Recognition of geological processes in permafrost conditions

  • Ludmila StrokovaEmail author
Case history


Any evaluation of geological processes in the permafrost zone is complicated by the rigorous climate and the general inaccessibility of such areas, which has resulted in insufficient information on territories in permafrost zones. The aim of this study was to delineate areas of geological processes in the zone of the discontinuous permafrost of Western Siberia based on the example of the Beregovoe oil and gas condensate field. An integrated approach using remote materials, the data from a walk-over survey, and laboratory testing of soils for the future pipeline was used. To estimate the prevalence and dynamics of exogenous geological and cryogenic processes, we described the climatic, geomorphic, geological, hydrogeological, and engineering–geological conditions of the territory as the basis of their emergence and development as well as the methodical issues of remote sensing. The recognition of landforms produced by different geological processes depends on the size of the landforms being mapped, their morphological expression, and the contrast between the disturbed landforms and the surrounding undisturbed areas. We defined the interpretive signs of major exogenous processes in the satellite images of the area and created a map on a 1:100,000 scale showing the distribution of geological processes at different geomorphic levels. This approach can be used to assess exogenous processes in other Arctic and Subarctic areas.


Soil Thermokarst Frost mounds Permafrost Satellite images Siberia 



The research was carried out at Tomsk Polytechnic University within the framework of Tomsk Polytechnic University Competitiveness Enhancement Program grant.


  1. Barcan VS (2010) Stability of palsa at the southern margin of its distribution on the Kola peninsula. J Polar Sci 4(3):489–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baulin VV, Dubikov GI (1982) Map of zoning of Western Siberian plain on thickness and structure of a permafrost (scale 1:1,500,000). Gosstroi SSSR, PNIIIS, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  3. Blaschke T, Feizizadeh B, Hoelbling D (2014) Object-based image analysis and digital terrain analysis for locating landslides in the Urmia Lake basin, Iran. IEEE J Sel Top Appl Earth Observ Remote Sens 7(12):6905735; pp 4806-4817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Braducan YUV, Vasilenko EP, Voronin AS, Gorelina TE (2015) State geological map of Russian Federation. Scale 1:1000000 (third generation). A Series of West-Siberian. Sheet Q-43-New Urengoy. Explanatory note. Saint-Petersburg, Cartographic factory VSEGEI, p 320 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  5. Brown RJЕ (1973) Permafrost—distribution and relation to environmental factors in the Hudson Bay Lowland analyzed. In: Proc Symp on the Physical Environment of the Hudson Bay Lowland, Ontario. University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, pp 35–68Google Scholar
  6. Duguay CR, Zhang T, Leverington DW, Romanovsky VE (2005) Remote sensing of permafrost and seasonally frozen ground. In: Duguay CR, Pietroniro T (eds) Remote sensing in northern hydrology: measuring environmental change. Series volume 163. American Geophysical Union, Washington DC, pp 91–118Google Scholar
  7. Dunckova L, Bednarik M, Krcmar D, Marschalko M, Tornyai R (2018) GIS-based multicriteria evaluation of foundation conditions. Bull Eng Geol Environ.
  8. El Haj El Tahir M, Kaab A, Xu C-Y (2010) Identification and mapping of soil erosion areas in the Blue Nile, eastern Sudan using multispectral ASTER and MODIS satellite data and the SRTM elevation model. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 14(7):1167–1178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Emery W, Camps A (2017) Introduction to satellite remote sensing: atmosphere, ocean, land and cryosphere applications. Elsevier, Amsterdam New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Ershov ED (1989) Geocryology of the USSR. Western Siberia. Nedra, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  11. French HM (2007) The periglacial environment, 3rd edn. Wiley, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. French H, Shur Y (2010) The principles of cryostratigraphy. Earth Sci Rev 101:190–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gafarov NA, Baranov JB, Denisevich EV, Kulapov SM (2010) Use of space information in the gas industry. Gazprom Expo, Moscow (in Russian)Google Scholar
  14. Google Earth Pro (64-bit) (2014) Yamal-Nenets Autonomous District, Russia. 65° 47′ 27.83"N, 78° 59′ 28.99"E, Eye alt 28 km. Borders and labels. Image Landsat / Copernicus, DigitalGlobe 2019.,78.9077954,12338m/data=!3m1!1e3. Accessed 9 Feb 2019
  15. Grosse G, Romanovsky VE, Jorgenson T, Walter KM, Brown J, Overduin PP (2011) Vulnerability and feedbacks of permafrost to climate change. Eos 92:73–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Haltigin TW, Pollard WH, Dutilleul P, Osinski GR (2012) Geometric evolution of polygonal terrain networks in the Canadian high Arctic: evidence of increasing regularity over time. Permafr Periglac Process 23:178–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harms TK, Abbott BW, Jones JB (2013) Thermo-erosion gullies increase nitrogen available for hydrologic export. Biogeochemistry 117(2-3)
  18. Jorgenson MT, Grosse G (2016) Remote sensing of landscape change in permafrost regions. J Permafrost Periglacial Process 27(4):324–328. Special Issue: Transactions of the International Permafrost Association.
  19. Karlsson JM, Jaramillo F, Destouni G (2015) Hydro-climatic and lake change patterns in Arctic permafrost and non-permafrost areas. J Hydrol 529:134–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kokelj SV, Lantz TC, Kanigan J, Smith SL, Coutts R (2009) Origin and polycyclic behaviour of tundra thaw slumps, Mackenzie Delta region, Northwest Territories, Canada. Permafr Periglac Process 20:173–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kravtsova VI, Rodionova TV (2016) Methods of permafrost studies variations in size and number of thermokarst lakes in different permafrost regions: spaceborne evidence. J Kriosfera Zemli 20(1):75–81 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  22. Kricuk LN, Jastreba NV, Kornienko SG (2012) Processes of formation of permafrost rocks on the Yamal Peninsula and their engineering-geological value. In: Engineering Surveys in Construction: 8th all-Russian Conference of Survey Organizations. Geomarketing, Moscow, pp 85–89 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  23. Kukushkin SJ (2016) Indicators of anthropogenic load on natural-territorial complexes in the development of oil and gas deposits in the North of Western Siberia. PhD thesis. St. Petersburg (in Russian)Google Scholar
  24. Lewkowicz AG, Coultish TL (2004) Beaver damming and palsa dynamics in a subarctic mountainous environment. Wolf Creek, Yukon Territory, Canada Arctic, Antarctic, Alpine Res 36(2):208–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Li Z, Shi W, Lu P, Wang Q, Miao Z (2016) Landslide mapping from aerial photographs using change detection-based Markov random field. J Remote Sens Environ 187:76–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Liljedahl AK, Boike J, Daanen RP, Fedorov AN, Frost GV, Grosse G, Hinzman LD, Iijma Y, Jorgenson JC, Matveyeva N, Necsoiu M, Raynolds MK, Romanovsky VE, Schulla J, Tape KD, Walker DA, Wilson CJ, Yabuki H, Zona D (2016) Pan-Arctic ice-wedge degradation in warming permafrost and its influence on tundra hydrology. Nat Geosci 9:312–318Google Scholar
  27. Manjoro M, Kakembo V, Rowntree KM (2012) Trends in soil erosion and woody shrub encroachment in Ngqushwa district, eastern cape province, South Africa. J Environ Manag 49(3):570–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Melehin MS, Nekrasova JA, Li DE (2017) Technical report on engineering-geological investigation, no. 4414P-IGD. Tjumen 'PromIzyskanija, Tyumen (in Russian, unpublished)Google Scholar
  29. Miller JR, Friedman JM (2009) Influence of flow variability on floodplain formation and destruction, little Missouri River, North Dakota. Bull Geol Soc Am 121(5-6):752–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Murton JB (2009) Global warming and thermokarst Permafrost Soils. In: Margesin R (ed) Soil biology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp185–203Google Scholar
  31. Mwaniki MW, Agutu NO, Mbaka JG, Ngigi TG, Waithaka EH (2015) Landslide scar/soil erodibility mapping using Landsat TM/ETM+ bands 7 and 3 normalised difference index: a case study of central region of Kenya. J Appl Geogr 64:108–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nitze I, Grosse G, Jones BM, Arp CD, Ulrich M, Fedorov A, Veremeeva A (2017) Landsat-based trend analysis of Lake dynamics across northern permafrost regions. Remote Sens 9:640Google Scholar
  33. Novikov DA (2002) Geological and hydrogeological conditions of Beregovoe oil and gas condensate field. Bull Tomsk Polytechnic Univ 305(8):211–215 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  34. Omsk Cartographic Factory (2004) Atlas of the Yamal-Nenets Autonomous District [Maps]. Administration of the Yamal-Nenets Autonomous District, Faculty of Ecology and Geography, Tyumen State University, Omsk (in Russian)Google Scholar
  35. Park S, Oh C, Jeon S, Jung H, Choi C (2011) Soil erosion risk in Korean watersheds, assessed using the revised universal soil loss equation. J Hydrol 399(3-4):263–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Piacentini T, Urbano T, Sciarra M, Schipani I, Miccadei E (2016) Geomorphology of the floodplain at the confluence of the Aventino and Sangro rivers (Abruzzo, Central Italy). J Maps 12(3):443–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pizano C, Baron AF, Schuur EAG, Crummer KG, Mack MC (2014) Effects of thermo-erosional disturbance on surface soil carbon and nitrogen dynamics in upland arctic tundra. IOP Publ Environ Res Lett 9:075006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Plug LJ, Werner BT (2002) Nonlinear dynamics of ice-wedge networks and resulting sensitivity to severe cooling events. Nature 417:929–933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Reis S, Yalcin A, Atasoy M, Sancar C, Ekercin S (2012) Remote sensing and GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping using frequency ratio and analytical hierarchy methods in Rize province (NE Turkey). Environ Earth Sci 66(7):2063–2073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rowland JC, Jones CE, Altmann G, Bryan R, Crosby BT, Geernaert GL, Hinzmann LD, Kane DL, Lawrence DM, Mancino A, Marsh P, McNamara JP, Romanovsky VE, Toniolo H, Travis BJ, Trochim E, Wilson CJ (2010) Arctic landscapes in transition: response to thawing permafrost. EOS 91:229–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schuur EAG, Bockheim J, Canadell JG, Euskirchen E, Field CB, Goryachkin SV, Hagemann S, Kuhry P, Lafleur PM, Lee H, Mazhitova G, Nelson FE, Rinke A, Romanovsky VE, Shiklomanov N, Tarnocai C, Venevsky S, Vogel JG, Zimov SA (2008) Vulnerability of permafrost carbon to climate change: implications for the global carbon cycle. BioScience 58(8):701–714Google Scholar
  42. Shur YL, Jorgenson MT (2007) Patterns of permafrost formation and degradation in relation to climate and ecosystems. Permafr Periglac Process 18:7–19. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Russian Scientific-Technical Information Centre for Standardization, Metrology and Conformity Assessment (2012) SP 25.13330.2012 Set of rules: soil bases and foundations on permafrost soils. Russian Scientific-Technical Information Centre for Standardization, Metrology and Conformity Assessment, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  44. Russian Scientific-Technical Information Centre for Standardization, Metrology and Conformity Assessment (2016) SP 22.13330.2016 set of rules: foundation of buildings and structures. Russian Scientific-Technical Information Centre for Standardization, Metrology and Conformity Assessment, MoscowGoogle Scholar
  45. Slagoda EA, Ermak AA (2014) Interpretation of exogenous processes in typical tundra of the Yamal peninsula (case study of the district in the middle Yuribey river). J Bull Tyumen State Univ 4:28–38 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  46. Strokova LA, Dmitrieva SA, Osmushkina NV, Osmushkin AV (2019) Experience of engineering-geological zoning on bearing capacity of soils of the industrial site of Elga coal-preparation plant in Yakutia. J Bull Tomsk Polytechnic Univ Geo Аssets Eng 330(2):175–185 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  47. Strokova LA, Ermolaeva AV (2015) Natural features of construction of the main gas pipeline «the power of Siberia» on a site Chayandinskoye oil and gas field—Lensk. Bull Tomsk Polytechnic Univ 326(4):41–55 (in Russian)Google Scholar
  48. Strokova LA, Ermolaeva AV, Golubeva VV (2016) The investigation of dangerous geological processes resulting in land subsidence while designing the main gas pipeline in south Yakutia. In: Shvartzev SL, Popov VK (eds) IOP Conference Series. Earth Environ Sci 43:6.
  49. Thenkabail PS (ed) (2015) Remote sensing handbook volume III. In: Remote sensing of water resources, disasters, and urban studies, 1st edn. CRC Press, p 673.
  50. Ulrich M, Grosse G, Strauss J, Schirrmeister L (2014) Quantifying wedge-ice volumes in Yedoma and Thermokarst Basin deposits. Permafr Periglac Process 25:151–161. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vasilchuk YUK, Vasilchuk AC (1998) The 14C age of Palsas in northern Eurasia. J Radiocarbon 40(2):895–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Veremeeva A, Gubin S (2009) Modern tundra landscapes of the Kolyma lowland and their evolution in the Holocene. J Permafr Periglac Process 20(4):399–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Washburn AL (1983) Palsas and continuous permafrost. In: Pewe TL, Brown J (eds) Proc 4th Int Conf. on Permafrost. National Academy Press, Washington DC, pp 1372–1377Google Scholar
  54. Westermann S, Duguay CR, Grosse G, Kääb A (2015): Remote sensing of permafrost and frozen ground. In: Tedesco M (ed) Remote sensing of the cryosphere, (GIS & Remote Sensing)(Cryosphere Science Series). Wiley Blackwell, Hoboken, p 408.
  55. Xu C, Sheng S, Zhou W, Cui L, Liu M (2011) Characterizing wetland change at landscape scale in Jiangsu Province, China. Environ Monit Assess 179(1-4):279–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Youssef AM (2015) Landslide susceptibility delineation in the Ar-Rayth area, Jizan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, using analytical hierarchy process, frequency ratio, and logistic regression models. J Environ Earth Sci 73(12):8499–8518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zaddeh GO, Katayev SG, Kuskov AI (2000) Regional climatological changes in meteorological fields during the last decades of 20th Century. In: Kabanov MV (ed) Regional monitoring of the atmosphere, part 4: natural climatic changes. MGP RASKO, Tomsk, pp 11–56 (in Russian)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of GeologyTomsk Polytechnic UniversityTomskRussia

Personalised recommendations