During ten field seasons, in the format of the scientific and educational expedition “Flotilla of Floating Universities”, whose concept is based on the synthesis of science and art, many researches and educational, volunteer and publishing projects and events have been implemented in the Volga region, the Caspian region, the Don region and the Urals. The research areas of the tenth field season in 2024 (Samara–Saratov Volga region) focused on: a) stratigraphic and astrochronological analysis of sections of Upper Cretaceous and Paleogene sediments, b) studying the role of living matter in the evolution of geoecosystems with special attention to biosimilar bodies (paleosoils, hardgrounds), c) analyzing the distribution of cosmic matter in natural environments in the zone of the “Saratov meteor shower” in 1918, and d) the history of the Great academic expeditions in the 18th century (the Volga routes of I.I. Lepekhin, P.S. Pallas, and I.P. Falk). The key scientific and educational projects were a field meeting of the RAS Commission for the Study of the Heritage of Outstanding Scientists (V.I. Vernadsky section) and a field session of the Moscow Society of Naturalists (MOIP) on the Volsk–Saratov section of the expedition’s main route.

A brief analysis of modern interdisciplinary directions in science as the basis for its further development is given. The intense development of the theory of self-organization, synergetics, fractal theory, and the theory of complex systems and especially the modern development of nanoscience and nanotechnologies are noted. The commonality and difference of these scientific directions and their prospects are shown.

The paper is devoted to the outstanding Russian scientist Vladimir I. Vernadsky, who is one of the founders of ecology. As a student of V.V. Dokuchaev, he developed his teacher’s ideas of a systematic dynamic approach to the study of nature and introduced a deep scientific ecological content into the concepts of the biosphere and the noösphere. V.I. Vernadsky is the founder of a complex of modern Earth sciences (geochemistry, biogeochemistry, radiology, and hydrogeology) and the creator of many scientific schools. In his scientific work, he covered many research areas, from geology to the study of the role of living matter in geochemical cycles, from soil science to the biosphere, the increasing influence of scientific thought, human activity in the biosphere and its transformation into the noösphere. The importance of agriculture in the biosphere and the noösphere is considered. The biosphere is an area of active life on Earth (troposphere, hydrosphere and part of the lithosphere), the composition, structure and energy of which are mainly due to the activity of living organisms. The noösphere is its thinking shell. Agriculture, whose most important part are grassland ecosystems, is an important component of the biosphere, being a reproducible, autotrophic sustainable resource (energetical, environmental, food and feed). In light of the pressing environmental problems facing the world, environmental education and environmental thinking are a priority for the development of the biosphere, the noösphere and agriculture.

Based on V.I. Vernadsky’s teaching of the biosphere and modern scientific data, an attempt was made to analyze the mechanisms of the dynamics of modern global processes using the example of climate changes. Possible causes of the warming, both natural and anthropogenic, observed in the last century are considered. It is shown that it is the increase in temperature that causes the increase in the concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere, and not vice versa, as follows from the greenhouse effect hypothesis. This seems to be the main cause for the low effectiveness of any international efforts to stabilize the climate. The course of natural processes, as well as the evolution of the biosphere as a whole, has an unstable, cyclical nature, running according to its own laws. Particular attention is paid to V.I. Vernadsky’s doctrine of the biosphere, his views on the role of reason and scientific research in solving problems inevitably arisen in the course of evolution on Earth, caused by the rapidly developing, from a historical standpoint, humanity. Scientific research is a reliable defender of both the interests of mankind and the biosphere as a whole. This was V.I. Vernadsky’s basis of his positive outlook on the future of our civilization and the biosphere.

The open-air exhibition “Glaciers from the Arctic to Moscow” aims to present the interdisciplinary issues of complex cosmoglobal aspects and mechanisms of interaction between the geospheres, which are the product of climate change spanning the entire history of the planet and continuously affecting ecosystems. The exhibition is organized at the Botanical Garden of Moscow State University in collaboration with the Earth Science Museum of Moscow State University as a cluster of the Youth Museum. A synthetic version of the distribution of glacial covers in the territory of the East European Plain and a version of the most commonly accepted scale of glaciations and interglaciations of the Quaternary period with the main astrochronological reference points have been specially developed and designed to be easily understood by a wide range of visitors to the exhibition. Special attention is paid to Milanković’s cycles, and original information stands have been created to reflect their work. The natural basis of the exhibition is formed by a group of different-sized erratic boulders, arranged according to the reconstructed location of the rocks that form them in their parent locations, modeling the “glacier route” on the East European Plain. By analyzing the “travel notes” in the form of systems of characteristic grooves and “tan crusts,” as well as the composition of the rocks, together with each visitor, it is possible to reconstruct the path of a particular boulder, and, with the help of information boards, to try to understand the scenario of the glacier’s development, the history of the region, and the planet as a whole. The created exhibition can be positioned as a universal conceptual and design solution for the space of a university science museum.

The article, based on materials from the Moscow State University Archives, examines the activities of the Botanical Garden of Moscow University during the Great Patriotic War (1941–1945). Using a systematic approach, the article traces changes in the main parameters of the Botanical Garden’s structural and functional organization under the influence of adverse external factors. It is shown how, in the context of the crisis caused by the war, which led to a shortage of resources for scientific activities, the areas of research and educational work were transformed, and the composition and structure of the Botanical Garden’s plant collections, as well as the number and organizational structure of its scientific and auxiliary staff, changed. Special attention is paid to the personality of K.I. Meyer, who headed the Botanical Garden in 1940–1948.

Of fundamental and priority applied importance are new scientific and practical results obtained at the V.R. Williams Federal Research Center of Forage Production & Agroecology for the study of natural food resources in Russia, based on modern knowledge, materials and technologies. For all 11 natural and economic regions of Russia (Northern, Northwestern, Volga-Vyatka, Central, Central Chernozem, Volga, North Caucasian, Ural, West Siberian, East Siberian, and Far Eastern), agro-landscape and ecological zoning of land and forage ecosystems has been developed. The following materials were obtained for each area: a map M 1:2,500,000, a legend, a database on land, a database on forage lands, a database on negative processes, a classification of forage lands, a classification of deer pastures (where available), recommendations for forage production and environmental management in agriculture. The research used the Map of the Soil and Ecological Zoning of Russia from the Faculty of Soil Science of Lomonosov Moscow State University, as well as other numerous sources. When creating and developing new highly productive and resistant plant varieties and nature-like technologies based on zoning, science and industry will be able to use local natural and climatic resources with the greatest efficiency and minimize the development of negative processes.

The article talks about the important role played by the rectilinear-directing mechanism in the history of world science and technology. Using the example of pantograph, an early mathematical instrument, we will trace the development of this design, unique in its simplicity, over time and show rare examples of these devices from the collection of the Museum of Bauman Moscow State Technical University. The widespread use of pantographs dates back to the 18th–19th centuries, which allows us to reveal the relationship between natural sciences (the body of knowledge about the Earth, natural objects, phenomena and processes) and engineering, purely technical disciplines, using the example of the use of these scientific instruments in the activities of naturalists and scientists and inventors. Until recently, in mechanical engineering, the use of pantograph mechanisms made it possible to solve the problems of producing parts with complex shaped surfaces on copying machines without the use of CNC systems. Nowadays, copying machines with pantographs continue to be produced, but rather for hobbies, leisure, and artistic processing of materials. The authors’ choice of the topic is dictated by the infrequent mention of such tools and mechanisms in modern Russian publications and sources.

The old hypothesis by Academician V.I. Vernadsky of the biosphere being a geological force to build the surface and immediate interior of our planet is indirectly supported based on statistical data. According to occurrence data on findings of all known animal specimens and according to some characteristics of the tectonic activity of the Earth, the presence of several previously unknown cycles shortening from cycle to cycle (approx. By a factor of 1.51) over about a billion years, is substantiated. This leads to an idea of a cause-and-effect relationship between these two different categories of cycles. The influence of tectonics on biota, to one degree or another, has long been known. However, due to the mentioned cycles being rather accelerated, it is difficult to imagine that such strong acceleration in the tectonic cycles could arise due to some intra-tectonic causes, whereas the accelerated nature of biotic evolution due to some intrabiotic causes is quite possible. So, a conclusion arises of the mentioned contracting tectonic cycles being modulated by biota. Possible mechanisms of such influence are hypothesized, their clarification requiring additional research. This conclusion is revolutionary for geology and reveals biotic evolution’s previously unknown role as an active creator of global tectonic (cyclic) processes at a new, quantitative level, which is also revolutionary for evolutionary biology. But, regardless of these conclusions, the mentioned decreasing cyclicity is of interest itself, for the first time (statistically) speaking about the accelerated nature of evolution over such vast time periods.

The article analyzes geotourism perspectives based on natural history museums. Significant trends for the integrated development of geotourism and natural history museums are formulated. These trends allow revealing prospective views on the tourist potential of the territory. In order to clarify the geotourism development potential at the place of the Earth’s geochronological key stages, several museums were analyzed in conjunction with the geotoponyms of geological systems in the world. A geoheritage interpretation model, correlating ex situ museums and in situ objects, is developed. It includes territorial aspects and substantive formats of interpretation, depending on the target audience and the format of interaction with geoheritage. Geoheritage evaluation includes three groups of criteria (scientific, educational and geotourism), each being estimated to summarize approaches for the museum representation. The criteria are ranged according to the comparison purpose of in situ and ex situ forms. The variety of geoheritage interpretation forms allows suggesting recommendations for geotourism development. One symbolically significant way is the museumification of in situ and ex situ objects to correlate the museum network and the network of protected areas as a complex tourist infrastructure. For the Perm Region as a historically significant place of the Permian geological system discovery, the priority is to develop a complex plan to integrate the possibilities of geoheritage representation through museum forms and in the natural environment. In view of the objective scientific data, the Perm Region has no GSSP of the Permian system; therefore the role of the “symbolic stratotype” should have the Permian Period Museum as the basic object of the geotourism infrastructure and the starting point of tourist routes. The supportive role in the Permian geoheritage preservation and representation belongs to the network of municipal and university museums.