Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative Study of Different Types of Digital Elevation Models on the Basis of Drainage Morphometric Parameters (Case Study of Wadi Fatimah Basin, KSA)

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Earth Systems and Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nowadays there are a lot of geospatial datasets available in the form of different types of Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) which were launched with different resolutions. These datasets are used for studying the physiographical features of the hydrographic basins through the tracing and extracting the elevation points, watershed boundaries, streamlines, flow directions and morphometric parameters assessment. Many researchers have used these datasets to study and evaluate the hydrologic behavior of the basins which is considered as the reflection of physiographic features of the hydrographic basins. In the Middle East especially in Saudi Arabia, the trend of using DEMs increased for hydrographic basin analysis and assessment of hydrologic behavior. So, there is an important question about the accuracy and sensitivity of these datasets which are acquired from different DEMs. This study deals with four types of DEMs, first is derivative from Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER 30 m resolution), second is Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission (SRTM 90 m resolution), third is SRTM 30 m resolution and the fourth is the Advanced Land Observing STLT (ALOS 30 resolution). More than 35 morphometric parameters including drainage network, basin geometry, basin texture and basin relief characteristics were measured and calculated using these four types of DEMs and calibrated with topographic maps of 1:250 K and 1:50 K scale and also google earth maps. Results show that the SRTM 30 m is characterized by high accuracy and has a very good matching with google earth maps and topographic map of scale1:50,000. This research is dealing with the comparison of the morphometric parameters of the hydrographic basin based on the type of DEM. It is clear to conclude that the SRTM 30 resolution is the best type for hydrology and water resources study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bali R, Agarwal KK, Nawaz Ali S, Rastogi SK, Krishna K (2011) Drainage morphometry of the Himalayas glacio-fluvial basin, India: hydrologic and neotectonic implications. Environ Earth Sci 66(4):1163–1174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Band LE (1986) Topographic partition of watersheds with digital elevation models. Water Resour Res 22:15–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basahi J, Masoud M, Zaidi S (2016) Integration between morphometric parameters, hydrologic model, and geo-informatics techniques for estimating WADI runoff (case study WADI HALYAH—Saudi Arabia). Arabian J Geosci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-016-2649-6(13 Article number 610)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callaghan J, Mark DM (1984) The extraction of drainage networks from digital elevation data. Comput Vis Graph Image Process 28(3):323–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caraballo-Arias NA, Conoscenti C, Di Stefano C, Ferro V (2014) Testing GIS-morphometric analysis of some Sicilian badlands. Catena 113:370–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chorley RJ, Morley LSD (1959) A simplified approximation for the hypsometric integral. J Geol 67:566–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook AJ, Murray T, Luckman A, Vaughan DG, Barrand NE (2012) A new 100-m digital elevation model of the Antarctic Peninsula derived from ASTER Global DEM: methods and accuracy assessment. Earth Syst Sci Data 4:129–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Das S, Patel PP, Sengupta S (2016) Evaluation of different digital elevation models for analysing drainage morphometric parameters in a mountainous Terrain: a case study of the Supin-Upper Tons Basin, Indian Himalayas. Springer, Berlin, p 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-3207-0

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dawod G (2008) Towards the redefinition of the Egyptian geoid: performance analysis of recent global geoid and digital terrain models. J Spat Sci 53(1):31–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denker H (2005) Evaluation of SRTM3 and GTOPO30 Terrain Data in Germany. In: Jekeli C, Bastos L, Fernandes J (eds) Gravity, Geoid and Space Missions. International Association of Geodesy Symposia, vol 129. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich WE, Wilson CJ, Montgomery DR, McKean J (1993) Analysis of erosion thresholds, channel networks, and landscape morphology, using a digital terrain model. J Geol 101(2):259–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dragut L, Schauppenlehner T, Muhar A, Strobl J, Blaschke T (2009) Optimization of scale and parametrization for terrain segmentation: an application to soil-landscape modeling. Comput Geosci 35(9):1875–1883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckert S, Kellenberger T, Itten K (2005) Accuracy assessment of automatically derived digital elevation models from aster data in mountainous terrain. Int J Remote Sens 26(9):1943–1957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elfeki A, Masoud M, Niyazi B (2017) Integrated rainfall–runoff and flood inundation modeling for flash flood risk assessment under data scarcity in arid regions: Wadi Fatimah basin case study, Saudi Arabia. Nat Hazards 85(1):87–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-016-2559-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans IE (2012) Geo-morphometry and landform mapping: what is a landform? Geomorphology 137:94–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faniran A (1968) The index of drainage intensity—a provisional new drainage factor. Aust J Sci 31:328–330

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraris F, Firpo M, Pazzaglia FJ (2012) DEM analyses and morphotectonic interpretation: the Plio Quaternary evolution of the eastern Ligurian Alps Italy. Geomorphology 149–150:27–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gopinath G, Swetha TV, Ashitha MK (2014) Automated extraction of watershed boundary and drainage network from SRTM and comparison with Survey of India toposheet. Arab J Geosci 7(7):2625–2632

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorokhovich Y, Voustianiouk A (2006) Accuracy assessment of the processed-SRTM based elevation data by CGIAR using field data from USA and Thailand and its relation to the terrain characteristics. Remote Sens Environ 104:409–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goudie A (ed) (2004) Encyclopedia of geomorphology. Routledge, London GSI (Geological Survey of India) (2004) Geological Quadrangle Map–Kalpa Quadrangle, Himachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. Geological Survey of India, Kolkata, p 1202

  • Gregory KJ, Walling DE (1973) Drainage basin form and process. Wiley, New York, p 456

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurnell AM, Montgomery AR (1999) Hydrological applications of GIS. Wiley, Chichester, p 176

    Google Scholar 

  • Haggett P (1965) Locational analysis in human geography 339. Edward Arnold Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayakawa YS, Oguchi T, Lin Z (2008) Comparison of new and existing global digital elevation models ASTER-GDEM and SRTM-3. Geophys Res Lett 35:L17404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirt C, Filmer MS, Featherstone WE (2010) Comparison and validation of the recent freely available ASTER-GDEM ver1, SRTM ver4.1 and GEODATA DEM-9S ver3 digital elevation models over Australia. Aust J Earth Sci 57(3):337–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooke JM (2008) Temporal variations in fluvial processes on an active meandering river over a 20-year period. Geomorphology 100:3–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horton RE (1932) Drainage basin characteristics. Trans Am Geophys Union 13:350–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horton RE (1945) Erosional development of streams and their drainage basins, hydrophysical approach to quantitative morphology. Geol Soc Am Bull 56:275–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosseinzadeh SR (2011) Drainage network analysis, comparison of digital elevation model (DEM) from ASTER with high resolution satellite image and aerial photographs. Int J Environ Sci Dev 2(3):194–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacques PD, Salvador ED, Machado R, Grohmann CH, Nummer AR (2014) Application of morphometry in neotectonic studies at the eastern edge of the Parana Basin Santa Catarina State Brazil. Geomorphology 213:13–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenson SK, Domingue JO (1988) Extracting topographic structure from digital elevation data for geographic information system analysis. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 54:1593–1600

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirby E, Whipple KX (2012) Expression of active tectonics in erosional landscapes. J Struct Geol 44:54–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiser L, Kelly M (2010) GPS- vs. DEM-derived elevation estimates from a Hardwood dominated forest watershed. J Geogr Inform Sys 2:147–151

    Google Scholar 

  • Korup O, Schmidt J, McSavaney MJ (2005) Regional relief characteristics and denudation pattern of the western Southern Alps New Zealand. Geomorphology 71:402–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lague D, Crave A, Davy P (2003) Laboratory experiments simulating the geomorphic response to tectonic uplift. J Geophys Res Solid Earth 108(B1):ETG 3-1–ETG 3-20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay JB, Evans MG (2008) The influence of elevation error on the morphometrics of channel networks extracted from DEMs and the implications for hydrological modelling. Hydrol Process 22(11):1588–1603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maidment DR (2002) ArcHydro GIS for water resources. ESRI Press, California

    Google Scholar 

  • Majure JJ, Soenksen PJ (1991) Using a geographic information system to determine physical basin characteristics for use in flood-frequency equations. In Balthrop BH, Terry JE (eds) US geological survey national computer technology Meeting-Proceedings, Phoenix, Arizona, November 14–18, 1988: US Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 90–4162:31–40

  • Masoud M (2015) Rainfall-runoff modeling of ungauged Wadis in arid environments (case study Wadi Rabigh—Saudi Arabia). Arab J Geosci 8(5):2587–2606. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-014-1404-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masoud M (2016) Geoinformatics application for assessing the morphometric characteristics’ effect on hydrological response at watershed (case study of Wadi Qanunah, Saudi Arabia). Arabian J Geosci. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-015-2300-y(Article number 280)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melton M (1957) An Analysis of the Relations Among Elements of Climate, Surface Properties and Geomorphology. Department of Geology, Columbia University, Technical Report, 11, Project NR 389-042. Office of Navy Research, New York

  • Mesa LM (2006) Morphometric analysis of a sub-tropical Andean Basin (Tucuman Argentina). Environ Geol 50:1235–1242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller VC (1953) A quantitative geomorphic study of drainage basin characteristics in the Clinch Mountain area, Virginia and Tennessee. Project NR, Technical Report 3, Columbia Univ., Department of Geology, ONR, Geography Branch, New York, pp 389–042

  • Morris DG, Heerdegen RG (1988) Automatically derived catchment boundaries and channel networks and their hydrological applications. Geomorphology 1:131–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller JE (1968) An introduction to the hydraulic and topographic sinuosity Indexes1. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 58(2):371–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pike RJ (2000) Geo-morphometry-diversity in quantitative surface analysis. Prog Phys Geogr 24(1):1–20

    Google Scholar 

  • Prasanna kumar V, Vijith H, Geetha N (2013) Terrain evaluation through the assessment of geomorphometric parameters using DEM and GIS: case study of two major sub-watersheds in Attapady. South India. Arab J Geosci 6(4):1141–1151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ragheb A (2015) Enhancement of google earth positional accuracy. Int J Eng Res Technol 4(1):627–630

    Google Scholar 

  • Rinaldi M (2003) Recent channel adjustments in alluvial rivers of Tuscany, Central Italy. Earth Surf Process Land 28:587–608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • San BT, Suzen ML (2005) Digital elevation model (DEM) generation and accuracy assessment from ASTER stereo data. Int J Remote Sens 26(22):5013–5027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saran S, Sterk G, Peters P, Dadhwal VK (2009) Evaluation of digital elevation models for delineation of hydrological response units in a Himalayan watershed. Geocarto Int 25:105–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/10106040903051967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schumm SA (1956) Evolution of drainage system and slope in badlands of Perth Amboy. New Jersey 67:597–546

  • Sefercik UG (2012) Performance estimation of ASTER Global DEM depending upon the terrain inclination. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 40:565–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sefercik UG, Alkan M (2009) Advanced analysis of differences between C and X Bands using SRTM data for mountainous topography. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 37:335–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smedberg E, Humborg C, Jakobsson M, Morth C-M (2009) Landscape elements and river chemistry as affected by river regulation—a 3-D perspective. Hydrol Earth Syst Sci 13:1597–1606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder NP, Whipple KX, Tucker GE, Merritts DJ (2000) Landscape response to tectonic forcing: digital elevation model analysis of stream profiles in the Mendocino Triple Junction Region, Northern California. Geol Soc Am Bull 112(8):1250–1263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strahler AN (1952) Hypsometric analysis of erosional topography. Bull Geol Soc Am 63:1117–1142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strahler AN (1954) Quantitative geomorphology of erosional landscapes. In: Proceedings of the 19th international geological congress Algiers, vol 13, no 3, pp 341–354

  • Strahler AN (1957) Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. Trans Am Geophys Union 38:913–920

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strahler AN (1964) Quantitative geomorphology of drainage basins and channel networks. Handbook of applied hydrology. McGraw Hill Book Company, New York, p 411

    Google Scholar 

  • Summerfield MA, Hulton NJ (1994) Natural controls of fluvial denudational rates in major world drainage basins. J Geophys Res 99(B7):13871–13883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suwandana E, Kawamura K, Sakuno Y, Kustiyanto E, Raharjo B (2012) Evaluation of ASTER GDEM2 in comparison with GDEM1, SRTM DEM and topographic-map-derived DEM using inundation area analysis and RTK-dGPS data. Remote Sens 4:2419–2431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taramelli A, Reichenbach P, Ardizzone F (2008) Comparison of SRTM elevation data with cartographically derived DEMs in Italy. Rev Geogr Acad 2(2):41–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarboton DG, Bras RL, Rodriguez-Iturbe I (1991) On the extraction of channel networks from digital elevation data. TT Hydrol Process 5:81–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trimble SW (2009) Fluvial processes, morphology and sediment budgets in the Coon Creek Basin, WI, USA, 1975–1993. Geomorphology 108:8–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tucker GE (2004) Drainage basin sensitivity to tectonic and climatic forcing: implications of a stochastic model for the role of entrainment and erosion thresholds. Earth Surf Process Land 29(2):185–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USGS (United States Geological Survey) (2004) Shuttle radar topography mission, 3 Arc second scene SRTM_n036e052, Global Land Cover Facility. University of Maryland, College Park, p 2000

    Google Scholar 

  • USGS (United States Geological Survey) and Japan ASTER Program (2003) ASTER scene ASTGTM2_N31E078_dem, 1B. USGS, Sioux Falls

    Google Scholar 

  • Weydahl DJ, Sagstuen J, Dick OB, Ronning H (2007) SRTM DEM accuracy over vegetated areas in Norway. Int J Remote Sens 28(16):3513–3527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whipple KX (2001) Fluvial landscape response time: how plausible is SteadyState denudation? Am J Sci 301:313–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker AC (2012) How do landscapes record tectonics and climate? Lithosphere 4(2):160–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson JP, Aggett G, Deng Y, Lam CS (2008) Water in the landscape: a review of contemporary flow routing algorithms. In: Zhou Q, Lees B, Tang G (eds) Advances in digital terrain analysis. Lecture notes in geoformation and cartography series, vol 3. Springer, Berlin, pp 213–236

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wood J (1996) The geomorphological characterization of digital elevation models. PhD Dissertation, University of Leicester, p 466

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Water Research Centre, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

    Burhan Niyazi, Syed Zaidi & Milad Masoud

  2. Department of Hydrology and Water Resources Management, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

    Burhan Niyazi

  3. Hydrology Department, Desert Research Center, Cairo, Egypt

    Milad Masoud

Authors
  1. Burhan Niyazi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Syed Zaidi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Milad Masoud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Burhan Niyazi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Niyazi, B., Zaidi, S. & Masoud, M. Comparative Study of Different Types of Digital Elevation Models on the Basis of Drainage Morphometric Parameters (Case Study of Wadi Fatimah Basin, KSA). Earth Syst Environ 3, 539–550 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41748-019-00111-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41748-019-00111-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation