National Institute of Geological Sciences

College of Science
University of the Philippines Diliman

A Morphometric Analysis of Five River Basins in the Bulaloc and Canipan Quadrangles in
Southern Palawan, Philippines

In partial fulfilment of the requirements for Geology 170 (Field Geology)

Submitted by
ANTONIO LORENZO M. MEDINA
ENID C. QUIAMBAO
DON PIETRO B. SALDAJENO
JOEL MARI C. VILLA, JR.
Submitted to
DR. CARLO A. ARCILLA
DR. MARIO A. AURELIO
Professors
PAOLO ANDRE D. BENAVIDES
JOHN DALE B. DIANALA
SOFIA MARAH P. FRIAS
JOSE DOMINICK S. GUBALLA
JOHN PAUL A. MENDOZA
LIKHA G. MINIMO
JAMES CESAR A. REFRAN
LEONILA M. BRON-SIKAT
RUSSEL RAFFY M. ONG
JASMIN CONSUELO D. URQUICO
RICHARD L. YBANEZ
Instructors

ABSTRACT
This paper studies the morphometric parameters of the basins in the Bataraza and Rizal
municipalities of the province of Palawan. The morphometric analysis utilized the Horton-Strahler
method in determining relevant stream parameters which were then correlated to topographic and
lithologic factors. The study showed that drainage density has positive correlation with slope and has an
inverse relationship with permeability which was assessed by the constant of channel maintenance and
stream frequency. Bifurcation ratios appear to be negatively correlated with drainage density. This may be
due to topographic factors, differing stream lengths, and differing stream sinuosities.
INTRODUCTION
In previous studies, morphometric parameters have been widely used to analyze drainage systems
of different basins. Using these morphometric parameters is limited to the accuracy of digital elevation
models (DEMs), aerial photographs and other maps used in tracing all the streams that comprise a
drainage network. Parameters such as bifurcation ratios, linear aspects and areal aspects are useful in
correlating bedrock lithologies, dissection and geomorphic processes that shape the fluvial landscape of
the area.
The study area covers the municipalities of Rizal and Bataraza (Figure 2), located in the southern
region of Palawan (Figure 1). The study area consists of high, irregular mountains with narrow valleys
occurring in between them. The Bulanjao Range is the most prominent topographic feature of the area,
appearing to bisect the study area laterally. Streams on the western side of the Bulanjao Range drain to the
South China Sea while those in the eastern side drain to the Sulu Sea (Cabrera, 1985). The range is
surrounded by flatlands that are currently used for agricultural purposes which may be attributed to the
abundant river systems in these plains. The major streams in the study area include the Canipan River,
which flows parallel to the west of the ridge in the coastal plain, the Iwahig River situated east of the
Canipan quadrangle, and the Sumbiling River, located south of the Bulanjao Range. Field observations
combined with the use of several Geographic Information System (GIS) software were used to gather the
required morphometric parameters in the study area to conduct a Horton-Strahler drainage analysis.

Figures 1 & 2. (Left) Map of Palawan showing the political boundaries of its municipalities. The study
area is boxed in red. (Right) A closer view of the bounded area in Figure 1 with the barangays covered in
the study.
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
A study on the relationship of drainage density with slope angle was conducted in Japan in 2004,
and two types were established under these conditions. Type 1 follows a downward sloping trendline,
where drainage density decreases with increasing slope value, and Type 2 follows a convex-upward domeshaped trend, where drainage density increases with slope angle up to a point where the slope angle
becomes high enough such that the drainage density begins to decrease again (Lin & Oguchi, 2004). The
Type 2 trend is characteristic of more mature watersheds than the Type 1 trend, and differences in the
stage of stream-net growth can also be attributed to the location and general inclination of the watersheds
being analyzed. Lin & Oguchi also proposed that the effects of geology seem to have a lesser weight than
the maturity of the watershed, as evidenced by their findings in the Usu and Kusatsu-Shirane areas.
Although previous studies suggested that therelationship between slope angle and drainagedensity
corresponds to dominant erosion types,this study has indicated that they correspondmore directly to the
stages of channelization (Lin & Oguchi, 2004).
2

A drainage pattern analysis was conducted on the Foix Canyon System in the Mediterranean Sea
to determine the role of gullies in its evolution (Tubau et al., 2013). The primary method used was the
Horton-Strahler analysis, and parameters such as drainage density, stream frequency and drainage area
relief patterns were utilized alongside it. The main process responsible for canyon head growth and
across-flank transport of material from the continental shelf is the formation of a large dendritic network
extending from the canyon thalweg up to the canyon rim. These are called rim gullies. Toe gullies form
smaller pinnate networks restricted to the lower portion of the canyon flanks. These are intepreted as the
morphological expression of the rejuvenation of rim gullies and the canyon itself (Tubau et al., 2013).
The drainage system anomaly of 15 basins in the Zagros folded belt in Iran was studied via a
morphometric analysis (Bahrami, 2013). The methodology of the study consisted of the computation of
various factors including drainage density and bifurcation ratio. The study concluded that the elongation
and tilting of the basins are associated with varying rates of uplift, folding and anticline hinge spacing,
which are controlled by the tectonic activity in the Zagros belt.
Pakhmode et al. (2003) evaluated the drainage network of the Kurzadi river basin by analyzing
morphometric parameters including stream-order analysis, bifurcation ratio, length ratio, drainage density,
constant of channel maintenance, length of overland flow and stream frequency and integrating these data
into hydrogeological mapping. Domains of high surface permeability typically indicate relatively higher
length ratios and lower drainage density and stream frequency (Pakhmode et al., 2003).It was then
concluded that the sub-basins with higher values of the constant of channel maintenance and length of
overland flow, and lower values of drainage density and stream frequency indicate higher permeability to
infiltration.
Tolessa et al. (2013) examined the morphometric parameters of the Tandava River Basin in India
through a Horton-Strahler analysis alongside Schumms methods. Stream order versus the logarithm of
the stream count, drainage density, stream frequency, drainage texture, bifurcation ratio, elongation ratio,
circulatory ratio were calculated for the analysis. Drainage density was correlated with subsoil permeability
and vegetation thickness, while stream frequency was correlated with drainage density. The bifurcation
ratio was then correlated with the area lithology and structures, and elongation ratio with hardness and
3

slope. The conclusion was that the Tandava River Basin had medium drainage density, coarse texture
ratio, and low elongation ratio.
METHODOLOGY
Watershed Delineation
The delineation of stream basins was executed in ArcGIS 10 by using a 90m SRTM DEM map
obtained from PHILGIS (Figure 3). The processing was based on flow accumulation and flow direction
of the streams as generated by the hydrogeology tool in ArcGIS 10. Five stream-nets were produced in
the study area as shown in Figure 4. The geometry of the sub-basins is generally characterized by a single
drainage network which is topographically controlled as evidenced by the radiating streams from areas of
high elevation.

Figure 3. 3D slope shader 90m STRM DEM map of the study area as bounded by the box.
Map generated by GlobalMapper.
Linear and Areal Morphometric Parameters
ArcGIS 10 was also used to measure the stream lengths of individual segments to be able to
calculate various morphometric parameters including drainage density, stream frequency, length ratio,
texture ratio and bifurcation ratio. These parameters, along with the stream orders, will be the main
factors that will evaluate the drainage network of each basin.

Figure 4. Stream-nets delineated in the study area. A number was

assigned to a basin for presentation of results.
The Strahler (1952) method of assigning stream orders was employed in the study. This method
explains that two streams of the same order must combine to form a stream that is one order higher.
First-order streams are designated as the tributaries which combine to form higher order stream channels.
The highest order stream carries all the discharge of water that was transported by lower order streams.
Horton (1945) defined the drainage density (Dd) as the total length of streams in a basin divided
by the area of the basin, as shown by the equation
=

(1)

where Dd = drainage density

L = total stream lengths in a basin
A = basin area
This morphometric parameter will indicate the closeness of the spacing of the streams and also
the texture of the basin. Horton (1945) proposed that drainage densities are indicators of the linear scale
of landform elements in a stream-eroded topography. The areas of the basins were calculated using
Quantum GIS (QGIS) and were subsequently used to compute for the drainage densities of the basins.
Drainage densities are classified as poor (P), medium (M) or excellent (E) based on the
quantitative interpretation of this parameter by Deju (1971). The range of values is below 0.5km-1 for P
density basins, between 0.5 km-1 and 1.5 km-1 for M density basins, and greater than 1.5 km-1 for E
density basins. In the study, the drainage densities will also be characterized in relation to bedrock
lithology. The lithologic data were obtained from the Geology 170 (Field Geology) report by the Batch
2015 of the National Institute of Geological Sciences, University of the Philippines Diliman (UP-NIGS).
The constant of channel maintenance or the inverse of the drainage density qualitatively
describes the permeability of the underlying bedrock. This parameter was introduced by Schumm (1956)
to refer to the area needed to maintain 1 kilometer of channel length. The stream frequency is another
morphometric parameter proposed by Horton (1932) which he defined as the ratio of the number of
streams in a basin to the basins area. It is a relevant factor in determining surface runoff and steeper
ground surfaces which are characterized by high stream frequencies (Pakhmode et al., 2003).
Bifurcation Ratio &Horton Analysis
Horton (1945) defined the bifurcation ratio (Rb) as the ratio of the number of streams of one
order to the number of streams of the next order, as shown by the equation
=

+1

(2)

where Rb = bifurcation ratio

Nu = number of streams of order u
u = stream order of interest
6

The bifurcation ratios of each order for each basin were calculated using number of streams of
each order counted using ArcGIS 10.1 .
Horton (1945) also proposed the Law of Stream Numbers, Law of Mean Stream Lengths, and
Law of Total Stream Lengths, given respectively by Equations (3), (4), and (5).
=

(3)

= 1 1

(4)

= 1 1

(5)

where Nu= number of streams of order u

Rb = bifurcation ratio
RL = length ratio
Lmu = mean length of streams of order u
Lu = total length of streams of order u
s = highest stream order in the basin
u = stream order of interest
The values of log(Nu), log(Lmu), and log(Lu) were calculated and plotted versus u for each basin
using Microsoft Excel 2013. A best-fit line was made for each plot, and by taking the R2 values of the
best fit lines, the accuracy of the best-fit lines approximation was examined. The graphs are shown in the
Results and Discussion section.
R2 values of the best fit lines were treated as a measure of how closely the basins obey Hortons
laws. The basins were compared on their degree of obedience to Hortons laws based on the R 2 values of
the best fit lines. The rationale for this is discussed in the Appendix.
RESULTS & DISCUSSION
Linear Aspect
Morphometric analysis was started with the division of the basin into five sub-basins, with their
perimeters and areas calculated from ArcGIS (Table 1).

Sub-basin
1
2
3
4
5

Area (km2)
60.08723088
68.88788012
103.960319
81.23358186
136.5596901

Perimeter (km)
42.50837581
57.17145037
50.08501351
49.09494727
38.27103616

Table 1. Area and perimeters of the sub-basins in the study area.

Number of Streams per Order

Sub-basin
No.

N1

1
2
3
4
5
TOTAL

N2
6
4
10
4
13
37

26
17
28
16
39
126

N3
2
1
2
1
3
9

N4
1
0
0
0
1
2

N
35
22
40
21
56
174

Table 2. Summary of the number of streams in each stream order per basin.
Drainage basin analysis was started with the assignment of stream orders to the streams in the
five sub-basins, according to Strahlers stream orders, up to the fourth order. A total of 174 streams were
counted, with first-order streams comprising 72.41% of all streams, second-order streams 21.27% of all
streams, third-order 5.17% of all streams and fourth-order 1.15% of all streams (Table 2).
Subbasin

Stream Length (km)

L1

Lx1

L2

Lx2

L3

Lx3

L4

Lx4

Total
Length
(km)

43.350

1.667

7.821

1.303

17.224

8.612

2.599

2.599

70.995

40.095

2.359

11.714

2.928

18.864

18.864

70.673

66.833

2.387

23.950

2.661

30.258

15.129

121.042

42.312

2.645

18.543

4.636

13.690

13.690

74.546

83.071

2.130

32.984

2.537

29.022

9.674

18.649

18.649

163.726

Table 3. Stream Lengths of the sub-basins arranged by their stream orders.

Slope steepness can be a factor in the stream lengths. Ideally, areas with steeper slopes will have
shorter basins. Sub-basin 3, which is situated in an area with sharp slopes, shows the shortest stream

lengths. Consequently, sub-basin 5 has the longest stream length since it is located in an area with gentle
slopes. Stream lengths of the sub-basins are shown in Table 3.

log(total stream length) vs Stream Order

5.5

log(total stream length)

5
4.5
4
3.5

Red Basin

Blue Basin

2.5

Orange Basin

Cyan Basin

1.5

Green Basin

1
0.5
0
1

Stream Order
Figure 5. Stream order vs. log total stream length
Figure 5 shows the relationship between the logarithm of the total stream length and stream
order. Upon inspection, it is concluded that the stream-net conforms to Hortons law of stream length.
The total stream length decreases as stream order increases, which is expected. Note that only sub-basins
4 and 5 have best-fit lines, as the curves for the other three basins are too far from linear to prove useful
in approximating the data points.

Sub-basin
No.
1
2
3
4
5

Area (km2)
60.08723
68.88788
103.9603
81.23358
136.5597

Stream Frequency
(km-2)
0.582486487
0.319359515
0.38476219
0.258513776
0.410077088

Drainage Density
(km-1)
1.181529831
1.025910169
0.521435348
0.917669505
1.198935531

Drainage
Type
M
M
M
M
M

Constant of Channel
Maintenance (km)
0.846360349
0.974744212
1.917783296
1.089716935
0.834073204

Table 4. Stream frequency, drainage density and constant of channel maintenance values for the subbasins in the study area.

Areal Aspect
The overall drainage density of the study area is 1.111491502 km-1 which indicates a medium
density basin based on the Deju (1971) quantification of drainage densities. Table 4 lists all the drainage
density values computed for each sub-basin. The drainage density of sub-basin 3 is significantly lower
than those of the other four which may be attributed to the high permeability and abundant vegetative
cover of alluvium in the south-eastern area of the Canipan Quadrangle. Sub-basin 4 is covered by most
alluvium too but the very low relief of the area allows the drainage network to form as part of the eastern
coastal plain.
The constant of channel maintenance is simply the inverse of the drainage density and is
indicative of the permeability of the bedrock. As expected and in line with the interpretation of the
drainage densities previously, sub-basins 3 and 4 registered the highest constant of channel maintenance
values. The relatively higher constants of channel maintenance of sub-basins 3 and 4 basically suggest that
large areas are needed to maintain 1 km of the stream channel which relate to their high permeability.

Figure 6. Lithologic map of the area overlain with the streams and stream-nets used in the study. Map
generated in QGIS.

10

For stream frequencies, the overall value for the entire study area was calculated to be 0.386402
km-2. The values for stream frequency and drainage density indicate a positive correlation between the
two variables although their exact relationship cannot be accurately delineated with the data presented in
this paper. However, it may be said that the high values of stream frequency are related to the size of the
area covered in the Bulanjao Range which is a high relief and low permeability area.
The areas of the delineated stream nets generally cover a range of lithologies as shown in Figure
6. The stream head of all sub-basins are located in the topographic highs in the area where bedrock is
composed of ophiolitic rocks (ultramafic and volcanic rocks). The streams located in the ophiolitic
terrane of the Bulanjao Range shows a radial pattern. These streams then drain and incise through the
clastic rocks (for sub-basins 1 & 2) or through alluvial deposits (for sub-basins 3 & 4). Streams cutting
through the clastic rocks generally show a trellis pattern which indicates structural control by differential
erosion of folded sedimentary rocks. These clastic rocks are part of the Panas Formation which were
turbidites that underwent folding during the obduction of the Palawan Ophiolite onto the Palawan
Continental Block in the Early Miocene to Late Oligocene (Aurelio et al., 2013). Isolated or intermittent
streams occur frequently in the flat lying coastal plains (Cabrera, 1985) as seen in sub-basins 3 & 4. The
drainage network of sub-basin 5 is more complex than the others as it consists of a wide variety of
lithologies and the area covers the transition of the flat-lying plain to the sandstone areas at higher
elevation. The topographic control explains why the streams drain directly from the interbedded
sandstone area into the flat lying plains instead of also cutting through the massive sandstones.
Bifurcation Ratio
Mean Rb is lower for sub-basins 1 and 5, and higher for sub-basins 2, 3 and 4 (Table 5). Higher
bifurcation ratio can mean greater flood risk, since there are a large number of lower-order streams that
flow into a small number of higher-order streams, possibly causing the higher-order streams to overflow.
Thus, sub-basins 2, 3 and 4 may be more susceptible to flooding than sub-basins 1 and 5.
Analysis of bifurcation ratios is complex because of the diversity of lithologies, which cause
variations in bifurcation behavior within sub-basins. Although the mean Rb of sub-basin 5 is low at only
3.444, it can be seen from Figure 6 that bifurcation and stream density are high in the interbedded
11

sandstone area of sub-basin 5, but bifurcation is low in areas of covered by alluvium in the same subbasin. Topographic control may be the cause of this difference; the interbedded standstones are located
in a mountainous region above the low-lying areas covered by alluvium, so most of the lower-order
branches of the stream are found in the topographically higher interbedded sandstone region. These
streams flow down to the higher-order, less branched streams in the lowland alluvium areas. Difference
in permeability may also play a role; the interbedded sandstones are probably less permeable than the
alluvium, thus causing greater bifurcation and stream density in the region of interbedded sandstones.
Since the low-lying alluvium region occupies a substantially larger percentage of the area of sub-basin 3
than the topographically higher interbedded sandstone, the mean Rb for the entire sub-basin is low.
Mean Rb is low in sub-basins 1 and 5 despite their high drainage densities. This implies that
many of the streams in the two sub-basins are long, but do not bifurcate very much. This leads to large
total stream lengths (and therefore high drainage densities), but low mean R b. On the other hand, subbasin 3 has a high mean Rb despite having a low drainage density. This implies that most of the streams
in sub-basin 3 are short and bifurcate frequently, leading to a low total stream length (and therefore low
drainage density), but large Rb.
From the data, it appears that bifurcation ratio is negatively correlated with drainage density. The
basins with larger bifurcation ratios have lower drainage densities, and vice versa. This may be because the
basins with larger bifurcation ratios have numerous short streams, while the basins with lower bifurcation
ratios have fewer but longer and more sinuous streams. This may also be due to topographic factors.
High bifurcation ratio is more likely to occur in the topographically higher regions of the study area, since
the more numerous, low-order streams from the mountains flow down to the less numerous, high-order
streams in the lowlands. For the same reason, low bifurcation ratio is more likely to occur in the
topographically lower regions of the study area. Most of the area of sub-basins 1 and 5 are in
topographically lower regions, thus they tend towards lower bifurcation ratios, while most of the area of
sub-basins 2, 3, and 4 are in topographically higher regions, which thus they tend towards higher
bifurcation ratios.

12

Sub-basin
No.
1

Stream Order,
u
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
4

No. of Streams, Nu

Rb

26
6
2
1
17
4
1
28
10
2
16
4
1
39
13
3
1

4.333
3
2
4.25
4
2.8
5
4
4
3
4.333
4
-

Mean Rb

3.111

4.125

3.9

3.444

Table 5. Summary of the individual and average bifurcation ratios of each sub-basin.
Horton Analysis
The values of log(Nu) for each stream order u were calculated and graphed in Figure 7. Values of
R2 for each of the basins are shown in the graph. Sub-basin 4 has an R2 value of 1, which indicates
perfect adherence to Hortons Law of Stream Numbers. Sub-basin 1 has the lowest R2 value, which
indicates that it is the least adherent to Hortons Law of Stream Numbers.
The values of log(Lmu) for each stream order u were calculated and graphed in Figure 8. Values
of R2 for each of the basins are shown in the graph. Sub-basin 4 has the highest R2 value, which indicates
that it is the most adherent to Hortons Law of Mean Stream Lengths. Sub-basin 1 has the lowest R2
value, which indicates that it is the least adherent to Hortons Law of Mean Stream Lengths.
The values of log(Lu) for each stream order u were calculated and graphed in Figure 9. Values
of R2 for each of the basins are shown in the graph. Sub-basin 4 has the highest R2 value, which indicates
that it is the most adherent to Hortons Law of Total Stream Lengths. Sub-basin 2 has the lowest R2
value, which indicates that it is the least adherent to Hortons Law of Mean Stream Lengths.

13

Horton analysis shows that sub-basin 4 has the highest R2 values for the plots of the logarithm of
stream order, mean stream length, and total stream length vs. stream order. Sub-basin 1 had the lowest R2
values for the logarithm of stream order vs. stream order and logarithm of mean stream length vs. stream
order plots, and sub-basin 2 had the lowest R2 values for the logarithm of the total stream length vs.
stream order plot.

Figure 7. Graph of log(Nu) versus u for all five sub-basins in the study area. R2 values shown for each
sub-basin.

14

Figure 8. Graph of log(Lmu) vs u for all five sub-basins in the study area. R2 values are shown for each
sub-basin.

Figure 9. Graph of log(Lu) versus u for all five sub-basins in the study area. R2 values are shown for
each sub-basin.

15

Based on the properties of Hortons equations shown in the Appendix, Hortons Laws are most
applicable to a river basin where the lower-order streams are numerous and short, and the higher-order
streams are few and long. Conversely, the applicability of Hortons Laws decreases if lower-order streams
are relatively few and long and higher-order streams are relatively plenty and short. This is supported by
the R2 data, which indicate that sub-basin 4 is the one that has the highest R2 values. Sub-basin 4 has
relatively more short lower-order streams, and less long high-order streams. In contrast, sub-basins that
have low R2 values, such as sub-basins 1 and 2, have long and relatively few lower-order streams, and
have relatively short higher-order streams.
CONCLUSION
All of the five sub-basins are comprised mostly of first-order streams, accounting for 72.41% of
the total number of streams. Sub-basin 5 is the largest sub-basin in area and consequently has the largest
total stream length. Results of plotting the logarithm of the total stream length vs. stream order show that
slope angle is inversely proportional to stream length.
The basin was identified as a medium-type density basin based on Dejus density classification of
drainage systems. Drainage density has a positive correlation with stream frequency and an inversely
related relationship with constant of channel maintenance which were observed in the low drainage
density, high constant of channel maintenance and low stream frequency values for sub-basins 3 and 4
while the other way around were observed in sub-basins 1 and 2. Sub-basin 5 does not conform to this
trend due to numerous changes in lithologies and a complex characterization of relief. However, it was
observed that the ophiolitic rocks in the Bulanjao Range correspond to steeper slopes, higher stream
frequency, higher drainage density and lower permeability and show radial pattern of streams, and the
clastic rocks around the range are generally more permeable due to gentler slopes, lower stream frequency
and lower drainage density. The clastic rocks in the western side of the range were known to be folded
turbidites which allowed formation of trellis stream patterns. Intermittent streams were observed in the
eastern coastal plain of the area.
The bifurcation ratios appear to be negatively correlated with drainage density. This is probably
due to topographic factors; the sub-basins with low bifurcation ratios are mostly lowland areas, while the
16

sub-basins with high bifurcation ratios are mostly highland areas. The highland areas with high relief have
greater bifurcation than the lowland areas with low relief. But the sub-basins with low bifurcation ratios
have longer and more sinuous streams, which gives them high drainage densities.
Using R2 as a measure of adherence to Hortons Laws, it was found that the sub-basins with
short but numerous lower-order streams and long but few higher-order streams have greater adherence to
Hortons Laws than the sub-basins with longer and fewer lower-order streams, and shorter and more
numerous higher-order streams.
REFERENCES
Aurelio, M.A., Forbes, M.T., Taguibao, K.J.L., Savella, R.B., Bacud, J.A., Franke, D., Pubellier, M., Savva,
D., Meresse, F., Steuer, S., & Carranza, D. (2014). Middle to Late Cenozoic tectonic events in
south and central Palawan (Philippines) and their implications to the evolution of the southeastern margin of South China Sea: Evidence from onshore structural and offshore seismic data.
Marine and Petroleum Geology, In Press, 1-16.
Bahrami, S. (2013). Analyzing the drainage system anomaly of Zagros basins: Implications for active
tectonics. Tectonophysics, 608, 914-928.
Blue Marble Geographics. (2014) Global Mapper 15. www.globalmapper.com
Cabrera, R. (1984). Report on the Geological Appraisal and Assessment of Guano and Phosphate Rock Deposits in
Southern Palawan (Technical Report). Manila: Bureau of Mines.
Deju, R. (1971). Regional hydrology fundamentals. New Jersey: Gordon & Breach Publishing Group.
ESRI. (2011). ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10. Redlands, CA: Environmental Systems Research Institute.
Hassen, M. B., Deffontaines, B., & Turki, M. M. (2014). Recent tectonic activity of the Gafsa fault
through morphometric analysis: Southern Atlas of Tunisia. Quaternary International, 338, 99-112.
Horton, R. (1932). Drainage basin characteristics. Bulletin of the American Geophysical Union, 13, 350-361.

17

Lin, Z., & Oguchi, T. (2004). Drainage density, slope angle, and relative basin position in Japanese bare
lands from high-resolution DEMs. Geomorphology, 63(3-4), 159-173.
Pakhmode, V., Kulkarni, H., & Deolankar, S. (2003). Hydrological-drainage analysis in watershedprogramme planning: a case from the Deccan basalt. Hydrogeology Journal, 11, 595-604.
QGIS Development Team. (2014). QGIS Geographic Information Information System. Open Source
Geospatial Foundation Project. http://qgis.osgeo.org.
Schumm, S. A. (1956). Evolution of drainage basins and slopes in Bundland Amboy-New Jersey. Bulletin
of the Geological Society of America, 67, 597-646.
Strahler, A. N. (1952). Dynamic basis for geomorphology. Bulletin of the Geological Society of America, 63, 923938.
Strahler, A. N. (1952). Statistical analysis in geomorphic research. The Journal of Geology, 62, 1-25.
Tolessa, A., Rao, J., & Babu, V. (2013). Morphometric analysis of the Tandava river basin, Andhra
Pradesh, India. International Journal of Advanced Remote Sensing and GIS, 2(1), 56-69.
Tubau, X., Lastras, G., Canals, M., Micallef, A., & Amblas, D. (2013). Significance of the fine drainage
pattern for submarine canyon evolution: The Foix Canyon System, Northwestern Mediterranean
Sea. Geomorphology, 184, 20-37.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We would like to thank the NIGS faculty who guided us in properly executing this research as beginners,
and for being understanding enough to extend the deadline multiple times. We are also grateful to our
adviser Sir Richard Ybaez who helped us in choosing this topic and suggesting the proper software for
our analysis.

18

APPENDIX A
Tables of the Lengths of Individual Stream Segments
SUB-BASIN 1
N1
1 01
1 02
1 03
1 04
1 05
1 06
1 07
1 08
1 09
1 10
1 11
1 12
1 13
1 14
1 15
1 16
1 17
1 18
1 19
1 20
1 21
1 22
1 23
1 24
1 25
1 26

Length (km)
4.211515504
1.007762492
1.70381097
1.75318132
1.523829033
5.314933114
3.279319435
0.827221859
0.753009423
0.725758201
2.987493175
3.4730053
1.354245142
1.007887248
0.998577978
1.016672272
0.95091169
0.769804147
0.925308291
0.869820373
2.913784656
1.053570113
1.427222429
1.194405798
1.020255351
0.286944853

N2
2 01
2 02
2 03
2 04
2 05
2 06

Length (km)
1.246042275
0.610496691
2.682607689
1.132953457
2.056931357
0.092233647

N3
3 01
3 02

Length (km)
6.811902084
10.41261425

N4
4 01

Length (km)
2.598824107

SUB-BASIN 2
N1
1 01
1 02
1 03
1 04
1 05
1 06
1 07
1 08
1 09
1 10

Length (km)
1.704775319
2.006812045
1.695060634
1.577462461
3.44583634
2.413509295
3.424501619
2.912677061
2.389256026
4.385554299

N2
2 01
2 02
2 03
2 04

Length (km)
4.689319735
4.009035499
2.23240774
0.782983659

N3
3 01

Length (km)
18.8641553

19

1 11
1 12
1 13
1 14
1 15
1 16
1 17

4.397037248
0.838501505
1.425581156
1.528998096
2.351023273
2.180444528
1.417843926
SUB-BASIN 3

N1
1 01
1 02
1 03
1 04
1 05
1 06
1 07
1 08
1 09
1 10
1 11
1 12
1 13
1 14
1 15
1 16
1 17
1 18
1 19
1 20
1 21
1 22
1 23
1 24
1 25
1 26
1 27
1 28

Length (km)
1.374986267
0.719853877
5.243230723
4.602731011
4.743012789
1.774542854
1.740110633
0.912066717
1.057666367
1.457376652
2.953407792
1.955238601
1.297066094
2.759563118
2.173934342
1.709126772
1.997477587
2.179057835
3.352784093
1.980953319
4.168775214
2.849090128
2.245812895
2.286666468
4.733516017
1.720480265
0.738995673
2.105534841

N2
2 01
2 02
2 03
2 04
2 05
2 06
2 07
2 08
2 09

Length (km)
3.02003692
2.823875243
4.054510644
2.540641719
2.578658181
1.706659312
3.809027731
2.610373249
0.806550467

N3
3 01
3 02

Length (km)
18.8641553
11.39409633

SUB-BASIN 4
N1
1 01
1 02
1 03

Length (km)
2.182991612
1.939066533
1.376148738

N2
2 01
2 02
2 03

Length (km)
2.607731776
3.756820957
5.531694504
20

1 04
1 05
1 06
1 07
1 08
1 09
1 10
1 11
1 12
1 13
1 14
1 15
1 16

1.489630106
1.573511863
1.65628691
1.792103487
1.611591289
4.227686392
3.065635129
0.795400932
1.447361856
3.658486381
8.340069312
2.281466397
4.874864959

2 04

6.646690446

N3
3 01

Length (km)
13.69034127

SUB-BASIN 5
N1
1 01
1 02
1 03
1 04
1 05
1 06
1 07
1 08
1 09
1 10
1 11
1 12
1 13
1 14
1 15
1 16
1 17
1 18
1 19
1 20
1 21
1 22
1 23
1 24
1 25
1 26
1 27
1 28
1 29

Length (km)
1.346302314
2.291689636
1.981713461
1.729651102
1.008118316
0.839627892
1.384070328
0.640392203
0.826181883
6.984872249
1.521920498
1.151649748
3.12314786
2.826851206
1.201392931
2.03274468
1.480118833
1.954706815
1.035045874
3.066942031
2.10981456
0.725902504
3.664643485
3.751138201
1.308376854
1.081099061
1.876695852
1.183453234
0.907957248

N2
2 01
2 02
2 03
2 04
2 05
2 06
2 07
2 08
2 09
2 10
2 11
2 12
2 13

Length (km)
3.494269163
0.368192055
2.190653903
0.39136827
1.625572354
1.994641318
2.759876016
2.322917175
1.073087742
5.757814432
0.832076615
2.057976379
8.115314432

N3
3 01
3 02
3 03

Length (km)
7.013117411
13.9912021
8.017933639

N4
4 01

Length (km)
18.64909921

21

1 30
1 31
1 32
1 33
1 34
1 35
1 36
1 37
1 38
1 39

1.68471248
1.587863219
1.295223925
2.299800233
3.246831919
4.466074874
2.203146695
5.312732749
1.753906556
4.184638815

22

APPENDIX B
R2 of Best Fit Lines of log(Nu), log(Lmu), and log(L) vs. u as a Measure of Adherence to
Hortons Laws
In the Methodology section, it was asserted that a linear relationship between x and log(y) must
imply an exponential relationship between x and y. In order to prove that this assertion is valid, let us
prove that an exponential relationship between x and y is a necessary and sufficient condition for a linear
relationship between x and log(y).
An exponential equation is any equation of the form:
=

(6)

where a is an arbitrary constant, and b is a constant which serves as the base of the exponential
function. If a > 0 and b > 1, the function represents exponential growth. If a > 0 and 0 < b < 1, the
function represents exponential decay.
Let us first prove that an exponential relationship between x and y is a sufficient condition for a
linear relationship between x and log(y). We assume an exponential relationship, and show that it must
inevitably lead to the conclusion that x and y are linearly related. Taking the logarithm of both sides in
Equation (6), we get:
log() = log( ) = () = [log()]
log() = [log()]

(7)

Since a and b are both constants, log(ab) is also a constant. Equation (7) is of the form y = mx +
b1, with m = log(ab) and b1 = 0 (we use b1 instead of b to avoid confusion with the b used in Equations
(6) and (7)). Therefore, for any variable y dependent on a variable x, an exponential relationship between
y and x is a sufficient condition for a linear relationship between log(y) and x.
Now let us prove that an exponential relationship between y and x is a necessary condition for a
linear relationship between log(y) and x. We first assume a linear relationship between log(y) and x, and

23

show that it must inevitably lead to the conclusion that y and x are exponentially related. Let us set up the
equation:
log() = + 1

(8)

which mathematically states that log(y) is linearly related to x. Raising both sides to the power of 10 in
order to remove the logarithmic term, we get:
= 10+1 = (10 ) (101 )
= (101 )(10 )

(9)

Since b1 and m are constants, 10b1 and 10m are also constants. Thus, Equation (9) is of the same
form as Equation (5), with a = 10b1and b = 10m. Therefore, Equation (9) is an exponential function, and
we have proven that an exponential relationship between y and x is a necessary condition for a linear
relationship between log(y) and x.
Combining this with our two findings, we have proven that an exponential relationship between
y and x is a necessary and sufficient condition for a linear relationship between log(y) and x. In other
words, y and x are exponentially related if and only if log(y) and x are linearly related.

From this finding, we can infer that deviations from linearity in a graph of log(y) versus x must
imply deviations from an exponential relationship between y and x. We can infer that the lower the value
of R2 in the best fit line of a graph of log(y) versus x, the greater the deviation from exponential behavior
between y and x. It turns out that Hortons laws of stream numbers, mean stream lengths, and total
stream lengths are exponential functions, as we shall show.
Hortons laws of stream numbers, mean stream lengths, and total stream lengths are given
respectively by Equations (3), (4), and (5) in the Methodology section.
=

(3)

24

 = 1 1

(4)

= 1 1

(5)

By rearranging the terms, Equations (3), (4), and (5) can be expressed respectively in the forms:
1

= ( ) ( )

= ( 1 )

= ( )( )

(10)

(11)

(12)

Equations (10), (11), and (12) are of the same form as Equation (6). Therefore they are
exponential functions relating Nu to u, Lmu to u, and Lu to u, respectively. Because we asserted that R2of
the best fit line of a graph of log(y) versus x can be taken as a measure of how closely y and x follow
exponential behavior, we can infer that R2 of the best fit lines of log(Nu), log(Lmu), and log(Lu) versus u
can be taken as a measure of how closely the drainage basin obeys Hortons laws of stream numbers,
mean stream lengths, and total stream lengths. The higher the R2, the more closely Hortons laws are
obeyed, and thus the more accurate the calculations based on Hortons laws. The lower the R 2, the less
obedient the basin is to Hortons laws, and thus the less accurate the calculations based on Hortons laws.

25