Nine axioms for interpreting landscapes from a geoscience perspective are presented, and illustrated via a case study. The axioms are the self-evident portions of several key theoretical frameworks: multiple causality; the law–place–history triad; individualism; evolution space; selection principles; and place as historically contingent process. Reading of natural landscapes is approached from a perspective of place formation. Six of the axioms relate to processes or phenomena: (1) spatial structuring and differentiation processes occur due to fluxes of mass, energy, and information; (2) some structures and patterns associated with those fluxes are preferentially preserved and enhanced; (3) coalescence occurs as structuring and selection solidify portions of space into zones (places) that are internally defined or linked by mass or energy fluxes or other functional relationships, and/or characterized by distinctive internal similarity of traits; (4) landscapes have unique, individualistic aspects, but development is bounded by an evolution space defined by applicable laws and available energy, matter, and space resources; (5) mutual adjustments occur between process and form (pattern, structure), and among environmental archetypes, historical imprinting, and environmental transformations; and (6) place formation is canalized (constrained) between clock-resetting events. The other three axioms recognize that Earth surface systems are always changing or subject to change; that some place formation processes are reversible; and that all the relevant phenomena may manifest across a range of spatial and temporal scales. The axioms are applied to a study of soil landscape evolution in central Kentucky, USA.
AgnewJA (2011) Space and place. In: AgnewJALivingstoneD (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Geographical Knowledge. London: SAGE, 316–330.
2.
AndrewsWMJr (2004) Geologic controls on Plio-Pleistocene drainage evolution of the Kentucky River in central Kentucky. PhD dissertation, University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA.
3.
BaileyRG (1998) Ecoregions. The Ecosystem Geography of the Oceans and Contingents. Berlin: Springer.
4.
BarnhiselRIBaileyHHMatondangS (1971) Loess distribution in central and eastern Kentucky. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings35: 483–486.
5.
BerkowitzBEwingRP (1998) Percolation theory and network modeling applications in soil physics. Surveys in Geophysics19: 23–72.
6.
BockheimJGGennadiyevAN (2010) Soil-factorial models and earth-system science: a review. Geoderma159: 243–251.
7.
BrunsdenD (1990) Tablets of stone: Towards the ten commandments of geomorphology. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie79: 1–37.
8.
BrysonRA (1997) The paradigm of climatology: An essay. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society78: 449–455.
9.
BuiEN (2004) Soil survey as a knowledge system. Geoderma120: 17–26.
10.
BurkeRTA (1903) Soil survey of Scott County, Kentucky. Washington, DC: Field Operations of the Bureau of Soils, US Department of Agriculture.
11.
CochranFVBrunsellNASuykerAE (2016) A thermodynamic approach for assessing agroecosystem sustainability. Ecological Indicators67: 204–214.
12.
CotterillFDFoissnerW (2010) A pervasive denigration of natural history miscontrues how biodiversity inventories and taxonomy underpin scientific knowledge. Biodiversity and Conservation19: 291. doi: 10.1007/s10531-009-9721-4
13.
CresswellT (2014) Place: An Introduction. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
14.
De HaasTPierikHJvan der SpekAJF. (2018) Holocene evolution of tidal systems in the Netherlands: Effects of rivers, coastal boundary conditions, eco-engineering species, inherited relief and human interference. Earth-Science Reviews177: 139–163.
15.
DokuchaevVV (1883) Russian Chernozem. In: MonsonS (ed), Selected Works of V.V. Dokuchaev. Volume 1. Jerusalem: Israel Program for Scientific Translations.
16.
EaglesonPS (2002) Ecohydrology: Darwinian Expression of Vegetation Form and Function. New York: Cambridge University Press.
17.
GersmehlPJ (1976) An alternative biogeography. Annals of the Association of American Geographers66: 223–241.
18.
GleasonHA (1939) The individualistic concept of the plant association. American Midland Naturalist21: 92–110.
19.
GriffenAMAyrsOL (1906) Soil survey of Madison County, Kentucky. Washington, DC: Field Operations of the Bureau of Soils, US Department of Agriculture.
20.
HudsonBD (1992) The soil survey as paradigm-based science. Soil Science Society of America Journal56: 836–841.
21.
HuggettRJ (1995) Geoecology. London: Routledge.
22.
HumphreysGSWilkinsonMT (2007) The soil production function: A brief history and its rediscovery. Geoderma139: 73–78.
23.
HuntAG (2016) Spatio-temporal scaling of vegetation growth and soil formation from percolation theory. Vadose Zone Journal15. doi:10.2136/vzj2015.01.0013
24.
HutchinsonGE (1957) Concluding remarks. Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quantitative Biology22: 415–427.
25.
JennyH (1941) The Factors of Soil Formation. New York: McGraw-Hill.
26.
JohnsonDL (2002) Darwin would be proud: Bioturbation, dynamic denudation, and the power of theory in science. Geoarchaeology17: 7–40.
27.
JohnsonKMOuimetWB (2018) An observational and theoretical framework for interpreting the landscape palimpsest through airborne LiDAR. Applied Geography91: 32–44.
28.
JohnsonDLKellerEARockwellTK (1990) Dynamic pedogenesis: New views on some key soil concepts and a model for interpreting Quaternary soils. Quaternary Research33: 306–319.
29.
KarathanasisADMacnealBR (1994) Evaluation of parent material uniformity criteria in loess-influenced soils of west-central Kentucky. Geoderma64: 73–92.
30.
KauffmanG (2009) Modelling karst geomorphology on different time scales. Geomorphology106: 62–77.
31.
KerrJAAverittSD (1921) Soil survey of Garrard County, Kentucky. Washington, DC: Field Operations of the Bureau of Soils, US Department of Agriculture.
32.
KikuzawaKLechowiczMJ (2016) Axiomatic plant ecology: Reflections toward a unified theory for plant productivity. In: HikosakaKNiinemetsUAntenN (eds) Canopy Photosynthesis: From Basics to Applications. Dordrecht: Springer, 399–423.
33.
KingLC (1953) Canons of landscape evolution. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America64: 721–752.
34.
KleidonAMalhiYCoxPM (2010) Maximum entropy production in environmental and ecological systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B365: 1297–1302.
35.
KleidonAZeheEEhretU. (2013) Thermodynamics, maximum power, and the dynamics of preferential river flow structures at the continental scale. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences17: 225–251.
36.
LaneSNRichardsKS (1997) Linking river channel form and process: Time, space and causality revisited. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms22: 249–260.
37.
LapenisAG (2002) Directed evolution of the biosphere: Biogeochemical selection or Gaia?Professional Geographer54: 379–391.
38.
LeopoldLB (1994) A View of the River. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.
39.
LewisPK (1979) Axioms for reading the landscape. Some guides to the American scene. In: MeinigDJacksonJB (eds) The Interpretation of Ordinary Landscapes. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 11–31.
40.
MardenMFullerICHerzigA. (2018) Badass gullies: Fluvio-mass-movement gully complexes in New Zealand’s east coast region, and potential for remediation. Geomorphology307: 12–23.
41.
MarstonRA (2010) Geomorphology and vegetation on hillslopes: Interactions, dependencies, and feedback loops. Geomorphology116: 206–217.
42.
MartinLL (2006) Effects of forest and grass vegetation on fluviokarst hillslope hydrology, Bowman’s Bend, Kentucky. PhD dissertation, University of Kentucky, Lexington, USA.
43.
MuellerTGHartsockTSStombaughTS. (2003) Soil electrical conductivity map variability in limestone soils overlain by loess. Agronomy Journal95: 496–507.
44.
NansonGCHuangHQ (2008) Least action principle, equilibrium states, iterative adjustment and the stability of alluvial channels. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms33: 923–942.
45.
NansonGCHuangHQ (2016) A philosophy of rivers: Equilibrium states, channel evolution, teleomatics and the least action principle. Geomorphology302: 3–19.
46.
NansonGVHuangHO (2017) Self-adjustment in rivers: Evidence for least action as the primary control of alluvial-channel form and process. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms42(4): 575–594.
47.
OmernikJM (1987) Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers77: 118–125.
OzawaHOhmuraALorenzRD. (2003) The second law of thermodynamics and the global climate system: A review of the maximum entropy production principle. Reviews of Geophysics41: 1018.
50.
PhillippeWRBlevinsRLBarnhiselRI. (1972) Distribution of concretions from selected soils of the Inner Bluegrass region of Kentucky. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings36: 171–173.
51.
PhillipsJD (2007) The perfect landscape. Geomorphology84: 159–169.
52.
PhillipsJD (2008) Goal functions in ecosystem and biosphere evolution. Progress in Physical Geography32: 51–64.
53.
PhillipsJD (2009) Landscape evolution space and the relative importance of geomorphic processes and controls. Geomorphology109: 79–85.
54.
PhillipsJD (2011) Emergence and pseudo-equilibrium in geomorphology. Geomorphology132: 319–326.
PimmSL (1991) The Balance of Nature? Ecological Issues in the Conservation of Species and Communities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
63.
PredA (1984) Place as historically contingent process: Structuration and the time geography of becoming places. Annals of the Association of American Geographers74: 279–297.
64.
PrestonNBrierleyGFryirsK (2011) The geographic basis of geomorphic enquiry. Geography Compass5: 21–34.
65.
RayLL (1974) Geomorphology and quaternary geology of the glaciated Ohio River valley; a reconnaissance study. Washington, DC: US Geological Survey Professional Paper PP-826.
66.
RichardsKCliffordN (2008) Science, systems, and geomorphologies: Why LESS may be more. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms33: 1323–1340.
67.
RodbellDTFormanSLPiersonJ. (1997) Stratigraphy and chronology of Mississippi Valley loess in western Tennessee. Geological Society of America Bulletin109: 1134–1148.
68.
RósaPNovákT (2011) Mapping anthropic geomorphological sensitivity on global scale. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie55(1): 109–117.
69.
SackRD (1997) Homo Geographicus: A Framework for Action, Awareness, and Moral Concern. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
70.
SauerCO (1925) The Morphology of Landscape. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
71.
SchaetzlRJThompsonMI (2015) Soils – Genesis and Geomorphology. 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press.
72.
SchummSA (1991) To Interpret the Earth: Ten Ways to Be Wrong. New York: Cambridge University Press.
73.
ShouseMLPhillipsJD (2016) Soil deepening by trees and the effects of parent material. Geomorphology269: 1–7.
74.
SimmonsIG (1993) Interpreting Nature. Cultural Constructions of the Environment. London: Routledge.
75.
SimpsonGG (1963) Historical science. In: AlbrittonCC (ed) The Fabric of Geology. Stanford, CA: Freeman, Cooper & Co., 24–48.
76.
SmithCH (1986) A contribution to the geographical interpretation of biological change. Acta Biotheoretica35: 229–278.
77.
SmithTR (2010) A theory for the emergence of channelized drainage. Journal of Geophysical Research – Earth Surface115: F02023.
78.
SokolovIAKonyushkovDE (2002) On the laws of the genesis and geography of soils. Eurasian Soil Science35: 686–698.
79.
TellerJTGoldthwaitRP (1991) The old Kentucky River; A major tributary to the Teays River. Geological Society of America Special Papers258: 29–42.
80.
TrudgillS (2012) Do theories tell us what to see? The 19th century observations of Darwin, Ramsay, and Bonney on glacial features. Progress in Physical Geography36: 558–566.
81.
TwidaleCR (2004) River patterns and their meaning. Earth-Science Reviews67: 159–218.
82.
WilcockDBrierleyGHowittR (2013) Ethnogeomorphology. Progress in Physical Geography37: 573–600.
