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

By

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includes published and unpublished data on the major aspects of karst and will be used to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

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 (km). ...................................................... 52
Table 10. Classification for the worlds regions based on countries. .............................. 54
Table 11. World karst area calculations (km). 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. .................................................................................................................... 55
Table 12. Area calculations for the karst of Russian Federation by type (km). . ......... 55
Table 13. Area calculations for the karst of South America by type (km). .................... 56
Table 14. Area calculations for the karst of Africa by type (km). .................................. 56
Table 15. Area calculations for the karst of North America by type (km). ..................... 57
Table 16. Area calculations for the karst of East and South East Asia by type (km). ... 57
Table 17. Area calculations for the karst of Middle East and Central Asia by type (km).
........................................................................................................................................... 58
Table 18. Area calculations for the karst of Europe by type (km). ................................ 58
xi

Table 19. Area calculations for the karst of Astralasia by type (km). ............................. 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 (km).

60

xiii

Figure 15. Percentages of continent covered by karst in km

64

Figure 16. Comparison using Ford and Williams (2007) verses KROWs 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, landuse, 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 1990s, 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

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

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 Cviji (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 CO or HS. 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 Italys 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.

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 1970s (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 karstboundary 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

15
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.

16
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.

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

18
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 worlds
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 TNCs
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.

20

Figure 5. Images of animals found in karst ecosystems

21

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 dont 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 cavesalkaline settings, cold temperatures, the nonexistence
of light and difficult accessprovide 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.

23

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.

24

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 areas 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
25

pseudokarst. Individual polygons were assigned distribution attributes: karst ID, karst
type, size in km, 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

26

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 KROWs
maps conform to the representation of other current karst mapping projects (Weary et al.,
2008).

27

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.

28

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 cavingin 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.

30

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.
Network of Scientist
Name
A

31

Areas of Study

Contact Information

Auckland Speleo Group

Aggie Speleological Society
Akiyoshi-dai Museum of
Natural History
Alexander, Calvin
Alberquerque, Elaine F.

New Zealand
Texas
Japan

www.asg.org.nz/
stuact.tamu.edu/stuorgs/cave/
akihaku@ymg.urban.ne.jp

Minnesota
Universidade Santa Ursula, Istituto de Ciencias
Biologicas e Ambientais, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

alexa001@umn.edu

Aley, Tom

Ozark Underground Laboratory, Missouri, USA

American Cave Conservation

Association
American Caving Accidents
Andrichouk, Slava
Andrews, Peter

United States of America

www.cavern.org/

United States of America

Ukraine, Poland
Natural History Museum, Department of
Paleontology, UK
Mexico

www.caves.org/pub/aca/
geo@wnoz.us.edu

England
World

t.atkinson@ucl.ac.uk.eastern
www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/speleoatlas/SA
index1.html

Association for Mexican Cave

Studies
Atkinson, Tim
Atlas of Speleothem
Microfabrics

www.amcs

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).

32

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

33

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
34

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.

35

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.

36

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

38

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 sets 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 polygons 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

39

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, nonspatial 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.

40

Table 2. Karst polygon attribute table (PAT).

Field name

Information type

OBJEDTID

A unique identifier assigned by ArcMap.

(e.g. 1,2,3499)
A description of the characteristics of the data assigned
by ArcMap. (e.g. Polygon)
The unique identifier for every karst polygon
(e.g. 1,2, 3499)
A unique type of karst, as from the original source
coverage. (e.g. Carbonate, Evaporite, Pseudokarst)
The location of the karst polygon by content.

Shape
Karst_ID
Karst_Type
(mandatory)
Continent
(mandatory)
Countries
(mandatory)
Area_ sq_m

Shape_ Length

The location of the karst polygon by countries within its

borders.
A measurement of area for each polygon. Calculated
based on the perimeter of the geographical distribution
of the karst polygon.
A measurement of the length of the perimeter of the
karst polygon.

Field/Data
Type
ObjectID
Geometry
Short Integer
Text
Text
Text
Number
(Double)
Number
(Double)

The attributes stored for each karst feature were stored in the KROW polygon attribute
table and include the continent, countries, Karst_Type, Area_sq, Shape_Length, and
Karst_ID.

41

Table 3. KROW polygon attribute table (PAT).

OBJECTID

Karst_
ID

Karst_Type

Countries

Continent

Area_sq

Shape_Length_
m

Carbonate

Mexico

388566

2493

Carbonate

Mexico

738439

3347

Carbonate

Mexico

388566

2493

Carbonate

Mexico

Carbonate

Mexico

3953554
3
388566

34442

5
6

Carbonate

Mexico

Carbonate

Mexico

Carbonate

Mexico

Carbonate

Mexico

10

10

Carbonate

Mexico

5567855
3
5785133
1
1573487
9
1666136
4
388566

42639

North
America
North
America
North
America
North
America
North
America
North
America
North
America
North
America
North
America
North
America

2493

31163
25589
15339
2493

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.

42

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

43

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
24
56
85
106
66
0
15
37

Africa
Asia
Australiasia
Europe
North America
Oceania
South America
World Maps

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).
44

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
Ref_ID (mandatory)
Author
Title
Reference Type
Year
Issue
Pages
Descriptors

Information type
The unique code assigned by RefWorks software to
each reference in the table. Format: 3-digit number.
Authors of each reference.
Title of the associated reference.
Journal Article, Book , ect.
Year in which the reference was cited.
Issue in which the reference was cited
Pages pertaining to document.
Key words that describe the science, location, and
techniques used in the paper.

45

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

Ref_
ID
1

26

46

Authors

Title

Continent

Descript.1

Asfawossen Asrat,
Andy Baker,
Mohammed Umer
Mohammed, Melanie J.
Leng, Peter Van
Calsteren and Claire
Smith.
Giovanni Barrocu;
Michele Muzzu; and
Gabriele Uras.

A high-resolution multi-proxy
stalagmite record from Mechara,
southeastern Ethiopia; palaeohydrological implications for
speleothem palaeoclimate
reconstruction

Africa

Absolute
age

Hydrogeology and vulnerability

map (Epik method) of the
Supramonte karstic system,
north-central Sardinia
Assessment of regional
karstification degree and
groundwater sensitivity to pollution
using hydrograph analysis in the
Velka Fatra Mountains, Slovakia
Management of karst aquifers in
Serbia for water supply

Europe

Karst

Europe

Slovakia

Europe

Serbia

27

Peter Malik.

28

Z. Stevanovic, I.
Jemcov and S.
Milanovic.

Descript.
2
Africa

Descript.
3
Ethiopia

Descript.4

Groundwater

Sardinia

Italy

Carbon

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

47

48
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
49

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
Ref_id
(mandatory)
Karst_id
(mandatory)

Information type
A unique code assigned by RefWorks
software to each reference.
The unique code assigned by
ARCMAP software to each polygon
that represented karst.

Field Type
Number; unique
values
Number; unique
values

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.

50

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 Earths 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).

51

Continent

Table 8. Total karst features represented in the GIS.

Carbonate Evaporite PseudoTotal
Karst
Karst
karst
Polygons

Russian Federation
South America
Africa
North America
East and South East Asia
Middle East & Central
Asia
Europe
Australasia
Worlds total polygons
Worlds karst area (km)

202
461
453
8902
1564
425

0
5
47
77
0
4

0
279
561
183
34
33

202
745
1061
9162
1598
462

872
618
13497
16654361

97
0
230
236036

13
126
1229
1630235

982
744
14956

Total
Area
(km)
3690997
767579
3148247
3626121
2856515
2334377
1441828
654970
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.

Karst Type
Carbonate
Evaporite
Pseudokarst
Total

Table 9. Area calculations for each karst type (km).

Area (km) rounded
Area (km)
16,700,000
16,709,152
200,000
236,103
1,900,000
1,872,843
18,800,000
18,818,099

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
52

(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 km 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.

53

Table 10. Classification for the worlds regions based on countries.

Region

Countries Included

World

Exclude Antarctica, Greenland and Iceland

Russia
Federation plus
South America

Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia,

Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan
Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Falkland
Islands (Malvinas), French Guiana, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru,
South Georgia and the South Sandwich Island, Surinam Uruguay,
Venezuela
Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi,
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
Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize,
Bermuda, Canada, Cayman Islands, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominica,
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)
Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, East Timor, Indonesia
(excluding Papua), Japan, Korea (north and south), Lao, Malaysia,
Mongolia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand,
Vietnam
Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cyprus, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel,
Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Maldives, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan,
Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Syria, Tajikistan,
Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Yemen
Albania, Andorra, Austria Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech, Denmark, Estonia, Faroe
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
American Samoa, Australia, Baker-Howland-Jarvis, Christmas
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.

Africa

North America
(exclude
Greenland)

East and South

East Asia

Middle East and

Central Asia

Europe (exclude
Iceland and
Russia)

Australasia

54

Land Area
km2
133448089
20649781.47
17792882.43

30001574.36

22229293

15638628.9

11129676.65

6125842.012

9611377.312

Table 11. World karst area calculations (km). 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
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

13497
0.00001
776083.90
16709152.67
1228.07
14423.06

Evaporites
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

230
4.62
40310.69
236103.69
1022.09
3157.763

Pseudokarst
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

1229
0.027
297640.24
1872843.52
1510.36
11501.29

55

Table 12. Area calculations for the karst of Russian Federation by type (km). .
Russia Federation Plus
Carbonates
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

202
4.77
776083.90
3690997.23
18272.26
74908.12

Evaporites
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

0
0
0
0
0
0

Pseudokarst
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

0
0
0
0
0
0

Table 13. Area calculations for the karst of South America by type (km).
South America
Carbonate
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

461
0.97
103537.89
498416.97
1081.16
6036.05

Evaporites
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

5
451.73
11417.15
15585.01
3117.00
4216.62

Pseudokarst
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

279
4.29
27546.27
253576.91
908.88
2595.24

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

Africa
Carbonate
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

453
0.531
402003.38
2430464.99
5365.26
22399.21

Evaporites
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

47
121.30
10609.48
47249.95
1005.318
1651.28

Pseudokarst
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

561
1.28
297640.24
670531.74
1195.24
12803.22

Table 15. Area calculations for the karst of North America by type (km).
North America
Carbonate
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

8902
0.00001
315483.95
3364504.51
377.95
5388.60

Evaporites
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

77
4.62
12523.91
66820.08
867.79
2089.64

Pseudokarst
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

183
0.03
70742.25
194796.13
1064.46
5613.99

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

East and South East Asia

Carbonate
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

1564
0.046
435514.40
2682669.68
1715.26
15617.13

Evaporites
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

Pseudokarst
0 Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
0 Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

34
114.41
41898.19
173844.85
5113.08
7429.20

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

Evaporites

Pseudokarst

Count:

425

Count:

Minimum:

1.68

Minimum:

64.60

Minimum:

32.13

Maximum:

714768.55

Maximum:

3860.96

Maximum:

22239.26

Sum:

6250.98

Sum:

Mean:

1562.74

Mean:

5388.26

Standard Deviation:

1446.29

Standard Deviation:

6779.49

Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

2150312.89
5059.56
36507.99

Count:

33

177812.69

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

Europe
Carbonate
Count:

Evaporites
872

Count:

Pseudokarst
97

Count:

13

Minimum:

0.002

Minimum:

15.59

Minimum:

39.91

Maximum:

195421.88

Maximum:

40310.69

Maximum:

5463.19

Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

1323331.28
1517.58
10787.40

Sum:

100129.70

Sum:

18366.79

Mean:

1032.26

Mean:

1412.83

Standard Deviation:

4205.89

Standard Deviation:

1503.08

Table 19. Area calculations for the karst of Astralasia by type (km).
Australasia
Carbonate
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

618
0.01
247876.31
513663.68
831.17
10184.56

Evaporites
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

0
0
0
0
0
0

Pseudokarst
Count:
Minimum:
Maximum:
Sum:
Mean:
Standard Deviation:

126
0.10
42739.75
141306.20
1121.48
4364.21

59

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

Table 20. Percentage of Karst Cover

%

Russia Federation

Total % of Percentage of eight regional-scale

subareas of the Earths surface covered by
Karst
three types of karst (carbonate, evaporate,
Carbonate Evaporite Pseudokarst Cover
and pseudokarst), modified after
Hollingsworth (2009). The table is keyed
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

East & South East

Asia

17.15

0.00

1.11

18.27

Middle East &

Central Asia

19.32

0.06

1.60

20.97

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

Region

61

The maximum karst area (km) 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.

63

64
Figure 15. Percentages of continent covered by karst in km

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

65

Region

Land Area
km2

Percentage
(Ford &
Williams 2007)
12.53
16.13

Maximum Carbonate
Outcrop (km2)
(KROW)
16709153
3690997

Percentage
(KROW)

%
Difference

133448089
20649781

Maximum Carbonate
Outcrop (km2)
(Ford & Williams 2007)
16721876
3331673

World
Russia Federation
plus
South America
Africa
North America
(exclude
Greenland)
East and South
East Asia
Middle East and
Central Asia
Europe (exclude
Iceland and
Russia)
Australasia

12.52
17.87

0.01
-1.74

17792882
30001574
22229293

370809
2773252
4076077

2.08
9.24
18.34

498417
2430465
3364505

2.80
8.10
15.14

-0.72
1.14
3.20

15638629

1688219

10.80

2682670

17.15

-6.36

11129677

2554380

22.95

2150313

19.32

3.63

6125842

1334864

21.79

1323331

21.60

0.19

9611377

592601

6.17

513664

5.34

0.82

66
Figure 16. Comparison using Ford and Williams (2007) verses KROWs 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. Eckerts 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 4030 north and south.

67

Table 22. Attributes of Eckert IV projection.

Eckert IV Equal Area Projection
Parameter
1 Standard Parallel
Central Meridian
Other Meridians

Parallels
Poles
Symmetry
False easting (meters)
False northing (meters)
Units
Datum
Spheroid

Value
For this projection, only one standard parallel is
specified. The other standard parallel is the same
latitude with the opposite sign. The standard parallel is
by definition fixed at 4030'
Straight line half as long as the Equator
Equally spaced semi ellipses concave toward the
central meridian. The outer meridians, 180 east and
west of the central meridian, are semicircles.
Unequally spaced straight parallel lines, perpendicular
to the central meridian. Spacing is greatest toward the
Equator
Lines half as long as the Equator
About the central meridian of the Equator
0.00000
0.00000
Meters
WGS_1984
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.

68

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 km.
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.

69

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 19 highlights the karst of the African continental region. This continent has a
cumulative total of about 3,100,000 km of karst, or 10.49% of the total land cover. This
region has approximately 2,400,000 km of carbonate karst, mostly in the northern part of
the region. Area of pseudokarst totals approximately 700,000 km 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.
Africas 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 its role
associated with weathering of rocks (Kunsky, 1957, Otvos, 1976, Pano1978; 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-

73

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.

74

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 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 km to 440,000 km per polygon and is, on average 1,700 km 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 km to 440,000 km per polygon and is, on average 1,700 km 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,

78

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 km 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
km 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 km to 250,000 km with an average of 800 km per polygon.

79

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 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 km with the minimum polygon area being 0.00001 km and a maximum area of
320,000 km.
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. Mexicos 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 km and of this area 4.31% is covered by karst (approximatly
770,000 km). 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 km
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).

83

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

84

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.

85

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 Surveys 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,

87

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.

88

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 mapbased 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 worlds 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 KROWs 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.

89

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.

90

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-Salgtarjn, SAP 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.

91

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 microbemineral 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.

92

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.

93

ilek V. 1998 The physical and chemical processesof sandstone pseudokarst genesis
(English sum.). In: ilek V., Kopeck 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.
Cviji, 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.

94

Cviji, J., 1903, Das Karstphanomen: Versuch Einer Morphologischen

MonographieGeographische Abhandlungen Herausgegeben Von A. Penck, v. V.H,
3. Wien, p. 218-329.
Cviji, 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 OpenFile 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.

95

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 WaterResources Investigations Report 02-4174, 43-44 p.
Espinasa-Perea, R., 2007, Karst de Mxico, in Coll-Hurtado: Instituto de Geografa,
Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico, 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.

96

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

97

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: 10.1130/00167606(1993)105<0241:USDOTD>2.3.CO;2.

98

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 CO 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 CO 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 dualfracture 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.

99

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 6Al 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. 604608.-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.
Kunsk J. 1957 Typy pseudokrasovch tvar v eskoslovensku. eskoslov. 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 20055160, 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.
Pano V. 1978 Krasov typy podle hledisk geologickch. 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, Whats 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
cavits no calcaires do monde. Un. Intern. Splol.: 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: Highresolution 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. 481493, 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
Fr 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., 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 NZINTIMATE 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

127

Network of Scientist s; gray shading indicates direct correspondence with E. Hollingsworth.

Name
Areas of Study/Location of Work
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 Natural History Japan
akihaku@ymg.urban.ne.jp
Alexander, Calvin
Minnesota
alexa001@umn.edu
Alberquerque, Elaine F.
Universidade Santa Ursula, Istituto de Ciencias Biologicas e Ambientais, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Aley, Tom
Ozark Underground Laboratory, Missouri, USA
American Cave Conservation Association United States of America
www.cavern.org/
American Caving Accidents
United States of America
www.caves.org/pub/aca/
Andrichouk, Slava
Ukraine, Poland
geo@wnoz.us.edu
Andrews, Peter
Natural History Museum, Department of Paleontology, UK
Association for Mexican Cave Studies
Mexico
www.amcs
Arkinson, Tim
England
t.atkinson@ucl.ac.uk.eastern
Atlas of Speleothem Microfabrics
World
www.gly.uga.edu/railsback/speleoatlas/SAindex1.ht
ml
Audra, Philippe
Departement de geographie, Italian alps, France,
philippe.audra@unice.fr
Switzerland
Auler, Augusto
Departamento de Geografia, Universidade Federal a.auler@bristol.ac.uk; aauler@hotmail.com
de Minas Gerais, Brazil
B
Badino, Giovanni
Universit di Torino, Dipartimento di Fisica Generale, Italy
Baichtal, James
Alaska Panhandle, USA Panhandle
jbaichtal@fs.fed.us
Bahn, Paul G.
UK
Barany-Kevei, Ilona
Department of Climatology and Landscape, University of Szeged, Hungary
Bartsiokas, Antonis
Department of History and Ethnology, Democritus University of Thrace, Greece
Bat Conservation International
World
http://www.batcon.org/
Beaus Cave
Switzerland
http://www.beatushoehlen.ch
Beck, Barry
USA
bbeck@pela-tenn.com
Beddows, Patricia A.
School of Geographical Sciences, University of
beddows@mcmaster.ca
Bristol, UK, Mexico
Bednarik, Robert G.
Australian Rock Art Research Association, Australia
Bedos, Anne
Universit Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, France

128

Beltram, Gordana
State Nature Conservation Authority, Slovenia
Bernasconi, Reno
Switzerland
Beron, Petar
Bulgaria
beron@mail.bg
Bishop, Dick
RSK (UK) Limited, US, AAPG
r.bishop@rskuklimited.com; www.rskuklimited.com
Bonacci, Ognjen
Civil Engineering Faculty, Hydrology Department, Croatia
Borneo Caving Expedition Online Educational Project
http://www.northcoast.com/~rchilds/
Bosak, Pavel
Czech Republic, Slovakia
bosak@gil.cas.cz
Boston, Penny
Cave and Karst Research Program, New Mexico
pboston@nmt.edu
Institute of Mining and Technology, New Mexico,
USA
Bottrell, Simon
University of Leeds, School of Earth Sciences, UK
Boutin, Claude
Laboratoire d'Ecologie, Universite P. Sabatier de Toulouse, France
Boyd, Jim
Ontario Geological Survey, Ontario, Canada
jim.boyd@ontario.ca
Boyer, Douglas
US Department of Agriculture, Appalachian Farming Systems Research, West Virginia, USA
Brady, James
California State University at Los Angeles, Department of Anthropology, USA
Brancelj, Anton
National Institute of Biology, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Brison, David N.
France
British Cave Research Ass.
England
http://www.sat.dundee.ac.uk/~arb/bcra/ or
http://www.bcra.org.uk/
Brook, George
University of Georgia, Georgia, USA, Africa
gabrook@uga.edu
Brooks, Simon
UK
Brunton, Frank
Ontario Geological Survey, Ontario, Canada
frank.brunton@ontario.ca
Bulog, Boris
Department of Biology, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Buck, Marcus J.
Ontario, Canada
mbuck@karstsolutions.com
Bueno, Heber
Karst information Portal, Columbia
mystisch11@hotmail.com;
espeleocolsantander@yahoo.com
BUMAK
Bogazici University Speleological Society, Bogazii bumakyonkur@googlegroups.com;
University Speleological Society, Turkey
bumak@boun.edu.tr
Bunnell, Dave
USA
Burri, Ezio
Italy (Southern)
burri@univaq.it
C
Cabro, Patrick
France
patric.cabrol@ual.es
Calaforra, Jose M.
Spain- Gypsum karst
jmcalaforra@ual.es
Camacho, Ana I.
Cientfico Titular CSIC, Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales, Madrid, Spain

Camassa, Michele M
Caving UK
Chamberlain, Andrew
Chenoweth, Sean
Christiansen, Kenneth
Cigna, Arrigo
Ciochon, Russell
Clark, Arthur
Clark, Brian
Cobolli, Marina
Coles, Rick
Coineau, Nicole
Constantin, Silviu

129

Cordingley, John
Crawford, Nicholas
Craven, Stephen
Crispim, Jose Antonio
Crothers, George M.
Culver, Dave
D
Davies, Gareth
Davis, Donald G.
Davis, Emily (Adviser)
Day, Michael
Daoxian, Yuan
Debevec, Vanja
Decu, Vasile
Deharveng, Louis
Derooij, Rob
de Waele, Jo

Istituto Sperimentale di Biologia del Sottosuolo "P. Parenzan", Latiano (Brindisi), Italy
United Kingdom
www.caving.uk.com
University of Sheffield, Department of Archaeology and Prehistory, UK
Department of Geography, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA.
Department of Biology, Grinnell College, USA
Societ Speleologica Italiana, Cocconato (Asti),
arrigocigna@tiscali.it
Italy
University of Iowa, Department of Anthropology, USA
Australian speleological Federation, Australia
akclarke@utas.eduau
Gunung Mulu World Heritage Area, Park Manager, enquiries@mulupark.com
Sarawak, Malaysia
Department of Human and Animal Biology, La Sapienza University, Rome, Italy
Canadian Cave, Canada,
ric.coles@shaw.ca; webguy@cancaver.ca
Observatiore Ocanologique de Banyuls, Universite P. et M. Curie, France
Department of Geospeleology, "Emil Racovita"
Silviu.Constantin@go.ro
Institute of Speleology, Bucharest, Romania
UK
Center for Cave & Karst Studies, Department of Geography and Geology, Western Kentucky University
South Africa
sacraven@mweb.co.za.caves
Portugal
j.a.crispim@fc.ul.pt
University of Kentucky, William S. Webb Museum of Anthropology, USA
American University, Department of Biology, USA
Appalachians
gdavies@directvinternet.com
USA
Speleobooks, Schoharie, New York
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Department of mickday@csd.uwm.edu
Geography, Caribbean and USA
China
dxyuan@gladiolus.gxnu.edu.cn
Park Skocjanske jama, Slovenia
Institutul de Speologie "Emil Racovita", Romania,
Laboratoire d'Entomologie, Universit Paul Sabatier, France
Switzerland, Netherlands
Rob.derooij@unine.ch
International Journal of Speleology, Sardinia
jo.dewaele@unibo.it

Dilsiz, Cuneyt
Diaz, Pedro
Drew, Dave
Dreybrodt, Wolfgang

130

Drysdale, Russell
Dublyansky, Victor
Dunkley, John
Dunne, Suzanne
Dykes ,Peter
E
Eaves-Johnson, K. Lindsay
Eavis, Andy
Edgell, Stuart
Ek, Camille
Ekmekci, Mehmet
Elery-Hamilto-Smith
Espinasa, Ramone
Eriksen, Berit
F
Farrant, Andrew R.
Fanlquist, Lynne
Fairchild, Ian
Farrant, Andy
Faulkner, Trevor
Field, Malcom S.
Filippov, Andrej G.
Filipponi, Marco
Finlayson, Clive
Ford, Derek (Adviser)

Faculty of Earth and Life Sciences, Vrije University, Netherlands

Caribbean Water Science Center, USGS, Puerto
pldiaz@usgs.gov
Rico
Trinity College, Geography Department, Ireland
University of Bremen, Institute of Experimental
dreybrodt@t-online.de
Physics, Germany
Australian , Italy
Russell.Drysdale@newcastle.edu.au
Department of Geology, Perm State University, Russia.
Australia
Department of Geography, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland
Australian speleological Federation, Australia
pdykes@ix.net.au
Department of Anthropology, University of Iowa, USA
UK
Persian Gulf
sedgell@netspeed.com.au
Belgium
camille.ek@ulg.ac.be
Turkey
ekmekci@hacettepe.edu.tr IUCN/UNESCO, Australia
elery@melb.alexia.net.au
University of Mexico, Mexico
ramone@cablevision.net.mx
University of Aarhus, Department of Prehistoric Archaeology, Denmark
British Karst, Persian Gulf
arf@bgs.ac.uk
US Geological Survey (Austin, TX), Karst Interest lfahlqst@usgs.gov
Portal
Keele University, School of Earth Sciences & Geography, UK
ritish Geological Survey, UK
Norway
tfaulkne@globalnet.co.uk
Environmental Protection Agency, Editor of Journal field.malcome@epa.gov
of Cave and Karst Studies, US
East Siberian Research Institute of Geology, Geophysics and Mineral Resources, Irkutsk, Russia
Switzerland, Great Britain
marcofilipponi@epfl.ch
Director of the Gibraltar Museum, Gibraltar
School of Geography & Geology, McMaster
dford@mcmaster.ca
University, World

Forti, Paolo
Frankland, John
Frumkin, Amos
G
Gabrovsek, Franci

Istituto Italiano Di Speleologia, University of Bologna, Italy

UK
Department of Geography, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel

131

University of Bremen Germany, Dinaric Karst,

gabrovsedk@zrc-sazu.si
Slovenia
Galdenzi, Sandro
Instituto Italiano di Speleologia, Ancona, Italy
Gauchon, Christophe
Laboratoire de Gographie de l'Universit de Savoie, France
Genty, Dominique
France
dominique.genty@cea.fr
Gergely, Horvath
Hungary
Horvath.gergely@freemail.hu
Gibson, Dave
UK
Gillieson, David (Adviser)
James Cook University, School of Tropical
gillieson@jcu.edu.au
Environment Studies & and Geography, Australia
Gines, Angel
Department de Biologia (rea d'Ecologia),
agines@educacio.caib.es
Universitat de les Illes Balears, Mallorca
Glover, Ian
Institute of Archaeology, University College London, UK
Goldie, Helen
Department of Geography, University of Durham, UK
Goodchiled, Mike
GIS and Karst
good@geog.ucsb.edu
Goodwin, Mick
Australian speleological federation, Australia
michaeldamiangodwin@yahoo.com.au
Gradzinski, Michal
Poland, Oregon
gradzinm@ing.uj.edu.pl
Griffiths, Paul
British Columbia, GIS and Karst, Vancouver Island pgrigg@island.net
Grimes, Ken
Regolith Mapping, Australia
ken-grimes@h140.aone.net.au
Gross, Eliza
US Geological Survey, US Karst Map,
egross@usgs.gov
Gnay, Gultekin. International Research and Application Center for Karst Water
Gutierrez, Francisco
Spain
fgutier@unizar.es
Hacettepe University, Ankara
Turkey
Gunn, John
Department of Environmental and Geographical
j.gunn@hud.ac.uk
Sciences, Huddersfield University, UK and Africa
Gunung Mulu World Heritage Area
Sarawak
enquiries@mulupark.com
H
Halliday, William R. (Adviser)
USA
Hamilton-Smith, Elery (Adviser)
Cave and Karst Management, Charles Sturt
elery@alphalink.com.au
University, New South Wales, Australia
Huselmann, Philippe
Institute of Geography, University of Fribourg,
praezis@speleo.ch

Hervant, Frdric. Hydrobiologie et

cologie souterraines
Hildreth-Werker, Val
Hill, Carol A.
Hobbs, Horton
Hoetzl, Professor
Holsinger, John R.
Hope, Jeanette
Hose, Louise D.
Howarth, Frank G.
Howes, Chris
Hoyt, John

132

Hubert,Trimmel
Hunt, Chris
Hynes, Doug
I
Iliffe, Thomas
Issa, Arie
Institute of Karst Geology
J
James, Julia
Jeannin, Pierre-Yves
Jianhua, Cao
Johnson, Steve
Jones, Trevor
Juberthie, Christian
Judson, David
K
Karp, Danuta

Switzerland
Universit Claude-Bernard Lyon I, France
Hillsboro, New Mexico, USA
Geology Department, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Wittenberg University, Dept of Biology, USA
Germany
heinz.hoetzl@agk.uni-karlsruhe.de
Biological Sciences, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virgina, USA
River Junction Research, New South Wales, Australia
National Cave and Karst Research Institute, Carlsbad, New Mexico, USA
Bernice P. Bishop Museum Honolulu, Hawaii, USA
UK
Aquifer Sciences Program Manager, Edwards
Aquifer Authority, San Antonio, Texas, USA
Australia
hubbert.trimmel@reflex.at
Geographical Sciences, University of Huddersfield, UK
Ontario Geological Survey, Ontario, Canada
poljeprotector@gmail.com
Texas A&M University-Galveston, Dept. of Marine Biology, USA
Israel, Palestine
issar@bgumail.bgu.ac.il
Guilin, China
University of Sydney, School of Chemistry,
Australia
11 Rue Emile-Argand, Centre of Hydrogeology,
Switzerland
Karst Dynamics Laboratory, Institute of Karst
Geology, China
Senior Hydrogeologist, Edwards Aquifer Authority,
National Risk Assessments Project, Australia,
Laboratoire souterrain du C.N.R.S., Moulis, France
UK

jmi@chem.usyd.edu.au

Australia (northern)

karp@octa4.net.au

pierre-yves.jeannin@chyn.unine.ch
jhcao@karst.edu.ch; jhcaoch@yahoo.com
San Antonio, Texas, USA
trevor.jones@ga.gov.au

KarstBase

Cave and Karst Database, Global

Kambesis, Pat
Karst Information Portal
Kashima, Naruhiko
Kazuko, Urushibara Yoshino
Kennedy, Jim
Kiernan, Kevin

Hoffman Environmental Research Institute, USA

Databases, Publications, Maps
Ehime University, Japan
Japan, Philippines
Philippines, PSS
University of Tasmania, Australia, Tasmania

Kim, Burmshick
Kim, Yongcheol

University of Arkansas, South Korea,

Korean Institute of Geosciences & Mineral
yckim@kigam.re.kr
Resources, South Korea
Korean Institute of Geology and Mines, South
yjkim@kigam.re.kr
Korea,
Institute of Geological Sciences, National Academy klim@speleogenesis.info
of Science, Kiev
Karst Research Institute, Scientific Research Center of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts,
Postojna, Slovenia
Karst Research Institute ZRC SAZU, Postojna, Slovenia
Karst Research Institute, ZRC SAZU, Ljubljana, Slovenia
Slovene Museum of Natural History Ljubljana, Slovenia,
Department of Geography, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA

Kim, Yongje
Klimchouk, Alexander (Adviser)
Knez, Martin

133

Kogovsek, Janja. Professional Adviser

Kranjc, Andrej
Krytufek, Boris
Kueny, Jeff
L
Labegalini, Jose Ayrton
LaMoreaux, Philip E.
Lascu, Cristian
Latham, Alf
Laumanns, Michael
Lauritzen, Stein-Erik
Lavoie, Kathleen H.
Lera, Thomas
Lindsey, Bruce
Lino, Claton
Llona, Ana C.

http://network.speleogenesis.info/directory/bibliogra
phy/karstbase/index.php
www.karstportal.org
kazukouy@ceres.dti.ne.jp
jkennedy@batcon.org
kevin.kiernan@utas.edu.au;
kevink@postoffice.utas.au

Brazil
ja.labegalini@uol.com.br
P.E. LaMoreaux & Associates, Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USA
E. Racovitza Speleological Institute, Cluj, Romania
University of Liverpool, Archaeology Dept, UK
Iraq, Caves
michael.laumanns@bmf.bund.de
University of Bergen, Geologisk Institutt, Norway stein.lauritzen@geol.uib.no
Professor of Biology and Dean, Faculty of Arts and Science, Plattsburgh State University of New York
USA
US Geological Survey, US Karst Map
blindsey@usgs.gov
Brazil
cflino@uol.com.br
Pinto. Laboratorio de Prehistoria, Asturias, Spain

Longley, Glenn
Loucks, Robert
Lowe, David (Adviser)
Lu, Yaoru
Lundberg, Joyce
M
Madalaine, Eric
Maire, Richard
Martens, Koen
Martini, Jacques
Mathieu, Jacques
Mauries, Jean-Paul
McFarlane, Donald

134

Messana, Giuseppe
Meyer-Rochow, V.B.
Michie, Neville
Middleton, Gregory
Mihevc, Andrej
Milanovic, Petar
Miller, Rebecca
Miller, Thomas
Milner ,Steve
Minton, Mark-Bill
Mixon, Bill
Moldovan, Oana
Moravian Karst
Mouret, Claude
Mueller, Bill
Muhammad, Ros Fatihah
Munteanu, Anca

Southwest Texas State University, Edwards Aquifer Research and Data

University of Texas at Austin, Bureau of Economic Geology, USA
British Geological Survey, UK
China
yrlu@mail.tongji.edu.cn
Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, Carleton University, Canada
World Cave Database, France
eric.madelaine@sophia.inra.fr
Universit Bordeaux, France
rmaire@dymset.u-bordeaux.fr
Department of Freshwater Biology, Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences, Belgium
Council for Geosciences (former Geological
jacquesmartini07@orange.fr
Survey), South Africa, Pretoria
Hydrobiologie et cologie souterraines, Universit Claude-Bernard Lyon, France
Laboratoire de Zoologie-Arthropodes, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle de Paris, France
The Claremont Colleges, California, Caribbean
dmcfarla@jsd.claremont.edu
biospeleologist
CNR - ISE Sezione di Firenze, Italy, Africa
giuseppe.messana@ise.cnr.it
Faculty of Engineering and Science, International University Bremen, Germany
New South Wales, Australia
Department of Primary Industries, Australia , Tasmania
Karst Research Institute, Postojna, Slovenia
Yugoslavia
Archaeologist in the Universit de Lige, Belgium, Lige
University of Puerto Rico, Puerto Rico, Guatemala, tmiller@uprm.edu
Belize
Australian Speleological Federation, Australia
milner@adelaide.on.net
Association for Mexican Cave Studies, Mexico
mminton@nmhu.edu
Mexico
bmixion022@austin.rr.com;
bmixon@alumni.uchicago.edu
Institut du Speleologie, Cluj, Romania
www.moravskykras.net/en/information.html
France
Department of Geography, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, USA.
Malaya
fatihah77@hotmail.com
Romania
munteanca@yahoo.com

Mylroie, John
N
Nader, Fadi
Nicks, Linda
Northup, Diana E.
O
Olson, Rick
Onac, Bogdan

135

Oromi, Pedro
Osborne, Armstrong
Otte, Marcel
P
Palmer, Art (Adviser)
Parise, Mario
Pavuza, Rudolf
Peden, Dan
Pentecost, Allan
Perritaz, Luc
Philippine Speleological Society
Ponta, Gheorghe M.
Price, Liz
Proudlove, Graham
Q
Quinif, Yves
R
Raeisi, Ezzat
Reddell, James R.
Ribera, Carles
Rodrguez-Vidal, Joaquin
Rollins, Jon
Romero, Aldemaro
Rossi, Carlos

Department of Geosciences, Mississippi State University, USA

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium, Italy
fadinader@hotmail.com
Source Water Protection, Ontario, Canada
nicksl@thamesriver.on.ca
University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico
Ecologist, Mammoth Cave National Park, USA
University of Cluj, Dept. of Mineralogy, Romania, bonac@cas.usf.edu
Europe (SE)
Universidad de La Laguna, Departamento de Biologia Animal, Tenerife, Spain
School of Development and Learning, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
Universit de Lige, Service de Prhistoire, Lige, Belgium
State University of New York at Oneonta, Earth Sciences Department, USA
Italy
m.parise@ba.irpi.cnr.it
Museum of Natural History Vienna, Austria
Cave Links A-z
Cavenut@pobox.com
King's College London, School of Health and Life Sciences, UK
Institute of Geography, University of Fribourg, Switzerland
Philippines
www.pss.org.ph
Romania
gponta@pela.com
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Manchester Museum, Department of Zoology, UK
Belgium

bougui@skynet.be

Dept. of Geology, Shiraz University, Iran

raeisi@sun01.susc.ac.ir
University of Texas at Austin, Texas Memorial Museum, USA
University of Barcelona, Facultat de Biologia, Spain
Department of Geology, University of Huelva, Spain
Canadian Rockies
jrollins@telus.net
Macalester College, Environmental Studies Program and Biology, USA
Departamento de Petrologia y Geoquimica, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain

Russell, William
S
Sabol, Martin
Salomon, Jean-Noel
Sambugar, Beatrice
Sasowsky, Ira D.
Sauro, Ugo

Mexico

whrussel@gmail.com

136

Department of Geology and Paleontology, Comenius University in Bratislava, Slovakia

France
courrege@montaigne.u-bordeaux.fr
Museum of Natural History, Verona, Italy
Department of Geology, University of Akron, USA
University of Padova, Dipartimento di Geografia, ugo.sauro@unipd.it
Italy
Sbordoni, Valerio
Department of Biology, Tor Vergata University, Roma, Italy
Schindel, Geary
Edwards Aquifer Authority, San Antonio, Texas
Schroeder, Jacques
Australia, Northwest Territory
schroeder.jacques@ugam.ca
Sebela, Stanka
Karst Research Institute ZRC SAZU, Postojna, Slovenia
Self, Charles
UK
Semikolennykh, Andrey
Russia, Arctic Karst
semik@biolith.msk.ru
Senior, Kevin
Italy
Shaw, Ian
Canadian Caver, Canada, Ontario
lynnian@shaw.ca
Shaw, Raynor
Hong Kong Geological Survey
jabrshaw@netvigator.com
Shaw, Trevor (Adviser)
UK and Honorary Research Fellow, Karst Research Institute, Postojna, Slovenia
Shopov, Yavor Y.
Faculty of Physics, University of Sofia, Bulgaria
yvshopov@phys.uni-sofia.bg
Shrewsbury, Carolina
USA
Shtober, Nurit
Israel
nshtober@research.haifa.ac.il
Simek, Jan
Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, USA
Silagi, Mario
Brazil
msilagi@mandic.com.br
Sket, Boris (Adviser)
Biotechnical Faculty, Department of Biology, Slovenia
Slabe, Tadej
Karst Research Institute, Postojna, Slovenia
Smart, Chris
University of Western Ontario, Department of Geography, Canada
Smith, Dave
New Zealand
dwsmith@doc.govt.nz
Smith, Marion O.
USA
Song Linhua, Karstology and Speleology c/o Institute of Geography, China
Group
Spate, Andy
Australia
andyspate@aliencamel.com
Speleogenesis
Information exchange, Collaboration
http://network.speleogenesis.info
Sptl, Christoph
Universitt Innsbruck, Institut fr Geologie und Palontologie, Austria
Stevanovic, Zoran
Serbia, Montenegro
zstev@eunet.yu

Steward, Paul
Stierman, Donald
Stoch, Fabio
Stone, Andrea
Swain, Bruce
T
Taiti, Stefano
Tarhule-Lips, Rozemarijn
Tao Tang, Department of Geography and
Planning
Taylor, Steven J.
Tercafs, Raymond
Thurgate, Mia
Tolan-Smith, Chris
Tooth, Anna F.
Trajano, Eleonora
Trimmel, Hubert

137

Tyc, Andrzej
U
Ukrainin Institute of Speleology
Urbani, Franco
Urich, Peter
V
Vale, Able
Vakhrushev, Boris
Van, Tran Tan
Velebit Nature Park
Veni, George
Viles, Heather
W
Waltham, Tony (Adviser)

USA,
Department of Geology, University of Toledo, Ohio, USA
Museum of Natural History, Italy
Univ. of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Dept. of Art History, USA
Australia
bruceswain@yahoo.com
Istituto per lo Studio degli Ecosistemi, Firenze, Italy
University of Oklahoma, Department of Geography, USA
State University of New York, College at Buffalo, USA
Illinois Natural History Survey, Center for Biodiversity, USA
Institute of Zoology - Dept of Animal Physiology, University of Liege, Belgium
Jenolan Caves Reserve Trust, New South Wales, Australia
UK
UK
Instituto de Biocincias, Departamento de Zoologia, Brazil
Retired Director of the Department of Karst and Cave Science, Museum of Natural History, Vienna,
Austria
University of Silesia, Department of Geomorphology, Poland
Ukraine
Venezuela
Philippines, Tropical Karst

Institute@speleoukraine.net
urbani@cantv.net
pbu@waikato.ac.net

Caribbean, Puerto Rico

Tavrichesky University, Ukraine
Vietnam
Croatia
National Cave and Karst Institute, San Antonio,
New Mexico
University of Oxford, School of Geography, UK

enlacepr@caribe.net
trantv@hn.vnn.vn
velebit@gs.htnet.hr
gveni@nickri.org

Department of Civil Engineering, Nottingham Trent University, UK

Webb, Rauleigh
Weber, Axel
Werker, Jim C.
White, Susan
Wildberger, Andres
Williams, Paul (Adviser)

138

Woo
Wood, Paul (Adviser)
Wookey, Cambridge
Worthington, Stephen R.H.
X
Xuewen, Zhu
Y
Yaoru, Lu
Yonge, C.J.
Yoshimura, Kazuhisa
Z
Zander, Dieter
Zhang, Shouyue

State Cave Recorder and Map Curator , Australia

rauleigh@iinet.net.au
Universitat Hamburg, Germany
USA
Australia
s.white@latrobe.edu.au
Swiss Institute for Speleology & Karst Studies, La wildfisch@bluewin.ch
Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland
University of Auckland, Department of Geography, p.williams@auckland.ac.nz
New Zealand
Korea (caves/volcanic karst)
wooks@kangwon.ac.kr; happycaver@hotmail.com
University of Loughborough, Department of Geography, UK
UK
Worthington Groundwater, Dundas, Ontario, Canada
China (South)

zhanghai5225@yahoo.com

Chinese Academy of Engineering, China

Alberta Karst Consulting, Alberta, Canada
Japan

yrlu@mail.tongji.edu.cn

University of Hamburg, Germany

China

kazz@chem.rc.kyushu-u.ac.jp

syzhangjin822@yahoo.com.cn

139