See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/321800339

The Danube Delta: an Overview of its Holocene Evolution

Article in Mediterranee · June 2016

DOI: 10.4000/mediterranee.8186

CITATIONS READS

21 1,471

3 authors:

Nicolae Panin Laura Tiron Dutu

National Institute for Research and Development of Marine Geology and Geoecol… National Institute for Research and Development of Marine Geology and Geoecol…
103 PUBLICATIONS 2,829 CITATIONS 35 PUBLICATIONS 214 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Florin Duţu
National Institute for Research and Development of Marine Geology and Geoecol…
27 PUBLICATIONS 172 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Laura Tiron Dutu on 07 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 37
no 126 - 2016

The Danube Delta

an Overview of its Holocene Evolution
Le delta du Danube, synthèse de son évolution holocène
Nicolae PANIN, Laura TIRON DUŢU, Florin DUŢU
National Institute of Research and Development for Marine Geology and Geo-ecology GEOECOMAR
23–25 Dimitrie Onciul Street, 024053 Bucharest, Romania.

Abstract – This paper presents a short synthesis on the physiography,
geology, hydrology and evolution of the Danube Delta during the
Holocene. Deltaic conditions were initiated during the Quaternary,
when the Danube started flowing into the Black Sea basin. The Danube
Delta is formed of a sequence of clastic deposits ranging from tens
to 300‑400 meters thick that accumulated mainly during the Late
Pleistocene and the Holocene. The Holocene evolution phases of the
Danube Delta have been elucidated by corroborating geomorphological,
structural, textural, geochemical, mineralogical and faunal analyses
and mainly by 14C dating. Five main evolutionary phases have been
elucidated: (1) the formation of the Initial Letea-Caraorman Spit,
11700‑7500 yr. BP; (2) the St. George I Delta, 9000-7200 yr. BP; (3) the
Sulina Delta, 7200-2000 yr. BP; (4) the St. George II and Kilia Deltas,
2500 yr. BP to present; and (5) the Cosna-Sinoie Delta, 3500-1500 yr. BP.
The paper also describes the anthropogenic changes that have occurred
during the last two centuries.
Key words: delta evolution, hydrographic network, anthropogenic
impacts, lobes, river water, sediment discharge
Résumé – Cette contribution propose une courte synthèse sur la
physiographie, la géologie, l’hydrologie et l’évolution du delta du
Danube durant l’Holocène. Le contexte deltaïque est apparu durant le
Quaternaire quand le Danube a commencé à se déverser dans le bassin
de la mer Noire. Le delta du Danube est formé par une séquence de
dépôts détritiques d’une épaisseur oscillant entre quelques dizaines et
300‑400 m qui se sont accumulés pour l’essentiel durant le Pléistocène
supérieur et l’Holocène. Les phases d’évolution holocènes du delta du
Danube ont été précisées en croisant analyses géomorphologiques,
sédimentologiques, géochimiques, minéralogiques, biologiques et
surtout par datation 14 C : (1) la formation de la Pointe initiale de
Letea‑Caraorman vers 11 700-7 500 ans BP ; (2) le delta de St Georges I vers
9 000-7 200 ans BP ; (3) le delta de Sulina vers 7 200-2 000 ans BP ; (4) les
deltas de St Georges II et de Kilia entre 2 500 ans BP et l’actuel ; (5) le delta
Cosna-Sinoie entre 3 500 et 1 500 ans BP. Cet article décrit également les
évolutions d’origine anthropogénique qui ont eu lieu durant les deux
derniers siècles.
Mots clés : évolution deltaïque, réseau hydrographique, impacts
anthropiques, lobes, eaux fluviales, rejet sédimentaire

Most of the world’s deltaic systems started forming (1963), A.C. Banu (1965), A.C. Banu and L. Rudescu (1965),
between 7400 and 9 500 yr. BP as a result of decelerating N. Panin (1974, 1976, 1983, 1989, 1996, 1997, 2003 and 2009),
sea-level rise (Stanley and Warne, 1993). Situated N. Panin and D. Jipa (2002), N. Panin and I. Popescu
in the contact area between continental and marine (2004), N. Panin et al. (2005) ; N. Panin and W. Overmars
environments, deltas serve as the primary pathway for (2012) ; P. GÂȘTESCU and B.V. Driga (1981 and 2009), C.
the transport of fresh water and terrigenous sediment Bondar (1972, 1992 and 1993), C. Bondar et al. (1991),
to the coastal ocean (Milliman and Meade, 1983). L. Giosan et al. (1997, 2005 and 2006), A. Stănică and N.
The structure and the evolution of deltaic systems are Panin (2009), L. Tiron (2010), L. Tiron Duțu et al. (2014)
controlled by extremely complex processes and factors and Vespremeanu-Stroe et al. (2013).
including variations in relative sea level, fluvial inputs,
marine dynamics, morphology and tectonics. Authors have
studied these processes for many of the world’s largest
rivers including the Amazon (Nittrouer et al., 1986),
the Yellow River (Liu et al., 2004 and 2007), the Yangtze
River (Chen et al., 2000), the Po River (Cattaneo et al.,
2003), the Ganges-Brahmaputra system (Kuehl et al., 1997;
Goodbred and Kuehl, 1999 and 2000), the Mekong River
(Ta et al. 2002; Xue et al., 2010) and the Mississippi River
(Knox, 2006 ; Biedenharn et al., 2000); etc.).

The Danube Delta (Fig. 1) is part of a large European geo-

system consisting of the Danube River – Danube Delta –
Black Sea. Many investigations have been carried out on
this system, and especially on the Dan­ube Delta, since
the middle of the 19 th century, which have im­proved our
understanding of the genesis, structure and evo­lution of
this system. Particularly important are the studies of A. C.
Hartley (1867), Gr. Antipa (1915 and 1941), C. Brătescu
(1922 and 1942), G. Vâlsan (1934), I. Lepsi (1942), H. Slanar
(1945), I.G. Petrescu (1957), P. CoteȚ (1960), M. Bleahu
(1963), H. Grumãzescu et al. (1963), E. Liteanu et al. (1961),
E. Liteanu and A. Pricãjan (1963), A. A. Almazov et al. Fig. 1 – Danube Delta general view. Landsat satellite image
38
1 - General setting and general
description
1.1 - Geological context
The Danube Delta is situated in an area of high structural
mobility, repeatedly affected by strong subsidence and
important sediment accumulation. Deltaic conditions
developed here during the Quaternary, when the Danube
started flowing into the Black Sea basin.
The Danube Delta overlaps the Pre-Dobrogean
Depression, which, in turn, lies mainly on the Scythian
Platform. The sequence of the Scythian Platform deposits,
which constitute the fill material of the Pre-Dobrogean
Depression, displays six sedimentation cycles: Palaeozoic
calcareous–dolomitic; Lower Triassic of considerable
thickness (400-2,500 m), slightly unconformable
over‑subjacent deposits consisting of red continental
detrital deposits with interlayered volcanic rocks;
Middle-Upper Triassic transgressive, marine, comprising
carbonate rocks in the lower part (350-450 m limestones,
and 500-600 m dolomites) and of detrital rocks (450 m) in
the upper part; Jurassic transgressive marine, consisting
of detrital deposits at the base (Middle Jurassic,
500‑1,700 m thick) and carbonate ones at the top (Upper
Jurassic, 1,000 m thick in the southern area); Lower
Cretaceous overlying Jurassic deposits, consisting of red
continental deposits of varying thickness (ca. 500 m) and
Sarmatian-Pliocene overlying different Mesozoic deposits
and consisting of alternating clay, sand and sandstone
(200‑350 m thick) (Panin, 2003).
1.2 - The Danube River Danube Delta – Black
Sea System
The Danube River is one of Europe’s most important
waterways, flowing over 2,860 km across the continent
from the Schwarzwald Massif down to the Black Sea.
The Danube is listed (after the river Volga) as the second
largest river in Europe. Its drainage basin extends over
817,000 km2 and more than 15 countries share the Danube
catchment area, which is inhabited by more than 80
million people.
The average annual water discharge of the Danube
River at the delta apex is 6,550 m 3 .s -1 . According
to N. Panin (2003), N. Panin and D. Jipa (2002),
M. Meybeck et al. (2003) and D.E. Walling (2006), the
present sediment discharge was modified by the building
of the Iron Gates dams that induced a critical decrease
in the sediment discharge from ≈ 67 million t.yr -1
to ≈ 30‑40 million t.yr-1.
The Danube Delta, the largest delta in the European
Union, is located at the mouth of the Danube River, where
it flows into the Black Sea. Situated between 44°25’ and
45°30’ N and between 28°45’ and 29°46’ E (Fig. 1), the
Danube Delta is bordered by the Bugeac Plateau to the
north and by the Dobrogean Orogenic Unit to the south.
1.3 - The Danube Delta Hydrographical Network
The delta starts (the delta apex) at the first bifurcation of
the Danube, named Ceatal Izmail (Mile 43 from the mouth
zone, measured along the Sulina distributary), into the
Kilia distributary to the North and to Tulcea distributary
in the South.
At present the Kilia distributary, the largest of the delta
system, is 117 km long and forms the border between
Ukraine and Romania. At its mouth Kilia, forms a secondary
lobate delta of 24,400 ha, with numerous distributaries
(the main ones are the Oceakov flowing to the NE, and
Stary Stambul oriented towards the S‑SE); this secondary
delta lies within Ukrainian territory and, in 1998, was
declared the “Ukrainian Danube Biosphere Reserve”, a fully
protected ecological zone, under UNESCO jurisdiction.
The Tulcea distributary stretches from the Ceatal Izmail
17 km to the east to a new bifurcation, Ceatal Sfântu
Gheorghe (St. George) at Mile 33.84 (km 62.2), where it
divides into two main distributaries: Sulina on the left
and Sfântu Gheorghe (St. George) on the right.
From the Ceatal St. George, the Sulina distributary flows
eastward 71.7 km (present-day length, including the 8 km
of dykes at the mouth of the arm) towards the Black Sea.
The Sulina distributary’s present-day physiography results
from a large diversion programme carried out between
1868 and 1902 by the European Danube Commission. This
project shortened the branch by 24 % (83.8 km before the
cut-offs, and now only 63.7 km), and induced a deepening
of the river channel in time, from less than 2.5 m in 1857
to at least 9.5 m in 1959. The shortening and deepening
of the river channel radically changed the hydrological
regime of the Delta by increasing the water discharge of
the Sulina distributary from 7 – 9 % to about 19 % of total
Danube discharge.
The St. George distributary, starting from the
hydrographic knot at Ceatal Sfântu Gheorghe is
108.8 km long until the sea. The distributary flows some
15-20 km across the North Dobrogean unit, formed of
old geological formations that are difficult to erode,
and this influences the river’s physiography. The course
of the St. George branch can be subdivided into three
sections (Panin, 1976): (1) the Dobrogean section of
limited meandering (between km 104 and km 90); (2) the
free meandering segment of the St. George arm (between
km 90, where the Dobrogean unit ends, and km 22) with
a succession of 6 meander loops; and (3) the downstream
section of limited meandering (between km 22 and km 0).
The St. George meander loops were rectified in 1981-1992;
these cut-offs led to a shortening of the distributary by
about 31 km and, consequently, increased the free water
surface slope and water flow velocity determining higher
water and sediment discharges.
At its mouth, the St. George distributary forms a small
secondary delta with two secondary branches, which fork
at km 5: the prolongation of the main St. George channel
 39

(also called Kedrilles in historical documents) and the Olinca
branch on the right. This latter branch bifurcates to two
small branches: the Seredne on the left, about 3.5 km long
(already silted to-day), and the Turetzkii (or Gârla Turcului)
on the right, some 4.5 km in length.
1.4 - The Danube Delta’s Geomorphological and
Depositional Units
The Danube Delta can be divided into three major
depositional systems (Panin, 1989) (Fig. 2): (1) the delta plain
with a total area of about 5800 km 2, of which the marine

Fig. 2 – The Danube Delta major morphological and depositional units (after Panin, 1989). Legend 1: delta plain with: (1a) the fluvial delta plain, (1b) the marine
delta plain, (1c) the fossil and modern beach-ridges and littoral accumulative formations built up by the juxtaposition of beach-ridges; 2: the delta front with: (2a)
the delta front platform, (2b) the relics of the “Sulina Delta” and its delta front, (2c) the delta front slope; 3: the Danube prodelta; 4: depth contour lines in meters
40
delta plain area comprises 1800 km2; (2) the delta-front, with
an area of ca 1,300 km 2, which is divided into the delta-
front platform (800 km 2) and the delta-front slope (ca.
500 km2) and extends offshore to a water depth of 30‑40 m;
(3) the prodelta lies offshore, at the base of the delta-front
slope, down to a depth of 50‑60 m, and covers an area of
over 6,000 km2. To the depositional system should be added
the Danube deep-sea fan system that occurs off Romania,
Bulgaria and Ukraine in the northwestern Black Sea and
extends from a depth of several hundred meters down to
the abyssal plain (over 2,200 m).
The delta plain starts from the delta apex, at the first
bifurcation of the Danube Ceatal Izmail. The delta plain
is roughly triangular in shape, with a strong southward
asymmetry. The average altitude of the Delta relief is about
0.52 m with a mean inclination of ca. 0.0428 %. The delta
plain contains different elements of positive and negative
relief: the positive relief components include continental
relics (e.g. Stipoc remnants) and promontories (e.g. Kilia)
entering the delta territory, fluvial subaerial levees, old and
present-day marine beach ridges and littoral accumulative
formations formed by the juxtaposition of numerous ridges
(among which the most important are: Jibrieni in Ukraine,
and Letea, Caraorman, Sãrãturile, Perisor, Chituc etc. in
Romania), lacustrine spits (e.g. Stipoc spit) (Fig. 3). Negative
relief forms are represented by areas covered by water
constituting the Delta’s hydrographic network. About 54.5 %
of the Danube delta plain consists of areas having altitudes
between 0 and 1 m above the Black Sea - Sulina reference
system, and 18 % with altitudes between 1 and 2 m.
The delta front area is about 1,300 km2 and can be divided
into the delta front platform (ca. 800 km 2) and the delta
front slope (ca. 500 km2). The main distributaries debouche
into zones with different bathymetry: in the North, the
Kilia branch flows into a continental shelf area of 20‑25 m
depth, while in the South, at the mouth of the St. George
distributary, the water depth is considerably higher
(30‑40 m). This differentiates the morphology of the delta
front in the two mentioned areas.
The prodelta lies off-shore, at the base of the delta
front down to a depth of 50‑60 m, and covers more
than 6,000 km2. The eastern limit of the prodelta can be
accurately identified in Fig. 2. Elongated depressions, such
as small valleys or submarine channels (4 – 10 m deep)
bordered by lateral levees or ridges, have been identified
in the prodelta area. These channels seem to represent
discharge courses of turbid f low yield by the river
distributaries, especially at high flood.
2 - The Holocene evolution of the Danube
Delta
The Danube Delta was mainly formed during the Upper
Pleistocene highstands (Karangatian, Surozhian) and the
Holocene. Its present-day geomorphology expresses the
interaction of the river (sediment and water discharge,
flow energy, etc.) and the sea (wave and littoral currents
regime, sea-level changes, etc.) over the past about
12,000 yr.
The ages of the delta evolution phases are presently under
discussion. The first data set of 14C age determinations is
quite old (1972‑1978). It was obtained in the framework of
a collaborative project between the Romanian Institute
of Geology and Geophysics and the Centre for Applied
Isotope Studies in the USA. The results were published
in 1983 (Panin et al., 1983; Noakes and Herz, 1983) and
represented the base of the following succession and
timing of evolution phases: (1) the “Blocked Danube Delta”
and formation of the Letea-Caraorman initial spit, 11,700-
7,500 yr. BP; (2) the St. George I Delta, 9,000-7,200 yr. BP; (3)
the Sulina Delta, 7,200-2,000 yr. BP; (4) the St. George II and
Kilia Deltas, 2,800 yr. BP to present; (5) the Cosna-Sinoie
Delta, 3,500‑1,500 yr. BP (not calibrated ages).
L. Giosan et al. (2005 and 2006) suggested younger ages
for the initial stages of delta development (for example,
in their view, the St. George I Phase could not be much
older than ~5,500-6,000 yr. BP). This hypothesis seems to
be more consistent with our present-day understanding
of water‑level changes in the Black Sea during the
Pleistocene – Holocene time. Nevertheless a number of
questions are still under discussion.
A new campaign of age determinations using, this
time, two methods – radiocarbon by AMS and thermo-
luminescence – is now in progress. The first results
obtained gave us comparable ages using the two methods
and these results are very similar with the previous
data set (for example for the Initial spit: 14C age at 80 cm
sampling depth – 9,973 yr. BP while TLD at 150 cm sampling
depth – 9,200 yr. BP). The 14C age was obtained on a marine
shell and the age is quite difficult to correlate with present
understanding of the Black Sea evolution. Consequently,
we consider that the timing of the Danube Delta phases
is still open and new studies and age determinations are
needed. For the moment, it is too early to take a definitive
decision. Probably the new data will introduce some
corrections to the old scheme and will allow a closer fit
with the Black Sea development.
Bearing in mind that the succession of the main phases
of the Danube Delta development is well established
and not contested, in the present paper we shall mainly
describe the physiographic changes of the delta during
these phases. Conventionally we shall use the chronology
of the “old” 14C ages data set mentioned above.
2.1 - The “Blocked Danube Delta” and the initial
spit of Letea-Caraorman
At the beginning of the Holocene, the present area of
the Danube Delta was transformed into a large marine
bay - the Danube Gulf (Fig. 4). All the tributary valleys
from the north, from the Bugeac Plateau (Kitai, Catlabug,
Ialpug, Kahul) had been partially invaded by the sea and
then transformed into lakes (lagoons, locally referred
 41

Fig. 3 – The Danube Delta’s geomorphological-sedimentological structure – The map outlines the main sets of beach ridges and the development phases of the
delta during the Holocene. 1: marine beach ridges; 2: lacustrine spit; 3: directions of main beach ridges and beach ridge sets; 4: river meandering zone – After
Panin, 1989.
42
to as limans) following the formation of spits at their
mouths. At the mouth of the Danube Gulf, between
the Jebriani promontory to the north and Murighiol-
Dunavăț promontory of Dobrogea to the south, a spit was
formed by the littoral sediment drift fed by Ukrainian
rivers (Dniester, Dnieper and Southern Bug). The spit
was named, in accordance with other predeces­sors, the
“Jebriani‑Letea‑Caraorman Initial Spit”. It almost entirely
closed access to the Danube Gulf and repre­sented the
coastline for this period of time.
During the existence of the Danube Gulf, almost the
en­t ire solid discharge of the Danube River was deposited
inside the gulf sheltered by the initial spit, and formed a
deltaic body called the “Blocked Danube Delta” phase F
(~11,000 – 9,000 yr. BP) (Fig. 4).
2.2 - The “Saint George I Delta”
Between the southern end of the initial spit and
the Murighiol–Dunavăţ Promotor y, there was a
passage through which the first Danube distributary,
Palaeo-St. George, flowed into the sea (Fig. 5). It is here that
the first delta of the Danube was formed - the “St. George I
Delta” and its development lasted for about 2,000 years
(~ 9,000 – 7,000 yr. BP).
At present, only the northern wing of this delta can
be recognised. This flank is represented by the littoral
accumulative formation Caraorman, built up by the
juxtaposition of an impressive number of palaeo-beach
ridges. These ridges were formed exclusively of sandy
sediments from Ukrainian rivers transported along the
seashore by littoral drift.
The progradation of the St. George I Delta coastline
totalled around 10 km in about two thousand years. At the
end of this phase the Palaeo-St. George distribu­tary was
partially clogged and a new distributary named Sulina was
formed.
2.3 - The Sulina Delta
The newly formed distributary had broken the Initial
Spit at some 20 km north of the Palaeo-St. George
mouth zone and started to build its own delta – the
Sulina Delta (Fig. 6). The develop­ment of the Sulina Delta
lasted about 5,000 years (after N. Panin et al., (1983), from
7,200 to 2,000 yr. BP). Initially, its evolution was slow and
its shape was controlled by waves and littoral drift. The
progressive increase of sediment discharge from the
Sulina distributary caused a significant progradation of
the Sulina Delta front, which became lobate over time with
three and then five distributaries.
The maximum progradation of the Sulina Delta into
the sea (Fig. 6) (the Sulina Delta front was 10‑15 km
offshore from the present shoreline), coincides with the
Phanagorian regression when sea level was at -2 to -4 m
elevation. The total progradation of the Sulina Delta front
during these 5,000 yr was around 30 km.
Detailed descriptions of the structure of the two wings of
the Sulina Delta are given in previous papers (Panin, 1989,
1996 and 1997).
At the end of the Sulina Delta Phase, at about 3,000 yr. BP
the Sulina distributary was partially clogged and lost its
importance in the delta system, culminating in the gradual
erosion and retreat of the Sulina delta front. At that time,
the St. George distributary was reactivated in the south
and a new distributary, the Kilia, was formed in the north.
Both these distributaries started to build their deltas.
2.4 - The Saint George II Delta
The formation and the development of the St. George II
Delta took place during the past ~3000 yr (Panin, 1983,
1989 and 1996). The St. George II Delta’s northern part
is represented by the Sărăturile littoral accumulative
formation, while its southern f lank comprises an
impressive number of fossil beach ridges and beach ridge
sets that record the progradation of the delta shoreline
(Fig. 7). The Sărăturile Formation has a divergent
structure, com­posed of numerous beach-ridge sets. The
divergent structure is due to the coastline regression in
the north as the Sulina Delta was subject to continuous
erosion, while in the south the coast was prograding with
the development of the St. George II Delta. The southern
wing of the St. George II Delta is formed of multiple fossil
beach ridges and beach ridge sets, recording successive
steps of delta development and progradation dur­ing the
last ca. 3,000 yr. BP. The latest ridge is the arcuate lateral
mouth bar Sakhalin (Island Sakhalin) that appeared in
the 19th century and is developing rapidly nowadays. The
overall progradation over 3,000 yr. was of about 16‑20 km,
the average rate of progradation being of 8‑9 m.yr-1.
2.5 - The Kilia delta
When the Kilia distributary reached and broke the Initial
Spit (about 2,500 yr. ago), a new depocentre, the Kilia Delta,
began to develop. At the beginning, the progradation was
very slow as the Kilia’s sediment supply was low. During
this period the Kilia Delta was of a wave-dominated type.
Around 1,000 yr ago, the Kilia distributary reached a
predominant importance in the delta system, its sediment
supply gradually increased and the Kilia Delta became
lobated (Fig. 7). The most rapid progradation occurred in
the last five centuries and will be discussed further. The
sandy sediments supplied by the littoral drift system from
the Ukrainian rivers stops north of the Kilia Delta forming
the Jebriani Formation ridges. During the past in 2500 yr,
the Kilia Delta has prograded by about 18 km.
2.6 - Sinoie Delta
In the southern Danube Delta territory, during the period
from 3,500 to 1,500 yr BP, there was a secondary delta, the
Si­noie Delta (Fig. 8). Two successive development stages
have been elucidated: Cosna and Sinoie Deltas. These two
deltas are, in fact, formed by a secondary distributary, the
Dunavăț. Dur­ing the first centuries AD, the Sinoie Delta was
eroded and its material redeposited as beach ridges forming
the Lupilor, Istria and Chituc accumulative formations. The
 43

Fig. 4 – The Danube Delta coastline position during the “blocked Danube Delta”
44

Fig. 5 – The position of the Danube Delta coastline during the maximum progradation of the St. George I Delta phase
 45

Fig. 6 – The position of the Danube Delta coastline during the maximum progradation of the Sulina Delta phase
46

Fig. 7 – The position of the Danube Delta coastline during the present-day progra­dation of the Kilia and St. George II Deltas
 47

Fig. 8 – The position of the Danube Delta coastline during the Cosna-Sinoie Delta phase. The coastline at ~ 100 yr AD is also shown
48
Lupilor sets of beach ridges were synchronous with the
existence of the Greek and Roman cities Istros/His­tria and
Orgame/Argamum (~7th century BC to ~7th century AD) on
the western coast of the Black Sea. The sediments eroded
from the Sinoie Delta drifted southwards and caused the
decline and, in the end, the collapse of the town of Istria
at about 700 AD.
Giosan et al. (2006), do not support the hypothesis
of the edification of the delta Cosna-Sinoie by the
Dunavăț distributary. In their opinion, the sedimentary
transport by the littoral drift is sufficient to explain the
formation of the Lupilor, Istria and Chituc accumulative
formations. Giosan’s opinion on the Cosna lobe appears to
be a singular one – Vespremeneanu-Stroe et al. (2013)
support the existence of this delta, while for him the lobe
was built later and faster than in our interpretation.
In the littoral drift hypothesis as the only source of
sediments for the Lupilor, Sinoie and Chituc Formations,
the closest source of sediments is the St. George
distributary that is located at about 30-40 km NE of the
supposed Dunavăț mouth zone. The St. George – Dunavăț
section of the delta coast is characterised by the largest
sediment deficit and the weakest littoral drift of the entire
delta front, with zones where the drift orientation is
opposite to the southward general sediment transfer along
the coast. It is not possible that the very large amount of
sediments that composes the Lupilor, Sinoie and Chituc
Formations had drifted southward from the St. George
mouth and passed through the Sf. St. George – Dunavăț
section of the weakest littoral drift.
Additionally, (1) there is some geophysical evidence
for an old incised channel and some remains from a
frontal beach ridge or presently-submerged mouth zone;
(2) the mineralogical composition of the heavy fraction
of the littoral sands sustains the area close to the river
mouth (close to the mouth zone there are some less
stable minerals than those that can support important
longshore drift); (3) there is a large residual of heavy
minerals (mainly titanite, zircon, rutile, garnet, ilmenite)
in the northern part of the Chituc formation that was
formed by a strong palaeo-erosion of a large volume of
littoral sands from an important sedimentary body (the
Cosna lobe).
Concerning the age of the Cosna-Sinoie Delta: the ages
proposed by us are based on 14C and TLD determinations
and the differences are compared to Vespreanu-
Stroe’s et al. (2013) results. We sampled the first set
of beach-ridges marking the onset of the Cosna-Sinoie
Delta. The ages we obtained from the entire range
of Cosna‑Sinoie beach-ridges sets span the period
from about 3,550 yr BP to 1,500 yr BP, while the ages
proposed by Vespremeanu-Stroe et al. (2013) are in
the interval 2000‑1300 yr BP. In principle, we agree with
Vespremeneanu-Stroe’s hypothesis that the maximum
development of the Dunavăț and Cosna Delta occurred
around 1400-1300 yr BP.
2.7 - The evolution of the Danube Delta
hydrographic network during the Holocene
(Fig. 9)
The bifurcation of the Danube River at the first hydro­
graphic knot probably occurred during the “Danube
Blocked Delta”. The northern distributary – Palaeo‑Kilia,
during this period appears to have been less important,
with a smaller discharge than the southern one
– Palaeo‑Tulcea branch. The evolution of the southern
branch was inf luenced by the land of the northern
Dobrogea: there were four impingements against Dobrogea
- the first at Tulcea, the second, about 7 km downstream,
at Nufăru (Preslav), fol­lowed by Carasuhat and Mahmudia
impingements (Panin, 1976). After the impingement
at Preslav, (km 104 upstream from the mouth zone of
the St. George arm) the distributary divided into two
distributaries – Palaeo-St. George (southern branch)
and Palaeo-Sulina (northern branch) as a result of
disturbed flow conditions that occurred immediately
after the impinge­ment. Consequently, initially the second
hydrographical knot (Ceatal St. George) was located a few
kilometres downstream from the present-day bifurcation
point, immediately after Preslav. The Palaeo-St. George
branch became the most important and active distributary
for a long period and was responsible for the formation of
the first Danube Delta, the St. George I Delta.
The Kilia distributary flowed northwards, touching the
Bugeac Plateau in the Izmail area, where it changed the
flow direction towards the east, probably, along the Stipoc
lacus­t rine spit and then followed the present-day course
of the Sontea channel to join the Paleo-Sulina distributary
around Mile 25‑Mile 24 (on the so-called Old Danube)
(Panin, 1976 and 1997).
During the phase of maximum progradation of the
St. George I Delta, the palaeo-distributary St. George
formed me­a nders of 10-14 km wavelength (λ), with
amplitudes (α) of 5-7 km and curvature indices r m/w
exceeding 2.0 (Panin, 1976) (Fig. 9).
Only at the end of the Phanagorian regression, when
the sea level was lowered by several meters (‑2 – ‑4 m)
and the relief energy increased, was the St. George
distributary drained and a new generation of meander
bands characterised by λ = 2.4-5.0 km, α = 1.5-4.0 km and
r m/w values of 1.49‑2.1 was formed (Panin, 1976) (Fig. 8).
Then the excessive length of the distributary channel
and associated low-energy relief led to a partial clogging
of the Palaeo-St. George which lost its major role in the
hydrographic system of the delta during the following
period. The Palaeo-Sulina branch gradually be­c ame
the most important distributary (for a period of almost
5,000 yr) and some 6,000‑7,000 yr. BP broke the initial spit
in the Răducu area, (Fig. 9), starting to build the “Sulina
Delta”. The Palaeo‑Sulina distributary meander system
(composed of Maliuc and “Big M” meander bends), had
wavelengths and am­plitudes very similar to those of
the Palaeo‑St. George branch (λ = 14-16 km; α = 5-7 km;
rm/w = 2.67-2.78) (Panin, 1976).
 49

Fig. 9 – Hypothetical courses of the Paleo-St. George, Paleo-Sulina and Paleo-Kilia distributaries – After Panin, 1976 with completions.

The Kilia distributary may have adopted its present course
around 3,000-3,500 years BP. The area north of Stipoc spit,
the Pardina Depression, was occupied by the Lake Thiagola,
mentioned by ancient texts (among them Ptolemy or
Claudios Ptolemaios – ~90‑168 AD), that was a lagoon
formed in the drowned valleys deriving from the Bugeac
Plateau (Panin, 1983). The Kilia arm probably entered the
Pardina Depression after exceptionally high water in the
Danube River and Gulf. The distributary probably found
a way out to the sea through the Initial Spit at almost
50
the same time. Since then, the Kilia distributary began
introducing an increasing quantity of sediment to the
coastal area forming its own depocentre, the Kilia Delta.
2.8 - Present state of the Danube Delta
hydrographic system
Anthropogenic pressure in the last 150 years has
transformed the majority of river systems (Petts, 1984;
Church, 1995; Sear, 1995; Xu, 1996; Brandt, 2000;
Shields et al., 2000; Batalla, 2003; Gaeuman et al., 2005;
Magilligan and Nislow, 2005; Phillips et al., 2005).
Disturbances like river-draining operations, such
as meander cut-offs initiated for navigation or f lood
mitigation purposes, often lead to dramatic changes in
fluvial profiles (Hooke, 1986; Kesel, 2003; Kiss et al., 2008).
For the lower Danube River, and especially for the Danube
Delta, anthropogenic changes started in the 19th century,
mainly after the Crimean war with the establishment
of the European Danube Commission in 1856. The
Commission’s objective was to improve the navigability of
the delta distributaries and to transform the river into an
international waterway, stretching from the Black Sea to
Central Europe. The anthropogenic interventions in the
delta continued in the 20th century and their cumulative
impact on the delta system has been very important. The
measures and the actions during this period of time are
described in part 1.3. of the present paper.
Tab. 1 – Danube River water discharge distribution through the delta’s main distributaries
Distribution of Danube water discharge among the delta’s channels (%)
1857 1902
Danube distributaries
Kilia distributary 72.0 – 73.0
Tulcea ~ 28.0
Sulina 7.4 9.0
St. George ~ 19.0
After Bondar and Panin, 2000.
Fig. 10 – Changes in water discharge between the Danube Delta’s main distributaries during the period 1840‑2003 – After Bondar and Panin, 2000.
Furthermore, within the lower Danube, two barrages
(Iron Gates I and II, built up in 1970 and 1983, respectively)
and the hydrotechnical regulation works along the Danube
tributaries have dramatically decreased the sediment
discharge at the Danube mouths (by around 25‑40 %)
(Panin and Jipa, 2002; Panin, 2003; Panin and
Overmars, 2012) (Fig. 10). This had an adverse impact on
the sedimentary budget of the delta’s coastal zone, which
became unbalanced and characterized by strong erosion
of the delta front.
The distribution of Danube River water discharge
through the main delta branches has varied in the last
two centuries, mainly as a result of human intervention:
deviation projects, damming, channel construction.
Table 1 and Fig. 10 show the estimated variations in water
discharge over the last century (Bondar and Panin, 2000).
At present, the Kilia distributary is still the largest of the
delta system, but its water and sediment discharges have
decreased significantly and, consequently, progradation of
the Kilia Delta has slowed down.
The hydrotechnical works carried out along the Sulina
distributary explain the gradual deepening of the river
channel from less than 2.5 m in 1857 to at least 9.5 m in 1959
(Bondar and Papadopol, 1972; Bondar and Panin, 2000)
and to 14‑15 m at present (Fig. 11), (Duţu, 2014). Recent
1921 1960 1990 2003
62.0 – 63.0 57.0 – 58.0 ~ 52
~ 38.0 ~ 42.0 ~48
12 18.0 – 19.0 ~ 20
~ 18.0 ~ 23.0 ~ 28

Fig. 11 – Diversion of the Sulina distributary meander belts during the period 1868-1902
studies (Duţu, 2014) show that the Sulina channel is very
dynamic, with a high capacity for erosion and sediment
transport. Active bed forms (mega-ripples, small and high
dunes) have been identified across the entire channel
bed. The present-day evolution of the Sulina branch is
controlled by the continuous anthropogenic works and
interventions (dredging for navigation purposes) with
direct implications for the fluvial profile.
The St. George distributary meander cut-offs caused
dramatic changes in the local distribution of river-flow
velocities, discharge, and sediment fluxes (Ichim and
Radoane, 1986; Popa, 1997; Panin, 2003; Tiron, 2010,
Tiron Duţu et al., 2014). A rupture of the natural bend
evolution occurred – strong silting processes are more
actively expressed in the aggradation of the channel bed,
the narrowing of channels and the development of bars
and islands along the natural meander bend sections
(Jugaru Tiron et al., 2009; Tiron Duţu et al., 2014).
Fig. 12 – The St. George distributary – the meander belts diversion project
(1981 – 1992), Satellite Landsat image
Additionally, different other works have been undertaken
on the Danube Delta territory in or­der to open the fresh
water supply to different zones of the delta or to facilitate
the navigation and the access to these areas. Thus, a
network of 300 km of canals was artificially created.
Among these canals, the following had a particularly
important impact on the environment: the canal “King
Charles I” (canalul “Regele Carol I”), dredged in 1906 on
23 km to rectify a small, second­a ry, distributary Dunavăț
that at that time was almost completely silted; the canal
“King Ferdinand”, dug between 1911 to 1914 along 28 km
to open a waterway to the Lake Dranov area and finally, to
the Razelm lagoon and the canal “Mila 36”, cut in 1983‑1985
to facilitate the access from the Tulcea distributary (from
Tulcea city), to the Kilia distributary (to Kilia Veche village).
51
3 - Discussions and conclusions
3.1 - The chronology of the delta development
phases
As shown in chapter 2, the chronology of delta evolution is
presently under discussion.
There are at least two prevailing hypotheses concerning
the timing of delta development phases, differing notably
with regards to the ages for the initial stages of delta
evolution. The first hypothesis, based on an older data
set, considers that the onset of delta formation occurred
around 10-9 ka BP and the first delta lobe (“St. George I
Delta”) was formed and existed at 9‑7.2 ka BP. The second
hypothesis, based on a more recent data set, suggests
that the first delta lobe St. George I was formed around
6 ka BP. To solve this controversy a new age determination
campaign is currently in progress. We consider that the
problem of the timing of the Danube Delta phases needs
new studies and age determinations. These new data will
also contribute to a better understanding of the Black Sea
region’s development.
3.2 - Influence of the sea-level changes on the
Danube depocentre
The development of the Danube Delta is closely linked
to the evolution of the Black Sea water level on the one
hand and to the development of the Danube River, of its
sediment and water discharge on the other.
In the last 100 ka there have been at least three
high-stands of the Black Sea: the Karangatian phase
(~125 – ~65 ka BP), the Surozhian phase (~40–25 ka BP) and
after the melting of Würmian icecap (after ~16-15 ka BP).
A low stand is documented during the Younger Dryas,
followed by a quite rapid transgression of the sea up to the
present-day water level.
During the Karangatian, the water level was a few
meters higher than present-day and this meant that
the Mediterranean water entered the Black Sea and the
water covered the lowlands such as the present-day
delta territory. The Surozhian high-stand brought the
water level to a slightly lower mark similar to today, and
consequently the water did not cover the entire delta area,
but it seems that at least the eastern part of the delta was
submerged. The Würmian icecap melting again brought
the water level to a stand that allowed the water to cover
the delta territory and restored the connection between
the Black and the Mediterranean seas.
52

These high stands are the periods when the Danube
River sediment load accumulated within the present-day
delta territory. By contrast, during low-stands, the river
continued to flow down towards the Black Sea depression,
to the low-stand coastal zones situated at or even beyond
the shelf break. On the present-day delta territory the
low-stands are marked by important incisions of the
river valley and strong erosion when the older deposits
were washed out almost completely. The following
transgressions infilled the incisions and covered the area
with new blankets of sediments.
The evolution phases of the Danube delta have also been
influenced by small-scale sea-level variations (for instance,
the Phanagorian regressive phase), as well as by the
possible autocyclic shifting of the main sediment supply
between the Danube distributaries and correspondingly of
depocentres from one area to another.

References
Almazov A. A., Bondar C., Diaconu C. et al., (1963), Zona de vărsare a Dunării. Monografie hidrologică, Ed. Tehnică, Bucureşti, 396 p.
Antipa G., (1915), Wissenschaftliche und wirtschaftliche Probleme des Donaudeltas, Anuarul Institutului Geologic al României, 7, 1, Bucureşti,
88 p.
Antipa G., (1941), Marea Neagră, 1 – Oceanografia, bionomia si biologia generală a Mării Negre, Publicatia Fondului Vasile Ada­machi, vol. X,
LV, Academia Română, Bucureşti, 313 p.
Banu A. C., (1965), Contribuţii la cunoaşterea vârstei şi evoluţiei Deltei Dunării, Hidrobiologia, Ed. Acad. RPR, Bucureşti, 6, p. 259-278.
Banu A. C., Rudescu L., (1965), Delta Dunării, Ed. Știinţifică, Bucureşti, 295 p.
Batalla R. J., (2003), Sediment deficit in rivers caused by dams and instream gravel mining. A review with examples from NE Spain,
Revista C&G, 17, 3-4, p. 79-91.
Biedenharn D. S., Thorne C. R., Watson C. C., (2000), Recent morphological evolution of the Lower Mississippi River, Geomorphology,
34, p. 227‑249.
Bleahu M., (1963), Observaţii asupra evoluţiei zonei Histria în ultimile trei milenii, Probleme de Geografie, 9, p. 45‑56.
Bondar C., (1972), Contribuție la studiul hidraulic al ieșirii în mare prin gurile Dunării, Studii de Hidrologie, Probleme de Oceanografie,
32, Bucureşti, 467 p .
Bondar C., (1992), Trends and cyclicity of annual Danube discharge at Delta input, in XVI Konferenz der Donauländer über hydrologische
Vorhersagen und Hydrologische-Wassersistschaftliche Grundlagen (18- 22 May 1992), Kelheim, p. 321‑326.
Bondar C., (1993), Hidrologia în studiul de caz al Deltei Dunarii, Anua­r ul Știinţific al Institutului Delta Dunarii, Tulcea, p. 285‑289.
Bondar C., State I., Cernea D. et al., (1991), Waterflow and sediment transport of the Danube at its outlet into the Black Sea,
Meteorology and Hydrology, 21, 1, p. 21‑25.
Bondar C., Panin N., (2000), The Danube Delta Hydrologic Database and Modelling, GeoEcoMarina, 5-6, p. 5‑53.
Bondar C., Papadopol A., (1972), Evoluţia albiei Canalului Sulina, Transporturi auto, navale şi aeriene, 2 (19), 3, p. 144‑147.
Brandt S. A., (2000), Classification of geomorphological effects downstream of dams, Catena, 40, p. 375‑401.
Brătescu C., (1922), Delta Dunării. Geneza și evoluţia sa morfologică și cronologică, Buletinul Societății Regale de Geografie, 41, p. 3‑39.
Brătescu C., (1942), Oscilaţiile de nivel ale apelor si bazinului Mării Ne­g re, Buletinul Societății Regale de Geografie, 61, p. 1‑112.
Cattaneo A., Correggiari A., Langone L. et al., (2003), The late-Holocene Gargano subaqueous delta, Adriatic shelf: sediment
pathways and supply fluctuations, Marine Geology, 193, 1‑2, p. 61‑91.
Chen Z., Song B., Wang Z., Cai Y., (2000), Late Quaternary evolution of the sub-aqueous Yangtze Delta, China: sedimentation,
stratigraphy, palynology, and deformation, Marine Geology, 162, 2-4, p. 423‑441.
Church M., (1995), Geomorphic response to river flow regulation: case studies and time-scales, Regulated Rivers: Research and
Management, 11, 1, p. 3‑22.
COTEȚ P., (1960), Evoluţia morfohidrografică a Deltei Dunării (O sinteză a studiilor existente și o nouă interpretare), Probleme de Geogra­
fie, 7, p. 53‑81.
Duţu F., (2014), Studiul dinamicii hidro-sedimentare şi morfologice a braţului Sulina din Delta Dunării, PhD thesis, 158 p.
Gaeuman D., Schmidt J., Wilcock P. R., (2005), Complex channel responses to changes in stream flow and sediment supply on the
lower Duchesne River, Utah, Geomorphology, 64, p. 185‑206
GÂȘTESCU P., Driga B. V., (1981), Évolution du débit liquide à l’embouchure du Danube dans la mer Noire pendant la période 1850-1980,
Revue Roumaine de Géologie, Géophysique, Géographie, Série Géo­g raphie, 25, 2, p. 229‑236.
Gâştescu P., Driga B. V., (2009), Sistemul circulaţiei apei şi bilanţul hidric în Delta Dunării, Riscuri şi catastrofe, 8, 6, p. 17‑26.
Giosan L., Bokuniewicz H. J., Panin N. et al., (1997), Longshore sediment transport pattern along Romanian Danube delta coast,
Geo-Eco-Marina, 2, p. 11‑24.
 53

Giosan L., Donnelly J. P., Vespremeanu E. et al., (2005), River Delta Morphodynamics: examples from the Danube Delta, in Giosan
L. and Bhattacharya P. (eds.), River Deltas – Concepts, Models and Examples, LSEPM Special Publication 83, Tulsa (Oklahoma), p. 393‑411.
Giosan L., Donnelly J. P., Vespremeanu E. et al., (2006), Young Danube delta documents stable Black Sea level since the middle
Holocene: Morphodynamic, paleogeographic and archeological implica­tions, Geology, 34, 9, p. 757‑760.
Goodbred S. L., Kuehl S. A., (1999), Holocene and modern sediment budgets for the Ganges–Brahmaputra river system; evidence for
highstand dispersal to flood-plain, shelf, and deep-sea depocenters, Geology, 27, 6, p. 559‑562.
Goodbred S. L., Kuehl S. A., (2000), The significance of large sediment supply, active tectonism, and eustasy on margin sequence
development: Late Quaternary stratigraphy and evolution of the Ganges–Brahmaputra delta, Sedimentary Geology, 133, 3-4, p. 227‑248.
Grumăzescu H., Stăncescu C., Nedelcu E., (1963), Unităţile fizico-geografice ale Deltei Dunării, Hidrobiologia, 4, p. 129‑162.
Hartley A. C., (1867), Rapport sur l’amélioration de la navigabilité du Bas-Danube, Mémoires sur les travaux d’amélioration aux embou­
chures du Danube par la Commission Européenne, Galaţi, p. 29-48.
Hooke J. M., (1986), Changes in Meander Morphology, in GARDINER V. (ed.), International Geomorphology, Part I, Wiley, Chichester,
p. 591- 600
Ichim I., Radoane M., (1986), Efectele barajelor în dinamica reliefului. Abordare geomorfologicã, Editura Academiei, Bucureşti, 160 p.
Jugaru Tiron L., Le Coz J., Provansal M. et al., (2009), Flow and sediment processes in a cutoff meander of the Danube Delta during
episodic flooding, Geomorphology, 106, 3-4, p. 186-197.
Kesel R. H., (2003). Human modifications to the sediment regime of the Lower Mississippi River flood plain, Geomorphology, 56, 3-4,
p. 325-334.
Kiss T., Fiala K., Sipos G., (2008), Alterations of channel parameters in response to river regulation works since 1840 on the Lower
Tisza River (Hungary), Geomorphology, 98, no 1-2, p. 96-110.
Knox J. C., (2006), Floodplain sedimentation in the Upper Mississippi Valley: Natural versus human accelerated, Geomorphology, 79,
p. 286-310.
Kuehl S. A., Levy B. M., Moore W. S. et al., (1997), Subaqueous delta of the Ganges–Brahmaputra river system, Marine Geology, 144,
p. 81-96.
Lepsi I., (1942), Materiale pentru studiul Deltei Dunării. Partea I-a. Bu­letinul Muzeului Regional Bassarabia, Chișinău, 10, p. 94-325.
Liteanu E., Pricăjan A., Baltac G., (1961), Transgresiunile cuaternare ale Mării Negre pe teritoriul Deltei Dunării, Studii și Cercetări
Geolo­gice, Bucureşti, 6, 4, p. 743-762.
Liteanu E., Pricăjan A., (1963), Alcătuirea geologică a Deltei Dunării, Hidrobiologia, București, 4, p. 57-82.
Liu J. P., Milliman J. D., Gao S. et al., (2004), Holocene development of the Yellow River’s subaqueous delta, North Yellow Sea, Marine
Geology, 209, 1-4, p. 45-67.
Liu J., Saito Y., Wang H. et al., (2007), Sedimentary evolution of the Holocene subaqueous clinoform off the Shandong Peninsula in
the Yellow Sea, Marine Geology, 236, 3-4, p. 165-187.
Magilligan F. J., Nislow T. K. H., (2005), Changes in hydrologic regime by dams, Geomorphology, 71, p. 61-78.
Meybeck M., Laroche L., Dürr H. H. et al., (2003), Global variability of daily total suspended solids and their fluxes in rivers, Global
and Planetary Change, 39, p. 65‑93.
Milliman J. D., Meade R. H., (1983), World-wide delivery of river sediment to the oceans, Journal of Geology, 91, p. 1‑21.
Nittrouer C. A., Kuehl S. A., DeMaster D. J. et al., (1986), The deltaic nature of Amazon shelf sedimentation, GSA Bulletin, 97, 4,
p. 444‑458.
Noakes J. E., Herz N., (1983), University of Georgia Radiocarbon Dates VII, Radiocarbon, 25, 3, p. 919-929.
Panin N., (1974), Evoluţia Deltei Dunării în timpul Holocenului, Studii Tehnice și Economice ale Institutului Geologic, Seria H - Geologia
Cuaternarului, 5, p. 107‑121.
Panin N., (1976), Some aspects of fluvial and marine processes in the Danube Delta, Annuar Institute of Geology and Geophysics, 50,
p. 149‑165.
Panin N., (1983), Black Sea coast line changes in the last 10,000 years. A new attempt at identifying the Danube mouth as described
by the ancients, Dacia, N.S., 27, 1-2, p. 175‑184.
Panin N., (1989), Danube Delta. Genesis, evolution and sedimentol­ogy, Révue Roumaine de Géologie, Géophysique, Géographie, Série
Géographie, Bucureşti, 33, p. 25‑36.
Panin N., (1996), Danube Delta. Genesis, evolution, geological setting and sedimentology, Geo-Eco-Marina, 1, p. 7‑23.
Panin N., (1997), On the Geomorphologic and Geologic Evolution of the River Danube - Black Sea Interaction Zone, Geo-Eco-Marina, 2,
p. 31‑40.
Panin N., (2003), The Danube Delta. Geomorphology and Holocene Evolution: a Synthesis, Géomorphologie: relief, processus, envi­
ronnement, 4, p. 247‑262.
54

Panin N., (2009), Contribution to the study of the sediment sink pro­cesses within the Danube – Black Sea system, Geo-Eco-Marina, 15,
p. 29‑35.
Panin N., Panin S., Herz N. et al., (1983), Radiocarbon Dating of Danube Delta deposits, Quaternary Research, 19, p. 249‑255.
Panin N., Jipa D., (2002), Danube River Sediment Input and its Inter­action with the North-western Black Sea, Estuarine, Coastal and
Shelf Science, 54, 2, p. 551‑562.
Panin N., Popescu I., (2002-2003), The Black Sea: Climatic and Sea Level Changes in the Upper Quaternary, Trav. de l’Institut de
Spéléologie “Emile Racovitza”, Académie Roumaine, Bucarest, 41 – 42, p. 39‑51.
Panin N., Ion G., Ion E., (2005), The Danube Delta – Chronology of Lobes and Rates of Sediment Deposition, Geo-Eco-Marina, 9‑10,
p. 36‑40.
Panin N., Overmars W., (2012), The Danube Delta evolution during the Holocene: Reconstruction attempt using geomorphological
and geological data, and some of the existing carthographic documents, Geo-Eco-Marina, 18, p. 75‑110.
Petrescu I. G., (1957), Delta Dunării. Geneză și evoluție, Ed. Știinţifică, Bucureşti, 234 p.
Petts G. E., (1984), Impounded rivers: perspectives for ecological management, Wiley, Chichester, 326 p.
Phillips J. D., Slaterry M. C., Musselman Z. A., (2005), Channel adjustments of the the lower Trinity River, Texas, downstream of
Livingston dam, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 30, p. 1419‑1439.
Popa A., (1997), Environment changes in the Danube Delta caused by the hydrotechnical works on the St. George branch, Geo-Eco-
Marina, 2, p. 135‑147.
Sear D. A., (1995), Morphological and sedimentological changes in a gravel-bed river following 12 years of flow regulation for
hydropower, Regulated Rivers: Research and Management, 10, p. 247-264.
Shields F. D., Simon A., Steffen L. J., (2000), Reservoir effects on downstream river channel migration, Environmental Conservation,
27, 1, p. 54-66.
Slanar H., (1945), Zur Kartographie und Morphologie des Donaudel­tas, in Mitteilungen der geographischen Gesellschaft, Wien, p. 1-12.
Stanley D. J., Warne, A.G., (1993), Nile delta: recent geological evolution and human impact, Science, 260, p. 228-231.
Stănică A., Panin N., (2009), Present evolution and future predictions for the deltaic coastal zone between the Sulina and
Sf. Gheorghe Danube river mouths (Romania), Geomorphology, 107, p. 41-46.
Ta T. K. O., Nguyen V. L., Tateishi M. et al., (2002), Sediment facies and late Holocene progradation of the Mekong River Delta in
Bentre Province, southern Vietnam: an example of a tide- and wave-dominated delta, Sedimentary Geology, 152, 3-4, p. 313-325.
Tiron L., (2010), Delta du Danube - Bras de St. George. Mobilité morphologique et dynamique hydro-sédimentaire depuis 150 ans, GeoEcoMarina
Special Publication, 4, Bucureşti, 280 p.
Tiron Duţu L., Provansal M., Le Coz J. et al., (2014), Contrasted sediment processes and morphological adjustments in three
successive cutoff meanders of the Danube Delta, Geomorphology, 204, p. 154-164.
Vâlsan G., (1934), Nouvelle hypothèse sur le Delta du Danube, in Comptes rendus du congrès International de Géographie, Varsovie, 2,
p. 342-355.
Vespremeanu-Stroe A., Preoteasa L., Hanganu D. et al., (2013), The impact of the Late Holocene coastal changes on the rise and
decay of the ancient city of Histria (southern Danube delta), Quaternary International, 293, p. 245-256
Walling D. E., (2006), Human impact on land–ocean sediment transfer by the world’s rivers, Geomorphology, 79, p. 192-216.
Xu J., (1996), Underlying gravel layers in a large sand bed river and their influence on downstream-dam channel adjustment,
Geomorphology, 17, p. 351-359.
Xue Z., Liu J. P., DeMaster D. et al., (2010), Late Holocene Evolution of the Mekong Subaqueous Delta, Southern Vietnam, Marine
Geology, 269, p. 46-60.

View publication stats