Applied Geomatics

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12518-020-00303-w

REVIEW

Geodiversity index weighted by multivariate statistical analysis

Fabíola Menezes dos Santos 1 & Denise de La Corte Bacci 1 & Antonio Roberto Saad 1 &
Anderson Targino da Silva Ferreira 1,2

Received: 27 September 2019 / Accepted: 12 March 2020

# Società Italiana di Fotogrammetria e Topografia (SIFET) 2020

Abstract
Although there are differences in geodiversity definitions, there is a consensus that the term covers elements of abiotic nature like
geology, geomorphology, soils, among others. However, the attempt to evaluate these geodiversity elements revealed the need to
create methodologies that can quantify them. In this sense, the goal of this study was to propose and implement a method capable
of measuring geodiversity through a weighted index using multivariate statistics (principal component analysis) to rank a data set
and indicate the real influence of each variable on geodiversity distribution. As a case study, we used the Guarulhos municipality
(São Paulo state, Brazil). The results indicated that the variable “soils” was the one that most influenced the geodiversity index,
due to its higher spatial variance, followed by the layers “geology,” “hydrography,” and “relief.” The Geoindex map pointed out
that the sites of greatest geodiversity were those where there was high variability of latosol, cambisol, and gleysols, as well as
where the lithology pointed to rocks of the Ferrous Formation, granitoid, metapelites, and restricted floodplains adjacent to areas
with a high density of lineaments. Hill relief and high-density drainage patterns also influenced the increase of the Geoindex. This
map also pointed out that areas of natural heritage, such as waterfalls, rocky outcrops, and lookouts, appeared associated
respectively with high, medium, and low values of geodiversity.

Keywords Geoindex weighted . Geodiversity . Geoheritage . Principal component analysis

Introduction in 1992, as well as the Malvern International Conference about the

Even though geodiversity studies are relatively recent in
geosciences, researchers around the world are seeking to under-
stand it from different perspectives and methods of quantifica-
tion. In this sense, Serrano and Ruiz-Flaño (2007) suggest that
the concept of geodiversity may have arisen in the 1940s, with
Argentine geographer Frederico Alberto Daus, as a geographical
diversity of places, municipalities, regions, and human habitats.
According to Burek and Potter (2002), its origin would have
occurred in 1991 at the First International Symposium on the
Conservation of our Geological Heritage. Gray (2004, 2008) as-
sociates the beginnings of this concept with the Rio Earth Summit
* Anderson Targino da Silva Ferreira
andersontsferreira@gmail.com
1
Geosciences Institute of the University of São Paulo (IGc-USP),
Cidade Universitária, Rua do Lago, 562, São Paulo 05508-080,
Brazil
2
Master’s Program in Geoenvironmental Analysis, Guarulhos
University (MAG-UNG), Praça Tereza Cristina, Centro,
Guarulhos, São Paulo 07023-070, Brazil
Geological and Landscape Conservation in the UK in 1993. On
this last occasion, geologists and geomorphologists have used this
concept to describe variety within abiotic nature, drawing an anal-
ogy to the idea of biodiversity.
Stanley (2001) associated the first time cultural and
biological aspects with the geodiversity concept. He was
approaching the link between biodiversity, soils, minerals,
rocks, fossils, active processes, and the built environment.
While Sharples (1995, 2002) related the concept of
geodiversity to geological; geomorphological; and soil char-
acteristics, including evidence of the history of the Earth and
the processes involved (biological, hydrological, and atmo-
spheric), the same concept also assumed in the Australian
natural Heritage Charter (AHC, 2002).
By an anthropogenic perspective, Kozlowski (2004) and
Serrano and Ruiz-Flaño (2007) remark that geodiversity is a
result of the natural variation on the earth’s surface, due to
geological, geomorphological, and pedological processes
with others generated from human activity, especially from
the nineteenth century, with the dispersion and circulation of
chemical elements and compounds (toxic and radioactivity) in
the lithosphere. Likewise, Gray (2013) also highlights a

geological time when considering fossils as components of
geodiversity, as well as interactions between geological, geo-
morphological, pedological, and hydrological aspects, includ-
ing their structures, systems, and contributions to landscapes.
Even though there are differences in definitions of
geodiversity, there is a consensus that the term encompasses
abiotic nature and hence geology, geomorphology, and soils
(Johansson et al. 2001; Gray 2004). Stepišnik and
Trenchovska (2017) emphasize the need for identification,
interpretation, and evaluation of these geodiversity elements,
since the lack of a broader knowledge of their distribution
makes effective management and conservation impossible
(Hjort & Luoto, 2010; Gray, 2013).
In an attempt to better understand and evaluate the
elements of geodiversity, Stepišnik and Trenchovska
(2017) pointed to the need for methodologies that aim to
quantitatively measure the diversity of nature’s abiotic
aspects within a specific area. We highlight the contribu-
tions of Serrano and Ruiz Flaño (2007), CPRM (2007),
Serrano et al. (2009), Benito-Calvo et al. (2009), Hjort
and Luoto (2010), Parks and Mulligan (2010), Castro
et al. (2011), Grigio et al. (2011), Fassoulas et al.
(2012), Manosso and Ondicol (2012), Malinowska and
Szumacher (2013), Pereira et al. (2013), Silva et al.
(2013), Kot (2014), Melelli (2014), Pellitero et al.
(2014), Silva et al. (2015), Argyriou et al. (2016), Ilić
et al. (2016), Manosso and Nóbrega (2016), Najwer
et al. (2016), Pereira and Ruchkys (2016), Melelli et al.
(2017), Ozsahin (2017), Santos et al. (2017a), Stepišnik
and Trenchovska (2017), and Nascimento et al. (2018).
Fig. 1 Location of the
municipality of Guarulhos, São
Paulo, Brazil (SE, Brazil)
Appl Geomat
The proposals above are distinguished as to the ele-
ments of geodiversity evaluated, the hierarchy of the
adopted classes, as well as the scale and geoprocessing
techniques, are taken. In this context, using the compo-
nents of geodiversity proposed by Gray (2013), the ob-
jective of this work was to develop a weighted quanti-
tative method using multivariate statistical analysis to
assess local geodiversity, as well as to point out the
relationship of this geodiversity with the natural heritage
sites, taking the case of Guarulhos, São Paulo (SE,
Brazil) as a case study.
Study area
The São Paulo Metropolitan Region (SPMR) is made up of 39
municipalities with approximately 20 million inhabitants con-
taining large industrial, commercial, and financial complexes,
which accounts for 18% of the gross national product (GNP)
and more than half of the State of São Paulo GNP. The study
area selected for this analysis is located at the Guarulhos mu-
nicipality, the second-largest city in São Paulo state (SE,
Brazil) with 31,870 ha and a population of more than
1,349,113 inhabitants (IBGE 2018) (Fig. 1).
The climate is subtropical and humid (Nimer, 1989), with
dry winters and rainy summers, influenced by oceanic humid-
ity and cold Antarctic fronts (Ribeiro et al. 2018). The average
annual temperature is between 18 and 19 °C, with the warmest
month around 22 °C and the coldest below 15 °C (Oliveira
et al. 2009).
Appl Geomat
The association of geological, geomorphological, and ped-
ological aspects compartmentalized the study area in north
and south, conditioning the urban occupation, with the “pre-
served” north and the urbanized south (Oliveira et al. 2009).
The northern portion has rugged topography of hills and
mountains sculpted in Precambrian basement rocks on the
Atlantic Plateau. In this region, the Cantareira (Pirucaia),
Bananal, and Itaberaba mountains ranges’ altitudes reach over
1000 m. These energetic forms of relief develop from east to
west and are responsible for the emergence of many springs
and high-density drainage patterns. This accentuated relief is
support by basement rocks standing out the metamorphic,
metasediment, and metavolcanic, with granitic intrusions
(Oliveira et al. 2009; Monteiro et al. 2012), covered by
argisols, cambisols, and litholic neosols, predominantly shal-
low and clayey (Fig. 2 a, b, c, and d).
The lands of the southern portion are related to the São
Paulo sedimentary basin, whose formation is linked to vertical
movements that occurred about 60 million years ago, which
resulted in the Southeast Brazilian Continental Rift system
(Riccomini 1989; Oliveira et al. 2009; Pacheco 2015). It has
altitudes ranging between 683 and 800 m and is dominated by
sedimentary terrain (Paleogene and Neogene) filled with thick
and thin conglomeratic clastic rocks (Riccomini et al. 2004)
that generate predominant Argisoils in hills, as well as the
quaternary alluvial sediments, composed of unconsolidated
sands, of varying granulometry, and of gley soil rich in clay
and organic matter (Oliveira et al. 2009) (Fig. 2 a, b, c, and d).
Natural resources of geodiversity
The exploration of geodiversity resources in Guarulhos
stands out in two historical moments that intertwine to
this day. The first corresponds to the exploitation of
gold in the sixteenth century, considered the first mining
cycle in Brazil. This began in 1552 with the discovery
of alluvium gold in the northern portion of the munic-
ipality, overlapping Precambrian rocks on the Atlantic
Plateau near the Jaguamimbaba mountain range, current
Gil’s Peak (lookout n° 15, Fig. 2). This cycle spanned
about 220 years and was responsible for the consolida-
tion of Brazil’s first urban structures, in addition to the
enslavement of indigenous and black people brought
from Africa (Reis Filho 2013; Ferreira et al. 2018).
The second moment corresponds to the advancement of
urban occupation, which after the gold mining cycle oc-
cupied the Paleogene and Neogene sedimentary terrains
of the southern portion of the municipality (Fig. 2d), with
the extraction of clay for brick manufacture and more
recently with the explorations of sand and groundwater
(Cumbica Aquifer).
Other areas of the northeast portion of the municipal-
ity are still used for commercial exploration of gravel
associated with granite and gneiss rocks and sand de-
rived from altered quartzite (Omar et al. 2008; Oliveira
et al. 2009; Perez-Aguilar et al. 2013). Today, the north-
ern portion of the municipality is still relatively pre-
served. Still, it is gradually undergoing urban sprawl
from the south, from the smoother topography, the
longest-occupied hills, and vast plains to the north
(Ferreira et al. 2018).
Methodological approach
The geodiversity analysis took into consideration not only the
quantity but also its environment distribution or variance. For
this, the methodology in this paper proposes to quantify
geodiversity through two steps: 1) standardization of thematic
maps and 2) weighting of thematic variables through principal
component analysis.
Standardization and weighting of thematic maps
The parameters or layers that made up the geodiversity
index were geology, relief, soil, and hydrography.
Therefore, information from the “Geoenvironmental
Bases for an Environmental Information System of
Guarulhos Municipality” was used (Oliveira et al.
2009). For each layer, the existing features were count-
ed for each cell of the 500 × 500-m grid (Fig. 3), by
Santos et al. (2017a). After this, all maps were stan-
dardized from zero to one. Being that, closer to 1
(one), the diversity of the layer is higher, whereas closer
to 0 (zero) is smaller. For this, Eq. 1 was used:
ðOv−SvÞ
Theme diversityi ¼ ð1Þ
ðHv−SvÞ
Where “Ov” is the observed value for each cell, while “Hv”
and “Sv” are, respectively, the higher and smaller values found
for each layer (Fig. 3).
The combination of large sets of environmental vari-
ables can have a high correlation or multicollinearity,
causing the estimates of these parameters to be statistical-
ly skewed (Cruz-Cardenas et al. 2013). To remove this
collinearity and verify the participation of each variable,
the principal component analysis (PCA) is recommend-
able. This technique reduces the number of correlated
variables while preserving the total variance of the data
set (Lattin et al., 2011; Dormann et al., 2012). Thus, the
result of the analysis, the Eigenvalues, represents the var-
iance of each principal component (Table 1), while the
Eigenvectors (Table 2) show the loads or the share of each
layer within each principal component (PC). Thus,
 Appl Geomat

Fig. 2 Geoheritage sites over thematic maps. a Geology. b. Relief. c Soils. d Hydrography overlapping altitude

through Eq. 2, it is possible to estimate which parameters lesser weight (Table 3) within the entire data set (Boori
(geology, relief, soils, or hydrography) have greater or et al., 2016).

jEigenvector PC1  Eigenvalue PC1j þ … þ jEigenvector PC4  Eigenvalue PC4j

Variable weight ¼ ð2Þ
n

variable, the geodiversity index (Geoindex) was calculated based

Where n is the sum of each variable weight (geology, relief, on Table 3 using the following equation. Note: the values of
soils, and hydrography). After calculating the weight of each Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors are given in the module.
Appl Geomat

Fig. 3 Example of diversity

quantifying the geology layer
(lithological units and structures)
overlaid by a 500 m × 500-m grid

20%, 12%, and 10% of the total variance of the image infor-
Geoindex ¼ geologyweight þ relief weight þ soilsweight mation in Fig. 2, while Table 2 shows the contribution of each
þ hydrographyweight ð3Þ layer through the module of its loads (eigenvectors) on each
PC. Thus, considering the variability in each PC
The weighted Geoindex results of Eq. 3 may not reach the (Eigenvectors; Table 2), the parameters that most influenced
highest value (1.0). In this way, the results were divided into the formation of Geoindex were, respectively, soils, geology,
five statistical classes (Fig. 4) based on the mean value (μ) and hydrography, and relief (Table 3).
standard deviation (σ), corresponding to the five categories of For the geological sub-index (Fig. 5a), the highest values
Geoindex: very low, low, medium, high, and very high. All are in the northern portion of the municipality, where the oc-
map processing and generation were performed using currence count involved both units and lithological structures
ArcGIS v. 10.2 and the Universal Transverse Mercator (faults, fractures, lineaments, among others). This region fits
(UTM) projection, datum WGS 1984. The maps scales is into the context of the Gold Cycle Geopark project (Pérez-
1:50,000. Aguilar et al. 2012), where metamorphic and
metasedimentary rocks such as quartzites and quartz shales
form gradually to relatively abrupt contacts in the NW portion
of the study area, near the Barro Branco Fault (Fig. 2a).
Results
Table 2 Eigenvectors matrix
The principal component analysis (Table 1) shows that the
Variable Eigenvectors
four PCs (PC1, PC2, PC3, and PC4) have respectively 58%,
PC1 PC2 PC3 PC4
Table 1 Eigenvalues matrix
Geology 0.58 0.01 − 0.81 − 0.01
PC1 PC2 PC3 PC4
Relief 0.17 0.97 0.14 − 0.09
Eigenvalues 0.029 0.01 0.006 0.005 Soils 0.73 − 0.16 0.52 0.42
% 57.8 20.1 12.2 9.9 Hydrography 0.32 − 0.18 0.24 − 0.9

Table 3 Weight of each
variable Variable Weight
Geology 0.27
Relief 0.19
Soils 0.34
Hydrography 0.20
∑ 1
Contact metamorphism-induced granitic intrusions appear in
the north-central part associated with Ferrous Formations and
gold mineralizations in the region. While in the NE portion,
metavolcanic (metabasic) rocks seem to be interdigitated with
metasediments such as schists, marble, metatuffites, and
metapelites (Pérez-Aguilar et al. 2012, 2013).
In the southern portion, the geological diversity sub-index
showed low values, due to the presence of two lithological types:
the first formed by Paleogene and Neogen sediments such as
claystone, sandstones, and conglomerates of the São Paulo and
Caçapava Formations and the second by quaternary alluvium
composed mainly of clay, sand, and gravel (Oliveira et al. 2009).
For the relief sub-index (Fig. 5b), the municipality present-
ed little diversity of this parameter, with values below 0.4 in
practically the entire territory. However, values considered
high–very high are arranged and aligned along the Jaguaribe
River Fault that cuts the municipality in the NE-SW direction
and divides the municipality into the northern and southern
compartments. In this region, the relief changes abruptly from
high hills to hillock interspersed with restricted alluvial plains
(Fig. 2b) (Oliveira et al. 2009; Pérez-Aguilar et al. 2012).
The very high diversity for the soil sub-index (Fig. 5c) was
mainly due to the more significant variability of this parameter
in the northern portion, due to moderately deep soil (Latosol
and Cambisol) and shallow soils (Neossol). These areas are
subject to mass movements (Oliveira et al., 2009). Below the
Jaguaribe Fault, in the southern portion of the municipality,
low diversity is associated with the soils found: Argisols and
Gleyssolos (Fig. 2c). The first (Argisols) is derived from
Paleogenic and Neogenic rocks, while the second
(Gleyssolos) is found in floodplains (Oliveira et al. 2009). In
these lowlands, clay extraction was of great cultural and eco-
nomic importance in the brick making during the 1950s, with
about 250 artisan ceramics with an average production of
Fig. 4 The five categories of Geoindex (μ is the mean and σ is the
standard deviation)
Appl Geomat
approximately 1 million bricks per day (Oliveira et al. 2008;
Reis Filho, 2013; Ferreira et al. 2018).
In the hydrography sub-index (Fig. 5d), the areas with the
highest values are those conditioned by elongated mountains
and parallel hills carved on igneous and metamorphic rocks that
originated parallel-pinnate pattern drainages within closed val-
leys and dendritic/trellis in the northern portion (Fig. 2d).
Conversely, low and very low values appear represented by low-
er density and frequency drainages on steep-walled valleys with
small floodplains as well as on flatlands, all on the southern
portion (Fig. 2d) (Ponçano et al. 1981; Pérez-Aguilar et al. 2012).
In Fig. 6, the very high Geoindex is associated with latosol,
cambisol, and gley soils overlapped to lithologies like Ferriferous
Formation, Metasedimentary (Metapellites), Metavolcanic
(Metabasic), and Granitoid. Besides those, As well as, with the
relief of mountains and hills (Fig. 2b) that condition the high-
density drainage pattern in closed valleys (Fig. 2d).
For Melelli (2014), geodiversity is strictly linked to the pres-
ence of the natural heritage geosites. In this sense, it is notewor-
thy that the places inserted and/or adjacent to the high and very
high geodiversity areas (Fig. 6a) are the same ones that integrate
the natural heritage or geoheritage points as rocky outcrops, look-
outs, and waterfalls (Fig. 7 a, b, c, and d), as well as regions of the
cultural heritage of former gold mining (Pérez-Aguilar et al.
2012, 2013). Figure 6(b) shows that approximately 78% of
geoheritage sites are in areas with medium to very high
Geoindex values, corroborating the relationship of these values,
mainly with rocky outcrops and waterfalls. Otherwise, only the
two lookouts and a waterfall (22%) are located in areas with low
to medium geodiversity values.
On the other hand, tectono-structural lineaments, such as
Veigas and Jaguari faults (Fig. 2a), point to an alignment of
waterfalls in areas with medium to very high values (Fig. 6 a
and b). Santos (2015) pointed out that in Guarulhos, waterfalls
are classified, according to Christofoletti (1981), into two types: i)
erosive origin—carved by watercourse due to the differential
erosive potential of the rocks (Fig. 7c) and ii) due to rock mass
discontinuities, marked by tectonic-structural lineaments such as
fault escarps and shearing zones (Fig. 7c). The author highlight
yet, that waterfalls arranged in notched drainages on high and low
hills are associate with red/yellow latosols, and haplic cambisols,
supported in granitoid, metapelites, and metabasic rocks.
Discussion
In the northern part of the territory, the dashed green areas
(Fig. 6a) correspond to the eight conservation areas (CA).
These areas were created by the federal, state, or municipal
governments as a strategy for the maintenance of natural re-
sources in the long term (Brasil, 2000). Within these, it is
possible to observe an urbanization process that, according
to municipal legislation, must take place to cushion, qualify,
Appl Geomat
Fig. 5 Geoheritage sites over sub-index maps. a Geology. b Relief. c Soils. d Hydrography
and control the occupation of these areas (Guarulhos, 2019).
Bearing in mind that the distribution and survival of the var-
ious living species depend on the physical and chemical con-
ditions of the environment they occupy (Pereira et al. 2008).
However, historically, this region has suffered from the
process of environmental degradation, with the implementa-
tion of sanitary landfills, irregular subdivisions, highways, and
even recreational activities without quantifying the impacts.
Thus, considering the scientific, educational (Pérez-Aguilar
et al. 2012), and touristic (Santos, 2015) values, as well as
the psychological and physiological health benefits that the
natural heritage areas provide (Gray, 2013), the effects of deg-
radation actions can make the elements of geodiversity in
these areas more vulnerable—causing soil erosion, siltation,
and water pollution, in addition to increasing geological risk,
with landslides and floods (Oliveira et al. 2009; CPRM, 2015;
Santos et al. 2016; Santos et al. 2017b; Vargas et al. 2017;
Santos et al. 2019; Vargas et al. 2019).
However, although the quantitative approach is an essential
tool in the identification of natural heritage (Melelli, 2014), it
is highlighted that the management of geodiversity is com-
plex, requiring the adoption of public strategies and measures
 Appl Geomat

Fig. 6 a Geoheritage sites over the Geoindex map of the Guarulhos municipality. b The number of geoheritage site occurrences per Geoindex classes

aimed at sustainable use (Brilha, 2005, 2016, 2018), which
was not observed in the study area.
Conclusions and recommendations
The application of the method presented here, based on the
multivariate statistical analysis (PCA), allowed us to identify
which layers had major or minor influence in the spatial
distribution of the Geoindex. The results indicated that the
layer “soils” was the one with the highest variance and the
one that most influenced the Geoindex, followed by the layers
“geology,” “hydrography,” and “relief.” The Geoindex map
pointed out that the places with the highest geodiversity were
those representatives of the natural heritage geoheritage sites
described in the literature with scientific, educational, and
tourist value, such as waterfalls, Marundito outcrop in the
Pelado Peak, and the Nhangussu hill viewpoint. Besides, the

Fig. 7 Examples of the outcrop,

lookout, and waterfalls found in
high geodiversity sites. a
Marundite outcrop in the Pelado
Peak (Point 19 in Figs. 2, 4, and
5). b Nhangussu Hill Lookout
(Point 17 in Figs. 2, 4, and 5). c, d
Waterfalls located at Dona Tereza
Club (Point 3 in Figs. 2, 4, and 5)
Appl Geomat
proposed method contributed to the development of a meth-
odology capable of measuring geodiversity through an easily
applied index that can be used in any area that has physical
cartography (geology, relief, pedology, and hydrography) in
the same scale. The methodology also advances in the sense of
using a multivariate statistical method to hierarchize the ana-
lyzed data set to indicate the real influence of each layer on the
geodiversity distribution of the study area. Finally, the process
of environmental degradation that occurred over time is
compromising the elements of the geodiversity of these areas,
consequently causing the loss of scientific, educational, and
touristic values, also harming human health itself.
Funding information This study was financially supported by the
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior.
References
Argyriou AV, Sarris A, Teeuw RM (2016) Using geoinformatics and
geomorphometrics to quantify the geodiversity of Crete, Greece.
Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 51:47–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jag.2016.04.006
Australian Heritage Commission – AHC (2002) Australian natural heri-
tage charter. 2nd ed. Canberra: Australian Heritage Commission in
association with the Australian Committee for the International
Union for the Conservation of Nature, 26 p
Benito-Calvo A, Pérez-González A, Magri O, Meza P (2009) Assessing
regional geodiversity: the Iberian Peninsula. Earth Surf Process
Landf 34(10):1433–1445. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.1840
Boori M, Choudhary K, Kupriyanov AV (2016) Vulnerability analysis on
Hyderabad city, India. Comput Opt 40(5):752–758. https://doi.org/
10.18287/2412-6179-2016-40-5-752-758
Brasil (2000) Lei N 9.985, de 18 de julho de 2000. Regulamenta o art.
225, § 1o, incisos I, II, III e VII da Constituição Federal, institui o
Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza e dá
outras providências, Brasília, DF. Available: http://www.planalto.
gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/L9985.htm. Accessed 20 February 2020
Brilha, JBR (2005) Patrimônio geológico e geoconservação: a
conservação da natureza na sua vertente geológica. São Paulo:
Palimage editora, 190p
Brilha, JBR (2016) Inventory and quantitative assessment of geosites and
geodiversity sites: a review. Geoheritage, p 1–16
Brilha JBR, Gray M, Pereira DI, Pereira P (2018) Geodiversity: an inte-
grative review as a contribution to the sustainable management of
the whole of nature. Environ Sci Pol 86:19–28. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.envsci.2018.05.001
Burek CV, Potter JA (2002) Minding the LGAPs. A different approach to
the conservation of local geological sites in England? Geoscientist
12(9):16–17
Castro AF, Amaro VE, Souto MVS, Grigio AM, Freitas CCM (2011)
Modeling and development of a computational system for evalua-
tion of the coastal dynamics of Macau area, Rio Grande do Norte
State, Brazil. J Coast Res 64:1648–1652
Christofoletti A (1981) Fluvial geomorphology. Edgard Blucher, São
Paulo
CPRM - Serviço Geológico do Brasil (2007) Mapa de Geodiversidade do
Brasil: escala 1:2.500.000, Legenda Expandida + CD-ROM.
Brasília: CPRM - Serviço Geológico do Brasil 68p
CPRM - Serviço Geológico do Brasil (2015) Carta de Susceptibilidade a
Movimentos Gravitacionais de Massa e Inundações: Município de
Guarulhos – SP: mapa, color, escala 1:50.000. Brasília: CPRM -
Serviço Geológico do Brasil
Cruz-Cárdenas G, López-Mata L, Villaseñor JL, Ortiz E (2013) Potential
species distribution modeling and the use of principal component
analysis as predictor variables. Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad
85(1):189–199. https://doi.org/10.7550/rmb.36723
Dormann CF, Elith J, Bacher S, Buchmann C, Carl G, Carré G et al
(2012) Collinearity: a review of methods to deal with it and a sim-
ulation study evaluating their performance. Ecography 36(1):27–46.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.2012.07348.x
Fassoulas C, Mouriki D, Dimitriou-Nikolakis P, Iliopoulos G (2012)
Quantitative assessment of geotopes as an effective tool for
geoheritage management. Geoheritage 4:177–193
Ferreira, ATS, Oliveira, AMS, Queiroz, W, Oliveira, AA, Santos, FM,
Oliveira, MVM, Torresani, BDCG, Balisa, EG (2018) Do ouro ao
verde: os serviços ecossistêmicos. In: Vânia Maria Nunes dos Santos;
Pedro Roberto Jacobi. (Org.). Educação, Ambiente e Aprendizagem
Social - reflexões e possibilidades à geoconservação e
sustentabilidade. 1ed.Curitiba: CRV, v. 1, p. 71–84
Gray, M (2004) Geodiversity: valuing and conserving abiotic nature. 1ª
ed. Chicheste: John Wiley & Sons, 434 p
Gray M (2008) Geodiversity: developing the paradigm. Proc Geol Assoc
119(3–4):287–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0016-7878(08)80307-0
Gray M (2013) Geodiversity: valuing and conserving abiotic nature, 2ª
edn. John Wiley & Sons, Chicheste, 495 p
Grigio AM, Amaro VE, Diodato MA, Castro AF (2011) Determination of
indices of multiple and multiple weighted geodiversity of landscape
of the Piranhas-Assu river, Rio Grande do Norte – Brazil. J Coast
Res 64:1668–1671
Guarulhos (2019) lei n° 7.730, de 04 de junho de 2019. Substitutivo n° 01
ao Projeto de Lei n° 2260/2018 de autoria do Poder Executivo.
Institui o Plano Diretor do Município de Guarulhos, o Conselho
Municipal de Desenvolvimento Urbano - CMDU, o Fundo
Municipal de Desenvolvimento Urbano - FMDU, cria o Fundo
Municipal de Desenvolvimento - FMD, e revoga as Leis n/s.
6.055, de 30/12/2004, 6.308, de 16/11/2007, 6.819, de 23/03/
2011, 7.490, de 07/07/2016, e os artigos 67 e 68 da Lei n° 6.253,
de 24/05/2007. Available: https://leis.guarulhos.sp.gov.br/06_
prefeitura/leis/leis_download/07730lei.pdf
Hjort J, Luoto M (2010) Geodiversity of high-latitude landscapes in
northern Finland. Geomorphology 115(1–2):109–116. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2009.09.03
IBGE – Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (2018) https://
cidades.ibge.gov.br/brasil/sp/guarulhos/panorama. Accessed 01
July 2019
Ilić M, Stojković S, Rundić L, Ćalić J, Sandić D (2016) Application of the
geodiversity index for the assessment of geodiversity in urban areas:
an example of the Belgrade city area, Serbia. Geologia Croatica
69(3):325–336. https://doi.org/10.4154/gc.2016.27
Johansson, CE, Alapassi, M, Nordic Council of Ministers, Nordic
Council (2001) Geodiversitet I Nordisk Naturvård. Copenhagen:
Nordisk Ministerråad. 151 p
Kot R (2014) The point bonitation method for evaluating Geodiversity: a
guide with examples (polish lowland). Physical Geography, n 97:
375–393
Kozlowski S (2004) Geodiversity: the concept and scope of geodiversity.
Przeglad Geologiczny 52(8/2):833–837
Lattin JM, Carroll JD, Green PE (2011) Analyzing multivariate data.
Cengage Learning, São Paulo, 475 p
Malinowska E, Szumacher I (2013) Application of landscape metrics in the
evaluation of geodiversity. Miscellanea Geographica 17(4):28–33
Manosso FC, Ondicol RP (2012) Geodiversidade: Considerações Sobre
Quantificação e Avaliação da Distribuição Espacial. Anu Inst
Geocienc 35(1):90–100
Manosso FC, Nóbrega MT (2016) Calculation of geodiversity from land-
scape units of the Cadeado Range region in Paraná, Brazil.

Geoheritage 8(3):189–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-015-
0152-1
Melelli, L (2014) Geodiversity: a new quantitative index for natural
protected areas enhancement. GeoJournal of Tourism and
Geosites. n.11, v. 13, p. 27–37
Melelli L, Vergari F, Liucci L, Del Monte M (2017) Geomorphodiversity
index: quantifying the diversity of landforms and physical land-
scape. Sci Total Environ 584-585:701–714. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.101
Monteiro, MD, Gurgueira, MD, Rocha, H C (2012) Geologia da Região
Metropolitana de São Paulo. In: Twin Cities - Solos das cidades de
São Paulo e Curitiba. ABMS, São Paulo, p. 15–44
Nascimento ST, Castro PTA, Ruchkys UA (2018) Geodiversidade dos
Compartimentos Geomorfológicos do Anticlinal de Mariana, Minas
Gerais. (2018). Geociências 37(3):497–504
Najwer A, Borysiak J, Gudowicz J, Mazurek M, Zwoliński Z (2016)
Geodiversity and biodiversity of the postglacial landscape
(Dębnica River catchment, Poland). Quaestiones Geographicae
35(1):5–28
Nimer, E (1989) Climatologia do Brasil. 2a ed. Rio de Janeiro, Fundação
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística – IBGE, 421 p
Oliveira, ES et al. (2008) Guarulhos: espaço de muitos povos. 2a ed. São
Paulo: Noovha América. https://www.guarulhos.sp.gov.br/sites/
default/files/livroguarulhos.pdf. Accessed 11 January 2019
Oliveira, AMS, Andrade, MRM, Queiroz, W, Sato, SE (2009)
Geoenvironmental bases for an environmental information system
of the municipality of Guarulhos, SP-Brazil. Geoprocessing
Laboratory of the Universidade Guarulhos, Guarulhos. 178p. 4v.
Mapas. (FAPESP Report - Process 05/57965–1)
Omar, E, et al. (2008) Guarulhos tem História: Questões sobre História
Natural, Social e Cultural. São Paulo: Ananda Gráfica e Editora. 200p
Ozsahin E (2017) Geodiversity assessment in the Ganos (Isıklar) Mount
(NW Turkey). Environ Earth Sci 76(271):1–10
Pacheco, R (2015) Geomorphological mapping of the gold cycle of
Guarulhos-SP. Dissertation, Guarulhos University
Parks KE, Mulligan M (2010) On the relationship between a resource
based measure of geodiversity and broad scale biodiversity patterns.
Biodivers Conserv 19:2751–2766
Pellitero, R, Manosso, FC, Serrano, E (2014) Mid- and large-scale
geodiversity calculation in Fuentes Carrionas (Nw Spain) and
Serra do Cadeado (Paraná, Brazil): methodology and application
for land management. Swedish Society for Anthropology and
Geography, p 219–235
Pereira, DI, Brilha, J, Pereira, P (2008) Geodiversidade: valores e usos.
Braga: Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, Universidade do
Minho, 16 p
Pereira, DI, Pereira, P, Brilha, J, Santos, L (2013) Geodiversity assess-
ment of Paraná State (Brazil): an innovative approach.
Environmental Management, n.52, p.541–552
Pereira EO, Ruchkys U (2016) Quantificação e Análise da Geodiversidade
Aplicada ao Geoturismo na área de Proteção Ambiental Sul da Região
Metropolitana de Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais. Revista Ra’eGa
Curitiba 37:207–226
Pérez-Aguilar, A, Barros, EJ, Andrade, MRM, Oliveira, ES, Juliani, C,
Oliveira, MAS (2012) Geoparque Ciclo do Ouro, Guarulhos, SP. In:
Schobbenhaus C, da Silva CR (eds) Geoparques do Brasil-
Propostas. CPRM, Brasília, pp 543–582
Pérez-Aguilar A, Juliani C, de Barros EJ, de Andrade MRM, de Oliveira
ES, de Braga AD, Santos RO (2013) Archaeological gold mining
structures from colonial period present in Guarulhos and Mairiporã,
São Paulo state, Brazil. Geoheritage 5(2):87–105. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s12371-013-0074-8
Ponçano, WL et al (1981) Mapa geomorfológico do Estado de São Paulo,
escala 1:1.000.000 – Nota Explicativa. São Paulo: IPT; Divisão de
Minas e Geologia Aplicada. v. 1, 94 p. 5 figuras
Appl Geomat
Reis Filho, NG (2013) As minas de ouro e a formação das capitanias do
sul. 1. ed. São Paulo: Via das Artes. 285 p
Ribeiro FND, Oliveira AP, Soares J, Miranda RM, Barlage M, Chen F
(2018) Effect of sea breeze propagation on the urban boundary layer
of the metropolitan region of Sao Paulo, Brazil. Atmos Res 214:
174–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosres.2018.07.015
Riccomini, C (1989) O rift continental do sudeste do Brasil. São Paulo.
Thesis, Universidade de São Paulo
Riccomini, C, Sant’Anna, LG, Ferrari, AL (2004) Evolução Geológica do
Rift Continental do Sudeste do Brasil. In: Mantesso-Neto, V.;
Bartorelli, A.; Carneiro, C. D. R.; Brito-Neves, B. B. (Org.)
Geologia do Continente Sul-Americano - Evolução da Obra de
Fernando Flávio Marques de Almeida. Beca, São Paulo, p 383–421
Santos DS, Mansur KL, Gonçalves JB, Arruda ER, Manosso FC (2017a)
Quantitative assessment of geodiversity and urban growth impacts
in Armação dos Búzios, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Appl Geogr 85:184–
195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2017.03.009
Santos EQG, Ferreira ATS, Peloggia AUG, Saad AR, Oliveira AMS,
Santos MST (2017b) Terrenos e processos tecnogênicos na área de
proteção ambiental Cabuçu-Tanque grande, Guarulhos (SP):
análise, mapeamento e quantificação. Revista brasileira de
geomorfologia, v 18:825–839
Santos, FM, Oliveira, AA, Torresani, BDCG, Queiros, W, Oliveira, AMS
(2016) Análise das alterações tecnogênicas das cachoeiras do
município de Guarulhos (SP). Revista UnG – Geociências, v.15, n.1
Santos, FM, Bacci, DC, Ferreira, ATS (2019) Desafios e perspectivas
para a inserção de programas educacionais no Geoparque Ciclo do
Ouro, Guarulhos-SP. In: Aguilera, G. J.; Zuffo, A. M. (Org.).
Enfoque interdisciplinar na educação ambiental. Atena Editora, p.
52–65. https://doi.org/10.22533/at.ed8421905065
Santos, FM (2015) Geoenvironmental characterization of waterfalls in
Guarulhos/SP: a geotourism potential assessment. Dissertation,
Guarulhos University
Serrano, EC, Ruiz-Flaño, P (2007) Geodiversidad: Concepto, evaluación
y aplicación territorial. El caso de Tiermes Caracena (Soria). Boletín
de la AGE, n.45, p.79–98
Serrano E, Ruiz-flaño P, Arroyo P (2009) Geodiversity assessment in a
rural landscape: Tiermes-Caracena area (Soria, Spain). Memorie
Descrittive Della Carta Geoligica d'Italia 87(p):173–180
Sharples C (1995) Geoconservation in forest management-principles and
practice. Tasforests 7:37–50
Sharples, C (2002) Concepts and principles of geoconservation.
Tasmanian Parks & Wildlife Service website.https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/266021113_Concepts_and_
principles_of_geoconservation. Accessed 21 February 2019
Silva JP, Pereira DI, Aguiar AM, Rodrigues C (2013) Geodiversity as-
sessment of the Xingu drainage basin. Journal of Maps 9(2):254–
262. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2013.775085
Silva JP, Rodrigues C, Pereira DI (2015) Mapping and analysis of
geodiversity indices in the Xingu River basin, Amazonia, Brazil.
Geoheritage 7:337–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12371-014-0134-8
Stanley, M. (2001). Welcome to the 21st century, Geodiversity Update, n.
1, p.1
Stepišnik U, Trenchovska A (2017) A new quantitative model for com-
prehensive geodiversity evaluation: the Škocjan Caves Regional
Park, Slovenia. Geoheritage 10(1):39–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12371-017-0216-5
Vargas RR, Gonçalves JJS, Dalmas FB, Saad AR, Arruda ROM, Ferreira
ATS (2017) The contribution of the Guarulhos municipality (São
Paulo state) to the water quality of the Alto Tietê System. Pesquisas
Em Geociências (Online) 44:109–121
Vargas RR, Saad AR, Dalmas FB, Arruda ROM, Ferreira ATS (2019)
Assessment of the environmental quality of the Cachoeirinha-
Invernada watershed, Guarulhos municipality (State of São Paulo,
Brazil), as an urbanization reflex. Pesquisas Em Geociências
(Online) 46:e0802. https://doi.org/10.22456/1807-9806.95468