National Botanical Institute, Private Bag X7, 7735, Claremont, South Africa.
Environ Monit Assess. 1995 Jan;37(1-3):159-77. doi: 10.1007/BF00546887.
The desertification debate in South Africa has benefitted greatly in recent years from the contributions of a wide range of disciplines. In this paper we review the conflicting and supporting evidence for degradation in the eastern Karoo as reported in recent archaeological, historical, and stable carbon isotope studies as it relates to three key aspects of the debate: the precolonial environment, the rate and nature of change, and the relative contributions of humans and climate to the process. First, all studies suggest a greater grassiness at some time in the past, but researchers disagree on the timing of the switch to more shrubby conditions in the eastern Karoo. Second, regional rainfall records for the past 2 decades reveal an above-average rainfall period, and numerous long-term surveys show an increase in grass cover over the same period. These findings question the expanding Karoo hypothesis as well as the argument that the Karoo's carrying capacity has decreased in recent years. Finally, the relative responsibilities of humans and climate in the degradation process remain poorly understood and generally have not formed the focus of investigation.
近年来,南非的荒漠化辩论受益于广泛学科的贡献。在本文中,我们回顾了最近的考古学、历史学和稳定碳同位素研究中报告的有关东卡鲁退化的相互矛盾和支持性证据,这些证据与辩论的三个关键方面有关:前殖民环境、变化的速度和性质,以及人类和气候对这一过程的相对贡献。首先,所有研究都表明过去某个时候的草原面积更大,但研究人员对东卡鲁向更灌木状条件转变的时间存在分歧。其次,过去 20 年的区域降雨记录显示出一个高于平均水平的降雨期,许多长期调查显示同期草皮覆盖率增加。这些发现对不断扩大的卡鲁假说以及卡鲁近年来承载能力下降的论点提出了质疑。最后,人类和气候在退化过程中的相对责任仍未得到充分理解,而且通常也不是调查的重点。