LAND USE AND LAND COVER CHANGE OF HIGH TOCANTINS RIVER BASIN (GOIAS, BRAZIL): INFLUENCE OF PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND THE RELATION WITH THE INDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES
Keywords:geoprocessamento, paisagem, dinâmica espacial
AbstractThe aim of this study is to analyze the land use and land cover in the upper Tocantins river basin, Goias state, based on the spatial changes in the range of 29 years, the influence of the physical aspects of its dynamic and its impacts on indigenous communities. The methodology was based on GIS techniques and literature. The spatial area was defined from the processing of digital eleva tion models (DEM), in reference to the drainage basin confluent to “Serra da Mesa” hydroelectric plant (HEP), northern state of Goiás . Landsat 5 and 8 satelite images were used, which were preprocessed, classified and highlighted. The characterization of the physical environment was carried from the compilation of thematic maps (geological units, geomorphic units and soils) and the MDE. To associate the indigenous community, literature search was performed, searching the literature, publications related to the recent history of Indigenous Territories in the area. The classification resulted in a land cover and land use map with three classes: Cerrado, Anthropogenic cover and Water bodies. Over the past 29 years there was a change in predominant class, from cerrado to anthropogenic cover. This alterations occupy, mainly, areas of Oxisols in flat reliefs, in regional planation surface. In the same period, the scenario of landscapes transformation hit two indigenous communities: the Avá - Canoeiro, with the emergence of HEP, and the Tapuia by land pressure. This spatial configuration directs the conservation of Cerrado remaining (fragments) present in the study area.
How to Cite
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.