Geotourism Itineraries and Augmented Reality in the Geomorphosites of the Arribes del Duero Natural Park (Zamora Sector, Spain)

Abstract

The geomorphosites of the Zamora sector of the Arribes del Duero Natural Park are presented and put forward as the basis for a geotourism proposal using augmented reality. The aim, on the one hand, is to make a valuable, natural heritage more widely known in an attractive, educational manner, and, on the other, to contribute to the sustainable development of a socio-economically depressed rural area by preserving this legacy. The methodology consists of a combination of field work, geomorphological analysis with attention to scientific, cultural, and management criteria, and the development of augmented reality resources. The result is the design of a geotourism itinerary through nine geomorphosites of granite structural forms. The georoute covers 46 km by road and 11 km along footpaths where the visit is equipped with various augmented reality materials. We show the potential of this tool for arousing the interest of visitors and providing enjoyment, learning, and interactive participation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Notes

  1. 1.

    The Spanish Royal Academy defines arribes as “steep slopes on both sides of the River Duero.”

  2. 2.

    This dam was inaugurated in 1961 under the protection of a hydroelectric project carried out on the international stretch of the Douro River based on the Spanish-Portuguese agreement of 1927. In addition to the Miranda dam, the Ricobayo, Villalcampo, Castro, Picote, Bemposta, Almendra, Aldeadávila, and Saucelledams were built. They are all accessible by road and offer the impressive walls of the river gorge.

  3. 3.

    This trail is a long-distance footpath (GR 14) that is part of the Natural Roads Network developed by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food of the Government of Spain. It runs for 755 km from the source of the Duero river in the Picos de Urbión (province of Soria) to the Vega Terrón river pier (the Spanish-Portuguese border in the province of Salamanca). Divided into 42 stages, number 29—called “Asomados a los arribanzos”—begins in Mámoles and ends in Fornillos de Fermoselle (5.6 km) and provides an easy access route to geomorphosites No. 4 and 5.

  4. 4.

    The Royal Spanish Academy defines the term lastra as “a large stone neither carved nor sculpted, smooth, flat and not very thick.” In this geomorphosite, it refers to the rocky bed of the cascade, which has been subjected to the fluvial abrasion of the white-water rapids that have polished the granite surface.

  5. 5.

    The presence of ochre clays and kaolinites in some abandoned farms in nearby towns (for example, Fuente de Valdelanta in Zafara) testify to subtropical type paleoclimatic conditions during the Miocene, which must have intensified the alteration of the granitic plinth considerably. In this way, a regolith was configured which began to be dismantled from the Pleistocene onwards, after the definitive downcutting of the Duero river and the consequent decrease in the base level of the tributary river network.

  6. 6.

    The limestone present in this deposit was extracted in the past for calcination in a lime kiln in Pinilla de Fermoselle. The place name of the Teso de la Calera is the only vestige of this activity today.

  7. 7.

    The Carabineros Corps, created in 1829 and later integrated into the Civil Guard, was in charge, among other functions, of border surveillance. Among its main objectives was the repression of contraband, an illegal activity that had some of its main routes on the Iberian border in Arribes del Duero (Cruz-Sagredo 2010).

References

  1. Aldighieril B, Testal B, Bertini A (2016) 3D Exploration of the San Lucano Valley: virtual geo-routes for everyone who would like to understand the landscape of the dolomites. Geoheritage 8:77–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-015-0164-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aluri A (2017) Mobile augmented reality (MAR) game as a travel guide: insights from Pokémon Go. J Hosp Tour Technol 8(1):55–72

    Google Scholar 

  3. Antón L, Martín S, García D, Pérez-Soba C (2017) El Duero zamorano. Recorrido por una historia de cientos de millones de años. Guía de campo del Geolodía Zamora 2017. Sociedad Geológica de España, Madrid. Disponible en https://sge.usal.es/archivos_pdf/geolodia17/guias_geolodia17/gdia17gui_zamora.pdf

  4. Azuma RT (1997) A survey of augmented reality. Presence Teleop Virt 6(4):355–385. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Beato S, Poblete MA, Marino JL (2020a) Lugares de interés geomorfológico de la Sierra del Aramo (Macizo Central Asturiano, NW España): propuesta y evaluación. Investig Geográficas 101:e59866. https://doi.org/10.14350/rig.59866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Beato S, Poblete MA, Marino JL, Herrera D, Fernández F (2020b) Carreteras paisajísticas y realidad aumentada en la Sierra del Aramo (Macizo Central Asturiano). Ería, Revista Cuatrimestral de Geografía 2020-2. Año XL 145-166. https://doi.org/10.17811/er.2.2020.145-166

  7. Bingham HC, Juffe-Bignoli D, Lewis E, MacSharry B, Burgess ND, Visconti P, Deguignet M, Misrachi M, Walpole M, Stewart JL, Brooks TM, Kingston N (2019) Sixty years of tracking conservation progress using the World Database on Protected Areas. Nat Ecol Evol 3:737–743. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0869-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bruno DE, Perrotta P (2012) A geotouristic proposal for Amendolara territory (northern ionic sector of Calabria, Italy). Geoheritage 4:139–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-011-0047-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Burlando M, Firpo M, Queirolo C, Rovere A, Vacchi M (2011) From geoheritage to sustainable development: strategies and perspectives in the Beigua Geopark (Italy). Geoheritage 3:63–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-010-0019-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Carmigniani J, Furht B (2011) Augmented reality: an overview. In: Furht B (ed) Handbook of augmented reality. Springer, New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0064-6_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Cayla N (2014) An overview of new technologies applied to the management of geoheritage. Geoheritage 6:91–102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-014-0113-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cayla N, Hobléa F, Reynard E (2014) New digital technologies applied to the management of geoheritage. Geoheritage 6:89–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-014-0118-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cruz-Sagredo JD (2010) Contrabandistas somos y en el descamino nos encontraremos. Junta de Castilla y León, Valladolid

  14. Díez A, Fernández J (2000) Rocas ígneas. In Rodríguez LR (dir) Memoria explicativa de la Hoja 423 del Mapa Geológico de España a Escala 1:50.000. ITGE, Madrid, pp 26-96

  15. Dowling RK (2011) Geotourism’s global growth. Geoheritage 3:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-010-0024-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dowling RK, Newsome D (2006) Geotourism. Elsevier, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Eagles PFJ, McCooland SF, Haynes CDA (2002) Sustainable tourism in protected areas: guidelines for planning and management. IUCN Publications Services Unit, Cambridge

  18. Escuder J, Mediavilla R, Sanz MA (2000) Estratigrafía. In Rodríguez LR (dir) Memoria explicativa de la Hoja 423 del Mapa Geológico de España a escala 1:50.000. ITGE, Madrid, pp13-25

  19. Farsanil NT, Coelho C, Costa C (2011) Geotourism and geoparks as novel strategies for socio-economic development in rural areas. Int J Tour Res 13:68–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. González-Delgado JA, Martínez-Graña AM, Civis J, Sierro FJ, Goy JL, Dabrio CJ, Ruiz F, González-Regalado ML, Abad M (2015) Virtual 3D tour of the Neogene palaeontological heritage of Huelva (Guadalquivir Basin, Spain). Environ Earth Sci 73:4609–4618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-014-3747-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gonzalo FJ, López M (1983) Tipificación estructural de los filones estanno-volframiferos más representativos de la penillanura salmantino-zamorana. Studia Geologica Salmanticensia XVIII:159–170

  22. Goy JL, Martínez-Graña AM, Sanz JM, Cruz R, Andrés C, De Bustamante I, Zazo C, González-Delgado JA, Martínez-Jaraíz C (2013) Inventario y catalogación del patrimonio geológico de los espacios naturales del sur de Castilla y León (Salamanca-Ávila, España). In: Patrimonio Geológico, un recurso para el desarrollo. Cuadernos del Museo Geominero, 15. Instituto Geológico y Minero de España, Madrid, España, pp. 389–-400. http://eprints.imdea-agua.org:13000/id/eprint/309

  23. Grandgirard V (1997) Géomorphologie et gestion du patrimoine natural: la mémoire de la Terre est notre mémoire. Geographica Helvetica 52:47–56. https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-52-47-1997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gray M (2004) Geodiversity: valuing and conserving abiotic nature. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  25. Hiwasaki L (2003) Tourism in Japan’s parks and protected areas: challenges and potential for sustainable development. Int Rev Environ Strateg 4(1):107–126

    Google Scholar 

  26. Hose TA (2007) Geotourism in Almeria Province, southeast Spain. Tourism 55(3):259–276

    Google Scholar 

  27. Julivert M, Fontboté JM, Ribeiro A, y Nabais-Conde LE (1972) Mapa tectónico de la Península Ibérica y Baleares a escala 1:1.000.000. ITGE, Madrid

  28. López M, Carnicero A (1987) El plutonismo hercínico de la penillanura salmantino-zamorana (centro-oeste de España): Visión de conjunto en el contexto geológico regional. In: López M, Carnicero A (coords.) Geología de los granitoides y rocas asociadas al Macizo Hespérico. Rueda, Madrid, pp 53-68

  29. López FJ, López M (1993) Geología del basamento en el antiforme de Miranda do Douro (Sector Oeste de Zamora). Studia Geologica Salmanticensia XXVIII:103-140

  30. López-Mielgo N, Loredo E, Sevilla J (2015) Cuando las cuentas no cuadran: Despliegue de aplicaciones de Realidad Aumentada en destinos turísticos rurales. II Congreso Mundial de Destinos Turísticos Inteligentes.http://www.smartdestinationsworldconference.org/_files/_event/_19238/_editorFiles/file/24596_SDWC2018_Lopez_Loredo_Sevilla.pdf

  31. Loredo E, López-Mielgo N, Sevilla J (2019) Realidad Aumentada en destinos turísticos rurales: oportunidades y barreras. Int J Inf Syst Tour 4(2):1–17 http://www.smartdestinationsworldconference.org/_files/_event/_19238/_editorFiles/file/24596_SDWC2018_Lopez_Loredo_Sevilla.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  32. Manchado EM, García E, Suárez M (2012) Génesis del yacimiento de arcillas especiales de Tamame de Sayago (Zamora). Macla 16:94–95

    Google Scholar 

  33. Marino JL, Poblete MA, Beato S (2017) Valoración del patrimonio geomorfológico de un sector del Parque Natural de Arribes del Duero (Bajo Sayago, Zamora). Cuaternario y Geomorfología 31(3-4):27–50. https://doi.org/10.17735/cyg.v31i3-4.55303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Marino JL, Poblete MA, Beato S (2018) Geomorfología de los Arribes del Duero zamoranos. Estud Geográficos 79(285):419–444. https://doi.org/10.3989/estgeogr.201816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Marino JL, Poblete MA, Beato S. (2019) El relieve de los Arribes del Duero zamoranos y los Lugares de Interés Geomorfológico. Ediciones de la Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo

  36. Martín-Duque JF, Caballero J, Carcavilla L (2010) Organización de información geomorfológica orientada a la ordenación y gestión de espacios naturales. El caso de Covalagua y Las Tuerces (Palencia, España). Bol R Soc Esp Hist Nat Sec Geol 104(1-4):71–92

    Google Scholar 

  37. Martín-Duque JF, Caballero J, Carcavilla L (2012) Geoheritage Information for Geoconservation and Geoturism Through the Categorization of Landforms in a karstic Landscape. A Case Study from Covolagua and Las Tuerces (Palencia, Spain). Geoheritage 4:93–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-012-0056-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Martínez JR, Martínez D, Bea F (2004) Introducción a la Zona Centroibérica. In: Vera JA (ed) Geología de España. ITGE, Madrid, pp 68–69

    Google Scholar 

  39. Martínez-Graña AM (2015) Asómate al impresionante balcón del Duero/Douro (Arribes del Duero). Guía de campo del Geolodía Salamanca 2015. Sociedad Geológica de España, Madrid. Disponible en https://sge.usal.es/archivos_pdf/geolodia15/geogu%c3%adas%20geolod%c3%ada%2015/gdia15gui_salamanca.pdf

  40. Martínez-Graña AM, Legoinha P, González-Delgado JA, Dabrio CJ, Pais J, Goy JL, Zazo C, Civis J, Armenteros I, Alonso-Gavilan G, Dias R, Cunha T (2017) Augmented reality in a hiking tour of the Miocene Geoheritage of the Central Algarve cliffs (Portugal). Geoheritage 9:121–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-016-0182-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Martínez-Graña AM, Bajo I, González-Delgado JA, Cárdenas-Carretero J, Abad M, Legoinha P (2018) Virtual 3D tour applied to the paleontological heritage of the Neogene of Sevilla (Guadalquivir Basin, Spain). Geoheritage 10:473–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-017-0247-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Martínez-Graña AM, Goy JL, González-Delgado JA, Cruz R, Sanz J, Cimarra C, de Bustamante I (2019) 3D Virtual itinerary in the geological heritage from natural areas in Salamanca-Ávila-Cáceres, Spain. Sustainability 11:144. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Martín-Izard A, Reguilón R, y Palero F (1992) Las mineralizaciones litiniferas del oeste de Salamanca y Zamora. Estud Geol 48:19-32

  44. Martín-Serrano A (1988) El relieve de la región occidental zamorana. La evolución geomorfológica de un borde del Macizo Hespérico. IEZ Florián de Ocampo, Zamora

  45. Martín-Serrano A (1994) Macizo Hespérico Septentrional. In: Gutiérrez M (ed) Geomorfología de España. Rueda, Madrid, pp 25–62

    Google Scholar 

  46. Miccadei E, Piacentini T, Esposito G (2011) Geomorphosites and geotourism in the parks of the Abruzzo Region (Central Italy). Geoheritage 3:233–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-011-0037-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Milgram P, Takemura H, Utsumi A, Kishino F (1994) Augmented reality: a class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. Telemanipulator Telepresence Technol:2351. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.197321

  48. Moro MC (1985) Los yacimientos e indicios minerales de la provincia de Zamora. Anuario del IEZ Florián de Ocampo 2:315–327

    Google Scholar 

  49. Mulec I, Wise N (2012) Srategic guidelines for the potential geotourism destination Titel Loess Plateau (Vojvodina Region, Serbia). Geoheritage 4:213–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-012-0065-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Ngwira MP (2015) Geotourism and geoparks: Africa’s current prospects fors ustainable rural development and poverty alleviation. In: Errami E, Brocx M, Semeniuk V (eds) From geoheritage to geoparks: case studies from Africa and beyond. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 25–33

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  51. Olay D, Herrera D, Fernández F (2019) La realidad aumentada como instrumento para la difusión de la dinámica del paisaje mediante el empleo de fotografía. ArtyHum, Revista Digital de Artes y Humanidades. Monográfico Desafíos epistemológicos, técnicos y educativos para las Humanidades Digitales, Febrero 2019, 11-29

  52. Panizza M (2009) The geomorphodiversity of the dolomites (Italy): a key of geoheritage assessment. Geoheritage 1:33–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-009-0003-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Panizza M, Piacente S (1993) Geomorphological assets evaluation. Z Geomorphol 87:13–18

    Google Scholar 

  54. Panizza M, Piacente S (2003) Geomorfologia culturale. Pitagora, Bologna

  55. Panizza M, Piacente S (2008) Geomorphosites and geotourism. Rev Geográfica Acadêmica 2(1):5–9

    Google Scholar 

  56. Pellitero R, González-Amuchastegui MJ, Ruiz-Flaño P, Serrano E (2011) Geodiversity and geomorphosite assessment applied to a natural protected area: the Ebro and Rudron Gorges Natural Park (Spain). Geoheritage 3:163–174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-010-0022-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Pereira P, Pereira D (2010) Methodological guidelines for geomorphosite assessment. Géomorphologie 16:215–222. https://doi.org/10.4000/geomorphologie.7942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Pérez A, Martín-Serrano A, Po C (1994) La Depresión del Duero. In: Gutiérrez M (ed) Geomorfología de España. Rueda, Madrid, pp 351–388

    Google Scholar 

  59. Pralong JP (2005) A method for assessing tourist potential and use ofgeomorphological sites. Géomorphologie 11:189–196. https://doi.org/10.4000/geomorphologie.350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Preto ME, López M (2005) Patrimonio Geológico Transfronteiriço na Regiao do Douro. Roteiros. Universidade de Trás os Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real

  61. Reynard E (2005) Géomophosites et paysages. Géomorphologie 3:181–188. https://doi.org/10.4000/geomorphologie.338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Rodríguez RM, López M (1993) Las anatexitas del área de Villarino y su contexto geológico (Arribes del Duero, Noroeste de Salamanca). Studia Geologica Salmanticensia XXVIII:71–101

  63. Rodríguez-Rodríguez L, Antón L, Rodés Á, Pallàs R, García-Castellanos D, Jiménez-Munt I, Struth L, Leanni L, Team ASTER (2000) Dates and rates of endo-exorheic development: insights from fluvial terraces (Duero River, Iberian Peninsula). Glob Planet Chang 193:103271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2020.103271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Santos I, Henriques R, Mariano G, Pereira DI (2018) Methodologies to represent and promote the geoheritage using unmanned aerial vehicles, multimedia technologies, and augmented reality. Geoheritage 10:143–155. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-018-0305-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Serrano E, González-Trueba JJ (2005) Assessment of geomorphosites in natural protected areas: the Picos de Europa National Park (Spain). Géomorphologie 3:197–208. https://doi.org/10.4000/geomorphologie.364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Solé L (1958) Observaciones sobre la edad de la penillanura fundamental de la Meseta española en el sector de Zamora. Breviora Geol Asturica 2:3–8

    Google Scholar 

  67. Tscheu F, Buhalis D (2016) Augmented reality at cultural heritage sites. In: Inversini A, Schegg R (eds) Information and communication technologies in tourism. Springer, Cham, pp 607–619

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We want to express our gratitude for the comments and suggestions made by the members of the Observatorio del Territorio (OT, Spain), which have helped to improve the manuscript. The English text was reviewed and revised by Robin Walker.

Funding

This study was financially supported by the Ministry of Economy, Industry and Competitiveness: Project CSO2017-84623-R.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to José Luis Marino Alfonso.

Supplementary Information

ESM 1

(PDF 1538 kb)

ESM 2

(PDF 1476 kb)

ESM 3

(PDF 644 kb)

ESM 4

(PDF 1282 kb)

ESM 5

(PDF 2265 kb)

ESM 6

(PDF 960 kb)

ESM 7

(PDF 1503 kb)

ESM 8

(PDF 603 kb)

ESM 9

(PDF 1542 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Marino Alfonso, J.L., Poblete Piedrabuena, M.Á., Beato Bergua, S. et al. Geotourism Itineraries and Augmented Reality in the Geomorphosites of the Arribes del Duero Natural Park (Zamora Sector, Spain). Geoheritage 13, 16 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-021-00539-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Geomorphosites
  • Geotourism
  • Augmented reality
  • Sustainable development
  • Deprived rural areas