Advertisement

Morphometric analysis of watershed using remote sensing and GIS—a case study of Nanganji River Basin in Tamil Nadu, India

  • Pandian ManganEmail author
  • Mohd Anul Haq
  • Prashant Baral
Original Paper
  • 86 Downloads

Abstract

Morphometric analysis of a river basin is essential to identify and assess seasonal changes in drainage basin characteristics, understand the groundwater potential, and address issues related to management of soil erosion due to flash floods during the high flows. Nanganji River Basin is one of the least studied seasonal river basins in India which carry substantial flows during the monsoon period. In this study, morphometry of Nanganji River Basin, located in the central Tamil Nadu prairies, has been studied using remote sensing and GIS. The interrelationship between the various morphometric factors of the basin has been studied using a correlation matrix. Factor analysis has been applied to group the individual morphometric parameters into a smaller number of factors. Further, these factors have been studied in relation to the sub-basins to understand the existing relation between the factors and the sub-basins. Finally, the study identifies environmental issues of the Nanganji River Basin mostly related to the river flow regime which widens significantly during the monsoon months.

Keywords

Basin morphometry Factor analysis Nanganji River Basin 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful to IBM Corporation for providing online version of IBM SPSS Statistics for the necessary computations.

References

  1. Agarwal CS (1998) Study of drainage pattern through aerial data in Naugarh area of Varanasi district, UP. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 26(4):169–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ali SA, Khan N (2013) Evaluation of morphometric parameters—a remote sensing and GIS based approach. Open J Mod Hydrol 03:20–27.  https://doi.org/10.4236/ojmh.2013.31004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aspinall R, Pearson D (2000) Integrated geographical assessment of environmental condition in water catchments: linking landscape ecology, environmental modelling and GIS. J Environ Manag 59(4):299–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bassey Eze E, Efiong J (2010) Morphometric parameters of the Calabar river basin: implication for hydrologic processes. J Geogr Geol 2.  https://doi.org/10.5539/jgg.v2n1p18
  5. Biswas S, Sudhakar S, Desai VR (1999) Prioritisation of subwatersheds based on morphometric analysis of drainage basin: a remote sensing and GIS approach. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 27(3):155–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chopra R, Dhiman RD, Sharma PK (2005) Morphometric analysis of sub-watersheds in Gurdaspur district, Punjab using remote sensing and GIS techniques. J Indian SocRemote Sens 33(4):531–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chorley RJ (1957) Climate and morphometry. J Geol 65:623–633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chorley RJ, Donald EGM, Poguzelski MA (1957) A new standard for estimating drainage basin shape. Am J Sci 255:138–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clarke JI (1966) Morphometry from maps. Essays in geomorphology. Elsevier Publ. Co, New York, pp 235–274Google Scholar
  10. Conforti M, Aucelli PP, Robustelli G, Scarciglia F (2011) Geomorphology and GIS analysis for mapping gully erosion susceptibility in the Turbolo stream catchment (Northern Calabria, Italy). Nat Hazards 56(3):881–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Corp IBM (2018) IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows. IBM Corp, Armonk, NYGoogle Scholar
  12. Dinagara Pandi P, Thena T, Nirmal B, Aswathy MR, Saravanan K, Mohan K (2017) Morphometric analyses of Neyyar River Basin, southern Kerala, India. Geol Ecol Landsc 1(4):249–256.  https://doi.org/10.1080/24749508.2017.1389494 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ehsani AH, Quiel F (2008) Geomorphometric feature analysis using morphometric parameterization and artificial neural networks. Geomorphology 99(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. ESRI (2011) ArcGIS Desktop: Release 10. Environmental Systems Research Institute, RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  15. Grohmann CH (2004) Morphometric analysis in geographic information systems: applications of free software GRASS and R. Comput Geosci 30(9):1055–1067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. H. G. Solutions (2014) Envi. Exelis Visual Information Solutions: Boulder, CO, USAGoogle Scholar
  17. Harvey JW, Bencala KE (1993) The effect of streambed topography on surface-subsurface water exchange in mountain catchments. Water Resour Res 29(1):89–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Horton RE (1932) Drainage basin characteristics. Trans Am Geophys Union 13:350–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Horton RE (1945) Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Bull Geol Soc Am 56:275–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jackson DA (1993) Stopping rules in principal components analysis: a comparison of heuristical and statistical approaches. Ecology. 74:2204–2214.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1939574 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jordan G (2003) Morphometric analysis and tectonic interpretation of digital terrain data: a case study. Earth Surf Process Landf 28(8):807–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kale VS (2003) Geomorphic effects of monsoon floods on Indian rivers. In Flood Problem and Management in South Asia Springer, Dordrecht, (pp. 65–84)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kale VS, Gupta A (2001) Introduction to geomorphology. Orient LongmanGoogle Scholar
  24. Kasturirangan K, Aravamudan R, Deekshatulu BL et al (1996) Indian Remote Sensing satellite IRS-1C—the beginning of a new era. Curr Sci 70:495–500Google Scholar
  25. Klovan JE (1975) R and Q mode factor analysis. In: R.B. Mc Cammon (ed.). Concepts in Geostatistics, Springler-Verlag : 21–69Google Scholar
  26. Kumar R, Kumar S, Lohani AK, Nema RK, Singh RD (2000) Evaluation of geomorphological characteristics of a catchment using GIS. GIS India 9(3):13–17Google Scholar
  27. Lawrence FC, Upchurch SB (1982) Identification of recharge areas using geochemical factor analysis. Groundwater 20(6):680–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lhomme J, Bouvier C, Perrin JL (2004) Applying a GIS-based geomorphological routing model in urban catchments. J Hydrol 299(3):203–216CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. López-Vicente M, Navas A, Machín J (2009) Geomorphic mapping in endorheic catchments in the Spanish Pyrenees: an integrated GIS analysis of karstic features. Geomorphology 111(1):38–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Magesh NS, Chandrasekar N, Soundranayagam JP (2011) Morphometric evaluation of Papanasam and Manimuthar watersheds, parts of Western Ghats, Tirunelveli district, Tamil Nadu, India: A GIS approach. Environ Earth Sci doi 64:373–381.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-010-0860-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Melton MA (1959) A derivation of Strahler’s channel ordering. J Geol 67:345–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Miller VC (1953) A quantitative geomorphic study on drainage basin characteristics in the Clinch mountain area, Virginia and Tennessee, Project NR 389-042, Technical report 3. Columbia university, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Nag SK (1998) Morphometric analysis using remote sensing techniques in the Chaka sub-basin, Purulia district, West Bengal. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 26(1–2):69–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 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(1):25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. NASA LP DAAC (2015) ASTER Global Digital Elevation Model (GDEM). NASA EOSDIS Land Processes DAAC, USGS Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center, Sioux Falls (https://lpdaac.usgs.gov), accessed January 1, 2017, at https://gdex.cr.usgs.gov/gdex/
  36. National Remote Sensing Agency (NRSA) (1995) Integrated mission for sustainable developmentGoogle Scholar
  37. Obi Reddy GE, Maji AK, Gajbhiye KS (2002) GIS for morphometric analysis of drainage basins. GIS lndia 11(4):9–14Google Scholar
  38. Ozdemir H, Bird D (2009) Evaluation of morphometric parameters of drainage networks derived from topographic maps and DEM in point of floods. Environ Geol 56:1405–1415.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00254-008-1235-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Pareta K, Pareta U (2011) Quantitative morphometric analysis of a watershed of Yamuna Basin, India using ASTER (DEM) Data and GIS. Int J Geomatics Geosci  https://doi.org/10.1109/IJCNN.2014.6889368
  40. Purohit M, Kaur S (2017) Rainfall Statistics of India – 2016Google Scholar
  41. Rai PK, Mohan K, Mishra S, Ahmad A, Mishra VN (2017) A GIS-based approach in drainage morphometric analysis of Kanhar River Basin, India. Appl Water Sci doi 7:217–232.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-014-0238-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ratnam KN, Srivastava YK, Rao VV, Amminedu E, Murthy KSR (2005) Check dam positioning by prioritization of micro-watersheds using SYI model and morphometric analysis—remote sensing and GIS perspective. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 33(1):25–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rebai N, Achour H, Chaabouni R, Bou Kheir R, Bouaziz S (2013) DEM and GIS analysis of sub-watersheds to evaluate relative tectonic activity. A case study of the North-south axis (Central Tunisia). Earth Sci Inf 6:187–198.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12145-013-0121-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Reghunath R, Murthy TRS, Raghavan BR (2002) The utility of multivariate statistical techniques in hydrogeochemical studies: An example from Karnataka, India. Water Res 36:2437–2442.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(01)00490-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Rekha BV, George AV, Rita M (2011) Morphometric analysis and micro-watershed prioritization of Peruvanthanam sub-watershed, the Manimala River Basin, Kerala, South India. Environ Res Eng Manag 57(3):6–14Google Scholar
  46. Schumm SA (1956) Evolution of drainage systems and slopes in badlands at Port Amboy, New Jercy. Bull Geol Soc Am 67:597–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 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(3):412–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Strahler AN (1952) Hypsometric (area – altitude) analysis of erosional topography. Bull Geol Soc Am 63:1117–1142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Strahler AN (1958) Dimensional analysis applied to fluvially eroded landforms. Bull Geol Soc Am 69:279. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1958)69[279:DAATFE]2.0.CO;2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Strahler AN (1964) Part II. Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and channel networks. Handbook of Applied Hydrology. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 4–39Google Scholar
  51. Subburaj A (2008a) District Groundwater Brochure Karur District. Tamil, NaduGoogle Scholar
  52. Subburaj A (2008b) District Groundwater Brochure Erode District. Tamil, NaduGoogle Scholar
  53. Suresh S (2008) District Groundwater Brochure Dindigul District. Tamil, NaduGoogle Scholar
  54. Thyne G, Güler C, Poeter E (2004) Sequential analysis of hydrochemical data for watershed characterization. Ground Water 42:711–723.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2004.tb02725.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vittala SS, Govindaiah S, Gowda HH (2004) Morphometric analysis of sub-watersheds in the Pavagada area of Tumkur district, South India using remote sensing and GIS techniques. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 32(4):351–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ward JH (1963) Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. J Am Stat Assoc 58:236–244.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1963.10500845 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pandian Mangan
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mohd Anul Haq
    • 1
  • Prashant Baral
    • 1
  1. 1.Geographic Information SystemsNIIT UniversityNeemranaIndia

Personalised recommendations