4.6 Article

Name and scale matter: Clarifying the geography of Tibetan Plateau and adjacent mountain regions

Journal

GLOBAL AND PLANETARY CHANGE
Volume 215, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2022.103893

Keywords

Conservation; Geographical scale; Hengduan Mountains; Himalaya; Mountains of Central Asia; Pan-Tibetan Highlands; Species richness; Tibetan Plateau; Toponym

Funding

  1. Strategic Priority Research Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences [XDB31010000]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41971071, 32170398, 31770367]
  3. Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences, CAS [ZDBS-LY-7001]
  4. Top-notch Young Talents Project of Yunnan Provincial 'Ten Thousand Talents Program' [YNWRQNBJ-2018-146]
  5. CAS Light of West China Program
  6. International Partnership Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences
  7. CAS President's International Fellowship Initiative [2022VBA0004]
  8. Postdoctoral International Exchange Program of the Office of China Postdoctoral Council
  9. Postdoctoral Targeted Funding and Postdoctoral Research Fund of Yunnan Province
  10. UK Natural Environment Research Council/National Natural Science Foundation of China [NE/P013805/1, 41661134049]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Geographical names play a crucial role in various disciplines, but inconsistencies and arbitrary scales hinder communication. A multi-disciplinary approach was used to standardize nomenclature for the Pan-Tibetan Highlands, with the proposal of a new term 'Pan-Tibetan Highlands'. New geographical boundaries were defined based on historical and contemporary perspectives, with a focus on conservation gaps in the region. The study aims to benefit quantitative spatial analysis and promote cross-disciplinary comparisons.
Geographical names and the entities they represent act as a fundamental cornerstone across numerous disciplines. However, inconsistent geographical names and arbitrarily defined regional geographical scales are common, hindering cross-disciplinary communication and synthesis. The Pan-Tibetan Highlands, comprising the Tibetan Plateau, Himalaya, Hengduan Mountains and Mountains of Central Asia, is a case in point. To rectify these inconsistencies of terminology, we employed a multi-disciplinary approach to standardize the nomenclature of the Tibetan Plateau and the three adjacent mountain regions, defining their spatial extent using historical and contemporary perspectives. A literature meta-analysis indicated that 'Tibetan Plateau', 'Himalaya' and 'Hengduan Mountains' are the most suitable names for these regions in terms of both priority (earliest use) and popularity, whereas 'Mountains of Central Asia' emerges as appropriate for the mountain chains to the west of the Tibetan Plateau. The new term 'Pan-Tibetan Highlands' is proposed to replace the less precise and arguably misleading 'High Mountain Asia' for these regions collectively. Additionally, new geographical boundaries, applicable back through time, are proposed for each region, based on geological and geomorphological features. Using these new boundaries, the Pan-Tibetan Highlands area is 3.95 x 10(6) km(2) with a mean elevation of 3824 m, while the Tibetan Plateau is smaller (1.82 x 10(6) km(2)) and higher (4465 m) than commonly assumed. Across the Pan-Tibetan Highlands, the proportion of protected areas is far below the proposed 30% anticipated in the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework target with only a few exceptions. Additionally, the Hengduan Mountains showed the highest vascular plant species richness and endemism, followed by Himalaya, Mountains of Central Asia and the Tibetan Plateau. The obvious conservation gap in the Pan-Tibetan Highlands calls for urgent research-based optimization of conservation networks. Our approach benefits quantitative spatial analysis by providing well-defined geographical scales for various fields, aiding cross-disciplinary comparisons and synthesis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available