Arabian Journal of Geosciences

, 11:530 | Cite as

Morphometric assessment and sub-watershed prioritization of Khari River basin in semi-arid region of Rajasthan, India

  • Nitika Mundetia
  • Devesh SharmaEmail author
  • Swatantra Kumar Dubey
Original Paper


Watershed management is very crucial for arid and semi-arid regions dealing with limited availability of water resource. Morphometric assessment and prioritization studies provide basic criterion for effective local level watershed planning and natural resource management. The present study is an attempt to analyze morphometric characters of the Khari River basin and prioritize the sub-watersheds on the basis of ground water potentialities indicated by morphometric parameters using GIS approach. Khari River is semi-arid ephemeral; it is a tributary of Banas River, an important river of central Rajasthan (India). The basin has been subdivided in five sub-watersheds namely SW1 to SW5. Linear, areal, and relief parameters are calculated for Khari basin as well as for each sub-watershed. Morphometric parameters that are related to groundwater potentialities are ranked and compound factor values are calculated for each sub-watershed and priority is allotted based on these values. First priority is given to the least value of compound factor that indicate most deficit ground water condition. Overall results illustrate that Khari is a sixth-order stream and covers 6205 km2 area. Dendritic pattern is observed in Khari and in all the five sub-watersheds that indicate homogenous nature of underlain material and less structural control in the topography. Presence of low bifurcation ratio, low drainage density, and low drainage frequency values are favorable parameters of good permeability, infiltration in the basin, further gentle slope, coarse drainage texture, moderate to low relief, and elongated shape—all these parameters indicate good groundwater potentialities in major portions of the basin. Prioritization results show that the sub-watershed SW4 is at first priority with most deficit groundwater potential in comparison to other sub-watersheds and require water conservation measures. Sub-watershed SW4 has high values in linear parameters and low value in shape parameters that specify for poor groundwater potential, less permeability and high runoff, etc. Sub-watershed SW5 on contrary has indicated highest ground water potential in comparison to other sub-watersheds of the basin. The study provide local drainage morphometric information and preliminary prioritization for better water resource management in semi-arid region to achieve water self-sufficiency and sustainability at basin level.


Resource Stream order Drainage texture Runoff Sustainability 


  1. Agarwal CS (1998) Study of drainage pattern through aerial data in Naugarh area of Varanasi District, U.P. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 26:169–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aher PD, Adinarayana J, Gorantiwar SD (2014) Quantification of morphometric characterization and prioritization for management planning in semi-arid tropics of India: a remote sensing and GIS approach. J Hydrol 511:850–860. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ali K, Bajracharya RM, Sitaula BK, Raut N, Koirala HL (2017) Morphometric analysis of Gilgit River basin in mountainous region of Gilgit-Baltistan Province, northern Pakistan. J Geosci Environ Prot 05:70–88. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Al-Sulaimi J, Khalaf FJ, Mukhopadhyay (1997) Geomorphological analysis of paleo drainage systems and their environmental implications in the desert of Kuwait. Environ Geol 29:94–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Altaf S, Meraj G (2014) Morphometry and land cover based multi-criteria analysis for assessing the soil erosion susceptibility of the western Himalayan watershed. Environ Monit Assess 8391–8412. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Altaf F, Meraj G, Romshoo S a. (2013) Morphometric analysis to infer hydrological behaviour of Lidder watershed, western Himalaya, India. Geogr J 2013:1–14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Amma Rao GT, Gurunadha Rao VVS, Dakate R et al (2012) Remote sensing and GIS based comparative morphometric study of two sub-watersheds of different physiographic conditions, west Godavari District, A.P. J Geol Soc India 79:383–390. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Aouragh MH, Essahlaoui A (2014) Morphometric analysis of a Guigou Sub-watershed, Sebou basin, Middle Atlas, Morocco using GIS based ASTER (DEM) image. Int J Innov Res Sci Eng Technol 3(4), 11503-11512Google Scholar
  9. Arya RK, Sarda VK (2017) Morphometric analysis of a semi-arid region using GIS. Int J Eng Res Appl 07:08–17. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Avinash K, Jayappa KS, Deepika B (2011) Prioritization of sub-basins based on geomorphology and morphometric analysis using remote sensing and geographic information system (GIS) techniques. Geocarto International 26:569–592. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Balasubramanian A, Duraisamy K, Thirumalaisamy S et al (2017) Prioritization of subwatersheds based on quantitative morphometric analysis in lower Bhavani basin, Tamil Nadu, India using DEM and GIS techniques. Arab J Geosci 10.
  12. Biswas A, Das Majumdar D, Banerjee S (2014) Morphometry governs the dynamics of a drainage basin: analysis and implications. Geogr J 2014:1–14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Breyer SP, Scott Snow R (1992) Drainage basin perimeters: a fractal significance. Geomorphology 5:143–157. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Choudhari PP, Nigam GK, Singh SK, Thakur S (2018) Morphometric based prioritization of watershed for groundwater potential of Mula river basin, Maharashtra, India. Geol Ecol Landscapes 9508:1–12.
  15. Clarke JI (1966) Morphometry from maps, essays in geomorphology. Elsevier Publication Co., New York, pp 235–274Google Scholar
  16. Das AK, Mukherjee S (2005) Drainage morphometry using satellite data and GIS in Raigad district, Maharashtra. J Geol Soc India 65:577–586Google Scholar
  17. Dempsey N, Jayaraj SR, Redmond E (2018) There’s always the river: social and environmental equity in rapidly urbanising landscapes in India. Landsc Res 43:275–288. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Everard M, Sharma OP, Vishwakarma VK, Khandal D, Sahu YK, Bhatnagar R, Singh JK, Kumar R, Nawab A, Kumar A, Kumar V, Kashyap A, Pandey DN, Pinder AC (2018) Assessing the feasibility of integrating ecosystem-based with engineered water resource governance and management for water security in semi-arid landscapes: a case study in the Banas catchment, Rajasthan, India. Sci Total Environ 612:1249–1265. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Faniran A (1968) The index of drainage intensity—a provisional new drainage factor. Aust J Sci 31:328–330Google Scholar
  20. Farhan Y, Al-shaikh N, Mausa R (2017) Prioritization of semi-arid agricultural watershed using morphometric and principal component analysis, remote sensing, and GIS techniques, the Zerqa River Watershed. Agric Sci 8:113–148. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Food and Agriculture Organization guideline for slope classification and land capabilities.
  22. Gardiner V (2003) Drainage basin morphometry  In: Goudie A (ed) Geomorphological Techniques, 2nd edn. London, Routledge, p 79–91Google Scholar
  23. Government of India, Dams in Rajasthan, Water Resources Information System of India.
  24. Government of India, Department of Science & Technology , Survey of India Accessed 21 May 2018
  25. Government of Rajasthan, Ministry of Water Resources, Central Ground Water Board, Groundwater year book, Rajasthan (2013) Accessed 7 Dec 2017
  26. Government of Rajasthan; Central Groundwater Board; Groundwater scenario district profile reports. Accessed 15 Dec 2017
  27. Gregory KJ (1966) Dry valleys and the composition of the drainage net. J Hydrol 4:327–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gregory KJ, Walling DE (1968) The variation of drainage density within a catchment. Hydrol Sci J 13(2):61–68Google Scholar
  29. Groundwater Department of Rajasthan, Hydrogeological Atlas of Rajasthan districts (2013)
  30. Gulavani VS, Deshmukh PSS, Zende M (2017) Geomorphological analysis of upper Karha watershed in semi-arid area, Maharastra, India. Int Educ Sci Res J.3:52–56Google Scholar
  31. Hadley RF, Schumm SA (1961) Sediment sources and drainage basin characteristics in upper Cheyenne River basin. USGS Water-Suppl Pap 1531-B:198Google Scholar
  32. Horton RE (1932) Drainage basin characteristics transactions. Am Geophys Union 13:350–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Horton RE (1945) Erosional development of streams and their drainage basin; hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Geol Soc Am Bull 56:151–180. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014) Climate change, impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability, summary for policy maker.
  35. Jacobson PJ, Jacobson KN, Seely, MK (1995) Ephemeral rivers and their catchments: sustaining people and development in western Namibia. Desert Research Foundation of Namibia Google Scholar
  36. Jasmin I, Mallikarjuna P (2013) Morphometric analysis of Araniar river basin using remote sensing and geographical information system in the assessment of groundwater potential. Arab J Geosci 6:3683–3692. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kadam AK, Umrikar BN, Sankhua RN (2016) Geomorphometric characterization and prioritization of watershed from semi- arid region, India for green growth potential. J Environ Res Dev 11:417–432Google Scholar
  38. Kalwar SC, Vijay PL (1991) In: Sharma, Hari Shanker (ed) Indian geomorphology: selected papers from the 2nd conference of the Indian Institute of Geomorphologists on environmental geomorphology. Concept Publishing Company Chapter 29Google Scholar
  39. Kandpal H, Kumar A, Reddy CP, Malik A (2017) Watershed prioritization based on morphometric parameters using remote sensing and geographical information system watershed prioritization based on morphometric parameters using remote sensing and geographical information system. Indian J Eco 4(3):433-437Google Scholar
  40. Kuchay NA, Bhat MS (2013) Automated drainage characterization of Dudganga watershed in western Himalayas. Eur Sci Jounal 9:126–138Google Scholar
  41. Kumar P, Kshitij R (2017) A GIS-based approach in drainage morphometric analysis of Kanhar River basin, India. Appl Water Sci 217–232. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kumar A, Samuel SK, Vyas V (2014) Morphometric analysis of six sub-watersheds in the central zone of Narmada River. Arab J Geosci 8:5685–5712. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kumar P, Rajeev R, Chandel S et al (2018) Hydrological inferences through morphometric analysis of lower Kosi river basin of India for water resource management based on remote sensing data. Appl Water Sci 8:1–16. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Magesh NS, Chandrasekar N (2014) GIS model-based morphometric evaluation of Tamiraparani subbasin, Tirunelveli district, Tamil Nadu, India. Arab J Geosci 7:131–141. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Magesh NS, Jitheshlal KV, Chandrasekar N, Jini KV (2012) GIS based morphometric evaluation of Chimmini and Mupily watersheds, parts of western Ghats, Thrissur District, Kerala, India. Earth Sci Inf 5:111–121. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Magesh NS, Jitheshlal KV, Chandrasekar N, Jini KV (2013) Geographical information system-based morphometric analysis of Bharathapuzha river basin, Kerala, India. Appl Water Sci 3:467–477. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Martins AK, Gadiga BL (2015) Hydrological and morphometric analysis of upper Yedzaram catchment of Mubi in Adamawa state, Nigeria. Using geographic information system (GIS). World Environ 5:63–69.
  48. Mesa LM (2006) Morphometric analysis of a subtropical Andean basin (Tucuman, Argentina). Environ Geol 50(8):1235–1242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Meshram SG, Sharma SK (2017) Prioritization of watershed through morphometric parameters: a PCA-based approach. Appl Water Sci 7:1505–1519. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Miller VC (1953) A quantitative geomorphic study of drainage basin characteristic in the clinch, Mountain area, Verdinia and Tennesser, Projet NR Tech. Rept. 3 Columbia University, Department of Geology, ONR, Geography branch, New York, pp 389–042Google Scholar
  51. Mundetia N, Sharma D (2014) Analysis of rainfall and drought in Rajasthan state, India. Glob Nest J 17:12–21Google Scholar
  52. Nag SK, Chakraborty S (2003) Influence of rock types and structures in the development of drainage network in hard rock area. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 31:26–35. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Narain P, Khan MA, Singh G (2006) Potental for water conservation and Havesting against drought in Rajasthan. IWMI.104Google Scholar
  54. Nayar V, Natarajan, K (2013) Quantitative Morphometric analysis of Kosasthalaiyar sub basin (Chennai basin) using remote sensing (SRTM) data and GIS techniques. Int J Geomat Geosci 4(1):89 Google Scholar
  55. Osano PO (2015) Morphometric characterization and hydrological assessments of river Njoro watershed using system for automated geoscientific analysis (SAGA) and shuttle radar topographic mission (SRTM) digital elevation model. Int J Adv Remote Sens GIS 4:37–44Google Scholar
  56. Patel DP, Gajjar CA, Srivastava PK (2013) Prioritization of Malesari mini-watersheds through morphometric analysis: a remote sensing and GIS perspective. Environ Earth Sci 69:2643–2656. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Perrin J, Ferrant S, Massuel S, Dewandel B, Maréchal JC, Aulong S, Ahmed S (2012) Assessing water availability in a semi-arid watershed of southern India using a semi-distributed model. J Hydrol 460–461:143–155. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pitchaiah PS (2017) Impacts of sand mining on environment—a review. SSRG International J Geoinfor Geolog Sci 4:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Pophare AM, Balpande US (2014) Morphometric analysis of Suketi river basin, Himachal Himalaya, India. J Earth Syst Sci 123:1501–1515. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rais S, Javed A (2014) Identification of artificial recharge sites in Manchi Basin, eastern Rajasthan (India) using remote sensing and GIS techniques. J Geogr Inf Syst 6:162–175Google Scholar
  61. Rawat U, Awasthi A, Gupta DS et al (2017) Morphometric analysis using remote sensing and GIS techniques in the Bagain River basin. Indian J Sci Technol 10:1–9. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Reddy VR (2003) Land degradation in India. Econ Polit Wkly 38:4700–4713Google Scholar
  63. Reddy GPO, Maji AK, Gajbhiye KS (2004) Drainage morphometry and its influence on landform characteristics in a basaltic terrain, Central India—a remote sensing and GIS approach. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 6:1–16. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Rekha VB, George AV, Rita M (2011) Morphometric analysis and micro-watershed prioritization of Peruvanthanam sub-watershed, the Manimala River basin, Kerala, South India. Enviro Res Eng Manag  3:6–14Google Scholar
  65. Rodríguez-Estrella T (2012) The problems of overexploitation of aquifers in semi-arid areas: the Murcia region and the Segura Basin (south-East Spain) case. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci Discuss 9:5729–5756. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sangle AS, Yannawar PL (2014) Morphometric analysis of watershed using GIS and RS: a review. Int J Eng Res Technol (IJERT) 3:599–602Google Scholar
  67. Schumm SA (1956) Evolution of drainage systems and slopes in badlands at Perth Amboy, New Jersey. Bull Geol Soc Am 67:597–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sehgal IJ, Babar M (2013) Morphometric analysis with reference to hydrogeological repercussion on Domri River sub-basin of Sindphana River basin, Maharashtra, India. J Geosci Geomatics 1:29–35.
  69. Shaikh M, Birajdar F (2015) Analysis of watershed characteristics using remote sensing and gis techniques. Int J Innov Res Sci Eng Technol 4. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Shaji J, Anilkuar R (2014) Socio-environmental impact of river sand mining: an example from Neyyar River, Thiruvananthapuram District of Kerala, India. IOSR J Human Soc Sci 19:1–7Google Scholar
  71. Shreve RL (1966) Statistical law of stream numbers. J Geol 74:17–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Singh A, Demaria F, Krishna V (2015) Illegal sand mining conflicts in India. Illegal Sand Mining Conflicts in India, EJOLT Factshee 10:1–4Google Scholar
  73. Sinha-Roy S (2007) Study of fluvial geomorphology and tectonics of the Khari-Mashi drainage basin, Rajasthan, for data-base preparation and groundwater recharge capability assessment (Final Report) Birla Institute of Scientific Research JaipurGoogle Scholar
  74. Smith KG (1950) Standards for grading texture of erosional topography. Am J Sci 248(9):655–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Sreebha S, Padmalal D (2011) Environmental impact assessment of sand mining from the small catchment rivers in the southwestern coast of India: a case study. Environ Manag 43:130–140. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Sreedevi PD, Subrahmanyam K, Ahmed S (2005) The significance of morphometric analysis for obtaining groundwater potential zones in a structurally controlled terrain. Environ Geol 47:412–420. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Sreedevi PD, Owais S, Khan HH, Ahmed S (2009) Morphometric analysis of a watershed of South India using SRTM data and GIS. J Geol Soc India 73:543–552. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Sreedevi PD, Sreekanth PD, Khan HH (2013) Drainage morphometry and its influence on hydrology in an semi arid region: using SRTM data and GIS. Environ Earth Sci 70:839–848. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Strahler AN (1957) Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. Trans Am Geophys Union 38:913–920. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Strahler AN (1964) Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and channel networks. In: Te Chow V (ed) Hand book of applied hydrology. McGraw Hill Book Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  81. Subramanya K (2013) Engineering Hydrology, 4e. Tata McGraw-Hill EducationGoogle Scholar
  82. Subyani AM, Qari MH, Matsah MI (2010) Digital elevation model and multivariate statistical analysis of morphometric parameters of some wadis, western Saudi Arabia. Arab J Geosci 5:1–11. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Suresh M, Sudhakar S, Remote R, Service S (2004) Prioritization of watersheds using morphometric parameters and assessment of surface water potential using remote sensing. Journal of the Indian Society of Remote Sensing 32:249–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Vittala SS, Govindaiah S, Gowda HH (2008) Prioritization of sub-watersheds for sustainable development and management of natural resources: an integrated approach using remote sensing, GIS and socio-economic data. Curr Sci 95:345–354Google Scholar
  85. Voss K, Swenson S, Rodell M (2015) Quantifying renewable groundwater stress with GRACE. 5217–5238. ReceivedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wani MH, Javed A (2013) Evaluation of natural resource potential in semi-arid micro-watershed, eastern Rajasthan, using remote sensing and geographic information system. Arab J Geosci 6:1843–1854. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. World Economic Forum (2018). Environmental performance index, Yale Center for Environmental law & policy, Yale University, in collaboration with the world economic forum with support from the McCall MacBain Foundation and Mark T. DeAngelis,
  88. Yadav SK, Dubey A, Szilard S, Singh SK (2018) Prioritisation of sub-watersheds based on earth observation data of agricultural dominated northern river basin of India. Geocarto Int 6049:1–18. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Yanina M, Angillieri E, Fernández OM (2017) Morphometric analysis of river basins using GIS and remote sensing of an Andean section of route 150, Argentina. A comparison between manual and automated delineation of basins. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas 34:150–156Google Scholar
  90. Zende AM, Nagarajan R, Atal KR (2013) Prioritization of sub-watersheds in semi arid region, Western Maharashtra, India using Geographical Information System. Am J Eng Res 2(10):128–135Google Scholar
  91. Ziemer GL (1973) Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins related to fish production. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Division of Commercial Fisheries. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nitika Mundetia
    • 1
  • Devesh Sharma
    • 1
    Email author
  • Swatantra Kumar Dubey
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Environmental Science, School of Earth SciencesCentral University of RajasthanAjmerIndia

Personalised recommendations