Advertisement

Morphotectonic analysis of the Sali River basin, Bankura district, West Bengal

  • Sujit DasEmail author
  • Krishnendu Gupta
Original Paper
  • 49 Downloads

Abstract

Morphotectonic analysis of a drainage system is widely applied in evaluating the morphological evolution of a region in response to tectonic deformation as reflected by structural and morphometric parameters. Essentially, the combination of lithological, tectonic, and climate factors lead the development and the evolution of a drainage system regardless of the general geological setting of a region. The Sali River is developed in the westernmost part of the shelf zone of the Bengal Basin and adjusts its course depending on the underlying geological structure, climatic effects, and tectonic activities. In order to identify the tectonic activity of the study area, morphotectonic and geomorphic analyses have been carried out by performing a tectonic lineaments analysis and by evaluating different geomorphic indices, like hypsometric integral (Hi), elongation ratio (Re), stream length-gradient index (SL), river profile, ratio of valley floor width to valley height (Vf), stream sinuosity, etc. The structural and morphological (e.g., incised valleys and hanging paleochannels) features were able to hypothesize the influence of active tectonics on the Quaternary evolution of the landscape. On the basis of morphotectonic analysis, an attempt has been made to trace out the plausible phases of the geomorphic evolution of the Sali basin by using remote sensing and GIS techniques. Analysis of the all morphometric and geomorphic indices revealed that the upper catchment tectonic activity plays an important role in the development of watershed hydrology, whereas the basin that is located in lower altitude (where Pleistocene to Holocene deposits crop out) are affected by depositional and neotectonic activity.

Keywords

Morphotectonic Hypsometric integral Active tectonic Neotectonic 

References

  1. Arlegui LE, Soriano MA (1998) Characterizing lineaments from satellite images and field studies in the Central Ebro basin (NE Spain). Int J Remote Sens 19(16):3169–3185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Azañón JM, Pérez-Peña JV, Giaconia F, Booth-Rea G, Martínez-Martínez JM, Rodríguez-Peces MJ (2012) Active tectonics in the central and eastern Betic Cordillera through morphotectonic analysis:the case of Sierra Nevada and Sierra Alhamilla. J Iber Geol 38 (1): 225–238Google Scholar
  3. Azor A, Keller EA, Yeats RS (2002) Geomorphic indicators of active fold growth: South Mountain-Oak Ridge anticline, Ventura basin, Southern California. Geol Soc Am Bull 114(6):745–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barbero L, Jabaloy A, Gómez-Ortiz D, Pérez-Peña JV, Rodríguez-Peces MJ, Tejero R, Estupiñán J, Azdimousa A, Vázquez M, Asebriy L (2010) Evidence for surface uplift of the Atlas Mountains and the surrounding peripheral plateaux: combining apatite fission-track results and geomorphic indicators in the western Moroccan Meseta (coastal Variscan Paleozoic basement). Tectonophysics 502:90–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhattacharaya AK, Dhar N (2001-‘03) A report on geo-environmental appraisal in Durgapur-Panagarh urban area and its environs for developmental activities within Asansol- Durgapur development authority area, district Burdwan, West Bengal. GSI Unpublished Progress ReportGoogle Scholar
  6. Bookfield ME (1998) The evolution of the great river systems of southern Asia during the Cenozoic India-Asia collision: rivers draining southwards. Geomorphology 22(3–4):285–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bull WB, McFadden LD (1977) Tectonic geomorphology north and south of Garlock fault, California. In: Doehring DO (ed) Geomorphology in Arid Regions: A Proceedings Volume of the 8th Annual Geomorphology Symposium, State University of New York, Binghamton, pp 115-138Google Scholar
  8. Burbank D, Anderson RS (2001) Tectonic geomorphology. Blackwell Science, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen YC, Sung Q, Cheng K (2003) Along-strike variations of morphotectonic features in the Western foothills of Taiwan: tectonic implications based on stream gradient and hypsometric analysis. Geomorphology 56:109–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Clarke JL (1966) Morphometry from maps. In: Dury GH (ed) Essays in Geomorphology. Heinemann, London, pp 235–274Google Scholar
  11. Cox RT (1994) Analysis of drainage-basin symmetry as a rapid technique to identify areas of possible quaternary tilt-block tectonics: an example from the Mississippi embayment. Geol Soc Am Bull 106(5):571–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Crosby B, Whipple K (2006) Knickpoint initiation and distribution within fluvial networks: 236 waterfalls in the Waipaoa River, North Island, New Zealand. Geomorphology 82:16–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cuong NQ, Zuchiewicz WA (2001) Morphotectonic properties of the Lo River fault near Tam Dao in North Vietnam. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 1:15–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dar RA, Romshoo SA, Chandra R, Ahmad I (2014) Tectono-geomorphic study of the Karewa Basin of Kashmir Valley. J Asian Earth Sci 92:143–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Das S (2016) Applied geomorphological investigation for Sustainable Basin management: a study in Sali River basin, Bankura District, West Bengal. Unpublished Ph.D thesis, Dept. of Geography, Visva-BharatiGoogle Scholar
  16. Das S, Gupta K (2014) Morphometric analysis of the polygenetic drainage basin: a study in Sali River, Bankura district, West Bengal. Geo-Analyst 4(1):11–23Google Scholar
  17. District Resource Map (2001) Bankura District. Geological Survey of India, E.R, KolkataGoogle Scholar
  18. El Hamdouni R, Irigaray C, Fernández T, Chacón J, Keller E (2008) Assessment of relative active tectonics, southwest border of Sierra Nevada (southern Spain). Geomorphology 96(1–2):150–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Faniran A (1968) The index of drainage intensity - a provisional new drainage factor. Aust J Sci 31:328–330Google Scholar
  20. Gardiner V (1982) Drainage basin morphometry: quantitative analysis of drainage basin form. In: Sharma HS (ed) Perspectives in geomorphology. Concept Publishing Co, New Delhi, pp 107–142Google Scholar
  21. Geological Survey of India (1985) Geological Quadrangle Map. 73MGoogle Scholar
  22. Geological Survey of India (2011) Thematic mapping in parts of Bankura - Burdwan districts, West Bengal for ground characterization of lineaments / faults in the context of neo-tectonic activity in the area keeping in view the recent seismic activity in the area. PGRS division, ER, Kolkata pp 15–80Google Scholar
  23. Goldrick G, Bishop P (2007) Regional analysis of bedrock stream long profiles: evaluation of Hack’s SL form, and formulation and assessment of an alternative (the DS form). Earth Surf Process Landf 32:649–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gupta K (2002) Dwarakeswar River basin: a study in applied geomorphology. Unpublished Ph D Thesis, Dept of Geography, Visva- Bharati, SantiniketanGoogle Scholar
  25. Hack JT (1957) Studies of longitudinal profiles in Virginia and Maryland: US Geological Survey Professional Paper 294-B, 45–97Google Scholar
  26. Hack JT (1973) Stream profile analysis and stream- gradient index. U.S. Geological Survey. J Res 1:421–429Google Scholar
  27. He C, Cheng Y, Gang R, Qi Y (2018) Geomorphological signatures of the evolution of active normal faults along the Langshan Mountains, North China. Geodin Acta 30(1):163–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Horton RE (1945) Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins: hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Geol Soc Am Bull 56:275–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Huang XJ, Niemann JD (2006) Modelling the potential impacts of groundwater hydrology on long-term drainage basin evolution. Earth Surf Process Landf 31:1802–1823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hung LQ, Batelaan O, De Smedt F (2005) lineament extraction and analysis, comparison of LANDSAT ETM and ASTER imagery. In: Ehlers M, Michel U (ed) Suoimuoi tropical karst catchment, Vietnam. Remote sensing for environmental monitoring, GIS applications and geology, Proc of SPIE  https://doi.org/10.1117/12.627699
  31. Hurtrez JE, Sol C, Lucazeau F (1999) Effect of drainage area on hypsometry from an analysis of small-scale drainage basins in the Siwalik Hills (Central Nepal). Earth Surf Process Landf 24:799–808CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jain S, Verma PK (2006) Mapping active tectonics intensity zones using remote sensing and GIS. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 34(2):131–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Keller EA, Pinter N (1996) (2nd ed.) Active tectonic earth quake—uplift and landscape. Prentice hall Inc., New Jersey, Upper Saddle River, pp. 337Google Scholar
  34. Keller EA, Pinter N (2002) (2nd ed.) Active tectonic earth quake—uplift and landscape. Prentice hall Inc., New Jersey, Upper Saddle River, pp. 337Google Scholar
  35. Korup O (2006) Rock-slope failure and the river long profile. Geology 34:45–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Korup O, Schmidt J, McSavenecy MJ (2005) Regional relief characteristics and denudation pattern of the western Southern Alps, New Zealand. Geomorphology 71:402–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lifton NA, Chase CG (1992) Tectonic, climatic and lithologic influences on landscape fractal dimension and hypsometry: implications for landscape evolution in the San Gabriel Mountains, California. Geomorphology 5:77–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Markose VJ, Jayapada KS (2011) Hypsometric analysis of Kali River basin, Karnataka, India, using geographic information system. Geocarto Int 26(7):553–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Mayer L (1986) Tectonic geomorphology of escarpments and mountain fronts, active tectonics. DC. National Academy Press, Washington, pp 125–135Google Scholar
  40. Merritts D, Vincent KR (1989) Geomorphic response to coastal streams to low, intermediate and high rates of uplift, Menddocino triple junction region, northern California. Gol Soc Am Bull 101(11):1373–1388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Miller VC (1953) A quantitative geomorphic study of drainage basin characteristics in the Clinch mountain area. Department of Geology, Columbia University, Virginia and TennesseeGoogle Scholar
  42. Moglen GE, Bras RL (1995) The effect of spatial heterogeneities on geomorphic expression in a model of basin evolution. Water Resour Res 31:2613–2623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Monteiro KDA, Missura R, Correa ACDB (2010) Application of the hack index-or stream length-gradient index (SL index)-to the Tracunhaem River watershed, Pernambuco, Brazil. Geociências 29:533–539Google Scholar
  44. O’leary DW, Freidman JD, Pohn HA (1976) Lineament, linear, lineation: some proposed new definitions for old terms. Geol Soc Am Bull 87:1463–1469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pan S (2013) Application of remote sensing and GIS in studying changing river course in Bankura District, West Bengal. Int J Geomatics Geosci 4(1):149–163Google Scholar
  46. Parizek RR (1976) On the nature and significance of fracture traces and lineaments in carbonates and other terrains. Karst Hydrology and Water Resources, Proceedings of the US–Yugoslavian Symposium, Dubrovnik, Yugoslavia, pp. 47–100Google Scholar
  47. Pavano F, Pazzaglia FJ, Catalano S (2016) Knickpoints as geomorphic markers of active tectonics: a case study from northeastern Sicily (southern Italy). Lithosphere-US 8(6):633–648.  https://doi.org/10.1130/L577.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pavano F, Catalano S, Romagnoli G, Tortorici G (2018) Hypsometry and relief analysis of the southern termination of the Calabrian arc, NE-Sicily (southern Italy). Geomorphology 304:74–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pedrera A, Pérez-Peña JV, Galindo-Zaldívar J, Azañón JM, Azor A (2009) Testing the sensitivity of geomorphic indices in areas of low-rate active folding (eastern Betic Cordillera, Spain). Geomorphology 105:218–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pérez-Peña JV, Azañón JM, Booth-Rea G, Azor A, Delgado J (2009) Differentiating geology and tectonics using a spatial autocorrelation technique for the hypsometric integral. J Geophys Res Earth Surf 114:F02018.  https://doi.org/10.1029/2008JF001092 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Pérez-Peña JV, Azor A, Azañón JM, Keller EA (2010) Active tectonics in Sierra Nevada (Betic Cordillera, SE Spain): insights from geomorphic indexes and drainage pattern analysis. Geomorphology 119:74–87.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.02.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Raj R, Bhandari S, Maurya DM, Chamyal LS (2003) Geomorphic indicators of active tectonics in the Karjan River basin, lower Narmada Valley, Western India. J Geol Soc India 62:739–752Google Scholar
  53. Ramírez-Herrera MT (1998) Geomorphic assessment of active tectonics in the Acamby Graben, Mexican volcanic belt. Earth Surf Proc Land 23:317–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Roy S, Sahu AS (2015) Quaternary tectonic control on channel morphology over sedimentary low land: a case study in the Ajay-Damodar interfluve of eastern India. Geosci Front 6(6):927–946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sajadi P, Singh P, Mukherjee S, Asthana H, Luo PP, Chapi K (2018) Analysis of drainage morphometry and tectonic activity in the Dehgolan Basin Kurdistan, Iran, using remote sensing and geographic information system. In: Singh CK (ed) Geospatial applications for natural resources management. Taylor & Francis Group, Didcot, pp 131–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sander P (2007) Lineaments in groundwater exploration: a review of applications and limitations. Hydrogeol J 15(1):71–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sarma PK, Sarmah K, Chetri PK, Sarkar A (2013) Geospatial study on morphometric characterization of Umtrew River basin of Meghalaya, India. Int J Water Resour Environ Eng 5:489–498Google Scholar
  58. Schumm SA (1956) Evolution of drainage systems and slopes in Badlands at Perth Anboy, New Jersey. Bull Geol Soc Am 67:597–646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Singh CP (2002) Applied geomorphology: a study. B. R. Publishing Corporation, DelhiGoogle Scholar
  60. Singh T, Awasthi AK (2010) Stream profiles as indicator of active tectonic deformation along the inter-foreland thrust, Nahan salient, NW India. Current Sci 98(1):95–98Google Scholar
  61. Snyder NP, Whipple KX, Tucker GE, Merritts DJ (2000) Landscape response to tectonic forcing: digital elevation model analysis of stream profiles in the Mendocino triple junction region, northern California. Geol Soc Am Bull 112:1250–1263.  https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(2000)112b1250:LRTTFDN2.0.CO;2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Strahler AN (1952) Hypsometric analysis of erosional topography. Geol Soc Am Bull 63:1117–1142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Strahler AN (1964) Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and channel networks. In: Chow VT (ed) Handbook of applied hydrology. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 439–476Google Scholar
  64. Verrios S, Zygouri V, Kokkalas S (2004) Morphotectonic analysis in the Eliki fault zone (Gulf of Corinth, Greece). Bull Geol Soc Greece 34(1):1706–1715CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wells S, Bullard T et al (1988) Regional variations in tectonic geomorphology along segmented convergent plate boundary. Pacific Costa Rica. Geomorphology 1:239–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Whipple KX, Tucker GE (1999) Dynamics of the stream-power river incision model: implications for height limits of mountain ranges, landscape response timescales, and research needs. J Geophys Res-Solid Earth 104:17661–17674.  https://doi.org/10.1029/1999JB900120 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Willet SD, Hovius N, Brandon MT, Fisher D (2006) Tectonics, climate, and landscape evolution: Geological Society of America Special Paper pp 398, 449.  https://doi.org/10.1130/2006.2398(00)
  68. Willgoose GR, Hancock G (1998) Revisiting the hypsometric curve as an indicator of form and process in transport-limited catchment. Earth Surf Process Landf 23:611–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Saudi Society for Geosciences 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dasghara High SchoolHooghlyIndia
  2. 2.Department of GeographyVisva-BharatiSantiniketanIndia

Personalised recommendations