW-GTR-351
   Google Scholar
• Melelli, L. (2014). Geodiversity: A new quantitative index for natural protected areas enhancement. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 1, 27–37. Retrieved from http://gtg.webhost.uoradea.ro/PDF/GTG-1-2014/3_142_MELLELI_LAURA.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Minár, J., & Evans, I. S. (2008). Elementary forms for land surface segmentation: The theoretical basis of terrain analysis and geomorphological mapping. Geomorphology, 95, 236–259. doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2007.06.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moriarty, K. M., Epps, C. W., Betts, M. G., Hance, D. J., Bailey, J. D., & Zielinski, W. J. (2015). Experimental evidence that simplified forest structure interacts with snow cover to influence functional connectivity for Pacific martens. Landscape Ecology, 30, 1865–1877. doi:10.1007/s10980-015-0216-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Najwer, A., & Zwoliński, Z. (2014). Semantyka i metodyka oceny georóżnorodności – przegląd i propozycja badawcza [Semantic and geodiversity assessment methods – Review and research proposal]. Landform Analysis, 26, 115–127. doi:10.12657/landfana.026.011
   Google Scholar
• Nichols, W. F., Killingbeck, K. T., & August, P. (1998). The influence of geomorphological heterogeneity on biodiversity II. A landscape perspective. Conservation Biology, 12, 371–379. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.1998.96238.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niewiarowski, W. (1987). Evolution of the lower Vistula valley in the Unisław Basin and at the river gap to the north of Bydgoszcz-Fordon. In L. Starkel (Ed.). Evolution of the Vistula river valley during the last 15 000 years. Geographical Studies, Special Issue (Vol. 4, pp. 233–252). IGiPZ PAN. Retrieved from http://www.rcin.org.pl/igipz/Content/18829/WA51_35222_r1987-nr4_Stud-Geogr-Special-I.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Niewiarowski, W., & Kot, R. (2011). Delimitation and characteristics of natural landscapes of the Chełmno-Dobrzyń Lakeland, Urszulewo Plain and the neighbouring Vistula and Drwęca Valleys. Geographia Polonica, 84, 33–59. doi:10.7163/GPol.2011.1.3
   Google Scholar
• Niewiarowski, W., & Weckwerth, P. (2006). Geneza i rozwój rzeźby terenu [Genesis and relief development]. In L. Andrzejewski, P. Weckwerth, & S. Burak (Eds.), Toruń i jego okolice. Monografia przyrodnicza (pp. 65–96). Toruń: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Mikołaja Kopernika.
   Google Scholar
• Őrsi, A. (2011). Quantifying the geodiversity of a study area in the Great Hungarian Plain. Journal of Environmental Geography, 4, 19–22. Retrieved from http://www.geo.u-szeged.hu/journal/sites/default/files/article_file/3%20Orsi%20A%202011.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Panizza, M. (2009). The geomorphodiversity of Dolomites (Italy): A key of geoheritage assessment. Geoheritage, 1, 33–42. doi:10.1007/s12371-009-0003-z
   Google Scholar
• Pasierbski, M. (1967). Mapa Geomorfologiczna Polski 1:50,000, arkusz 322 Rzęczkowo. [Geomorphological Map of Poland in scale 1:50,000, sheet 322 Rzęczkowo]. Toruń: Instytut Geografii PAN.
   Google Scholar
• Pellitero, R., Manosso, F. C., & Serrano, E. (2015). Mid- and large-scale geodiversity calculation in Fuentes Carrionas (NW Spain) and Serra do Cadeado (Paraná, Brazil): Methodology and application for land management. Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography, 97, 219–235. doi:10.1111/geoa.12057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pereira, D. I., Pereira, P., Brilha, J., & Santos, L. (2013). Geodiversity assessment of Parana State (Brazil): An innovative approach. Environmental Management, 52, 541–552. doi:10.1007/s00267-013-0100-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plexida, S. G., Sfougaris, A. I., Ispikoudis, I. P., & Papanastasis, V. P. (2014). Selecting landscape metrics as indicators of spatial heterogeneity – A comparison among Greek landscapes. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation, 26, 26–35. doi:10.1016/j.jag.2013.05.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saaty, T. L., & Vargas, L. G. (2006). Decision making with the analytic network process economic, political, social and technological applications with benefits, opportunities, costs and risks (p. 282). Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Sarnowski, Ł., Podgórski, A., & Brykała, D. (2016). Planning a greenway based on an evaluation of visual landscape attractiveness. Moravian Geographical Reports, 24, 55–66. doi:10.1515/mgr-2016-0017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schindler, S., Poirazidis, K., & Wrbka, T. (2008). Towards a core set of landscape metrics for biodiversity assessments: A case study from Dadia National Park. Greece. Ecological Indicators, 8, 502–514. doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2007.06.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serrano, E., & Ruiz-Flaño, P. (2007). Geodiversity: A theoretical and applied concept. Geographica Helvetica, 62, 140–147. Retrieved from http://www.geogr-helv.net/62/140/2007/gh-62-140-2007.pdf10.5194/gh-62-140-2007
   Google Scholar
• Serrano, E., Ruiz-Flaño, P., & Arroyo, P. (2009). Geodiversity assessment in rural landscape: Tiermes-Caracena area (Soria, Spain). Memorie Descrittive della Carta Geologica d᾿Italia, 87, 173–180. Retrieved from http://www.isprambiente.gov.it/files/pubblicazioni/periodicitecnici/memorie/memorielxxxvii/memdes-87-serrano.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Silva, J. P., Rodrigues, C., & Pereira, D. I. (2015). Mapping and analysis of geodiversity indices in the Xingu river basin, Amazonia, Brazil. Geoheritage, 7, 337–350. doi:10.1007/s12371-014-0134-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Testa, B., Aldighieri, B., Bertini, A., Blendinger, W., Caielli, G., Franco, R., Giordano, D., & Kustatscher, E. (2013). Geomorphodiversity of the San Lucano Valley (Belluno Dolomites, Italy): A well-preserved heritage. Geoheritage, 5, 151–172. doi:10.1007/s12371-013-0079-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tian, Y., Jim, C. Y., Tao, Y., & Shi, T. (2011). Landscape ecological assessment of green space fragmentation in Hong Kong. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 10, 79–86. doi:10.1016/j.ufug.2010.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, M. G. & Gardner, R. H. (Eds.). (1991). Quantitative methods in landscape ecology. The analysis and interpretation of landscape heterogeneity (Vol. 82, p. 536). New York, NY: Springer, Ecological Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Walford, N. (2011). Practical statistics for geographers and earth scientists (p. 416). Chichester: Willey-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Weckwerth, P. (2010). Evolution of the Toruń Basin in the Late Weichselian. Landform Analysis, 14, 57–84. Retrieved from http://geoinfo.amu.edu.pl/sgp/LA/LA14/LA14_07.pdf
   Google Scholar
• White, S., & Wakelin-King, G. A. (2014). Earth sciences comparative matrix: A comparative method for geoheritage assessment. Geographical Research, 52, 168–181. doi:10.1111/1745-5871.12062
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, J. P. (2012). Digital terrain modeling. Geomorphology, 137, 107–121. doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.03.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, J. P., & Gallant, J. C. (2000). Digital terrain analysis. In J. P. Wilson & J. C. Gallant (Eds.), Terrain Analysis: Principles and Applications (pp. 1–27). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Wrotek, K. (1986). Szczegółowa Mapa Geologiczna Polski 1:50,000, arkusz 320 Rzęczkowo [Detailed Geological Map of Poland in scale 1:50,000, sheet 320 Rzęczkowo]. Warszawa: Polish Geological Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Young, A. (1972). Slopes. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.
   Google Scholar
• Zwoliński, Z. (2009). The routine of landform geodiversity map design for the Polish Carpathian Mts. Landform Analysis, 11, 77–85. Retrieved from http://geoinfo.amu.edu.pl/sgp/LA/LA11/LA11_11.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Zwoliński, Z., & Stachowiak, J. (2012). Geodiversity map of the Tatra National Park for geotourism. Questiones Geographicae, 31, 99–107. Retrieved from http://geoinfo.amu.edu.pl/qg/archives/2012/QG311_099-107.pdf
   Google Scholar