Three concepts: an academic ecologist’s view

 [Три концепції: погляд академічного еколога]

Alexander Protasov https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0204-2007

Institute of Hydrobiology, NAS of Ukraine (Kyiv, Ukraine)

Cite as

Protasov, A, 2024. Three concepts: an academic ecologist’s view. GEO&BIO, 26: 32-44. [Ukrainian, with English summary]

doi: https://doi.org/10.53452/gb2604

pdf: gb2604-protasov.pdf

Abstract

Human activity not only creates new materials and technologies, changes the nature of natural geochemical processes, which can have a local impact on the biosphere and the processes in it, as V.I. Vernadsky pointed out, but also creates new types of ecosystems—urban ecosystems, where man builds completely new elements and entire systems of biotopes for the existence of their populations, agroecosystems, where through the use of agricultural technology receives the necessary products of a limited number of species of organisms. It also creates techno-ecosystems, where natural elements together with artificial, technical elements create habitats for organisms. The noospherogenesis, in fact, is the formation of a coexisting system of natural and anthropogenic ecosystems. General ecological principles, which to a greater or lesser extent are addressed in the ‘Concept of balanced (sustainable) development of agroecosystems in Ukraine for the period up to 2025,’ as well as proposals for the creation of the ‘Concept of effective and safe operation of techno-ecosystems’ are considered. It is pointed out that the concept of ‘agroecosystem’ should be considered quite broadly, since it can include not only landscapes, but also aquatic environments. Anthropodependent biotic communities include not only agricultural plants, but also a full spectrum of organisms, from bacteria to mammals. It is pointed out that there is a contradiction between the idea of preserving biodiversity in ecosystems and the high productivity of certain significantly dominant populations. It is noted that technical objects do not exist separately from the environment, but create various techno-ecosystems with natural elements, in which there is a close relationship and mutual influence of technical and biotic elements and factors. The environment is also impacted not by technical systems, but by techno-ecosystems. As one of the factors of scientific and practical support of activities in the field of agroecosystems and techno-ecosystems development management, the directions of scientific research in the concept of research development in the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine are considered. Some issues of practical use of the provisions of the EU Water Framework Directive are discussed, namely in the aspect of application to aquatic techno-ecosystems. During military operations, the destructive power of anthropogenic factors increases by many times, the importance of different factors shifts, which should be reflected in the general conceptual provisions of the complexes of interrelations between nature and human activity.

Key word: biosphere, agroecosystem, techno-ecosystem, concept, noosphere, state of war

Correspondence to

Alexander A. Protasov; Institute of Hydrobiology, NAS of Ukraine; 12 V. Ivasyuk Avenue, Kyiv, 04210 Ukraine; Email: pr1717@ukr.net

Article info

Submitted: 20.01.2024. Revised: 09.07.2024. Accepted: 28.07.2024

References

Afanasyev, S. O. 2023. Impact of war on hydroecosystems of Ukraine: conclusion of the first year of the full-scale invasion of Russia (a review). Hydrobiological Journal, 59 (4): 3–16. http://doi.org/10.1615/HydrobJ.v59.i4.10

Concept... 2003. The Concept of Balanced (Sustainable) Development of Agroecosystems in Ukraine for the Period up to 2025. 2003. Approved by the Order of the Ministry of Agrarian Policy of Ukraine, 20.08.2003, No. 280. [Ukrainian]

Nalepa, T. F., D. W. Schloesser (eds). 1993. Zebra Mussels. Biology, Impacts, and Control. Boca Raton, 1–810.

Odum, E. P. 2001. The ‘techno-ecosystem’. The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 82 (2): 137–138.

Priess, J. A., J. Hauck, R. Haines-Young, R. Alkemade, M. Mandryk, [et al.]. 2018. New EU-scale environmental scenarios until 2050 — Scenario process and initial scenario applications. Ecosystem Services, 29 (3): 542–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.08.006

Protasov, A. A. 2008. Biodiversity and Its Estination. Conceptual Diversicology. Kyiv, 1–107. [Russian]

Protasov, A. A. (ed.). 2011. Techno-ecosystem of NPP. Hydrobiology, Abiotic Factors, Ecological Assessments. Kyiv, 1–234. [Russian]

Protasov, O. O. 2017. Biogeomics. Ecosystems of the World in the Structure of the Biosphere. Kyiv, 1–382. [Ukrainian]

Protasov, O. O., A. A. Silayeva, T. M. Novosiolova, Y. I. Uzunov. 2019. Assessment of Ecological Potential of the Aquatic Technoecosystems on the Basis of Comparative Approach. Hydrobiological Journal, 56: 69–86. https://doi.org/10.1615/HydrobJ.v56.i3.60

Resolution... 2024. The Main Scientific Directions and the Most Important Problems of Basic Research in the Field of Natural, Technical, Social and Human Sciences of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine for 2024–2028. Resolution of the Presidium of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine of 10.01.2024. Kyiv, № 8: 1–49. [Ukrainian]

Sozinov, A. A., Y. N. Shtepa, V. I. Pridatko. 2004. Agrosphere as an object of target research by means of remote sensing and GIS for improvement of management of territorial development of natural biodiversity conservation. Scientific Notes of the V. I. Vernadsky Tavrichesky National University. Series Geography, 17 (56) 2: 72–87. [Russian]

Vernadsky, V. I. 1945.The biosphere and the noosphere. American scientist, 33 (1): 1–12.

Zagorodniuk, I., Z. Barkaszi, O. Protasov, V. Prydatko-Dolin. 2023. The biodiversity concept in crisis? Global tendencies and a view from Ukraine. Geo&Bio, 24: 183–213. [Ukrainian] https://doi.org/10.53452/gb2413

Zagorodniuk, I. V. 2024. Natural history field studies in war time Ukraine: changes of priorities. Visnyk of the National of Sciences of Ukraine, (4): 58–68. [Ukrainian] https://doi.org/10.15407/visn2024.04.058