INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540
I
DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS
I
Volume
XIY,
Issue I, January 2025
Remote Sensing and GIS-Based Evaluation of Morphometric
Parameters of Madhupur Tract Basin
Muhammad Qumml Hassan, M.
Aziz
Hasan, and Jowaher Raza
Department of Geology, Faculty of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Dhaka, Ramna, Dhaka 1000,
Bangladesh
DOI
:
https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2025.1401025
Received: 17 January 2025; Accepted: 28 January 2025; Published: 18 February 2025
Abstract:
Evaluating the complexity of the water system is essential to balance its utilization, maintenance, and management. A
quantitative description of the drainage system, an essential aspect of the characteristics of a basin, can be assessed by the
morphometric characteristics at a defined scale. Morphometric analysis quantitatively studies landforms' physical dimensions and
characteristics within a drainage basin. The Madhupur Tract, a large upland area in central Bangladesh, is surrounded by the Jamuna-
Brahmaputra River floodplain. Geologically, the Madhupur Tract predominantly consists of older Pleistocene deposits, with a mix
of clay, silt, and sand. The drainage pattern in the Madhupur Tract is primarily dendritic, resembling a tree-like structure. Madhupur
Tract Drainage Basin has 9,025 streams of different orders, covering an area of almost 3,677 km2. It is very elongated in shape with
rapid discharge in a short period. Lower-order streams are high in number, probably due to the elevated nature of the area. A gradual
decrease in the number of streams can be seen as inversely decreasing with increasing stream order. The consistent decrease in the
number of streams in relation to stream order throughout the basin indicates the dominance of erosional landforms. The changes in
stream length ratio throughout the basin show that the area is in the early stages of irregular hydrological behavior. The overall
drainage density of the Madhupur Tract Basin is high in the lower reaches, indicating less porous rock on the bed surface, high slope,
and high water flow regimes. The low form factor value indicated the elongated nature of basins with low peak flow for longer.
Flood flows of elongated basins can be more easily managed than circular basins. The relief ratio of the Madhupur Tract Basin was
measured to be around 0.156, apparently very low, indicating minimal elevation differences with a relatively flat or gently undulating
terrain. The ruggedness number of the Madhupur Tract Basin is 33.54. A low ruggedness indicates a relatively smooth and uniform
landscape with gradual elevation changes. Both surface water and groundwater interactions influence the Madhupur Tract's drainage
system. The lateritic formations in the region contribute to the formation of aquifers, affecting the groundwater flow and the overall
drainage dynamics.
I.
Introduction
Assessment of the complexity of the water system is needed to equate the utilization, maintenance, and management of the system,
as well as the occurrence, distribution, movement, and properties of water on earth (Khan & ElKashouty, 2023). The development
of water resources necessitates the assessment of the complexity of the water system for equate utilization, maintenance, and
management of the system, encompassing the occurrence, distribution, movement, and properties of water on earth and their
relationship with the environment within each phase of the hydrological cycle. A quantitative description of the drainage system, an
essential aspect of the characteristics of a basin, can be assessed by the morphometric characteristics at a defined scale and synthesize
the hydrological responses (Mahala, 2020; Bogale, 2020).
Morphometric analysis quantitatively studies landforms' physical dimensions and characteristics within a basin or drainage basin
(Kumar et al., 2015). It analyzes the shape of the Earth's surface and landforms. Measuring and calculating various parameters,
including stream length, drainage density, and relief ratio, characterizes the terrain's shape, size, and relief. The analysis gives
valuable insights into the processes occurring in a Basin, aiding in assessing its behavior, erosion potential, and overall landscape
characteristics. Water management studies are needed to protect the limited water resources because surface water resources are
rare in most places. (Mahala, 2020; Bogale, 2020)
Morphometric studies are essential for effective basin management and sustainable utilization of water resources. The outcome of
the analysis of linear and areal parameters is dependent on determining the effect of catchment characteristics and the distribution
of stream networks of different orders within the area. (Khan & ElKashouty, 2023; Arulbalaji & Gurugnanam, 2017)
The objective of the present study was to analyze the Madhupur Tract Basin's linear, areal, and relief morphometric attributes.
Remote Sensing (RS) and Geographical Information System (GIS) techniques were used to update drainage and surface water bodies
and evaluate the basin's linear, relief, and aerial morphometric attributes. Analyses of drainage efficiency, sediment transport, and
topography variations helped assess runoff, erosion, and land stability. The findings will support sustainable watershed management,
flood mitigation, and effective land use planning in the region. (Arefin & Alam, 2020)
Madhupur Tract
The Madhupur Tract, a large upland area in central Bangladesh, is surrounded by the Jamuna-Brahmaputra River floodplain (Hossain
et al., 2014). (Figure 1). The southern part of this tract is known in Bangla as Bhawal Garh and the northern part as Madhupur Garh.
Geologically, it is a terrace one to ten meters above the adjacent floodplains (Rahman et al., 2005). The total extent of this Tract is
4,244 sq km. The main section stretches from just south of Jamalpur in the north to Fatullah of Narayanganj in the south. Most of
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540
I
DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS
I
Volume
XIY,
Issue I, January 2025
Dhaka City is on this Tract. Madhupur Tract has seven small outliers; four are in the east and three in the north (Rahman et al.,
2005).
The Madhupur Tract is an exposed Quaternary interfluve between two pathways for the Brahmaputra River (Pickering et al., 2013).
The Madhupur Tract is an uplifted Pleistocene Interfluve tilted to the east. The western margin of the Madhupur Tract is a fault,
termed the Madhupur Fault, which has several echelon linear segments with underlying faults being correct lateral strike-slip faults.
There are different interpretations of the faults underlying the Madhupur Tract. (Morgan and McIntire, 1959; Alam, 2007). The
Lalmai hills and the Madhupur locality represent tectonically uplifted blocks. Still, the whole Barind Tract and a significant portion
of the Madhuput tracts are not tectonically uplifted; instead, these originated from erosional-depositional processes (Towhida et al.,
2006). The western margin of the Madhupur tract is an erosional feature due to river truncation (Hossain et al., 2014; Figure 2).
Geologically, the Madhupur Tract predominantly consists of older Pleistocene deposits, with a mix of clay, silt, and sand. The
landscape is marked by dissected plateaus and numerous small hills, creating a varied topography (Figure 3). It consists of uplands
with closely or broadly divided terraces connected to shallow or large, deep valleys. Erosional processes, including the weathering
of rocks, have contributed to the forming of characteristic landforms in the area. The soils here are generally classified into three
main categories: Madhupur clay, Madhupur gravelly clay, and Madhupur sandy loam. These soil types influence the region's
agricultural practices, impacting crop selection and yield.
The drainage pattern in the Madhupur Tract is primarily dendritic, resembling a tree-like structure (Figure 3). The rivers and streams
in the region flow in a pattern where smaller tributaries join larger rivers, forming a network that drains the water from the plateau.
The area is drained by several rivers, including the Old Brahmaputra, Arial Khan, and Karatoya, which play a significant role in
shaping the hydrological characteristics of the area.
Both surface water and groundwater interactions influence the Madhupur Tract's drainage system. The lateritic formations in the
region contribute to the formation of aquifers, affecting the groundwater flow and the overall drainage dynamics (Figure 4).
II.
Methodology
The morphological features were retrieved using Arc Hydrology methods with the input of digital elevation model earth observation
datasets, which are significant in comprehending the spatial arrangement of stream network features. These are widely applied in
deriving detailed linear, relief, and areal morphometric parameters. Geomorphological Assessments of terrains were done
automatically based on Shuttle Radar Topography Mission - Digital Elevation Model (SRTM-DEM) high-resolution images of
terrain and landscape. Data set characteristics are explained in Table 1. Arc toolbox in GIS 10.3 was used to analyze the morphologic
characteristics of the basin, including ArcHydro Tools for watershed delineation, Spatial Analyst for slope, aspect, and drainage
density, and Hydrology Tools for stream order and flow direction. Zonal Statistics and Raster Calculator tools were used to analyze
terrain attributes. GIS techniques offer a powerful tool for analyzing, managing, and extracting spatial information for better
understanding. (Ehsani et al. 2010; Figure 4)
The study area was delineated in a GIS environment with the help of Arc-GIS 10.3 assigning Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM),
World Geodetic System (WGS dating from 1984 and last revised in 2004), and 43N Zone Projection System.
Spatial analyst tools of hydrology options within the Arc toolbox were used to assess the flow direction and accumulation direction
to prepare a basin map. Raster calculation was conducted to generate stream networks and correct the location of the basin outlet.
The basin was categorized into three morphometric aspects: linear, relief, and shape. The methodology adopted for computations
of morphometric parameters with formulae is listed in Table 1.
The topographic wetness index (TWI) is calculated to assess the hydro-geomorphic features of a drainage basin, describing
topography's influence on soil moisture distribution and surface runoff. (Beven & Kirkby, 1979). The Topographic Position Index
(TPI), first introduced by Weiss (2001), classifies landforms based on elevation differences between a focal point and the
surrounding area. The TWI is calculated using gridded DEM. The negative TPI value indicates that the central point is lower than
its surrounding average height, whereas positive TPI indicates a position higher than its average height. (Günther et al., 2014; De
Reu et al., 2013; Sørensen et al., 2006).
III.
Results and Discussion
Quantitative evaluation of the morphometric parameters describes the basin characteristics; each parameter is classified into
different dimensional aspects, namely, linear aspects, areal aspects, and relief. The arrangement of streams in a drainage system
constitutes the drainage pattern, which reflects mainly structural or lithologic controls of the underlying rocks. The following
description explains the characteristics of the Madhupur basin. Madhupur Tract Drainage Basin has 49 basins. They have an area
coverage of almost 8,200 km2, with an average area of 168 km2. These basins are generally elongated in shape, with a total perimeter
of almost 380 km (Figure 5).
IV.
Linear Morphometric Parameters
Linear aspects explain the one-dimensional parameters to indicate channel patterns of the drainage network and the topological
characteristics.
Stream Order
Stream Ordering was proposed by Strahler (1957). It is a hierarchical relationship between stream segments and their connectivity.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540
I
DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS
I
Volume
XIY,
Issue I, January 2025
First-order streams are the smallest, unbranched ones; second-order segments are formed when two first-order streams confluence;
segments of third-order streams combine, and so on. It is the first step of drainage analysis based on the hierarchical ranking of
streams. Higher-order streams generally exhibit increased discharge and drainage area, playing a crucial role in shaping the overall
hydrological patterns of a region. This stream order depends on the basin shape, size, and relief characteristics of such a basin
(Haghipour and Burg 2014).
The total number of streams of the Madhupur Tract area or basin is 9,025, covering an area of almost 8,200 km2. Lower-order
streams are high in number, probably due to the elevated nature of the area. A gradual decrease in the number of streams can be
seen as inversely proportional to increasing stream order. (Figure 6; Table 2)
The consistent decrease in the number of streams to stream order (average 57.67 %) throughout the basin indicates the dominance
of erosional landforms. Higher order streams (4th, 5th order) are fewer due to their alluvial deposits. Basins with high stream
numbers have higher runoff and rapid peak flow than those with low stream numbers (Bhat et al., 2019).
Geological factors influence the high density of low-order streams in the Madhupur Tract basin, which promotes surface runoff and
stream formation. Anthropogenic activities, including deforestation and agricultural expansion, increase runoff and erosion
(Brammer, 2016).
Stream Numbers
Stream number refers to the count of individual streams within a specified area. It is a quantitative measure of the density of the
stream network. High stream numbers suggest a denser network, indicating intricate drainage patterns and potential susceptibility
to various hydrological processes.
The interplay between stream order and stream number yields valuable information about basin characteristics. Madhupur Basin,
with a high stream order and low stream number, indicates a more hierarchical and organized drainage pattern, with a few major
rivers dominating the landscape. (Table 3)
Bifurcation Ratio (Rb)
The Bifurcation Ratio (Rb) quantifies the branching pattern of a drainage basin's stream network. It is calculated by dividing the
number of streams of a given order by the number of streams in the next higher order (Mayhew, 2015). Bifurcation ratios typically
range between 3.0 and 5.0 in basins where geological structures exert minimal influence on drainage patterns. The drainage network
is shaped by homogeneous lithology and uniform erosion processes from minimal structural control (Chowdhury, 2016). The mean
bifurcation ratio of 2.54 in the Madhupur Tract basin suggests that geological structures moderately influence the drainage pattern,
reflecting a balance between lithological uniformity and structural control, denoting water-carrying capacity and related flood
potentiality. (Horton, 1945; Strahler, 1957; Joji et al., 2013; Table 2; Table 3)
The bifurcation ratio of streams in the basin ranges from 1.56 to 3.16 (Table 4). The low Rb indicates a dendritic or tree-like drainage
pattern, with stream segments tending to converge into more significant streams at a lower rate.
Stream Length
Stream length is calculated using the Horton law, which indicates the successive stages of stream segment development.
(Horton,1945; Table 1) A direct geomorphic and hydrological sequence can be approximated from different order stream lengths
(Castillo et al., 1988). Generally, the total length of streams is maximum in 1st order and decreases as the stream order increases.
Such a trend indicates discrepancies and inconsistencies in the lithology of the area. Studies suggest higher stream lengths in a
mountain–plain front than in a plateau–plain front river basin. (Sreedevi et al. 2005). The stream length ranges from 1610 km (1st
Order) to 77 km (5th Order). (Table 4)
A higher stream order with a lower stream length (Figure 7) can indicate specific geomorphological and hydrological characteristics
with anthropogenic influence on the basin, thus requiring a holistic understanding of the local geomorphology, hydrology, and
anthropogenic impact. It indicates diverse topographic features, steep gradients, or rugged terrain, causing streams to cover relatively
shorter distances. It is also influenced by growing urbanization, altering the natural stream patterns.
Mean Stream Length
The mean stream length indicates the basin's early stage of geomorphic development. This causes discrepancies in surface flow
discharge and sedimentation (Mahala, 2020). The mean stream length for 1st-order streams is 0.17 km, 2nd-order streams are 0.15
km, 3rd-order streams are 0.18 km, 4th-order streams are 0.22 km, and 5th-order streams are 0.30 km (Table 4). The total length of
streams decreases with the increase of stream order, giving a negative linear change showing a dendritic-type drainage pattern
(Figure 7). The low mean value of high-order streams indicates that development stopped. Relatively higher values indicate low
erosion potential, which denotes old erosional landform development. (Table 4)
Stream Length Ratio
The stream length ratio is vital to the discharge the basin's surface flow and erosional stages (Horton, 1945). The ratios between
stream orders 1 & 2, 3 & 4, and 4 & 5 are almost similar, ranging between 0.44 and 0.55. The changes in stream length ratio denote
that the area is in an early stage of geomorphic development, and the area has a high potential for frequent changes shortly, indicative
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540
I
DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS
I
Volume
XIY,
Issue I, January 2025
of irregular hydrological behavior. (Table 5)
Areal Morphometric Parameters
Stream Frequency (Fs)
Stream frequency is the total number of stream segments irrespective of the order per unit area (Horton, 1945). It may also be defined
as the ratio between the total number of stream segments cumulative of all orders and the basin area (Table 1). Different stream
frequencies through the basin with the same drainage density may be possible. Permeability, infiltration capability, and basin relief
correlate with stream frequency. In reaction to runoff processes, it offers a drainage basin response. The drainage density of the
basin, initial resistivity of the rocks, relief, and precipitation all affect stream frequency. Stream frequency at the Madhupur Tract
basin is 5.101 number/km2, indicative of an immediate surface runoff. High slope and greater precipitation increase stream
frequency (Sf), whereas low permeability and less available surface flow decrease stream frequency (Bali et al., 2011; Thomas et
al., 2010; Table 5).
Drainage Density
Drainage density is calculated as the expression of the closeness of channel spacing within a basin, as it provides a numerical
measurement of runoff potentiality and landscape dissection (Horton, 1945). It measures the ratio of the total length of streams
irrespective of stream order to the per unit area of the basin (Joji et al., 2013; Magesh & Chandrasekhar, 2014; Table 1). It depends
upon that basin's underlying geology, relief, geomorphology, climate, vegetation, etc. (Parveen et al., 2012; Obeidat et al., 2021).
Slope gradient and relative relief are the main controlling factors on drainage density (Magesh et al., 2011). Low drainage density
values prevail in basins with low relief and vice versa (Strahler, 1957). Low drainage density indicates highly permeable subsoil
material under dense vegetation, low relief, and low runoff, whereas high drainage density implies high runoff and low infiltration
rate. Madhupur Tract basin has a drainage density of 0.86 and is fast-drained. (Harllin & Wijeyawickrema, 1985; Kelson & Wells,
1989; Horton, 1945; Table 6)
The drainage density throughout the Madhupur Tract Basin ranges from 0.01 to 69.48 km/km2, indicating significant lithology,
topography, and land use heterogeneity (Hasan et al., 2016; Rahaman et al., 2017). The overall drainage density is 0.86 km/km2.
High drainage density in lower reaches indicates less porous rock in the bed surface, high slope, and high water flow regimes. Low
drainage density is observed in the basin's northern plain areas due to low relief and high permeability. Drainage Density of the
Madhupur Tract basin can be considered low to moderate. (Table 5; Figure 8)
Texture Ratio (Rt)
Texture ratio (Rt) is calculated from stream frequency and drainage density (Horton, 1945; Table 1). It is also the ratio between the
total stream segments and the basin's perimeter. As recognized by Horton, infiltration capacity is the single critical factor influencing
texture ratio. It is also an essential fluvial parameter that denotes the relative spacing of the drainage network of any basin. Infiltration
capacity is an essential factor influencing the texture ratio. (Horton, 1945; Table 3)
Form Factor (Rf)
In the context of river morphology, the Form Factor refers to a dimensionless parameter used to quantify the shape or elongation of
a drainage basin. It is calculated by dividing the basin's area (A) by the square of its length (L), providing insights into the basin's
overall form (Horton, 1932; Table 2). The value of Ff is always less than 0.7854, which indicates a perfectly circular basin, often in
regions with uniform topography and drainage patterns (Bali et al., 2011). Flood flows of the elongated basin can be more easily
managed than those of the circular basin (Castillo et al., 1988). The average form factor of the study area is 0.058, indicative of a
very elongated basin. (Table 3)
Elongation Ratio (Re)
Elongation Ratio is a dimensionless parameter used in geomorphology to quantify the degree of elongation or stretching of a
landform, such as a drainage basin or a basin (Schumm, 1956). It is calculated by dividing the longest dimension of the landform by
its perpendicular width. It is also a significant index of basin shape (Gayen et al., 2013). It can be crucial for understanding the
landform characteristics and their implications for hydrological processes. Changes in the Elongation Ratio may also be relevant for
assessing vulnerability to specific environmental changes (Gayen et al., 2013; Table 6). R
e
-assesses drainage basins' planimetric
characteristics, with a lesser value suggesting a comparatively wider landform. Basins with high Re are nearly circular and tend to
have uniform precipitation distribution, resulting in a quick response to rainfall, higher peak discharge, and increased flood potential.
A high value also implies geomorphic distortions or tectonic influence.
Furthermore, basins with low Re ratios have delayed runoff concentration, with prolonged but lower peak flows and reduced flood
risks (Schumm, 1956; Singh & Singh, 1997; Mesa, 2006; Table 4). The Madhupur tract basin's Re value is 4.68 (Table 4). This high
value suggests an elongated and irregular shape with slow runoff concentration, extended lag time, and reduced peak discharge,
lowering flood susceptibility.
Circularity Ratio (Re)
The circularity Ratio quantifies a basin's circularity or roundness. It is calculated by dividing the landform's area by the square of its
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540
I
DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS
I
Volume
XIY,
Issue I, January 2025
perimeter. (Strahler, 1957; Table 1). Understanding the landform characteristics and their implications for hydrological processes is crucial
to quantitatively characterizing basins' shape and organization (Strahler, 1957). Peak discharge from high precipitation will impact basins
with a high circular ratio.
A High R
e
value suggests a circular basin with rapid hydrological response and increased flooding. On the other hand, basins with a low R
e
value are elongated, with more prolonged runoff, reduced peak discharge, and low flood risks. A low Rc value also reflects structural
control, influencing drainage development and flow dynamics within the basin. (Schumm, 1956; Singh & Singh, 1997; Mesa, 2006; Table
6)
The average circularity ratio value of the Madhupur Tract basin is 0.32 (Table 3), which indicates near-circular characteristics and an
elongated basin shape with lower compactness. This suggests slower runoff, extended peak discharge time, and reduced flash flood potential.
Relief Morphometric Parameters
Basin Relief (H)
Basin relief indicates the variation in elevation within a basin. It assists in understanding landform characteristics and the overall
terrain complexity. Basin relief measures the difference in elevation between the highest and lowest points within a drainage basin.
Higher basin relief indicates more varied and rugged topography, while lower relief suggests a relatively flat or gently sloping
landscape (Sreedevi et al., 2009). A steeper relief often leads to faster runoff, increased erosion potential, and dynamic river systems.
The measured basin relief value of the Madhupur Tract Basin is 39, inferring a gently sloping and undulating landscape with fast
runoff. (Table 3; Table 6)
Relief Ratio (Rr)
The Relief Ratio is a dimensionless parameter that characterizes the relative difference in elevation between the highest and lowest
points within a specified area, often expressed as a ratio (Schumm, 1956; Soni, 2017). The relief ratio of the Madhupur Tract Basin
was measured to be around 0.156, apparently very low, indicating minimal elevation differences with a relatively flat or gently
undulating terrain.
Basin Slope (Sb)
Basin slope, or drainage basin slope, refers to the average gradient or inclination of the land within a specific drainage basin. It measures
how steep or gentle the terrain is within the entire basin, providing insights into the drainage area's overall topographical characteristics.
(Schumm, 1956; Soni, 2017)
Ruggedness number (Rn)
The ruggedness number, also known as the terrain ruggedness index (TRI), measures a landscape's topographic complexity or
roughness (Schumm, 1956). It quantifies the variability in elevation within a specified area, providing information about the physical
characteristics of the terrain. (Strahler, 1956; Selvan et al., 2011; Adhikari, 2020) The ruggedness number of the Madhupur Tract
Basin is 33.54. A low ruggedness indicates a relatively smooth and uniform landscape with gradual elevation changes. This may
correspond to plains, lowland areas, or regions with minimal topographic variation. (Table 3; Table 6)
V.
Conclusion
Madhupur Tract Drainage Basin has an area coverage of almost 3,677 km2 and a perimeter of almost 380 km. The form factor value
of the basin is 0.05, which signifies that it is very elongated in shape. Such a low form factor implies that this drainage basin
experiences rapid discharge in a short period.
The total number of streams of the Madhupur Tract area or basin is 9,025, covering an area of almost 8,200 km2. Lower-order
streams are high in number, probably due to the elevated nature of the area. A gradual decrease in the number of streams can be
seen inversely decreasing with increasing stream order. The consistent decrease in the number of streams in relation to stream order
throughout the basin indicates the dominance of erosional landforms. Higher-order streams are less in number due to the alluvial
deposits. The changes in stream length ratio denote that the area is within the early stage of geomorphic development of irregular
hydrological behavior.
The overall drainage density of the Madhupur Tract Basin is high in the lower reaches, indicating less porous rock in the bed surface,
high slope, and high water flow regimes. Low drainage density is observed in the basin's northern plain areas due to low relief and
high permeability. The low form factor value indicated the elongated nature of basins with low peak flow for longer. Flood flows of
elongated basins can be more easily managed than those of circular basins. The average circularity ratio value of the Madhupur
Tract basin indicates its near-circular characteristics. It also suggests substantial peak flood runoff during the monsoon season, and
neotectonic uplift also alludes to decreased peak flow characteristics and mature geomorphological adjustment. The relief ratio
indicated that the Madhupur Tract has high relief with a high slope. An extremely high value of ruggedness number occurs when
both variables are significant, and the slope is steep.
The measured basin relief value of the Madhupur Tract Basin is 39, a gently sloping and undulating landscape with fast runoff. The
relief ratio of the Madhupur Tract Basin was measured to be around 0.156, apparently very low, indicating minimal elevation
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,
MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)
ISSN 2278-2540
I
DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS
I
Volume
XIY,
Issue I, January 2025
differences with a relatively flat or gently undulating terrain. The ruggedness number of the Madhupur Tract Basin is 33.54. A low
ruggedness indicates a relatively smooth and uniform landscape with gradual elevation changes. This may correspond to plains,
lowland areas, or regions with minimal topographic variation.
Declaration
Funding
This work was part of the Dhaka University Centennial Research Grant Project for Session 2020-20 21 (Reg-3-4 7804).
Conflict of interest
To their knowledge, the authors declare that there should not be any conflict of interest as this work was done as part of a nationally
approved project.
Reference
1.
Adhikari , S. (2020). Morphometric Analysis of a Drainage Basin: A Study of Ghatganga River, Bajhang District, Nepal.
The Geographic BaseVol. 7: 127-144, 2020. Doi:10.3126/tgb.v7i0.34280.
2.
Alam, M. . (2007). Stratigraphic and Structural Features of the Surma Basin and the Upliftment of the Madhupur Tract of
Northeastern Bengal Basin. Journal of Geological Society of India, 69, 1319-1327.
3.
Arulbalaji, P. & Gurugnanam, B. (2017). Geospatial tool-based morphometric analysis using SRTM data in Sarabanga
Basin, Cauvery River, Salem district, Tamil Nadu, India. Appl Water Sci (2017) 7:3875- 3883. DOI 10.1007/s13201-01 7-
0539-z.
4.
Bali, R., Agarwal, K.K., Ali, S.N., Rastogi, S.K., & Krishna, K. (2011). Drainage morphometry of Himalayan Glacio-
fluvial bas in, India: hydrologic and neotectonic implications. Environ Earth Sci 66(4):1163- 1174.
5.
Bhat, M.S., Alam , A., Ahmad, S. , Farooq, H., & Ahmad, B. (2019). Flood hazard assessment of Upper Jhelum basin
using morphometric parameters. Environ Earth Sci. 78(2):54.
6.
Bogale, A. (2020). Morphometric analysis of a drainage basin using geographical information system in Gilgel Abay basin,
Lake Tana Bas in, upper Blue Nile Basin, Ethiopia. Applied Water Science (2021) 11:122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-
021-01447-9
7.
Castillo , V, Diazsegovia, A, & Alonso, S.G. (1988). Quantitative study of fluvial landscapes, a case study in Madrid,
Spain. Landsc Urb Plan 16:201- 217.
8.
De Reu, J., Bourgeois, J., Bats, M., Zwertvaeg her, A., Gelorini, V, De Smedt, P., Chu,
W.,
Antrop , M., De Maeyer , P.,
Finke, P., Van Meirvenne , M., Verniers, J., & Crombe, P. (2013). Application of the topographic position index to
heterogeneous landscapes. Geomorphology 186, 39-49. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph .2012.12.015.
9.
Ehsani, A.H., Quiel,
F.,
& Maleklan, A. (2010). Effect of SRTM resolution on morphometric feature identification using
neural network-self organizing map. Geoinformatica 14:405-4 24.
10.
Giinther, A., Van Den Eeckhaut, M., Malet, J.P., Reichenbac h, P., & Hervas, J. (2014). Climate- physiographically
differentiated Pan-European landslide susceptibility assessment using spatial multi-criteria evaluation and transnational
landslide information. Geomor- phology 224, 69-85. doi: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2014.07.011.
11.
Haghipour, Burg JP (2014) Geomorphological analysis of the drainage system on the growing Makran accretionary wedge.
Geomorphology 209:111- 132.
12.
Horton, RE. (1945). Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins: Hydrophysical approach to quantitative
morphology. Geo. Soc. Am. Bulletin., 56: 275-37°.
13.
Hossain, A., Akhter, S.H., Steckler, M.S., & Caldwell,
R.
(2014) Tectonics of Madhupur Tract, and its Influence on the
Cenozoic Sediments and Jamuna River Avulsion. American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2014, abstract id. T31C-
4636.
14.
Joji, V S., air, A.S., & Baiju, KV (2013). Drainage basin delineation and quantitative analysis of Panamaram Basin of
Kabani River Basin, Kerala, using remote sensing and GIS. J Geo! Soc Ind 82:368- 378.
15.
Kabir, A.S.M.S., Delwar Hossain, & Rashed Abdullah. "2 -D Electrical Imaging in Some Geotechnical Investigation of
Madhupur Clays, Bangladesh." Journal Geological Society of India, 77 (2011): 73-81. https://doi.or g/10.1007/s12594-
011-0009-4.
16.
Khan, M.Y.A. & ElKashouty, M. (2023). Basin prioritization and hydro-morphometric analysis for the potential
development of Tabuk Basin, Saudi Arabia, using multivariate statistical analysis and coupled RS-GIS approach.
17.
Kumar R, Kumar S, Lohani AK, Nema RK, Singh RD (2000) Evaluation of geomorphological characteristics of a
catchment using GIS. GIS India 9(3):13-17.
18.
Mahala,
A.
(2020). The significance of morphometric analysis to understand the hydrological and morphological
characteristics in two different morpho-climatic settings. Applied Water Science (2020) 10:33.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-019-1118-2.
19.
Maitra, M.K. & Akhter, S.H. (2010). Neotectonic Activities along Madhupur Tract and Its Adjoining Areas. Proceedings,
3rd International Earthquake Symposium, Bangladesh, Dhaka, March.5-6 2010.
20.
Miller,
V.
(1953 ) A Quantitative Geomorphic Study of Drainage Basin Characteristics in the Clinch Mountain Area,
Virginia and Tennessee. Project NR 389-402, Technical Report 3, Columbia University, Department of Geology,
ONR
NewYork
21.
Pickering, J.L., Goodbred, S.L., Beam, J.C., Ayers, J.C ., Covey, A.K., Rajapara, H.M., & Singhvi, A.K. (2018). Terrace
formation in the upper Bengal basin since the Middle Pleistocene: Brahmaputra fan delta construction during multiple high
stands. Basin Research, 30.
22.
Rahm an, M.A., Moslehuddin, A.Z.M., & Saha, D.K. (2005). Mineralogy of Soils from Different Agroecological Regions
of Bangladesh: Region 28 - Madhupur Tract. Clay Science 12,333-339(2005).
23.
Saha, S., Das, J., & Mandal, T. (2022). Investigation of the basin hydro-morphologic characteristics through the
morphometric analysis: A study on Rayeng basin in Darjeeling Himalaya. Environmental Challenges 7 (2022) 100463.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2022.100463.
24.
Schumm, S.A. (1956) Evolution of Drainage Systems & Slopes in Badlands at Perth, New Jersey. Bulletin of the Geological
Society of America, 67, 597-646.
25.
Selvan , M.T., Ahmad, S. , & Rashid , S.M. (2011). Analysis of the geomorphometric parameters in high altitude Glacierised
terrain using SRTM DEM data in Central Himalaya, India.
ARP
J Sci Technol 1(1):22- 27.
26.
Smith, K.G. (1950) Standards for Grading Textures of Erosional Topography. American Journal of Science, 248, 655- 668.
http://dx.doi.or g/10.2475/ajs.248.9 .655
27.
Sreedevi, P.D., Subrahmanyam, K., & Ahmed, S. (2005). The significance of morphometric analysis for obtaining
groundwater potential zones in a structurally controlled terrain. Environ Geol 47(3):412-4 20.
28.
Strahler, A. . (1952) Dynamic Basis of Geomorphology. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 63, 923-938.
29.
Strahler , A. . (1957). Quantitative analysis of basin geomorphology. Transactions of the American Geophysical Union,
33(6), 913-920.
30.
Strahler , A. . (1964). Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and channel networks. In Chow, VT. (ed.)
Handbook of Applied Hydrology, McGraw-Hill, New York. pp 439-476.
31.
Thomas, J., Joseph, S., & Thrivikramaji, K.P. (2010). Morphometric aspects of a small tropical mountain river system, the
southern Western Ghats, India. Int J Digit Earth 3(2):135-156.
32.
Towhida, R., Hossain, M.M., & Suzuki, S. (2006). A Review on the Quaternary Characteristics of Pleistocene Tracts of
Bangladesh. Geology.
33.
Verstappen, H. (1983) Applied Geomorphology: Geomorphological Surveys for Environmental Development. Elsevier,
NewYork.
Figure 1: Map showing the location and extent of Madhupur Tract.
Figure 2: Structural elements in and around Madhupur Tract. This figure also shows the direction of the strike-slip movement
along the Madhupur Fault (Source: Maitro & Akhter, 2010).
Figure 3: Surface geology Map of the study area and surroundings.
Figure 4: A drainage map of the Madhupur Tract Area (modified from Begum et al., 2009).
Figure 5: Map showing basin basins of Madhupur Tract study area. Each basin is identified by individual color
shade.
Figure 6: Stream order map of Madhupur Tract basin, calculated using Strahler method.
Figure 7: Stream Order vs Stream Number vs Stream Length.
Figure 8: Drainage Density characteristics of the Madhupur Tract Basin area.
Figure 9: Map showing Stream Flow direction over the Madhupur Tract Basin.
Table 1: Characteristics of data sources used for the morphometric study.
Data Type
Data Source
Landsat image (land use map)
GloVis, Landsat 8 OLI (Panchromatic band of 15 m × 15 m, visible, NIR, SWIR bands of 30
m × 30 m and thermal band of 100 m × 100 m resolution), 2014, row/path- 43/138
Digital elevation model (DEM)
USGS 1 arc second, UTM-45, WGS 1984
Drainage Density Map
DEM (USGS 1 arc second), 30 m × 30 m resolution, UTM-45, WGS 1984
Table 2: Morphometric Parameters (Methodology adopted for Computations of Linear and Areal Morphometric
Parameters with formulae.
Parameters
Equation
Unit
Explanation
Linear Aspect
Basin Perimeter
P
km
Outer boundary of drainage basin / basin
Basin Length
L
b
=1.312
X
A
0.568
km
Length of basin
Stream Order
Sµ
no.
Hierarchical rank
Stream Number
Nµ
no.
number of streams of a given order ‘µ’
Stream Length
Lµ
km
the total length of streams (km) of all order ‘µ’
Mean Stream Length

=
km
L
u
= total length of streams (km) of a particular order ‘u’
N
u
= Total number of streams of a particular order ‘u’
Stream Length Ratio
=


+
ratio
L
um
= mean stream length of a particular order ‘u’
L
um
+ 1 = mean stream length of next higher order ‘u + 1’
Bifurcation Ratio
=
+
ratio
N
u
= number of streams of a particular order ‘u’
N
u
+ 1 = Number of streams of next higher order ‘u + 1’
Mean Bifurcation Ratio
R
bm
ratio
mean of bifurcation ratios of all orders
Areal Aspect
Basin Area
A
km
2
Area from which water drains
Form Factor
=
ratio
A = area of the basin (km
2
)
L
b
= basin length (km)
Drainage Density
=
µ
km / km
2
L
µ
= length of all stream (km)
A = Basin area (km
2
)
Stream Frequency
=
/ km
2
N
u
= total number of streams of a given basin
A = total area of basin (km
2
)
Circularity Ratio
=

km
A = area of the basin (km
2
)
P = perimeter of the basin (km)
Elongation Ratio
=

km
P = outer boundary of a drainage basin (km)
L = basin length (km)
Texture Ratio (Drainage
Texture)
=
/ km
N
u
= total number of streams of a given basin
P = perimeter of the basin (km)
Constant Channel
Maintenance
 =
km
D
d
= drainage density
Relief Aspects
Basin Relief
=
m
R = highest relief
r = lowest
relief
Relief Ratio
=
ratio
H = relative relief (m)
L
b
= length of the basin (m)
Dissection Index
=
ratio
H = relative relief (m)
R = absolute relief (m)
Basin Slope
=
ratio
H = relative relief (m)
L
b
= length of the basin (m)
Ruggedness Number
=
ratio
R = Basin Relief
D
d
= drainage density
Index
Topographic Wetness
Index (TWI)
 = 

ratio
= Upslope contributing area per unit contour width
(m²/m)
= Slope angle in radians
Topographic Position
Index (TPI)
 =
ratio
= Elevation of the target cell
= Mean elevation of neighboring cells within a
specified radius
Table 3: Morphometric results for the Madhupur Tract basin.
Parameters
Unit
Calculated Values
Linear Aspect
Basin Perimeter km 380
Basin Length km 139
Stream Order no. 5
th
Order
Stream Number no. 18,757
Stream Length km 3,163
Mean Stream Length km 1.56
Stream Length Ratio ratio 0.47
Mean Bifurcation Ratio ratio 2.54
Areal Aspect
Basin Area km
2
8,200
Form Factor ratio 0.06
Drainage Density km / km
2
0.55 - 2.06
Stream Frequency / km
2
14.57 - 205.51
Circularity Ratio km 0.32
Elongation Ratio km 4.68
Texture Ratio (Drainage Texture) / km 9.8
Relief
Aspects
Basin Relief m 39
Relief Ratio ratio 0.16
Ruggedness Number ratio 35.54
Table 4: Ranges and classification of morphometric parameters.
Table 5: Linear morphometric results against stream orders across the Madhupur Tract basin.
Table 6: Ranges and classification of areal and relief aspects of morphometric parameters.
Stream Number
Bifurcation Ratio
Mean Bifurcation
Ratio
Stream Length
(km)
Mean Stream
Length (km)
Stream Length
Ratio
0.17
0.15
0.18
0.22
0.30
0.55
0.46
0.43
0.44
1610
887
412
176.58
77
2.54
9396
6018
2273
813
258
1.56
2.65
2.80
3.16
Stream Order
1
2
3
4
5
Linear Aspects
Parameter Ranges
FORM FACTOR (Pérez, 1979)
DRAINAGE DENSITY
(Pérez, 1979)
MEAN SLOPE -
the mainstream
(IBAL, 2009)
MEAN SLOPE -
basin/basin
(Pérez, 1979)