Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Received September 28, 2012; revised November 1, 2012; accepted November 10, 2012
ABSTRACT
The quantitative analysis of drainage system is an important aspect of characterization of watersheds. Morphometry is
measurement and mathematical analysis of landforms. The present study is an attempt to evaluate the drainage mor-
phometrics of Upper South Koel Basin using Remote Sensing and GIS approach. A morphometric analysis was carried
out to describe the topography and drainage characteristics of Upper South Koel watershed. The stream numbers, orders,
lengths and other morphometric parameters like bifurcation ratio, drainage density, stream frequency, shape parameters
etc. were measured. The drainage area of Upper South Koel watershed is 942.4 sq km and the drainage pattern is den-
tritic. The watershed was classified as 6th order drainage basin. The low values of bifurcation ratio and drainage density
suggest that the area has not been much affected by structural disturbances. The study reveals that the different geo-
morphic units in the study area i.e. Structural hills, Pediments, Valley fills, Pediplains formed under the influence of
permeable geology, are moderate to nearly level plains, with medium to low drainage density (<2.0) & low cumulative
length of higher order streams . Such studies can be of immense help in planning and management of river basins.
INDIA
Pandra
!
±
23°30'0"N
23°30'0"N
!
Chanho
!
!
Jingi ! Choreya
!
Hannat Tangar
Kairo
!
Rantu
!
JHARKHAND Makunda
23°20'0"N
23°20'0"N
!
!
Itki
Chhati
!
Nagri
!
Bero
Legend
!
Settlement Locations
Major River
0 9 18 km
Streams
Projection-UTM,Spheroid/Datum-WGS 84 Upper South Koel Watershed
23°30'0"N
±
23°30'0"N
23°20'0"N
23°20'0"N
Legend
Alluvium Fault(Confirmed)
Granite Gneiss Lineament/Fracture (Confirmed)
Hornblende Schist Lineament/Fracture (Inferred)
& Amphibolite
Laterite
23°10'0"N
0 9 18 km
Metabasic Dyke
23°10'0"N
Projection-UTM,Spheroid/Datum-WGS 84 Schist
provides a list of the main parameters with their descrip- are described below. The linear aspect computations of
tion and the formulae used to calculate them. the basin and the sub-basins are presented in Tables 2(a)
and (b).
6. Result and Discussion
6.1.1. Stream Number (Nu)
The total drainage area of Upper South Koel watershed is
It is obvious that the total number of streams gradually
942.40 sq km and has been divided into four sub basins
decreases as the stream order increases. With the appli-
based on water divide concept for morphometric analysis
cation of GIS, the number of streams of each order and
(Figure 3) .The development of drainage network in a
the total number of streams was computed.
region is dependent on the lithology, structure, topogra-
phy, rainfall apart from endogenetic and exogenic influ-
6.1.2. Stream Order (U)
ences. The drainage is mainly dentritic. Based on drain-
Stream ordering was done based on the method proposed
age order, the watershed has been classified as sixth or-
by Strahler [7].The streams with no tributaries are desig-
der basin.
nated as order 1. These channels normally flow only dur-
Morphometric analysis of drainage network developed
ing wet conditions. The second order streams are those
in the study area can help a lot in understanding the geo-
having first order streams as its tributaries. When two
morphic processes and hydrological characteristic of the
second order streams join they give rise to third or- der
watersheds under study. The linear, relief and areal as-
streams and so on. When streams of different orders join,
pects of the watershed and sub-basins have been ana-
they give rise to a stream having higher value among the
lyzed to understand the morphometrics of the basin.
two.
Application of this ordering procedure through GIS
6.1. Linear Aspects
shows that the drainage network of the study area is of
Computation of the linear aspects such as stream order, sixth order. Among the sub-basins, sub-basin I is of sixth
stream number for various orders, bifurcation ratio, order whereas sub-basin II, sub-basin III and sub-basin
stream lengths for various stream orders and length ratio IV are of fifth order.
±
23°30'0"N
23°30'0"N
SUB-BASIN I
SUB BASIN II
SUB BASIN III
SUB BASIN IV
23°20'0"N
23°20'0"N
Legend
1 Order
2 Order
3 Order
4 Order
5 Order
0 9 18 km 6 Order
Sub-Basins
Projection-UTM,Spheroid/Datum-WGS 84
84°50'0"E 85°0'0"E 85°10'0"E 85°20'0"E
Table 2. (a) Linear aspects of the Upper South Koel Basin; (b) Linear aspects of the Upper South Koel Basin.
(a)
Basin/ Perimeter Area
Stream Numbers in Different Orders Order Wise Total Length of Streams (in km)
Sub-Basin (in km) (in sq km)
N1 N2 N3 N4 N5 N6 Total N1 N2 N3 N4 N5 N6 Total
Sub-Basin I 74.31 234.9 199 91 39 23 46 398 149.64 76.13 28.62 13.1 29.52 297.01
Sub-Basin II 80.78 290.25 177 86 47 19 45 374 180.74 78.34 41.15 14.19 20.22 334.64
Sub-Basin III 56.68 175.78 152 69 19 37 20 297 121.09 49.95 14.51 24.57 14.35 224.52
Sub-Basin IV 67.09 240.24 136 69 32 18 14 269 138.42 59.27 27.22 13.15 12.46 250.52
Upper South
138.42 941.17 664 315 137 97 79 46 1338 589.89 263.69 111.5 65.01 47.03 29.52 1106.64
Koel
(b)
Basin/
Mean Stream Length Stream Length Ratio(RL) Bifurcation Ratio (Rb)
Sub-Basin
N1 N2 N3 N4 N5 N6 Total 2/1 3/2 4/3 5/4 6/5 1/2 2/3 3/4 4/5 5/6 Mean
Sub-Basin I 0.75 0.84 0.73 0.57 0.64 3.53 1.12 0.86 0.78 2.89 2.33 1.69 1.38
Sub-Basin II 1.02 0.91 0.86 0.75 0.45 3.99 0.89 0.94 0.87 0.6 2.05 1.83 2.47 0.42 1.35
Sub-Basin III 0.8 0.72 0.76 0.66 0.72 3.66 0.9 1.05 0.87 1.09 2.20 3.63 0.51 1.85 1.64
Sub-Basin IV 1.02 0.86 0.85 0.73 0.89 4.35 0.84 0.99 0.86 1.22 1.97 2.15 1.78 1.28 1.44
Upper South
0.88 0.84 0.81 0.67 0.6 0.64 4.44 0.95 0.96 0.83 0.89 1.07 2.11 2.29 1.41 1.23 1.72 1.75
Koel
6.1.3. Stream Length (L) orders of a basin [5]. The stream length ratio between
Stream length is defined as the total length of all streams streams of different order in the study area shows varia-
of each order in the drainage basin. Strahler [7] sug- tion. The stream length ratio in the watershed varies be-
gested that the stream length of a particular order is in- tween 0.82 - 1.15. This variation might be attributed to
versely proportional to the stream order i.e. length of variation in slope and topography, indicating the late
stream decreases with increase in stream order. Sub-ba- youth stage of geomorphic development in the streams of
sin II has highest cumulative length of streams whereas the study area [11].
Sub-Basin I has lowest cumulative length of streams.
6.1.6. Bifurcation Ratio (Rb)
6.1.4. Mean Stream Length (Lsm) According to Schumm [12], the term bifurcation ratio
Mean stream length is a characteristic property related to may be defined as the ratio of the number of the stream
the drainage network components and its associated ba- segments of given order to the number of segments of the
sin surfaces [7]. Generally, cumulative length of stream next higher orders. The bifurcation ratio in the watershed
of a particular order is measured and the mean length of varies between 1.41 - 2.29. The low bifurcation values
that order is obtained by dividing the cumulative stream are indicative of less structural complexity which in turn
length by number of segments of that order. has not distorted the drainage pattern of the basin [7].
The mean stream length in the watershed varies from
0.60 to 0.88. The mean stream length of any given order 6.2. Areal Aspects
is greater than that of the lower order and lesser than that The aerial aspects of the drainage basin such as drainage
of its next higher order. It is observed that in the water- density (Dd), stream frequency (Fs), texture ratio (T),
shed, mean stream length decreases with increase in elongation ratio (Re), circularity ratio (Rc) and form fac-
stream order. Such anonymity might be due to variations tor ratio (Rf), Length of Overland ratio (Lo) were calcu-
in slope and topography. lated and results have been given in Table 3
Upper South Koel 1.17 1.42 1.66 0.71 0.62 0.39 0.43
Rc values approaching 1 indicates that the basin shapes is 0.002 while those of the sub-basins are given in Table
are like circular and as a result, it gets scope for uniform 4. The lower values may indicate the presence of base-
infiltration and takes long time to reach excess water at ment rocks that are exposed in the form of small ridges
basin outlet. The Rc of the whole basin is 0.62, while and mounds with lower degree of slope [15]. Low relief
those of the 5 sub-basins are shown in Table 3. It is a ratios also indicate that the discharge capabilities of the
significant ratio, which indicates the dentritic stage of a watershed are low and chances of groundwater potential
basin. are good.
±
23°30'0"N
23°30'0"N
23°20'0"N
23°20'0"N
Legend
Slope ( in Degree)
0 - 0.5
0.5 - 2
2-5
0 9 18 km 5 - 10
10 - 21
Projection-UTM,Spheroid/Datum-WGS 84
84°50'0"E 85°0'0"E 85°10'0"E 85°20'0"E
±
23°30'0"N
23°30'0"N
23°20'0"N
23°20'0"N
Legend
Structural Hill Pediment Inselberg
Linear Ridge Complex
Inselberg Pediplain
0 9 18 km Residual Hill Valley
Pediment River/WaterBody
Projection-UTM,Spheroid/Datum-WGS 84
84°50'0"E 85°0'0"E 85°10'0"E 85°20'0"E
Pediments, Pediplain, Valley, Ridges have been deline- 2000, pp. 13-17.
ated based on image characteristics. Valleys are the un- [5] R. E. Horton, “Erosional Development of Streams and
consolidated sediments deposited by streams/rivers, Their Drainage Basins: Hydrophysical Approach to
normally in narrow fluvial valley and constitute boulders, Quantitative Morphology,” Bulletin Geological Society of
cobbles, pebbles; gravels, sand and silt, cover nearly America, Vol. 56, 1945, pp. 275-370.
doi:10.1130/0016-7606(1945)56[275:EDOSAT]2.0.CO;2
34.5% of the study area. Pediplains are gently sloping,
smooth surfaces of erosional bed rocks resulting from [6] A. N. Strahler, “Dynamic Basis of Geomorphology,”
Bulletin Geological Society of America, Vol. 63, No. 9,
coalescence of two or more pediments. Pediplains oc- 1952, pp. 923-938.
cupy 52.25% of the total study area. Structural hills doi:10.1130/0016-7606(1952)63[923:DBOG]2.0.CO;2
comprising meta-igneous rocks show linear to arcuate [7] A. N. Strahler, “Quantitative Geomorphology of Basins
pattern covering 1.39% of the area. Pediments occur at and Channel Networks,” In: V. T. Chow, Ed., Handbook
the foot hills and occupy 11.86 % of the study area. of Applied Hydrology, Mcgraw Hill Book Company, New
York, 1964.
8. Conclusion [8] M. E. Morisawa, “Relation of Morphometric Properties to
Runoff in the LiHle Mill Creek, Ohio, Drainge Basin,”
The study reveals that GIS and remote sensing can be Tech Report 17, Columbia University, Department of
very useful in evaluation of various morphometric pa- Geology, New York, 1959.
rameters and its influence on landforms. Interpretation of [9] L. B. Leopold and J. P. Miller, “Ephemeral Streams: Hy-
satellite images can help delineate lithological and geo- draulic Factors and Their Relation to the Drainage Net-
morphic units. GIS facilitates analysis of various mor- work,” US Geological Survey, 1956.
phometric parameters and acts as an effective tool in es- [10] J. Krishnamurthy, G. Srinivas, V. Jayaram and M. G.
tablishing relationship between drainage morphometry Chandrasekhar, “Influence of Rock Types and Structures
and properties of landforms. The study also reveals that in the Development of Drainage Networks in Typical
DEM can useful in studying the topography within GIS Hard Rock Terrain,” ITC Journal, No. 3/4, 1996, pp. 252-
environment. Geomorphological study of an area is the 259.
systematic study of present day landforms, related to [11] S. Singh and M. C. Singh, “Morphometric Analysis of
their origin, nature, development, geologic changes re- Kanhar River Basin,” National Geographical Journal of
corded by the surface features and their relationship to India, Vol. 43, No. 1, 1997, pp. 31-43.
other underlying structures. Therefore, it has become an [12] S. A. Schumm, “Evolution of Drainage Systems and
integral part of groundwater study of an area. Some Slopes in Bad Lands at Perth Amboy, New Jersey,” Bul-
letin Geological Society of America, Vol. 67, No. 5, 1956,
morphometric elements (measurement of landforms) pp. 597-646.
provide valuable information for groundwater condition.
[13] R. E. Horton, “Drainage Basin Characteristics,” Transac-
The morphometric parameters evaluated using GIS tions—American Geophysical Union, Vol. 13, 1932, pp.
helped to understand various terrain parameters such as 350-361.
nature of the bedrock, infiltration capacity, runoff, etc.
[14] K. G. Smith, “Standards for Grading Texture of Erosional
Similar studies in conjunction with high resolution satel- Topography,” American Journal of Science, Vol. 248,
lite data help in better understanding the landforms and 1950, pp. 655-668. doi:10.2475/ajs.248.9.655
their processes and drainage pattern demarcations for [15] R. Datt and N. L. Ramanathan, “Environmental Monitor-
basin area planning and management [17]. ing,” Proceedings of Seminar on the Status of Environ-
mental Studies in India, Thiruvananthapuram, 26-28
March 1981, pp. 284-287.
REFERENCES
[16] V. Subramnyan, “Geomorphology of the Deccan Vol-
[1] J. C. Doornkamp and A. M. K. Cuchlaine, “Numerical canic Province, India,” In: K. V. Subbarao and R. N. Suk-
Analysis in Geomorphology—An Introduction,” Edward heswala, Eds., Deccan Volcanism and Related Basalt
Arnold, London, 1971. Provinces in Other Parts of the World, Memoir No. 3,
[2] A. N. Strahler, “Quantitative Analysis of Watershed Geo- GSI, Bangalore, 1981, pp. 101-116.
morphology,” Transactions—American Geophysical Un- [17] M. Bagyaraj and B. Gurugnanam, “Significance of Mor-
ion, Vol. 38, No. 6, 1957, pp. 913-920. phometry Studies, Soil Characteristics, Erosion Phenom-
[3] H. Verstappen, “The Applied Geomorphology,” Interna- ena and Landform Processes Using Remote Sensing and
tional Institute for Aerial Survey and Earth Science GIS for Kodaikanal Hills, a Global Biodiversity Hotpot in
(I.T.C), Enschede, 1983. Western Ghats, Dindigul District, Tamil Nadu, South In-
dia,” Research Journal of Environmental and Earth Sci-
[4] R. Kumar, S. Kumar, A. K. Lohani, R. K. Nema and R. D. ences, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2011, pp. 221-233.
Singh, “Evaluation of Geomorphological Characteristics
of a Catchment Using GIS,” GIS India, Vol. 9, No. 3,