Karst Regions of the World

Home , Anton Saroka, Geo Super, Lichtenstein Cave, List of karst areas, Nicole Trimmel, Subterranea (geography)

KARST REGIONS OF THE WORLD (KROW)—POPULATING GLOBAL KARST DATASETS AND GENERATING MAPS TO ADVANCE THE UNDERSTANDING OF KARST OCCURRENCE AND PROTECTION OF KARST SPECIES AND HABITATS WORLDWIDE KARST REGIONS OF THE WORLD (KROW)—POPULATING GLOBAL KARST DATASETS AND GENERATING MAPS TO ADVANCE THE UNDERSTANDING OF KARST OCCURRENCE AND PROTECTION OF KARST SPECIES AND HABITATS WORLDWIDE

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment Of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Geology

Emily Hollingsworth University of Arkansas Bachelor of Science in Geology, 2006

May 2009 University of Arkansas

ABSTRACT

Historically, many people dealing with caves and karst have tended to be guarded about

sharing information. They have sought to protect their property, their resources, liability

risk, and special interests by keeping details about karst (especially caves) secret. This

has resulted in inconsistent, localized, and hard-to-access knowledge and data, in highly

generalized large-scale maps of widely varying consistency and quality. Most

importantly, secrecy has resulted in a general lack of understanding about the complexity,

science, and fragile nature of many of these unique settings. Obviously, there are needs

for individual cave locations to be restricted on a need-to-know basis, but the requirement

to accurately characterize areas having potential to develop near-surface karst is becoming increasingly urgent as humans throughout the world expand their range and land-use practices that jeopardize rare and irreplaceable karst resources.

Because of the lack of an accessible and comprehensive source of information on the

global distribution of karst habitats and species, an effort to create an international karst

database has been initiated by the University of Arkansas and The Nature Conservancy of

Arkansas (TNC). The comprehensive database of karst distribution and biodiversity has

been designated Karst Regions of the World (KROW).

This compilation will serve as a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) dataset that

includes published and unpublished data on the major aspects of karst and will be used to

create large-scale maps delineating known and potential karst regions of the world.

Delineation of karst areas within the database was based on the most current karst maps

and references united by GIS manipulations. Data within the database includes geologic,

hydrologic, speoleogenetic, biologic and ecologic information, as well as documentation

citations. By combining dissimilar geodata from numerous sources and integrating them into a single Karst Regions of the World Database (KROWDB), which can be use to

retrieve karst data and perform spatial analyses, a critical tool will be created for future

karst management and conservation efforts. This framework will be available to karst

stakeholders for initiating karst conservation and planning on a global scale and with the help of scientific community, the archive will be updated as new information is collected.

One of the underlying motives for this project, and the impetus for involvement by The

Nature Conservancy, is to advance the protection of karst species and habitats globally.

Delineation of areas of environmental and ecological sensitivity can be achieved by blending detailed data described previously with maps of distribution of cave-limited and endangered and threatened species. The importance of characterizing, conserving, and protecting the karst areas and the species that live within them cannot be emphasized strongly enough, given the increasing population density of humans that reside on karst lands, and the ecosystems that rely on karst environments and karst water to sustain life.

The proposed global karst GIS dataset will help fill this data gap and provide a starting point for future protection of karst habitats and species, and at the same time, will provide a valuable interactive set of tools for a broad range of needs for all karst stakeholders.

This thesis is approved for Recommendation to the Graduate Council.

Thesis Director:

______(Dr. Van Brahana)

Thesis Committee:

______(Dr. Phil Hays)

______(Dr. Tom Paradise)

______(Ethan Inlander)

THESIS DUPLICATION RELEASE

I hereby authorize the University of Arkansas Libraries to duplicate this Thesis when needed for research and/or scholarship.

Agreed ______Emily Hollingsworth

Refused ______Emily Hollingsworth

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, sincere appreciation is due to my committee members for their guidance. I would especially like to thank my advisor, Dr. Van Brahana. I couldn’t have asked for a more supportive, insightful, and encouraging advisor - you have made this whole journey possible and have inspired me each step of the way. I am also grateful to Dr. Phil Hays, Dr. Tom Paradise, and Ethan Inlander, who served as the committee and offered valuable assistance throughout my career as a student. Each of them has led in my studies and I will remember them forever as exceptional mentors and friends. I would also like to thank Dr. Fed Limp, John Wilson, and Dr. Jason Tullis for their instruction in

GIS technique.

Special thanks to my family: my Mom, Sister, Aunt Bunnie and Uncle Steve, all of whom are the most vital components in my life. I am who I am today because of the blessings and guidance you have given to me. I would also like to thank my friends; you have filled my life with special moments, memories, and support. My dogs, Chaos and

Marley; also deserve unconditional thanks for being my secret source of unconditional love. Last, but not least, I must thank the person who fills my life with sunshine and smiles, Jose Rios. To my loving Jose, without your support I could not of achieved all that I have achieved. Your belief in me, encouragement, and patience keeps me going.

Thank you all from the bottom of my heart,

Emily Hollingsworth

viii TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT ...... vii

THESIS DUPLICATION RELEASE...... vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... ix

LIST OF TABLES ...... xi

LIST OF FIGURES ...... xiii

INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Problem Statement ...... 2

Brief History of TNC Involvement in Karst ...... 3

Purpose and Scope ...... 4

Previous Research ...... 5

Karst Concepts ...... 6

GIS and Database Management ...... 11

Mapping Considerations ...... 12

Ecosystem Considerations ...... 19 METHODOLOGY ...... 24

Conceptual Framework and Design of the Geodatabase ...... 24

Karst Terminology ...... 26

Data Collection ...... 29

Network of Scientists ...... 29

Data Preparation ...... 32

ix Data Incorporation ...... 34

Design and Integration of the Geodatabase ...... 47 RESULTS ...... 51

Statistics Using the KROWD ...... 51

KROW Maps ...... 67

Disclaimer ...... 85 CONCLUSION ...... 86

Recommendations for Future Work ...... 87 SELECTED REFERENCES ...... 90

Appendicies

Appendix A. Network of Scientists ...... 126

x LIST OF TABLES

Table ...... Page

Table 1. Network of karst scientists.. Consisting of data sources, contacts used, and a brief description of the study area for the contact. Entities highlighted in grey had direct communication with E. Hollingsworth, thesis author...... 31

Table 2. Karst polygon attribute table (PAT)...... 41

Table 3. KROW polygon attribute table (PAT)...... 42

Table 4. . Karst references by continent...... 44

Table 5. KROW REFERENCE table with field definitions...... 45

Table 6 Example of the reference table created from the RefWorks database for collected karst references...... 46

Table 7. KROW POLYGON_REFERENCE table with field definitions...... 50

Table 8. Total karst features represented in the GIS...... 52

Table 9. Area calculations for each karst type (km²)...... 52

Table 10. Classification for the world’s regions based on countries...... 54

Table 12. Area calculations for the karst of Russian Federation by type (km²)...... 55

Table 13. Area calculations for the karst of South America by type (km²)...... 56

Table 14. Area calculations for the karst of Africa by type (km²)...... 56

Table 15. Area calculations for the karst of North America by type (km²)...... 57

Table 16. Area calculations for the karst of East and South East Asia by type (km²). ... 57

Table 17. Area calculations for the karst of Middle East and Central Asia by type (km²)...... 58

Table 18. Area calculations for the karst of Europe by type (km²)...... 58

xi Table 19. Area calculations for the karst of Astralasia by type (km²)...... 59

Table 20. Percentage of Karst Cover ...... 61

Table 21. Comparison of Ford and Williams’ (2007) calculations for the world carbonate outcrop map to the KROW calculations...... 65

Table 22. Attributes of Eckert IV projection...... 68

xii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Distribution of major carbonate rock outcrops of the world, version 1.0 (Ford and Williams, 1989). Carbonate outcrops are depicted in black. Scale is not specified; the dark line separating the Eastern Hemisphere and the Western Hemisphere represents missing Atlantic Ocean basin that was not included to facilitate map presentation on a single page. 15

Figure 2. Distribution of major carbonate rock outcrops of the world, version 3.0 (Ford and Williams, 2007) Version 3.0 is a revision to their first carbonate outcrop map (Ford and Williams, 1989) and is in greater detail, reflecting GIS technology and recent attempts to differentiate the purity of the carbonate rocks. 16

Figure 3. The global distribution of evaporite rocks depicting the maximum extent of gypsum, anhydrite, and salt (after Kozary, M.T. et al., 1968). Projection, scale, and orientation of this map are not specified, and represent distribution symmetry at a low level of accuracy (>>10 kilometers of boundary resolution). 17

Figure 5. Images of animals found in karst ecosystems 21

Figure 6. Data preparation flow chart demonstrating the methodology adopted for the preparation of data prior to the integration into the database. 33

Figure 7. Screen capture of the spatialy referenced base map of Australia. 36

Figure 8. Multiband raster dataset showing the karst of Australia (Grimes et al. 2007). 36

Figure 9. Intermediate workmap showing variations of the geo-referenced base map and the multiband raster image. 37

Figure 10. A representation of the control points, at two different levels of scale, before the transformations take place. 37

Figure 11. A screen grab from ArcMap of the raster image aligned with the vector dataset, projected in the Eckert IV, and the associated transformation data points. 38

Figure 12. RefWorks is an online tool facilitating reference management and organization. (source: http://www.refworks.com/.) 43

Figure 13. Data model for KROW database. Dashed lines indicate a one-to-one relationship and solid lines indicate a one-to-many relationship. 48

Figure 14. Total karst area for each contiental region (km²). 60

xiii Figure 15. Percentages of continent covered by karst in km² 64

Figure 16. Comparison using Ford and Williams (2007) verses KROW’s calculations for maximum carbonate outcrop. 66

Figure 17. Map of the global distribution of carbonate, evaporite, and pseudokarst using the KROW database as the source. 70

Figure 18. Map of the global index for KROW maps with rectangles delineating contintal regions . 71

Figure 19. Distribution of karst for the continental region of Africa . 72

Figure 20. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of Europe. 75

Figure 21. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of South Central Asia. 76

Figure 22. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of East and South East Asia. 77

Figure 23. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of Australasia. 80

Figure 24. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of North America. 81

Figure 25. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of South America. 84

xiv INTRODUCTION

For many millennia, and long before written language, caves, bluff shelters, and most

other karst landforms served native peoples of the earth because they provided temporary

shelter from weather and the elements, they served as lairs for animals that were both

predator and prey of early humans, and spiritually and emotionally, these karst features

stood as portals to the underworld, full of unknown danger and shrouded in mythology. .

Scientific understanding regarding karst came late; for the most part, all major

understanding and technological breakthroughs have come during the last 150 years, with

most rigorous, quantitative developments limited to the last 50 years. Disciplines

contributing understanding have been diverse, and varying methods and terminology have not facilitated cross-discipline communication.

Today, millions of people live in karst settings, threatening the eco-environmental vulnerable area. Recently, information technology has played an important role in environmental protection of many types of landforms. Geographic information systems have become more significant instruments for environmental management and analysis in scientific research. Undoubtedly, GIS-based research on global karst environments is worthwhile and representative, but previous research focuses mainly on concentrated karst areas. This paper focuses on the expanding technology of GIS and the benefits of establishing a global GIS representation of the karst regions of the world (KROW). The present work is oriented to explore quantitative assessment methods of karst distribution analysis and to provide a framework for future integration of karst data. More importantly, proposed methodology of GIS application and data integration in karst distribution assessment has common sense and expandability for other study cases.

1 Problem Statement

Maps delineating karst regions of the world (KROW) and databases documenting aspects

of these karst features are rare, highly variable in scale and in accuracy, and poorly characterized on a worldwide and local basis. Unlike hydrogeologic mapping efforts

(Struckmeier, 2006), which have been undertaken for virtually all countries, countrywide karst mapping efforts have only been undertaken where karst resources are extremely valuable, where karst hazards are significant, or where managers and scientists have unique, long-range visionary plans for these resources. As a result, national, multinational, continental-scale, or world-scale karst maps are incomplete, highly variable in accuracy, and generally poor representations of the distribution of KROW.

Considering the fact that karst settings are reported to cover from 12 to 25 percent of the land surface of the earth (White, 1988; Veni et al., 2001; Ford and Williams, 2007);

including parts of all continents, and a huge range of topographic, physiographic, land-

use, and climatic settings, the scant attention paid to lack of worldwide karst mapping

seems inappropriate.

Unfortunately, lack of precise delineation of KROW has restricted the ability of all karst

stakeholders, especially conservationists, to manage resources, plan for development, and

address threats to karst ecosystems. Recognizing the need for such information, the

objective of this thesis are to build an interactive, meaningful karst database, and from

this database, to accurately map KROW. Although The Nature Conservancy has as its

goal to advance the protection of karst species and habitats globally, the products

generated will have application throughout those sub disciplines of our science that

require large-scale mapping, and accurate karst-boundary delineation at country-wide or

2 larger scale. The preliminary effort, described and developed in this thesis, is restricted

to previously completed research and maps.

Brief History of TNC Involvement in Karst

As mentioned previously, TNC is a major contributor and funder of this project and their interest warrants explanation. The Nature Conservancy has launched a goal to protect

10% of each of the world's major terrestrial habitat types by 2015. Karst is not classified as a major habitat type by the TNC; yet, karst landscapes occur in at least 26 of 29

countries where TNC works. In 1999, TNC in Arkansas established the Ozark Karst

Program (OKP) with the goal of protecting this ecoregion's rare, endangered, and diverse

karst species. The TNC and the OKP have challenged scientists and researchers to more

thoroughly study subterranean habitats and establish more knowledge of the ecosystems

so that karst could be classified as a major habitat type by the TNC.

The TNC is now developing tools that will help to address karst conservation at a global

scale and prioritize its karst conservation efforts across the globe. A Karst Conservation

Toolbox is being assembled that will be a centralized source of methods for karst science and conservation practitioners.

In the late 1990’s, TNC formed a Subterranean Biodiversity Workgroup, which encompasses more than 50 Conservancy programs worldwide, with hundreds of staff and partners. These scientists have expanded information by collecting known distribution and status of subterranean animals of the world that will be compiled in a database

format. The ultimate goal of the Subterranean Biodiversity Workgroup of TNC is to rank

3 sites around the world by biological importance and degree of threat, and to create conservation plans to protect these places.

Not only will the creation of a digital database and karst map allow for ranking and delineation of areas of environmental and ecological sensitivity by blending detailed data based on hydrology, land use, biodiversity, and distribution of endangered and threatened species, it will also be essential for developing a GIS karst toolbox.

Purpose and Scope

There are two overarching goals for this thesis. The first goal (objective 1) is to conceptualize, develop, and initially populate an interactive karst database that will serve as documentation for the occurrence of known and potential near-surface (within 100 meters) karst areas throughout the world. Objective 1 is referred to as creation of Karst

Regions of the World database.

The second goal (objective 2) is to generate updated and qualified maps of known karst regions of the world at worldwide and continent scales. Objective 2 is referred to as creation of Karst Regions of the World maps.

Objective 1 will be based only on existing work from published (see the selected references and data base on attached CD), and from accessible unpublished sources, data sets, and maps made available from cooperation with a network of relevant karst researchers (see table 1) and observation programs. The multiple source data will be integrated into a cumulative digital GIS database. Objective 2 will be based on the latest and most accurate karst maps (for example, Veni et al., 2001; Ford and Williams, 2007;

Weary et al., 2008), coupled with geologic maps (USGS World Energy Assessment

4 Team, 2000), integrating all known maps with refined karst distribution based on GIS manipulation of the datasets generated in objective 1.

The geographical scope of this thesis is global. The thematic scope of this study is limited to sites included, or with the potential to be included, in the Karst Regions of the

World database and maps. These sites initially are limited to 1) landscapes that are formed by the primary action of processes in a shallow karst setting, 2) to karst landscapes, caves, and other features of outstanding historical and/or scientific relevance,

3) to ecosystems and biologic environments that are known from karst-type settings, and

4) to locations that do not fit any of the previous categories but have universal importance and a karst connection, in relation to geosciences, speleology, hydrology, biology, or civil society.

Insofar as the work is based on a compilation of work by previous researchers from diverse backgrounds and with diverse objectives, a broad range of accuracy (literally five orders of magnitude) exists on maps used for the database and this thesis. The interactive components of the maps presented herein allow for assessment of known and likely levels of accuracy, but it should be cautioned that as a preliminary product, the intended use of these maps is to focus attention on specific areas and regions. It is not appropriate to use these map products for construction or engineering projects.

Previous Research

Karst is a true interdisciplinary science, and it encompasses a range of foci as diverse as geology, geomorphology, hydrogeology, cave mapping, biology, speleology, anthropology, archeology, geochemistry, stable isotopes, radionuclides, land-use

5 assessment, planning, water-resources, geophysics, water-tracing, hazards, geographic

information systems, microbiology and ecology, to name but a few. Coupled with other

interdisciplinary technologies such as geographic information systems (GIS) and digital data-management techniques, which also touch on wide-ranging disciplines that are rapidly expanding, the list of relevant references exceeds many thousands of citations.

Specific references to topics essential to this research (several hundred) have been limited

to four general categories, which follow. The interested reader is encouraged to follow

sources discussed herein for additional documentation and references.

Important sources of information on karst features and caves are included in recent karst

encyclopedias by Gunn (2004) and Culver and White (2005) and texts by Ford and

Williams (2007), Palmer (2007) and Salomon (2006).

Karst Concepts

Karst is a general term used worldwide to describe distinctive landforms, hydrology, and

environments that arise from the combination of high-rock solubility and well-developed

subsurface drainage networks on rock types that are readily dissolved by water

(Sweeting, 1981; Jennings, 1985; Yuan, 1991; Klimchouk et al., 2000; Gunn, 2004;

Culver and White, 2005; Ford and Williams, 2007; Palmer, 2007). The word karst means

stony, barren ground and is derived from the Serbo-Croatian word karra/gara, meaning

stone, and the Slovenian word kras (Gams et al., 1973, 1993, 2003; Kranjc et al., 2001).

The terrain is produced by chemical dissolution by variably acidic water on soluble layers

of bedrock, notably carbonate rocks such as limestone, dolomite, or marble, (Bretz, 1942;

Palmer, 1991; Klimchouk et al., 2000; Gunn, 2004; Culver and White, 2005; Ford and

Williams, 2007; Palmer, 2007), and to a lesser extent, evaporites rocks such as gypsum,

6 anhydrite, and halite, (Kozary et al., 1968; Klimchouk et al., 2000; Klimchouk et al.,

2002; Johnson and Neal, 2003). Pseudokarst, forms are similar in morphology to karst

landform but occur by completely different processes, have been documented in

lithologies as diverse as quartz diorite (Jennings, 1971), quartzite (White et al., 1966), and basalt (Halliday, 1960).

Despite differences in processes of origin, volcanic and dissolutional caves have environmental similarities that have led to analogous faunas (Peck et al., 1973).

Distinctive physiography and subsurface hydrology are essential components of karst, although these are not always visually obvious (Quinlan, 1976).

The Dinaric karst region, located on the border of Slovenia and Italy, has come to be recognized as “classic karst”. Research and mapping of this area have a long, rich history. This region achieved international scientific importance through the investigations and publications of Jovan Cvijić (1893, 1901, 1918), and these studies established him as one of the worldwide founders of modern karst science. Some of his major contributions related the development of karst landforms to subsurface hydrology

(Das Karstphanomen, 1893).

Karst areas normally are characterized by a general absence of permanent surface streams and the presence of enclosed depressions, sinking streams, caves, dry valleys, gorges, natural bridges, and fluted rock outcrops. Waters may reside underground in solutionally enlarged channels, some of which are big enough to be termed caves. Typically, karst regions lack rivers and other surface water because water is transported into fissures and conduits in the rock and then flows as underground streams in caves. Eventually the waters return to the land surface, often as large springs. As the process of dissolution

7 occurs, rainwater dissolves rock to form voids or caves. Other natural processes

commonly intervene and create landscapes with multiple components, such as

glaciokarst, a karst landscape that was glaciated during the Pleistocene, or fluviokarst, a

karst landform that is superimposed on a former fluvial landscape (Jennings, 1985), etc.

Dissolution is normally dominated by meteoric waters, but can commonly have a

component of thermal waters enriched by CO₂ or H₂S. Caves can also form at the

interface of fresh and salt water along the coast. Important sources of information on the

many features and varieties of karst and caves include encyclopedias by Gunn (2004) and

Culver and White (2005) and texts by Ford and Williams (2007), Palmer (2007) and

Salomon (2006).

It is common for landscapes to develop on quartzites and dense siliceous sandstones. In

thermal waters the solubility of quartzose rocks approaches that of carbonate rocks and so

solutional caves may form, but this is not the case at normal temperatures and pressures.

In some quartzite terrains, caves develop along the flanks of escarpments or gorges where

deep fractures permit the input of water and hydraulic gradients are steep. The

landforms and drainage characteristics of these siliceous rocks is therefore a style of

fluviokarst, i.e., a landscape and subterranean hydrology that develops within the vadose zone as a consequence of the essential combined effects of dissolution and mechanical erosion and transport by running water.

Pseudokarst is a landform produced by processes other than dissolution or dissolution induced subsidence and collapses. A special case is vulcanokarst, which comprise tubular caves within lava flows. The roofs of such caves often suffer mechanical collapse, which creates enclosed depressions that divert water underground. An outstanding example of

8 such a landform is the Jeju Volcanic Island and Lava Tubes located in the Republic of

Korea.

Glaciers also have sinking streams, caves, collapse depressions and large springs, but the

karst-like features are produced by melting rather than dissolution, so the landscape is a glacial pseudokarst. Enclosed collapse depressions can be formed at the surface when patches of permafrost melt, forming the pitted karst-like landscape termed thermokarst.

This karst landform is expected to become more prevalent as with increased global

temperatures and changing rain patterns associated with global warming. .

Karst landform development is closely associated with the hydrological cycle. As water

passes into, flows through, and emerges from karst terrain, the resulting landforms can be

assigned to input, throughput or output roles.

The principles of karstic landform development, the origin of caves, and the geomorphic,

hydrologic, and geochemical processes of karst have been researched since the 19th

century. Landforms now generally recognized as pseudokarst were written about in

China around 2,300 year ago (Liu et al., cited by Pewe et al., 1995) and Italy’s Mount

Etna was written about only a little later (Carus, T., cited in Banit, 1993). Scientists of

Eastern Europe and North America who applied the modern scientific method to karst

and cave-development theories molded the 20th century ideas.

Modern developments in karst are marked by Kay (1957), in which the mechanisms of

cave-forming processes created a new approach to cave origins and karst hydrology. In a

paper by Barr (1960), a geographical and geomorphologic context for a species was

introduced, giving insight on the systematic evolution of cave animals.

9 Karst areas are dynamic; the geologic structure, solubility of the rocks involved, and the

climatic conditions determine to a great degree how rapidly these changes can take place.

The first karst textbooks written in English were written in the 1970’s (Jennings, 1971;

Sweeting, 1972). Since then, several notable textbooks have been published on karst, including those of Jakucs, (1977), Bogli (1980), Jennings (1985), Trudgill (1985), White

(1988), Ford and Williams (1989), and Gillieson (1996), most of these being an

assimilation of knowledge compiled by one or two internationally recognized karst authors.

Current and past karst researchers have attempted to provide geomorpholigsts and hydrologists with fundamental karst distribution data. In 1972, Herak and Stringfield

presented an attempt to explain karst geomorphology. Jennings (1983) described the worldwide scope of karst that provided an understanding of karst geomorphology and processes. Sweeting (1973) describes varied karst features of China and linked the academic thinking of the Chinese to the West.

Poulson and White (1969) integrated biology and geology in an interdisciplinary paper on cave environments. W.B. White went on to describe how karst aquifers evolve in different geological settings, with different classifications of aquifers based on the geologic setting (1969). Accurate maps of caves, geologic context, and fluid mechanics were used by Palmer (1975) to place constraints on groundwater-flow regimes to account for maze and branchwork patterns in caves. Ford and Ewers (1978) addressed the origins of caves, presented evidence that caves formed above, at, and below the water table based on fracture frequency, and provided a useful model for the development of a wide variety of caves.

10 During the decade of the 1980s, karst interpretation tools made remarkable advances.

Age dating was applied specifically to speleothems and indicated paleoclimatic significance. Periods of low growth and abundant growth of speleothems were tied to glacial advances and retreats (Gascoyne, Ford, and Schwarcz et al., 1983). Jones (1984) pioneered the delineation of entire groundwater basins by use of tracer experiments.

Dreiss (1989) combined rainfall curves (input) and spring hydrographs (output) to

produce a black-box approach to modeling karst aquifers (Dreiss, 1989). She was one of

the first to display a continuous chemical record of karst springs, known as chemographs, and distinguished aquifer storage water and storm flow.

Klimchouk (2007) established the importance of hypogene speleogenesis and

characteristics of hypogenic karst aquifers in the book titled Hypogene Speleogenesis:

Hydrogeological and Morphogenetic Perspective. The book describes the major and

widespread phenomenon and provides a practical guidance for karst investigations for

many years to come.

GIS and Database Management

At present, information technologies have been widely applied to environmental

management and environmental assessments (Wiedemann, 2003; Stevens, et al., 2007),

but karst researchers have used few of the growing technologies to advance the

understandings of the distribution of global karst. In as much as, one aim of this thesis is

to build a bridge between traditional karst and cave mapping and the sophisticated GIS

environment of today. Undoubtedly, GIS-based researches on world karst landscapes are

11 worthwhile and representative. Previous GIS and digital research has focused on concentrated areas of karst (Butler and Walsh, 1998; Phelan, 1999; Perez, 2005; Florea et al., 2005; and Gao et al., 2006). The introduction of GIS and the large quantity of digital remote sensing data available currently have opened possibilities of exploring and processing spatial data, increasing and broadening the possibilities for karst research

(Butler and Walsh, 1998). GIS-based database management systems (DBMS) have been introduced to manage and analyze karst features on both regional and national scales

(Denizman, 1997; Kochanov and Kochanov 1997; Whitman & Gubbels 1999; Cooper et al. 2001; Lei et al. 2001).

Florea (2007) used GIS to model and analyze the impacts of an interstate corridor purposed in an area of known karst habitats. Guan et al., 2007, used environmental factors to asses the vulnerability of karst areas in Chongqing, China. Others have recognized the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) as a tool to compile digital karst maps and facilitate spatial data analysis. A sinkhole database was constructed by

Dalgleish and Alexander (1984b), and updated by Magdalene and Alexander (1995) using a spreadsheet format.

Mapping Considerations

Although The Nature Conservancy has as its goal to advance the protection of karst species and habitats globally, the products generated will have application throughout those subdisciplines of our science that require large-scale mapping, and accurate karst- boundary delineation at countrywide or larger scale. Raster datasets represent imaged maps, surfaces, environmental attributes sampled on a grid, or photos of an objects referenced to features. Vector data represent shape features as an ordered set of

12 coordinates with associated attributes. Vector data in a geodatabase has a structure that directs the storage of features by their relationships and allows for geometric operations, such as calculating length and area, identifying intersections, and finding nearby features.

Mapping has long been an important tool for conservation scientists, but typically karst mapping has been undertaken at highly variable scale and accuracy (Johnson and

Quinlan, 1994; Weary, 2005; Jianhua et al., 2007). Mapping of global karst has been a progression, beginning with maps of poor resolution with broad delineations that serve as generalized interpretations of karst distributions. The first version of the world map of carbonate rocks appeared in Ford and Williams (1989) and at a continent scale (Culver,

1999; Veni et al. 2001; Epstein et al. 2001; Epstein et al. 2002) or global scale (Kozary et al. 1968); Ford and Williams, 2007 (Figure2)), several efforts to integrate all known data into a meaningful map of karst of the world have been undertaken. The first depiction of world carbonates (Ford and Williams, 1989) is reproduced as figure 1. Figure 2 is a recently revised version of Ford and Williams 1989 map that was assembled using GIS technologies in an Eckert IV equal area projection. This representation is of variable quality and generalizations occur in areas where carbonates are common, but not necessarily continuous in outcrop and where superficial deposits mask outcrops. Figures

1 and 2 show the distribution of karst limited to carbonate rocks, but karst is also found on highly soluble rocks, like evaporites. Figure 3 is a map of evaporite rocks (Kozary,

1968). This map is presented in an irregular projection.

These maps have been limited in dependability, owing to high degree of map variability, qualities, and scales (Figure 4). Unfortunately, the variability of existing data and maps, and the disparity of project goals have led to construction of component maps and have

13 made integration of world maps truly difficult. Highly variable project objectives,

funding, map scales, karst understanding, discipline focus, resource needs, data formats, accuracy, precision, completeness, and willingness to share available data have limited efforts to compile such a product. Until now, no global distribution maps of karst integrate distributions of carbonate karst, evaporite karst and pseudokarst.

14 ts s are sphere and the Western Hemisphere represen sphere and the Western Hemisphere facilitate map presentation on a single page. presentation on a single page. facilitate map

e world, version 1.0 (Ford and Williams, 1989). Carbonate outcrop and Williams, 1.0 (Ford e world, version d; the dark line separating Eastern Hemi missing Atlantic Ocean basin that was not included to that Atlantic Ocean basin missing depicted in black. Scale is not specifie Figure 1. Distribution of major carbonate rock outcrops of th outcrops rock carbonate major of Figure 1. Distribution

evision evision ttempts ttempts logy and recent a of the carbonate rocks.

the world, version 3.0 (Ford and Williams, 2007) Version 3.0 is a r and Williams, 3.0 (Ford the world, version nd Williams, 1989) and is in greater detail, reflecting GIS techno nd Williams, to differentiate the purity to their first carbonate outcrop map (Ford a to their first carbonate outcrop map Figure 2. Distribution of major carbonate rock outcrops of outcrops rock carbonate major of Figure 2. Distribution

Figure 4. Comparison of three maps delineating aspects of karst distribution of the African region. Typically karst mapping has been undertaken at highly variable scale and accuracy (Johnson and Quinlan et al. 1994; Weary et al. 2005; Jianhua et al. 2007). The map by Ford and Williams (2008) of carbonate rock outcrops v3.0 in an Eckert IV equal area projection and was used as a starting reference for the KROW maps generated in this thesis

Ecosystem Considerations

Karst terrains and processes occur worldwide, and the organisms that inhabit these

ecosystems have been described using a wide range of increasingly sophisticated tools

and technologies (Culver, 1982; Culver, 1989; Hamilton-Smith, 1997; Taylor, 1999;

Cacchio et al., 2004; Culver and White, 2005; Barton, 2006; Barton et al., 2006; Jianhua

et al., 2007; and Spalding et al., 2007)

Karst is associated with the identification of unique and unusual biodiversity. Different

parts of the world, different lithologies, amount of precipitation, and many other factors

create isolated and dependent environments, with endemic species . Some of the world’s

most rare and endangered fauna occur within karst habitats, making it essential for identification and conservation. Figure 5 depicts animals found in karst ecosystems.

Amblyopsis spelea (top left), is a northern cave fish found in Kentucky and Indiana.

Troglophile cave crickets (top right) can live within or out of caves. Myotis velifer

(lower right), the Little Brown Bat, is of North and Central America. The cave

salamander (bottom left) is a sightless, pigmentless amphibian that moves from surface to

shallow karst ecosystems. The bottom middle picture is one of several as-yet unnamed

insect species from Borneo believed to be previously undiscovered before the TNC’s

2004 expedition to the Indonesian Caves. Blind cave salamander larvae has fully

functioning eyes; as they mature, their eyelids grow over their vestigial eyes

(bottom left).

There are thousands of species of cave dwelling animals worldwide that use various karst

features for habitat. Plants, such as mosses and ferns, grow in wet places close to cave

entrances. Karst floras develop in shaded moist terrains, including well-developed

19 epikarst, along karst bluffs or canyons, and in and around large deep sinkholes. Caves are used intermittently by large carnivores for shelter or resting. Birds and small mammals, such as woodrats, often nest in caves. Elk and deer commonly bed down in the vicinity of cave entrances during summer when the air from caves is cooler, and during the winter when cave air is generally warmer than surrounding temperatures.

Caves and their stable environments can be critically important habitat for bat species that depend on them for roosting and hibernation.

Figure 5. Images of animals found in karst ecosystems

Some karst species have evolved over time to be able to live in exclusive total darkness.

One such example are the troglobites, meaning cave dweller, who have survived the last ice age in subsurface cavities and are commonly blind with underdeveloped skin pigment. Other species have the ability to live above and below the ground often exploring for food outside of caves. These creatures are called troglophiles, meaning cave lover. Animals wandering into caves but usually don’t live within them are cave gests, called trogloxenes.

Scientific and educational opportunities abound in karst landscapes. In particular, subsurface karst environments provide a porthole into landform development and past environmental circumstances. Karst areas serve as natural laboratories to study biogeographical, ecological, evolutionary, and taxonomic research (Schilthuizen et al.,

1999). Studying cave morphology and secondary deposits like speleothems and sediments can yield information on climate change, surface temperatures at the time of deposition, and stable isotopes.

The natural setting of karst caves—alkaline settings, cold temperatures, the nonexistence of light and difficult access—provide opportunities for the discovery of undisturbed archaeological materials well-preserved animal remains, and rare species (e.g. fossils of the dwarf hominid Homo Floresiensis were found in a cave in Indonesia; Morwood et al.,

2004). Information obtained can reveal details of how ancient peoples lived, provide evolutionary links to the past, and help determine historic and prehistoric human and animal migration patterns.

The ability of karst hydrogeologic systems to flow rapidly exposes the delicate karst ecosystem to contaminants. Pollutants move rapidly from the land surface through

22 fractures and conduits in the limestone down to the water table. Sinking streams, solution hollows, or dolines, may provide direct entry points to groundwater, with little or no filtration or attenuation of contaminants. In addition, little protection is provided by the characteristically this soil cover over karst systems. Therefore, if water is impure high permeability rates results in little time for contaminates to be filtered out. Due to the characteristics of karst, these aquifers are prone to degradation that can render drinking water useless.

High permeability rates coupled with uncontrolled human interaction can lead to serious environmental problems. Surface changes, agriculture, industry, disposal of waste, and mismanagement affect the amount and chemistry of water in the system. In urbanized areas the probability for impacts quite high.

METHODOLOGY

Conceptual Framework and Design of the Geodatabase

This project utilized spatial data analysis techniques. The procedure was subdivided into phases: data collection, data preparation, data incorporation, design and integration of

the database, karst review and compilation of maps, and analysis of the statistical

relationships between data.

Since the onset of this project, known cave and karst features have been inventoried and

integrated into a GIS, consisting of the global karst distribution. In addition, karst areas

formally studied have references to past research joined to their map counterparts. This

document provides the basic background and documentation for the KROW database and

maps. The database in this thesis is complete, but preliminary in that it is still undergoing

data contributions and standardization procedures. The data products of the thesis consist

of three main parts, the spatial database, a set of supplemental tables relating the

reference information to the database, and maps representing KROW. It should be

understood that collectively the datasets do not represent a single map, but rather serve as

a data resource to generate a variety of karstrelated maps.

The digital karst maps are presented in standardized formats as ARC/INFO export files,

ArcView shapefiles, and Adobe pdfs. Three data tables relate the map distributions to

detailed reference and distribution information and accompany these GIS files. The maps

of karst distribution have been fitted to a common set of global country and state

boundaries based on the 1:5,000,000 map of the world. When the maps are merged, the

combined attribute tables can be used directly with the merged maps to make derivative

maps.

The global database for karst was constructed by acquiring digital versions of existing karst maps. Few digital karst maps already existed, so it was a necessity to create a number of digital representations where areas lacked them. For these areas, new digital compilations were prepared by digitizing existing printed maps and raster images with cooperation of the area’s stakeholders.

Data-set architecture and maps were initially created at the continent scale. Geologic maps of individual countries exist for parts of the world, and where these were accessible in digital format they were incorporated into the database for analysis of karst areas to generate preliminary regional scale work maps.

Within continents, further subdivision by country, state, region, and local area were undertaken as necessary to adequately delineate the preliminary karst boundaries based on geology maps. Obviously, if karst maps exist for specific areas, these were incorporated directly. Where no digital data sets were available, paper maps were scanned and incorporated into ArcMap 9.2, where they were transformed into the projection of the referenced base map.

ArcMap 9.2 and ArcInfo GIS and mapping software were chosen as the spatial analysis, visualization, and spatial data-management tool for KROW. Digital-processing techniques were applied for data visualization, enhancement, and interpretation of multiple geodata sets.

The second stage was to attribute the individual GIS karst representations, following the approach of Veni et al. (2001), by dividing karst into 3 broad categories, carbonate, evaporite, and pseudokarst. Karst distribution was cataloged in the KROW Database

(KROWD) and assigned shape categories for carbonate karst, evaporite karst, and

pseudokarst. Individual polygons were assigned distribution attributes: karst ID, karst type, size in km², shape length, and location by continent and countries.

Karst Terminology

Understanding database construction and mapping needs of KROW requires a precise definition of the following four terms.

• Carbonate karst is a terrain with distinctive hydrology and landforms arising from

the combination of high rock solubility and well-developed secondary porosity.

Ground-water flow velocities typically are much faster here than they are in

porous media, contaminant attenuation mechanisms typically are much less

effective, and flow tends to be anisotropic and heterogeneous. In most cases,

carbonate karst is produced by chemical dissolution by slightly acidic water on a

soluble layer of bedrock, notably limestone or dolomite.

• Evaporite karst is similar to carbonate karst in that dissolution is the dominant

process, but unlike carbonate karst, the very high solubility of evaporite minerals

produces highly mineralized ground water. Environments and ecosystems in

evaporite karst would be expected to foster organisms more tolerant of dissolved

solutes. The most common of these lithologies include gypsum, anhydrite, and

halite. Desert climates are often indicated in the geologic record by thick sections

of evaporites (anhydrite, gypsum and halite) that have accumulated in both

lancastrian and marine settings either adjacent to margins of recently pulled apart

continental plates, in compressional terrains of colliding margins, or in areas of

local tectonic uplift or sediment accumulation that have isolated standing bodies

of water from the sea.

• Pseudokarst is an environment or setting that resembles karst landforms, but

where dissolution or dissolution induced subsidence and collapse are not the

critical formative processes to produce cavities, isolated voids or connected

passages or tubes. The subsurface environment in these areas is similar in many

ways to other types of karst, but because they were formed by processes other

than dissolution, ground-water flow, water quality, and environmental factors

typically are distinct.

Pseudokarst typically develops in lava, unconsolidated sediments or volcanic ash,

talus, ice and permafrost (Kempe and Halliday, 1997). Pseudokarst is most

highly developed in basalt flows with lave tubes (Halliday, 1960). A special case

is volcano-karst, which includes tubular caves within lava flows. Mechanical

collapse is common in these settings and provides access underground.

• Regions are areas of land or water that contain a geographically distinct

assemblage of ecosystems and natural communities; each may be differentiated

by climate, subsurface geology, physiography, hydrology, soil, and vegetation.

The karst distribution map that is associated with the KROW database depicts karst by color-coding into three main categories: Carbonate shown as green, Evaporite shown as blue, and Pseudokarst shown as red. By using this color-coded system, the KROW’s maps conform to the representation of other current karst mapping projects (Weary et al.,

2008).

Carbonate and evaporite karst were distinguished from one another because of the major differences in water quality created by rock-water interaction in these settings, and pseudokarst was distinguished from the other two because its process of formation is so completely different than other karst formations. All methods contribute to similar subsurface ecosystems, but each has the potential to harbor a distinct group of organisms based on unique physical and chemical attributes of lithology and mode of formation.

The distinction between buried and surface karst was determined to be outside the scope of the overarching needs of TNC. Although buried versus surface distinction was included in the map of U.S. karst lands (Veni et al., 2001), and is obviously important to hydrogeologists and others in the karst community studding hypogene speleogenesis, with respect to environments suitable for cave-adapted organisms, it was considered and rejected. The reason for rejection was the fact that almost all subsurface karst environments have the potential to and likely do host microbes, yet less than 1% have been studied or sampled. Based on this dearth of data, and the widespread distribution

potential, any delineation of deeply buried karst regions would include most of the

continental landmasses. Such a gross overestimation of karst regions would detract from

those surface areas that are truly home to fragile ecosystems.

The digital karst map was related to supplemental karst data of specific documentation

regarding map scale, display attributes, analysis properties, map use, data source, and

relevant annotations. With the merger of spatial databases, tables can be made accessible

through the GIS by pointing at locations on the map.

For this study, once the database was filled with reference information and polygons were

created, general statistics were computed for karst variables. In addition, an analysis was completed to determine if patterns were evident within the datasets.

Data Collection

Data mining was undertaken from a number of search engines and Internet resources, as

well as obvious publications and maps in the public domain. Major data sources include

geological surveys, journal articles, speleological and caving societies, unpublished

theses, university and karst institutes, conference proceedings, textbooks, engineering

reports, water-tracing studies, and caving-club newsletters.

Network of Scientists

Partnerships have been formed with a number of national and local public agencies,

scientific groups, and research organizations to acquire the raw data from geologic and

karst studies. In this process, a network of karst scientists and cave and karst

organizations was developed and a detailed list of contacted individuals was created

(Table 1 and Appendix A) to serve as data sources for the global karst GIS layers. These

sources are further supplemented with personal contacts across the wide range of science,

engineering, and caving—in fact, contact with any groups that focus on some aspect of

karst. Table 1 is an example of a single page showing the color-coded format used for

Appendix A. When a row in the table is colored gray it indicates that the specific

individual or group was in contact directly with a KROW representative. Selected

examples of these groups and their information dissemination outlets include the Karst

Interest Group (KIG) of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the Karst Commission of

the International Association of Hydrogeologists, the International Union of Speleology,

29 the Karst Information Portal, the National Speleological Society, the Karst Waters

Institute, Cave Research Foundation, British Cave Research Association, National Cave and Karst Research Institute, Australasian Cave and Karst Management Association,

Canadian Karst Resources and Issues, Slovenian Karst Research Institute, Karstica

European Network, UIS Commission on Karst Hydrogeology and Speleogenesis, South

American Landscape, Karst and Caves of Madagascar, and IGCP 379 “Karst Processes and the Carbon Cycle”.

Literature reviews were conducted and a functional network of science professionals was created to serve as the major data sources for the global karst GIS layers. As a result of continued partnership, we have developed a large dataset from a variety of sources, with our data largely obtained from public-agencies, reports, karst organizations, and other records.

Network of Scientist Name Areas of Study Contact Information A Auckland Speleo Group New Zealand www.asg.org.nz/ Aggie Speleological Society Texas stuact.tamu.edu/stuorgs/cave/ Akiyoshi-dai Museum of Japan [email protected] Natural History Alexander, Calvin Minnesota [email protected] Alberquerque, Elaine F. Universidade Santa Ursula, Istituto de Ciencias Biologicas e Ambientais, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 31 Aley, Tom Ozark Underground Laboratory, Missouri, USA American Cave Conservation United States of America www.cavern.org/ Association American Caving Accidents United States of America www.caves.org/pub/aca/ Andrichouk, Slava Ukraine, Poland [email protected] Andrews, Peter Natural History Museum, Department of Paleontology, UK Association for Mexican Cave Mexico www.amcs Studies Atkinson, Tim England [email protected] Atlas of Speleothem World www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/speleoatlas/SA Microfabrics index1.html

Data Preparation

Preliminary maps and datasets were based on existing known studies, published and unpublished, of major aspects of karst, which include geologic, hydrologic, speoleogenetic, biologic, and ecologic data layers, with documentation citations and a relative ranking of accuracy. The most valuable source data were comprised of digital,

GIS based geologic and karst maps ranging in scale, cave and karst journal articles, books, and media with site specific location maps, and mineral resource data from multiple sources. Some spatial data can present insufficiencies when represented in a

GIS, which made it necessary to adopt a methodology for restructuring the data before the integration into the GIS (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Data preparation flow chart demonstrating the methodology adopted for the preparation of data prior to the integration into the database.

The disparate nature of the source data places serious restrictions on how these data can be used and the degree to which they can be integrated. Data restrictions arise from differences in scale, map units, exposure, mapping philosophy, and many other map characteristics. Data were evaluated for availability, licenses, resolution, storage (what kind of file formats will be used, how large is each file), extent, accuracy (will the data resolution provide us with required spatial accuracy), and accessibility. Display and

analysis properties were considered for each map, including; map use, implications for

theme display, symbology, and annotations were also taken into account.

Guidelines have been developed to ensure that the data are entered in a uniform and

consistent manner. These guidelines provide normalization to the data collected from multiple sources (individual scientist, geological databases, and library archives).

Guidelines were developed to facilitate translation from paper documentation into a digital database. The guidelines define the fields, give default values, and describe what to do if information is missing.

Data Incorporation

Raster datasets commonly do not contain spatial reference information and sometimes the location information delivered with them is inadequate or the data does not align properly with other data. In order to use valuable raster data in conjunction with other spatially referenced datasets it often needs to be georeferenced or aligned to a known map coordinate system.

Data were entered using a GIS and processed into a form compatible for data analysis.

Data parameters were correctly defined and entered into ArcView 9.2 for display, projection, and overlay onto base maps. The data for KROW database consists of spatial data and attribute data, which were produced in a wide variety of formats. In some cases, this required the prior extraction or conversion from one data format to another. It should be emphasized that most of the data included in KROWD came from digital sources.

Paper maps were incorporated only when it was necessary. Although most of the maps were available as ArcGIS coverages or shapefiles, the items and formats in the polygon attribute tables (PATs) and arc attribute tables (AATs) varied dramatically. When the

maps were acquired in digital format they were processed using ArcGIS and were put in

a standard map projection, coordinate system and GIS format and karst related data were

extracted. These data were rasterized and when necessary georectified to allow spatial

analysis and algebraic manipulation. Complementary data were extracted from a variety

of digital GIS and published sources and from the Internet.

Georeferencing input data allowed for the creation and storage of control points with

assigned coordinates and a defined projection that related to raster datasets. The graphic

elements within the GIS database were georeferenced, providing a defined location using map coordinates and assigning a coordinate system. This process allows for the georeferenced raster data to be viewed, queried, and analyzed with other geographic data. an exact coordinate for any feature, or part of a feature.

To illustrate approaches and work products a case study for the distribution of karst in

Australia is presented (Figure 7 to Figure 11). Australia was selected because extensive work had been done for the continent, yet the karst complexity was not so great as to overwhelm the database. Georeferencing was conducted in ArcMap by loading an existing spatially referenced base map into an active ArcMap, (Figure 7); in the desired coordinate system of World Eckert IV projection.

Figure 7. Screen capture of the spatialy referenced base map of Australia.

The multiband raster dataset depicted in Figure 8 showing the karst of Australia (Ken G.

Grimes, written commun. 2007) was incorporated into the spatially referenced GIS base

map (Figure 7).

Figure 8. Multiband raster dataset showing the karst of Australia (Grimes et al. 2007). The multiband raster dataset was individually incorporated into an active map where the projection of the specific raster dataset was identified. The raster image was overlain on

the base map and the two maps showed comparably different projections.

Figure 9. Intermediate workmap showing variations of the geo-referenced base map and the multiband raster image.

An overlay of the referenced base map (pink) on the unreferenced raster image exhibited

comparable difference between the two map projections (Figure 9). The georeferencing

process involves align the two maps where they most closely “fit” together. Using the

georeferencing toolbar, ground control points- known x, y coordinates- were identified that linked the raster image and reference map. (Figure 10).

Figure 10. A representation of the control points, at two different levels of scale, before the transformations take place. The red base map was selected in an area of a known location (Figure 10). Then the raster image was selected in the same known location. The x and y coordinates for each

37 known location was stored and a polynomial transformation link was created. A suitable number of control points (5 to 10 points) were required to keep the residual error to a minimum, thereby optimizing accuracy. After accuracy verification of geographical and political boundary control points, the raster image was georeferenced by ArcMap, transformed into the projection of the base map, integrated with the vector dataset, and a new shapefile was created (Figure 11.) The newly created ArcInfo shapefiles, which correspond to the vector dataset, were projected to the World Eckert IV equal area projection.

Figure 11. A screen grab from ArcMap of the raster image aligned with the vector dataset, projected in the Eckert IV, and the associated transformation data points.

Often, it was a necessity to digitize features found on printed or digital maps to match the digital format of the GIS. After maps were georeferenced, the digitizing process was carried out in ArcMap. This procedure entailed superimposition of two or more input maps or data layers with the aim of producing a composite map showing the intersection of the mapping units on the individual data layers. The Editor Toolbar was added and an editing session was started. Karst features were verified and created by digitizing a series

of points, creating line work that would make up individual polygons. ID numbers were assigned to polygons in the attribute table of the shapefile. The edits were then saved and the editing session was terminated.

Digigitization of paper maps into a digital format, or to images with known coordinate

locations introduces registration error. The degree to which the transformation can

accurately map all control points can be measured mathematically by the root mean

square (RMS) method in ArcMap. Each feature digitized into the database will have an

introduced error equivalent to the RMS error. The goal during registration was to

minimize the RMS error as much as possible. High RMS errors, in some cases, point to a

systematic error such as poor scanner or digitizer calibration. Known standards were adhered to during the data conversion process

The power of GIS to combine data from many sources, using many different scales, projections and data models is one of its major strengths. But the inevitable consequences of combining data sources and changing scales are the loss of sensitivity to each data set’s idiosyncrasies, particularly its accuracy. To discuss the accuracy problems associated with the spatial data a qualitative assessment of the accuracy of the individual polygons was conducted. It is understood that an inherent error is introduced when data is integrated at different scales and accuracies. Ideally, we wanted to address the error of the positional accuracy of a polygon to generate confidence on an estimate of the polygon’s area. Acknowledging that different polygons were attributed to different source material at varying scales and accuracy made estimating error difficult. It was necessary to assess the accuracy of the different source material and to broadly classify each source as very good (~10m), good (~100m), fair (`1000m), and poor (`10km). All

of the digital maps incorporated for the U.S. Geological Survey were ranked as “very

good”. Ford and Williams (2007) carbonate outcrop map was classified as “good”. All paper maps incorporated were either classified as fair or poor, depending on the representation provided.

Once digitized features were created, each was assigned specific karst attributes. A standardized polygon attribute table (PAT) was developed for the karst polygon coverages to represent individual karst areas. In addition to the standard fields created for the coverage by the ARCINFO system, we added several fields including the

Karst_Type and Karst_ID for joins and relates to the supplemental attribute tables. One record in the feature attribute table corresponds to each feature in the coverage

(Table 2). Data were entered into the attribute tables through customized ArcView,

ArcMap, and Microsoft application interfaces to take advantage of readily available software and to simplify interactions between multiple users. The spatial data were entered through an ArcView interface along with their associated attributes. In addition to the standard field created for the coverage by the ARCINFO system (area, perimeter), we added several fields including karst_type, continent, and countries, to supplement the attribute table with non-spatial data (Table 3). Once the spatial data were recorded, non- spatial data (layer data and associated comments) were entered. Data attribute type and field properties, such as precision, scale, or length, were specified in ArcMap when adding a new field.

Table 2. Karst polygon attribute table (PAT). Field name Information type Field/Data Type OBJEDTID A unique identifier assigned by ArcMap. ObjectID (e.g. 1,2,3…499) Shape A description of the characteristics of the data assigned Geometry by ArcMap. (e.g. Polygon) Karst_ID The unique identifier for every karst polygon Short Integer (e.g. 1,2, 3…499) Karst_Type A unique type of karst, as from the original “source Text (mandatory) coverage”. (e.g. Carbonate, Evaporite, Pseudokarst) Continent The location of the karst polygon by content. Text (mandatory) Countries The location of the karst polygon by countries within its Text (mandatory) borders. Area_ sq_m A measurement of area for each polygon. Calculated Number based on the perimeter of the geographical distribution (Double) of the karst polygon. Shape_ Length A measurement of the length of the perimeter of the Number karst polygon. (Double) The attributes stored for each karst feature were stored in the KROW polygon attribute table and include the continent, countries, Karst_Type, Area_sq², Shape_Length, and

Karst_ID.

Table 3. KROW polygon attribute table (PAT). OBJECTID Karst_ Karst_Type Countries Continent Area_sq² Shape_Length_ ID m² 1 1 Carbonate Mexico North 388566 2493 America 2 2 Carbonate Mexico North 738439 3347 America 3 3 Carbonate Mexico North 388566 2493 America 4 4 Carbonate Mexico North 3953554 34442 America 3 5 5 Carbonate Mexico North 388566 2493 America 6 6 Carbonate Mexico North 5567855 42639 America 3 7 7 Carbonate Mexico North 5785133 31163 America 1 8 8 Carbonate Mexico North 1573487 25589 America 9 9 9 Carbonate Mexico North 1666136 15339 America 4 10 10 Carbonate Mexico North 388566 2493 America

To facilitate reference data integration into the database RefWorks, an online research management, writing and collaboration tool, was used. RefWorks can be accessed at http://www.refworks.com/, where an account and a personal reference database can be created.

Figure 12. RefWorks is an online tool facilitating reference management and organization. (source: http://www.refworks.com/.)

Reference information for each document was stored and organized in RefWorks; a tool designed for researchers to easily gather, manage, store, share, and generate all types of information and citations or bibliographies. This software permits capture of reference information for online resources and allows integration of non-digital references to create a personal database online.

In the RefWorks domain, publications and references were manually input, imported automatically, and added from data vendors as a text filed or by copy/paste and saved within the database. A unique ID number was automatically assigned by RefWorks to each entry and was titled Ref_ID. Continental folders organized reference data, which included: Africa, Antarctica, Asia, Australiasia, Europe, North America, Oceania, South

America, and World Maps. References can be added or removed from individual folders.

The total number of reference sources for each continent can be found in Table 4.

Table 4. . Karst references by continent. Continent Number of References Africa 24 Asia 56 Australiasia 85 Europe 106 North America 66 Oceania 0 South America 15 World Maps 37

The reference style of the Geological Society of America Bulletin was chosen as the format for the references within the database and in the Selected Reference portion of this thesis. The output style editor was used to create a custom output style, which was used to incorporate the database into an excel filed. The output style was named KROW

Database (KROWD) and the included output fields are: Ref ID, Authors, Title, Ref

Type, Periodical, Pub Year, Volume, Issue, Pages, Links, and Descriptors.

The format of the bibliography, the type of file, and the references to include in the exported references were delineated. The supplemental attribute tables, KROW

REFERENCE, (Table 6) which accompany the spatial databases were developed using the RefWorks database program. The reference table serves the purpose of containing the citations for reference sources used in compiling the supplemental tables. The table was formatted from a list of references, a HTML file type was created and a bibliography was downloaded to the computer and displayed. This information was then selected, copied, and pasted as a HTML into Microsoft Office Excel 2007 (Table 5).

The structure of the reference table, Table 6, was designed to accommodate karst data from a variety of sources and formats, to create a common interface for entering and displaying data, and to support current and future scientific and karst studies. The Excel file was then saved as an .xls and dBase (.dbf) format and was ready for incorporation into the geodatabase as a supplemental table.

Table 5. KROW REFERENCE table with field definitions. Field name Information type Ref_ID (mandatory) The unique code assigned by RefWorks software to each reference in the table. Format: 3-digit number. Author Authors of each reference. Title Title of the associated reference. Reference Type Journal Article, Book , ect. Year Year in which the reference was cited. Issue Issue in which the reference was cited Pages Pages pertaining to document. Descriptors Key words that describe the science, location, and techniques used in the paper.

Table 6 Example of the reference table created from the RefWorks database for collected karst references.

Ref_ Authors Title Continent Descript.1 Descript. Descript. Descript.4 ID 2 3 1 Asfawossen Asrat, A high-resolution multi-proxy Africa Absolute Africa Ethiopia Carbon Andy Baker, stalagmite record from Mechara, age Mohammed Umer southeastern Ethiopia; palaeo- Mohammed, Melanie J. hydrological implications for Leng, Peter Van speleothem palaeoclimate Calsteren and Claire reconstruction Smith. 26 Giovanni Barrocu; Hydrogeology and vulnerability Europe Karst Ground- Sardinia Italy Michele Muzzu; and map (Epik method) of the water 46 Gabriele Uras. “Supramonte” karstic system, north-central Sardinia 27 Peter Malik. Assessment of regional Europe Slovakia karstification degree and groundwater sensitivity to pollution using hydrograph analysis in the Velka Fatra Mountains, Slovakia 28 Z. Stevanovic, I. Management of karst aquifers in Europe Serbia Jemcov and S. Serbia for water supply Milanovic.

Design and Integration of the Geodatabase

A geodatabase is essentially a relational or object-relational database that has been enhanced by geographic data storage, referential integrity constraints, map display, feature editing, and analysis functions. The geodatabase consists of a collection of tables that store data. Rows represent features and columns represent characteristics. Functions of a database include: editing data, joining, linking, and relating data tables, query building, analysis, and security versioning. A major benefit of storing the feature attributes in a geodatabase rather than in a shapefile is that the data within the database can be easily updated, and the changes are automatically reflected in the GIS layers.

A basic three-level structure was adopted for the KROW database to provide a common framework for all data and to allow for future expansion (Figure 13). The inventory of known karst occurrences uses ArcGIS and the RefWorks database as the main programs for the storage, retrieval, manipulation and display of data. The karst represented in the

GIS was linked to reference information for source maps and data, providing scientific detail on specific karst sites. This information was housed in a database that includes three tables. The first table includes boundaries of karst areas represented as polygons, classifications of karst (carbonate, evaporite, or pseudokarst), geographical locations (e.g. continent and country), and the calculated area of karst extent. The second table is a collection of karst references from around the globe. The last table is used to link the

GIS karst dataset to the reference table. The final product will provide a useful aid for

Figure 13. Data model for KROW database. Dashed lines indicate a one-to-one relationship and solid lines indicate a one-to-many relationship.

Delineation of cave and karst systems allowing for improved protection and management at national, regional, or site levels.

An ESRI geodatabase was created in ArcCatalog 9.2 (ESRI, 2007). ArcCatalog was opened and the destination folder was selected and a New/Personal Geodatabase was selected. The geodatabase was titled karst_map.gdb. The karst polygon shapefile data in

World Eckert IV was imported into the geodatabase within ArcCatalog as a polygon feature class. The shapefiles were imported into the geodatabase by right clicking on the geodatabase and pressing Import/shapefile to Geodatabase.

The spatial and non-spatial data was integrated by creating a relationship class.

Relationship classes manage the associations between objects in one class (feature class or table) and objects in another. It's appropriate when one record in a target spatial layer has many matches in the nonspatial table and allows for a relationship to be established between the polygon and the attribute data. A relate makes a connection between a record in the feature attribute table and a corresponding record in the related attribute table. An item in one table is used as a relate key (karst_id) to a corresponding item or column in the related table (ref_id). Relationship classes are stored in the geodatabase making them always available when working with either of the related objects

For the KROW database, our objective was to relate many different karst areas to many different karst references. In GIS terminology this is called a many-to-many relationship.

To create this relationship and populate the KROW POLYGON TEFRENCE table, a many-to-many relationship class was established. This allowed for multiple records in the destination table to match multiple records in the source table. This GIS junction table was titled KROW POLYGON REFERENCE (Table 7). The KROW

POLYGON_REFERNCE table was created to link the GIS representation of karst

polygons (KROW PAT) to the reference table (REFERENCES).

Table 7. KROW POLYGON_REFERENCE table with field definitions. Field name Information type Field Type Ref_id A unique code assigned by RefWorks Number; unique (mandatory) software to each reference. values Karst_id The unique code assigned by Number; unique (mandatory) ARCMAP software to each polygon values that represented karst.

By using a geodatabase the two tables, references and polygons, have been linked by the polygon reference table. This makes the information that is displayed in map format

interactively accessible by pointing and clicking on a specific polygon and once selected

then viewing the associated references for that polygon.

RESULTS

Statistics Using the KROWD

The comprehensive integration of known cave and karst data resulted approximately

15,000 karst polygons representing 14.10 % of the Earth’s surface. Relationships based

on position and aerial distribution of karst phenomena were considered and evaluated in a

statistical framework, providing information on the number, area, and percentage of land cover of carbonate, evaporite, and pseudokarst polygons for each continent and the world

ArcGIS Spatial Analysis capabilities were used to consider relationships based on position and aerial distribution. These analyses were chosen because they were easy to use in map-based interface and they provided an advantage for visualizing spatial relationships. A variety of criteria were used to evaluate the global distribution of karst phenomenon in a statistical framework. The statistics provided information on the total number of carbonate, evaporite, and pseudokarst polygons for each continent currently in the KROWD. (Table 8).

Table 8. Total karst features represented in the GIS. Continent Carbonate Evaporite Pseudo- Total Total Karst Karst karst Polygons Area (km²) Russian Federation 202 0 0 202 3690997 South America 461 5 279 745 767579 Africa 453 47 561 1061 3148247 North America 8902 77 183 9162 3626121 East and South East Asia 1564 0 34 1598 2856515 Middle East & Central 425 4 33 462 Asia 2334377 Europe 872 97 13 982 1441828 Australasia 618 0 126 744 654970 World’s total polygons 13497 230 1229 14956 World’s karst area (km²) 16654361 236036 1630235 18520632

The global karst data were evaluated by area parameters to provide meaningful identification of patterns and irregularities. A statistical summary of the KROW karst areas is shown in Table 9 with distinctions for carbonate, evaporite, and pseudokarst.

Table 9. Area calculations for each karst type (km²). Karst Type Area (km²) Area (km²) rounded Carbonate 16,709,152 16,700,000 Evaporite 236,103 200,000 Pseudokarst 1,872,843 1,900,000 Total 18,818,099 18,800,000

Following the methodology of Ford and Williams (2007) calculations (v.3.0) for the area of the world carbonate outcrops; the world was divided into a regional classification for comparison of area estimations (Table 20 and Figure 2). The continental scale subdivisions include: Russian Federation Plus, South America, Africa, North America

(excluding Greenland), East and South east Asia, Middle East and Central Asia, Europe

(excluding Iceland and Russia), and Australasia. For a complete list of the countries

within each region and the total land area in km² see Table 10.

Using the ArcMap interface a region was selected and the count (the number of

polygons), minimum area, maximum area, sum of all areas, and the standard deviation

was documented. The tables were divided by region into statistics for carbonate, evaporite, and pseudokarst and the calculated statistics were recorded in Tables 12-20.

By adding the area found for carbonate, evaporite, and pseudokarst, a total area for all three karst occurrences was found (Table 11). The total world area for karst was then divided by the number of polygons for each karst type to yield an average area in kilometers squared.

Table 10. Classification for the world’s regions based on countries. Region Countries Included Land Area km2 World Exclude Antarctica, Greenland and Iceland 133448089 Russia Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, 20649781.47 Federation plus Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan South America Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Falkland 17792882.43 Islands (Malvinas), French Guiana, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Island, Surinam Uruguay, Venezuela Africa Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, 30001574.36 Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Comoros, Congo, Congo the democratic, Cote D'ivoire, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mayotte, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Reunion, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Western Sahara, Zambia, Zimbabwe North America Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, 22229293 (exclude Bermuda, Canada, Cayman Islands, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica, Greenland) Dominica Republic, El Salvador, Guadeloupe, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Martinique, Mexico, Montserrat, Nicaragua, Panama, Puerto Rico, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Turks and Caicos Islands, US, Virgin Islands, Virgin Islands (US) East and South Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, East Timor, Indonesia 15638628.9 East Asia (excluding Papua), Japan, Korea (north and south), Lao, Malaysia, Mongolia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, Vietnam Middle East and Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cyprus, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, 11129676.65 Central Asia Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Maldives, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan, Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Yemen Europe (exclude Albania, Andorra, Austria Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and 6125842.012 Iceland and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech, Denmark, Estonia, Faroe Russia) Islands, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova, Monaco, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Ukraine, UK, Vatican City, Yugoslavia Australasia American Samoa, Australia, Baker-Howland-Jarvis, Christmas 9611377.312 Island, Cook Islands, Fiji, French Polynesia, Guam, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, New Caledonia, New Zealand, Niue, Norfolk Island, Northern Mariana Islands, Palau, New Guinea (Papua New Guinea plus Papua), Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Wallis and Futuna Islands, West Iran, Western Samoa.

Table 11. World karst area calculations (km²). Spatial distribution of karst mapping features on a global scale. Areas were calculated by mapping unit and compared with area percentage of cover feature group (e.g. carbonate karst) and percentage of cove of the land mass. World Carbonates Evaporites Pseudokarst Count: 13497 Count: 230 Count: 1229 Minimum: 0.00001 Minimum: 4.62 Minimum: 0.027 Maximum: 776083.90 Maximum: 40310.69 Maximum: 297640.24 Sum: 16709152.67 Sum: 236103.69 Sum: 1872843.52 Mean: 1228.07 Mean: 1022.09 Mean: 1510.36 Standard Deviation: 14423.06 Standard Deviation: 3157.763 Standard Deviation: 11501.29

55 Table 12. Area calculations for the karst of Russian Federation by type (km²). . Russia Federation Plus Carbonates Evaporites Pseudokarst Count: 202 Count: 0 Count: 0 Minimum: 4.77 Minimum: 0 Minimum: 0 Maximum: 776083.90 Maximum: 0 Maximum: 0 Sum: 3690997.23 Sum: 0 Sum: 0 Mean: 18272.26 Mean: 0 Mean: 0 Standard Deviation: 74908.12 Standard Deviation: 0 Standard Deviation: 0

Table 13. Area calculations for the karst of South America by type (km²). South America Carbonate Evaporites Pseudokarst Count: 461 Count: 5 Count: 279 Minimum: 0.97 Minimum: 451.73 Minimum: 4.29 Maximum: 103537.89 Maximum: 11417.15 Maximum: 27546.27 Sum: 498416.97 Sum: 15585.01 Sum: 253576.91 Mean: 1081.16 Mean: 3117.00 Mean: 908.88 Standard Deviation: 6036.05 Standard Deviation: 4216.62 Standard Deviation: 2595.24

Table 14. Area calculations for the karst of Africa by type (km²). 56 Africa Carbonate Evaporites Pseudokarst Count: 453 Count: 47 Count: 561 Minimum: 0.531 Minimum: 121.30 Minimum: 1.28 Maximum: 402003.38 Maximum: 10609.48 Maximum: 297640.24 Sum: 2430464.99 Sum: 47249.95 Sum: 670531.74 Mean: 5365.26 Mean: 1005.318 Mean: 1195.24 Standard Deviation: 22399.21 Standard Deviation: 1651.28 Standard Deviation: 12803.22

Table 15. Area calculations for the karst of North America by type (km²). North America Carbonate Evaporites Pseudokarst Count: 8902 Count: 77 Count: 183 Minimum: 0.00001 Minimum: 4.62 Minimum: 0.03 Maximum: 315483.95 Maximum: 12523.91 Maximum: 70742.25 Sum: 3364504.51 Sum: 66820.08 Sum: 194796.13 Mean: 377.95 Mean: 867.79 Mean: 1064.46 Standard Deviation: 5388.60 Standard Deviation: 2089.64 Standard Deviation: 5613.99

Table 16. Area calculations for the karst of East and South East Asia by type (km²). 57 East and South East Asia Carbonate Evaporites Pseudokarst Count: 1564 Count: 0 Count: 34 Minimum: 0.046 Minimum: Minimum: 114.41 Maximum: 435514.40 Maximum: Maximum: 41898.19 Sum: 2682669.68 Sum: 0 Sum: 173844.85 Mean: 1715.26 Mean: Mean: 5113.08 Standard Deviation: 15617.13 Standard Deviation: Standard Deviation: 7429.20

Table 17. Area calculations for the karst of Middle East and Central Asia by type (km²). . Middle East and Central Asia Carbonate Evaporites Pseudokarst Count: 425 Count: 4 Count: 33 Minimum: 1.68 Minimum: 64.60 Minimum: 32.13 Maximum: 714768.55 Maximum: 3860.96 Maximum: 22239.26 Sum: 2150312.89 Sum: 6250.98 Sum: 177812.69 Mean: 5059.56 Mean: 1562.74 Mean: 5388.26 Standard Deviation: 36507.99 Standard Deviation: 1446.29 Standard Deviation: 6779.49

Table 18. Area calculations for the karst of Europe by type (km²). 58 Europe Carbonate Evaporites Pseudokarst Count: 872 Count: 97 Count: 13 Minimum: 0.002 Minimum: 15.59 Minimum: 39.91 Maximum: 195421.88 Maximum: 40310.69 Maximum: 5463.19 Sum: 1323331.28 Sum: 100129.70 Sum: 18366.79 Mean: 1517.58 Mean: 1032.26 Mean: 1412.83 Standard Deviation: 10787.40 Standard Deviation: 4205.89 Standard Deviation: 1503.08

Table 19. Area calculations for the karst of Astralasia by type (km²). Australasia Carbonate Evaporites Pseudokarst Count: 618 Count: 0 Count: 126 Minimum: 0.01 Minimum: 0 Minimum: 0.10 Maximum: 247876.31 Maximum: 0 Maximum: 42739.75 Sum: 513663.68 Sum: 0 Sum: 141306.20 Mean: 831.17 Mean: 0 Mean: 1121.48 Standard Deviation: 10184.56 Standard Deviation: 0 Standard Deviation: 4364.21

Figure 14. Total karst area for each contiental region (km²).

Table 20. Percentage of Karst Cover

Total % of Percentage of eight regional-scale % % % subareas of the Earth’s surface covered by Karst three types of karst (carbonate, evaporate, Region Carbonate Evaporite Pseudokarst Cover and pseudokarst), modified after Hollingsworth (2009). The table is keyed Russia Federation 17.87 0.00 0.00 17.87 to figure 1.

South America 2.80 0.09 1.43 4.31 Africa 8.10 0.16 2.23 10.49

North America 15.14 0.30 0.88 16.31

61 East & South East 17.15 0.00 1.11 18.27 Asia

Middle East & 19.32 0.06 1.60 20.97 Central Asia

Europe 21.60 1.63 0.30 23.54

Australasia 5.34 0.00 1.47 6.81

World 12.52 0.18 1.40 14.10

The maximum karst area (km²) was then calculated for each region (Table 20). These

data are summarized as a bar graph (Figure 14).

The Russian Federation had the largest area covered with carbonate karst. The second

largest area covered by carbonate karst was North America, followed in descending order

by: Africa, East and South East Asia, the Middle East and Central Asia, Europe, South

America and Australasia. There was no pseudokarst or evaporite karst mapped in the region of the Russian Federation Plus, but it is known, but not included within the

KROWD, that there is a major area of evaporite karst in Ukraine. The largest area covered with pseudokarst was found in Africa, followed by: South America, North

America, the Middle East and Central Asia, East and South East Asia, Australasia, and

Europe. Evaporite karst was mapped in Europe, North America, Africa, South America,

and the Middle East and Central Asia in extremely small quantities.

The area of land covered by carbonate, evaporite, and pseudokarst was then converted to

a percentage of land for each continent and for the world. The data was transformed to

percentages to allow for a more representative evaluation. The percentage of karst

occurrence is presented in Table 20.

Calculations reveled that the largest percentage of land covered by all karst types occurred in the region of Europe (excluding Iceland and Russia) with 23.54%. The second greatest percentage of area covered by karst was in the Middle East and Central

Asia, almost 20.97%. The area for all karst types decreases slightly for East and

Southeast Asia (18.27%), the Russian Federation Plus (17.87%), and North America

(16.31%). Africa had approximately 10.49% of karst cover. The least cover was found in Africa (10.49%), Australia (6.81%), and South America (4.31%). The total percentage

62 of land covered by karst for the world is 14.10%. This was divided into 12.52% carbonate karst coverer, pseudokarst covered 1.31% and evaporite karst only covered

0.18%.

KROW calculations for carbonate karst cover were then compared to Ford and Williams

(2007) calculations for the world carbonate outcrop areas (Table 21).

When comparing the calculations for the world cover of carbonate karst of Ford and

Williams with the KROW calculations there was less than .01% different. This slight difference in percentage of carbonate karst cover helps to confirm the accuracy and comparability of our carbonate karst mapping. Accuracy was also noticeable graphically when comparing Ford and William (2007) carbonate outcrop map (Figure 2) and KROW karst distribution map (Figure 16).

Although the carbonate karst percentages matched closely for calculations for the world, the percent difference for the regions of the Middle East and Central Asia, East and South

East Asia, and North America have significantly high disagreement between them.

Figure 15. Percentages of continent covered by karst in km²

Table 21. Comparison of Ford and Williams’ (2007) calculations for the world carbonate outcrop map to the KROW calculations. Region Land Area Maximum Carbonate Percentage Maximum Carbonate Percentage % km2 Outcrop (km2) (Ford & Outcrop (km2) (KROW) Difference (Ford & Williams 2007) Williams 2007) (KROW) World 133448089 16721876 12.53 16709153 12.52 0.01 Russia Federation 20649781 3331673 16.13 3690997 17.87 -1.74 plus South America 17792882 370809 2.08 498417 2.80 -0.72 Africa 30001574 2773252 9.24 2430465 8.10 1.14 North America 22229293 4076077 18.34 3364505 15.14 3.20 (exclude Greenland) East and South 15638629 1688219 10.80 2682670 17.15 -6.36

65 East Asia Middle East and 11129677 2554380 22.95 2150313 19.32 3.63 Central Asia Europe (exclude 6125842 1334864 21.79 1323331 21.60 0.19 Iceland and Russia) Australasia 9611377 592601 6.17 513664 5.34 0.82

Figure 16. Comparison using Ford and Williams (2007) verses KROW’s calculations for maximum carbonate outcrop.

KROW Maps

Over 15,000 cave and karst features from eight regions of the world have been compiled

into a geodatabase. The majority of these features are concentrated on three continents:

North America, Europe, and Africa and this is generally accepted as the result of geology

and past documentation.

The projection chosen was Eckert IV Equal Area and is described in Table 22. This

projection was chosen because it is commonly used for world maps; the projection is pseudo-cylindrical and preserves equal-area. Eckert’s projection makes the outer meridians half-circles with all of the other meridians regularly spaced elliptical arcs except the central meridian, which is straight and half as long as the Equator. Scale is true along the parallel at 40º30’ north and south.

Table 22. Attributes of Eckert IV projection. Eckert IV Equal Area Projection Parameter Value For this projection, only one standard parallel is specified. The other standard parallel is the same 1 Standard Parallel latitude with the opposite sign. The standard parallel is by definition fixed at 40º30' Central Meridian Straight line half as long as the Equator Equally spaced semi ellipses concave toward the Other Meridians central meridian. The outer meridians, 180º east and west of the central meridian, are semicircles. Unequally spaced straight parallel lines, perpendicular Parallels to the central meridian. Spacing is greatest toward the Equator Poles Lines half as long as the Equator Symmetry About the central meridian of the Equator False easting (meters) 0.00000 False northing (meters) 0.00000 Units Meters Datum WGS_1984 Spheroid WGS_1984

The world map representing the geographical distribution of landmasses was obtained from Terraspace, a Russian space agency, and includes coastlines and national borders.

The shape file is named world map_EckertIV.shp and is in Eckert IV projection.

Williams also used this world map and Ford (2007) in the compilation of the world map of carbonate outcrops v3.0.

A digitally compiled map of the distribution of karst has been created (Figure 17) with the KROW database that depicts carbonate, evaporite, and pseudokarst occurrences with the geographical distribution of landmasses on a global scale. Using mapping tools and terminology developed by past geologic and karst cartographers; we have produced a preliminary karst map that minimizes subjective bias in karst delineation and characterization (Figure 16). Map layout and symbology were planned in ArcMap 9.2.

All maps were then exported from ArcMap and imported into Adobe Illustrator CS3 for

cartographic manipulations. The legend of each map was arranged for the easiest map viewing. Index map and declination information were included on each map layout.

These approaches incorporated recent advances in the use of GIS to characterize karst

boundaries and sequences and are resulting in the refinement of global karst delineations.

The total area mapped (all eight regions) encompassed about 133,000,000 km².

The world was subdivided into eight regions, following the methodology of Ford and

Williams (2007), and individual regions were mapped on the global index for KROW

dataset and maps (Figure 17). The eight regions are listed from largest area to smallest

area: Africa, North America, Russian Federation, South America, East and South East

Asia, the Middle East and Central Asia, Australian, and Europe. This figure delineates

the extent of each separate continental-scale map. The purpose of dividing the world into

regional maps was to highlight examples of the detail available in the KROW maps and

database. Each regional map contains an upper or lower panel so that the uninterrupted

imagery can be easily compared within maps. The most important features in each of the

eight regions are briefly discussed in terms of spatial relationships and map patterns

within the next few paragraphs.

Figure 17. Map of the global distribution of carbonate, evaporite, and pseudokarst using the KROW database as the source.

Figure 18. Map of the global index for KROW maps with rectangles delineating contintal regions .

Figure 19. Distribution of karst for the continental region of Africa .

Figure 19 highlights the karst of the African continental region. This continent has a

cumulative total of about 3,100,000 km² of karst, or 10.49% of the total land cover. This

region has approximately 2,400,000 km² of carbonate karst, mostly in the northern part of

the region. Area of pseudokarst totals approximately 700,000 km² and is well

represented in the eastern part of this region, which corresponds to know volcanic

provinces. Evaporite karst is limited to the extreme northern and southern parts of the

region and contributes relatively little area to the karst area totals. These data can be

attributed to the U.S.G.S. Open File Report 97-470A, 2001.

Africa’s karst (Lumanns, 2001a, b, c) is relatively little compared to other continental

areas, which may be due to a lack of documentation. The Atlas Mountains in the

northern part of the continent are known for shafts and caves (Halliday, 2003) and the

karst of Madagascar is well known around the world.

Because of the diversity of geologic and climatic settings, Europe has many different

types of karst terrain (Figure 20)(KROW reported approximately 21.60% of the

continental region to be covered by carbonate karst, 1.63% of the continental region covered by evaporites karst and a relative lack of pseudokarst. (0.30% of the continentals cover). The lack of pseudokarst documentation may be do to the number of European scientists that do not accept the term due to the un-precise nature of the term and it’s role associated with weathering of rocks (Kunsky, 1957, Otvos, 1976, Panoš1978; Bella 1995;

Self, Mullan 1997).

There are complex spatial distribution patterns for both carbonate and evaporite karst of

Europe. This could be a consequence of the complex geology of the area and the amount of tectonics. The distinctive distribution of evaporite karst is associated with Emilia-

Romagna area for central and southern Italy (Galdenzie et al., 1995) and the Alps for the

area trending north, northwest. The folded and fated nature of the limestones and

dolomites that underlie the Alps are a perfect setting for alpine karts. Southern Spain has

huge tracts of limestone in the high Sierras (Calaforra et al., 1993 a, b) and along the

eastern coast the show cave of Nerja is well known for large stalagmites (Trimmel,

2003). Spanning the Spanish and French border the Pyrenees exhibit spectacular alpine karst. Central Europe has complex karst areas with the largest carbonate outcrops occurring in southern Poland and in Slovakia (Gams et al., 1981). A long karst belt extents through Romania, Moldovia, Bulgaria, and former Yugoslavia and exists due to

the complex geological background and Tertiary uplift of the Carpathians and Balkans

(Bogden et al., 2003, Klimchouk et al., 2002, Kvanjc, 1984). The Dinaric Alps region is

well known for the large number of polijes, or enclosed depressions, as well as the rich

historical aspects of karst (Cvijic, 1901,1903,1918). The northeastern portion of figure

20 represents the an area of the Dinaric alps, an area dotted with caves and underground

rivers, the characteristic features of karst topography. The northern portion of Europe has

localized areas of karst.

Figure 20. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of Europe.

Figure 21. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of South Central Asia.

Figure 22. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of East and South East Asia.

Figure 21 and Figure 22 depict the karst of South Central Asia area and East and south

East Asia, respectively, representing the geographical distribution of carbonate,

evaporite, and pseudokarst. South Central Asia, Greece, Turkey, Lebanon, Israel, and

Arabian Peninsula are well known for arid karst. Due to increased rainfall during the

Quaternary ice ages a karst terrain developed (Frumkin et al., 1999).

The East and South Eastern Asia continental region has a distinctive pattern depicted by

elongate carbonate units that correspond to the complex tectonic make up of this region, which has a terrene derived from Gondwanaland in the late Early Permian Period

(Daoxian, 1991; Jianhua et al., 2007; Lu, 1996; Sweeting, 1990; Waltham, 1985). Data ranges from 0.05 km² to 440,000 km² per polygon and is, on average 1,700 km² per polygon. There is also a distinctive pseudokarst patter in the Indonesian archipelago,

which is reflecting one of the most active vulcanological regions of the world. It is also

noted the relative lack of evaporite karst, which may be due to a sampling bias or lack of documentation. Respectively, carbonate karst, evaporite karst, and pseudokarst cover

17.15%, 0%, and 1.11% for a total of 18.27% of the land surface area, respectively. Data

ranges from 0.05 km² to 440,000 km² per polygon and is, on average 1,700 km² per polygon. There is also a distinctive pseudokarst patter in the Indonesian archipelago,

which is reflecting one of the most active vulcanological regions of the world. It is also

noted the relative lack of evaporite karst, which may be due to a sampling bias or lack of documentation.

Figure 23 is a detailed karst maps of Australasia that depict the know distribution of

carbonate karst, pseudokarst, and evaporite karst. It is notable the lack of evaporite karst,

which may be due to a lack of information or a sampling bias, a majority of carbonate

karst, and small quantities of pseudokarst (Davies et al., 1978; Jennings, 1983,1971;

Finlayson et al., 2003). The total land area for the region of Australasia is approximately

9,600,000 km² with a total percentage of land covered by karst of 6.81%. This is a

relatively low percentage compared with the other regional percentages of land cover and could be due to the great age of much of the continent and the ample time to erode limestone deposits away. Carbonate karst has an approximate surface area of 510,000

km² consisting of 5.34% of the total karst cover. A significant carbonate karst area is

found in the southwestern portion of the region and is attributed to one of the largest karst

areas on earth called Nullarbar Plain (Atkinson, 1992). This area is known for caves and

scattered sinkholes. Many of the Pacific islands have coral reef deposits that have

become karstified through the years. Pseudokarst cover is 1.47% of the total land surface

cover. Pseudokarst in much of Australia has formed from the dissolution of silica in

relatively insoluble rocks like quartz sandstones. There are volcanic karst associated with

places in North Queensland, western Victoria, and Heard Island. The spatial resolution

data ranges from 0.006 km² to 250,000 km² with an average of 800 km² per polygon.

Figure 23. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of Australasia.

Figure 24. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of North America.

Figure 24 represents the spatial disrtibution of karst for the continental area of North

America. North America had a total percentage of surface area covered by karst of

16.31%. Of this percentage, 15.4% was carbonate karst, 0.30% was evaporite karst, and

0.88% was pseudokarst. The mean area for individual polygons was approximately

2,000 km² with the minimum polygon area being 0.00001 km² and a maximum area of

320,000 km².

The patterns of the carbonate karst distribution of the eastern United States reflect the bedrock geology, lithology, abundant rainfall, relativly soluble rocks, and the extent of deformation (Bakalowicz et al., 1987; Brucker et al., 1976). Extensive carbonate karst occurs in Mississippian and Ordivican age limestones. The southeastern United States has extensive carbonate karst in Florida, Alabama, and Georgia. The world;s longest known cave and many other large cave systems are found in the Mammoth Cave area of cental Kentucky. As you travel to the west, there is an apparent northwest trending line of carbonate karst intermingled with pseudokart and evaporite karst that spans the southern portions of North America to the northern portion s (Ford et al., 1975; Ford,

1983 a, b, c; Halliday, 2004; Lao et al, 2000). This line is actualy a vast geological feature called the American Cordillera and it is associated with mumerous oroganies and the associated deformation. Extensive karst also is developed on the limestones that ring the Ozark Dome in Missouri and northern Arkansas. Much of the evaporite karst in the area of western Okalhoma and eastern Texas is associated with extensive gypsum deposits.

The western portion of North America has a relative lack of carbonate karst in comparison with the distribution of pseudokarst. The most extinsive areas of

82 pseudokarst deposits are in the Snake Rive area of Idaho, in part of the Columbia Basalt

Plateau in Washington and Oregon, and in the lava fields of northeastern California. The pseudokarst features include lava tubes, fissures, open sinkholes, and caves formed by extrusion of the still-liquid portion of the lava.

Central America and the Caribbean have some of the most spectacular examples of tropical karst. Mexico’s karst is known for the lack ofsurface streems and low relife of the Yucatan Peninsula (Back et al., 1984; Badino et al.,2007; Espinasa-Perena, 2007).

Figure 25 corresponds to the distribution of carbonate karst, evaporite karst and pseudkarst for the region of South America. The total land area of South America is approximatly 17,800,000 km² and of this area 4.31% is covered by karst (approximatly

770,000 km²). The majority of the karst cover is represented by carbonate karst with

2.80%. Most of the carbonate karst is found in the continental shield located in the eastern portion of this region. Many of these carbonate polygons match up to their conterparts located in Africa. The percentage of area distribution of pseudokarst is

1.43% . All of the distribution of pseudokarst parallels the Pacific shore in a geographical region called the great cordillera, which is made up of the Andes ranges.

The Andes are seismicaly active older volcanoes. The distribution of evaporite karst for the region of South America has only 5 polygons with a total surface area of 15,000 km² which is 0.09% of the total percentage of area coverd by karst. Little is known about the karst of South America, but many caves have been reported in Venezuela and Columbia

(Auler, 1995; Mendona et al., 1994; Prandini et al., 1990).

Figure 25. Distribution of karst rocks for the coninental region of South America.

Disclaimer The data and maps herein are not intended to be used for purposes of site-specific land

use planning or site-specific hazard, geologic, or geotechnical evaluations. Although the

digital form of the data removes the constraint imposed by the scale of the original data,

the detail and accuracy issues inherent in map scale limitations are also present in the

digital data. This report is preliminary and has not been reviewed for conformity with

editorial standards.

The TNC and the University of Arkansas do not guarantee the precision or accuracy of

project and field exploration locations, any data contained, or any entries in the database.

Reliance on existing studies implies that the quality of the data is varied. The user accepts these data with all faults, and assumes all responsibility for use thereof, and agrees to hold the KROW harmless from and against any damage, loss, or liability arising from any use of these data. Use of data requires acknowledgement and citation of

KROW on all printed or digital precuts that have made use of these data.

CONCLUSION

This thesis takes past karst documentation and maps, sets up a standardized comprehensive GIS data integration system, developed a multifaceted karst database representing karst areas and references, produced global and continental scale karst maps

at a higher spatial resolution with greater implications for land-use and management

decisions, and used GIS spatial distribution analyses to calculate continental scale distribution areas of evaporite karst, carbonate karst, and pseudokarst. This work provides a reference for distribution of karst areas, creates a framework for the allocation of conservation resources globally, and provides a broad context within which to evaluate regional-scale conservation priorities.

The useful tool that has been created that could be used to study the environmental and historical relevance of karst. By using the KROW Maps and database insight on the age, controls and the situational hydraulics in karst development could be refined.

Considerations for the amount of rain an area receives per year, the time of formation, geology, and other environmental aspects could be related to the KROWD to decipher karst distributions.

The KROW maps and datasets mark a karst mapping program that has taken full advantage of new and past data and analytical methods to further advance our understanding global karst distribution. While this collection of data was sufficient for the analysis performed in this project, the database can be expanded to include more detailed information such as spatial patterns in biodiversity, know species distributions, ranges of species, and biogeographic regions or ecoregions. Future versions may provide

86 the opportunity to include feature descriptions, comments, photos, as well as allow a user to add new feature classes to the database or store new shapefiles within the file structure.

In summary, this study produced new karst distribution data that classified carbonate karst, evaporite karst, and pseudokarst on a global scale. It was found that including past karst research in a digital GIS format increased mapping accuracy

Recommendations for Future Work

Although the project in its current form has demonstrated the value of a detailed data compilation within the framework of global and regional scientific investigations, the full range of the approach to geospatial data has been explored modestly. We recognize several additional areas in which this work could be expanded to the greater benefit of current and future users:

1) Expanding the existing geologic data compilation, both spatially and thematically, to

achieve spatially continuity on a global scale by incorporate geospatial data types not

part of our current data model into the relational database structure.

a) Integrating the U.S. Geological Survey’s World Petroleum Assessment conducted

by the USGS World Energy Assessment Team. This report addresses oil, gas,

and natural gas liquid deposits outside of the United States and by doing so

provides a digital dataset for bedrock and surfical geology for most of the world.

They have delineated geologic contacts and thematically depicted generalized

geologic age. The coverages include polygons and polygons labels that represent

generalized geologic age of surface outcrops and bedrock of Africa, Asia,

Caribbean, Europe, North America, Svalbard, South America, Russia, India, and

many other parts of the world. This data has been incorporated for areas of South

America, the Caribbean, Africa, and North America, but it is suggested to further

the distribution knowledge of karst by incorporating the rest of the data for the

world. These reports can be found on line or in the files accompanying this

thesis. b) It is also suggested for the region of Africa to incorporate the Multipurpose

Africover Databases on Environmental resources (MADE) data found at

http://www.africover.org/index.htm. This data set has remotely sensed data for

the natural resources of Africa (and 9 other countries) produced as 1; 200,000

scale maps. The data has been accessed through a contact at The Nature

Conservancy African program that is collaborating with the U.S.G.S. to model

ecosystems across Africa. c) The evaporite and pseudokarst of the Asian countries is lacking documentation

and delineation in the KROW maps and datasets. Recently, through written

communication with Elery Hamilton-Smith, a map and descriptions of carbonate,

evaporite, and pseudokarst for this area were received. The map, Karst Areas of

the Asian Countries, documents the distribution of limestone karst, Subjacent

rocksalt karst, and gypsum karst. It would be valuable to integrate this map and

further investigate the salt karst of Thailand, the pseudokarst of Southern

Vietnam, the Philippines, and Indonesia, and if there are any systematically

mapped areas of gypsum karst.

2) It is also suggested to expand how users, both members of the project team and the

broader public, can view, query, and analyze the karst data within this database for

scientific, engineering, and educational applications, emphasizing web-accessed map-

based interfaces. This process would be aided by the development of a systematized

approach for data delivery and storage. Maintaining the data digitally will ensure that

the information can be easily shared, or protected, as needed. It could also facilitate

future digital database maintenance.

3) To create the most powerful and effective ecosystem and biodiversity conservation

assessment it is suggested to integrate the TNC Subterranean Biodiversity working

groups’ data into the KROW geodatabase. This will allow for the integration of

disparate sources of biological and environmental data and the ranking, delineation,

quantification, and protection of the known distribution of the world’s subterranean

animals. When this step has been accomplished, it is suggested to create new KROW

products for distribution to all karst’ stakeholders.

4) Communication and collaboration with karst researchers and scientist has provided

useful advices and ideas that have bettered this project. In the eyes of the author,

KROW would benefit from the continued collaboration of all karsts’ stakeholders.

Although these future plans would expand the value of detailed karst information, the current costs of the present efforts are quite high and time intensive. Ultimately, the value of KROW’s detailed karst maps would increase if any of these suggested recommendations were accomplished. But, in the eyes of the author, the value of KROW would benefit the most by tying the database with detailed biodiversity information. This would yield a new product that addresses a wider array of important karst topics.

SELECTED REFERENCES

Aley, T., 2002, Groundwater tracing handbook: Protem, Mo., Ozark Underground Laboratory, p. 35.

Allred, K., 2004, Some carbonate erosion rates of southeast Alaska: Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, v. 66, p. 89-97.

Allred, K., and Allred, C., 1998, Tubular lava stalactites and other related segregations: Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, v. 60, p. 131-140.

Annable, W.K., and Sudicky, E.A., 1999, On predicting contaminant transport in carbonate terrains: Behavior and prediction, in Palmer, A.N., Palmer, M.V. and Sasowsky, I.D., eds., Karst modeling: Charles Town, W.Va, Karst Waters Institute, Special Publication 5, p. 133-145.

Atkinson, A., 1992, The Undara lava tube system, North Queensland, Australia: Updated data and notes on the mode of formation and possible lunar analogue, in Proceedings of 6th International Symposium of Vulcanospeleology, Hilo, Hawaii, National Speleological Society, p. 95-120.

Atkinson, T.C., and Smith, D.I., 1976, The erosion of limestones, in Ford, T.D. and Cullingford, C.H.D., eds., The science of speleology: London, Academic Press, p. 151-177.

Atkinson, T.C., and Smart, P.L., 1977, Caves and karst of southern England and South Wales: guidebook for the International Congress of Speleology at Sheffield, 1977: Great Britain; Bridgewater (BCRA Sales, 30 Main Rd, Westonzoyland, Bridgewater, Somerset), 7th I.S.C. Committee; Distributed by British Cave Research Association, p. 83.

Auler, A., 1995, Lakes as a speleogenetic agent in the karst of Lagoa Santa, Brazil: Cave and Karst Science, v. 21, p. 105-110.

Back, W., Hanshaw, B., and Van Driel, J.N., 1984, Role of groundwater in shaping the eastern coastline of the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico, in LaFleur, R.G., ed., Groundwater as a geomorphic agent: Boston, Massachusetts, Allen and Unwin, Inc., p. 281-293.

Badino, G., and Forti, P., 2007, The exploration of the Caves of the Giant Crystals (Naica, Mexico): National Speleological Society News, v. 65, p. 12-15.

Bakalowicz, M.J., Ford, D.C., Miller, T.E., Palmer, A.N., and Palmer, M.V., 1987, Thermal genesis of dissolution caves in the Black Hills, South Dakota: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 99, p. 729-738.

Baker, A., Smart, P.L., and Ford, D.C., 1993, Northwest European palaeoclimate as indicated by growth frequency variations of secondary calcite deposits: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 100, p. 291-301.

Barkai, R., Gophers, A., Lauritzen, S.E., and Frumkin, A., 2003, Uranium series dates from Qesem Cave, Israel, and the end of the lower Paleolithic: Nature (London), v. 423, p. 977-979, doi: 10.1038/nature01718.

Barton, H.A., 2006, Introduction to cave microbiology: A review for the non-specialist: Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, v. 68, p. 43-54.

Barton, H.A., and Luiszer, F., Journal of Cave and Kars science, Microbial metabolic structure in a sulfidic cave hot spring: Potential mechanisms of biospeleogenesis: 2005, v. 67, p. 43-54.

Basagic, H., Fountain, A.G., and Clark, D.H., 2004, Glacier shrinkage and effects on alpine hydrology; AGU 2004 fall meeting: EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Union, v. 85, p. U51A-06.

Bennett, P.C., 1991, Quartz dissolution in organic rich aqueous systems: Geochemica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 55, p. 1781-1797.

Bogli, A., 1980, Karst hydrology and physical speleology: Berlin, Springer-Verlag, p. 284.

Bella P. 1995 - Kras and pseudokras – fundamental terminological problems (English sum.). In: Gaal L. (ed.). Proc. of Intern. Working Meeting "Preserving of Pseudokarst Caves". Rimavska Sobota-Salgótarján, SAŽP Banska Bystrica: 68-76.

Bonacci, O., 1987, Karst hydrology: Berlin, Springer-Verlag, p. 184.

Bosak, P., Ford, D.C., Glasek, J., and Horacek, I., 1989, Paleokarst: Prague and Amsterdam, Academia and Elsevier, p. 725.

Boston, P., 1999, A bit of peace and quiet: the microbes of Lechuguilla: National Speleological Society, v. 57, p. 237-238.

Boston, P., Spilde, M., Northup, D., Melim, L., Soroka, D., Kleina, L., Lavoie, K., Hose, L., Mallory, L., Dahm, C., Crossey, L., and Scheible, R., 2001a, Cave biosignature suites: Microbes, Minerals, Mars: Astrobiolobical Journal, v. 1, p. 25-55.

Boston, P.J., Spilde, M.N., Northup, D.E., and Melim, L.A., 2001b, Cave microbe- mineral suites; best model for extraterrestrial biosignatures; Lunar and planetary science, XXXII; Papers presented to the Thirty-second lunar and planetary science conference: Abstracts of Papers Submitted to the Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, v. 32

Boston, P.J., Spilde, M.N., Northup, D.E., Melim, L.A., Soroka, D.S., Kleina, L.G., Lavoie, K.H., Hose, L.D., Mallory, L.M., Dahm, C.N., Crossey, L.J., and Scheible, R.T., 2001c, Cave biosignature suites; microbes, minerals, and Mars: Astrobiology, v. 1, p. 25-55.

Boston, P.J., Fredrick, R.D., Welch, S.M., Werker, J., Myer, T.R., Sprungman, B., Hildreth-Werker, V., Thompson, S.L., and Murphy, D.L., 2003, Human utilization of subsurface extraterrestrial environments: Gravitational and Space Biology Bulletin, v. 16, p. 121-121.

Boston, P.J., Hose, L.D., Northup, D.E., and Spilde, M.N., 2006, the microbial communities of sulfur caves: A newly appreciated geologically driven system on Earth and potential model for Mars, in Harmon, R.S. and Wicks, C.M., eds., Perspectives on karst geomorphology, hydrology, and geochemistry- A tribute volume to Derek C. Ford and William B. White: Geological Society of America, Special Paper 404, p. 331-344.

Bottrell, S.H., Gunn, J., and Lowe, D.J., 2000, Calcite dissolution by sulfuric acid, in Klimchouk, A.B., Ford, D.C., Palmer, A.N. and Dreybrodt, W., eds., Speleogenesis evolution of karst aquifers: United States (USA), National Speleological Society, Huntsville, AL, United States (USA), .

Brahana, J. V., Thrailkill, John, Freeman, Tom, and Ward, W. C., 1988, Comparative hydrogeology of carbonate rocks, in Back, William, Seaber, P. R., and Rosenshein, J. S., eds., Ground Water Hydrogeology: Volume of Decade of North American Geology (DNAG) Series, v. 0-2, ch. 38, p. 333-352.

Bretz, J H., 1942, Vadose and phreatic features of limestone caverns: Journal of Geology, v. 50, p. 675-811.

Brook, D.B., Eavis, A.J., Lyon, M.K., and Waltham, A.C., 1982, Caves of the limestone: Sarawak Museum Journal, v. 30, p. 95-119.

Brucker, R.W., and Watson, R.A., 1976, The longest cave: United States (USA), Alfred A. Knopf, New York, N.Y., United States.

Butler, D.R., and Walsh, S.J., 1998, Special Issue- The Application of Remote Sensing and Geographic Information systems in the Study of Geomorphology: Geomorphology, v. 21, p. 179-349.

Cacchio, P., Contento, R., Ercole, C., Cappuccio, G., Marines, M.P., and Lepidi, A., 2004, Involvement of microorganisms in the formation of carbonate speleothems in Cervo Cave (L'Aquila, Italy): Geomicrobiol.J, v. 21, p. 479-509.

Calaforra, J.M., Dell'Aglio, A., and Forti, P., 1993a, Preliminary data on the chemical erosion in gypsum karst; 1, The Sorbas region (Spain); 1; Proceedings of the XI international congress of speleology: Proceedings of the International Congress of Speleology, v. 11, p. 97-99.

Calaforra, J.M., Dell'Aglio, A., and Forti, P., 1993b, The role of condensation-corrosion in the development of gypsum karst; the case of the Cueva del Agua (Sorbas-Spain); 1; Proceedings of the XI international congress of speleology: Proceedings of the International Congress of Speleology, v. 11, p. 63-65.

Cennis, P.F., Rowe, P.J., and Atkinson, T.C., 2001, The recovery and isotopic measurement of water from fluid inclusions in speleothems: Geochemica Et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 65, p. 871-884.

Chabert, C., and Courbon, P., 1997, Atlas des cavities non calcaires du monde (World atlas of caves in non-carbonate rocks): International Union of Speleology, p. 109.

Chapelle, F.H., 2001, Ground-water microbiology and geochemistry (2nd ed.): New York, Wiley, p. 477.

Choquette, P.W., and Pray, L.C., 1970, Geologic nomenclature and classification of porosity in sedimentary carbonates: American Association of Petroleum Geologist Bulletin, v. 54, p. 207-250.

Čilek V. 1998 – The physical and chemical processesof sandstone pseudokarst genesis (English sum.). In: Čilek V., Kopecký J. (eds), Das Sandsteinphanomen – Klima, Leben und Georelief. Libr. Czech Spel. Soc. v. 32: 134-153.

Coons, D., Maze development in Hawai'i lava tubes: A statistical analysis, in National Speleological Society Annual Convention, Marquette Mich., National Speleological Society, p. 42.

Cooper, A.H., Farrant, A.R., Adlam, K.A.M., and Walsby, J.C., April 1-4,2001, The development of a national geographic information system (GIS) for British karst geohazards and risk assessment. in Beck BF, Herring JG (eds) Geotechnical and environmental applications of karst geology and hydrology, proceedings of the 8th multidisciplinary conference on sinkholes and the engineering and environmental impacts of karsts. Louisville, KY: Balkema, Lisse, A.A., p. 145-151.

Cowell, D.W., and Ford, D.C., 1983, Karst hydrology of the Bruce Peninsula, Ontario, Canada; V. T. Stringfield symposium; processes in karst hydrology: Journal of Hydrology, v. 61, p. 163-168.

Culver, D.C., 1982, Evolution and ecology: Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, p. 223.

Culver, D.C., 1999, Terrestrial Ecoregions of North America. A Conservation Assessment, in Ricketts, T.H., ed., Ecosystem and Species Diversity Beneath Our Feet: Washington, DC, Island Press, p. 56-60.

Culver, D.C., and White, W.B., 2005, Encyclopedia of Caves: Burlington, MA, Elsevier Academic Press, p. 654.

Curl, R.L., 1986, Fractal dimensions and geometries of caves: Mathematical Geology, v. 18, no.8, p. 765-783.

Curl, R.L., 1964, On the definition of a cave: National Speleological Society Bulletin, v. 26 no.1, p. 1-6.

Cvijić, J., 1901, Morphologische und glaciale Studien aus Bosnien, der Hercegovina und Montenegro: die Karst-Poljen: Abhandlungen Der Geographie Gesellschaft Wien, v. 3(2), p. 1-85.

Cvijić, J., 1903, Das Karstphanomen: Versuch Einer Morphologischen MonographieGeographische Abhandlungen Herausgegeben Von A. Penck, v. V.H, 3. Wien, p. 218-329.

Cvijić, J., 1918, Hydrographie souterraine et evolution morphologique du karst. Hydrographie Souterraine Et Evolution Morphologique Du Karst, v. 6(4), p. 375-426.

Daly, D., Drew, D., Deakin, J., Ball, D., Parkes, M., and Wright, G., 2000, The karst of Ireland: Dublin: v.28, Karst Working Group, Geological Survey of Ireland, p. 37.

Daoxian, Y., 1991, Karst of China, Geological Publishing House.

Davies, G.R., Moslow, T.F., and Sherwin, M.D., 1997, The Lower Triassic Montney Formation, west-central Alberta; An issue focused on the study of Triassic of the Western Canada sedimentary basin: Bulletin of Canadian Petroleum Geology, v. 45, p. 474-505.

Davies, J.L., Williams, M.A.J., and Jennings, J.N., 1978, Landform evolution in Australasia: Canberra; Norwalk, Conn., Australian National University Press, 376p.

Davies, W.E., Simpson, J.H., Ohlmacher, G.C., Kirk, W.E., and Newton, E.G., 1984a, Digital Engineering Aspects of Karst Map: U.S. Geological Survey, Report Open- File Report 2004-1352.

Davies, W.E., Simpson, J.H., Ohlmacher, G.C., Kirk, W.S., and Newton, E.G., 1984b, Engineering aspects of karst: U.S. Geological Survey, National Atlas, scale 1:7,500,000.

Davis, W.M., 1930, Origin of limestone caverns: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 41, p. 475-628.

Denizman, C., 1997, Geographic Information Systems as a tool in karst geomorphology: Abstracts with Programs - Geological Society of America, v. 29, no. 6, p. 290.

Dorale, J.A., Edwards, R.L., Ito, I., and Gonzalez, L.A., 1998, Climate and vegetation history of the midcontinent from 75 to 25 ka: A speleothem record from Crevice Cave, Missouri, U.S.A. Science, v. 282, p. 1871-1874.

Dorale, J.A., Gonzalez, L.A., Reagan, M.K., Pickett, D.A., Murrell, M.T., and Baker, R.G., 1992, A high-resolution record of Holocene climate change in speleothem calcite from Coldwater Cave, northeast Iowa: Science, v. 258, p. 1626-1630.

Dreiss, S.J., 1982, Linear kernels for karst aquifers: Water Resources Research, v. 18, no.4, p. 865-876.

Dreybrodt, W., 1988, Processes in karst systems: Physics, chemistry, and geology: Berlin, Germany, Springer-Verlag, p. 288.

Dreybrodt, W., and Gabrovsek, F., 2002, Basic processes and mechanisms governing the evolution of karst, in Gabrovsek, F., ed., Evolution of karst: From prekarst to cessation: Postojna-Ljubljana, Slovenia, Institute for Karst Research, p. 115-154.

Dublyansky, V.N., Klimchouk, A.B., Kisselyov, V E (Kisselyov, V.Ye), and British Cave Research Association, Sheffield, (GBR), 1985, Speleology in the U.S.S.R; B.C.R.A. Cave Science symposium: Cave Science (1982), v. 12, p. 9-18.

DuChene, H.R., and Hill, C.A., 2000, The caves of the Guadalupe Mountains: Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, v. 62, no.2, p. 107.

Epstein, J.B., Orndorff, R.C., and Weary, D.J., 2001, U.S. Geological Survey National Karst Map: National Speleological Society Convention Program Guide, Great Salpetre Cave Preserve, Kentucky, p. 87.

Epstein, J.B., Weary, D.J., Orndorff, R.C., Bailey, Z.C., and Kerbo, R.C., 2002, U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, Shepherdstown, W.V.: National Karst Map Project, an Update: U.S. Geological Survey, Report Water- Resources Investigations Report 02-4174, 43-44 p.

Espinasa-Pereña, R., 2007, Karst de México, in Coll-Hurtado: Instituto de Geografía, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Report A. coord. (2007).

Ewers, R.O., 2006, Karst aquifers and the role of assumptions and authority in science, in Harmon, R.S. and Wicks, C.M., eds., Perspectives on karst geomorphology, hydrology, and geochemistry - A tribute to Derek C. Ford and William B. White: Geological Society of America, Special Paper 404, p. 235-242.

Fagundo, J.R., Rodriguez, J.E., de la Torre, J., Arencibia, A., and Forti, P., 2002, Hydrologic and hydro chemical characterization of the Punta Alegre gypsum karst (Cuba): Boletin De La Sociedad Venezolana De Espeleologia, v. 36, p. 11-16.

Farabegoli, E., Forti, P., Palmentola, G., and Pellegrino, G.B., 1997, Geomorphic evolution of karst and fluvial basins in the surroundings of Bologna; Fourth international conference on geomorphology; guidebook for the excursions: Supplementi Di Geografia Fisica e Dinamica Quaternaria (Testo Stampato), v. 3, p. 205-213.

Faure, G., 1998, Principles and applications of geochemistry (2nd ed.): Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice-Hall, p. 600.

Finalyson, B., and Hamilton-Smith, E., 2003, Beneath the Surface: A natural History of Australian Caves. Sydney, Australia, University of New South Wales Press., p. 199.

Florea, L.J. Fratesi, B., and Chaves, T., 2005, The reflection of karst in the online mirror: a survey within scientific databases, 1960-2005. Journal of Cave Karst Studies, v. 69 no.1, p. 229-236.

Florea, L., and Cunningham, K., March 14th-18th, 2007, Hydrostratigraphy of the karst aquifers of Florida, in Karst Waters Institute: Time in Karst, Postojna, Slovenia, p. 1-3.

Ford, D.C., 1964, Origin of closed depressions in the central Mendip hills (England): Technical Program Abstracts - International Geographical Congress, p. 105-106.

Ford, D.C., and Stanton, W.I., 1969, The geomorphology of the south-central Mendip hills: Proceedings of the Geologists' Association, v. 79, p. 401-427.

Ford, T.D., and Cullingford, C.H.D., 1976, The Science of speleology: London; New York, Academic Press, p. 593.

Ford, D.C., Quinlan, J.F., and Doyle, F.L., 1975, Karst of Canada--Karst du Canada, in Karst hydrogeology: United States (USA), Geol. Surv. Ala., Univ., Ala., United States (USA).

Ford, D.C., and Doyle, F.L., 1975, Cave systems and groundwater hydrologic organization in limestones--Systems de cavernes et organization hydrologique d'eau

de sol en calcaire, in Karst hydrogeology: United States (USA), Geol. Surv. Ala., Univ., Ala., United States (USA).

Ford, D.C., 1983a, Alpine karst systems at Crowsnest Pass, Alberta-British Columbia, Canada; V. T. Stringfield symposium; processes in karst hydrology: Journal of Hydrology, v. 61, p. 187-192.

Ford, D.C., 1983b, Effects of glaciations upon karst aquifers in Canada; V. T. Stringfield symposium; processes in karst hydrology: Journal of Hydrology, v. 61, p. 149-158.

Ford, D.C., 1983c, Karstic interpretation of the Winnipeg aquifer (Manitoba, Canada); V. T. Stringfield symposium; processes in karst hydrology: Journal of Hydrology, v. 61, p. 177-180.

Ford, D.C., Smart, P.L., and Ewers, R.O., 1983d, The physiography and speleogenesis of Castleguard Cave, Columbia Ice fields, Alberta, Canada; Castleguard Cave and karst, Columbia ice fields area, Rocky Mountains of Canada; a symposium: Arctic and Alpine Research, v. 15, p. 437-450.

Ford, D.C., and Williams, P.W., 1989, Karst Geomorphology and Hydrology: London, Unwin Hyman, p. 601.

Ford, D.C., and Schwarcz, H.P., 1990, Uranium-series disequilibrium dating methods, in Goudie, A.S., ed., Geomorphological techniques: United Kingdom (GBR), Unwin Hyman, London, United Kingdom (GBR).

Ford, D.C., and Hill, C.A., 1991, Accumulation of calcite raft debris near Lake of the Clouds, Carlsbad Cavern, NM; a U-series study; National Speleological Society, 1988 annual meeting; abstracts: The NSS Bulletin, v. 53, p. 23.

Ford, D.C., Schwarcz, H.P., Shopov, Y., and Morrison, J.O., 1992, Speleothems; palaeoclimate recorders with a high temporal resolution; American Quaternary Association 12th biennial meeting; program and abstracts: Program and Abstracts - American Quaternary Association. Conference, v. 12, p. 10.

Ford, D.C., Lundberg, J., Palmer, A.N., Palmer, M.V., Dreybrodt, W., and Schwarcz, H.P., 1993, Uranium-series dating of the draining of an aquifer; the example of Wind Cave, Black Hills, South Dakota; with Suppl. Data 9302: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 105, p. 241-250, doi: 10.1130/0016- 7606(1993)105<0241:USDOTD>2.3.CO;2.

Ford, D.C., 2003, Perspectives in karst hydrogeology and cavern genesis: Speleogenesis and Evolution of Karst Aquifers, v. 1, unpainted.

Ford, D.C., and Williams, P.W., 2007, Karst Hydrology and Geomorphology London, Wiley Chichester, p. 576.

Forti, P., and Rabbi, E., 1981, The role of CO² in gypsum speleogenesis; 1 (super o) contribution: International Journal of Speleology, v. 11, p. 207-218.

Forti, P., Costa, G., Outes, V., Re, G., and Barredo, S., 1993, Two peculiar karst forms of the gypsum outcrop between Zapala and Las Lajas (Neuquen, Argentina); 1; Proceedings of the XI international congress of speleology: Proceedings of the International Congress of Speleology, v. 11, p. 54-56.

Frumkin, A., Carmi, I., Gopher, A., Ford, D.C., Schwarcz, H.P., and Tsuk, T., 1999, A Holocene millennial-scale climatic cycle from a speleothem in Nahal Qanah Cave, Israel: Holocene, v. 9, p. 677-682.

Gabrovsek, F., Menne, B., and Dreybrodt, W., 2000, A model of early evolution of karst conduits affected by subterranean CO² sources: Environmental Geology (Berlin), v. 39, p. 531-543.

Gabrovsek, F., and Dreybrodt, W., 2001, A model of the early evolution of karst aquifers in limestone in the dimensions of length and depth: Journal of Hydrology, v. 240, p. 206-224.

Gabrovsek, F., Romanov, D., and Dreybrodt, W., 2004, Early karstification in a dual- fracture aquifer; the role of exchange flow between prominent fractures and a dense net of fissures: Journal of Hydrology, v. 299, p. 45-66, doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2004.02.005.

Galdenzi, S., and Menichetti, M., 1995, Occurrence of hypogenic caves in a karst region; examples from central Italy: Environmental Geology (Berlin), v. 26, p. 39-47.

Gams, I., 1973, Slovenska kraska terminologija (Slovene karst terminology). Zveza Geografskih Snstitucij Jugoslavije, Ljubljana.

Gams, I., and Natek, K., 1981, Geomorfoloska Karta 1:100000 in razvoj reliefa v Litijski Kotlini. Geomorphologic map at 1:100,000 of the relief evolution of Litija Basin, central Slovenia: Geografski Zbornik - Acta Geographica, v. 21, p. 5-63.

Gams, I., 1993, Origin of the term "karst," and the transformation of the Classical Karst (kras); Environmental change in karst areas: Environmental Geology (Berlin), v. 21, p. 110-114.

Gams, I., Nicod, J., Sauro, M., Julian, E., and Anthony, U., 1993, Environmental change and human impacts on the Mediterranean karsts of France, Italy and the Dinaric region; Karst terrains, environmental changes and human impact: Catena Supplement, v. 25, p. 59-98.

Gams, I., 2001 The origin of the term karst in the time of transition of karst (kras) from deforestation to forestation. in International Conference on Environmental Changes in Karst Areas (IGU/UIS), Quaderni del Dipartimento di Geografia 13: Universita di Padova, p. 1-8.

Gams, I., 2003, Kras v Sloveniji v prostoru in dasu: Zrc Sazu, Ljubljana, Zalozba ZRC, p. 516.

Gao, Y., Alexander, C., and Tipping, R.G., 2002, The development of a karst feature database for southeastern Minnesota: Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, v. 64 (1), p. 51-57.

Gao, Y., Tipping, R.G., and Alexander, E.C., 2006, Applications of GIS and database technologies to manage a karst feature database: Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, v. 68, p. 144-152.

Granger, D.E., Fabel, D., and Palmer, A.N., 2001, Pliocene-Pleistocene incision of the Green River, Kentucky, determined from radioactive decay of cosmogenic ²6Al and 10Be in Mammoth Cave sediments: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 113, no.7, p. 825-836.

Grimes, K.G., 1975, Pseudokarst; definition and types: Proceedings - Biennial Conference, Australian Speleological Federation, p. 6-10.

Grimes, K.G., 1998, Redefining the boundary between karst and pseudokarst: A discussion: Cave and Karst Science, v. 24, no.2, p. 87-90.

Grund, A., 1903, Die Karsthydrographie: Geographisches Abhandlung herausgegeben von A. Penck (Karst hydrology: Geographic proceedings edited by A. Penck): p. 200.

100

Guan, D., Watari, K., Fukahori, H., Gao, W., 2008, Assessment of eco-environment vulnerability in karst regions, in the Real Corp 008 Proceedings, Vienna, Italy.

Gunn, J., 2004, Encyclopedia of Caves and Karst Science. New York, Fitzroy Dearborn, p. 902.

Halliday, W.R., 1960, Pseudokarst in the United States: Bulletin of the National Speleological Society, v. 22, p. 109.

Halliday, W.R., 1960b, Changing concepts of speleogenesis: National Speleological Society Bulletin, v. 22, no.1, p. 23-29.

Halliday, W.R., 1966, Depths of the earth; caves and cavers of the United States: New York, Harper & Row, p. 398.

Halliday, W.R., 1996, Protecting Caves from Road Construction: National Speleological Society, p. 37.

Halliday, W.R., 2000, Halliday, W., 2000, Raw Sewage and Solid Waste Dumps in Big Island Lava Tube Caves: A public Health Menace, T: The Cave Conservationist, v. 19, p. 8.

Halliday, W.R., 2003, Caves and Karst of Northeast Africa: International Journal of Speleology, v. 32 (1/4), p. 19-32.

Halliday, W.R., 2004b, Pseudokarst, in Gunn, J., ed., Encyclopedia of caves and karst science: N.Y., Fitzroy Dearborn Publishing, p. 604–608.-608.

Halliday, W.R., 2004a, volcanic caves, in Gunn, J., ed., Encyclopedia of caves and karst science: N.Y., Fitzroy Dearborn, p. 760-764.

Halliday, W.R., 2007, Pseudokarst in the 21st century: Journal of Caves and Karst Studies, v. 69, p. 103-113.

Hamilton, F.E.I., 1964, Abstracts of papers: 20th International Geographical Congress: London, Published on behalf of the 20th International Geographical Congress by Nelson, p. 361.

Hamilton-Smith, E., 1997, The IUCN Guidelines for Cave and Karst Protection: Report Proceedings of the 1997 Karst and Cave Management Symposium, 82 p.

101

Hamilton-Smith, E., 2002, Management Assessment in karst areas: Acta Carsologica, v. 31/1, p. 13-20.

Harmon, R.S., and Wicks, C.M. eds., 2006, Perspectives on karst geomorphology, hydrology, and geochemistry - a tribute volume to Derek C Ford and William B White: Geological Society of America, Special Paper 404, p. 344.

Hamilton-Smith, E., 2007, Karst and World Heritage Status: Acta Carsologica, v. 36/2, p. 291-302.

Harmon, R.S., Schwarcz, H.P., Thompson, P., Ford, D.C., Thompson, G.M., Lumsden, D.N., Walker, R.L., and Carter, J.A., 1978, Uranium series dating of stalagmites from Blanchard Springs Caverns, Arkansas, U.S.A. [modified]: Geochemica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 42, p. 433-440.

Hendy, D.H., 1971, The isotopic geochemistry of speleothems, I. The calculation of the effects of different modes of formation on the isotope composition of speleothems and their applicability as palaeoclimatic indicators: Geochemica et Cosmochimica Acta, v. 35, p. 801-824.

Hill, C.A., and Forti, P., 1986, Cave Minerals of the World: Huntsville, Alabama, National Speleological Society, p. 238.

Hollingsworth, E.J., Brahana, V.J., Inlander, E., and Slay, M., 2008, Creation of an international digital karst archive to advance the protection of karst species and habitats worldwide: Geol. Soc. of America, Abs. with Programs (South-Central Mtg.), v. 40, no. 3, p. Paper No. 136642, p.30.

Hollingsworth, E.J., Brahana, V.J., Inlander, E., and Slay, M., 2008, From Datasets to Maps, from Aquifers to Habitats- Karst Regions of the World (KROW): Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs (Ann. Mtg.), v. 40, no. 9, p. Paper No. 173-4.

Hollingsworth, E.J., Brahana, V.J., Inlander, E., and Slay, M., 2008, Karst Regions of the World (KROW): Global Karst Datasets and Maps to Advance the Protection of Karst Species and Habitats Worldwide, in U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, Bowling Green, Kentucky, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008-5023, p. 17-24.

102

Hollingsworth, E.J., Brahana, V.J., Inlander, E., and Slay, M., 2007, Developing global karst datasets and maps to advance the protection of karst species and habitats worldwide: Geol. Soc. of America, Absstract with Programs (Ann. Mtg.), v. 39, no. 6, p. Paper No. 175-4, p.477.

Holsinger, J.R., 2000, Ecological derivation, colonization, and speciation, in Wilkens, H., Culver, D.C. and Humphreys, W.F., eds., Subterranean ecosystems- Ecosystems of the world., v. 30, p. 399-415.

Huppert, G., Burri, E., Forti, P., and Cigna, A., 1993, Effects of tourist development on caves and karst; Karst terrains, environmental changes and human impact: Catena Supplement, v. 25, p. 251-268.

Jennings, J.N., 1964, Syngenetic karst as exemplified in Australia: Technical Program Abstracts - International Geographical Congress, p. 106..

Jennings, J.N., 1971, Karst: Cambridge, Mass., M.I.T. Press, p. 252.

Jennings, J.N., and Mabbutt, J.A., 1967, Landform studies from Australia and New Guinea: Cambridge, London, Cambridge U.P., 434p.

Jennings, J.N., 1983, A map of karst cave areas in Australia. Australian Geographical Studies, v. 21, p. 183-196

Jennings, J.N., 1983, The disregarded karst of the arid and semiarid domain: Karstologia, v. 1, p. 61-73.

Jennings, J.N., and Jennings, J.N., 1985, Karst Geomorphology: New York, B. Blackwell, 293p.

Jennings, J.N., 1985, Karst geomorphology: United States (USA), Basil Blackwell, New York, NY, United States.

Jianhua, C., Daoxian, Z., Cheng, Z., and Zhongcheng, J., August 13-15, 2007, Karst ecosystem of Guangxi zauang Autonomous Region Constrained by Geological Setting: Relationship between carbonate rock exposure and vegetation coverage, in International Conference on Karst Hydrogeology and Ecosystems, Bowling Green, USA: Bowling Green, KY, Hoffman Environmental Research Institute, p. 15-16.

Johnson, K.S., and Quinlan, J.F., 1994, Regional mapping of karst terrains in order to identify potential environmental problems; Changing karst environments;

103

hydrogeology, geomorphology and conservation; abstracts of papers: Cave and Karst Science, v. 21, p. 15.

Jones, W.K., 1974, Karst hydrology in West Virginia; a review of research: Conf.Karst Geol.Hydrol.Proc, p. 11-17.

Kambesis, P., 2000, Stream flow in Kaumana Cave: The Cave Conservationist, v. 19, p. 7.

Kempe, S., and Halliday, W.R., Report of the Discussion on Pseudokarst, in 12th International Congress of Speleology, 107p.

Kiraly, L., 1975, Rapport sur l'etat actuel des connaissances dans le domaine des caracteres physiques des roches karstiques. Report on the current knowledge in the domain of physical properties of karstic rocks: International Union of Geological Sciences.Series B, no.3, Hydrogeology of Karstic Terrains, p. 53-67.

Klimchouk, A., Ford, D.C., Palmer, A.N., and Dreybrodt, W., January 2000, Speleogenesis. Evolution of karst aquifers: Huntsville, Alabama, National Speleological Society, 527p.

Klimchouk, A., 2007, Hypogene Speleogenesis: Hydrogeological and morphogenetic perspective: National Cave and Karst Research Institute Special Paper no.1, v. 1, p. 106 p.

Klimchouk, A.B., 1994, Karst morphogenesis in the epikarst zone; Changing karst environments; hydrogeology, geomorphology and conservation; abstracts of papers: Cave and Karst Science, v. 21, p. 16.

Klimchouk, A.B., Aksem, S.D., Johnson, K.S., and Gunay, G., 2002, Gypsum karst in the western Ukraine; hydrochemistry and solution rates; Evaporite karst; Karst 2000: Carbonates and Evaporites, v. 17, p. 142-153.

Klimchouk, A.B., Aksem, S.D., Younger, P.L., Lamont-Black, J., and Gandy, C.J., 2005, Hydrochemistry and solution rates in gypsum karst; case study from the western Ukraine; ROSES (Risk of Subsidence due to Evaporite Solution) Conference; European Commission's 4th framework program of research and technological development: Environmental Geology (Berlin), v. 48, p. 307-319, doi: 10.1007/s00254-005-1277-3.

104

Klimchouk, A.B., and Andrejchuk V.N., 2003, Karst Breakdown Mechanisms from Observations in the Gypsum Caves of the Western Ukraine: Implications for Subsidence Hazard Assessment: Speleogenesis and Evolution of Karst Aquifers, v. 1, p. 1-20.

Kovac, N., Faganeli, J., Sket, B., and Bajt, O., 1998, Characterization of macroaggregates and photodegradation of their water soluble fraction; Advances in organic geochemistry 1997; proceedings of the 18th international meeting on Organic geochemistry; Part II, Biogeochemistry: Organic Geochemistry, v. 29, p. 1623-1634.

Kowalski, K., 1975, Die fossil Sauegetierfauna der Hoehle Raj bei Kielce und ihre Bedeutung fuer die Wurm-Stratigraphie in Polen. The fossil mammal fauna from the Raj Cave near Kielce and its significance in the Wurm stratigraphy of Poland: Quartaerpalaeontologie; Abh.Ber.Inst.Quartaerpalaeontologie Weimar, v. 1, p. 217-219.

Kozary, M.T., J.C. Dunlap, and W.E. Humphrey, 1968, Incidence of saline deposits in geologic time. Geological Society of America, Report Special Paper 88, 43-57 p.

Kranjc, A., About the name kras (karst) in Slovenia. in 13th International Congress of Speleology, Brazil, p. 140-142.

Kranjc, A., Gabrovsek, F., Culver, D.C., and Sasowsky, I.D., 2007, Time in karst: Charles Town, West Virginia, Karst Waters Institute Special Publication 12, 246p.

Kranjc, A., and Opara, B., 2002, Temperature monitoring in Kochanske James caves: Acta Carsologica, v. 31/1, p. 85-96.

Kranjc, A., 1994, Anthropogenic changes to karst poljes morphology in Slovenia; Changing karst environments; hydrogeology, geomorphology and conservation; abstracts of papers: Cave and Karst Science, v. 21, p. 17.

Kranjc, A., 1984, Speleological characteristics of alpine karst in Slovenia, northwestern Yugoslavia; A symposium; Arctic and alpine karst; Theme issue: Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift, v. 38, p. 177-183.

Kunský J. 1957 – Typy pseudokrasových tvarů v Československu. Českoslov. Kras 10, 3: 108-125.

105

Lao, C., and Gooding, K., 2000, The Role of Lava Tube Caves in Contributing to Contamination of Groundwater in Hawaii: The Cave Conservationist, v. 19, p. 8.

Larson, C.V., 1991, Nomenclature of lava tube features; Sixth international symposium of Vulcanospeleology; 1991: Geo (Super 2), v. 19, p. 27.

Latham, A.G., Schwarcz, H.P., Ford, D.C., and Pearce, G.W., 1979, Palaeomagnetism of stalagmite deposits: Nature (London), v. 280, p. 383-385.

Laumanns, M., 2001a, Report on the speleological projects in the Matumbi Hills (Kilwa District), Tanga and Zanzibar, Berliner Hohlenkundliche Berichte (Berlin), v1. 67p.

Laumanns, M., 2001b, Report on the European speleological project “Cheringoma Mozambique 1998”: Berliner Hohlenkundliche Berichte (Berlin), v. 2, 85p.

Laumanns, M., 2001c Report on the speleological project “Rio Buzi”, Berliner Hohlenkuncliche Berichte (Berlin), v. 3, 43p.

Lauritzen, S.E., 1991, Uranium series dating of speleothems; a glacial chronology for Nordland, Norway for the last 600 ka; Late Quaternary stratigraphy in the Nordic countries 150,000-15,000 BP: Striae, v. 34, p. 127-133.

Lehmann, H., Birot, P., Corbel, J., Harrassowitz, H., Lasserre, G., Rathjens, C., Roglic, J., and Wissmann, H.V., 1954, Das Karstphaenomen in den verschiedenen Klimazonen; 1, Bericht von der Arbeitstagung der Internationalen Karstkommission in Frankfurt a. Main vom 27. bis 30. Dezember 1953; The karst phenomena in the different climatic zones: Erdkunde, v. 8, p. 112-122.

Lindgren, R.J., Dutton, A.R., Hovorka, S.D., Worthington, S.R.H., and Painter, S., 2005, Conceptualization and simulation of the Edwards Aquifer, San Antonio region, Texas; U. S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group proceedings: Report SIR 2005- 5160, 48-57 p.

Lindsey, B.D., Berndt, M.P., Katz, B.G., Ardis, A.F., Keneth, A., 2009 Factors Affecting Water Quality in Selected Carbonate Aquifers in the Unites States, 1993-2005: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigation Report 2008-5240, 115p.

Lisker, S., Porat, R., Davidovich, U., Eshel, H., Lauritzen, S.E., and Frumkin, A., 2007, Late Quaternary environmental and human events at En Gedi, reflected by the

106

geology and archaeology of the Moringa Cave (Dead Sea area, Israel): Quaternary Research, v. 68, p. 203-212, doi: 10.1016/j.yqres.2007.03.010.

Lowe, D.J., 1993, The Forest of Dean caves and karst; inception horizons and iron-ore deposits: Cave Science (1982), v. 20, p. 31-43.

Lowe, D.J., Bottrell, S.H., and Gunn, J., 2000, Some case studies of speleogenesis by sulfuric acid, in Klimchouk, A.B., Ford, D.C., Palmer, A.N. and Dreybrodt, W., eds., Speleogenesis evolution of karst aquifers: United States (USA), National Speleological Society, Huntsville, AL, United States (USA), .

Lowry, D.C., and Jennings, J.N., 1974, The Nullarbor karst Australia: Zeitschrift Fuer Geomorphologie, v. 18, p. 35-81.

Lu, Y., 1986, Karst in China, Geologic Publishing House, Beijing, China.

Lu, Y., 1996, Gypsum Karst in China: International Journal of Speleology, v. 25 (3/4), p. 297-307.

Lundberg, J., and Ford, D.C., 1994, Late Pleistocene sea level change in the Bahamas from mass spectrometric U-series dating of submerged speleothem: Quaternary Science Reviews, v. 13, p. 1-14.

Mangin, A., 1975, Contribution a l'etude hydrodynamique des aquiferes karstiques; III, Constitution et fonctionnement des aquiferes karstiques. Hydrodynamic study of karst aquifers; III, Constitution and function of karst aquifers: Annales De Speleologie, v. 30, p. 21-124.

Melim, L.A., Northup, D.E., Boston, P.J., Queen, J.M., and Allen, C.C., 1999, Evidence for bacterially-mediated precipitation of pool fingers, Hidden Cave, Guadalupe Mountains, NM; American Association of Petroleum Geologists 1999 annual meeting: Annual Meeting Expanded Abstracts - American Association of Petroleum Geologists, v. 1999, p. A92.

Mendonca, A.F., Pires, A.C.B., and Barros, J.G.C., 1994. Pseudosinkhole occurrences in Brasilia, Brazil: Environmental Geology, v. 23, p. 36-40.

Monroe, W.H., 1979, Caves and canyons in the karst belt of northern Puerto Rico; Problems in karst environments: Zeitschrift Fuer Geomorphologie. Supplementband, p. 21-24.

107

Monroe, W.H., 1977, Geomorphologie de Puerto Rico. Geomorphology of Puerto Rico, in De Galinanes, M.T., ed., Geovision de Puerto Rico; aportaciones recientes al estudio de la geografia: Puerto Rico (PRI), Univ. Puerto Rico, Centro Investigaciones Sociales, Puerto Rico (PRI), .

Monroe, W.H., 1976, The karst landforms of Puerto Rico: U. S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA, United States (USA), Report P 0899, 69 p.

Mylroie, J.E., 1977, Speleogenesis and karst geomorphology of the Helderberg Plateau, Schoharie County, New York [Ph.D. thesis]: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, United States (USA), .

Mylroie, J.E., Mylroie, J.R., Nelson, C.S., Mortimer, N., and Wallace, L.M., 2007, Flank margin caves in New Zealand Tertiary limestones; Geological Society of New Zealand and New Zealand Geophysical Society joint annual conference; launching International Year of Planet Earth, 26-29 November 2007, Tauranga; program and abstracts: Geological Society of New Zealand Miscellaneous Publication, v. 123A, p. 109.

Mylroie, J.E., and Vacher, H.L., 1999, A conceptual view of carbonate island karst; Karst modeling; proceedings of the symposium: Karst Waters Institute Special Publication, v. 5, p. 48-57.

Newnham, R.M., Lowe, D.J., and Williams, P.W., 1999, Quaternary environmental change in New Zealand; a review; New Zealand: Progress in Physical Geography, v. 23, p. 567-610.

Onac, B., and Veres, D.S., 2003, Sequence of secondary phosphates deposition in a karst environment; evidence from Magurici Cave (Romania): European Journal of Mineralogy, v. 15, p. 741-745.

Otvos E. G. 1976 – “Pseudokarst” and “pseudokarst terrains”, problems of terminology. Gdeol. Soc. Amer. Bull. 87, 7: 1021-1027.

Palmer, A.N., 1991, Origin and morphology of limestone caves: Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 103, p. 1-21.

Palmer, A.N., Geomorphology and Hydrology of Karst Terrains (Book): American Scientist, v. 78, 271p.

108

Palmer, A.N., 1983, Karst research in North America: Karstologia, v. 1, p. 39-46.

Palmer, A.N., 1975, The origin of maze caves: The NSS Bulletin, v. 37, p. 57-76.

Palmer, A.N., 1990, Geomorphology and Hydrology of Karst Terrains (Book): American Scientist, v. 78, p. 271.

Palmer, A.N., 2007, Cave Geology: Cave Books, 454 p.

Panoš V. 1978 – Krasové typy podle hledisk geologických. Acta Univ. Palackine Olom., Facult. Rer. Nat. 58, Geogr.-Geol. 17: 83-101.

Peck, S., 1973, A Review of the Invertebrate Fauna of Volcanic Caves in Western North America: Bulletin of the National Speleological, v. 35, p. 104.

Perez, L., Urbani, F., and Universidad Central de Venezuela, Escuela de Geologia, Minas y Geofisica, Caracas, (VEN), 2005, Mejoramiento de la cartografia de rocas metamorficas de la hoja 6947, Cordillera de la Costa-Venezuela, basado en la aplicacion de sistemas de informacion geografica y teledeteccion espacial. Cartographic improvement of metamorphic rock mapping, Sheet 6947, Cordillera de la Cosa, Venezuela; based on GIS and remote sensing; I jornadas venezolanas de geologia de rocas igneas y metamorficas. First Venezuelan meeting on Igneous and metamorphic rock geology: Geos (Caracas), v. 38, p. 36-37.

Pfister, B., Burgess, K., and Berry, J., 2001, What’s a Map? - Media Mapping Technology is Redefining the Term, Geoworld, v. 14, p. 43.

Phelan, Terri Lynn, 1999, GIS and 3-D visualization for geologic subsurface static modeling in a mantled karst environment near Savoy, Arkansas: unpublished University of Arkansas M.A. Thesis, Department of Geography, 158 p

Postpischl, D., Agostini, S., Forti, P., and Quinif, Y., 1991, Palaeoseismicity from karst sediments; the "Grotta del Cervo" cave case study (central Italy); Investigation of historical earthquakes in Europe: Tectonophysics, v. 193, p. 33-44.

Prandini, F.L., Nakazawa, V.A., Dantas, A.M.A., Holzer, T.L., 1990, Karst and urbanization: Investigation and monitoring in Cajamar, Sao Paulo state, Brazil: Selected papers on Hydrogeology, edt. Simpson, E.S. and Sharp, J.M., International Association of Hydrogeologist, 53-65p.

109

Quinlan, J.F., 1976, Hydrology of the Turnhole Spring groundwater basin and vicinity, Kentucky; an area that includes part of Mammoth Cave National Park: Report 11.

Rasmussen, J.B.T., Polyak, V.J., and Asmerom, Y., 2005, Cave response to surface climate variability; high-resolution drip rate data from Bat Cave passage, Carlsbad Cavern; New Mexico Geological Society spring meeting; abstracts: New Mexico Geology, v. 27, p. 49-50.

Ravbar, N., 2006, The protection of karst water sources in Slovenia; Karst, cambio climatico y aguas subterraneas, in Congreso Internacional Sobre El Agua Subterranea En Los Paises Mediterraneos, Malaga, Spain: Spain (ESP), Instituto Geologico Y Minero De Espana, Madrid, Spain (ESP).

Roberge, J., and Ford, D.C., 1983, The upper Salmon River karst, Anticosti Island, Quebec, Canada; V. T. Stringfield symposium; processes in karst hydrology: Journal of Hydrology, v. 61, p. 159-162.

Sarbu, S.M., Kinkle, B.K., Vlasceanu, L., Kane, T.C., Popa, R., and Ehrlich, H.L., 1994, Microbiological characterization of a sulfide-rich groundwater ecosystem; Breakthroughs in karst geomicrobiology and redox geochemistry: Geomicrobiology Journal, v. 12, p. 175-182.

Self C., Mullan G. 1997 – Karst and pseudokarst. In: Chabert C., Courbon P., Atlas des cavités no calcaires do monde. Un. Intern. Spéléol.: 14-15.

Self C., Mullan G. 2005 – Rapid karst development in an English quartzitic sandstone. Acta Carsol. 34, 2: 415-424.

Shaw, T.R., 1979, History of cave science: United Kingdom (GBR), Privately Published, Crymych, Wales, United Kingdom (GBR).

Shopov, Y.Y., and Ford, D.C., 1994, Luminescent microbanding in speleothems: High- resolution chronology and paleoclimate: Geology, v. 22, p. 407.

Smart, C.C., and Ford, D.C., 1986, Structure and function of a conduit aquifer: Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, Revue Canadienne Des Sciences De La Terre, v. 23, p. 919-929.

Smart, C.C., and Ford, D.C., 1983, The Castleguard karst, Main Ranges, Canadian Rocky Mountains; V. T. Stringfield symposium; processes in karst hydrology: Journal of Hydrology, v. 61, p. 193-197.

110

Spalding, M.D., Fox, H.E., Allen, G.R., Davidson, N., Ferdana, M.F., Halper, B.S., Jorge, M.A., Lomban, A., Lourie, S.A., Martin, K.D., McManus, D., Molnar, J., Recchia, D.A., and Robertson, J., 2007, Marine Ecoregions of the World: A bioregionalization of coastal and shelf areas: BioScience, v. 57 No.7, p. 573-583.

Star, J., and Estes, J., 1990, Geographic Information System – An Introduction [Ph.D. thesis]: Prentice Hall, Inc., University of California, Santa Barbara, p. 175.

Stevens, D., Dragicevic, S., Rothley, K., 2007. iDity: A GIS-CA modeling tool for urban planning and decision making. Environ. Model.software.22, 761-773.

Struckmeier, W., 2006, The world-wide hydrogeological mapping and assessment programme (WHYMAP) and the world-wide hydrogeological map information system (WHYMIS): International Association of Hydrogeology Commission on Hydrogeological Maps, Hannover, Germany

Sweeting, M.M., 1990, The Guilin karst; Union Internationale de Speleologie; international atlas of karst phenomena; sheets 8-12: Zeitschrift Fuer Geomorphologie. Supplementband, v. 77, p. 47-65.

Sweeting, M.M., and Bao Haosheng, 1990, Study on karst in China from a world perspective: Carsologica Sinica, v. 9, p. 342-352.

Sweeting, M.M., Boa Haosheng, and Zhang Dian, 1988, Karst in Tibet; Karst hydrogeology and karst environment protection; proceedings: IAHS-AISH Publication, v. 176, p. 213-218.

Sweeting, M.M., 1981, Karst geomorphology: Stroudsburg, Pa; New York, Hutchinson Ross; Distributed worldwide by Academic Press, p. 427.

Taylor, C.J., Nelson, H.S., Hileman, G., and Kaiser, W.P., September 12-15, Hydrogeologic-Framework Mapping of Shallow, Conduit-Dominated Karst— Components of a Regional GIS-Based Approach, in U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings, Rapid City, South Dakota, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific investigations Report 2005-5160, p. 103-113.

Taylor, M.R., 1999, Dark Life: N.Y., Scribner, 287p.

Urbani, F., and Universidad Central de Venezuela, (VEN), 2005, Historia de los mapas geologicos de Venezuela; 1850-2004. History of Venezuelan geologic maps; 1850-

111

2004; I simposio de estratotipos de Venezuela. First symposium on Venezuelan stratotypes: Geos (Caracas), v. 38, p. 72-73.

USGS World Energy Assessment Team, 2000, U.S. Geological Survey World Petroleum Assessment 2000: Description and Results: U.S. Geological Survey, Report USGS Data Series 60 version 1.0.

Vacher, H.L., and Mylroie, J.E., 2002, Eogenetic karst from the perspective of an equivalent porous medium: Carbonates and Evaporites, v. 17, p. 182-196.

Van H., A., Wiedemann, T., 2003. A monitoring tool for the provision of accessible and attractive urban green spaces. Landscape Urban Plann. 63, 109-126.

Veni, G., April 2002, Revising the Karst Map of the United States: Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, v. 64(1), p. 45-50.

Veni, G., DuChene, H., Crawford, N.C., Groves, C.G., Huppert, G.N., Kastning, E.H., Olson, R., and Wheeler, B.J., 2001, Living with Karst- A Fragile Foundation Series 4: Alexandria, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey, p. 64.

Vesper, D.J., and White, W.B., 2004, Spring and conduit sediments as storage reservoirs for heavy metals in karst aquifers: Environmental Geology (Berlin), v. 45, p. 481- 493, doi: 10.1007/s00254-003-0899-6.

Viles, H.A., 1984, Biokarst; review and prospect: Progress in Physical Geography, v. 8, p. 523-542.

Waltham, A.C., 1976, The world of caves: United Kingdom (GBR), Orbis Publishing, London, United Kingdom (GBR), 128p.

Waltham, A.C., 1974, The Geomorphology of the Caves of North-West England, in The Limestones and Caves of North-West England: United Kingdom (GBR), David & Charles-Br. Cave Res. Assoc., Newton Abbot, England, 200p.

Waltham, A.C., Brown, R. D., and Middleton, C., 1985,Karst and Caves in the Jabal Akhdar, Oman. Cave Science, Vol 12, No 3 (Sept. 1985), Bridgwater, UK (Brit. Cave Res Assoc): 69-79.

Waltham, A.C., Smart, P.L., Friederich, H., and Atkinson, T.C., 1985, Exploration of caves for rural water supplies in the Gunung Sewu Karst, Java; Colloque

112

international de karstologie appliquee. International meeting on applied karstology: Annales De La Societe Geologique De Belgique, v. 108, p. 27-31.

Waltham, A.C., Smart, P.L., Friederich, H., Eavis, A.J., and Atkinson, T.C., 1983, The caves of Gunung Sewu, Java: Cave Science (1982), v. 10, p. 55-96.

Weary, D.J., 2008, Preliminary map of potentially karstic carbonate rocks in the central and southern Appalachian states, U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 2008-1154: Version 1.0, scale 1:24,000.

Weary, D.J., September 12-15, An Appalachian regional karst map and progress towards a new national karst map. in Kumiansky, E.L., ed., U.S. Geological Survey Karst Interest Group Proceedings. Rapid City, South Dakota, U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 2005-5160, p. 93-102.

White, N., 2001, Karst in Arid Australia: National Cave and Karst Management Symposium, p. 109-113.

White, S.Q., Grimes, K., Mylroie, J.E., and Mylroie, J.R., March 14th-18th, 2007, The earliest time of karst cave formation, in Karst Waters Institute: Time in Karst, Postojna, Slovenia, p. 1-6.

White, W.B., 2003, Conceptual models for karstic aquifers: Speleogenesis and Evolution of Karst Aquifers, v. 1, p. unpaginated.

White, W.B., 1988, Geomorphology and hydrology of karst terrains: New York, Oxford University Press, 464p.

White, W.B., Culver, D.C., Herman, J.S., Kane, T.C., and Mylroie, J.E., 1995, Karst lands: American Scientist, v. 83, p. 450-459.

White, W.B., Jefferson, G., and Haman, J., 1966, Quartzite Karst in Southeastern Venezuela, v. 2, p.309- 314. International Journal of Speleology, v. 2, p. 309-314.

White, W.B., and White, E.L., 1989, Karst Hydrology, Concepts from the Mammoth Cave Area: New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 288p.

White, W.B., April 26-29, 1976, Conceptual models for karst aquifers; revisited; Hydrologic problems in karst regions, in International symposium on hydrologic problems in karst regions, Bowling Green, Ky, United States: United States (USA).

113

White, W.B., 1976, Cave minerals and speleothems, in Ford, T.D. and Cullingford, C.H.D., eds., The science of speleology: United Kingdom (GBR), Academic Press, Inc., London, England, United Kingdom (GBR), .

White, W.B., 1976, Caves; underground laboratories and underground wilderness: Earth and Mineral Sciences, v. 46, p. 9-12.

White, W.B., 1976, The geology of caves: General Geology Report - Pennsylvania Geological Survey, no.66, Geology and Biology of Pennsylvania Caves, p. 1-71.

Whitman, D., and Gubbels, T., April 10-14, Applications of GIS Technology to the triggering phenomena of sinkholes in central Florida, in Hydrogeology and engineering geology of sinkholes and karst, proceedings of the 7th multidisciplinary conference on sinkholes and the engineering and environmental impacts of karst, Harrisburg-Hershey, Penn.,: Rotterdam, A.A. Balkema, p. 67-73.

Williams, P.W., 1993, Karst Terrains: Environmental Changes and Human Impact: p. 25.

Williams, P.W., Ford, D.C., and Fong, Y.T., 2007, World Map of Carbonate Rock Outcrops v3.0: 9 sheet(s).

Williams, P.W., and Ford, D.C., 2006, Global distribution of carbonate rocks. Zeitschrift Für Geomorphologie, v. 147, p. 1-2.

Williams, P.W., Jennings, J.N., and International Geographical Congress, 1968, Contributions to the study of karst: Canberra, Australian National University.

Williams, P.W., 2004, Karst systems, in Harding, J.M., Mosley, M.P., Pearson, C. and Sorrell, B., eds., Freshwaters of New Zealand: New Zealand (NZL), New Zealand Hydrological Society, Wellington, New Zealand (NZL), .

Williams, P.W., 1994, New Zealand glacial history and late Quaternary climatic change; Palaeoclimates & climate modeling; proceedings of the National Science Strategy Committee for Climate Change workshop: Miscellaneous Series - Royal Society of New Zealand, v. 29, p. 39-41.

114

Williams, P.W., 1991, Solar radiation, soil solutions and speleothem records; Joint annual conference, Geological Society of New Zealand, New Zealand Society of Soil Science; program and abstracts: Geological Society of New Zealand, Lower Hutt, New Zealand (NZL), Report 59A, 145 p.

Williams, P.W., 1991, Tectonic geomorphology, uplift rates and geomorphic response in New Zealand; Geomorphology in unstable regions; selected papers of the COMTAG field symposium: Catena (Giessen), v. 18, p. 439-452.

Williams, P.W., 1988, The geomorphology of plate boundaries and active continental margins: Zeitschrift Fuer Geomorphologie. Supplementband, v. 69, p. 152.

Williams, P.W., 1978, Interpretations of Australasian karsts, in Davies, J.L. and Williams, M.A.J., eds., Landform evolutions in Australasia: Australia (AUS), Austr. Nat. Univ. Press, Canberra, Australia (AUS).

Williams, P.W., 1978, Karst research in China: Transactions of the British Cave Research Association, v. 5, p. 29-46.

Williams, P.W., 1975, Caves of New Zealand: New Zealand's Nature Heritage, v. 5, p. 1886-1892.

Williams, P.W., 1970, Limestone morphology in Ireland, in Irish Geographical Studies: Queen's Univ. Belfast, Dep. Geogr., Belfast.

Williams, P.W., 1969, Caves and karst areas in east New Guinea: Proceedings of the International Congress of Speleology, no.5, Vol.1, Morphologies Des Karstes, p. M 31.1-M 31.13.

Williams, P.W., and Fowler, A., 2002, Relationship between oxygen isotopes in rainfall, cave percolation waters and speleothem calcite at Waitomo, New Zealand: Journal of Hydrology. New Zealand, v. 41, p. 53-70.

Williams, P.W., King, D.N.T., Neil, H., and Zhao, J.-., 2005, Palaeoclimatic events and cycles determined from Late Pleistocene to Holocene speleothem (super 18) O and (super 13) C records from central New Zealand) ); Proceedings of the 2005 NZ- INTIMATE meeting, GNS-Rafter Laboratory, Wellington, July 4-5, 2005: Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, Lower Hutt, New Zealand (NZL), Report 2005/18, 11 p.

115

Williams, P.W., King, D.N.T., Neil, H., Zhao, J.X., and Australasian Quaternary Association, (NZL), 2006, A New Zealand speleothem record from the Late Glacial to c. 60 ka BP; preliminary results; 2006 Australasian INTIMATE meeting: Geological Society of New Zealand Miscellaneous Publication, v. 120, p. 27-28.

Williams, P.W., King, D.N.T., Zhao, J.X., Collerson, K.D., and Alloway, B.V., 2004, Late Pleistocene to Holocene speleothem (super 18) O and (super 13) C records from South Island, New Zealand, and their palaeoenvironmental interpretation; 2004 NZ-INTIMATE Meeting, GNS Rafter Laboratory, Wellington, 23-24 August 2004: Institute of Geological & Nuclear Sciences, Lower Hutt, New Zealand (NZL), Report 2004/22, 38 p.

Williams, P.W., Marshall, A., Ford, D.C., and Jenkinson, A.V., 1999, Palaeoclimatic interpretation of stable isotope data from Holocene speleothems of the Waitomo district, North Island, New Zealand: Holocene, v. 9, p. 649-657.

Worthington, S.R.H., 1994, Flow velocities in unconfined Paleozoic carbonate aquifers; Changing karst environments; hydrogeology, geomorphology and conservation; abstracts of papers: Cave and Karst Science, v. 21, p. 21-22.

Wray, R.A.L., 1997, Quartzite dissolution: Karst or pseudokarst? Cave and Karst Science, v. 24, no.2, p. 81-86.

Wright, V.P., Estaban, M., and Smart, P.L., 1991, Paleokarst and palaeokarstic reservoirs: Reading England, Postgraduate Research Institute for Sedimentology, University of Reading, p. 158.

Zhang, Z., 1991, Karst of China: p. 224.

Zhu, X., and Chen, W., 2005, Tiankengs in the karst of China: Cave and Karst Science, v. 32, no.2-3, p. 55-66.

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

Appendix A. Network of Scientists

126

of Thrace, Greece Greece of Thrace,

Www.asg.org.nz/ stuact.tamu.edu/stuorgs/cave/ [email protected] [email protected] www.cavern.org/ www.caves.org/pub/aca/ [email protected] www.amcs [email protected] www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/speleoatlas/SAindex1.ht ml [email protected] [email protected]; [email protected] [email protected] http://www.batcon.org/ http://www.beatushoehlen.ch [email protected] [email protected] Contact Information Information Contact Biologicas RioBrazil e Ambientais, Janeiro, de shading indicates direct correspondence with E. Hollingsworth. shading indicates direct correspondence New Zealand Texas Japan Minnesota SantaIstituto Ursula, Universidade Ciencias de USA Missouri, Laboratory, Underground Ozark of America United States of America United States Ukraine, Poland UK Paleontology, of Department Museum, History Natural Mexico England World France, alps, Italian de geographie, Departement Switzerland Federal Universidade de Geografia, Departamento de Minas Gerais, Brazil Italy Generale, Fisica di Dipartimento Torino, di Università Panhandle USA Panhandle, Alaska UK Hungary Szeged, of University Landscape, and Climatology of Department University Democritus Ethnology, History and of Department World Switzerland USA GeographicalSchoolof Sciences, University of Bristol, UK, Mexico Art Research Association,Australia Australian Rock Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France Areas of Study/Location of Work Work of of Study/Location Areas Network of Scientist s; gray gray s; of Scientist Network Name Name A Auckland Speleo Group Society Aggie Speleological History Natural of Museum Akiyoshi-dai Alexander, Calvin F. Elaine Alberquerque, Tom Aley, Cave Conservation Association American Accidents Caving American Andrichouk, Slava Peter Andrews, Studies Cave Mexican for Association Tim Arkinson, Microfabrics Atlas of Speleothem Audra, Philippe Auler, Augusto B Giovanni Badino, Baichtal, James G. Paul Bahn, Ilona Barany-Kevei, Antonis Bartsiokas, Bat Conservation International Beaus Cave Beck, Barry Beddows,A. Patricia G. Robert Bednarik, Anne Bedos,

127

[email protected] [email protected]; www.rskuklimited.com http://www.northcoast.com/~rchilds/ [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] http://www.sat.dundee.ac.uk/~arb/bcra/ or http://www.bcra.org.uk/ [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]; [email protected] [email protected]; [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid, Spain Madrid, Ciencias Naturales, de logical Society, Bogaziçi Society, logical

cal Society, Turkey Turkey cal Society, State Nature Conservation Authority, Slovenia Switzerland Bulgaria AAPG US, Limited, (UK) RSK Croatia Department, Hydrology Faculty, Engineering Civil Czech Republic, Slovakia Mexico New Research Program, Karst Cave and Instituteof Mining and Technology,Mexico, New USA UK Sciences, Earth of School Leeds, of University France de Toulouse, P. Sabatier Universite d'Ecologie, Laboratoire Canada Ontario, Survey, Geological Ontario USA Virginia, West Research, Systems Farming Appalachian Agriculture, of Department US USA Anthropology, of Department Angeles, Los at University State California NationalInstitute of Biology, Ljubljana,Slovenia France England Africa USA, Georgia, Georgia, of University UK Canada Ontario, Survey, Geological Ontario Slovenia Ljubljana, of University Biology, of Department Canada Ontario, Columbia Portal, Karst information Speleo Bogazici University Speleologi University USA Italy (Southern) France Spain- Gypsum karst CientíficoNacional Titular CSIC, Museo Beltram, Gordana Beltram, Bernasconi, Reno Beron, Petar Bishop, Dick Bonacci, Ognjen Project Educational Online Expedition Caving Borneo Bosak, Pavel Boston, Penny Bottrell, Simon Claude Boutin, Boyd, Jim Boyer, Douglas Brady, James Brancelj, Anton N. David Brison, British Ass. Cave Research Brook, George Simon Brooks, Brunton, Frank Bulog, Boris Buck, Marcus J. Heber Bueno, BUMAK Bunnell, Dave Burri, Ezio C Patrick Cabro, M. Calaforra, Jose I. Ana Camacho,

128

www.caving.uk.com www.caving.uk.com [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]; [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] of Archaeology and Prehistory, UK Prehistory, and of Archaeology iversité Paul Sabatier, France Paul iversité ilwaukee, Department of Department ilwaukee,

Istituto Sperimentale di BiologiaSottosuolo delLatianoParenzan", (Brindisi), Italy "P. United Kingdom University of Sheffield, Department USA. Wisconsin-Milwaukee, of University Geography, of Department USA College, Grinnell Biology, of Department (Asti), Italiana, Cocconato Società Speleologica Italy USA Anthropology, of Department Iowa, of University Australia Australian speleological Federation, GunungWorld Heritage Mulu Park Area, Manager, Sarawak, Malaysia Italy Rome, University, La Sapienza Biology, Animal and Human of Department Canada, Cave, Canadian France Curie, M. et P. Universite Banyuls, de Océanologique Observatiore Racovita" "Emil Geospeleology, of Department Instituteof Speleology, Romania Bucharest, UK CenterforKarstDepartment Cave & Studies, Geography of and Geology,Western KentuckyUniversity Africa South Portugal USA Anthropology, of Museum Webb S. William Kentucky, of University USA of Biology, Department University, American Appalachians USA Speleobooks, Schoharie, New York UniversityWisconsin-M of USA and Geography, Caribbean China Slovenia jama, Skocjanske Park Institutul Speologiede Racovita", Romania, "Emil Laboratoire d'Entomologie, Un Switzerland, Netherlands International Journal of Speleology, Sardinia Camassa, Michele M Michele M Camassa, Caving UK Andrew Chamberlain, Chenoweth, Sean Christiansen, Kenneth Arrigo Cigna, Ciochon, Russell Arthur Clark, Clark, Brian Cobolli, Marina Coles, Rick Nicole Coineau, Constantin, Silviu John Cordingley, Crawford, Nicholas Stephen Craven, Antonio Jose Crispim, M. George Crothers, Culver, Dave D Gareth Davies, G. Donald Davis, Davis, (Adviser) Emily Day, Michael Daoxian, Yuan Vanja Debevec, Decu, Vasile Louis Deharveng, Derooij, Rob de Waele, Jo

129

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] - [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Geophysics and MineralIrkutsk, Resources, Russia rth Sciences & Geography, UK & Sciences rth

, VrijeNetherlands, University, Sciences Life and Faculty of Earth Puerto USGS, Center, Science Water Caribbean Rico Ireland Department, TrinityGeography College, InstituteBremen, of ExperimentalUniversity of Physics, Germany Italy , Australian Russia. University, State Perm Geology, of Department Australia Ireland Dublin, College, Trinity Geography, of Department Australia Australian speleological Federation, USA Iowa, of University Anthropology, of Department UK Persian Gulf Belgium Turkey Australia IUCN/UNESCO, Mexico, Mexico of University Denmark Archaeology, Prehistoric of Department Aarhus, of University Persian GulfBritish Karst, Interest Karst TX), (Austin, Survey US Geological Portal Ea Keele University, School of UK Survey,Geological ritish Norway Journal of Editor Agency, Protection Environmental US Studies, Karst and Cave of Research InstituteGeology,East Siberian of Switzerland, Great Britain Gibraltar Gibraltar Museum, of the Director School of Geography & Geology, McMaster World University, Dilsiz, Cuneyt Diaz, Pedro Dave Drew, Wolfgang Dreybrodt, Russell Drysdale, Victor Dublyansky, Dunkley, John Dunne, Suzanne Dykes ,Peter E Eaves-Johnson, K. Lindsay Andy Eavis, Stuart Edgell, Ek, Camille Mehmet Ekmekci, Elery-Hamilto-Smith Ramone Espinasa, Eriksen, Berit F R. Andrew Farrant, Fanlquist, Lynne Fairchild, Ian Andy Farrant, Faulkner, Trevor S. Malcom Field, G. Andrej Filippov, Marco Filipponi, Clive Finlayson, (Adviser) Derek Ford,

130

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ersity, UK and Africa Africa ersity, UK and

Istituto Italiano Di Speleologia, University of Bologna, Italy IstitutoUniversity Italiano Di Speleologia, UK Israel of Jerusalem, University Hebrew Geography, of Department Karst, Dinaric Germany, Bremen of University Slovenia Institutodi ItalianoAncona, Speleologia, Italy France Savoie, de l'Université de Géographie de Laboratoire France Hungary UK Tropical of School University, Cook James Australia Geography, & and Studies Environment d'Ecologia), (Àrea de Biologia Department les Illes Balears, Mallorca Universitat de Instituteof Archaeology, University College London,UK UK Durham, of University Geography, of Department Karst and GIS Australia federation, speleological Australian Poland, Oregon Vancouver BritishGIS andIsland Columbia,Karst, Regolith Mapping,Australia Karst Map, Survey, US Geological US Spain Turkey Geographical and Environmental of Department Sciences, HuddersfieldUniv Sarawak USA Sturt Charles Management, Karst and Cave New SouthWales, Australia University, Institute ofof Fribourg, Geography,University Forti, Paolo Paolo Forti, Frankland, John Amos Frumkin, G Franci Gabrovsek, Galdenzi, Sandro Christophe Gauchon, Dominique Genty, Horvath Gergely, Dave Gibson, Gillieson,(Adviser) David Angel Gines, Glover, Ian Helen Goldie, Goodchiled, Mike Goodwin, Mick Michal Gradzinski, Griffiths, Paul Ken Grimes, Gross, Eliza Günay, Gultekin. International Research and Application Center for Karst Water Gutierrez, Francisco Hacettepe University, Ankara Gunn, John GunungWorld Mulu Heritage Area H WilliamHalliday, R. (Adviser) (Adviser) Elery Hamilton-Smith, Philippe Häuselmann,

131

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]; [email protected] [email protected] titute, Carlsbad,titute, New Mexico, USA sity of Huddersfield,sity of UK

Switzerland France I, Lyon Claude-Bernard Université New Mexico,Hillsboro,USA Mexico New Albuquerque, Mexico, New of University Department, Geology WittenbergofDept University,Biology, USA Germany USA Virgina, Norfolk, University, Dominion Old Sciences, Biological Australia Wales, South New Research, Junction River National Caveand Karst Research Ins Bernice P. Bishop USA Honolulu, Museum Hawaii, UK Edwards Manager, Program Sciences Aquifer USA Texas, Antonio, San Authority, Aquifer Australia Geographical Sciences, Univer Canada Ontario, Survey, Geological Ontario University-Galveston,A&M Texas of MarineDept. USA Biology, Israel, Palestine Guilin, China UniversitySydney, of School of Chemistry, Australia Hydrogeology, of Centre Emile-Argand, Rue 11 Switzerland Dynamics Laboratory,Karst InstituteKarst of China Geology, USA Texas, Antonio, San Authority, Aquifer Edwards Hydrogeologist, Senior National Risk Assessments Project, Australia, Moulis, France du C.N.R.S., souterrain Laboratoire UK (northern)Australia Hervant,Hydrobiologie Frédéric. et souterraines Écologie Val Hildreth-Werker, A. Hill, Carol Hobbs, Horton Hoetzl, Professor R. John Holsinger, Hope, Jeanette D. Louise Hose, G. Frank Howarth, Chris Howes, Hoyt, John Hubert,Trimmel Chris Hunt, Doug Hynes, I Thomas Iliffe, Issa, Arie Instituteof Karst Geology J Julia James, Pierre-Yves Jeannin, Jianhua, Cao Steve Johnson, Jones, Trevor Christian Juberthie, Judson, David K Danuta Karp,

132

http://network.speleogenesis.info/directory/bibliogra phy/karstbase/index.php www.karstportal.org [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]; [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Science, Plattsburgh State University of New York of University Plattsburgh State Science, of the Slovenian ofof the Academy Arts, Sciences and Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USA Tuscaloosa, Alabama, SAZU, Ljubljana,Slovenia

Archaeology Dept, UK Dept, Archaeology Cave and Karst Database, Global Global Database, Karst and Cave EnvironmentalHoffman Research Institute,USA Maps Publications, Databases, University,Ehime Japan Japan, Philippines PSS Philippines, Australia, Tasmania Tasmania, of University Korea, South Arkansas, of University KoreanGeosciences Institute of & Mineral Korea South Resources, KoreanGeology Institute of and Mines, South Korea, Instituteof GeologicalNational Academy Sciences, Kiev Science, of Karst Research Institute, Scientific Research Center Postojna, Slovenia Postojna, SloveniaKarst Research InstituteSAZU, ZRC Karst Research Institute, ZRC Slovenia, Ljubljana, History of Natural Museum Slovene USA Wisconsin-Milwaukee, of University Geography, of Department Brazil P.E. LaMoreaux & Associates, E. Racovitza SpeleologicalRomania Institute, Cluj, Liverpool,University of Caves Iraq, Bergen, Geologisk University of Institutt,Norway Professor of BiologyDean, and FacultyArts of and USA Karst Map Survey, US Geological US Brazil Spain Asturias, de Prehistoria, Laboratorio Pinto. KarstBase KarstBase Pat Kambesis, Portal Karst Information Naruhiko Kashima, Kazuko, Urushibara Yoshino Kennedy, Jim Kevin Kiernan, Burmshick Kim, Yongcheol Kim, Yongje Kim, (Adviser) Alexander Klimchouk, Knez, Martin Adviser Professional Janja. Kogovsek, Andrej Kranjc, Boris Kryštufek, Kueny, Jeff L Ayrton Jose Labegalini, LaMoreaux, Philip E. Lascu, Cristian Alf Latham, Michael Laumanns, Lauritzen, Stein-Erik Lavoie, Kathleen H. Lera, Thomas Bruce Lindsey, Lino, Claton C. Ana Llona,

133

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]; [email protected] www.moravskykras.net/en/information.html [email protected] [email protected] ternational Germany Bremen, University Edwards Aquifer Research and Data Data and Research Aquifer Edwards

, Puerto Rico, Guatemala, Guatemala, , Puerto Rico, (former Geological Southwest Texas State University, Geology,USA Austin,Texas Bureau of Economic at University of British Geological Survey, UK China Canada University, Carleton Studies, Environmental and Geography of Department France Cave Database, World France Bordeaux, Université ofFreshwater InstituteDepartment Biology,Royal Belgian Sciences, of Natural Belgium Council for Geosciences Africa, Survey), Pretoria South France Lyon, Claude-Bernard Université souterraines, Écologie et Hydrobiologie France de Paris, Naturelle d'Histoire National Museum de Zoologie-Arthropodes, Laboratoire Caribbean Colleges, California, The Claremont biospeleologist Africa Italy, di Firenze, Sezione ISE CNR - In Science, and Faculty of Engineering Australia Wales, South New Tasmania , Australia Industries, Primary of Department Karst Research Institute, Postojna, Slovenia Yugoslavia Archaeologist in the Université deLiège, Belgium, Liège Rico Puerto of University Belize Australian Speleological Federation, Australia Mexico Studies, Cave Mexican for Association Mexico Institutdu Speleologie, Romania Cluj, France USA. Wisconsin-Milwaukee, of University Geography, of Department Malaya Romania Longley, Glenn Glenn Longley, Robert Loucks, Lowe, David (Adviser) Lu, Yaoru Joyce Lundberg, M Madalaine, Eric Maire, Richard Martens, Koen Martini, Jacques Mathieu, Jacques Mauries, Jean-Paul McFarlane, Donald Giuseppe Messana, V.B. Meyer-Rochow, Michie, Neville Middleton, Gregory Andrej Mihevc, Petar Milanovic, Miller, Rebecca Miller, Thomas Milner ,Steve Mark-Bill Minton, Mixon, Bill Oana Moldovan, Karst Moravian Mouret, Claude Mueller, Bill Fatihah Ros Muhammad, Anca Munteanu,

134

nd Biology, USA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] www.pss.org.ph [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] iences Department, USA USA Department, iences Studies Program a Program Studies Préhistoire, Liège, Belgium sity of Fribourg, Switzerland rk at Oneonta, Earth Sc Earth rk at Oneonta,

Department of Geosciences, Mississippi State University, USA USA University, State Mississippi Geosciences, of Department KatholiekeUniversiteit Leuven, Italy Belgium, Canada Ontario, Protection, Water Source University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico Ecologist, Mammoth CaveNationalUSA Park, Romania, Mineralogy, of Dept. Cluj, of University Europe (SE) Spain Tenerife, Animal, Biologia de Departamento La Laguna, de Universidad Australia Wales, South New of Sydney, University Learning, and Development of School de Liège, Service Université Yo New of State University Italy Austria Vienna, History Natural of Museum Cave Links A-z King's College London, SchoolHealth of and Sciences, UK Life Instituteof Geography, Univer Philippines Romania Malaysia Lumpur, Kuala UK Zoology, of Department Museum, Manchester Belgium Dept. of Geology, Shiraz University, Iran USA Museum, Memorial Texas Austin, Texas at of University Facultat Spain Barcelona, de Biologia, University of Spain Huelva, of University of Geology, Department Rockies Canadian Macalester College, Environmental Departamento dePetrologiay Geoquimica, Universidad deMadrid, ComplutenseSpain Mylroie, John N Fadi Nader, Linda Nicks, Diana E. Northup, O Rick Olson, Bogdan Onac, Pedro Oromi, Osborne, Armstrong Otte, Marcel P (Adviser) Art Palmer, Parise, Mario Pavuza, Rudolf Dan Peden, Pentecost, Allan Perritaz, Luc Society Speleological Philippine M. Gheorghe Ponta, Price, Liz Proudlove, Graham Q Yves Quinif, R Raeisi, Ezzat R. Reddell, James Ribera, Carles Rodríguez-Vidal, Joaquin Rollins, Jon Aldemaro Romero, Rossi, Carlos

135

Mexico Slovakia Bratislava, in University Comenius Paleontology, and Geology of Department France Italy Verona, History, Natural of Museum USA Akron, of University of Geology, Department Geografia, di Dipartimento Padova, of University Italy Italy Roma, University, Vergata Tor Biology, of Department Texas San Antonio, Authority, Aquifer Edwards Territory Northwest Australia, Postojna, SloveniaKarst Research InstituteSAZU, ZRC UK Russia, Arctic Karst Italy Ontario Canada, Caver, Canadian Hong Kong Geological Survey HonoraryUK and Institute, Postojna, Research Karst Research Slovenia Fellow, Univer sityFaculty of Physics, of Sofia, Bulgaria USA Israel USA Tennessee, of University Anthropology, of Department Brazil Biotechnical Faculty, Department of Biology, Slovenia Karst Research Institute, Postojna, Slovenia Canada Geography, of Department Ontario, Western of University New Zealand USA Institute c/oof Geography, China Australia Collaboration exchange, Information Universität Innsbruck, Institut für Geologie und Paläontologie, Austria Serbia, Montenegro Russell, William S Sabol, Martin Jean-Noel Salomon, Beatrice Sambugar, D. Ira Sasowsky, Sauro, Ugo Valerio Sbordoni, Schindel, Geary Jacques Schroeder, Sebela, Stanka Self, Charles Semikolennykh, Andrey Kevin Senior, Ian Shaw, Raynor Shaw, Shaw, Trevor (Adviser) Y. Yavor Shopov, Carolina Shrewsbury, Shtober, Nurit Jan Simek, Silagi, Mario (Adviser) Sket, Boris Slabe, Tadej Chris Smart, Smith, Dave Smith,O. Marion SongKarstology Linhua, and Speleology Group Spate, Andy Speleogenesis Spötl, Christoph Stevanovic, Zoran

136

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] College at Buffalo,USA

USA, USA, USA Ohio, Toledo, of University Geology, of Department Italy History, Natural of Museum Univ. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Dept. of Art History, USA Australia IstitutoperStudio lodegli Ecosistemi, Italy Firenze, USA Geography, of Department Oklahoma, of University York, New of State University USA Biodiversity, for Center Survey, History Natural Illinois Instituteof Zoology of - Dept Animal Physiology,University ofBelgium Liege, Australia Wales, South New Trust, Reserve Caves Jenolan UK UK Instituto Biociências,de de Departamento Zoologia, Brazil Vienna, History, Natural of Museum Science, Cave and Karst of Department the of Director Retired Austria Poland Geomorphology, of Department Silesia, of University Ukraine Venezuela Karst Tropical Philippines, Caribbean, Puerto Rico Tavrichesky University, Ukraine Vietnam Croatia Antonio, San Institute, Karst and Cave National Mexico New UniversityOxford,UK ofSchool Geography, Trent University, UK Nottingham ofCivil Engineering, Department Steward, Paul Steward, Paul Donald Stierman, Stoch, Fabio Andrea Stone, Swain, Bruce T Taiti, Stefano Rozemarijn Tarhule-Lips, Tao ofDepartment Tang, Geography and Planning J. Taylor, Steven Tercafs, Raymond Mia Thurgate, ChrisTolan-Smith, F. Anna Tooth, Eleonora Trajano, Trimmel, Hubert Tyc, Andrzej U Ukrainin InstituteSpeleology of Franco Urbani, Urich, Peter V Vale, Able Boris Vakhrushev, Van, Tran Tan Velebit Park Nature George Veni, Viles, Heather W (Adviser) Tony Waltham,

137

[email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]; [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]

State Cave Recorder and Map Curator , Australia Australia , Curator and Map State Cave Recorder Germany Hamburg, Universitat USA Australia Studies, La Karst Institute for Speleology & Swiss Switzerland Chaux-de-Fonds, UniversityAuckland, of Department of Geography, New Zealand karst) Korea (caves/volcanic UniversityLoughborough, of of Department Geography,UK UK Canada Ontario, Dundas, Groundwater, Worthington (South) China China of Engineering, Academy Chinese Consulting, Canada Alberta, Karst Alberta Japan Germany Hamburg, of University China Webb, Rauleigh Axel Weber, C. Jim Werker, White, Susan Andres Wildberger, Williams, Paul (Adviser) Woo (Adviser) Paul Wood, Wookey, Cambridge R.H. Stephen Worthington, X Xuewen, Zhu Y Lu Yaoru, Yonge, C.J. Kazuhisa Yoshimura, Z Zander, Dieter Zhang, Shouyue

138

139