Morphometric analysis of sub-watersheds in the pavagada area of Tumkur district, South India using remote sensing and gis techniques

  • S. Srinivasa Vittala
  • S. Govindaiah
  • H. Honne Gowda
Cover Article


The study area covers 570 km2 comprising of 9 sub-watersheds (Dalavayihalli, Maddalenahalli, Talamaradahalli, Puluvalli tank, Nagalamadike, Gowdatimmanahalli, Naliganahalli, Devadabetta and Byadanur) range from 49 to 75 km2 forming part of Pennar river basin around Pavagada. The drainage network of 9 sub-watersheds was delineated using remote sensing data - Geocoded FCC of bands - 2 3 4 of IRS 1 C and 1 D (LISS III+PAN merged) on 1:50,000 scale and SOI topomaps were used as reference. The morphometric analysis of 9 sub-watersheds has been carried out using GIS softwares - Arclnfo and Are View. The drainage network shows that the terrain exhibits dendritic to sub-dendritic drainage pattern. Stream orders ranges from fourth to fifth order. Drainage density varies between 1.55 and 2.16 km/ km2 and has very coarse to coarse drainage texture. The relief ratio range from 0.006 to 0.021. The mean bifurcation ratio varies from 3.21 to 4.88 and falls under normal basin category. The elongation ratio shows that Devedabetta sub-watershed possesses circular shape while remaining sub-watersheds mark elongated pattern. Hence from the study it can be concluded that remote sensing techniques proved to be a competent tool in morphometric analysis.


Morphometric Analysis Drainage Network Drainage Density Stream Length Elongation Ratio 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Agarwal, C.S. (1998). Study of Drainage Pattern Through Aerial Data in Naugarh Area of Varanasi District, U.P. Jour. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing,26(4): 169–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. AIS & LUS (1990). Watershed Atlas of India, Department of Agriculture and Co-operation. All India Soil and Land Use Survey, IARI Campus, New Delhi.Google Scholar
  3. Clarke, J.I. (1966). Morphometry from Maps. Essays in Geomorphology. Elsevier Publ. Co., New York, pp. 235–274.Google Scholar
  4. GSI (1981). Geological and Mineralogical Map of Karnataka & Goa, Geological Survey of India.Google Scholar
  5. Gottschalk, L.C. (1964). Reservoir Sedimentation. In: V. T. Chow (ed), Handbook of Applied Hydrology. McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, Section 7-I.Google Scholar
  6. Horton, R.E. (1932). Drainage Basin Characteristics. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union,13: 350–361.Google Scholar
  7. Horton, R.E. (1945). Erosional Development of Streams and their Drainage Basins; Hydrophysical Approach to Quantitative Morphology. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull.,56: 275–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Langbein, W.B. (1947). Topographic Characteristics of Drainage Basins. U.S. Geol. Surv. Water-Supply Paper,986(C): 157–159.Google Scholar
  9. Miller, V.C. (1953). A Quantitative Geomorphic Study of Drainage Basin Characteristics in the Clinch Mountain area, Virginia and Tennessee, Proj. NR 389-402, Tech Rep 3, Columbia University, Department of Geology, ONR, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Nag, S.K. (1998). Morphometric Analysis Using Remote Sensing Techniques in the Chaka Sub-Basin, Purulia District, West Bengal. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing,26 (1&2): 69–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Nag, S.K. and Chakraborty, S. (2003). Influence of Rock Types and Structures in the Development of Drainage Network in Hard Rock Area. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing,31 (1): 25–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. NRSA (1995). Integrated Mission for Sustainable Development Technical Guidelines, National Remote Sensing Agency, Department of Space, Government of India, Hyderabad.Google Scholar
  13. Reddy, P.R.R. and Rangaswamy, C.Y. (1989). Groundwater Resources of Pavagada Taluk, Tumkur District. Groundwater Studies No. 240. Department of Mines and Geology, Government of Karnataka, Bangalore.Google Scholar
  14. Singh, S. and Singh, M.C. (1997). Morphometric Analysis of Kanhar River Basin. National Geographical. J. of India,43 (1): 31–43.Google Scholar
  15. Schumm, S.A. (1956). Evolution of Drainage Systems and Slopes in Badlands at Perth Amboy, New Jersey. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull.,67: 597–646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Smith, K.G. (1950). Standards for Grading Textures of Erosional Topography. Am. Jour. Sci.,248: 655–668.Google Scholar
  17. Srivastava, V.K. (1997). Study of Drainage Pattern of Jharia Coalfield (Bihar), India, Through Remote Sensing Technology. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing,25 (1): 41–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Srivastava, V.K. and Mitra, D. (1995). Study of Drainage Pattern of Raniganj Coalfield (Burdwan District) as observed on Landsat-TM/IRS LISS II Imagery. J. Indian Soc. Remote Sensing, 23 (4): 225–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Strahler, A.N. (1957). Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. Trans. Am. Geophys. Union,38: 913–920.Google Scholar
  20. Strahler, A.N. (1964). Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and channel networks. In: V. T. Chow (ed), Handbook of Applied Hydrology. McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, section 4-II.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Srinivasa Vittala
    • 1
  • S. Govindaiah
    • 2
  • H. Honne Gowda
    • 1
  1. 1.Karnataka State Remote Sensing Applications CenterKoramangala, BangaloreIndia
  2. 2.Department of GeologyUniversity of MysoreManasagangothri, MysoreIndia

Personalised recommendations