See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/313861024

INVESTIGATION OF MORPHOMETRIC AND HYDROLOGICAL

CHARACTERISTICS OF A WATER BASIN USING NUMERICAL MODELS

Article · January 2017

CITATIONS READS

5 679

2 authors, including:

Sinasi Kaya
Istanbul Technical University
136 PUBLICATIONS 1,562 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Uzaktan Algılama Teknolojileri Kullanılarak Ürün Çeşitliliğinin Belirlenmesi ve Bağ Alanlarının Mekânsal dağılımının Tespiti View project

National Land cover/use Database View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sinasi Kaya on 21 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

© by PSP Volume 26 – No. 1/2017, pages 360-368
INVESTIGATION OF MORPHOMETRIC AND
HYDROLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF A WATER BASIN
USING NUMERICAL MODELS
Sinasi Kaya, Arzu Kutukcu*
Istanbul Technical University, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Dept. of Geomatics Engineering
Maslak 34469, Istanbul, Turkey
ABSTRACT
Defining the characteristics of a basin is
extremely important in terms of its maximum
utilization rate. Impact of the basin structure and
morphological characteristics on the hydrological
processes is essential during conducting a research
on a basin. Morphological analyses on basins
enable scientists to acquire quantitive data, and thus
fundamental information about prioritization and
planning studies of disaster management at the
basin level can be obtained. In line with the
morphological analyses conducted for two
adjacent basins in this study, hydrological
evaluations were also carried out. In this study, both
the Buyuk Menderes River and Gediz River extend
across a long valley and join the Aegean Sea. For
calculating the parameters of the two river basins
such as drainage density, bifurcation ratio,
sinusoidal index which are among the important
morphological parameters, some hydrologic
systems analysis tools, were used. In the calculation
of the morphometric parameters regarding the
basins, Digital Terrain Model data at 10 m spatial
resolution constituted the most important basis. In
order to crosscheck the morphological evaluation
conducted for the basins, Soil and Water Assesment
Tool –SWAT model was utilized. The results of the
model verified the morphological analyses. It is seen
that the studies carried out coupled with Geographic
Information Systems would highly contribute to
hydrological and effective basin management
studies.
KEYWORDS:
Basin morphology, drainage density, bifurcation ratio,
SWAT
INTRODUCTION
Morphology is a Greek word which is a
combination of “morpho” meaning shape and
“logy” meaning field of study. Geomorphology
the hydrological characteristics of the basins. By
360
Fresenius Environmental Bulletin
refers to the study of geological formations. In order to
conduct such a study, it is necessary to know the
characteristics and distribution of geographical
formations at the area of concern and its surrounding,
their relation to other events, their formation causes and
evolvement. According to the cycle of erosion theory or
to the geomorphic cycle theory, the earth’s crust is
evolving geomorphically due to erosion. These stages
are named as youth, maturity and old age. At the youth
stage, the tributaries are rugged and steep. Rivers erode
their stream beds while flowing into ocean. At the
maturity stage, rivers carry water and sediment running
in a slightly curved shape. At the old age stage, rivers,
especially near the rivermouth where it reaches the
ocean, flows into the ocean through an almost open
plain. Rivers have a major impact in the development of
the landforms and topography has been shaped through
stream processing. Fluvial geomorphology deals with
landforms formed with the fluvial process and stream
effects covers particularly the topics of sediment
delivery in river basins and floodplain morphology
utilizing inputs from hydraulics, ecology and geology
[1].
While rivers have impact on the shape of the earth’s
crust in the river basin, river channels affect the
geomorphology of the earth’s crust as well as the
morphology of the basin. Therefore, by performing the
morphological analysis of a basin, it is possible to learn
about the geological and hydrological characteristics of
the basin. [2, 3]. Defining the morphometric characters
of the basin, such as the topology, pattern, shape of the
drainage network, basin relief features and basin area
and their impacts on the coastal portion of the basin,
plays an important role in the basin management [4, 5].
With the contribution of the scientists studying in river
basin morphology field, morphometric parameters of
linear, areal and relief aspects have been developed. In
this study, these parameters was calculated for Buyuk
Menderes and Gediz Basins and hydrological reactions of
the basins were evaluated from these parameters.
In this study, ArcGIS 9.3 Desktop and Soil and
Water Assesment Tool (SWAT) software was used.
Evaluating the morphologic structure of the adjacent
basins selected in line with the calculated morphometric
parameters, deductions were made for
utilizing Geographic Information Systems (GIS), it is
© by PSP Volume 26 – No. 1/2017, pages 360-368
aimed to contribute to the basin management.
STUDY AREA
Buyuk Menderes River Basin and Gediz
River Basin which are among the 25 river basins
of Turkey were selected as the research field.
Selecting adjacent basins for conducting analyses is
considered to be more substantive and coherent.
Buyuk Menderes River Basin has a total
drainage area of 24 873 km2 and is located in the
southwest of Turkey, as seen in Figure 1. Buyuk
Menderes River ends in the Aegean Sea and is 548
km long.
Gediz River Basin has a total drainage area of
17 000 km2 and covers the Gediz River with a
length of 401 km. It also joins the Aegean Sea.
FIGURE 1
Study Area
METHODOLOGY AND MATERIALS
The study consists of calculating morphologic
parameters as well as modelling to evaluate these
parameters.
Regarding the Buyuk Menderes and Gediz
River Basins, drainage network was extracted by
utilizing DTM data at 10 m spatial resolution. This
was done with ArcGIS Desktop software.
Thereafter, the drainage network in question was
divided into segments by using Strahler method.
Numerous morphometric parameters, such as stream
frequency, bifurcation ratio, drainage density were
calculated by utilizing this drainage network. In the
calculation of important linear morphometric
parameters among which there are Hydraulic
Sinuosity Index, Topographical Sinuosity Index and
Valley Index, Hydraulic Sinuosity Index,
361
Fresenius Environmental Bulletin
Standard Sinuosity Index, in order to acquire stream bed
sections, SWAT was used. For areal morphometric
parameters, such as basin shape, basin perimeter and
basin area were calculated by using shape files of the
Buyuk Menderes and Gediz River Basins at scale 1:100
000 vector data format. In testing the results of the
morphologic features desired to be reached and the
results of the hydrological regime of the basin, tools that
can easily be added as an extension in ArcSWAT
software were used. CORINE land use data at scale
1:100 000 utilized in this study is different from the
SWAT software land cover classification system;
therefore, with the help of scientists of different
disciplines, the classification systems in question were
matched, and thus the model started to be used. For soil
database, digital soil maps of the world produced by Food
and Agriculture Organisation, FAO - (United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization,
UNESCO) were utilized. Temperature, precipitation,
wind, solar radiation and relative humidity are among
the input data used in running the SWAT model. These
data are produced by National Centers Environmental
Prediction which forms part of U.S. National Weather
Service and can be reached in the format required for
SWAT software at http://globalweather.tamu.edu/
web.
Especially for the regions where there is no
observation station, these data sets become highly
functional.
In this study, for the stations located in the Buyuk
Menderes River and Gediz River Basins, 26 years (1988
- 2014) of data were downloaded. While these data can
be used in text format, required database table for the
model is available by downloading WGN Excel Macro
file found in SWAT home page. (http://swat.tamu.edu/)
The steps of the study are shown in Figure 2.
FIGURE 2
Steps of the Study
LINEAR MORPHOMETRIC PARAMETERS
Linear parameters examined in this study are;
Stream Order, Bifurcation Ratio, Length of Overland
Flow, Length of Main Channel, Channel Index,
Topographical Sinuosity Index, Standard Sinuosity
© by PSP Volume 26 – No. 1/2017, pages 360-368
Index.
Stream Order. Important studies related to
morphologic analyses of the drainage basins have
been developed since 1945.
The first step in forming the stream order is to
calculate other linear parameters. For this process,
drainage networks of the basins were extracted by
utilizing DTM data at 10 m spatial resolution as
well as ArcGIS Desktop software tools. When
stream order was extracted, Strahler numbering
system was used.
FIGURE 3
Strahler Stream Order Method
The drainage network of the Buyuk Menderes
River ve Gediz River Basins are given in Figure 4.
(a)
FIGURE 4
The drainage network of the (a) Buyuk
Menderes River Basin, (b) Gediz River Basin
The Average Length of Overland Flow.
Overland flow describes the tendency of water from
rainfall or melting snow to flow horizontally
without forming a channel. The distance between
362
Fresenius Environmental Bulletin
the origin of this water and proximate channel is called
overland flow. It is an important variable in determining
the time needed for water to get concentrated during the
flood stage. Unlike the streamflow which may continue
to flow for days, overland flow changes its course due
to the absorption of remaining surface water after rainfall
or to the evaporation. Due to the fact that the drainage
density is low and therefore the distance between the
channels is short, overland flow has minimum values. In
this case, the time of the accumulation of the water
shortens. The length of overland flow calculated for the
Buyuk Menderes and Gediz River Basins are illustrated
in Table 1.
Bifurcation Ratio. Bifurcation ratio plays an
important role in forecasting the hydrological regimes
of the drainage basins. It provides information about
the shape of the basin and its flow characteristics.
Bifurcation Ratio is described as the ratio between the
number of tributaries in one segment (Si) and those of
the next-higher segment (Si+1). If this ratio ranges
between 3 and 5, this means that the geology of the
basin is homogeneous. When bifurcation ratio is low,
i.e. 3 and less, then the drainage density is high. In the
alluvial zones, the bifurcation ratio is relatively low.
Although 5 and above is considered to be high for the
bifurcation ratio, this could indicate that there might be
structural controls over the drainage path in these zones.
In the basins where the stream segments have relatively
similar bifurcation ratios, and thus the water flows more
forcefully, flood hydrograph, despite rising slowly,
creates high peak discharges. In the basins where the
stream segments have relatively different bifurcation
ratios, although the flood hydrograph rises rapidly, it
cannot create high peak discharges [6]. The Buyuk
Menderes and the Gediz River Basins shown in Table 1
have relatively similar bifurcation ratios and indicate the
characteristics of the first group mentioned above.
Sinuosity Index. Sinuosity Index is a metric used
for extracting the structure of the drainage network and
is an important parameter in the morphologic studies.
In this study, the Sinuosity Index was calculated by
utilizing the model developed by Mueller. Index provides
information about the topological and hydrological
characteristics of the drainage basin.
The sinuosity of the channel might change due to
some tectonic movements which cause changes in the
river valley slope [7]. In this context, the Sinuosity Index
can also be used to measure the impact of the tectonic
movements on the channel morphology [8].
In order to calculate the Sinuosity Index of the
Buyuk Menderes and the Gediz River Basins for the
study, the rivers were divided into segments using
ArcSWAT interface and required parameters were
obtained. The calculation method of the parameters is
shown in Table 2, and the parameters used in the
calculation are illustrated in Table 3.
© by PSP Volume 26 – No. 1/2017, pages 360-368 Fresenius Environmental Bulletin

TABLE 1 Figure 5.
Linear Morphometric Parameters The Sinuosity Index varies between 1.0 and 4.0.
When this parameter is higher than 1.5, then the river
The Buyuk The shows the characteristics of the Buyuk Menderes River.
Menderes River Gediz
Name of the Basin
Basin River
When this parameter is between 1.05 and 1.3, then the
Basin river shows curved structure [11]. In cases where the
Basin Area (A, km²) 25 062 16 334
length of the river valley is equal to that of the channel, the
Stream Segments

S1 3 511 4536
basin is in the youth stage and the topographical factors
S2 1 675 2198
become effective. In such a case, TSI is 100 %, meaning
S3 920 1068 that there is no clearance between the mouth of the valley
S4 400 538 and the channel [12]. When the basin is passes through the
S5 170 370 maturity stage, HSI and meandering rate increase and
S6 237 230 hydrological factors start to be effective. In this case,
S7 60 69 although there is an indication of meandering in the
Total Number of
6 973 9009
Channel Sinuosity Index, there are no changes regarding
Segments(ƩS)
meandering in the Standard Sinuosity Index. As can be
Segment Length
( ƩL, km)
15 214.20 13417.79 seen in Table 3, while the channel index (1.54), that is, the
2.06,2.06,
total sum of Topographical and Hyraulic Sinuosity Index,
Bifurcation Ratio
2.10, 1.82, 2.3, 2.35, shows signs of meandering, Standard Sinuosity Index
(Rb=Si/Si+1 1.99,1.45,
0.72, 3.95
(dimensionless) ) 1.60, 3.33 (1.13) indicates a curved structure in of Buyuk Menderes
Average Bifurcation
2.21 2.08
River, Also, when the Topographical Sinuosity Index is
Ratio
less than 100 %, hydrological factors start to be effective,
Average Length of
Overland Flow(lo 0.83 0.61 albeit not completely. In this context, at the beginning of
=1/2D, km) the maturity stage, it can be said that both hydrological and
topographical factors play a role and that the structure of
TABLE 2 meander is observed based on the calculation of the
Sinuosity Index, other parameters and parameters made for the Buyuk Menderes River. As for the
calculation methods Gediz River Basin, both from TSI and SSI values, it can be
stated that the topographical features such as slope and
Valley Length (VL)= aspect have more effect on the hydrological characteristics
|AB|+|CD|/2 of the basin. Therefore, the length of the river and that of
the valley are almost equal.
Channel
Index/Total
Sinuosity
Index(CI)= CL/
|EF|

Valley
Index(VI)/Total
Topographical
Sinuosity Index =
VU/ |EF|

Standard The image (amended) is taken

Sinuosity
from the reference
Index(SSI)=
KI/VI source [9]

Hydraulic
Sinusoidal
Index(HSİ)=
((KI-VI) / ( KI-1))*100

TABLE 3
The Sinuosity Index, other parameters used in
the study [10]

Basin SI VI SSI HSI TSI

The Buyuk Menderes River 1.54 1.36 1.13 36 64
Basin
The Gediz River Basin 1.46 1.41 1.04 10.87 89.13 FIGURE 5
(a) The Gediz River Main Channel View (b) The
The parameters obtained from the Buyuk Buyuk Menderes River Main Channel View
Menderes and the Gediz River Basins are shown in

363
© by PSP Volume 26 – No. 1/2017, pages 360-368
AREAL MORPHOMETRIC PARAMETERS
These parameters are important regarding
basin management. Within the scope of this study,
basin area, length, perimeter, Form Factor,
Circularity Ratio, Elongation Ratio, Texture Ratio,
Stream Frequency, Drainage Density parameters
were examined. In Table 4, areal morphometric
parameters and values calculated for the Buyuk
Menderes and the Gediz River Basins can be seen.
Basin Area. The size of the basin is an
important parameter affecting the the time of
concentration. The bigger the area of the basin
isthe more time passes for water to accumulate.
Basin Perimeter. The basin perimeter, which
is an important parameter when calculating the size
and shape of a basin, is the length of a map line that
encloses the catchment area of a basin. In Table 4,
the basin perimeter is shown among the areal
morphometric parameters of the Buyuk Menderes
and the Gediz River Basins.
Basin Length. There are various calculation
methods for measuring the length of a basin. In this
study, the length of the Buyuk Menderes and the
Gediz River Basins shown in Table 4, was
computed by measuring the length in a straight line
from the mouth of a stream to the farthest point on
the drainage divide of its basin.
Drainage Density. The drainage density is a
parameter showing the degree of the fragmentation
of the basin caused by the rivers and is the total
length of all the rivers (∑L) divided by the total
area of the drainage basin. The studies indicate that
the drainage density is a hydrological event
influenced by the geological structure of the terrain.
If the drainage basin has a low drainage density, then
the basin soil has an ideal infiltration rate and that
the area surrounding the river has thick vegetation
cover; therefore, surface runoff time increases. In a
basin where drainage density is low, the time of
concentration lessens. Table 4 shows the drainage
density calculated for the Buyuk Menderes and the
Gediz River basins. According to this finding, The
Buyuk Menderes River Basin has a better
infiltration rate than the Gediz River Basin. As a
result, it can be concluded that the time of
concentration will be shorter in the Gediz River
Basin.
Stream Frequency. Stream frequency is the
ratio of the total number of streams in a drainage
basin to the area of the basin and it is the count of
all stream segments per unit area of a basin. If
the stream frequency is high, the surfaces are
impermeable and show low relief characteristics.
The stream frequency measured for the Buyuk
364
Fresenius Environmental Bulletin
Menderes River Basin is low, and therefore indicates
permeability. Table 4 illustrates the stream frequency of
Buyuk Menderes and the Gediz River Basins. In narrow
and elonged basins, the flow of water is slow due to
the longer time of concentration.
Form Factor. he shape of the basin is one of the
important factors influencing the time of concentration.
The basins where the form factor is low, that is to say,
near-zero, are considered to be narrow and elonged. The
basins where the form factor is high, approaching 1.0,
are considered to be shorter or medium-length, partially
circular-shaped basin. Since the time of concentration is
shorter for a basin whose shape approximates a circle,
the flow of water is rapid. Table 4 shows the form factor
value of the Buyuk Menderes and the Gediz River
Basins. It can be stated that since the basins are narrow
and elonged, the time of concentration increases
accordingly and considering these morphologic
parameters, the risk of flash flood is lower.
Circulatiry Ratio. The circularity ratio, along with
the elongation ratio, is one of the important areal
parameters which helps to understand the shape of a
basin. It is the ratio of the basin area to the area of a circle
having a circumference equal to the perimeter of the
basin. This ratio shows whether the drainage area has
same circularity or not. When the value converges
towards 1.0, the degree of circularity increases. The
circularity ratio of the Buyuk Menderes and the Gediz
River Basins can be seen in Table 4.
Elongation Ratio. Elongation ratio is defined as the
ratio of diameter of a circle of the same area as the basin
to the maximum basin length. If the elongation ratio is
low, i.e. near-zero, the basin is more elongated. If it
approaches 1.0, the basin is partially circular. The
elongation ratio of the Buyuk Menderes and the Gediz
River Basins can be seen in Table 4.
Texture Ratio. When evaluating the morphologic
aspects of a basin, one of the important parameters to
be taken into account is the texture ratio. It is the ratio
of the total number of segments (S1) in the first order of
the drainage network to the basin area and it is a ratio
used for defining the proximity of the channels.
Factors, such as lithologic structure, rugged terrain, have
an effect on the ratio. High texture ratio can be attributed
to the presence of high relief, steep slopes and low
permeability. When this ratio is high, however, the basin
has a higher peak discharge. The drainage texture less
than 2 indicates very coarse, between 2 and 4 is related
to coarse, between 4 and 6 is moderate, between 6 and
8 is fine and greater than 8 is very fine drainage texture.
This ratio should be assessed together with the drainage
density and stream frequency parameters.
The texture ratio of the Buyuk Menderes and the
Gediz River Basins is shown in Table 4.
© by PSP Volume 26 – No. 1/2017, pages 360-368 Fresenius Environmental Bulletin

TABLE 4 been produced in 2000 and 2006. In this study, Corine

Areal Morphometric Parameters Land Cover 2006 seamless vector data were used (Figure
7).
Parameters Formula Value Value
(B.Menderes) (Gediz)
Basin Area 25 062 16334
(A, km²)
Basin Perimeter 1 723.22 1289.56
(P, km)
Basin Length 305.55 251.09
(l, km)
Total channel 6 973 9009
segment lengths
(ƩS)
Segment Length 15 214.20 13 417.79
(ƩL, km)
Stream ƩS/A 0.28 0.55
Frequency (a)
(Frequency)
Drainage Density ƩL/A 0.60 0.82
(km/ km²)
Form Factor (F) F=A/l² 0.27 0.26
Circularity Ratio Rc = 0.10 0.12
(Rc) 12.57*
(A / P²)
Elongation Ratio Re=2 * 0.60 0.60
(A / π) ½
/P
Texture Ratio T = S1 x 2.04 3.52
(T) (1/P)

(b)
RUNNING THE SWAT MODEL FIGURE 6
(a) DTM Data of Gediz River Basin (b) DTM Data of
The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) Buyuk Menderes River Basin
is a physically based, hydrological and public
domain model jointly developed by USDA
Agricultural Research Service (USDA- ARS) and
Texas A&M AgriLife Research, part of The Texas
A&M University System, with the contribution of
U.S. Department of Agriculture. The morphological
analyses conducted were crosschecked by running
the model software. In order to run the model, the
DTM data used for the two basins were utilized
and the drainage network and subbasins were
extracted. After extracting subbasins, Hydrologic
Response Units (HRUs) of the basins were
extracted. Theyare delineated by overlaying land- (a)
use, soil and slope parameters per basin and
defining the basin or basins possessing the unique
combination of land- use/ soil/ slope attributes.
The purpose of creating HRU extracted for the
basins and subbasins is that SWAT hydrological
model uses HRUs as the basic unit of all model
calculations. In order to create HRUs, CORINE
land-use data and Harmonised World Soil Database
should be projected into the same coordinate
reference system (CRS) as DTM. In extracting
subbasins and conducting other numerous analyses,
DTM data used for basins were utilized (Figure 6). (b)
For both of the basins, CORINE land-cover FIGURE 7
data at scale 1:100 000 were used. The Corine Land (a) Land- Cover Data of Gediz River Basin (b) Land-
Cover (CLC) inventory is a Pan-European landuse Cover Data of Buyuk Menderes River Basin
and landcover mapping programme. Updates have

365
© by PSP Volume 26 – No. 1/2017, pages 360-368 Fresenius Environmental Bulletin

Another input used for creating HRUs is FAO soil

maps. They play a major role in determining the
movement of water in HRUs. Figure 8 shows the soil
maps for the basins.
By utilizing these data, HRUs were calculated for
both basins. The benefit of HRU is the increase in accuracy
it adds to the prediction of loadings from the subbasin.
Figure 9 shows of the results of the HRUs for the basins.
For the hydrological simulation in SWAT software,
meteorological data play an important role. Various
resources related to SWAT software are available at the
website of Texas A&M University. If needed,
(a)
meteorological data can be acquired from the website
(http://globalweather.tamu.edu/). Data, such as
temperature, precipitation, wind, solar radiation and
relative humidity are used in running the model. These
data are provided by National Centers for Environmental
Prediction, a part of the U.S. National Weather Service,
as Climate Forecast System Reanalysis (CFSR) data sets
through hourly weather forecasts and are presented in
SWAT format on the website. Temperature,
precipitation, wind, solar radiation and relative humidity
data between 1979 and 2014 are also vailable on this
website.

SWAT SIMULATION AND THE RESULS

(b)
FIGURE 8 Using SWAT interface, SWAT model was simulated
(a) FAO Soil Database of Gediz River Basin in January 2010 for the both of the studies basins. The
(b) FAO Soil Database of Buyuk Menderes accuracy of the morphological analyses shown in the
River Basin above sections was evaluated. Monthly PREC (Average
amount of precipitation in watershed during time step
(mm H2O)), SURQ (Surface runoff contribution to
streamflow during time step), LATQ (NO3 in lateral flow
on day in subbasin (kg N/ha)), GWQ (Groundwater
contribution to streamflow (mm)), SW (Amount of water
stored in soil profile in watershed for the day, month or
year (mm)), ET (Actual evapotranspiration from the
subbasin during time step (mm H2O)), PET (Potential
evapotranspiration (mm H2O)), WATER YIELD (Water
yield to streamflow from HRUs in watershed for the
(a) day, month or year (mm)), SED YIELD (Sediment yield
from HRUs in watershed for the day, month or year
(metric tons/ha)) parameters obtained from the model
simulation for both basins are shown in Table 5.

TABLE 5
January 2010 SWAT model results

(b)

FIGURE 9
(a) HRUs for Gediz River Basin (b) HRUs for
Buyuk Menderes River Basin

366
© by PSP Volume 26 – No. 1/2017, pages 360-368
Comparing Buyuk Menderes River Basin and
Gediz River Basin for January precipitation data, it
can be said that although the Buyuk Menderes
River Basin has less precipitation, its surface runoff
is higher than the Gediz River Basin. The monthly
rainfall in the Gediz River Basin is higher; therefore
the amount of water stored in soil profile in the
watershed is also higher. In the 4th section, in
accordance with the evaluation of the morphological
structure of the basins, the Buyuk Menderes River
Basin is expected to be more permeable. In that
case, the amount of water stored would be higher
than the Gediz River Basin. However, it was
assessed that running the model for a month could
not be enough to obtain the anticipated results.
Thus, it was decided that the results should be
examined by running the model for several years.
During the period of 1.1.1988 and 31.1.2014,
SWAT model was run. The graphical presentation of
the results of the annual SURQ values for the basins
is shown in Figure 10.
FIGURE 10
Comparison between SURQ values obtained
during the period of 1.1.1988 - 31.12.2013
Evaluating 26-years period, it is observed that
the surface runoff in the Gediz River Basin is higher
than the runoff in the Buyuk Menderes River Basin,
even when the annual rainfall is low. The evaluation
of the morphological analyses indicates that Gediz
River Basin has more permeable subsoil compared
to Buyuk Menderes is, in this case, verified.
As a result of the morphological analyses of the
basins, because it was observed that the Buyuk
Menderes had more permeable subsoil, the basin in
question is expected to have higher amount of
groundwater reservoir. According to the 2013 data
of General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works
web site, the groundwater reserve of the Buyuk
Menderes River Basin is assessed as 761.50 hm3
/year, while this corresponding value is 248.00 hm3
/year for the Gediz River Basin. Regarding these
results, it can be seen that the estimated volume of
groundwater reserve is higher in the Buyuk
Menderes River Basin compared to the Gediz River
Basin. In Table 5, GWQ value of the Gediz River
Basin in January 2010 is higher. During the period
of 1.1.1988 and 31.1.2014, when the model was
367
Fresenius Environmental Bulletin
operated, the results shown in Figure 11 were obtained.
As indicated, it can be seen that groundwater contribution
to streamflow in the Buyuk Menderes River Basin is
greater.
CONCLUSIONS
In this study, initially, the morphological analyses
of the neighbouring basins located in the west of Turkey
were conducted. In these morphologic analyses, the
following results were obtained;
 The Buyuk Menderes River Basin which has
lower drainage density has a higher level of infiltration
capacity compared to the Gediz River Basin.
 The time of concentration is shorter in the
Gediz River Basin. The Gediz River Basin, which has
a higher stream frequency parameter, has lower
permeability than the Buyuk Menderes River Basin.
 Due to the fact that both basins are narrow and
elongated, the time of concentration is longer in each
basin. The Gediz River Basin, whose texture ratio
parameter is high, is less permeable. Because the Gediz
River Basin has a high value of ruggedness number, it
has a higher probability of peak flow. The Buyuk
Menderes River Basin is more sloping and therefore the
velocity of the flow of water is higher.
When comparing SWAT model results of the two
basins, although the Buyuk Menderes River Basin has
lower rainfall in January 2010, its surface runoff was
estimated higher than the Gediz River Basin. The monthly
rainfall in the Gediz River Basin is higher; therefore the
amount of water stored in soil profile in watershed is also
higher. In the 4 th section, in accordance with the
evaluation of the morphological structure of the basins,
Buyuk Menderes River Basin is expected to be more
permeable. In that case, the amount of water stored would
be higher than Gediz River Basin. However, it was
assessed that running the model for a month could not be
enough to obtain the anticipated results. Thus, it was
decided that the results should be examined by running
the model for 25 years.
FIGURE 11
Comparison between GWQ values obtained during
the period of 1.1.1988 - 31.12.2013
Evaluating the 25-year period, it was observed that
 © by PSP Volume 26 – No. 1/2017, pages 360-368
even in the cases where the Gediz River Basin has a
lower annual rainfall; it still has a higher runoff
compared to the Buyuk Menderes River Basin. In the
3 rd section, the evaluation of the morphological
analyses put forth that Gediz River Basin has less
permeable subsoil compared to Buyuk Menderes is,
in this case, verified.
In conclusion, through the instruments of DTM
data and GIS, the morphological characteristics of
the basin were extracted by utilizing numerical
models. In view of these parameters, hydrological
assessments were made initially about the terrain. To
use these calculations and evaluations obtained for
both river basins of concern, the methodology may
be used for other basins as well and to develop them
by adding new parameters is considered to be
helpful. Also, evaluating adjacent or proximate
basins together and determining the similarities and
differences among them are important with regard to
water transfers among basins in the future.
REFERENCES
[1] Kaya, Ş., Tüysüz, O., (2015), “Using Digital
Elevation Model and Remotely Sensed Data in
Determining the Geomorphological and
Morphometric Features: Gaziköy- Saros
Region, Northwestern”, International Journal of
Environment and Geoinformatics, Vol. 2,(2), pp
1-15
[2] Akyüz, D., Kaya, Ş., Seker, D.Z., Kabdasli, S.
(2014), Definition of Flood Risky Areas With
Calculation of Stream Velocity Via Using
Numerical Model Numerical Model: Case
Study of Filyos River”, Turkey, Fresen.
Environ. Bull., 23(12), 3022-3028
[3] Sertel, E., Findik, N., Kaya, Ş., Seker D. Z. ve
A. Samsunlu, (2008), “Assessment of
Landscape Changes in the Kizilirmak Delta,
Turkey Using Remotely Sensed Data and GIS,”
Environmental Engineering Science, 25(3),
353-362
[4] Seker, D.Z., Kaya, Ş., Alkan, R.M., Tanık A.
ve Sertel, E., (2008), 3D Coastal Erosion
Analysis of Kilyos- Karaburun Region Using
Multi-Temporal Satellite Image Data, Fresen.
Environ. Bull., 17(11b), 1977- 1982
[5] Kaya, Ş., Seker, D.Z., Tanık, A., (2014),
“Temporal Impact of Urbanization on The
Protection Zones of Two Drinking Water
Reservoirs in Istanbul”, Fresen. Environ. Bull.,
23(12), 2984-2989
[6] Bishop V., Prosser R., (2001), Water
Resources: Process and Management, Collins
Educational; Second Edition (Reissue) Edition
[7] Keller E.A. & Pinter N. (1996), Active
tectonics: earthquakes, uplift and landscapes.
Prentice hall, new jersey
[8] Babar Md., (2005), Hydogeomorphology:
Fundamentals, Applications and Techniques,
368
View publication stats
Fresenius Environmental Bulletin
New India Publishing Agency
[9] Ghosh S., Mistri B. (2012), Hydrogeomorphic
Significance of Sinuosity Index in relation to River
Instability: A Case Study of Damodar River, West
Bengal, India, International Journal of Advances in
Earth Sciences, Volume 1, Issue 2, 49-57
[10] Mueller, J. E. ,(1968), An Introduction to the
Hydraulic and Topographic Sinuosity Indexes.
Annals of the Association of American Geographers,
Vol.58, No.2, pp. 371-385
[11] Seker, D.Z., Kaya, Ş., Musaoğlu, N., Kabdaşlı, S.,
Yuasa, A., and Duran, Z., (2005), Investigation of
Meandering in Filyos River by Means of
Satellite Sensor Data, Hydrological Processes, Vol.
19, No: 7, 1497-1508
[12] Pareta K., Pareta U., (2012), Quantitative
Geomorphological Analysis of a Watershed of Ravi
River Basin, H.P. India , International Journal of
Remote Sensing and GIS, Volume 1, Issue 1, 47-62
[13] Dingman S.L., (1978), Drainage Density and
Streamflow:A Closer Look ,Water Resources
Research, Vol. 14, No. 6
[14] Bayazıt M. (2013), Hidroloji , Birsen Yayınevi
[15] Horton R. (1945), Erosional development of streams
and their drainage basins; hydrophysical approach to
quantitative morphology, Geological Society of
America Bulletin
[16] David A. Sear, M. D. (2003), Guidebook of Applied
Fluvial Geomorphology, R&D Technical Report FD
1914
[17] M.Winchell, R.Srinivasan, M. Di Luzio, J.Arnold,
(2010), ArcSWAT Interface for SWAT 2009 User’s
Guide
[18] Goudie, A. (2014), Encyclopedia of Geomorphology,
694-699
[19] EROL, O. (1993), Ayrıntılı Jeomorfoloji Haritaları
Çizim Yöntemi. İ.Ü. Deniz Bilimleri ve Enstitüsü
Bülteni Sayı:10, 19-38
[20] Gregory, K. (1997), Fluvial Geomorphology of
Great Britain
Received: 29.06.2016
Accepted: 26.09.2016
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
Arzu Kutukcu
Istanbul Technical University Faculty of Civil
Engineering, Department of Geomatics Engineering
34469 Maslak, Istanbul, TURKEY
e-mail: kutukcuarzu@itu.edu.tr