Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
doi: 10.14355/ijrsa.2015.05.008
www.ijrsa.org
Key words
Geomorphometric Parameters; Sediment Production Rate; Run-off Rate; GIS; Remote Sensing; Tuirini Watershed; Mizoram
Introduction
The hilly terrain of Mizoram is prone to soil erosion due to soft nature of sediments, immature topography, heavy
rainfall, high drainage density and high relief with steep slopes. A large amount of eroded sediments outflow
from the watershed every year, particularly during the monsoon. The area is represented by a complex structural
deposition of argillaceous and arenaceous sediments of Neogene deposits. Estimation of soil erosion, sediment
production rate (SPR), runoff, sediment transportation and deposition within a watershed are essential for
conservation of land and water resources to sustain any developmental activity carried out on a watershed.
Management of natural resources at watershed scale produces multiple benefits in terms of increasing
groundwater storage, utilizing runoff for useful purposes, minimizing land degradation and controlling soil
erosion to reduce the effect of sediment yield on the watershed. Watershed is a technical term used to denote a
common drainage point. It is land area that captures precipitation in the form of rainfall, snow or dew and drains
water and sediments through a common outlet at which the water enters another water body such as a stream,
river, lake or ocean. Watershed characteristics such as size, drainage, climate, lithology, vegetation, slope, land
use/cover and soils affects peak rate of runoff, infiltration rates, erosion and sediment production.
Geomorphometry is the numerically analysing and quantifying of the land surface. Geomorphometric analysis of a
watershed gives reliable information about hydrogeological nature, geological structures, slope morphometry,
surface runoff, stream discharge and sediment yield etc., which helps for effective planning, development and
management of natural resources of an area. Land degradation due to weathering and erosional process produces
sediment load which is transported by surface runoff into the river or ocean. The amount of detached sediment
load traversing through the outlet of a watershed is known as sediment yield. Sediment yield and runoff of a
watershed are influenced by lithology, vegetation, soil, slope and rainfall intensity. For estimating soil erosion from
the watersheds, several empirical models based on the geomorphological parameters were developed in the past to
quantify the run-off and sediment production rate (Jose and Das, 1982; Misra et. al., 1984). Remote sensing and
Geographic Information System (GIS) are the most advanced techniques for watershed management, planning and
67
www.ijrsa.org
development. The present study was taken up to estimation of various geomorphometric parameters, SPR and
run-off using GIS tools for further planning and management of resources for sustainable development of the
watershed.
68
9248'E
9254'E
UBU
2351'N
9254'E
2351'N
2351'N
9248'E
www.ijrsa.org
2351'N
MBU
2342'N
2342'N
2342'N
2342'N
MBU
UBU
MBU
Legend
First order stream
Legend
UBU - Upper Bhuban Unit
MBU - Middle Bhuban Unit
2333'N
2333'N
2333'N
2333'N
Foramation boundary
Lithology
Sandstone
Shale and Siltstone
9248'E
Watershed boundary
Km
km
9254'E
9248'E
9254'E
9254'E
9252'E
9253'E
2352'N
2352'N
9251'E
2351'N
9256'E
2351'N
9255'E
9253'E
2351'N
9255'E
2342'N
2342'N
9253'E
9252'E
2350'N
9254'E
9251'E
2349'N
9256'E
2348'N
9255'E
2349'N
2343'N
2350'N
2344'N
9254'E
2344'N
9255'E
2343'N
9254'E
2351'N
9253'E
69
www.ijrsa.org
a) Trellis pattern: Trellis pattern is characterised by elongated tributaries flowing parallel or sub-parallel to
the major stream. The primary and secondary tributaries join the major river at approximately 90 0 angles.
Such patterns are developed in the areas of folded sedimentary rocks of various resistances to erosion. In
the study area trellis is the most dominant pattern and occupies about 92% of the area due to the presence
of folded bedrock of varying resistance and might be strong structural control upon streams (Fig. 4A).
b) Parallel pattern: The parallel drainage pattern comprises numerous streams flowing nearly parallel to each
other and all the streams join the main channel at approximately the same angle. Parallel drainage patterns
are found in areas where regional slopes are dominant and also in regions of parallel elongate landforms.
In the NE, SE and SW parts of the study area, some of the streams show the parallel type of drainage
pattern due to steep slopes and covers an area of about 6% (Fig. 4B).
c) Dendritic pattern: Tree like branching of streams and rivers that intersect primarily at acute angle is
defined as dendritic pattern. It indicates the homogeneity in texture, rock type and lack of structural
control. Dendritic to sub-dendritic pattern is observed in the limited part of the study area and constitutes
about 2% of the area because of its uniformly resistant and homogeneous nature of the rocks (Fig. 4C).
Materials and Methods
Three types of data sets have been used in the present study:
(i)
Survey of India topographic (SoI) maps on 1:50,000 scale bearing No. 84A/13, 14 and 15,
(ii)
Cloud free digital data of IRS-1D, LISS III (Linear Imaging Self Scanner) date of pass 04th February, 2001 in
three spectral bands viz. band 2 (0.52 0.59 m), band 3 (0.62 0.68 m) and band 4 (0.77 0.86 m) with
path-113 & row-055 (23.5 m spatial resolution), was procured from National Remote Sensing Centre
(NRSC), Hyderabad, India and
(iii)
Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM) digital elevation data with a spatial resolution of 90 m was
downloaded from the CGIAR Consortium for Spatial Information site (http;//srtm.csi.cgiar.org).
All the data were geometrically rectified and projected into UTM, WGS-1984 datum, 46N zone projection system,
so that errors can be minimized in GIS platform. ERDAS Imagine - 9.2 has been used for the digital analysis of
remotely sensed data and was geometrically corrected and resampled taking toposheets as reference. The drainage
networks and watershed boundary were delineated and digitized from SoI topographic maps and then updated
from satellite data at scale of 1:50,000. The data extraction and analysis were carried out using ArcGIS-10.2 tools.
For the determination of stream order, Strahler (1964) system was followed and the stream length had been
computed as per the law of Horton (1945). The different geomorphometric parameters were computed using
standard mathematical formulas of Gravelius (1914), Horton (1932 & 1945), Miller (1953), Schumm (1956), Melton
(1957), Hadely and Schumm (1961), Strahler (1964), Stoddart (1965), Kumar et. al. (2000) and Sreedevi et. al. (2005).
Sediment production rate and run-off were estimated based on Jose and Das (1982) method. The drainage map of
the area was prepared from SoI toposheets which were updated using IRS-1D, LISS-III imagery. Updated drainage
map was used for the analysis of drainage patterns of the study area. Geological map of the area had been
prepared from geological map of Mizoram worked out by Ganju (1975) and based on ground information. Flow
direction and flow accumulation of the watershed have been estimated by using ArcHydro Tools in ArcGIS-10.2
software. Digital Elevation Model (DEM) was generated from SRTM 90 m resolution data using Surface Tools in
ArcGIS-10.2 software.
Results and Discussions
The geomorphometric parameters of the watershed have been classified into four different categories viz. drainage
network, basin geometry, drainage texture and relief, which are discussed in the following sections.
1) Drainage Analysis
The parameters such as stream order, stream number, stream length, mean stream length, stream length ratio,
bifurcation ratio and Rho coefficient, which were described and the results have been tabulated in table 1.
70
www.ijrsa.org
Stream
order
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
6th
Total
Number
of streams
2177
436
91
20
4
1
2729
Stream
length ratio
1.24
2.12
2.02
2.17
3.33
-
Bifurcation
ratio
4.99
4.79
4.55
5.00
4.00
-
Mean
Rho coefficient
bifurcation ratio
4.66
0.47
The graphical relationship between the log value of stream numbers against stream orders when plotted gives a
straight line (Fig.5A) and supports the Horton (1945) law of stream numbers, which state that the number of
stream segments of each order usually decreased in geometric progression as the stream order increased. Similarly,
the logarithm plot of streams length versus stream order showed a linear relationship with a small deviation from
a straight line (Fig.5B) and confirmed to Horton (1945) law of stream length, which stated that the average
length of streams of different orders in a drainage basin tended closely to approximate a direct geometric
ratio. It is also evident from the fig. 5A & 5B that the linear pattern of drainage networks indicates the homogenous
rock material subjected to weathering and deviation from its general behaviour suggests the lithologic and
topographic variation across the watershed.
1.1) Stream Order, Number and Length
Stream order expresses the hierarchical relationship between the stream segments within a drainage network
and the order wise stream segment is the stream number. The length of stream segments in each order is known
as stream length. There are 2729 streams sprawled over an area of 420.07 sq.km, out of which 79.78 % area is of
1st order, 15.97 % area is of 2nd order, 3.34 % area is of 3rd order, 0.73 % area is of 4th order, 0.14 % area is of 5th
order and 0.03 % area is of 6th order stream. In the watershed most dominant streams are 1 st order, followed by
2nd order and then 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th order stream (Fig. 3). 1st and 2nd order streams which are located mostly in
high elevated area with steep slopes. Similarly, the length of 1st order streams constitute 69.02 %, 2nd order
streams constitute 17.25 %, 3rd order streams constitute 7.61 %, 4th order streams constitute 3.39 %, 5th order
streams constitute 1.47 % and 6th order stream constitute only 1.24 % of the total stream length. It is also
observed that the total length of stream segments is maximum in 1st order streams and decreases as the stream
order increases.
71
www.ijrsa.org
72
Watershed
area
(A) km2
Watershed
perimeter
(P) km
Watershed
length
(Lb) km
Length of
main stream
(Ls) km
420.07
110.70
45.30
56.75
Elevation in m
Elevation at (m)
Max (H)
Min (h)
Source
(a)
Confluence
(b)
Fall in
height
(a-b) km
1905
78
780
78
0.70
www.ijrsa.org
73
www.ijrsa.org
Legend
DEM
High:1905 m
Low:78 m
4) Relief Analysis
The relief characteristics of the watershed viz. watershed relief, absolute relief, relative relief, dissection index,
gradient ratio and time of concentration are measured for the present study and have been discussed below.
4.1) Relief and Absolute Relief
The difference between the highest elevation on the ridge and lowest elevation on the valley floor is known as
the relief (R) of the watershed. It has an influence on the channel slope which controls the flood pattern and the
amount of sediments which get transported (Hadely and Schumm, 1961). The maximum (H) and minimum (h)
elevations of the Tuirini watershed is 1905 m and 78 m respectively, thus watershed relief is 1.82 km that
indicates high relief with steep slopes of the area. Absolute relief (Ar) is the highest elevation of an area above
the mean sea level and the Ar of the study area is 1905 m.
74
www.ijrsa.org
93E
9248'E
9254'E
93E
Flow Direction
Legend
Legend
North
Flow Direction
Northeast
North
Flow Direction
North
Northeast
East
Northeast
Legend
East
Northwest
2333'N
2333'N
Northwest
South
South
Southeast
Southeast
West
West
Flow Accumulation
Northwest
2333'N
East
2333'N
2342'N
Legend
Value (Cubic
South meters)
High: 107695
Southeast
West
Sowthwest
Sowthwest
9248'E
2342'N
2342'N
2351'N
2351'N
2351'N
2342'N
2351'N
9248'E
9254'E
4
Km
88
93E
00
Sowthwest
Low:
0
9248'E
9254'E
4
Km
88
93E
75
www.ijrsa.org
76
www.ijrsa.org
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors express their gratitude to Head, Department of Geology, Mizoram University for providing Remote
Sensing and GIS laboratory facilities to carry out the current work. The first author is grateful to University Grants
Commission (UGC), New Delhi for providing financial support for the present research work.
REFERENCES
[1]
Chopra, R., Dhiman, R.D. and Sharma, P.K. (2005): Morphometric analysis of sub-watersheds in Gurdaspur district, Punjab
using Remote Sensing and GIS techniques. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 33(4), pp. 531540.
[2]
[3]
Fairfiled, J. and Leymarie, P. (1991): Drainage network from grid digital elevation models. Water Resource Research, 30(6),
pp. 16811692.
[4]
Ganju, J.L. (1975): Geology of Mizoram. Bulletin Geology, Mineralogical, Metallargical Society of India, 48, pp.1726.
[5]
Gravelius, H. (1914): Flusskunde. Goschen Verlagshan dlung Berlin. In: Zavoianu I, editor. Morphometry of drainage
basins. Amster dam: Elsevier.
[6]
Hadley, R.F. and Schumm, S.A. (1961): Sediment sources and drainage basin characteristics in upper Cheyenne river basin.
United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper, no.1531B, pp.137-196.
[7]
Horton, R.E. (1932): Drainage basin characteristics. Transactions of American Geophysics Union, 31, pp.350361.
[8]
Horton, R.E. (1945): Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins: hydrophysical approach to quantitative
morphology. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 56 (3), pp.275370.
[9]
Jose, C.S. and Das, D.C. (1982): Geomorphic prediction models for sediment production rate and intensive priorities of
watershed in Mayurakshi catchment. Proceeding of the international symposium on hydrological aspects of mountainous
watershed held at school of hydrology, University of Roorke, Nov. 46, 1, pp.1523.
[10] Kumar, R., Kumar, S., Lohani, A.K., Nema, R.K. and Singh, R.D. (2000): Evaluation of geomorphological characteristics of
a catchment using GIS. GIS India, 9, pp.1317.
[11] Melton, M.A. (1957): An analysis of the relations among elements of climate, surface properties and geomorphology.
Project NR 389042, Tech. Rep. 11, Columbia University.
[12] Miller, V.C. (1953): A quantitative geomorphic study of drainage basin characteristics on the Clinch Mountain area, Virgina
and Tennessee. Project NR 389402, Tech. Rep. 3, Columbia University, Department of Geology, ONR, New York.
[13] Misra, N., Satyanarayana, T. and Mukherjee, R.K. (1984): Effect of topoelements on the sediemnt production rate from subwatershed in upper Damodar valley. Journal of Agricultural Engineering, 21(3), pp.6570.
[14] Nag, S.K and Chakraborty, S. (2003): Influence of rock types and structures in the development of drainage network in
hard rock area. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 31(1), pp. 2535.
[15] Nag, S.K. (1998): Morphometric analysis using remote sensing techniques in the Chaka sub-basin, Purulia district, West
Bengal. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing, 26 (1&2), pp.6976.
[16] Ozdemir, H. and Bird, D. (2009): Evaluation of morphometric parameters of drainage networks derived from topographic
maps and DEM in point of floods. Environmental Geology, 56, pp.14051415.
[17] Schumm, S.A. (1956): Evolution of drainage systems and slopes in badland at Perth Amboy, New Jersey. Geological Society
of America Bulletin, 67, pp.597646.
[18] Singh, S. and Dubey, A. (1994): Geo-environmental planning of watersheds in India, Allahabad, India: Chugh Publications,
28 (A), pp.69.
[19] Sinha, N.K.P. (1966): Geomorphic evolution of northern Rupununi, British, Guiana. Ph.D. Thesis (Unpublished),
Department of Geography, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
[20] Sreedevi, P.D., Subrahmanyam, K. and Ahmed, S. (2005): The significance of morphometric analysis for obtaining
groundwater potential zones in a structurally controlled terrain. Environmental Geology, 47, pp.412420.
[21] Stoddart, D.R. (1965): Climatic geomorphology: Review and reassessment. Progress in Physical Geography, 1, pp.159222.
[22] Strahler, A.N. (1964): Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and channel networks. In: VT Chow (ed.), Handbook
of applied hydrology. McGraw Hill, New York, pp.4.394.76.
[23] Zernitz, E.R. (1932): Drainage pattern and their significance. Journal of Geology, XL (6), pp.498521.
77