International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Sediment Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijsrc

Original Research

A study on textural characteristics, heavy mineral distribution and

grain-microtextures of recent sediment in the coastal area between
the Sarada and Gosthani rivers, east coast of India
Ali Mohammad*, Parvathaneni Bhanu Murthy, Edupuganti Naga Dhanamjaya Rao,
Hari Prasad
Department of Geology, Andhra University, Visakhapatnam 530003, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The current study aimed to describe textural characteristics, heavy mineral composition, and grain
Received 25 April 2019 microtextures of the sediment from three micro-environments (foreshore, berm, and dune). A total of
Received in revised form forty-one (41) representative surficial sediment samples have been collected from fifteen (15) locations
9 March 2020
along the beach area between the Sarada and Gosthani rivers on the east coast of India, where the length
Accepted 12 March 2020
of the stretch is more than 100 km. The study reveals that most of the coastal sediment is medium to fine
Available online 19 March 2020
sand with relatively high ratios of coarse sand at Yarada beach, and the nature of the sediment is
moderately to well sorted. These characteristics indicate a high energy environment. The heavy mineral
Keywords:
Textural characteristics
analysis of the sediment in the current study was done for coarse (þ60#) and fine (þ230#) size fractions.
Heavy minerals Studying the weight percentage (WT%) reveals that a high percentage of heavy minerals is associated
Grain microtexture with fine fractions. Ilmenite, sillimanite, garnet, zircon, and rutile are the major heavy minerals identified
Coastal sediment in the current investigation. The concentrations of these heavy minerals show great variations from
Visakhapatnam Coast south to north of the study area. From an economic point of view, a considerable amount of heavy
minerals (average 48.41%) are present on both sides (north and south) of the Gosthani River mouth. In
the Sarada Estuary, the concentration of the economic heavy minerals was found under the minimum
economic range. The grain microtextures of the major heavy minerals from the different locations along
the study area demonstrate the variation in grain microtextures, which is controlled by the chemical and
mechanical processes. These microtextures reflect moderate to high wave energy on the beach area, in
addition to high mechanical impact on the grains from the estuary point.
© 2020 International Research and Training Centre on Erosion and Sedimentation/the World Association
for Sedimentation and Erosion Research. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction unconsolidated sediment contains different types of minerals

Coastal sediment is the result of the processes acting on the pre-
existing rocks. The study of the recent sediment uncovers essential
information about the geographical and geological history of the
recent past of the particular area under study. There has been a
growing interest in studying modern sediment in recent years.
These studies have opened up new fields of crucial economic re-
sources exploration (Anonymous, 2000; Freeman et al., 2003; G.
Banergee & D. Banergee, 2005; Harben, 2002; Mange & Wright,
2007; Raju et al., 2001; Summerhayes, 1967; among others). This
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ali.mooh89@Gmail.com (A. Mohammad).
which are classified as valuable minerals (such as, barium, chro-
mium, gold, iron, rare earth elements, tin, thorium, tungsten, and
zirconium), and rock-form minerals (such as, feldspar, garnet, silica,
etc.) (Sharma & Ram, 1964). Finding and extracting these valuable
minerals poses a big challenge for countries and companies
because the concentration of the typical heavy mineral sand ore
deposit is usually found in low amounts (Berquist et al., 1990;
Brown et al., 2009; Gent et al., 2005; Lenoble et al., 1995; Li &
Komar, 1992; Noakes, 1977; Perissoratis et al., 1987; Praditwan,
1988; Roy, 1999). Modern sediment forms a stretch of varying
width adjacent to marine water bodies all over the world. The
composition of this modern sediment depends on the rock sources
surrounding them. In general, sediment particles are transported
from continental rocks by means of mechanical erosion and then

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsrc.2020.03.007
1001-6279/© 2020 International Research and Training Centre on Erosion and Sedimentation/the World Association for Sedimentation and Erosion Research. Published by
Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503
accumulate and concentrate under appropriate conditions to be
form placer deposits. The placer deposits are probably considered
as economically viable deposits depending on the weight per-
centage of total heavy minerals (THM) from the representing
samples of that particular deposit. Thus, out of all sediment
transporting media, rivers are considered as the main transporting
agent from source to deposition areas, where the sand particles are
sorted by water motion (waves, tides, and currents) according to
the varying density (mass per unit of volume) of the constituent
minerals (Komar & Wang, 1984). During the sediment journey,
variable chemical and physical changes occur to these particles
(Boggs, 2006).
The Indian peninsula is surrounded by three seas, namely, the
Arabian Sea (west), Indian Ocean (south), and Bay of Bengal (east),
covering a coastal length of about 6,500 km and showing its sig-
nificance at different levels. In a commercial way, Indian coasts are
fortunate to have considerable amounts of heavy mineral wealth,
more than other countries. Comparatively, India has played a pio-
neering role among the heavy mineral producing countries. Andhra
Pradesh (AP) has a costal bar along the eastern part of India with a
coastal length of 974 km. This area receives huge amounts of
terrigenous materials which result from erosion and decomposi-
tion of igneous and different metamorphic rocks from the Eastern
Ghat Mobile Belt (EGMB). The parent rocks formed from mixed
origin (both igneous and metamorphic) resulting in variety in the
composition. Heavy minerals are the main characteristic feature of
the beach area of AP (Cheepurupalli et al., 2012; Deva Varma et al.,
1989; Mahadevan & Nateswara Rao, 1950; Mahadevan & Sriamdas,
1948; Mohan & Rajamanickam, 2000; Mohapatra et al., 2015;
Panda et al., 2002; Ramamohana Rao et al., 1982; Reddy et al.,
2012; Sastry et al., 1981, 1987; Sriramadas, 1951; Subrahmanyam
et al., 1982), and these heavy minerals also can exist in high con-
centrations, especially in areas adjacent to the large river estuaries
(Rao et al., 1993).
Prof. La Fond and Prasada Rao (1954, 1956) from Andhra Uni-
versity studied the various aspects of recent sediment and the
depositional environments. This could be considered as the first
attempt to study the recent sediment of the Visakhapatnam coast.
Later, many studies were done in the area between Visakhapatnam
and Bhimunipatnam, and such studies have examined various as-
pects in different facets. However, less work has been done on the
southern area of the current study area (southern part of the
Visakhapatnam Coast). Thus, in the current investigation, the
southern and northern sides of Visakhapatnam Coast are examined
in order to give a clear understanding of the depositional processes
and environments.
The current study is exploratory in nature, with the main aim of
drawing a general frame work of the distribution of sediment and
heavy minerals concentration, in addition to examining the eco-
nomic quantity of the useful heavy minerals within both sides of
the study area, and highlighting the best location for heavy min-
erals mining. Moreover, the current study provides a stone corner
for future investigations of beach sediment as potentially renew-
able resources of heavy minerals.
2. The study area
The current study area is a part of the Visakhapatnam Coast of
the Bay of Bengal (see Fig. 1). The study area is located between 17
23ʹ and 17 55ʹ N and 82 23ʹ and 83 29ʹ E with a beach stretch of
approximately 100 km. Visakhapatnam is the headquarters of
Visakhapatnam district, and it is located in the central part of the
study area, due to that, the current investigation has been divided
485
into two parts, namely, southern and northern relative to Visa-
khapatnam's location.
Visakhapatnam has a tropical wet and dry climate. The annual
mean temperature ranges between 24.7 and 30.6  C (76e87  F),
with the maximum in the month of May and the minimum in the
month of January; the minimum temperatures ranges between 20
and 27  C (68e81  F). Likewise, the current study area between
the Sarada and Gosthani rivers falls under a tropical climate, i.e.,
humid mega thermal with seasonal rainfall controlled by the
monsoon. The rainfall occurs mainly in the south-west monsoon
period (JulyeSeptember) and in the north-east monsoon
(October). The average rainfall in the area varies from 900 to
1500 mm per year.
The study area is located in the eastern part of the Eastern Ghat
Mobile Belt (EGMB). This area is bounded by the Bay of Bengal on
the east and EGMB on the west. EGMB consists of detached hills
that range from 30 to 594 m above MSL (Mean Sea Level). The
Kailasa and Yarada ranges are the most obvious hills in the area.
Precambrian khondalite and charnokite constitute the main rock
formation of these hills (King, 1886; Murthy, 1961; Narasimha Rao,
1945).
The beach area from Visakhapatnam and Bhimunipatnam is
slowly changing due to coastal processes (waves and tidal cur-
rents) (Kannan et al., 2016; Nooka Raju & Vaidyanadhan, 1971).
Therefore, these changes make drawing an accurate coastal line a
troublesome mission. The Visakhapatnam coast exhibits many
geomorphological features. Jagannadha Rao et al. (2012) studied
the costal geomorphology between Visakhapatnam and Bhimu-
nipatnam, where he classified coastal features in three types ac-
cording to the formation processes, such as: waves, sea level
oscillation, and the interaction between rock and sea water. Sandy
beaches, dunes, and rocky beaches are the main features that
characterize the study area. In addition to that, red sediment (bad
lands) located near Bhimunipatnam (Gosthani River estuary) can
be determined as the unique topography neighboring the study
area.
3. Materials and methods
Forty-one representative surficial sediment samples were
collected at fifteen locations (see Fig. 1) from three microenviron-
ments (foreshore, berm, and dune) along the study area. While
collecting the samples, the sampling covered rivers, streams,
channels, and estuaries present in the study area, i.e., one sample
from each environment. However, at some locations, the dune
environment was missing.
3.1. Grain size analysis
All forty-one surficial sediment samples had a hundred grams
sub-sample taken from each sample by coning and quartering the
original sample. Then, the representative sub-samples were
washed using distilled water to purify them from salts. The salt free
samples were processed by diluted hydrochloric acid (HCl) (1:10) to
remove shell fragments and carbonate materials, where this pro-
cess takes about 12 h. Later on, the washed samples were treated
with (1:10) hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) to remove organic matter.
Usually this process takes an overnight to achieve good results.
Oven dried samples were subjected to the standard ASTM sieves at
½ Ø interval for fifteen minutes on a Ro Tap sieve shaker. The sieves
were subjected to the G-Stat computer program (Appa Rao &
Karuna Karudu, 2018; Chauhan et al., 2014) to determine the
grain size parameters [Mean size (Mz), standard deviation (s1),
486 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503

Fig. 1. Location map of the study area (note: NH5 is the national highway 16 in India).
 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503 487

skewness (Sk) and kurtosis (KG)] following the Folk and Ward
(1957) method.
3.2. Heavy minerals analysis
Among the selected sieved materials, the following two size
fractions, namely, sieves þ60# (0.25 mm, coarse sand) and þ230#
(0.25e0.063 mm, fine sand) have been used for heavy mineral
separation. In order to remove the oxide coating, these fractions
were washed with stannous chloride (SnCl2). The foregoing washed
size fractions were rushed for drying and then subjected to heavy
mineral separated by using heavy liquid (Bromoform, CHBr3, spe-
cific gravity ¼ 2.89) through the float and sink method (Milner,
1962). Acetone was used to deodorize and remove the traces of
the used Bromoform from the heavy mineral grains' surface. Taking
into account the fugitive character of acetone, hot air oven (60  C)
was used to dry the separated heavy mineral grains. Then, the
heavy and light fractions were weighed and their weight percent-
ages were calculated. The heavy minerals were mounted on a glass
slide with Canada balsam. Thin slides (with 200e300 grains) were
studied using a Petrological microscope with a mechanical stage.
Ribbon counting methods were used for heavy minerals counting
(Galehouse, 1969). Weight percentage (WT%) was calculated by
multiplying the number of individual minerals in the slide by the
specific gravities of each mineral. Whereas, the total heavy minerals
(THM) for the bulk sample was calculated by summing the WT% for
both fractions.
3.3. Grain microtexture of heavy minerals
For grain-microtextures of heavy minerals, Scanning Electron
Microscopy (SEM) is the perfect instrument to do this task. Four
locations were chosen for the microtexture study, from these lo-
cations, many heavy mineral grains (10e30 for each) were picked
up using a microscope. All grains have been identified before fixing
them on the SEM stage. Gold coating was done for every grain to
improve the imaging of the sample.
4. Results and discussion
A detailed study has been done for the coastal samples to
determine the grain size parameters, such as, mean, standard

Table 1
Grain size parameters of the coastal sand from the area between Sarada to Gosthani rivers on the east coast of India (note: SD ¼ standard deviation, No. ¼ number, V ¼ very).

Location Mean SD Skewness Kurtosis Sand Silt Clay V coarse sand Coarse Medium Fine sand V fine sand Sorting Skewness Kurtosis
sand sand typea typea typea

Foreshore
L1/A 1.814 0.638 0.045 1.581 99.19 0.801 0 1.227 5.619 65.215 24.366 2.772 Mws Sy Vlk
L2/A 2.13 0.383 0.23 0.925 99.62 0.376 0 0 0.069 43.449 54.405 1.7 Ws Fsk Mk
L3/A 1.89 0.736 0.009 0.97 99.27 0.729 0 0.227 8.687 49.898 36.455 4.004 Ms Sy Mk
L4/A 1.69 1.106 0.06 0.924 98.67 1.327 0 3.033 19.752 33.27 34.212 8.405 Ps Sy Mk
L5/A 2.18 0.853 0.263 1.308 98.60 1.395 0 0.834 9.069 24.909 56.453 7.339 Ms Csk Lk
L6/A 2.63 0.694 0.017 1.201 97.21 2.786 0 0.577 1.124 16.924 58.852 19.737 Mws Sy Lk
L7/A 1.22 0.721 0.207 1.103 99.91 0.087 0 3.864 22.967 62.027 10.514 0.54 Ms Csk Mk
L8/A 2.18 0.549 0.016 0.874 99.35 0.647 0 0.038 0.973 39.463 54.083 4.796 Mws Sy Pk
L9/A 1.73 0.729 0.181 1.244 99.48 0.517 0 0.59 10.733 62.25 23.002 2.908 Ms Fsk Lk
L10/A 1.20 0.758 0.242 1.142 99.83 0.162 0 5.125 21.46 61.79 10.693 0.77 Ms Csk Lk
L11/A 1.11 0.803 0.271 0.762 99.95 0.043 0 12.483 20.504 56.711 9.902 0.356 Ms Csk Pk
L12/A 1.92 0.576 0.268 0.898 99.30 0.699 0 0.02 1.793 62.903 30.752 3.832 Mws Fsk Pk
L13/A 1.70 0.481 0.104 1.35 99.81 0.186 0 0.248 5.045 74.074 18.661 1.786 Ws Fsk Lk
L14/A 2.21 0.554 0.152 0.925 99.37 0.625 0 0.055 0.668 40.806 50.855 6.992 Mws Fsk Mk
L15/A 1.88 0.562 0.212 1.183 99.81 0.181 0 0.433 3.661 64.729 27.054 3.942 Mws Fsk Lk
Berm
L1/B 2.13 0.459 0.227 0.964 99.20 0.791 0 0 0.439 44.554 50.201 4.014 Ws Fsk Mk
L2/B 2.12 0.42 0.39 0.966 99.20 0.792 0 0 0 49.267 46.405 3.536 Ws Vfs Mk
L3/B 2.09 0.46 0.239 0.976 99.5 0.5 0 0 0.534 48.045 47.377 3.544 Ws Fsk Mk
L4/B 2.67 0.588 0.001 1.296 98.41 1.586 0 0 0.187 12.363 64.703 21.162 Mws Sy Lk
L5/B 2.67 0.641 0.013 1.502 96.68 3.314 0 0 0.315 13.039 65.254 18.078 Mws Sy Vlk
L6/B 2.84 0.456 0.207 1.555 97.51 2.487 0 0 0.044 2.685 72.121 22.663 Ws Fsk Vlk
L7/B 1.15 0.73 0.02 0.881 99.91 0.089 0 2.01 31.936 54.803 10.442 0.721 Ms Sy Pk
L8/B 2.22 0.588 0.251 1.206 97.84 2.158 0 0.009 0.372 38.328 53.86 5.273 Mws Fsk Lk
L9/B 1.96 0.732 0.031 1.109 99.52 0.479 0 1.682 5.412 51.609 35.858 4.96 Ms Sy Mk
L10/B 2.23 0.555 0.13 0.889 99.54 0.452 0 0.029 0.589 39.862 50.765 8.303 Mws Fsk Pk
L11/B 1.75 0.411 0.093 1.389 99.88 0.117 0 0.518 2.677 75.493 20.544 0.651 Ws Sy Lk
L12/B 2.08 0.449 0.344 0.957 99.40 0.598 0 0 0.095 53.279 42.467 3.561 Ws Vfsk Mk
L13/B 2.18 0.682 0.132 0.937 99.53 0.461 0 0.2 1.809 43.61 44.178 9.743 Mws Fsk Mk
L14/B 2.82 0.459 0.069 1.436 98.85 1.147 0 0 0.031 5.173 67.488 26.161 Ws Sy Lk
L15/B 2.60 0.471 0.117 1.208 99.45 0.547 0 0 0.123 11.485 71.535 16.311 Ws Csk Lk
Dune
L1/C 2.23 0.414 0.14 0.88 99.31 0.685 0 0 0.128 34.186 61.362 3.639 Ws Fsk Pk
L3/C 2.15 0.621 0.219 1.182 98.65 1.347 0 0.134 1.336 42.432 49.068 5.683 Mws Fsk Lk
L4/C 2.62 0.512 0.108 1.277 97.92 2.077 0 0 0.063 9.482 72.446 15.931 Mws Fsk Lk
L5/C 2.62 0.452 0.047 1.429 98.1 1.9 0 0 0.011 7.112 77.67 13.307 Ws Sy Lk
L6/C 2.79 0.491 0.194 1.671 97.26 2.735 0 0 0.006 4.247 74.336 18.676 Ws Fsk Vlk
L7/C 2.22 0.582 0.196 0.958 98.94 1.055 0 0 0.426 42.122 49.29 7.107 Mws Fsk Mk
L10/C 2.21 0.49 0.293 0.949 99.31 0.69 0 0 0.071 41.963 51.894 5.381 Ws Fsk Mk
L11/C 2.13 0.388 0.557 0.966 99.46 0.538 0 0 0.043 54.061 41.582 3.777 Ws Vfsk Mk
L12/C 2.35 0.592 0.046 1.035 99.18 0.818 0 0.034 0.478 30.031 58.006 10.632 Mws Sy Mk
L13/C 2.46 0.521 0.159 0.818 99.59 0.405 0 0 0.06 26.098 60.502 12.936 Mws Csk Pk
L15/C 2.01 0.456 0.306 1.07 99.79 0.208 0 0 0.275 59.731 36.113 3.674 Ws Vfsk M
a
Note: Mws: Moderately well sorted, Ms: Moderately sorted, Ws: well sorted, Ps: poorly sorted, Sy: symmetrical, Fsk: fine skewed, Vfsk: Very fine skewed, Csk: Coarse
skewed, Mk: Mesokurtic, Pk: Platykurtic, Lk: Leptokurtic, Vlk: Very leptokurtic.
488 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503
deviation, skewness, and kurtosis and also the heavy minerals
distribution within the study area (Table 1).
4.1. Grain size parameters
The samples from the beach area show a sandy nature, with
various ratios of grain size within the three sub-environments
(foreshore, berm, and dune).
4.1.1. Mean grain size (Mz)
The mean grain size represents the granular structure of the
overall grains of the sample, which can give a perception of the
dominant grain size. From one facet, the nature of sediment (or)
the dominant grain size reflects the nature of the coast, and in
another facet, the grain size is used to distinguish between high
and low energy environments (waves, currents, etc.) (Amaral,
1977; Nordstrom, 1977). Sediment from the foreshore (see
Fig. 2) show medium (1e2Ø) to fine (2e3Ø) grain sizes, where
the medium grain size is dominant in most samples (average
50.56%). The medium grain size is a result of the accumulation of
medium-sized grains at the expense of washing the light coarse
grains (Suresh Gandhi & Raja, 2014). The ratio of the coarse
grains is very low in most of the samples (average 8.8%). Whereas
at some locations it shows a drastic change, those are Location 7,
Location 10, and Location 11 at 22.97, 21.46, and 21.50%,
respectively.
Nordstrom (1977) found that the differences in grain size sta-
tistics are related to the variances in the wave energy and direction
on each beach. Samples from the Sarada and Gosthani river estu-
aries show fine sand with ratios 54.405 and 50.855%, respectively.
The fine tendency of the estuary sediment reflects the combined
effect of the beach processes and the river flow (Nittrouer et al.,
1983). The fine ratio at other locations shows a wide range from
9.9% (Location 11) up to 58.85% (Location 6). Silt and clay ratios at
all locations show very low values which range from 0.043%
(Location 11) to 2.78% (Location 6). Variation in the grain size of the
sediment along the study area is a result of dissimilarity in nature,
intensity of the process (Saravanan et al., 2013) and
Fig. 2. Mean size from foreshore, berm, and dune environments along the study area.
morphodynamics along the beach (Dora et al., 2014). Sediment
from the berm environment (see Fig. 2) is characterized by fine to
medium sand, and the ratio of fine grains shows high values at all
locations (average 49.54%) except for Yarada Beach (Location 7),
which shows medium sand (54.8%) to coarse sand (31.9%) with a
mean size value of 1.52 Ø. While in the dune environment, most of
the samples show fine sand with mean size values ranging from
2.018Ø up to 2.797Ø. Dunes at Yarada Beach (Location 7) show
almost equal proportions of medium and fine sand (42.12 and
49.3%, respectively) and low proportion of coarse grains (0.5%).
Mason and Folk (1958) found that the main factor affecting the
distribution of dune grain size depends on the distribution of berm
and backshore grain sizes.
4.1.2. Standard deviation of grain size (s1)
According to Folk (1974), the inclusive Graphic Standard Devi-
ation (s1) is the best overall measure of sorting. For this the
following formula was presented s1 ¼ (Ø84  Ø16)/4 þ (Ø95  Ø5)/
6.6, which comprises 90% of the grain-size distribution. Ø84, Ø16,
Ø95, and Ø5 represent the vertical projection of the cumulative
curve on the Ø axis. The results of this formula are expressed as “Ø”,
where Ø (or Krumbein phi) is the diameter of the particle in “phi”,
and it is given by the formula Ø ¼ log 2(D/D0); where D is the
diameter of the particle in “mm”, and D0 is the reference diameter
which equal to 1 mm.
Grain size sorting is a mirror of the deposition basin energy
(Roy & Biswas, 1975). The values obtained from the foreshore
environment (see Fig. 3) show moderately well sorted
(0.5e0.7Ø) to moderately sorted sediment (0.7e1Ø) with values
ranging from 0.38 to 1.106Ø (average 0.68Ø) in most of the
locations except for Location 4, which shows poor sorting (with
a value of 1.106Ø). This extreme value is the result of the
mixture of two sand modes, i.e., coarse and fine modes, where
the percentage of the coarse mode is 22.78% and 42.61% for fine
mode. It has been observed that the dominance of well sorted
to moderately well sorted nature is a reflection of the high
waves and strong shore currents along the coast (Biju Sabastian
et al., 2002). The Sarada River Estuary sediment is well sorted
 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503
Fig. 3. Standard deviation from foreshore, berm, and dune environments along the study area (Note: Vws: Very well sorted, Ws: Well sorted, Mw: Moderately well sorted, Ms:
Moderately sorted, and Ps: Poorly sorted).
with the s1 value of 0.383Ø. There are small changes in the
Gosthani River estuary, where the sorting shows moderately
well sorted with a s1 value of 0.554Ø. In general, well sorted
sediment in a river estuary area indicates the equal intermin-
gling processes of the sediment from the sea and the river
(Singarasubramanian et al., 2006).
The values derived from the berm environment (see Fig. 3)
indicate the predominance of well sorted sediment in most of the
locations under investigation, with values ranging from 0.41Ø to
0.73Ø and an average of 0.54Ø. The same is shown in the dune
sediment, which have values ranging from 0.39Ø to 0.62Ø (average
0.5Ø), and the standard deviation values belong to the categories
from moderately well sorted to well sorted.
4.1.3. Skewness (SK1)
Skewness is a measure of the proportion of coarse or fine frac-
tions within the sediment, and it is very helpful to understand the
near shore processes. Folk and other scientists who have worked on
sediment (Chappell, 1967; Duane, 1964; Folk & Ward, 1957;
Friedman, 1961, 1967) suggested that the skewness is the best in-
dicator and the most sensitive parameter to environmental
changes.
Skewness values from the foreshore sediment (see Fig. 4)
oscillating between 0.27 and 0.27Ø and trending from coarse to
fine skewness. The Sarada and Gosthani river estuaries sediment
show a dominance of fine skewness. The fine skewed nature in-
dicates that the sediment which were carried by the rivers has an
excess of fine particles (Angusamy & Rajamanickam, 2006). The
skewness value derived from Yarada Beach (Location 7) shows
coarse skewness. On the other hand, samples obtained from the
berm environment (see Fig. 4) show dominance of the fine skewed
sediment followed by near symmetrical except for location 15,
which is characterized by coarse skewed curves with value 0.117Ø.
The same features (i.e., fine skewed to near-symmetrical) also are
noted for the dune environment (see Fig. 4), but in this environ-
ment some changes happened at locations 13 and 15. While
skewness values show coarse to very fine skewed respectively, the
wide range of skewness values from the dune environment along
the study area reflect the asymmetry of wind speed and direction.
Livingstone et al. (1999) found that the variations in grain-size
parameters between dunes are related to the height of the dune
vegetation cover.
489
In general, backshore and dune environments receive their
sediment by wind action which is winnowing fine particles from
the sea side towards the land side (a direction favored by the pre-
vailing wind) (Mason & Folk, 1958). However, this action gives the
dune sediment a positive skewness nature (Mason & Folk, 1958).
Furthermore, in the current study, the wind direction is from the
sea side towards the land side. At location 4, the sediment shows an
extreme value (very coarse skewed), which is due to the presence of
two modes (sand and silt) with good content of coarse and very fine
sand (polymodal). Therefore, the sediment in this area is very
poorly sorted. Friedman (1967) has found that where fines exceed
the energy needed for transport, the beach sediment are deposited
from suspension. In other words, most fines imported to the beach
area are in suspension mode on the breaking zone due to the
uplifting force caused by the waves. These fines are washed to-
wards the onshore side, whereas sand is transported towards the
offshore side. When the supply of fines exceeds the wash energy,
some fines are transported towards the offshore and settle as
muddy sand. The supply rate and beach processes are mainly
associated with seasonal changes.
4.1.4. Kurtosis (KG)
Kurtosis is a measure of the tailedness of the grain size distri-
bution. It is also similar to sorting in showing dominance of the
center or ends of the population (Cadican, 1961). The average kur-
tosis value (1.09Ø) from the foreshore environment (see Fig. 5)
indicates a mesokurtic condition. It is also noticed that, the average
value from the southern sector shows leptokurtic, while this value
changes to mesokurtic conditions in the northern sector. The
average values from berm and dune environments (1.15Ø and 1.11Ø
respectively) show leptokurtic conditions. The berm as a whole
shows dominance of leptokurtic conditions followed by mesokurtic
conditions, whereas just two locations are showing platykurtic
conditions (Locations 7 and 10). In the dune environment, the
leptokurtic condition is dominant in the southern sector except for
Location 1, which shows a platykurtic conditions, while the
northern sector shows dominance of mesokurtic conditions except
for Location 13 which shows platykurtic conditions. Sorting of
sediment in high or low energy environments shows extreme
values of kurtosis (Folk & Ward, 1957). According to this, sediment
from the beach environment with high energy and high sorting rate
show extreme kurtosis values (leptokurtic to very leptokurtic).
490 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503

Fig. 4. Skewness from foreshore, berm, and dune environments along the study area. (note: Vcsk: Very coarse skewness, Csk: Coarse skewness, Nsy: Near symmetrical, Fsk: Fine
skewness, and Vfsk: Very fine skewness).

Fig. 5. Kurtosis from foreshore, berm, and dune environments along the study area (note: Vpk: Very platykurtic, Pk: Platykurtic, Mk: Mesokurtic, Lk: Leptokurtic, and Vlk: Very
leptokurtic).

Poorly sorted sediment usual shows platykurtic kurtosis with
coarse and fine ends of the population represented over.
4.2. Distribution of heavy mineral concentrations
4.2.1. Foreshore
Heavy minerals (HM) weight percentage (WT%) from the fore-
shore shows big variations between the þ60 and þ230 fractions. As
listed in Table 2, the percentage of HM from þ60 ranges from 0.038
to 16.40% (average 3.53%) and the long shore distribution shows
stabilization with some exceptions at locations 2, 5 and 15 (see
Fig. 6), where the increase is due to the particular conditions at a
site such as extra supply of heavy fractions. In the fine fraction, the
values of HM WT% take the range from 3.124 to 45.67% with an
average of 12.43%.
As presented in coarse fractions, the distribution histogram of
fine heavy minerals shows stability in the distribution (see Fig. 7).
On the other hand, the total heavy minerals (THM) percentage for
the bulk samples from the foreshore ranges from 1.56 to 23.65%
(average 6.4%). Moreover, it seems obvious that the content of
heavy minerals in the study area increases from the southern to the
northern sector (see Fig. 8). This indicates the high efficiency of
rivers in the northern sector to transfer and deposit heavy mineral
grains. Fig. 9 shows the spatial distribution of heavy minerals in
foreshore sediment along the study area. However, the content of
THM% at most locations is less than 5%.
The major heavy minerals in the coarse fraction are ilmenite
(6.23e37.85%), garnet (12.12e48.13%), sillimanite (7.31e39.47%),
magnetite (0e32.83%), rutile (0e5.56%), monazite (0e3%), and
zircon (0e2.04%). Fig. 10a shows the irregular distribution of the
major heavy minerals in the coarse fraction along the coastal part
of the study area, in which the garnet, ilmenite, and sillimanite
(among others) have the highest concentrations. In the þ230
fraction, the distribution of the major heavy minerals has more
regularity (see Fig. 11a), where sillimanite, magnetite, ilmenite,
and garnet have the highest concentrations. Magnetite and
sillimanite in the fine fraction show an inverse relation. In gen-
eral, the magnetite is a common accessory mineral in igneous
rocks, whereas the sillimanite is common in high grade gneiss,
which indicates the multiple-sources of the sediment in the
study area.
4.2.2. Berm
The weight percentage of heavy minerals for the bulk sediment
in the berm sediment along the study area ranges from 2.18 to
51.84%, with an average of 23.28%. Fig. 12 shows the spatial
 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503 491

Table 2
Distribution of heavy minerals (WT%) in the study area (note: Min. ¼ minimum, Max. ¼ maximum; Av. ¼ average).

Location Environment

Foreshore Berm Dune

þ60 60 to þ230 THM% þ60 60 to þ230 THM% þ60 60 to þ230 THM%

L1 0.52 4.268 2.16 0.254 9.662 4.84 0.27 9.13 4.58

L2 8.934 15.1 7.99 7.222 23.68 12.20 e e e
L3 0.214 6.614 3.31 0.326 12.492 6.26 0.36 11.628 5.83
L4 0.18 3.15 1.58 0.428 4.322 2.18 0.514 7.534 3.79
L5 11.842 24.23 12.7 16.028 22.462 12.03 0.198 7.574 3.8
L6 0.588 4.656 2.35 2.61 8.394 4.27 1.63 9.722 4.93
L7 0.038 3.124 1.56 5.778 84.752 42.66 2.986 14.11 8.7
L8 4.132 4.898 2.65 37.132 42.386 23.05 e e e
L9 0.818 6.0118 3.09 9.332 73.354 37.15 e e e
L10 0.45 10.572 5.3 37.39 85.862 44.80 28.836 59.958 31.42
L11 1.992 5.68 2.93 2.954 16.34 8.32 3.224 34.356 17.34
L12 0.294 5.742 2.88 1.706 11.94 6.06 15.87 34.036 17.81
L13 1.366 29.08 14.6 12.464 88.856 45.05 5.606 77.584 39.07
L14 5.246 17.79 9.15 0.428 91.506 48.41 e e e
L15 16.406 45.668 23.65 62.234 97.466 51.84 3.414 33.38 16.86
Min. 0.038 3.124 1.56 0.254 4.322 2.18 0.198 7.534 3.79
Max. 16.406 45.668 23.65 62.234 97.466 51.84 28.836 77.584 39.07
Av. 3.53 12.43 6.4 13.085 44.9 23.28 5.72 27.18 14.01

Fig. 6. Distribution of heavy minerals WT% in the þ60 fraction.

distribution of heavy minerals in the berm sediment along the
study area. It shows that the berm sediment along the study area
has relatively high concentrations of heavy minerals. In the þ60
fraction, the heavy minerals percentage shows a relatively high
percentage of HM in the northern sector, where it achieves the
highest value at Location 15. Some abnormality happened in Gos-
thani River Estuary which can be explained by excess supply of the
fine fraction compared to coarse particles The abnormal value at
Location 15 (north of Bhimunipatnam) is the result of two factors
working together to achieve this high concentration. The first factor
is the near shore currents, which transport the heavy mineral rich
sand from the Gosthani River Estuary (these currents have south-
north direction). The second factor is the high waves regime,
which transport and concentrate the heavy minerals at the berm
point with its forward and backward movements. In the fine frac-
tion (þ230), the HM WT% values range from 4.322 to 97.46%, with
an average of 44.9%. The distribution histogram within the fine
fraction corresponds with the distribution in the coarse fraction
with some change in Gosthani River Estuary. This indicates that the
coastal area is receiving more of heavy minerals as fine particles.
The distribution of the major minerals from the berm sediment
along the study area demonstrates the high percentage of garnet
within the coarse fraction which achieves 74.36% at Location 7. The
distribution also shows the gradual increase in the magnetite per-
centage towards the north, where the highest percentage in the
Gosthani River Estuary exceeds 50%. The percentage of sillimanite
shows a decrease towards the north. From that it can be concluded
there are different sources of sediment in the study area. In the finer
fraction, Fig. 11b clearly confirms the aforementioned spatial dis-
tribution, where the highest percentage of magnetite was obtained
in the northern sector at Location 15 (78.69%). On the other side
(southern sector), the sillimanite minerals were marked as the
dominant minerals with 56.58% at Location 1. Other minerals were
characterized by steady ratios along the study area, with some
variations in the garnet percentage towards the north, where the
percentage reached 2% at Location 15. Zircon and monazite min-
erals were found in promising quantities for economic use, espe-
cially on the two sides of the Gosthani River Estuary.
4.2.3. Dune
The weight percentage of heavy minerals in the bulk sediment
from the dune environments ranges from 3.79 to 39.07%, with an
average 14.01% (see Fig. 13). This percentage has a range from 0.198
to 28.83% in the coarse fraction, with an average of 5.72%. In the
492 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503
Fig. 7. Distribution of heavy mineral WT% in the þ230 fraction.
finer fraction, the weight percentage increases up to 27.18% as an
average, and the range varies from 7.53 to 77.58%. Garnet, silli-
manite and ilmenite are the dominant heavy minerals in the coarse
fraction (see Fig. 10c). While in the fine fraction, magnetite has the
highest percentage among the other heavy minerals along the
study area as shown in Fig. 11c, followed by sillimanite and garnet.
Ilmenite in the fine fraction has steadily increased from the
southern sector towards the north where it achieves the highest
percentage in Location 15 (30.86%).
4.3. Total heavy minerals distribution in the study area
Matching between the heavy minerals distribution and the
mean grain size of sediment from different environments is very
helpful to understand how the interrelation and the effect of me-
dium processes (Reddy et al., 2007). These processes play a major
role in the sediment selectivity depending on specific gravity and
the shape of the grains. The total heavy minerals distribution charts
clearly show that the THM% in the coarse fractions from the berm
environment have a relatively high percentage compared to other
environments. This percentage increases from south towards north,
where it achieves the highest value at Location 15 (about 63%),
which might be explained because of the near shore currents that
have the same direction (Chandramohan et al., 1984). In addition to
Fig. 8. Total heavy minerals distribution in the study area.
that, the rate of supply by local streams plays a major role on the
concentration and size of the heavy minerals fraction, which can be
noticeable at Locations 9, 10, and 11, where the supply agents in
these locations are small seasonal streams. In dunes, the distribu-
tion of coarse heavy minerals fractions is associated with many
factors, such as wind direction, coastal geomorphology, dune
height, and vegetation cover (Sloss et al., 2012). In the total heavy
mineral distribution chart (Fig. 8), the THM% shows relatively high
concentrations in the northern sector compared to the same per-
centage in the southern sector of the study area. The previously
mentioned factors are found at Location 11 in the northern sector.
In addition to the rate of supply, the percentage of heavy minerals
in the foreshore environment is directly affected by waves and tidal
currents (Reddy et al., 2012). In the study area, the HM WT% of the
coarse fraction shows low concentrations at most locations, which
is due to the repeated wear and tear by wave action. On the other
hand, results obtained from the Sarada and Gosthani river estuaries
reveal that the supply rate of coarse heavy mineral fractions is more
than the wash rate.
Fine fractions from the berm environment show a high con-
centration of HM WT% (average 49.83%). This percentage clearly
shows an increase in the HM content from south towards north
along the study area. In general, fine fractions are more likely to be
transported from the source than coarse fractions and also within
 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503 493

Fig. 9. Spatial distribution of the heavy minerals in the foreshore sediment along the study area.
494 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503

Fig. 10. Distribution of major heavy minerals in the coarse fraction (þ60), a) foreshore, b) berm, and c) dune (note: Il ¼ ilmenite, Rut ¼ rutile, Mon ¼ monazite, Gar ¼ garnet,
Zir ¼ zircon, Sil ¼ sillimanite, Mag ¼ magnetite).

Fig. 11. Distribution of major heavy minerals in the fine fraction (þ230), a) Foreshore, b) Berm, and c) Dune (note: Il ¼ ilmenite, Rut ¼ rutile, Mon ¼ monazite, Gar ¼ garnet,
Zir ¼ zircon, Sil ¼ sillimanite, Mag ¼ magnetite).
 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503 495

Fig. 12. Spatial distribution of heavy minerals in the berm sediment along the study area.
496 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503

Fig. 13. Spatial distribution of heavy minerals in the dune sediment along the study area.
 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503 497

Table 3 Hallsworth, 1999; Statteger, 1987; among others). The microtexture

Surface textures types used in this study. of the heavy mineral grains has been utilized as an indicator to
Mechanical origin Chemical origin understand the transport history, processes, and depositional en-
 Collision pits (small, medium and large)  Solution pits and hollows
vironments. The grain-surface studies of quartz have been an
 Conchoidal fractures  Solution crevasses investigation area for Krinsley and Donahue (1968), Krinsley and
 Straight steps  Irregular surface solution Doornkamp (1973), and Le Ribault (1975). These earlier studies
 Arcuate steps  Surface polishing provided good information about the mechanical and chemical
 Upturned plates  Crystalline overgrowth
actions affecting the grain surface, in addition to their use as an
 Parallel striations  Chemical etch pits
environmental indicator. SEM is probably the most useful auxiliary
 Imbricated grinding features Mechanical/chemical origin
instrument (Dill, 2007; Krinsley & Donahue, 1968; Vos et al., 2014)
 Bulbous edges  Fracture plates/planes to identify surface microtexture and grain morphology at the
 Straight scratches  Low relief micron scale. The microtexture of (heavy and/or light) mineral
 Curved scratches  Medium relief
grains have been divided into three types depending on their for-
 Sub-angular outline  High relief
 Rounded outline  Adhering particles mation origin (Krinsley & Donahue, 1968). These types are of me-
 V-shaped patterns chanical, chemical, and mechanical/chemical origins as listed in
Table 3.
The surface textures present on the heavy-mineral grains have
been analyzed. The heavy mineral grains have been selected from
four locations in the study area. These locations are the Sarada River
Estuary, Yarada Beach, Lawsons Bay, and the Gosthani River Estuary
the deposition area, which has been found by many researchers (Locations 2,7,9, and 14, respectively). Twenty-two features have
(such as, Azam et al., 2001; Borreswar Rao, 1957; Cheepurupalli been identified; where thirteen features are of mechanical origin,
et al., 2012; Dill, 1998; Komar & Wang, 1984; Mahadevan & four are of chemical origin, and five features have been formed as a
Nateswara Rao, 1950; Philander et al., 1999; Sunita et al., 2018; result of interaction between chemical and mechanical processes.
among others). The selective property and settling velocity are
considered as the major factors in fine grain-enrichment
4.4.1. Sarada River Estuary (Location 2)
(Slingerland, 1977, 1984). Komar and Wang (1984) found that,
The heavy minerals that were studied in the Sarada River Es-
“the degree of concentration of minerals in the placer deal with
tuary (monazite, ilmenite, rutile, and kyanite) show the dominance
increasing grain density and decreasing size”. This point of view
of mechanical features (Table 4). This result indicates that the
explains the high concentration of ilmenite in the fine fraction
grains have been transported for a long distance, where the
along the study area. Fine-heavy fractions from the dune environ-
rounded outlines and collision pits are the main and most observed
ment show correlation with the same fraction in the berm envi-
features on the grain surface (see Fig. 14). Chemical features have
ronment, which can be attributed to the fact that the berm is the
less impact on these grains since they are present as small chemical
main source of the fine fractions, whereas the rolling over or
pits and some solution hollows as on the rutile grain (see Fig. 14b).
windblown sand are the transport-supply for the dune area. In the
In addition to that, some adhering particles have been observed on
foreshore environment, as in the coarse fraction, the concentration
the monazite surface.
of THM% in the fine fraction shows low values, which reinforces the
wave-wash theory for selective minerals.
4.4.2. Yarada Beach (Location 7)
Heavy mineral grains that were obtained from Yarada Beach
4.4. Surface microtextures of heavy minerals seem to be highly affected by chemical processes (Table 4). The
solution hollows and the solution pits are the dominant features on
Provenance studies of heavy minerals have been undertaken by the grains surface. On the other hand, mechanical processes have
numerous researchers (such as, Callender & Folk, 1958; Dill, 1998, left their own prints as the rounded outlines, small impact pits,
2007; Dill et al., 2007; Feo-Codecido, 1956; Gravenor, 1979; conchoidal fractures, and scratches which can be noticeable on the
Hubert, 1962; Krynine, 1946; Morton, 1985, 1991; Morton & garnet, rutile, and zircon grains (Fig. 15). Yarada Beach is considered

Table 4
Identified microtextures, and their abundance, on heavy mineral grains from the study area.

Location name (Number) Heavy minerals Mechanical origina Mechanical/chemical origina Chemical origina

Sarada River Estuary (2) Monazite AA B B

Ilmenite B D A
Rutile AA D A
Kyanite AA C D
Yarada Beach (7) Garnet AA D A
Rutile B D AA
Zircon C AB A
Ilmenite AA D C
Lawsons Bay (9) Zircon B C C
Rutile A D C
Ilmenite AA C C
Garnet AA AB B
Gosthani River Estuary (14) Ilmenite A B B
Garnet B C AA
Zircon B B A
Monazite A C B
a
Note: AA: very abundant (>75%), A: Abundant (75e50%), B: Common (50e25%), C: Present (25e5%), D: Rare (<5%), AB: Absent.
498 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503

Fig. 14. Surface microtextures of heavy minerals from the Sarada River Estuary. a): Sub-rounded monazite grain shows small pits, (a) adhering particles, and (b) curved scratches. b):
Rounded ilmenite grain with (a) small pits and solution pits. c): Rutile grain shows angular shape with some rounded edges and numerous conchoidal fractures, upturned plates,
and V-shaped pits. d): Kyanite grain shows elongated-angular shape with (a) collision pits, arcuate steps, and (b) straight steps.

as an erosional area through various seasons (Ganesan & Raju,
2010). This allows the chemical weathering to take place, in addi-
tion to that, the circular motion of sediment due to waves action is
the main reason for the mechanical features on these grains
surfaces.
4.4.3. Lawsons Bay (Location 9)
The studied heavy minerals from Lawsons Bay are zircon, rutile,
ilmenite, and garnet. This area receives its sediment from small
channels pouring into the Bay of Bengal. The microtextures of the
grains show dominance of mechanical processes (Table 4), where
all the grains are characterized by rounded outlines reflecting
sediment reworked by waves. Zircon grains (see Fig. 16a) are
characterized by large conchoidal fractures, linear steps, and small
impact pits on the surface. These features are due to grain-to-grain
impacts (Higgs, 1979), mechanical grinding, or abrasion (Finzel,
2017). Ilmenite grains show spherical shape (Fig. 16c) with
numerous etch pits. Stieglitz and Rothwell (1978) found that the
microtextures of some minerals depend on crystallography and
also on the chemical conditions of the depositional environments.
This finding leads to the conclusion that the spherical form is due to
the trigonal system of ilmenite minerals. Garnet grains show
irregular shapes with dissolution features, such as surface pitting,
linear steps, and also numerous straight scratches which reflect a
combination of chemical and mechanical processes. Margolis
(1968) studied numerous quartz grains from different environ-
ments. He found that the grains under low wave activity are highly
impacted by sea water which is why they exhibit oriented etch pits.
On the other hand, gains from moderate wave regimes show both
chemical and mechanical features, where the mechanical textures
are a result of grain to grain impacts (Krinsley & Takahashi, 1962).
4.4.4. Gosthani River Estuary (Location 14)
Ilmenite, garnet, zircon, and monazite are the studied heavy
minerals from the Gosthani River Estuary area. Ilmenite grains (see
Fig. 17a) show well rounded shapes with flake features on the grain
surface. The mechanical feature is present as linear steps, and this
might lead to the conclusion that the grain was under diagenesis
conditions for a long time. Angular garnet grains (see Fig. 17b) show
many chemical and mechanical features, where the solution pits
 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503 499

are the main chemical feature while mechanical ones are present as
impact V-shaped pits and linear and arcuate steps. Garnet grains
show overgrowth features on the grain surface and also within
hollows. Zircon grains (see Fig. 17c) show numerous etch pits in
addition to solution hollows. Well-rounded outlines suggest that
the grains have been transported for a long distance, while these
grains were not subjected to beach processes yet. Monazite grains
(Fig. 17d) show similar features to zircon grains, where etch pits and
solution hollows are the major features on the grain surface. In
addition to this, the conchoidal fractures are present as mechanical
features.
5. Summary and conclusions
Studying the grain size statistics and heavy minerals of the
sandy samples have been taken from three sub-environments,
namely, foreshore, berm, and dune in the area between the Sar-
ada and Gosthani Rivers of the Visakhapatnam coast of India. The
results of the analysis demonstrate a relation between the grain
size and heavy minerals concentration. The sediment grain size in
the study area directly affects the concentration of heavy minerals,
in addition to marine and Aeolian processes which play major roles,
either in enrichment, or in decreasing the concentration after
deposition (Komar & Wang, 1984). Most of the sediment shows
medium to fine grain sizes, where the coarse grains exist in low
ratios which suggests a low energy environment of transport and
deposition. The sorting ranges between moderately well sorted to
well sorted. The good quality of sorting indicates that the sediment
was deposited under high energy (Biju Sabastian et al., 2002).
Heavy minerals along the study area showed increasing concen-
trations from south to north following the near shore currents di-
rection. These heavy minerals might have been derived from
metamorphic rocks (khondalites and charnokites) from the Eastern
Ghat. The spatial distribution of ilmenite, magnetite, zircon, garnet,
sillimanite, rutile, and monazite suggest that grain size, settling

Fig. 15. Surface microtextures of heavy minerals from Yarada Beach. a): Garnet grain shows sub-angular surface with rounded edges, this grain shows (a) conchoidal fractures, (b)
straight scratches and big size curves. b): sub-rounded rutile grain shows big chemical hole and crystals growth (white arrow), and medium pits. c): Sub-rounded zircon grain
shows (a) straight grooves and (b) reworked conchoidal fractures. d): Rounded ilmenite with numerous small pits and chemical solution.
500 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503

Fig. 16. Surface microtextures of heavy minerals from Lawsons Bay. a): Large conchoidal fracture on an angular zircon grain with high relief. b): elongated rutile grain with big pit
(white arrow) and reworked conchoidal fractures. c): Rounded ilmenite grain with small pits. d): Angular garnet grain with conchoidal fractures and straight scratches.

velocity, and specific gravity have played important roles in their
concentration in every environment.
Most heavy minerals in the current study are associated with
the grain size of the sediment. The weight percentage (WT%) of
ilmenite, sillimanite and zircon increases with decreasing grain
size, whereas the WT% of garnet is more concentrated in the coarse
fractions. The dune and berm sediment present on the two sides of
the Gosthani River Estuary contain economic amounts of heavy
minerals such as magnetite, ilmenite, zircon, and monazite, which
can be considered as potential reservoirs for mining in the future. In
contrast, the Sarada River Estuary sediment showed low concen-
trations of economic heavy minerals.
Grain microtextures of heavy minerals from The Sarada and
Gosthani river estuaries show the dominance of mechanical fea-
tures, where the conchoidal fractures, impact pits, and linear and
arcuate steps are the most commonly observed features on the
grain surfaces, in addition to well-rounded outlines. All these fea-
tures indicate that the grains have been subjected to long distance
transportation. Grains from the beach areas (Yarada and Lawsons
Bay, Locations 7 and 9, respectively) show a combination of me-
chanical and chemical features. These features reflect the envi-
ronmental energy and conditions, where all of these microtextures
indicate moderate to high wave energy. The microtextures which
have been recognized in the current study do not seem detailed
 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503
Fig. 17. Surface microtextures of heavy minerals from the Gosthani River Estuary. a): Ilmenite grain shows rounded shape with flakes features on the surface and straight steps
(white arrow). b): Angular garnet grain shows crystalline overgrowth (white arrow), chemical solution and V-shaped pits. c): Sub-rounded zircon grain shows solution hole (white
arrow) and big and small pits. d): Sub-rounded monazite grain shows solution pits (white arrow) and reworked conchoidal fractures.
enough to determine the environmental conditions, such as prov-
enance, transport agents, and depositional processes.
Acknowledgments
This research did not receive any financial support from any
governmental or private agency. All costs were provided by the
author. The author would like to thank Dr. Mai Mohamad and Mr.
Rambabu Ravuri for valuable recommendations.
References
Amaral, E. J. (1977). Deposition environments of the St. Peter sandstone by textural
analysis. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 47, 32e52.
Angusamy, A., & Rajamanickam, V. (2006). Depositional environment of sediments
along the southern coast of Tamil Nadu, India. Oceanologia, 48(1), 87e102.
Anonymous. (2000). Garnet. Industrial minerals, 398, 25.
Appa Rao, G., & Karuna Karudu, T. (2018). Grain size studies of coastal sediments of
Visakhapatnam to Bhimunipatnam, east coast of India e Statistical approach.
International Journal of Engineering Science Invention, 7(3), 62e75.
Azam, A. M., Krishnan, S., & Banerjee, D. C. (2001). Beach and inland heavy mineral
sand investigations and deposits in India e An overview. Special issue on Beach
and Inland Heavy Mineral Sand Deposits of India. Exploration and Research for
Atomic Minerals, 13, 1e21.
Banergee, G., & Banergee, D. (2005). Beach sands for refractories. Industrial Minerals,
451, 48e51.
501
Berquist, C. R., Fishler, C. T., Jr., Calliari, L. J., Dydak, S. M., Ozalpaslan, H., &
Skrabal, S. A. (1990). Heavy-mineral concentrations in sediments of the inner
continental shelf. Virginia Division of Mineral Resources Publication, 103, 31e94.
Biju Sabastian, Udayakumar, J., & Anirudhan, S. (2002). Beach sands of southern
India: Implication of sources and environment of deposition. Journal of the In-
dian Association of Sedimentologists, 21(1&2), 63e76.
Boggs, S. (2006). Principles of sedimentology and stratigraphy. Upper Saddle River, N.J.
U.S.: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Borreswar Rao, C. (1957). Beach erosion and concentration of heavy minerals.
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 27, 143e147.
Brown, T. J., Hetherington, L. E., Hannis, S. D., Bide, T., Benham, A. J., Idoine, N. E., &
Lusty, P. A. (2009). World mineral production 2003-07. Keyworth, Nottingham,
U.K.: British Geological Survey.
Cadican, R. A. (1961). Geologic interpretation of grain-size distribution measure-
ment of Colorado Plateau Sedimentary rocks. Journal of Geology, 69, 121e144.
Callender, D. L., & Folk, R. L. (1958). Idiomorphic zircon, key to volcanism in the
lower tertiary sands of Central Texas. American Journal of Science, 9, 256e257.
Chandramohan, P., Narasimha Rao, T. V., Panakala Rao, D., & Prabhakara Rao, B.
(1984). Studies on nearshore processes at Yarada beach (south of Visakha-
patnam Harbour) east coast of India. Indian Journal of Marine Sciences, 13,
164e167.
Chappell, J. (1967). Recognizing fossil strand line from grain size analysis. Journal of
Sedimentary and Petrology, 37, 157e165.
Chauhan, R., Ramanathan, A. L., & Aldhya, T. K. (2014). Patterns of seasonal vari-
ability in granulometric characteristics of Bhitrakanika mangrove- estuarine
complex, east coast of India. Indian Journal of Geo-Marine Sciences, 43(6),
1083e1090.
Cheepurupalli, N. R., Anu Radha, B., Reddy, K. S. N., Dhanamjaya Rao, E. N., &
Dayal, A. M. (2012). Heavy mineral distribution studies in different microen-
vironments of Bhimunipatnam coast, Andhra Pradesh, India. International
Journal of Scientific Research Publications, 2, 1e10.
502 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503
Deva Varma, D., Rao, A. T., & Rao, K. S. R. (1989). Heavy mineral characteristics of
Vamsadhara River along the east coast of India. Indian Journal of Earth Science,
16(34), 166e172.
Dill, H. G. (1998). A review of heavy minerals in clastic sediments with case studies
from the alluvial fan through the near-shore marine environments. Earth-Sci-
ence Reviews, 45, 103e132.
Dill, H. G. (2007). Grain morphology of heavy minerals from marine and continental
placer deposits, with special reference to FeeTi oxides. Sedimentary Geology,
198(1e2), 1e27.
Dill, H. G., Melcher, F., Füssl, M., & Weber, B. (2007). The origin of rutileeilmenite
aggregates (“nigrine”) in alluvialefluvial placers of the Hagendorf pegmatite
province, NE Bavaria, Germany. Mineralogy and Petrology, 89, 133e158.
Dora, G. U., SanilKumar, V., Vinayaraj, P., Philip, C. S., & Johnson, G. (2014). Quan-
titative estimation of sediment erosion and accretion processes in a micro-tidal
coast. International Journal of Sediment Research, 29(2), 218e231.
Duane, D. B. (1964). Significance of skewness in recent sediments, western Pamlico
Sound, North Carolina. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 27, 3e26.
Feo-Codecido, G. (1956). Heavy-mineral techniques and their application to Ven-
ezuelan stratigraphy. AAPG Bulletin, 40, 984e1000.
Finzel, E. S. (2017). Detrital zircon microtextures and U-PB geochronology of Upper
Jurassic to Paleocene strata in the distal North American Cordillera foreland
basin. Tectonics, 36, 1295e1316.
Folk, R. L. (1974). Petrology of sedimentary rocks. Austin, TX, U.S.: Hemphill Pub-
lishing Co.
Folk, R. L., & Ward, W. (1957). Brazos river bar: A study in the significance of grain
size parameters. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 27, 3e26.
Freeman, D. E., Aral, H., & Smith, L. K. (2003). The potential for recovery of chromite
sands from the Murray Basin, Australia. In: Heavy Minerals Conference 2003 (pp.
95e99). The South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Symposium
Series S34.
Friedman, G. M. (1961). Distinction between dune, beach and river sands from
textural characters. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 31, 514e529.
Friedman, G. M. (1967). Dynamic processes and statistical parameters compared for
size frequency distribution of beach and river sands. Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology, 37(2), 327e354.
Galehouse, J. S. (1969). Counting grain mounts: Number percentage vs. number
frequency. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 39(2), 812e815.
Ganesan, P., & Raju, N. S. N. (2010). Beach profiling studies at Yarada beach, Visa-
khapatnam, east coast of India (NIO Technical Report). Goa, India: National
Institute of Oceanography.
Gent, M. R., Alvarez, M. N., Iglesias, J. M. G., & Alvarez, J. T. (2005). Offshore oc-
currences of heavy-mineral placers, Northwest Galicia, Spain. Marine Geore-
sources & Geotechnology, 23, 39e59.
Gravenor, C. P. (1979). The nature of the late Paleozoic glaciation in Gondwana as
determined from an analysis of garnets and other heavy minerals. Canadian
Journal of Earth Science, 16, 1137e1153.
Harben, P. W. (2002). The industrial minerals handybook: A guide to markets, speci-
fications & prices. Surrey, U.K.: IMIL.
Higgs, R. (1979). Quartz-grain surface features of Mesozoic-Cenozoic sands from the
Labrador and western Greenland continental margins. Journal of Sedimentary
Research, 49, 599e610.
Hubert, J. F. (1962). A zircon-tourmaline-futile maturity index and the interde-
pendence of the composition of heavy mineral assemblages with the gross
composition and texture of sandstones. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 32,
440e450.
Jagannadha Rao, M., Greeshma Gireesh, A. G., Avatharam, P., Anil, N. C., &
KarunaKarudu, T. (2012). Studies on coastal geomorphology along Visakha-
patnam to Bhimunipatnam, east coast of India. The Journal of Indian Geophysical
Union, 16(4), 179e187.
Kannan, R., Kanungo, A., & Murthy, M. V. R. (2016). Detection of shoreline changes
Visakhapatnam coast, Andhra Pradesh from multi-temporal satellite images.
Journal of Remote Sensing & GIS, 5, 157e164.
King, W. (1886). The geological sketch of Visakhapatnam District, India. Geological
Survey of India, 19, 143e156.
Komar, P. D., & Wang, C. (1984). Processes of selective grain transport and the
formation of placers on beach. Journal of Geology, 92(6), 637e655.
Krinsley, D. H., & Donahue, J. (1968). Environmental interpretation of sand grain
surface textures by electron microscope. Geological Society of America Bulletin,
79, 743e748.
Krinsley, D., & Doornkamp, J. C. (1973). Atlas of sand grain surface textures. Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Krinsley, D., & Takahashi, T. (1962). Surface textures of sand grams, an application of
electron microscopy. Science, 135, 923e925.
Krynine, P. D. (1946). The tourmaline group in sediments. Journal of Geology, 54,
65e87.
La Fond, E. C., & Prasada Rao, R. (1954). Beach erosion cycles near Waltair on the Bay
of Bengal. Memoirs in Oceanographt, 1, 63e77.
La Fond, E. C., & Prasada Rao, R. (1956). On the erosion of the beach at Uppada. The
Port Engineer, 5(2), 2e9.
Le Ribault, L. (1975). L'exoscopie, method et applications. Notes Mem CFP, 12.
Lenoble, J. P., Auguries, C., Carbon, R., & Sagest, P. (1995). Marine mineral occurrences
and deposits of the economic exclusive zones, MARMIN: A data base. Editions. The
Institut français de recherche pour l'exploitation de la mer (IFREMER).
Li, M. Z., & Komar, P. D. (1992). Longshore grain sorting and beach placer formation
adjacent to the Columbia River. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 62(3),
429e441.
Livingstone, I., Bullard, J. E., Wiggs, G. F., & Thomas, D. S. (1999). Grain-size variation
on dunes in the Southwest Kalahari, Southern Africa. Journal of Sedimentary
Research, 69, 546e552.
Mahadevan, C., & Nateswara Rao, B. (1950). Black sand concentrates in Vizaga-
patnam coast. Current Science, 19, 48e49.
Mahadevan, C., & Sriramadas, A. (1948). Monozites in the beach sands of Visa-
khapatnam district. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences, 27(4),
257e278.
Mange, M. A., & Wright, D. T. (Eds.). (2007). Heavy minerals in use (Vol. 58). UK:
Elsevier.
Margolis, S. V. (1968). Electron microscopy of chemical solution and mechanical
abrasion features on quartz sand grains. Sedimentary Geology, 2, 243e256.
Mason, C. C., & Folk, R. L. (1958). Differentiation of beach, dune and Aeolian flat
environments by size analysis, Mustang Island, Texas. Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology, 28, 211e226.
Milner, H. B. (1962) Sedimentary petrology (1st ed., Vols. 1 and 2, pp. 643e715).
London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.
Mohan, P. M., & Rajamanickam, G. V. (2000). Buried placer mineral deposits along
the east coast between Chennai and Pondicherry. Journal of the Geological So-
ciety of India, 56, 1e13.
Mohapatra, S., Behera, P., & Das, S. K. (2015). Heavy mineral potentiality and
alteration studies for ilmenite in Astaranga beach sands, district Puri, Odisha,
India. Journal of Geoscience and Environment Protection, 3, 31e37.
Morton, A. C. (1985). Heavy minerals in provenance studies. In G. G. Zuffa (Ed.),
Provenance of arenites (pp. 249e277). Dordrecht: Reidel.
Morton, A. C. (1991). Geochemical studies of detrital heavy minerals and their
application to provenance research. Geological Society of London, Special Publi-
cation, 57(1), 31e46.
Morton, A. C., & Hallsworth, C. R. (1999). Processes controlling the composition of
heavy mineral assemblages in sandstones. Sedimentary Geology, 124, 3e29.
Murthy, M. S. (1961). Structure, mineralogy and petrology of the charnokite series and
associated rocks of Visakhapatnam (Doctoral dissertation). Department of geol-
ogy, Andhra University, Waltair.
Narasimha Rao, C. (1945). Geology and petrology of the Kailasa range (Master’s
thesis). Waltair: Department of geology, Andhra University.
Nittrouer, C. A., Sharara, M. T., & De Master, D. J. (1983). Variations of sediment
texture on the Amazon continental shelf. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 53(1),
179e191.
Noakes, L. C. (1977). Review of provenance for mineral sands and tin in Southeast
Asia. Technical Bulletin of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the
Pacific. Committee for Coordination of Joint Prospecting for Mineral Resources in
offshore areas (CCOP), 11, 157e168.
Nooka Raju, D., & Vaidyanadhan, R. (1971). Hill slope elements and surficial deposits
near Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. Journal of the Indian Geological Sciences
Association, 13, 45e51.
Nordstrom, K. F. (1977). The use of grain size statistics to distinguish between high-
and moderate-energy beach environments. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology,
47(3), 1287e1294.
Panda, N. K., Murthy, P. V. V. S. S., Sahoo, P., Ravi, G. S., & Ali, M. A. (2002). Evaluation
of Kalingapatnam coast and its influence on paleomineral concentration, east
coast of India. In A. C. Narayan (Ed.), Late Quaternary geology of India and sea
level changes (pp. 79e89). Memoirs-Geological Society of India.
Perissoratis, C., Angelopoulos, I., & Mitropoulos, D. (1987). Exploring the offshore
area of N.E. Greece for placer deposits: Geologic framework and preliminary
results. In P. G. Teleki, M. R. Dobson, J. R. Moore, & U. Von Stackelberg (Eds.),
Marine minerals (pp. 57e70). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Philander, C., Rozendaal, A., & De Meijer, R. J. (1999). Characteristics of zircon in
placer deposits along the west coast of South Africa. South African Journal of
Science, 95, 381e386.
Praditwan, J. (1988). Mineral distribution study for cassiterite and associated heavy
minerals in Uthai Thani, Suphanburi, Kanchanaburi, Ratchaburi and Prachuap Khiri
Khan provinces, central Thailand (Report of Investigation, 66). SEATRAD Centre.
Raju, R. D., Ali, M. A., & Krishnan, S. (2001). Exploration and research for atomic
minerals. Atomic Minerals Directorate for Exploration and Research, 13, 159.
Ramamohana Rao, T., Shanmukha Rao, C., & Sanyasi Rao, K. (1982). Textural analysis and
Mineralogy of the black sand deposits of Visakhapatnam- Bhimunipatnam coast,
Andhra Pradesh, India. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 23, 284e289.
Rao, B. K., Ramaiah, J. S., Murthy, P. B., & Swamy, A. S. R. (1993). Studies on heavy
minerals in the Krishna river basin. Journal of the Indian Association of Sedi-
mentologists, 12, 79e88.
Reddy, K. S. N., Deva Varma, D., Dhanamjayarao, E. N., & Lakshmi Prasad, T. (2012).
Distribution of heavy minerals in Nizampatnam- Lankavanidibba coastal sands,
Andhra Pradesh, east coast of India. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 79,
411e418.
Reddy, K. S. N., Lakshmi Prasad, T., & Babu Rao, N. (2007). Relationship of heavy
mineral redistribution in different micro environments to seasonal changes of
beach processes in an embayed beach of Yarada e Gangavaram, North Coastal
Andhra Pradesh. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 70, 963e974.
Roy, P. S. (1999). Heavy mineral beach placers in southeastern Australia: Their na-
ture and genesis. Economic Geology, 94, 567e588.
 A. Mohammad et al. / International Journal of Sediment Research 35 (2020) 484e503
Roy, R. N., & Biswas, A. B. (1975). Use of grain-size parameters for identification of
depositional processes and environments of sediments. Indian Journal of Earth
Science, 2(2), 154e1662.
Saravanan, S., Chandrasekar, N., & Joevivek, V. (2013). Temporal and spatial variation
in the sediment volume along the beaches between Ovari and Kanyakumari (SE
India). International Journal of Sediment Research, 28(3), 384e395.
Sastry, A. V. R., Swamy, A. S. R., & Rao, P. (1981). Distribution of garnet sands along
Visakhapatnam-Bhimunipatnam beach. Indian Journal of Marine Sciences, 1,
369e370.
Sastry, A. V. R., Swamy, A. S. R., & Vasudev, K. (1987). Heavy minerals of beach sands
along Visakhapatnam-Bhimunipatnam, east coast of India. Indian Journal of
Marine Sciences, 16, 39e42.
Sharma, N. L., & Ram, K. S. V. (1964). Introduction to India's economic minerals. India:
Dhanbad Publication.
Singarasubramanian, S. R., Mukesh, M. V., Manoharan, K., Murugan, S., &
Bakkiaraj, D. (2006). Sediment characteristics of the M-9 tsunami event be-
tween Rameswaram and Thoothukudi, Gulf of Mannar, southeast coast of India.
Science of Tsunami Hazards, 25(3), 161e163.
Slingerland, R. L. (1977). The effects of entrainment on the hydraulic equivalence
relationships of light and heavy minerals in sand. Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology, 47, 53e770.
Slingerland, R. L. (1984). Role of hydraulic sorting in the origin of fluvial placers.
Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, 54, 137e150.
Sloss, C. R., Shepherd, M., & Hesp, P. (2012). Coastal dunes: Geomorphology. Nature
Education Knowledge, 3(10), 2.
503
Sriramadas, A. (1951). The black sand concentrates of the Vizagapatam Beach. The
Quarterly Journal of the Geological, Mining, and Metallurgical Society of India, 23,
169e180.
Statteger, K. (1987). Heavy minerals and provenance of sands modeling of litho-
logical end member from river sands of northern Austria and from sandstones
of the Austroalpine Gosau Formation (Late Cretaceous). Journal of Sedimentary
Petrology, 57, 301e310.
Stieglitz, R. D., & Rothwell, B. (1978). Surface microtextures of freshwater heavy
mineral grains. Geoscience Wisconsin, 3, 21e34.
Subrahmanyam, N. P., Rao, N. K., Narasimhan, D., Rao, G. V. U., Jaggi, N. K., &
Rao, K. R. P. M. (1982). Alteration of beach sand ilmenite from Manavalakurichi,
Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 23(4), 168e174.
Summerhayes, C. P. (1967). Marine environments of economic mineral deposition
around New Zealand: A review. New Zealand Journal of Marine & Freshwater
Research, 1, 262e282.
Sunita, R., Jagadeeswari, V., & Ranjita, S. (2018). Placer deposits of Brahmagiri Coast,
Odisha e A new resource for industrial heavy minerals. IOP Conference Series:
Materials Science and Engineering, 338, 1e6.
Suresh Gandhi, M., & Raja, M. (2014). Heavy mineral distribution and geochemical
studies of coastal sediments between Besant Nagar and Marakkanam, Tamil
Nadu, India. Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences, 7, 256e268.
Vos, K., Vandenberghe, N., & Elsen, J. (2014). Surface textural analysis of quartz
grains by scanning electron microscopy (SEM): From sample preparation to
environmental interpretation. Earth-Science Reviews, 128, 93e104.