Antropojenik Jeomorfoloji Yaklaşımı İle Topografyadaki İnsan Etkisinin Modellenmesi: Muğla İlinin Kuzeybatı Sahası Örneği

Öz

İnsan faaliyetlerinin doğal koşullardaki baskı ve etki boyutlarının artması, jeomorfolojik unsurlarda da değişimlere yol açmaktadır. Bu çalışmada Muğla ilinin kuzey ve batısındaki 6 ilçe kapsamında zamansal ve mekânsal açıdan farklı kriterler kullanılarak antropo-jeomorfolojik etki yoğunluğunun modellenmesi ve ilişkisel bağlantılarının tespit edilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Antropo-jeomorfolojik ayak izi modeli 5 temel etki alanı ve 10 ana parametreden oluşmaktadır. Bu parametreleri; eğim, topografik rölyef, yol ağı, arazi kullanımı, maden sahalarının dağılışı, antropojenik baskı yoğunluğu, 40 yıllık NDVI ve NDBI analizleri, rölyef değişim yoğunluğu ve M-SLLAAC verileri oluşturmaktadır. Veriler, antropo-jeomorfolojik yaklaşım kapsamında korelasyona tabi tutulmuş, elde edilen kantitatif bulgularla, jeomorfolojik unsurlardaki baskı, değişim ve stresi ifade eden ayak izi yoğunluğunun dağılışı ortaya konmuştur. Model bulgularına göre araştırma sahası toplam alanının %4,7’si (270,3 km2) yüksek düzeyde antropo-jeomorfolojik ayak izi yoğunluğuna sahiptir. Bu sahalar, Batı Menteşe Dağları ve plato sahasındaki (Muğla-Yatağan arası ve Milas kuzeyi) maden alanları ile Bodrum yarımadası ve Güllük kıyılarında yoğunlaşmaktadır. Yüksek düzeyde antropo-jeomorfolojik ayak izinin olduğu sahalarda diğer alanlara göre rölyef değişimi ve arazi yüzey sıcaklığının (AYS) 4 kat artış gösterdiği saptanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Antropojenk Jeomorfoloji
• İnsan Etkisi
• Rölyef Değişimi
• CBS
• Muğla

Modelling Human Impact on Topography with Anthropogenic Geomorphology Approach: Example of the Northwest Field of Muğla Province

Öz

The increasing pressure and impact of human activities on natural conditions leads to changes in geomorphological elements. In this study, it is aimed to model the density of anthropo-geomorphological impact using different temporal and spatial criteria within the scope of 6 districts in the north and west of Muğla province and to determine their relational connections. Anthropo-geomorphological footprint model consists of 5 main impact areas and 10 main parameters. These parameters consist of slope, topographic relief, road network, land use, distribution of mining sites, anthropogenic pressure intensity, 40-year NDVI and NDBI analyses, relief change intensity and M-SLLAAC data. The data were correlated within the scope of anthropo-geomorphological approach, and the distribution of footprint density, which expresses the pressure, change and stress on geomorphological elements, was revealed with the quantitative findings obtained. According to the model findings, 4.7% (270.3 km2) of the total area of the research area has a high level of anthropo-geomorphological footprint density. These areas are concentrated in the western Menteşe Mountains and mining areas in the plateau area (between Muğla-Yatağan and north of Milas) and in the Bodrum peninsula and Güllük coasts. Relief change and land surface temperature (LSS) were found to increase 4 times in areas with high anthropo-geomorphological footprint compared to other areas.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Anthropogenic Geomorphology
• Human Impact
• Relief Change
• GIS
• Muğla

Kaynakça

1. Aguilar, R. G., Owens, R., & Giardino, J. R. (2020). The expanding role of anthropogeomorphology in critical zone studies in the Anthropocene. Geomorphology, 366, 107165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2020.107165
2. Akyüz, H. S., Basmenji, M., Kırkan, E., Aksoy, M. E., Dikbaş, A., & Erturaç, M. K. (2021). Muğla Fayı, GB Türkiye: Morfometrik, jeomorfolojik ve Paleosismolojik Yeni Bulgular. Yerbilimleri, 42(2), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.17824/yerbilimleri.868411
3. Amanambu, A. C., & Mossa, J. (2024). Machine learning insights of anthropogenic and natural influences on riverbed deformation in a large lowland river. Geomorphology, 446, 108986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2023.108986
4. Aylar, F., Uygun, S., & Zeybek, H. İ. (2024). Antopojenik jeomorfoloji kapsaminda topografik değişimin belirlenmesine bir örnek: Pazarsuyu Çayı Havzası (Giresun). Kesit Akademi, 10(40), Article 40. https://doi.org/10.29228/kesit.78038
5. Bauer, A. M., Edgeworth, M., Edwards, L. E., Ellis, E. C., Gibbard, P., & Merritts, D. J. (2021). Anthropocene: Event or epoch? Nature, 597(7876), 332-332. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02448-z
6. Brandolini, P., Cappadonia, C., Luberti, G. M., Donadio, C., Stamatopoulos, L., Di Maggio, C., Faccini, F., Stanislao, C., Vergari, F., Paliaga, G., Agnesi, V., Alevizos, G., & Del Monte, M. (2020). Geomorphology of the Anthropocene in Mediterranean urban areas. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment, 44(4), 461-494. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309133319881108
7. Brown, A. G., Tooth, S., Bullard, J. E., Thomas, D. S. G., Chiverrell, R. C., Plater, A. J., Murton, J., Thorndycraft, V. R., Tarolli, P., Rose, J., Wainwright, J., Downs, P., & Aalto, R. (2017). The geomorphology of the Anthropocene: Emergence, status and implications. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 42(1), 71-90. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.3943
8. Bruno, L., Meli, M., & Garberi, M. L. (2024). Human-induced landscape modification in the in the last two centuries in the Po delta plain (Northern Italy). Anthropocene, 48, 100453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2024.100453

9. Cao, W., Sofia, G., & Tarolli, P. (2020). Geomorphometric characterisation of natural and anthropogenic land covers. Progress in Earth and Planetary Science, 7(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-019-0314-x Castree, N. (2014). The Anthropocene and Geography I: The Back Story. Geography Compass, 8(7), 436-449. https://doi.org/10.1111/gec3.12141
10. Cendrero, A., Forte, L. M., Remondo, J., & Cuesta-Albertos, J. A. (2020). Anthropocene geomorphic change. Climate or human activities? Earth’s Future, 8(5), e2019EF001305. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019EF001305
11. Cendrero, A., Remondo, J., Beylich, A. A., Cienciala, P., Forte, L. M., Golosov, V. N., Gusarov, A. V., Kijowska-Strugała, M., Laute, K., Li, D., Navas, A., Soldati, M., Vergari, F., Zwoliński, Z., Dixon, J. C., Knight, J., Nadal-Romero, E., & Płaczkowska, E. (2022). Denudation and geomorphic change in the Anthropocene; a global overview. Earth-Science Reviews, 233, 104186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earscirev.2022.104186
12. Chakraborty, A.,. (2024). Rethinking the Anthropocene: Not a time-transgressive event but a sudden rupture on the geologic time scale. Anthropocene, 48, 100454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2024.100454
13. Chirico, P. G., Bergstresser, S. E., DeWitt, J. D., & Alessi, M. A. (2021). Geomorphological mapping and anthropogenic landform change in an urbanizing watershed using structure-from-motion photogrammetry and geospatial modeling techniques. Journal of Maps, 17(4), 241-252. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2020.1746419
14. Crutzen, P.J., Stoermer, E.F. (2000). The Anthropocene. Global Change Newsletter. Global Change Newsletter, 41(17). http://www.igbp.net/publications/globalchangemagazine/globalchangemagazine/globalchangenewslettersno4159.5.5831d9ad13275d51c098000309.html
15. Dikbaş, A. (2023). Gökova Fay Zonu’nun morfometrik özellikleri ve aktif tektonik açısından önemi, Doğu Akdeniz. Journal of Advanced Research in Natural and Applied Sciences, 9(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.28979/jarnas.1087937
16. Edgeworth, M., Gibbard, P., Walker, M., Merritts, D., Finney, S., & Maslin, M. (2023). The stratigraphic basis of the Anthropocene Event. Quaternary Science Advances, 11, 100088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qsa.2023.100088
17. Ellis E.C, & Ramankutty N., (2007). Putting people in the map: anthropogenic biomes of the world. Frontiers in the Ecology and the Environment 6: 439–447. https://doi.org/10.1890/070062
18. Ellis, E. C. (2017). Physical geography in the Anthropocene. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment, 41(5), 525-532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309133317736424
19. Erkal T. & Taş B.,. (2022). Değişen yeryüzü ve insanın etkisi (bir uygulamalı jeomorfoloji yaklaşımı) (1. bs). Nobel Kitabevi.
20. Ertek, A.,. (2023). Antroposen, antroposfer, antropojenik jeomorfoloji. Pegem Yayınevi.
21. Ertek, T. A. (2017). Antropojenik Jeomorfoloji: Konusu, kökeni ve amacı. Türk Coğrafya Dergisi, 69, Article 69. https://doi.org/10.17211/tcd.319409 Gibbard, P., Walker, M., Bauer, A., Edgeworth, M., Edwards, L., Ellis, E., Finney, S., Gill, J. L., Maslin, M., Merritts, D., &
22. Ruddiman, W. (2022). The Anthropocene as an event, not an Epoch. Journal of Quaternary Science, 37(3), 395-399. https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.3416
23. Gibbs, H. K., & Salmon, J. M. (2015). Mapping the world’s degraded lands. Applied Geography, 57, 12-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.11.024
24. Goudie, A. (1993). Human influence in geomorphology. Geomorphology, 7(1), 37-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-555X(93)90011-P
25. Guisan, A., Weiss, S. B., & Weiss, A. D. (1999). GLM versus CCA spatial modeling of plant species distribution. Plant Ecology, 143(1), 107-122. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009841519580
26. Head, M. J., Zalasiewicz, J. A., Waters, C. N., Turner, S. D., Williams, M., Barnosky, A. D., Steffen, W., Wagreich, M., Haff, P. K., Syvitski, J., Leinfelder, R., Mccarthy, F. M. G., Rose, N. L., Wing, S. L., An, Z., Cearreta, A., Cundy, A. B., Fairchild, I. J., Han, Y., … Summerhayes, C. P. (2022). The proposed Anthropocene Epoch/Series is underpinned by an extensive array of mid-20th century stratigraphic event signals. Journal of Quaternary Science, 37(7), 1181-1187. https://doi.org/10.1002/jqs.3467
27. Henselowsky, F., Rölkens, J., Kelterbaum, D., & Bubenzer, O. (2021). Anthropogenic relief changes in a long-lasting lignite mining area (‘Ville’, Germany) derived from historic maps and digital elevation models. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 46(9), 1725-1738. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.5103
28. Hooke, R. LeB. (2000). On the history of humans as geomorphic agents. Geology, 28(9), 843-846. https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(2000)28<843:OTHOHA>2.0.CO;2
29. Iwahashi, J., Kamiya, I., Matsuoka, M., & Yamazaki, D. (2018). Global terrain classification using 280 m DEMs: Segmentation, clustering, and reclassification. Progress in Earth and Planetary Science, 5(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40645-017-0157-2
30. Jefferson, A. J., Wegmann, K. W., & Chin, A. (2013). Geomorphology of the Anthropocene: Understanding the surficial legacy of past and present human activities. Anthropocene, 2, 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2013.10.005
31. Jennes. (2006). Jenness Enterprises—ArcView Extensions; Topographic Position Index. https://www.jennessent.com/arcview/tpi.htm
32. Kellner, A. W. A. (2024). Anthropocene epoch proposal rejected—Does it really matter? Anais Da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, 96, e2024962. https://doi.org/10.1590/0001-376520242024962
33. Kılıç, N. C. A., & Kalyoncuoğlu, Ü. Y. (2017). Muğla İli ve Çevresi İçin Depremsellik Ve Sismik Tehlike Analizi. Mühendislik Bilimleri ve Tasarım Dergisi, 5(3), https://doi.org/10.21923/jesd.348890
34. Kopar, İ., Çelik, M. A., & Bayram, H. (2018). Kapadokya Volkanik Provensi’ndeki volkan rölyefinin antropojenik degradasyonu üzerine bir analiz. Türk Coğrafya Dergisi, 71. https://doi.org/10.17211/tcd.424377
35. Kumral, R., & Yazıcı, Ö. (2024). Ankara’nın Gölbaşı İlçesinde Yerşekilleri Üzerindeki Antropojenik Etkiler. Coğrafya Dergisi, 0(49),. https://doi.org/10.26650/JGEOG2024-1523354
36. Li, J., Yang, L., Pu, R., & Liu, Y. (2017). A review on anthropogenic geomorphology. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 27(1), 109-128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-017-1367-7
37. Luengo, M. S., D’Amico, G., Pommarés, N., & Fucks, E. (2025). Natural and anthropogenic processes and landforms in the eastern sector of the Buenos Aires Province, Argentina (from Pleistocene to Anthropocene). Anthropocene, 49, 100457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2024.100457
38. Mark, D. M. (1975). Geomorphometric Parameters: A Review and Evaluation. Geografiska Annaler: Series A, Physical Geography, 57(3-4), 165-177. https://doi.org/10.1080/04353676.1975.11879913
39. Marsh, G. P. (1864). Man and nature, or physical geography as modified by human action. University of Washington Press.
40. Myneni, R. B., Hall, F. G., Sellers, P. J., & Marshak, A. L. (1995). The interpretation of spectral vegetation indexes. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing, 33(2), 481-486. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing. https://doi.org/10.1109/TGRS.1995.8746029
41. Natale, J., Vitale, S., Repola, L., Monti, L., & Isaia, R. (2024). Geomorphic analysis of digital elevation model generated from vintage aerial photographs: A glance at the pre-urbanization morphology of the active Campi Flegrei caldera. Geomorphology, 460, 109267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2024.109267
42. Nigam, R., Luis, A., & Kotha, M. (2024). Evaluation of efficiency of the index of potential anthropic geomorphology at meso level: A case study of Goa State, India. The Geographical Journal, 190(1), e12540. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12540
43. Nir, D.,. (1983). Man, a Geomorphological Agent (1. bs). Reidel. https://link.springer.com/book/9789027714015
44. Özşahin, E. (2013). Asi Nehri Deltasının (Hatay) Antropojenik Jeomorfolojisi. Öner, E. (Ed.) Profesör Doktor İlhan Kayan’a Armağan. (ss. 925-934). İzmir: Ege Üniversitesi Yayınları.
45. Pica, A., Lämmle, L., Burnelli, M., Del Monte, M., Donadio, C., Faccini, F., Lazzari, M., Mandarino, A., Melelli, L., Perez Filho, A., Russo, F., Stamatopoulos, L., Stanislao, C., & Brandolini, P. (2024). Urban Geomorphology Methods and Applications as a Guideline for Understanding the City Environment. Land, 13(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/land13070907
46. Price, S. J., Ford, J. R., Cooper, A. H., & Neal, C. (2011). Humans as major geological and geomorphological agents in the Anthropocene: The significance of artificial ground in Great Britain. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 369(1938), 1056-1084. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0296
47. Remondo, J., Forte, L. M., Cendrero, A., Cienciala, P., & Beylich, A. A. (2024). Human-driven global geomorphic change. Geomorphology, 457, 109233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2024.109233
48. Rick, T., Ontiveros, M. Á. C., Jerardino, A., Mariotti, A., Méndez, C., & Williams, A. N. (2020). Human-environmental interactions in Mediterranean climate regions from the Pleistocene to the Anthropocene. Anthropocene, 31, 100253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2020.100253
49. Roccati, A., Faccini, F., Luino, F., De Graff, J. V., & Turconi, L. (2019). Morphological changes and human impact in the Entella River floodplain (Northern Italy) from the 17th century. CATENA, 182, 104122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2019.104122
50. Rosol, C., Schäfer, G. N., Turner, S. D., Waters, C. N., Head, M. J., Zalasiewicz, J., Rossée, C., Renn, J., Klingan, K., & Scherer, B. M. (2023). Evidence and experiment: Curating contexts of Anthropocene geology. The Anthropocene Review, 10(1), 330-339. https://doi.org/10.1177/20530196231165621
51. Rózsa, P., & Novák, T. (2011). Mapping anthropic geomorphological sensitivity on a global scale. Zeitschrift Für Geomorphologie, Supplementary Issues, 109-117. https://doi.org/10.1127/0372-8854/2011/0055S1-0041 Rózsa, P., Incze, J., Balogh, S., & Novák, T. J. (2020). A Novel Approach to Quantifying the Degree of Anthropogenic Surface Transformation – the Concept of ‘Hemeromorphy’. Erdkunde, 74(1), 45-58.
52. Sipahi, S. K., & Bağcı, H. R. (2024). Antropojenik Jeomorfoloji’nin Yükselişini Niceliklendirme: Bibliometrik Bir Analiz. Mavi Atlas, 12(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.18795/gumusmaviatlas.1453132
53. Sofia, G., Marinello, F., & Tarolli, P. (2016). Metrics for quantifying anthropogenic impacts on geomorphology: Road networks. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 41(2), 240-255. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.3842
54. Steffen, W., Grinevald, J., Crutzen, P., & McNeill, J. (2011). The Anthropocene: Conceptual and historical perspectives. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 369(1938), 842-867. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0327
55. Su, S., Tian, J., Dong, X., Tian, Q., Wang, N., & Xi, Y. (2022). An Impervious Surface Spectral Index on Multispectral Imagery Using Visible and Near-Infrared Bands. Remote Sensing, 14(14). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs14143391
56. Sümer, Ö., Alak, A., & Tekin, A. (2020). Antropojen ve Antroposen Kavramlarının Tarihsel Gelişimine Yerbilimsel Bir Bakış. Türkiye Jeoloji Bülteni, 63(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.25288/tjb.605167
57. Syvitski, J., Ángel, J. R., Saito, Y., Overeem, I., Vörösmarty, C. J., Wang, H., & Olago, D. (2022). Earth’s sediment cycle during the Anthropocene. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, 3(3), 179-196. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-021-00253-w
58. Szabó, J., Dávid, L., & Loczy, D. (2010). Anthropogenic Geomorphology: A Guide to Man-Made Landforms. Springer Science & Business Media.
59. Tarolli, P. (2016). Humans and the Earth’s surface. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 41(15), 2301-2304. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.4059
60. Tarolli, P., & Sofia, G. (2016). Human topographic signatures and derived geomorphic processes across landscapes. Geomorphology, 255, 140-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2015.12.007
61. Tarolli, P., Cao, W., Sofia, G., Evans, D., & Ellis, E. C. (2019). From features to fingerprints: A general diagnostic framework for anthropogenic geomorphology. Progress in Physical Geography: Earth and Environment, 43(1), 95-128. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309133318825284
62. Taşoğlu, E., Öztürk, M. Z., Yazıcı, Ö. (2024). High Resolution Köppen-Geiger Climate Zones of Türkiye, International Journal of Climatology, 118, https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.8635
63. Uncu, L., & Karakoca, E. (2021). Antropo-jeomorfolojik bir yaklaşımla Bilecik (Merkez ilçe) taş ocaklarının mekânsal ve zamansal değişimi. Türk Coğrafya Dergisi, 77. https://doi.org/10.17211/tcd.933685
64. Ursu, A., Chelaru, D.-A., Mihai, F.-C., & Iordache, I. (2011). Anthropogenic landform modeling using GIS techniques case study: Vrancea region. Geographia Technica, 6(1), 91-100.
65. Uzun, M. (2020a). Antropojenik Jeomorfoloji Kapsamında Rölyefin Değişim Analizi: Ataşehir (İstanbul) Örneği. Coğrafi Bilimler Dergisi, 18(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.33688/aucbd.684790
66. Uzun, M. (2020b). Dilderesi Havzası’nda (Gebze-Dilovası) Antropojenik Jeomorfoloji: Değişimler, Boyutları ve Etkileri. lnternational Journal of Geography and Geography Education, 41. https://doi.org/10.32003/igge.623378
67. Uzun, M. (2021). Antropojenik Kaynaklı Jeomorfolojik Değişimlerin Oluşmasındaki Faktörlerin Coğrafi Analizi: Maltepe İlçesi (İstanbul) Örneği. Öneri Dergisi, 16(56). https://doi.org/10.14783/maruoneri.888364
68. Uzun, M. (2023). Antropojenik Jeomorfoloji Yaklaşımı ile Marmara Adası’nda Mermer Ocaklarından Kaynaklı Değişimlerin Analizi. Doğu Coğrafya Dergisi, 28(50). https://doi.org/10.5152/EGJ.2023.23071
69. Uzun, S. M. (2024). The Change Model of the Relief within the Scope of Anthropogenic Geomorphology using Geographical Information Systems and Remote Sensing Techniques on the Coasts of Izmit Gulf and its Surroundings. Gelecek Vizyonlar Dergisi, 8(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.29329/fvj.2024.1047.1
70. Verburg, P. H., Dearing, J. A., Dyke, J. G., Leeuw, S. van der, Seitzinger, S., Steffen, W., & Syvitski, J. (2016). Methods and approaches to modelling the Anthropocene. Global Environmental Change, 39, 328-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2015.08.007
71. Waters, C. N., Turner, S. D., Zalasiewicz, J., & Head, M. J. (2023). Candidate sites and other reference sections for the Global boundary Stratotype Section and Point of the Anthropocene series. The Anthropocene Review, 10(1), 3-24. https://doi.org/10.1177/20530196221136422
72. Witze, A. (2024). Geologists reject the Anthropocene as Earth’s new epoch—After 15 years of debate. Nature, 627(8003), 249-250. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00675-8
73. Xiang, J., Li, S., Xiao, K., Chen, J., Sofia, G., & Tarolli, P. (2019). Quantitative Analysis of Anthropogenic Morphologies Based on Multi-Temporal High-Resolution Topography. Remote Sensing, 11(12), Article 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs11121493
74. Yavuz, A. B., Türk, N., & Koca, M. y. (2002). Muğla Yöresi Mermerlerinin. Mineralojik, Kimyasal Fiziksel ve Mekanik özellikleri. Jeoloji Mühendisliği Dergisi, 26(1), Article 1.
75. Zalasiewicz*, J., Williams, M., Steffen, W., & Crutzen, P. (2010). The New World of the Anthropocene. Environmental Science & Technology, 44(7), 2228-2231. https://doi.org/10.1021/es903118j
76. Zalasiewicz, J., Head, M. J., Waters, C. N., Turner, S. D., Haff, P. K., Summerhayes, C., Williams, M., Cearreta, A., Wagreich, M., Fairchild, I., Rose, N. L., Saito, Y., Leinfelder, R., Fiałkiewicz-Kozieł, B., An, Z., Syvitski, J., Gałuszka, A., McCarthy, F. M. G., Sul, J. I. do, … Zinke, J. (2024). The Anthropocene within the Geological Time Scale: A response to fundamental questions. Episodes Journal of International Geoscience, 47(1), 65-83. https://doi.org/10.18814/epiiugs/2023/023025
77. Zha, Y., Gao, J., & Ni, S. (2003). Use of normalized difference built-up index in automatically mapping urban areas from TM imagery. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 24(3), 583-594. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160304987
78. Zhang, J., Wang, Y., & Li, Y. (2006). A C++ program for retrieving land surface temperature from the data of Landsat TM/ETM+ band6. Computers & Geosciences, 32(10), 1796-1805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2006.05.001