The structure of natural landscapes and its role in the development of the landscape zoning scheme of Belarus

The article presents the results of systematisation and mapping of the natural landscapes of Belarus, which domestic researchers have been engaged since the 1960s. During this time, considerable cartographic and literary material concerning the peculiarities of distribution, a set of classification units and zoning units, approaches to their allocation and mapping has been accumulated. However, the appearance at the beginning of the 21st century of new research methods along with the possibility of using modern technologies determined the need to refine and detail many cartographic landscape developments. At the same period (2006–2015), a series of 1 : 500 000 scale wall-mounted physical and geographical maps was created in Belarus and updated information was obtained about the features of the territorial distribution of a number of components of nature. The appearance of such information, along with the available data of remote sensing of the Earth and the possibility of application of geoinformation technologies, also allowed the development of new, detailed versions of maps of natural landscapes, both for institutions of higher and general secondary education using 6 classification units. One of them – map for institutions of higher education on a scale of 1: 500 000 – served as the basis for the analysis and identification of patterns of spatial distribution of natural territorial complexes in the rank of subtypes, groups of genera, genera and species of landscapes. An increase in the number of main classification units was found – genera (from 20 to 22) and species (from 105 to 107) – within the 2 subtypes, as well as a significant change in their area, boundaries and features of spatial distribution. The obtained results served as a basis for clarifying the distribution of regional complexes, which led to the compilation of a new version of the landscape zoning scheme. It was revealed that the number of provinces remained the same, their borders were clarified (the areas changed within 1–5 %) and names. The number of landscape districts has decreased from 56 to 53, their borders, areas and names have changed significantly.