DEM-based analysis of tectonic geomorphologic characteristics and tectonic activity intensity of the Dabanghe River Basin in South China Karst

Wei Yao; Kangning Xiong; Yunlong Fan; Xiaoxi Lyu

doi:10.1515/geo-2022-0481

Article Open Access

DEM-based analysis of tectonic geomorphologic characteristics and tectonic activity intensity of the Dabanghe River Basin in South China Karst

Wei Yao , Kangning Xiong , Yunlong Fan and Xiaoxi Lyu

Published/Copyright: June 14, 2023

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information

From the journal Open Geosciences Volume 15 Issue 1

Abstract

The Dabanghe River Basin, in the west of Guizhou Plateau, consists of numerous prominent geological structural features, such as the Shuicheng–Wangmo, Yadu–Ziyun, and Yongningzhen Faults, the Huangguoshu Waterfall, and the Guanjiao Knickpoint. The topographic conditions and structural systems are highly complex, making this a suitable area to study neotectonics. However, research on the geomorphology of the region is lacking. Combined with geomorphic parameters, quantitative exploration of tectonic geomorphic and tectonic activity in the Dabanghe River Basin is of great significance to reveal the formation of the Huangguoshu Waterfall, the development of landforms in western Guizhou, and the regularity of uplift of Guizhou Plateau. Therefore, based on a Digital Elevation Model, GIS software extracted and calculated six geomorphic parameters of the basin: Hypsometric Integral, Asymmetry Factor, Basin Shape Ratio, Stream-Gradient, and Valley Floor Width–Valley Height Ratio (VF) indexes. The tectonic geomorphic characteristics of the Dabanghe River Basin were analyzed, combined with the tectonic activity level classification method, and the Index of Relative Active Tectonics (IAT) of each sub-catchment was calculated. The geomorphic parameters of the basin were found to indicate its geomorphic characteristics well. The tectonic activity in the study area midstream is the most active, and the geomorphic evolution of some upstream and downstream reaches is affected by lithology, topography, and structure. The tectonic geomorphology of the basin is significantly affected by the fault system. Under the control of the Yadu–Ziyun Fault, the tectonic activity in the basin gradually weakens from west to east, and the differential tectonic activity (strong in the mid-reach and eastwards decrease) is consistent with observed seismic intensity. It is confirmed that our research results are consistent with the regional geological background and geomorphic characteristics through field geological survey. Therefore, this study confirms that the use of tectonic geomorphic parameters to classify active tectonics can be an important method to evaluate the stability of the crust in the region and further extends the application of geomorphic parameters in tectonics.

Keywords: Dabanghe River Basin; tectonic geomorphology; DEM; South China Karst

1 Introduction

To quantitatively analyze geomorphic evolution, scientists have established various quantitative indexes and morphological parameters reflecting geomorphic development [1,2,3,4,5,6]. With the development of digital topography, geomorphic parameters have increasingly been regarded as an important method for the study of tectonic geomorphic features, and tectonic activities worldwide [7]. Many scholars have introduced geomorphic parameters into tectonic geomorphology studies, providing scientific methods and basic data for quantifying geomorphic development [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. Some scientists extracted geomorphological parameters such as channel belt area, channel belt width (W), braid bar area, mountain front sinuosity (SMF), stream gradient index (SL), valley floor width valley height ratio (VF), basin elongation ration (RE), and channel steepness index (KS). Typical basins and tectonic belts such as northeastern India, Majuli Island, South Rifian Bridges, Tatra Mountains, Meghalaya, Sikkim, and Sukhnag Basin have been quantitatively studied [16,17,18,19,20,21,22]. These studies enriched the theoretical library of digital geomorphology research. A digital elevation model (DEM) is the digital expression of surface elevation information, and it plays an important role in extracting and analyzing geomorphic parameters. Using GIS tools combined with DEM data can efficiently extract the corresponding geomorphic parameters [23]. Despite the DEM data, still exists some problems (such as resolution problem, missing value problem, and data acquisition problem) in the study of tectonic geomorphology; however, a good scientific outlook is displayed [24]. Combining DEM data with geomorphic parameters to study regional tectonic geomorphology and the evaluation of tectonic activity intensity has become the main means of quantitative research on geomorphic evolution. Through this method, scholars have carried out multi-dimensional tectonic geomorphology research on typical river basins, fault zones, orogenic belts, and other active tectonic zones around the world [25,26,27,28].

In the South China Karst, neotectonic activity has changed the regional hydrodynamic conditions and influenced the surface and underground erosion process, which was one of the factors driving the formation of karst landforms [29,30]. Neotectonics altered the cycle of karst landform development and evolution, making its evolution irregular. Periodically, in the old age stage, the tectonic movements may reverse the evolutionary process toward the mature or young age stage. During this process, hydrodynamic conditions are constantly changing, and various shapes of vertebral and tower-like karst landscapes are formed [31,32]. The Dabanghe River Basin is located in the western part of the Guizhou Plateau. The basin consists of limestone, dolomite, sand, shale, and sandy clay rocks from the Triassic, Permian, and Carboniferous [33], among which soluble carbonate rocks are the thickest and are subject to intense dissolution by flowing water erosion, and karst geomorphology is typical. The Dabanghe River is the main first-class tributary of the Beipan River Basin of the Pearl River system. Since the Cenozoic, it has been influenced by strong surface tectonic uplift due to the compression effect of the southeast Qinhai–Tibet Plateau uplift [34,35]. The Yanshan period compressional torsional anticline, syncline, and a series of regional faults have developed this area (Figures 1 and 2). In addition, within tens of kilometers of the middle reaches of the mainstream, a waterfall group has been formed from the headward erosion knickpoints, represented by Huangguoshu Waterfall, which is very sensitive to the response of tectonic uplift. These structures make this region an excellent place to study the interaction mechanism between regional neotectonic movement and karst geomorphology [36,37,38], and it is of great significance to clarify the tectonic geomorphic characteristics of the basin for the formation and evolution of Huangguoshu Waterfall, and the response mechanism of karst development in the South China Karst to neotectonics. The western plateau of Guizhou is a typical karst erosion landform with a continuous distribution. Due to the lack of surface sediment records, it is difficult to undertake geochronology research, and it is still very difficult to clarify its geological evolution history since the Cenozoic [39]. This is the bottleneck of the geomorphic evolution research in western Guizhou and even the whole South China Karst. Using DEM data combined with geomorphic parameters can quantitatively explore the evolution characteristics of regional karst geomorphology and its relationship with tectonic movement. At present, the evaluation and research on the crustal stability of the Guizhou Plateau are mainly focused on the interpretation of active faults and earthquakes. The use of geomorphic parameters to construct active levels could enrich the evaluation methods of the crustal stability of the region [40,41,42]. Many rivers around the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau are strongly influenced by the neotectonic movement, and the river geomorphology of the basin often responds well to the tectonic uplift of the surface [43]. The Dabanghe River Basin is located on the southeast edge of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. The geological structures, such as folds, faults, knickpoints, and waterfalls, are relatively developed in the basin (Figure 1). This forms a natural laboratory for studying tectonic activities. Previous studies on the basin mostly focused on hydrology, ecology, engineering, and other aspects. There is a lack of research on geomorphic evolution. Therefore, the Dabanghe River Basin is selected as the study area, and the characteristics of its tectonic landforms and the intensity of tectonic activities are studied quantitatively by combining geomorphological parameters, which assist in further understanding the tectonic uplift of the surface and its geomorphological evolution pattern in the South China Karst.

Figure 1

Location and lithologic distribution diagram of the Dabanghe River Basin. Lithology and fault data [33,38]. The name of the waterfalls are as follows: f1: Dishuitan Waterfall; f2: Doupotang Waterfall; f3: Huangguoshu Waterfall; f4: Luositan Waterfall; and f5: Yinlianzhuitan Waterfall. This figure was obtained by plotting ASTER GDEM V2 data (the spatial resolution is 30 m).

Figure 2

Geomorphological types in the Dabanghe River Basin [47]. Di W. (Dishuitan Waterfall); Dou W. (Doupotang Waterfall); H W. (Huangguoshu Waterfall); L W. (Luositan Waterfall); Y W. (Yinlianzhuitan Waterfall).

In this study, ArcGIS, MATLAB, CalHypso, and other software or tools were used to calculate and extract various geomorphological parameters of the Dabanghe River Basin [44,45]. In addition, the evolution of geomorphology in this area was discussed from the following aspects: indication of geomorphic parameters to geomorphic characteristics of the region, the control effect of faults on the landscape of the basin, the spatial variation in tectonic geomorphic characteristics in the study area, and the quantitative analysis of tectonic activities.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Study area

The Dabanghe River Basin intersects the Guanling, Zhenning, and Xixiu Districts in Anshun. The river flows into Beipan River in Fujiazhai, Guanling. The geographical latitude is 105°15′–106°05′ E, 25°34′–26°43′ N. It is a first-class tributary of Beipan River [46] and has two sources in the east and west. The west source is the Kebu River and the Wanger River in the east. The shape of the basin is an inverted triangle with a catchment area of 2,891 km² (Figure 1). The altitude of the basin decreases from 2,015 m in the north to 369 m in the estuary in the south, and the terrain differs greatly. The longitudinal slope of the Dabanghe River is steep, with an average gradient of 9.5‰. The upstream is characterized by many wide valleys, while deep valleys are formed in the midstream and downstream. The Huangguoshu Waterfall is located in the middle of the Dabanghe River. Using the Huangguoshu Waterfall as the reference point, the valleys upstream of the waterfall are wide with a depth of less than 50 m. The reach between Huangguoshu and Hongyan (Figure 1) often forms surface or underground knickpoints at the confluence of the main river and tributaries. The valley structure is distributed alternately longitudinal, with transverse valleys. The region below Hongyan is a wide V-shaped structure with a strike-type depth of more than 150 m (Figure 3a and b). The channel is wide, and the longitudinal section is mostly gentle except for the scarp, with 3–5 m of accumulation terraces along the river (Figure 3c and d). Subjective and objective classification of basic geomorphic types is beneficial for a clearer understanding of regional basic geomorphic types. The 30 m resolution DEM data was selected, and 40 m × 40 m elevation data of the study area was obtained after resampling. After repeated tests, a 7 × 7 moving analysis window was selected to obtain the regional topographic relief. Lastly, the relief data and the DEM data were overlaid and processed according to the subjective and objective classification system of landforms. We lastly classified the basic geomorphic types of the study area according to the classification system of subjective and objective geomorphic types (Table 1 and Figure 2) [47]. The basic geomorphic types such as a low basin, low hill, small relief mid-low mountain, middle relief mid-low mountain, small relief middle mountain, and middle relief middle mountain are developed in the basin (Figure 2). In addition, the karst landform in the basin is typical, and a series of typical karst landforms, such as karst caves, fenglin, and peak clusters, are developed [30]. The study area is located in the transitional slope zone from the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau to the Guangxi Hilly and in the northeast fold zone of the slope of the Yunnan-Guizhou Plateau in the Yangtze Block. Since the Cenozoic, a series of tectonic uplift movements have occurred due to the compression effect of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau uplift [46]. Soluble limestone is widely distributed in the basin. In addition to a large amount of exposed Carboniferous, Permian, and Triassic limestone and dolomite, there are also clastic rocks such as Middle Triassic limestone with shale, Lower Triassic sand shale, Middle Permian sand shale, Upper Triassic lithic quartz sandstone, and sandy clay rock (Figure 1). A series of NW, NE-trending faults and regional small faults, such as Yadu–Ziyun, Shuicheng–Wangmo, Shangmuza, Yongningzhen, Shangtianba, and Zhenfeng Faults, developed in the basin, with a complex tectonic system and tectonic landform development. Among them, the NW-trending Yadu–Ziyun Fault controls the landscape of the area. The Yadu–Ziyun Fault Zone is composed of a series of NW and SW-trending imbricate thrust faults, which were formed in the Upper Paleozoic and Triassic strata [40]. These experienced a strong tectonic activity as early as the Yanshan period [41]. Qiu et al. determined that the Yadu–Ziyun Fault was a late Pleistocene Fault with strong activity by magnetotelluric measurement; in addition, it is influenced by the typical active tectonic belt [42]. In the southeastern section of the fault, when the Dabanghe River passes through the active tectonic belt from north to south, the Huangguoshu Waterfall groups, the Tianxing Bridge, and the karst cave have formed in the range of 10 km. This implies that the active tectonic zone has had a profound influence on the geomorphological evolution of the region.

Figure 3

Field geological survey photos: (a) and (b) wide V-shaped valley in the lower reaches of Hongyan; (c) and (d) river terraces developed in the lower reaches of Hongyan. Note: T1 represents the first terrace, and T2 follows closely.

Table 1

Subjective and objective landform classification table

Relief/m	Elevation/m
Relief/m	300–900	901–1,500	1,501–2,000
0–30	Low basin	Mid-low basin	Middle basin
31–200	Low hill	Mid-low hill	Middle hill
201–500	Small relief low mountain	Small relief mid-low mountain	Small relief Middle mountain
501–1,000	Middle relief low mountain	Middle relief mid-low mountain	Middle relief Middle mountain

2.2 Data and methodology

2.2.1 Data

The ASTER GDEM V2 (Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer Global Digital Elevation Model) data used in this study was acquired from the geospatial data cloud, which was jointly developed by METI and NASA, and distributed to the public for free. The elevation accuracy of this data had been improved to 12.6 m. We found that these data are suitable for extracting geomorphic parameters after testing.

2.2.2 Methods

We corrected the spatial position of the channel based on the field geological survey and Google Earth image first and then determined the catchments where the channel developed as the sub-catchments of the Dabanghe River. Finally, we obtained 31 sub-catchments. The tectonic geomorphological characteristics of the Dabanghe River Basin were analyzed by extracting a series of geomorphological parameters and calculating IAT values for each sub-catchment by developing an activity classification method. It aims to discuss the influence of tectonic activity on regional geomorphic evolution. Among them, GIS is used to extract and calculate HI, Asymmetry Factor (AF), Basin Shape Ratio (BS), SL, and VF (Figure 4).

Figure 4

Flow chart of methods for determining sub-catchments and extracting geomorphologic parameters in this study. V Fl W–V H R: valley floor width–valley height ratio.

In addition, we used ArcGIS and CalHypso to calculate the hypsometric integral (HI) curve [45]. The MATLAB script was used to extract knickpoints and logSA (logarithmic curve of drainage area and slope) diagrams to further analyze the cause of the formation of knickpoints and falls [44]. Each parameter model is defined as follows:

HI is used to represent the volume proportion of uneroded material in a catchment and is a parameter indicator to quantitatively describe elevation distribution in a certain region and to reflect the geomorphic erosion response of a catchment. In Figure 5a, “h” refers to the elevation of the non-eroded landform in a basin, and “H” refers to the initial elevation of the basin before being eroded. Different shapes of curves in Figure 5b represent different stages of geomorphic development [1]. The calculation formula is:

(1) HI = ( h mean − h min ) / ( h max − h min ) ,

where mean represents the average elevation of the catchment, min represents the minimum elevation value, and max refers to the maximum elevation of a basin.

Figure 5

Graphical interpretation of each tectonic-geomorphic parameter: (a) schematic of the watershed geomorphology evolution [1]; (b) HI curve chart; (c) schematic of the tectonic tilt of the basin; (d) schematic of the geomorphological parameters of AF, including the main streams and tributaries of the basin, and the areas through which they flow [5,6]; (e) schematic of the geomorphological parameters of BS[4]; (f) schematic diagram of SL [48]; (g) cross-section of the VF index [4], and (h) 3D map of the VF from the DEM.

AF is a parameter representing the tilt degree of a catchment. The AF value is defined as:

(2) AF = ( A r / A t ) 100 ,

where A _r refers to the catchment area located on the right side of the stream along the main stream direction (downstream outlet direction), and A _t refers to the total area of the catchment. The higher the AF value, the greater the tilt degree, and vice versa (Figure 5c and d) [5,6].

BS describes the development shape of a catchment and is a geomorphic parameter used to quantitatively study the topographic development and tectonic activity intensity of a catchment. The formula is defined as:

(3) BS = B l / B w ,

where B _l indicates the linear distance from the stream source to the outlet of the catchment, and B _w is the maximum width of a catchment. The narrower the basin, the stronger the tectonic activity (Figure 5e) [4].

The SL is obtained by multiplying the local slope value by the distance from the stream source to the center, amplifying the numerical effect of the local slope value, and reflects the regional difference of tectonic movement and erosion resistance of rock. The SL value is defined as:

(4) SL = ( Δ H / Δ L ) L ,

where ΔH represents the relative elevation difference of the local stream, ΔL represents the length of the stream, ΔH/ΔL represents the slope value of the local stream, and L refers to the distance from the source of the stream to the center point (Figure 5f) [48].

The VF is a geomorphological parameter used to describe the U-shaped and V-shaped valleys. The formula proposed by Bull is as follows:

(5) VF = 2 V f w / [ ( E L d − E s c ) + ( E r d − E s c ) ] ,

where Vfw is the width of the valley bottom, Eld is the elevation of the left valley shoulder, Erd refers to the elevation of the right valley shoulder, and Esc refers to the altitude of the valley bottom (Figure 5g and h) [4].

By calculating the geomorphic index values of each sub-catchment, the IAT is calculated. Then, IAT is divided according to the classification method of HI, AF, BS, SL, and VF indexes of each sub-catchment. Level 1 (1.0 ≤ IAT < 1.5), very strong tectonic activity; level 2 (15 ≤ IAT < 2.0), strong tectonic activity; level 3 (2.0 ≤ IAT < 2.5), moderate tectonic activity; level 4 (2.5 ≤ IAT), weak tectonic activity (Table 2) [4,21,48,49,50,51,52]. IAT is calculated as follows:

(6) IAT = ( HI + AF + BS + SL + VF ) / 5 .

Table 2

Classification table of each geomorphological parameter

	Level 1	Level 2	Level 3	Level 4	References
HI	HI > 0.50	0.40 < HI < 0.50	HI < 0.40	—	[49,50]
AF	\|AF − 50\| ≥ 15	7 ≤ \|AF − 50\| < 15	\|AF − 50\| < 7	—	[21,51]
BS	BS ≥ 3	2 ≤ BS < 3	BS < 2	—	[4,52]
SL	SL ≥ 500	300 ≤ SL < 500	SL ≤ 300	—	[48,52]
VF	VF < 0.50	0.5 ≤ VF < 1	VF > 1		[50,52]
IAT	1.0 ≤ IAT < 1.5	15 ≤ IAT < 2.0	2.0 ≤ IAT < 2.5	2.5 ≤ IAT	[50,52]

3 Results

3.1 HI

The HI index value reflects the degree of erosion and the stage of geomorphic development in the watershed. When HI < 0.40, the geomorphic development is at the old age stage [21]; when 0.40 < HI < 0.50, the geomorphic development is within the middle age; and, where HI > 0.50, the surface erosion is intense and unevenly developed, which is the juvenile stage [50]. The results showed that the sub-catchments HI ranged from 0.327 to 0.661, with large spatial differences in the HI values, indicating uneven geomorphic erosion and significant spatial differences in tectonic movements within the basin. Based on the extraction results, the geomorphic development of the Dabanghe River Basin was classified into juvenile (0.501 < HI < 0.661), middle (0.401 < HI < 0.500), and old stages (0.327 < HI < 0.400) (Figure 6) (Table 2). The area of the juvenile landform is the largest in the central region, which is also the area where Huangguoshu Waterfall and its core waterfall groups are located. This indicates that the development of Huangguoshu, and its core waterfall group, is still at a young stage (Figure 6). The HI curves are mostly an upward convex trend (Figure 7). The distribution of HI values shows that the landform developed in the central and western regions is relatively younger than that in the eastern and northeastern regions. Figures 6 and 7 show that high HI values and convex HI curves are mainly distributed near some thrust faults and regional faults (such as Shuicheng-Wangmo, Zhenfeng, and Shangmuzan Fault), which may indicate that these faults have a significant impact on the HI index.

Figure 6

The spatial distribution map of HI in the Dabanghe River Basin. f1: Dishuitan Waterfall; f2: Doupotang Waterfall; f3: Huangguoshu Waterfall; f4: Luositan Waterfall; f5: Yinlianzhuitan Waterfall.

Figure 7

The HI curve, where the horizontal coordinate normalized cumulative (a/A) represents the ratio of the uneroded area of the catchment to the total area; and normalized elevation (h/H) represents the ratio of the elevation of the uneroded surface to the maximum elevation of the catchment [1]. The dotted line in the figure shows the concave HI curve, most of which comes from the east bank of the basin. Arrows show their HI values.

3.2 AF

The higher the AF index value, the greater the degree of tectonic tilt, and vice versa. The AF index value can quantitatively reveal the degree of regional tectonic activity, and in general, the greater the deviation of the AF value from 50, the greater the basin tilt, and vice versa. Therefore, the value of |AF − 50| can quantify the degree of asymmetry of the basin shape [6]. Based on the results, the AF index values in the Dabanghe River Basin were classified into three levels, with the first level being 15.01–42.29, mainly in the west and south of the basin, with occasional distribution in the north. The second level is 7.01–15.00, mainly distributed in the northwest and southwest regions of the watershed. The third level was 0.40–7.00 in the northern and the northeastern regions of the basin (Figure 8) [21]. The spatial distribution of AF values in the basin can clearly see that the tectonic tilt degree in the west is generally greater than that in the east.

Figure 8

Spatial distribution of AF index of the basin’s sub-catchments.

3.3 BS

The BS index values in the Dabanghe River Basin range from 0.54 to 6.98. Based on the extraction results, the sub-catchment BS index was divided into three levels: the first level is 3.01–6.98, mainly in the central and the western regions of the basin, which indicates the relatively strong tectonic activity in these regions; the second level is 2.01–3.00, mostly in the southwestern and northwestern regions of the basin, which indicates moderate tectonic activity; the third level is 0.54–2.00, within the east, north and northeast parts of the basin, which may indicate that the intensity of tectonic activity in these regions is weak (Figure 9).

Figure 9

Spatial distribution of BS values in the studied basin.

3.4 SL

The SL index values for the Dabanghe River mainstream range from 0 to 5,025, with large spatial differences, indicating that the channel’s SL values are subject to tectonic uplift with significant regional differences. In the middle section of the channel, larger SL values are distributed. In the lower section of the channel, the SL index values in the ranges of 0–300, 301–500, and 501–1,000 are distributed intermittently (Figure 10). The spatial distribution of these SL values shows the steeper longitudinal profile of the midstream (from Doupotang Waterfall to Hongyan Village and Guanjiao Knickpoint reach), which may indicate relatively stronger tectonic activity in the midstream.

Figure 10

SL values for the Dabanghe River Basin. Di W. (Dishuitan Waterfall); Dou W. (Doupotang Waterfall); H W. (Huangguoshu Waterfall); L W. (Luositan Waterfall); Y W. (Yinlianzhuitan Waterfall).

3.5 Valley floor width–valley height ratio

The VF values of the 44 valleys of the Dabanghe River mainstream were extracted and calculated (Figure 11), yielding a range from 0.10 to 15.00. From the spatial distribution of the VF index values, a continuous distribution of low VF values was observed in Huangguoshu, and its core waterfall groups. The high VF value indicates that the valley presents a U-type, with a wide valley bottom. Taking Huangguoshu and its core waterfall group as the boundary, the VF values of the northern valleys are generally greater than 1, and the development of broad valleys, only the eighth valley has a value of VF <1. South of Huangguoshu, more valleys with VF index values less than 1 are present. This indicates that the spatial differences in the development characteristics of the upstream and downstream valleys in the Dabanghe River Basin are obvious with Huangguoshu Falls as the dividing point (from Doupotang Waterfall to Hongyan Village, most of the river valleys are V-shaped. And some deep valleys are also developed in the Guanjiao Knickpoint reach [Figure 11]). The spatial distribution of VF values shows that the valleys developed in the midstream are V-shaped, which shows that the strong down-cutting erosion in these reached [4].

Figure 11

Spatial distribution of the VF values for studied basin.

3.6 Index of relative active tectonics (IAT)

To get the IAT value of each sub-catchment in the Dabanghe River Basin, we count the SL index value of the main channel of each sub-catchment at an interval of 1 km. The results show that the high values of the SL index are mainly distributed in the west, southwest and middle of the basin (Figure 12a). We calculate the SL average value in each sub-watershed, and the results show that the high SL values are mainly distributed in the northwest of the basin (Figure 12b). We calculate the VF values of the main channel of each sub-catchment at an interval of 1 km. The results show that the high VF values are mainly distributed in the west, central and south, and the low values are distributed in the east and north of the basin (Figure 12c). By calculating the VF average value of the sub-catchments, we found that the low values are mainly distributed in the north and northeast (Figure 12d). The HI, AF, BS, SL, and VF levels of the sub-catchments were finally used to calculate the IAT levels of the sub-catchments following equation (6) [4,21,48,49,50,51,52]. Combined with the classification method of each geomorphic index (Table 2), the levels of the IAT were finally divided (Figure 12e and Table 3). The results of the IAT levels and classification show that the high levels are mainly distributed in the middle and west regions of the basin (Figure 12e). This shows that the tectonic activity intensity of the basin is stronger in the west than in the east. The midstream is stronger than the upstream and downstream (Figure 12e).

Figure 12

(a) Spatial distribution of the SL values of tributaries; (b) the SL average values of the sub-catchments; (c) the VF values of tributaries; (d) spatial distribution of the VF average values of the sub-catchments, and (e) the IAT values and IAT levels division of the studied basin.

Table 3

Geomorphologic parameters and IAT levels of the sub-catchments

Sub-catchments’ number	Geomorphic parameters and their levels
Sub-catchments’ number	HI	AF	BS	SL	VF	IAT
1	1	1	3	3	3	3
2	2	1	3	3	1	3
3	2	1	3	3	3	3
4	2	1	3	3	3	3
5	3	1	3	3	1	3
6	3	1	3	3	2	3
7	2	1	3	3	2	3
8	2	1	3	3	3	3
9	1	1	3	3	2	3
10	2	3	3	3	2	4
11	1	2	2	3	2	3
12	2	1	3	3	2	3
13	2	1	3	3	3	3
14	3	1	3	3	3	4
15	2	2	2	3	3	3
16	2	1	3	3	3	3
17	2	3	3	3	3	4
18	2	1	3	3	3	3
19	2	3	3	3	3	4
20	1	3	1	3	2	3
21	1	1	1	3	1	1
22	1	1	2	3	3	3
23	1	1	1	2	3	2
24	1	2	1	3	2	2
25	1	2	1	2	3	2
26	1	2	2	2	3	3
27	3	3	3	3	3	4
28	3	3	3	3	3	4
29	3	2	2	3	3	4
30	1	3	3	3	3	4
31	2	3	3	3	3	4

3.7 Spatial difference of geomorphologic parameters and characteristics of the studied basin

3.7.1 Indication of geomorphic parameters on the geomorphic characteristics of the basin

The progress of geospatial technology enables us to use DEM data to classify landforms. For example, Agrawal and Dixit used the topographical position index to classify landforms in northeastern India [53]. To more intuitively understand the basic geomorphic types of the Dabanghe River Basin, the DEM data were processed according to the subjective and objective classification system of basic geomorphic types [47] (Table 1), and the distribution map of basic geomorphic types was obtained (Figure 2). The basic geomorphological types and topographic relief of the basin are useful to further explore the indication of each geomorphological parameter to the geomorphological features.

The low HI values in the Dabanghe River are mostly distributed in the Guijia River Basin (No. 27 sub-catchment) and some sub-catchments downstream (Figures 1 and 6). The high values are mainly distributed in the northwest, southwest, and middle parts of the basin. Overall, most are in the central section. The central section of the Dabanghe River is the river sections where the waterfalls and knickpoints are concentrated. The landform development is in the young stage, and the HI values are high (Figure 6). The AF index reflects the tectonic tilt degree of the basin. The tilt degree is stronger in the west, center, and south regions (Figure 7), and tilt to the left bank. This is consistent with the terrain features of the Guizhou Plateau, which is high in the northwest and low in the southeast owing to the lateral expansion of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau [39]. The medium and high values of the BS index in the Dabanghe River Basin are mainly distributed in the Baling River Basin (No. 23 sub-catchment) (Figures 2 and 9), and some sub-catchments in the central regions (No. Sub-catchment 20–21, 24–25). The northern region of the Baling River Basin is a mid-low basin, and the southern region is low relief middle mountain and middle hill (Figure 2). The terrain of the basin is undulating (Figure 13a), and the basin is narrow and long (Figures 2 and 9). Both the SL and VF indexes can indicate the development form of the valley. Upstream, the Dabanghe River flows through the area with relatively small terrain fluctuation (Figure 2), and the SL and VF values are low-the wide valleys are developed, and the longitudinal profile of the channels are flat (Figure 13b and c). Subsequently, it flows through the area with large terrain fluctuation located at the intersection of middle and low mountains and middle and low hills (Figure 2). Several high SL values and low VF values appear in the Huangguoshu Waterfall, Luositan Waterfall, and Yinlianzhutan Waterfall regions. The longitudinal slope of the riverbed is steep; therefore, a box canyon has developed (Figure 13d and e). The SL and VF values of the Baling River Basin in the west of the basin are also of high level, and the river longitudinal profile are steep (some knickpoints are developed on the longitudinal section, such as Dishuitan Waterfall, etc.) and V-shaped canyons are developed (Figure 13f–h). The geomorphic parameters can better indicate the geomorphic evolutionary characteristics of the study area, and studying the regional geomorphic evolution in combination with various geomorphic parameters can provide more comprehensive results.

Figure 13

Field geological survey photos. (a) The undulating terrain near Baling River Canyon; (b) and (c) the wide valley upstream; (d) Huangguohu Waterfall and some knickpoints; (e) box canyon developed near Huangguoshu Waterfall; (f) and (g) satellite image of Dishuitan Waterfall (from Google Earth Image) and site photos; (h) deep V-shaped canyon developed in Baling River.

3.7.2 Spatial difference of geomorphologic parameters and characteristics of the studied basin

Geomorphological evolution is restricted to glacier, lithology, tectonic, external forces, and other factors [54]. The influence of lithology on the development of landforms is mainly reflected by the erosion resistance of lithology [55]. Generally, the erosion resistance of clastic rocks is weak, therefore the wide valleys developed mostly in the distribution area of clastic rocks such as shale and mudstone [56]. Because the middle and lower reaches of the upstream of the Dabanghe River flow through the middle Permian sand shale with limestone and the upper Triassic quartz sandstone and sandy clay rock (Figures 1, 9, 14 and 15), the VF value is higher in the upper reaches of the Dabanghe River. Using the MATLAB script, 250 m was selected as the sliding window, and 12.2 m was used as the elevation interval. The LogSA diagram, knickpoints, and longitudinal section of the main stream of the Dabanghe River were extracted (Figure 14a and b) [44]. The slope of the steady-state stream decreases with the increase in the catchment area. However, due to the influence of tectonic activities, the slope of some river sections increases significantly, and the SL value changes to varying degrees [57]. In addition to reflecting the degree of tectonic activity of the river section, the SL index can also indicate the lithology erosion resistance [58]. When the river section flows through the stratigraphic lithology boundary, the SL index changes [59]. The erosion resistance of clastic and soluble rocks is significantly different [60]. Through the distribution map of soluble and clastic rocks in the superimposed area, it can be found that the river section of the eighth valley flows between the soluble rock and the clastic rock, from soluble limestone to sandy shale, and the longitudinal section of the river changes (Figures 14b, 15a and b).

Figure 14

(a) Logarithmic diagram of slope and area of Dabang River main stream (Log SA), The black line in the figure represents the linear fitting of the logarithm of area and slope, and the black point represents the knickpoint; (b) River longitudinal profile and knickpoints, and spatial distribution including lithology using MATLAB script extraction of the main stream.

Figure 15

(a) Distribution of soluble and non-soluble rocks in the study area; (b) River longitudinal section of the upstream, midstream, and downstream of the study area, and the distribution of knickpoints and waterfalls.

In the Dabanheg River midstream, the HI, AF, and BS values were high, SL value was larger, and the VF value was lower. This river section contains the world famous Huangguoshu Waterfall and its core waterfall groups. This section is located near the Shuicheng-Wangmo Fault. The Hongyan area is intersected by the fault, and the geological tectonic activity is strong. This region has the highest SL values in the entire Dabanghe River Basin. The longitudinal section of the river is steep, and a series of large waterfalls and small knickpoints appear (Figures 6, 8–12). The upper section of the Dabanghe River midstream flows through a soluble rock distribution area with uniform lithology (Figure 15a and b). In the section with uniform lithology, the SL values change to varying degrees, and the values are generally high, indicating that the tectonic is the controlling factor affecting the longitudinal section of this reaches. The development of the valley landform of the Dabanghe River is affected by the local erosion base level, and the wide valleys and canyons from the upstream to the downstream are distributed alternately (Figure 16) [36]. This feature records the tectonic uplift movement of the crust. The rise of the crust causes the erosion base level to decline, bringing strong stream headward erosion and forming a series of headward erosion-type knickpoints. The formation of the Huangguoshu Waterfall is related to headward erosion. When the headward erosion reaches the lower regions, it first forms a karst-erosion sinkhole waterfall, and then collapses due to karst dissolution and erosion, forming the current Huangguoshu Waterfall. This indicates that a series of waterfalls and knickpoints which formed in the Dabanghe River midstream are related to the headward erosion caused by tectonic uplift. Therefore, a series of high SL values appeared in this section. In the lower region of the middle reaches, the longitudinal section of the river is gentle. Overall, the tectonic activity in the Dabanghe River midstream is relatively strong. The landform development is generally in the young stage, and the degree of structural inclination is strong. The deep box-canyons are generally developed in the river valleys, the channels are steep, and a series of large-scale waterfalls and knickpoints. The SL value of the Dabanghe River downstream is generally low, and only the SL value of the river section, approximately 65–67 km (Guanjiao Knickpoint) in the upper section of the downstream, becomes larger, which is mainly related to the change of lithology, the transition from soluble to non-soluble rock changes the SL index (Figure 15a and b). The lower segment of the downstream is bounded by the Zhenfeng thrust fault, and the VF values are larger on the south side of the fault and smaller on the north side. This is mainly because the northern side is the relative uplift area of the hanging wall of the fault. Under the influence of the uplift of the fault block, the downcutting erosion of the river dominates and forms a deeper valley. On the southern side, due to the relative decline of the fault block, the erosion is opposite to that of the Dabanghe River. Therefore, the horizontal and vertical erosions occur alternately, resulting in the characteristics of wide and deep valley bottom development on the relative decline side of the Zhenfeng Fault (Figure 16a and b). The knickpoint is affected by the tectonic uplift rate, uplift time limit of the upper and lower reaches of the river, and it will gradually move upstream [57,61]. The knickpoint often retreats upstream during the tectonic stationary period, and the subsequent tectonic uplift period causes the riverbed surface to erode and disintegrate during the stationary period, forming a rapid and knickpoint. Therefore, the sudden change of the high SL values and the alternating distribution of the high or low VF values in the Dabanghe River midstream are not only affected by the lithology difference, but reflect the intermittent uplift characteristics of the neotectonic movement in this river section.

Figure 16

Distribution of normalized VF index data: (a) local zoomed-in view of VF sampled valley points, corresponding to the orange circles in the normalized figure, the orange points in the figure represent the VF sampling points in the valley, and the red line indicates the location of the fault; (b) VF values corresponding to the orange sampled valley in (a).

The knickpoints on the Dabang River mainstream were classified by superimposing regional geological and lithologic maps on the stream longitudinal. The knickpoint types were divided into vertical-step and slope-break knickpoints. If the stream longitudinal abruptly becomes steep only in a local area near knickpoints, these were referred to as slope-break knickpoints. In general, abrupt changes in the lithology of river channels tend to form vertical-step knickpoints [61,62]. Because the spatial location of lithology is fixed, the location of vertical-step knickpoints are usually fixed. Compared to vertical-step knickpoints, slope-break knickpoints move upstream over time [63]. Based on the above theory, the first, sixth, and seventh knickpoints were found to be vertical-step knickpoints. The knickpoints in the midstream were mostly slope-break knickpoints, which is consistent with our analysis above (Figure 14a and b). Through the analysis of the spatial difference of tectonic geomorphology in the up, mid, and downstream of the Dabanghe River, it was concluded that the tectonic activity in the midstream of the basin was the strongest. The geomorphic evolution of the local reaches of the upstream and downstream is affected by lithology, topography, and hydrodynamic conditions.

4 Discussion

4.1 The controlling effect of faults on the Dabanghe River Basin landform

The Yadu–Ziyun Fault zone is approximately 350 km long in the Guizhou Province [40]. Zhang et al. noted that strong tectonic activity occurred in the Wei-Zi-Luo Fault zone in western Guizhou during the Early Yanshan period, and in the late Middle Triassic, the Youjiang Basin was closed. In addition, under the action of the extrusion stress field of the South China Massif, the fault zone underwent recoil and left-slip movement with obvious slip nature. Extrusion deformation and slip activity then occurred in the western, the Weining–Shuicheng, middle, and the Shuicheng–Xiaohebian sections in the western region of the fault zone, and the middle section of the fault zone [41]. Wang and Yin discussed the tectonic association between the Ziyun–Luodian Fault and the Niulanshan Anticline, and noted that the Ziyun–Luodian Fault was formed in the Upper Paleozoic and Triassic strata, and the strata had a strong strike-slip deformation along the fault [64]. As a result, an approximately equilateral acute triangle area surrounded by three framed anticline belts was formed on the west side of the Yadu–Ziyun Fault in the Liupanshui area, which was called the Langdai Triangle Structure [65]. The Langdai Triangle Structure zone is located west of Dabanghe River Basin, with a complex structure and developed fold system. Therefore, the tectonic activity in the west of the study area is strong, and the IAT levels are high. The Yongningzhen Fault is located southwest of the study area, with the characteristics of a thrust fault. The fault throw of the strata is approximately 600 m, the compression fracture width is 8 m, the deformation is strong in the sub-catchments of the southwest and west of Dabanghe River Basin, and the tectonic activity is strong under the influence of this fault and the Puli Fault (F7) [38]. The Shangtianba Fault, which is located in the northeastern region of the basin, strikes approximately 55−60°NE and inclines to the southeast. It cuts through the Permian and Triassic strata in the basin and develops a fault fracture zone greater than 20 m [38]. Some affected sub-catchments in the northeastern region of the basin have prominent active tectonic, high HI values, and convex HI cure (Figures 6 and 7). The Shangmuzan Fault has thrust property, and it mainly cuts the Lower Triassic Yongningzhen Formation, Middle Triassic, and Upper Triassic Laishike Formation [38]. Affected by the fault, the west of Dabang River shows strong active tectonic.

However, there are many factors that affect the evolution of landforms. In addition to tectoniclly factors, lithology, climate, and glaciers also affect the development and evolution of landforms. The geomorphic parameter values can reflect the characteristics of regional geomorphic evolution well. This study found that the lithology distribution in the study area is generally uniform, with mostly carbonate rocks, and the exposed strata are mostly Permian and Triassic strata. In areas where there is no significant difference in erosion resistance, the geomorphic parameter values changed to varying degrees, which means that lithology is not the main driver affecting the evolutionary characteristics of regional landforms. Precipitation directly affects the size of the erosion coefficient. When the precipitation is large, the erosion coefficient becomes larger. The time for the development of the landform to reach equilibrium is shortened, and the corresponding landform index level decreases [66]. The climate of the study area is a subtropical monsoon humid climate with little difference in precipitation (Figure 17a); therefore, climate is not the main factor affecting geomorphological development. The study area has not been affected by glaciers since the Cenozoic (Figure 17b); therefore, the effect of glaciers on geomorphic evolution can be excluded. Therefore, the geomorphological evolution of the study area is considered to be significantly affected by geological tectonic. The level of regional geomorphic parameter values of fault development is generally high (Figure 12). However, it should be noted that this is only applicable to the larger scale, where some specific reaches or regions' geomorphological evolution is only affected by the lithology, had been discussed in the last chapter. This study confirms that faults have a significant impact on the geomorphic evolution of the area. The areas with dense faults have higher IAT levels and stronger tectonic activities. In summary, the tectonic geomorphology of the Dabanghe River Basin is affected by the fault system. Among them, the regional large-scale Yadu–Ziyun Fault plays a controlling role in the tectonic geomorphology of the basin.

Figure 17

(a) Average annual rainfall (mm a⁻¹) in the study area, And these data can be found in Data availability statement part; (b) Distribution of present glaciers in the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau and its surrounding areas and the glacier data we collected were obtained from the National Cryosphere Desert Data Center-the first and second glacier inventory data (Data availability statement part). Q F. (Qianzhong Falut); Y-Z F. (Yadu–Ziyun Fault); M-S F. (Mile-Shizong Fault).

4.2 Quantitative analysis of tectonic activity intensity in the Dabanghe River Basin

Based on the Ms2.0–4.7 earthquakes in the Dabang River Basin and its surrounding areas from 2002 to 2022, we found that the earthquakes with a focal depth of 5–20 km and Ms2.0–4.7 have mainly occurred in the Langdai triangle tectonic area and the central canyon area of the Beipan River since 2002 (Figure 18a and b). In the Dabang River Basin, earthquakes mostly occur in the west and southwest of the basin, and its surrounding areas. An Ms4.1 earthquake also occurred in the southern part of Zhenning in the midstream of the basin. This indicates that the tectonic activity in the midstream of the Dabanghe River Basin is relatively strong, and the number of earthquakes with Ms2.0 or above in the western Liuzhi area are relatively large. This indicates that the intensity of tectonic activity in the basin gradually weakens from west to east. By calculating the IAT value of the sub-catchments (Figure 12e), it was found that our results were consistent with the earthquake distribution. In the western and central regions, the seismic intensity is larger and more frequent (the IAT levels are also larger). The results of the earthquake distribution and the IAT level all show that the tectonic activity in the western and central regions of the basin is strong, whereas that in the eastern and northeastern regions is weak. This indicates that the geomorphic parameter method is one of the important methods to evaluate the Dabanghe River Basin tectonic activity level. Studies confirm that earthquakes in western Guizhou are mostly related to a series of NE and NW-trending active faults [67]. However, these studies focused on the regional crustal stability on the regional scale, and few related studies were at the basin scale. In recent years, some scholars have used the method of tectonic geomorphic parameters to quantify the intensity of regional tectonic activity, which presents an idea to research the intensity of regional tectonic activity by using the method of geomorphic parameters [19,21,25,26,68,69]. However, in Guizhou, there are few studies using this method to quantify regional tectonic activity. Therefore, this paper quantitatively studies the tectonic activity level by extracting various geomorphological parameters. Comprehensive extraction of multiple parameters will make the results more robust.

Figure 18

Geological and tectonic sketch of the Dabanghe River Basin and its vicinity; Seismic data cited from the China Seismological Network. (a) Location of the study area (located at the southeast edge of the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau); (b) Langdai triangle structural area.

Our research is only a quantitative study of regional geomorphic evolution through mathematical methods, lacking geochronology. The research results related to geochronology are extremely rich [70–75]. How to combine geological dating with geomorphologic parameters in the future is the key to solve the spatial difference between tectonic activity and the time series succession of tectonic activity zone.

5 Conclusions

In this article, ArcGIS 10.2 is used to interpret the DEM of the Dabanghe River Basin. Combined with the digital landform research method, the six geomorphic parameters of HI, AF, BS, SL, and VF in the basin are extracted and analyzed. The spatial variability in the basin’s tectonic landform characteristics is studied, and the IAT of the basin is quantified by the tectonic activity classification method. The following conclusions are drawn:

The geomorphic parameters of the Dabanghe River Basin indicate the geomorphic features of the region well. Owing to the complex geomorphic drivers of the basin, the comprehensive analysis of geomorphic features combined with various geomorphic parameters makes the analysis results more rigorous. The tectonic geomorphology of the Dabanghe River Basin is significantly affected by the fault system, among which the Yadu–Ziyun Fault plays a controlling role in the geomorphology and evolution of the basin.
Controlled by the Yadu–Ziyun Fault, the tectonic activity of the basin gradually weakens from west to east. The tectonic activity is most active in the midstream of the basin, and the geomorphic evolution of the upstream and downstream of the basin is affected by lithology, topography, and hydrodynamic conditions. By calculating the IAT value of the sub-catchments, the results were found to be consistent with the earthquake distribution. In the western and central regions, the seismic intensity is larger and more frequent, and the IAT level is also larger. The results of the earthquake distribution and the IAT value show that the tectonic activity in the western and central parts of the Dabanghe River Basin is strong, while the tectonic activity in the eastern and northeastern regions is weak. This indicates that the geomorphic parameter method is an important method to evaluate the level of regional tectonic activity.
The quantitative study of regional tectonic activity intensity using geomorphic parameters enriches the methods and means of regional crustal stability evaluation and further extends the application of geomorphic parameters in tectonics.

Acknowledgments

This study was financially supported by the Philosophy and Social Science Planning Key Project of Guizhou Province (21GZZB43), the China-UNESCO Program of WH Nomination and Conservation (Tianhe 20200728), and the China Overseas Expertise Introduction Program for Discipline Innovation (D17016), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant: 42061001) and Natural science research funding project of Guizhou Provincial Department of Education (Grant: Qian Jiao KY[2021]036).

Author contributions: YW wrote the manuscript. XKN provided ideas and supervised. FYL provided method support. LXX provided help in data acquisition. We thank all the authors for their help in field geological work and computer.
Conflict of interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Data availability statement: The DEM data used in our manuscript are from https://www.gscloud.cn/search. We used ArcGIS 10.2 software to extract the data and create the associated drawings, and version 10.2 is available for download at https://www.arcgis.com/home/index. The seismic data are from the China Seismological Network (https://www.ceic.ac.cn/); precipitation data is from https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/data/.; the present glaciers data are from http://www.ncdc.ac.cn/portal/; the MATLAB 2016a download link we used is https://www.mathworks.com/.products/matlab.html.; CalHypso tool from literature: https://doi.org/10.1016/.j.cageo.2008.06.006. All data, including statistical data, open source code, free public data, and experimental data, are available by contacting the corresponding author.

References

[1] Strahler AN. Hypsometric (area-altitude) analysis of erosional topography. Bull Geol Soc Am. 1952;63(11):1117–42.10.1130/0016-7606(1952)63[1117:HAAOET]2.0.CO;2Search in Google Scholar

[2] Hack JT. Stream-Profile analysis and stream-gradient index. J Res US Geol Surv. 1973;1(4):421–9.Search in Google Scholar

[3] Cannon PJ. Generation of explicit parameters for a quantitative geomorphic study of the Mill Creek drainage basin. Ok Geol Notes. 1976;36:3–16.Search in Google Scholar

[4] Bull WB, Mcfadden LD. Tectonic geomorphology north and south of the garlock fault, california. In Doehring DO, Geomorphology in Arid Regions. Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Geomorphology Symposium, Binghamton; 1977.Search in Google Scholar

[5] Cox RT. Analysis of drainage-basin symmetry as a rapid technique to identify area of possible Quaternary tilt-block tectonics: an example from Mississippi embayment. Geol Soc Am Bull. 1994;106(5):571–81.10.1130/0016-7606(1994)106<0571:AODBSA>2.3.CO;2Search in Google Scholar

[6] Hare PW, Gardner TW. Geomorphic indicators of vertical neotectonism along converging plate margins, Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica. Tectonic Geomorphology-Proceeding of the 15th Annual Binghamton Geomorphology Symposium, Boston; 1984.Search in Google Scholar

[7] García-Delgado H, Villamizar N, Bernet M. Recent tectonic activity along the bucaramanga fault system (chicamocha river canyon, eastern cordillera of colombia): a geomorphological approach. Z Geomorphology. 2019;62(3):199–215.10.1127/zfg/2019/0630Search in Google Scholar

[8] Szypula B. Quantitative studies of the morphology of the south Poland using Relief Index (RI). Open Geosci. 2017;9(1):509–24.10.1515/geo-2017-0039Search in Google Scholar

[9] Kumar N, Dumka RK, Mohan K, Chopra S. Relative active tectonics evaluation using geomorphic and drainage indices, in dadra and nagar haveli, western india. Geod Geodyn. 2022;13(3):219–29.10.1016/j.geog.2022.01.001Search in Google Scholar

[10] Arroyo-Solorzano M, Quesada-Roman A, Barrantes-Castillo G. Seismic and geomorphic assessment for coseismic landslides zonation in tropical volcanic contexts. Nat Hazards. 2022;114(3):2811–37.10.1007/s11069-022-05492-8Search in Google Scholar

[11] Kupcikova K, Janocko J. Morphometric analysis as a tool for interpretation of tectonic activity: Spisska Magura and Tatry Mts., Western Carpathians. Acta Montan Slov. 2022;27(2):306–26.10.46544/AMS.v27i2.03Search in Google Scholar

[12] Rawat A, Kumar D, Chatterjee RS, Kumar H. A GIS-based liquefaction susceptibility mapping utilising the morphotectonic analysis to highlight potential hazard zones in the East Ganga plain. Env Earth Sci. 2022;81(13):358.10.1007/s12665-022-10468-9Search in Google Scholar

[13] Joel SL, Kelin X, Arjun MH. Isolating climatic,tectonic,and lithologic controls on mountain landscape evolution. Sci Ad. 2023;9(3):eadd8915.10.1126/sciadv.add8915Search in Google Scholar

[14] Bahrami S, Stokes M. Analyzing drainage basin orientation and its relationship to active fold growth (Handun anticline, Zagros, Iran). Geomorphology. 2023;426:108605.10.1016/j.geomorph.2023.108605Search in Google Scholar

[15] De Oliveira GP, Correa ACD, Tavares BDC, Monteiro KD. The influence of cenozoic magmatism on drainage rearrangement processes of the northeast sector of the Borborema Highlands, northeastern Brazil. J S Am Earth Sci. 2023;121:104124.10.1016/j.jsames.2022.104124Search in Google Scholar

[16] Aier I, Luirei K, Bhakuni SS, Thong GT, Kothyari GC. Geomorphic evolution of medziphema intermontane basin and quaternary deformation in the schuppen belt, nagaland, NE,india. Z Geomorphology. 2011;55(2):247–65.10.1127/0372-8854/2011/0055-0048Search in Google Scholar

[17] Lahiri SK, Sinha R. Morphotectonic evolution of the majuli island in the brahmaputra valley of assam, india inferred from geomorphic and geophysical analysis. Geomorphology. 2014;227:101–11.10.1016/j.geomorph.2014.04.032Search in Google Scholar

[18] Amine A, Ouardi HE, Zebari M, Makrini HE. Active tectonics in the Moulay Idriss Massif (South Rifian Ridges, NW Morocco): New insights from geomorphic indices and drainage pattern analysis. J Afr Earth Sci; 2020;167:103833.10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2020.103833Search in Google Scholar

[19] Buczek K, Górnik M. Evaluation of tectonic activity using morphometric indices: case study of the tatra mts. (western carpathians, poland). Env Earth Sci. 2020;79(8):176.10.1007/s12665-020-08912-9Search in Google Scholar

[20] Ali U, Ali SA, Yousuf M, Rasool QA, Ahmad I. Consideration of geomorphic indices in assessment of relative active tectonics in a part of seismogenic compressional kashmir basin. Arab J Geosci. 2021;14(13):1–5.10.1007/s12517-021-07523-3Search in Google Scholar

[21] Agrawal N, Gupta L, Dixit J. Geospatial assessment of active tectonics using SRTM DEM-based morphometric approach for Meghalaya, India. All Earth. 2022;34(1):39–54.10.1080/27669645.2022.2081112Search in Google Scholar

[22] Gupta V, Chauhan N, Penna I, Hermanns R, Dehls J, Sengupta A, et al. Geomorphic evaluation of landslides along the Teesta river valley, Sikkim Himalaya, India. Geol J. 2022;57(2):611–21.10.1002/gj.4377Search in Google Scholar

[23] Chang ZY, Sun WH, Wang J, Bai SB, Zhang ZG. Application of DEM in the morphological analysis of tectonic geomorphology: Status and prospect. J Nanjing Norm Univ, Nat Sci Ed. 2015;38(4):129–36.Search in Google Scholar

[24] Tang GA, Na JM, Chen WM. Progress of digital terrain analysis on regional geomorphology in China. Acta Geod Cartogr Sin. 2017;46(10):1570–91.Search in Google Scholar

[25] Prizomwala SP, Solanki T, Chauhan G, Das A, Bhatt N, Thakkar MG. Spatial variations in tectonic activity along the Kachchh Mainland Fault, Kachchh, western india: implications in seismic hazard assessment. Nat Hazards. 2016;82(2):947–61.10.1007/s11069-016-2228-xSearch in Google Scholar

[26] Xu W, Yuan ZD, Liu ZC, Gao ZW. River geomorphic parameters and their neotectonic significance of the northern piedmont of the zhongtiao mountain. Ari Land Geogr. 2018;41(5):1009–17.Search in Google Scholar

[27] Elias Z, Sissakian VK, Al-Ansari N. Assessment of the tectonic activity in northwestern part of the Zagros Mountains, northeastern iraq by using geomorphic indices. Geotech Geol Eng. 2019;37(5):3995–4007.10.1007/s10706-019-00888-zSearch in Google Scholar

[28] Bhat MA, Dar T, Bali BS. Morphotectonic analysis of aripal basin in the north-western himalayas (india): an evaluation of tectonics derived from geomorphic indices. Quatern Int. 2020;568:103–15.10.1016/j.quaint.2020.10.032Search in Google Scholar

[29] Yang MD. Brief description of karst landscape features in Guizhou plateau. J Guizhou Norm Univ Nat Sci. 1990;2:1–3.Search in Google Scholar

[30] Xiong KN. Development of cone karst in response to neotectonism in Guizhou. Geol GZ. 1996;2:181–6.Search in Google Scholar

[31] Williams PW. Geomorphic inheritance and the development of tower karst. Earth Surf Proc Land. 1987;12(5):453–65.10.1002/esp.3290120503Search in Google Scholar

[32] Xiong KN. Hydrodynamic genetics of cone Karst and Tower Karst–With special reference to the Middle Guizhou. Carsol Sin. 1994;13(3):237–45.Search in Google Scholar

[33] Wang YG, Suo ST, Zhang MF. Tectonicsand Carlin-type gold deposits in Southwestern Guizhou. Beijing: Geological Publishing House Press; 1994.Search in Google Scholar

[34] Tapponnier P, Molnar P. Active faulting and tectonics in China. J Geophys Res. 1977;82(20):2905–30.10.1029/JB082i020p02905Search in Google Scholar

[35] Fan YL, Liu JJ, Zhu KW, Li HB, Zou XX. Study on river downcutting rate in karst canyon: A case study of Nizhu River Grand Canyon in Beipan River. Quat Sci. 2021;41(6):1558–64.Search in Google Scholar

[36] Zhang YJ, Mo ZD. The origin and evolution of Orange Fall. Acta Geogr Sin. 1982;3:303–16.Search in Google Scholar

[37] Luo DR. A reliminary discussion on the Origin of Huangguoshu Waterfall Groups. Geol GZ. 1987;1:99–102.Search in Google Scholar

[38] Ji XX, Wang JK. Analysis of major faults and earthquakes in Anshun area. Low Carbon World. 2018;5(2):69–70.Search in Google Scholar

[39] Zhou DQ, Liu XM, Jiang LJ, Liu CR. Step-like landforms and uplift of Guizhou Plateau. Earth Env. 2005;33(2):79–84.Search in Google Scholar

[40] Liu J, Huang B, Yang T, Cao QC, Sun FF. Simple analysis of the relationship of structure to Ore-formation in the West-Southwest Guizhou Region. Acta Geol Sichuan. 2019;39(3):364–8.Search in Google Scholar

[41] Zhang RQ, Zhou Y, Wang XM, Li SJ, Li S. Structure features and tectonic evolution of the Wei-Zi-Luo Fault Zone in Southwestern Guizhou Province. J Geomech. 2009;15(2):178–89.Search in Google Scholar

[42] Qiu P, Wang JH, Zheng Y, Luo DC. Application of AMT and RaÅ Radon measurement method in active fault detection in Yadu-Ziyun Fault Zone. South China J Seismol. 2021;41(4):21–6.Search in Google Scholar

[43] Pan BT, Li JJ, Li BY. Discussion on evidences for surface uplift of the Tibetan Plateau. J Lanchow Univ, Nat Sci. 2000;36(4):12.Search in Google Scholar

[44] Wang YZ, Zheng DW, Zhang HP. The methods and program implementation for river longitudinal profile analysis—RiverProAnalysis, a set of opensource functions based on the Matlab platform. Sci China Earth Sci. 2021;65(9):1788–1809.10.1007/s11430-021-9938-xSearch in Google Scholar

[45] Pérez-Peña JV, Azañón JM, Azor A. CalHypso: An ArcGIS extension to calculate hypsometric curves and their statistical moments. Applications to drainage basin analysis in SE Spain. Comput Geosci-UK. 2008;35(6):1214–23.10.1016/j.cageo.2008.06.006Search in Google Scholar

[46] Fan YL, Pan BT, Hu ZB, Ren DY, Chen QW, Liu FL, et al. An analysis of tectonic geomorphologic characteristics of the Beipanjiang Basin in the Yunnan-Guizhou Plateau. Adv Earth Sci. 2018;33(7):751–61.Search in Google Scholar

[47] Gao X. The subjective and objective classification of geomorphologic forms. J Mt Sci. 2004;22(3):261–6.Search in Google Scholar

[48] Brookfield ME. The evolution of the great river systems of southern Asia during the Cenozoic India-Asia collision: rivers draining southwards. Geomorphology. 1998;22(3–4):285–312.10.1016/S0169-555X(97)00082-2Search in Google Scholar

[49] Alipoor R, Poorkermani M, Zare M, Hamdouni RE. Active tectonic assessment around rudbar lorestan dam site, high zagros belt (SW of Iran). Geomorphology. 2011;128(1–2):1–14.10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.10.014Search in Google Scholar

[50] Hamdouni RE, Irigaray CT, Fernández JC, Keller EA. Assessment of relative active tectonics, southwest border of the sierra nevada (southern spain). Geomorphology. 2008;96(1–2):150–73.10.1016/j.geomorph.2007.08.004Search in Google Scholar

[51] Pérez-Peña JV, Azor AA, Zañón JM, Keller EA. Active tectonics in the Sierra Nevada (Betic Cordillera, SE Spain): insights from geomorphic indexes and drainage pattern analysis. Geomorphology. 2010;119(1–2):74–87.10.1016/j.geomorph.2010.02.020Search in Google Scholar

[52] Li LB, Xu G, Hu JM, Yu XB, Chen H. Quantitative analysis od relative active tectonics of the upstream region of Weihe River based on DEM. Quat Sci. 2012;32(5):866–79.Search in Google Scholar

[53] Agrawal N, Dixit J. Topographic classification of North Eastern Region of India using geospatial technique and following seismic code provisions. Env Earth Sci. 2022;81(18):436.10.1007/s12665-022-10556-wSearch in Google Scholar

[54] Cyr AJ, Granger DE, Olivetti V, Molin P. Disinguishing between tectonic and lithologic controls on bedrock channel longitudinal profiles using cosmogenic 10be erosion rates and channel steepness index. Geomorphology. 2014;209:27–38.10.1016/j.geomorph.2013.12.010Search in Google Scholar

[55] Selby MJ. A rock moss streng classification for geomorphic purpose: with tests from Antarctica and New Zealand. Z Geomorphol. 1980;24(1):31–51.10.1127/zfg/24/1984/31Search in Google Scholar

[56] Bahrami S, Aghda S, Bahrami K, Rad MM, Poorhashemi S. Effects of weathering and lithology on the quality of aggregates in the alluvial fans of Northeast Rivand, Sabzevar, Iran. Geomorphology. 2015;241(19):19–30.10.1016/j.geomorph.2015.03.028Search in Google Scholar

[57] Kirby E, Whipple KX. Quantifying differential rock-uplift rates via stream profile analysis. Geology. 2003;29(5):415–8.10.1130/0091-7613(2001)029<0415:QDRURV>2.0.CO;2Search in Google Scholar

[58] Troiani MF, Della S. The use of the stream Length-Gradient index in morphotectonic analysis of smallcatchments: A case study from Central Italy. Geomorphology. 2008;102(1):159–68.10.1016/j.geomorph.2007.06.020Search in Google Scholar

[59] Chen M, Hu XF, Wang W. The cause of high-altitude knickpoints on river longitudinal profiles along the Zoulang Nan Shan. Acta Geogr Sin. 2018;73(9):1702–13.Search in Google Scholar

[60] Goudie AS. Quantification of rock control in geomorphology. Earth-Sci Rev. 2016;159:374–87.10.1016/j.earscirev.2016.06.012Search in Google Scholar

[61] Kirby E, Whipple KX. Expression of active tectonics in erosional landscapes. J Struct Geol. 2012;44:54–75.10.1016/j.jsg.2012.07.009Search in Google Scholar

[62] Haviv I, Enzel Y, Whipple KX, Zilberman E, Matmon A, Stone J. Evolution of vertical knickpoints (waterfalls) with resistant caprock: insights from numerical modeling. J Geophys Res. 2010;115:F03028.10.1029/2008JF001187Search in Google Scholar

[63] Quye-Sawyer J, Whittaker AC, Roberts GG. Calibrating fluvial erosion laws and quantifying river response to faulting in sardinia, italy-sciencedirect. Geomorphology. 2020;370:107388.10.1016/j.geomorph.2020.107388Search in Google Scholar

[64] Wang EQ, Yin JY. Cenozoic multi-stage deformation occurrred in southwest Sichuan: Cause for the dismemberment of the proto Sichuan Basin. J Northwest Univ (Nat Sci Ed). 2009;39(3):359–67.Search in Google Scholar

[65] Yang WN. Analysis of remote sensing images for tectonic pattern and stress field in Liuzhi-Langdai region Western Guizhou. Remote Sens Land Resour. 1996;2:21–8.Search in Google Scholar

[66] Snyder NP, Whipple KX. Landscape response to tectonic forcing: digital elevation model analysis of stream profiles in the mendocino triple junction region, northern california. Geol Soc Am Bull. 2000;112(8):1250–63.10.1130/0016-7606(2000)112<1250:LRTTFD>2.0.CO;2Search in Google Scholar

[67] Wang SY. Faults and Earthquakes in Guizhou. J Geomech. 2016;22(3):430–8.Search in Google Scholar

[68] Ezati M, Gholami E, Mousavi SM. Tectonic activity level evaluation using geomorphic indices in the shekarab mountains, eastern iran. Arab J Geosci. 2021;14(5):385.10.1007/s12517-021-06724-0Search in Google Scholar

[69] Gupta L, Agrawal N, Dixit J. Spatial distribution of bedrock level peak ground acceleration in the national capital region of india using geographic information system. Geomat Nat Haz. Risk. 2021;12(1):3287–316.10.1080/19475705.2021.2008022Search in Google Scholar

[70] Downes H, Carter A, Armstrong R, Dobosi G, Embey-Isztin A. Lower crustal zircons reveal neogene metamorphism beneath the pannonian basin (hungary). Open Geosci. 2015;7(1):223–33.10.1515/geo-2015-0028Search in Google Scholar

[71] Peng Y, Zhang YS, Wang LL. Provenance and tectonic significance of the zhongwunongshan group from the zhongwunongshan structural belt in china: insights from zircon geochronology. Open Geosci. 2020;12(1):25–43.10.1515/geo-2020-0003Search in Google Scholar

[72] Liu Y, Fang N, Qiang M, Jia L, Song C. The cretaceous igneous rocks in southeastern guangxi and their implication for tectonic environment in southwestern south china block. Open Geosci. 2020;12(1):518–31.10.1515/geo-2020-0160Search in Google Scholar

[73] Wu T, Yang R, Gao J, Li J. Age of the lower cambrian vanadium deposit, east Guizhou, South China: evidences from age of tuff and carbon isotope analysis along the bagong section. Open Geosci. 2021;13(1):999–1012.10.1515/geo-2020-0287Search in Google Scholar

[74] Howlett CJ, Reynolds AN, Laskowski AK. Magmatism and extension in the anaconda metamorphic core complex of western montana and relation to regional tectonics. Tectonics. 2021;40(9):e2020TC006431.10.1029/2020TC006431Search in Google Scholar

[75] Zhou GY, Li L, Xiao GQ, Yan L, Pearson DG, Hao QZ, et al. New constraints on the source of loess from U/Th-Pb geochronology of detrital multi-minerals. Geology. 2022;50(10):1156–60.10.1130/G50075.1Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2023-01-10

Revised: 2023-04-14

Accepted: 2023-04-18

Published Online: 2023-06-14

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/geo-2022-0481

Keywords for this article

Dabanghe River Basin; tectonic geomorphology; DEM; South China Karst

Creative Commons

BY 4.0