See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/261377632

Morphometric analysis of subwatershed in parts of Western Ghats, South

India using ASTER DEM

Article · October 2013

CITATIONS READS

0 103

4 authors:

Sujatha Ramani R. Selvakumar

SASTRA University SASTRA University
27 PUBLICATIONS   163 CITATIONS    28 PUBLICATIONS   78 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Rajasimmanuab Balasubramaniam G.V. Rajamanickam

Bharathidasan University Parisutham Institute of Technology and Science
6 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS    244 PUBLICATIONS   1,604 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Evaluation of Heavy Metal in 500 Plants and Pesticides Residue in 300 Plants under the sponsorship of Ayurvedic Pharmacopoeia Committee (APC) scheme View
project

Evaluation of hepatoprotective activity of Haldinia cordifolia against paracetamol induced liver damage in rats View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Rajasimmanuab Balasubramaniam on 07 April 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [sujatha Ramani]
On: 03 November 2013, At: 19:24
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk

Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tgnh20

Morphometric analysis of sub-

watershed in parts of Western Ghats,
South India using ASTER DEM
a a b
Evangelin Ramani Sujatha , R. Selvakumar , U.A.B. Rajasimman
c
& Rajamanickam G. Victor
a
School of Civil Engineering, SASTRA University, Thanjavur, Tamil
Nadu, India
b
Centre for Remote Sensing, Bharathidasan University,
Tiruchirapalli, Tamil Nadu, India
c
Sairam Group of Institutions, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
Published online: 31 Oct 2013.

To cite this article: Evangelin Ramani Sujatha, R. Selvakumar, U.A.B. Rajasimman & Rajamanickam
G. Victor , Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk (2013): Morphometric analysis of sub-watershed in
parts of Western Ghats, South India using ASTER DEM, Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, DOI:
10.1080/19475705.2013.845114

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2013.845114

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 2013
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2013.845114

Morphometric analysis of sub-watershed in parts of Western Ghats,

South India using ASTER DEM

EVANGELIN RAMANI SUJATHA*y, R. SELVAKUMARy,

U.A.B. RAJASIMMANz and RAJAMANICKAM G. VICTORx
ySchool of Civil Engineering, SASTRA University, Thanjavur, Tamil Nadu, India
zCentre for Remote Sensing, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirapalli,
Tamil Nadu, India
xSairam Group of Institutions, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

(Received 22 November 2012; accepted 11 September 2013)

Morphometric analysis is a key to understand the hydrological process and hence

is a prerequisite for the assessment of hydrological characteristics of surface water
basin. Morphometric analysis to determine the drainage characteristics of Palar
sub-watershed, a part of Shanmukha watershed in the Amaravati sub-catchment
is done using Advanced Space-borne Thermal Emission and Reflection Global
Digital Elevation Model (ASTER GDEM) data, and is supplemented with topo-
graphical maps in geographical information systems platform. This study uses
ASTER GDEM data to extract morphometric features of a mountain stream at
micro-watershed level. The sub-watershed is divided into six micro-watersheds.
The sub-watershed includes a sixth-order stream. Lower stream orders, in particu-
lar first-order streams, dominate the sub-watershed. Development of stream seg-
ments is controlled by slope and local relief. Drainage pattern of the sub-
watershed and micro-watersheds is dendritic in general. The mean bifurcation
ratio of the sub-watershed is 3.69 but its variation between the various stream
orders suggests structural control in the development of stream network. The
shape factors reveal the elongation of the sub-watershed and micro-watersheds.
The relief ratio reveals the high discharge capability of the sub-watershed and
meagre groundwater potential. This study is a useful tool for planning strategies
in control of soil erosion and soil conservation.

1. Introduction
Drainage pattern, density and geometry of the fluvial system are controlled primarily
by three determinants – topography, climate and geology (Frissel et al. 1986; Mesa
2006). The drainage characteristics reflect the influence of variation of these determi-
nants from place to place. Detailed morphometric analyses provide an insight on basin
evolution and further its role on development of drainage morphometry on landforms
and their characteristics. It is a vital tool in any hydrological investigation like assess-
ment of groundwater potential and management, pedology and environmental assess-
ment and is a subject of interest to both geomorphologists and hydrologists.
Physiographic characteristics of drainage basins like the size, shape, slope, drainage
density, size and length of streams can be correlated with various important hydrologic

*Corresponding author. Email: r.evangelin@gmail.com

Ó 2013 Taylor & Francis

 2 E.R. Sujatha et al.

phenomena (Chorley 1969; Gregory & Walling 1973; Rastogi & Sharma 1976). The
morphometric parameters describe and compare the basin characteristics and its pro-
cesses explaining the geologic and geomorphic history of the drainage basin (Strahler
1964). Morphometric analysis is a crucial step in understanding the watershed dynam-
ics. Drainage basin morphometry attempts to explain and predict the long-term
aspects of basin dynamics resulting in morphological changes within the basin
(Thomas et al. 2011) and also delineate physical changes in drainage system with time
in response to natural or anthropogenic disturbances (Thompson et al. 2001).
Morphometric analysis is comprehensively used in various fields of earth science
and engineering applications as an indirect tool for estimation of soil, landslide sus-
ceptibility mapping, predicting the movement of groundwater and analysing topog-
raphy (Pike 2000). This paper attempts to use Advanced Space-borne Thermal
Emission and Reflection Global Digital Elevation Model (ASTER GDEM), owing
to its better accuracy particularly in hilly and complex terrain than Shuttle Radar
Topography Mission (SRTM) DEM (Slater et al. 2006; Forkuor & Maathuis 2012)
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

to study the morphometric parameters. Delineation of sub- and micro-watershed

boundaries, drainage network and extraction of terrain features like slope are done
using ASTER GDEM. Geographic Information System (GIS) is used for the hydro-
spatial analysis. The drainage characteristics of Palar sub-watershed are studied to
describe and evaluate its hydrological characteristics by analysing topographical
maps and ASTER GDEM data. The present investigation can be used to prepare a
comprehensive watershed plan for the development, which integrates topography
and erosion status with the drainage characteristics of the region. The use of ASTER
GDEM data and GIS enables rapid, precise and inexpensive alternative for morpho-
metric analysis (Grohmann et al. 2007). This study describes the results of morpho-
metric analysis of tropical mountain river Palar in the Western Ghats, India to
understand the basin behaviour using remote sensing and GIS.

2. Study area
The Palar sub-watershed (figure 1) is bound between latitudes 10 120 38.1700 N and
10 220 36.3700 N and longitudes 77 270 5.1300 E and 77 340 19.8400 E, located in the
Western Ghats, Kodaikanal taluk of Dindigul district, Tamil Nadu, India and covers
an area of 101.21 km2. Palar flows from south to north joining the Shanmukha Nadi
and as a typical mountain river is characterized by numerous first-order streams
emptying into its two major tributaries – Tevankarai Ar and Gundar. It is the main
water source for the Kodaikkanal town. The climate of the region is cold and temper-
ate with high annual rainfall ranging between 1650 and 1800 mm. The region
receives both north-west and south-east monsoon with the highest rainfall during
October and November while there is sparse rainfall between mid-December and
March. There are intense summer showers in April and May. Bedrock geology is
monotonous with charnockite in varying degrees of weathering and a limited soil
cover. Structural hill and valley complex with pediments and valley fills are the chief
terrain features. The elevation is higher in the southern part of the basin and decrease
towards the north and rises again in the north-east. This region is a gentle valley –
nearly 87% of the slopes have a gradient less than 35 . The southern part of the study
area bustles with human activity while the north-eastern areas are barren rock expo-
sures with very limited settlements. Northern part is densely forested.
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 3
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

Figure 1. Location map of the Palar sub-watershed showing the drainage pattern and micro-
watershed divides.

3. Methodology
Survey of India (SOI) topographic maps of 1:50,000 scale (58 F/7, 58 F/8, 8 F/11 and
58 F/12) and ASTER GDEM (1 arcsecond, filled, finished, WGS84/EGM96 geoid,
2009) of 30 m resolution are used as base for the delineation of Palar sub-watershed.
ASTER data is pre-processed using ENVI 4.1 software. Ground Control Points are
collected from topographic maps in 1:50,000 scale for correction and geolocation. A
low-pass 3  3 filter was applied to smooth the data (Hengl & Evans 2009). Data
extraction and analysis is carried out using Arc Map 9.2. ASTER GDEM is proc-
essed by filling the sinks. Flow direction and flow accumulation grids are generated.
Pour points of Tevankarai, Gundar and Palar are digitized as points and converted
into raster with the same cell size as ASTER GDEM. Sub-watershed and micro-
watersheds are delineated using “watershed” function using the flow direction and
pour point grid using the water divide to delineate the boundaries. Detailed drainage
network is extracted from SOI topographic maps and stream ordering is based on
Strahler’s (1964) method.
Length and frequency of the stream of various orders are recorded for the analysis.
Basic morphometric parameters such as drainage area (A), perimeter (P), basin
 4 E.R. Sujatha et al.

length (Lb), stream order (Nu) and mean stream length are estimated. Derived
parameters like bifurcation ratio (Rb), mean stream length (Rl), drainage density
(Dd), elongation ratio (Re), circulatory factor (Rc), form factor (Ff) and RHO coeffi-
cient are calculated from the basic parameters. Relief-related parameters like basin
relief, slope, relief ratio, gradient ratio, hypsometric integral and ruggedness number
are estimated from ASTER GDEM.

4. Results
The results of the morphometric analysis of the mountain river sub-watershed Palar
and its micro-watersheds are presented in table 1 and 2 and are discussed in the fol-
lowing sections. The total drainage area is divided into six micro-watersheds. In gen-
eral, the watershed exhibits a dominantly dendritic drainage pattern (figure 1). The
entire region is made of charnockite of khondalite group and the development of
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

dendritic drainage pattern compliments the uniform lithology in this region (Mesa
2006). There is a slight change in micro-watershed 1 where it tends to be rectangular
owing to the major fault in north-east–south-west direction (figure 1).

4.1 Basic parameters

The basic morphometric parameters of the basin include geometry, stream order,
stream length and mean stream length.

4.1.1 Basin geometry. Drainage area (A) is a key watershed characteristic for
hydrologic analysis and design. Larger area and higher difference in elevation (relief)
leads to greater discharge. The total drainage area of the Palar sub-watershed is
101.28 km2 and the areas of the micro-watersheds are shown in table 1. Micro-water-
shed 1 is the largest with an area of 24. 97 km2 and micro-watershed 2 is the smallest
with an area of 11.86 km2. The perimeter of the Palar sub-watershed is 58.04 km and
the micro-watersheds are shown in table 1. The basin length corresponds to the maxi-
mum length of the sub-watershed and micro-watersheds measured parallel to the
main drainage line. The basin length of the watershed is 23.22 km and that of the
sub-watersheds are shown in table 1.

4.1.2 Stream order (Nu). Classification of streams based on the number and type
of tributary junctions is called stream ordering. It is a useful indicator of stream size,
discharge and drainage area (Strahler 1964). The number of streams (Nu) in each
order is presented in table 1 for each micro-watershed. The stream characteristics
confirm Horton’s first law (1945), “law of stream numbers”, which states that num-
ber of streams of different orders in a given drainage basin tends closely to approxi-
mate an inverse geometric ratio (figure 2). Palar is designated as a sixth-order basin.
Micro-watersheds 1, 2, 3 and 4 are of fourth order, while micro-watershed 5 is of fifth
order and micro-watershed 6 is of sixth order (Horton 1945; Strahler 1964).

4.1.3 Stream length (LT) and mean stream length (Lu). The stream length charac-
teristics of the sub-watershed confirm Horton’s second law (1945), “law of stream
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 5

Table 1. Basic and derived parameters of Palar sub-watershed.

Basic parameters SW MW 1 MW 2 MW 3 MW 4 MW 5 MW 6

Area (km2) 101.28 24.97 11.86 16.64 12.19 12.22 23.33

Perimeter (km) 58.04 34.34 18.58 17.58 17.05 14.72 26.23
Length (km) 23.22 10.64 6.15 5.64 5.66 5.44 6.07
N1 482 104 52 92 73 75 86
N2 107 21 15 20 14 18 19
N3 44 10 2 6 7 5 14
N4 23 3 1 2 3 4 10
N5 5 – – – – 1 4
N6 1 – – – – – 1
L1 (km) 0.52 0.52 0.55 0.52 0.47 0.47 0.57
L2 (km) 0.58 0.49 0.76 0.60 0.73 0.46 0.52
L3 (km) 0.93 1.23 1.27 0.89 0.56 1.13 0.81
L4 (km) 0.85 1.65 0.0035 1.42 1.37 0.76 0.46
L5 (km) 2.02 – – – – 0.063 2.51
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

L6 (km) 2.34 – – – – – 2.34

LT1 (km) 248.89 54.13 28.56 47.64 34.31 35.18 49.07
LT2 (km) 61.82 10.22 11.36 11.98 10.24 8.19 9.83
LT3 (km) 40.99 12.25 2.53 5.35 3.93 5.65 11.28
LT4 (km) 19.55 4.95 0.0035 2.83 4.12 3.03 4.62
LT5 (km) 10.11 – – – – 0.063 10.05
LT6 (km) 2.34 – – – – – 2.34
Rb1 – – – – – – –
Rb2 4.51 2.00 3.46 4.60 5.20 4.17 4.53
Rb3 2.43 2.10 7.5 3.33 2.00 3.60 1.36
Rb4 1.91 3.33 2.00 3.00 2.33 1.25 1.40
Rb5 4.60 – – – – 4.00 2.50
Rb6 5.00 – – – – – 4.00
Rbmean 3.69 2.48 4.32 3.64 3.18 3.26 2.76
Rl1 – – – – – – –
Rl2 1.12 0.94 1.38 1.15 1.55 0.98 0.91
Rl3 1.61 2.50 1.66 1.49 0.77 2.46 1.56
Rl4 0.91 1.35 2.86 1.59 2.45 0.67 0.57
Rl5 2.38 – – – – 0.08 5.43
Rl6 1.16 – – – – – 0.93
Rlmean 1.44 1.59 1.97 1.41 1.59 1.05 1.88
RHO 0.39 0.64 0.46 0.39 0.50 0.32 0.68
Fs 6.49 5.41 5.90 7.21 7.96 8.23 5.66
Dd 3.79 3.27 3.58 4.07 4.32 4.46 3.74
T 24.60 17.68 21.13 26.35 34.38 35.91 21.16
H (m) 294 1224 1200 1033 1033 1006 294
h (m) 2365 2365 2312 2209 2221 2214 1841
R (m) 2071 1141 1112 1176 1188 1208 1547
Rr 0.12 0.09 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.21 0.21
Gr 0.09 0.10 0.17 0.16 0.14 0.19 0.11
Ihyp 0.50 0.50 0.51 0.50 0.49 0.49 0.50
RN 8.96 7.73 8.28 8.99 9.59 9.43 6.89

length”, which states that the average length of streams of each of the different orders
in a drainage basin tends closely to approximate a direct geometric ratio. Drainage
networks of the sub-watershed and micro-watersheds show a nearly linear relation-
ship with a small deviation from straight line (Chow 1964). The total stream length
 6 E.R. Sujatha et al.

Table 2. Regression trend of stream order and stream number of the

micro-watersheds.

Micro-watershed Power equation R2

MW1 y ¼ 111.41x2.446 0.98

MW2 y ¼ 67.714x2.9543 0.96
MW3 y ¼ 105.21x2.7128 0.99
MW4 y ¼ 72.059x2.2454 0.99
MW5 y ¼ 86.216x2.534 0.96
MW6 y ¼ 102.46x2.1355 0.87

of the sub-watershed is 383.7 km and that of the micro-watersheds is shown in

table 1. The total stream length decreases with the increase in stream order. The
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

mean stream length of the watershed is 0.58 and that of the sub-watersheds are
shown in table 1.

4.1.4 Maximum and minimum elevation (H and h). The maximum and minimum
elevation of the sub-watershed is 2365 m (in the southern sector, in micro-watershed
1) and 294 m (in the northern sector, in micro-watershed 6) and that of the micro-
watersheds are shown in table 1. The relative relief of micro-watersheds 5 and 6 are
very high.

Figure 2. Horton’s first law using Palar sub-watershed data.

 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 7

4.2 Derived parameters

4.2.1 Bifurcation ratio (Rb). Bifurcation ratio (Rb) is a dimensionless parameter that
reveals the geometric similarity of the basin and expresses the ramification of the drain-
age network (Strahler 1964). The mean Rb of the watershed is 3.69, which falls within
the stipulated range of natural drainage system as suggested by Strahler (1964). How-
ever, the ambiguous trends in the variation of Rb from 1.91 to 5 for the sub-watershed
and from 1.36 to 7.5 for the micro-watersheds between stream orders suggest the influ-
ence of geology, structural control and relief on drainage branching. As the geology
(figure 3) of the area is uniform, relief plays a dominant role and also indicates substan-
tial structural controls (Mekel 1970).

4.2.2 Stream length ratio (Rl). Stream length ratio shows a significant relation with
surface flow discharge and erosion stage of the basin. The mean stream length of the
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

sub-watershed is 1.44 and that of the micro-watersheds are shown in table 1.

4.2.3 RHO coefficient (RHO). RHO coefficient relates the drainage density and
physiographic development of the basin, allowing the evaluation of the storage
capacity of the drainage network (Horton 1945). It is influenced by climate, geologic,
biologic, geomorphic and anthropogenic factors (Mesa 2006). The RHO coefficient

Figure 3. Geology and lineament map of Palar sub-watershed.

 8 E.R. Sujatha et al.

of sub-watershed and micro-watersheds vary between 0.32 and 0.68 (table 1). Micro-
watersheds 1 and 6 have high RHO and micro-watershed 4 the least.

4.2.4 Stream frequency (Fs). Stream frequency parameter depends on the lithology
of the basin and is an indication of the texture of the drainage network (Horton
1945). The stream frequency of the sub-watershed is 6.49 km2, and that of the
micro-watersheds is presented in table 1. Micro-watershed 5 has the highest stream
frequency, followed by micro-watershed 4 and micro-watershed 1 the lowest.

4.2.5 Drainage density (Dd). Drainage density is one of the often-used morphomet-
ric parameters in the analysis of various environmental variables. It is a measure of
the degree of fluvial dissection and depends on a number of factors like topography,
lithology, climate, pedology and vegetation (Nag 1998; Mesa 2006; Thomas et al.
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

2011). The drainage density of the sub-watershed is 3.79 km/km2 while those of the
six micro-watersheds are shown in table 1. Micro-watershed 5 and micro-watershed 4
have a high drainage density while micro-watershed 1 has the lowest.

4.2.6 Drainage texture (T). Drainage texture portrays the relative channel spacing
in a fluvial dissected terrain and depends on a number of natural factors like climate,
rainfall, vegetation, rock and soil type, infiltration capacity, relief and stage of devel-
opment of the basin (Smith 1950; Vincy et al. 2012). Soft and weak rocks without a
vegetative cover show a fine texture, while massive and resistant rocks produce
coarse texture. The drainage texture of the sub-watershed is 24.59 and that of the
micro-watersheds are given in table 1. Drainage texture of Palar sub-watershed and
its micro-watersheds can be categorized as ultra-fine (Smith 1950).

4.2.7 Basin relief (R). Basin relief controls the stream gradient, thereby influencing
the quantum of sediment transport and flood patterns (Hadely & Schumm 1961). It
helps in understanding the denudation characteristics of the basin. The relief of the
sub-watershed is 2071 m and that of the micro-watersheds is shown in table 1. The
sub-watershed and the micro-watershed have high relief due to physiographic moun-
tainous structure of the region. Micro-watershed 6 has the highest relief and micro-
watershed 2 the lowest.

4.2.8 Relief ratio (Rr). The relief ratio of the sub-watershed is 0.12, characterizing
mountainous configuration of the terrain (Schumm 1963). Micro-watershed 1 shows
the least relief ratio, indicating less erosive power owing to gentle gradient. Relief
ratio is higher for micro-watersheds 5 and 6.

4.2.9 Gradient ratio (Gr). Gradient flow indicates the channel slope for evaluation
of run-off volume (Sreedevi et al. 2005). The gradient ratio of the sub-watershed is
0.09 and that of the micro-watersheds are presented in table 1. It reflects the hilly
nature of the terrain. It is the least for micro-watershed 1 and the highest for micro-
watershed 5.
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 9
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

Figure 4. Slope map of the Palar sub-watershed and the micro-watersheds.

4.2.10 Slope. Slope of a basin is a morphometric factor of hydrological relevance

(Mesa 2006) that indicates the momentum of run-off and time of concentration of
run-off. Steep slopes have higher surface run-off and low infiltration rates, which in
turn accelerates erosion, especially in the case of barren slopes (Verstappen 1983).
The slope varies from 0 to 65 , with a mean of 18.89 . The slope derived from the
DEM is reclassified into seven classes: <5 , 5 –10 , 10 –15 , 15 –25 , 25 –35 , 35 –
45 and >45 (figure 4). Maximum pixels fall in the 15 –25 category. The mean
slope is the highest for micro-watershed 6 and is the lowest for micro-watershed 1.

4.2.11 Ruggedness number (RN). Ruggedness number is used to measure the flash
flood potential of the streams (Patton & Baker 1976). It expresses the geometric char-
acteristics of the basin. RN of the sub-watershed is 8.9 and that of the micro-water-
sheds are given in table 1. Micro-watersheds 4 and 5 have higher RN values showing
their susceptibility to erosion.

4.2.12 Hypsometric integral (Ihyp). Hypsometric integral is a measure of the degree

of fluvial landscape erosion (Strahler 1952; Markose & Jayappa 2011). Ihyp of the
sub-watershed is 0.5 and the micro-watersheds range between 0.49 and 0.50
 10 E.R. Sujatha et al.

Table 3. Shape factors of Palar sub-watershed.

Elongation ratio Circulatory ratio Form factor

Sub-watershed 0.49 0.38 0.19

Micro-watershed 1 0.53 0.27 0.22
Micro-watershed 2 0.63 0.43 0.31
Micro-watershed 3 0.82 0.68 0.52
Micro-watershed 4 0.69 0.53 0.38
Micro-watershed 5 0.72 0.71 0.41
Micro-watershed 6 0.89 0.43 0.63

(table 1), which means 50% of the original volume of the sub-watershed still remains
in the basins to erode.
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

4.3 Shape parameters

Watersheds have numerous shapes and its shape reflects the run-off behaviour at the
outlet. Typical parameters that describe the basin shape are discussed. The quantifi-
cation of shape parameters are shown in table 3.

4.3.1 Elongation ratio (Re). The elongation ratio for the watershed is 0.49 and that
of the sub-watershed is shown in table 3. Micro-watersheds 1, 2 and 4 are elongated
in shape, micro-watershed 5 is less elongated and micro-watersheds 3 and 6 oval,
showing high relief and considerable slope.

4.3.2 Circularity ratio (Rc). Circulatory ratio is influenced by the lithology of the
basin, stream frequency and gradient of various orders (Strahler 1964). It indicates
the basin shape, implying the rate of infiltration and time taken for the excess water
to reach the basin outlet depending upon the geology, slope and vegetative cover of
the area. Rc of the sub-watershed is 0.38, indicating an elongated basin, with a den-
dritic drainage pattern. Micro-watersheds 3 and 5 have a higher circulatory ratio.
Micro-watershed 5 is less elongated with uniform rate of infiltration and hence the
excess run-off takes longer time to reach the basin outlet.

4.3.3 Form factor (Ff). Horton (1945) proposed this parameter to predict the flow
intensity of a basin in a defined area. It shows an inverse relationship with square of
the axial length and a direct relation with peak discharge (Gregory & Walling 1973).
The form factor of the sub-watershed is 0.19 and that of the micro-watersheds are
shown in table 3. They have peak flows for longer duration. Micro-watershed 6 has
the highest form factor and thereby has the highest peak discharge in the sub-
watershed.

5. Discussion
An attempt is made to use ASTER GDEM for morphometric study especially in
mountain regions. SRTM DEM provides more accurate elevations but ASTER
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 11

Figure 5. Correlation between basin area and total stream length.

Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

GDEM offers better morphometric and geomorphic details (Pareta & Pareta 2011;
Forkuor & Maathuis 2012). Hence, it can be used in watershed planning at initial
phase as it is cost-effective and easily available. The watershed boundaries extracted
from pre-processed ASTER GDEM are compared using topographic maps and it
shows that the boundaries match closely.
First-order streams account for nearly 75% of the total number of streams in the
basin. Numbers of first-order streams are higher in all the micro-watersheds, indicat-
ing structural weakness present in the basin dominantly in the form of lineaments
(Mesa 2006). Regression trend of stream order and stream number exhibit a power
function relationship with negative correlation (table 2).
The relationship between area of micro-watershed and total stream length (figure
5) shows that area bears a linear relation with total stream length and has positive
correlation. The mean stream length of an order is higher than the next higher
order, except in the case of fourth-order streams, which can be due to local differen-
ces in slope and topography (Sreedevi et al. 2005; Imran Malik et al. 2011). In
general, it shows that the evolution of this basin dominantly follows the laws of ero-
sion acting on homogeneous geologic material with uniform weathering–erosion
characteristics. However, in the case of micro-watershed 1, it is lower for second-
order stream; in the case of micro-watershed 2, it is lower for fourth-order stream;
in the case of micro-watershed 4, it is lower for third-order stream; in the case of
micro-watershed 5, it is lower for second- and fifth-order streams; and in the case
of micro-watershed 6, it is lower for second-, fourth- and sixth-order streams. Dis-
crepancy in stream orders in the micro-watersheds is attributed to anomalous basin
development, local variation in the topography and effect of localized geological
disturbance.
In general, Rb of lower orders is higher, reflecting high dissection in these sections.
Bifurcation ratio of micro-watershed 2 falls in the range of 4–8, showing structural
disturbance in the area caused by the presence of a major fault (figure 3) in its prox-
imity (Clark et al. 2004). It is also evident from the higher Rb of second-order stream
(table 1), whereas micro-watersheds 1 and 6 have Rb less than 3, indicating that they
have no structural disturbance and are also prone to flooding (Chorley 1969).
Despite homogenous lithology, changes in Rb of various orders suggest dissimilar-
ities in the geometry. Head ward erosion can also be attributed to the changes in Rb
owing to general nature of the terrain.
 12 E.R. Sujatha et al.

Figure 6. Relation between drainage density of the micro-watersheds and stream frequency.
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

Rl between successive stream orders does not follow any system pattern of varia-
tions or empirical rule. This anomaly can be interpreted as a sign of disequilibrium in
the drainage development. The Rl of the sub-watershed and the micro-watersheds
are below the natural range (2.10–2.19) and, as suggested by Scheidegger (1970), indi-
cates structural control, dominance of slope and topographic conditions. High RHO
coefficient of micro-watershed 1 indicates high hydric storage and attenuates the ero-
sion effects during elevated discharge.
The stream frequency of all the micro-watersheds is moderate, indicating a moder-
ate run-off and their drainage density is high showing a highly dissected terrain. The
drainage density indicates a highly dissected steep terrain with impervious underlying
rocks, which is moderate to well drained with low infiltration. The micro-watersheds
have very fine texture, indicating high drainage development with high erosion.
Stream frequency, drainage density and texture are very high for micro-watershed 5,
indicating that it is erosion intensive while micro-watershed 1 has the least values
and thereby is less prone to erosion. Figure 6 shows the regression trend between
drainage density and stream frequency. It shows a positive linear correlation.
Relief ratio depicts a high-energy basin with intense erosion and high sediment
load, but it is significantly low for micro-watershed 1, depicting a low-energy basin
and this same may be attributed to its gentle topography. The gradient ratio also por-
trays a similar scenario. Micro-watershed 5 has the highest gradient ratio, indicating
higher potential for run-off and steep slopes. The hypsometric integral for both the
sub-watershed and its micro-watershed is 50%, depicting that the sub-watershed is in
equilibrium state.
The micro-watersheds have a moderate slope (figure 4). Despite the least mean
slope, the maximum and minimum slopes of the Palar sub-watershed also fall within
micro-watershed 1, indicating that a gentle topography and further exploitation by
anthropogenic activities has created a plateau-like terrain. It makes the basin a low-
energy basin with less sediment load. Micro-watersheds 5 and 6 are at the tail end of
the sub-watershed, having higher mean slope, providing a favourable topography
for higher rate of erosion. These results are synchronous with the inference from the
relief ratio and gradient ratio. Ruggedness number of all the micro-watersheds
reflects the mountainous nature of the terrain, with more erosion and dissection with
the lowest value for micro-watershed 1 and higher values for micro-watersheds 5 and
6, complimenting the results from slope, relief ratio and gradient ratio.
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 13

Figure 7. Relationship between bifurcation ratio and elongation ratio.

Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

Shape factors depict geomorphology and provide an insight into the run-off and
infiltration process in the basin. In general a higher Re is associated with circular
shape and a lower Re with elongated basin. The sub-watershed has an elongated
shape according to the classification proposed by Strahler (1964). Elongated basins
are characterized by more number of lower order streams and higher bifurcation
ratio (Chorley 1969). The regression trend between elongation ratio and bifurcation
ratio shows negative correlation (figure 7). The micro-watersheds 1, 4 and 5 do not
reflect this general norm and this anomaly can be attributed to structural and topo-
graphical control in drainage development. The elongation ratio also depicts the
strong relief in the sub-watershed. Micro-watershed 1 alone has a slightly lower elon-
gation ratio again suggesting a gentler slope. Rc of the micro-watersheds range
between 0.27 and 0.71. However, micro-watershed 5 shows high Re and Rc values,
indicating differential erosion and watershed displacement. Form factor for elon-
gated basins range between 0.1 and 0.8 (Strahler 1964) and all the micro-watersheds
fall in this category. Micro-watersheds 3, 6 and 5 have higher form factors than the
other micro-watersheds, reflecting their oval and less elongated shapes, respectively,
in coherence with their elongation and circulatory ratios. The higher form factor of
micro-watersheds 5 and 6 (table 3) also indicate higher drainage development and
structural control in these micro-watersheds. It is observed that elongation ratio >
circulatory ratio > form factor (Srinivasa & Nagesh 2011) except for micro-water-
shed 6, emphasizing structural control. Figure 8 shows the variation of the shape
parameters.

6. Conclusions
The study demonstrates the successful use of ASTER GDEM for hydrological analy-
sis at micro-watershed level for a mountain river. The stream ordering system of
Palar reveals high hierarchy and high degree of ramification of the watershed
(Horton 1945). The sub-watershed is classified as a sixth-order watershed. First-
order streams dominate the sub-watershed, and the drainage network provides a suf-
ficient superficial draining with a high number of lower order streams flowing directly
into the higher order. The bifurcation ratio of the watershed and sub-watershed
reflect the mountainous or highly dissected nature of the terrain. The mean
 14 E.R. Sujatha et al.

Figure 8. Variation of shape factors in the micro-watersheds.

Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

bifurcation ratio of the sub-watershed in relation to the variation of bifurcation ratio

with the successive stream orders suggests that drainage pattern is not influenced by
geology but by relief and structural controls. It also relates to the elongated shape of
the basin (Schumm 1956). The development of the stream segments is affected by
slope and local relief (Strahler 1964), which accounts for the difference in drainage
density of the sub-watersheds. The physiographic structure of the watershed gener-
ates high run-off and low infiltration, leading to high proportion and velocity of
overland flow. This causes sheet, rill and gully erosion and a high sediment load,
which is reflected in the high relief ratio of the watershed. The shape parameters
depict an elongated watershed with smaller flood peaks and longer flood flows (Greg-
ory & Walling 1973). This is a vital component to be considered in basin manage-
ment and land use planning. This is a cost-effective alternative for watershed
management and planning and is also easily available.

References
Chorley RJ. 1969. Introduction to fluvial processes. London: Methuen; p. 30–52.
Chow VT, editor. 1964. Handbook of applied hydrology. New York: McGraw Hill.
Clark MK, Schoenbohm LM, Royden LH, Whipple KX, Burchfiel BC, Zhang X, Tang W,
Wang E, Chen L. 2004. Surface uplift, tectonics, and erosion of eastern Tibet from
large-scale drainage patterns. Tectonics. 23. doi:10.1029/2002TC001402
Forkuor G, Maathuis B. 2012. Comparison of SRTM and ASTER derived digital elevation
models over two regions in Ghana – implications for hydrological and environmental
modeling. In: Piacentini T, editor. Studies on environmental and applied geomorphol-
ogy. InTech; p. 219–240.
Frissel CA, Liss WJ, Warren CE, Hurley MD. 1986. A hierarchical framework for stream habi-
tat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context. Environ Manag. 10:199–214.
Gregory KJ, Walling DE. 1973. Drainage basin form and process: a geomorphological
approach. New York: Wiley; p. 456.
Grohmann CH, Riccomini C, Alves FM. 2007. SRTM-based morphotectonic analysis of the
Poços de Caldas Alkaline Massif southeastern Brazil. Comput Geosci. 33:10–19.
Hadely RF, Schumm SA. 1961. Sediment sources and drainage basin characteristics in upper
Cheyenne River basin. United States Geological Survey water-supply paper, 1531-B.
Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; p. 137–196.
 Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk 15

Hengl T, Evans IS. 2009. Mathematical and digital models of the land surface. In: Hengl T,
Reuter HI, editors. Geomorphometry: concepts, software, applications. Amsterdam:
Elsevier; p. 31–63.
Horton RE. 1945. Erosional development of streams and their drainage density: hydrophysical
approach to quantitative geomorphology. Geol Soc Am Bull. 56:275–370.
Imran Malik M, Sultan Bhat M, Kuchay NA. 2011. Morphometric analysis of Lidder catch-
ment in Kashmir valley using geographical information system. Recent Res Sci Tech-
nol. 3(4):118–126.
Markose VJ, Jayappa KS. 2011. Hypsometric analysis of Kali River Basin, Karnataka, India,
using geographic information system. Geocarto Int. 26(7):553–568.
Mekel JFM. 1970. The use of aerial photographs in geological mapping. ITC text book of
photo-interpretations. Delft (The Netherlands): International Institute for Aerial Sur-
vey and Earth Sciences. Volume 8; p. 1–169.
Mesa LM. 2006. Morphometric analysis of a subtropical Andean basin (Tucumam, Argen-
tina). Environ Geol. 50(8):1235–1242.
Nag SK. 1998. Morphometric analysis using remote sensing techniques in the Chaka sub basin
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

Purulia district, West Bengal. J Indian Soc Remote Sensing. 26:69–76.

Pareta K, Pareta U. 2011. Quantitative morphometric analysis of a watershed of Yamuna
basin using ASTER (DEM) data and GIS. Int J Geomatics. 2(1):248–269.
Patton PC, Baker VR. 1976. Morphometry and floods in small drainage basins subject to
diverse hydrogeomorphic controls. Water Resour Res. 12:941–952.
Pike RJ. 2000. Geomorphometry: diversity in quantitative surface analysis. Prog Phys Geogra-
phy. 24:1–20.
Rastogi RA, Sharma TC. 1976. Quantitative analysis of drainage basin characteristics. J Soil
Water Conservation India. 26(1–4):18–25.
Scheidegger AE. 1970. Theoretical geomorphology. London: George Allen and Unwin;
p. 243–248.
Schumm SA. 1956. Evolution of drainage systems and slopes in Badlands at Perth Amboy,
New Jersey. Bull Geol Soc Am. 67:597–646.
Schumm SA. 1963. Sinuosity of alluvial rivers on the great plains. Bull Geol Soc Am. 74:1089–
1100.
Slater JA, Garvey G, Johnston C, Haase J, Heady B, Kroenung G and Little J. 2006. The
SRTM data “finishing” process and products. Photogrammetric Eng Remote Sensing.
72:237–247.
Smith KG. 1950. Standards for grading texture of erosional topography. Am J Sci. 248:655–
668.
Sreedevi PD, Subrahmanyam K, Shakeel A. 2005. The significance of morphometric analysis
for obtaining groundwater potential zones in a structurally controlled terrain. Environ
Geol. 47(3):412–420.
Srinivasa R, Nagesh KD. 2011. Classification of microwatersheds based on morphological
characteristics. J Hydro-Environ Res. 5:101–109.
Strahler AN. 1952. Hyposometric (area-altitude) analysis of erosional topography. Geol Soc
Am Bull. 63:1117–1141.
Strahler AN. 1964. Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and channel networks.
In: Chow VT, editor. Handbook of applied hydrology. New York: McGraw-Hill;
p. 439–476.
Thomas J, Joseph S, Thrivikramji KP, Abe G. 2011. Morphometric analysis of the drainage
system and its hydrological implications in the rain shadow regions, Kerala, India.
J Geographical Sci. 21(6):1077–1088.
Thompson JR, Taylor MP, Fryirs KA, Brierley GJ. 2001. A geomorphological framework for
river characterization and habitat assessment. Aquatic Conservation Marine Freshwa-
ter Ecosystem. 11:373–389.
 16 E.R. Sujatha et al.

Verstappen H. 1983. The applied geomorphology. Enschede (The Netherlands): International

Institute for Aerial Survey and Earth Science (ITC).
Vincy MV, Rajan B, Pradeepkumar AP. 2012. Geographic information system-based morpho-
metric characterization of sub-watersheds of Meenachil river basin, Kottayam district,
Kerala, India. Geocarto Int. 27(8):661–684.
Downloaded by [sujatha Ramani] at 19:24 03 November 2013

View publication stats