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

net/publication/342499465

MATLAB functions for extracting Hypsometry, Stream-length gradient index,

Steepness index, Chi gradient of channel and Swath profiles from Digital
Elevation Model (DEM) and other s...

Article in Applied Computing and Geosciences · June 2020

DOI: 10.1016/j.acags.2020.100033

CITATIONS READS

10 1,356

4 authors:

Nilesh K Jaiswara Sravan Kumar Kotluri

National Geophysical Research Institute National Geophysical Research Institute
10 PUBLICATIONS 33 CITATIONS 7 PUBLICATIONS 24 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Prabha Pandey Anand K Pandey

National Geophysical Research Institute National Geophysical Research Institute
28 PUBLICATIONS 190 CITATIONS 48 PUBLICATIONS 496 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Eastern Himalayan Syntaxis View project

Crustal density structure of the North-Western Indian Shield View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nilesh K Jaiswara on 02 July 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Applied Computing and Geosciences 7 (2020) 100033

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Computing and Geosciences

journal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/applied-computing-and-geosciences

MATLAB functions for extracting hypsometry, stream-length gradient index,

steepness index, chi gradient of channel and swath profiles from digital
elevation model (DEM) and other spatial data for landscape characterisation
Nilesh K. Jaiswara a, Sravan Kumar Kotluri b, Prabha Pandey a, b, Anand K. Pandey a, b, *
a
Academy of Scientific & Innovative Research, CSIR-National Geophysical Research Institute, Hyderabad, 500007, India
b
CSIR-National Geophysical Research Institute, Hyderabad, 500007, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The landscape, developed by the interaction of geological processes, is represented by Digital Elevation Models
Landscape (DEMs) of various spatial resolutions. These DEMs can be variously analysed for the spatial and linear morpho-
Hypsometry metric indices for landscape characterisation. We have developed MATLAB functions for extracting Hypsometric
Stream length gradient index
integral (Hi), Stream Length-gradient (SL) index, Normalized steepness index (ksn), Chi (χ) gradient index and
Normalized steepness index
Chi (χ) gradient
Swath profile with maximum, minimum and mean elevation profiles from DEM. These functions are tested on
Swath profile SRTM DEM (30 m, 90 m spatial resolution) and ASTER GDEM (30 m spatial resolution) from three different
catchments with varying tectono-geomorphic setup. The swath profile of the TRMM precipitation data is also
prepared to demonstrate the application of present functions on different raster dataset and their robustness for
multi-parametric correlations. The user-friendly MATLAB functions provide automation and flexibility to extract
the morphometric indices cited above from DEM and other raster data with user defined variables for different
tectonic-geomorphology and environmental studies.

1. Introduction
Tectonic-geomorphology and environmental studies aim at charac-
terising the landscape to understand the competitive interaction of tec-
tonic processes and climate-driven gradation on a regional scale (Hack,
1973; England and Molnar, 1990; Anderson and Anderson, 2010; Bur-
bank and Anderson, 2011). Landscapes can be characterized by various
spatial and linear geomorphic parameters derived from topography such
as slope, relief, drainage patterns, longitudinal profiles and stream gra-
dients (Seeber and Gornitz, 1983; Keller and Pinter, 2002; Whittaker
et al., 2007). In active mountainous terrain, the drainage networks
generally flow perpendicular to the range front producing high stream
gradients and try to attain a steady-state (uplift ¼ erosion), whereas the
channels parallel to mountain front represent a stage where the tectonic
uplift exceeds the erosion power of streams to incise the topography
(Anderson and Anderson, 2010; Burbank and Anderson, 2011). The
hypsometry index (Hi) (Strahler, 1952), stream length (SL) index (Hack,
1973), normalized channel steepness index (ksn) and Chi (χ) gradient are
among the commonly used spatial and linear parameters for identifying
the stages of catchment evolution and zone of the focused erosion
relative to the gradation process (Keller and Pinter, 2002; Wobus et al.,
2006; P
erez-Pe~ na et al., 2009a; Kirby and Whipple, 2012; Perron and
Royden, 2013; Mudd et al., 2014). The swath profile condenses spatial
information of the rectangular area to the elevation profile and forms an
integral part of any terrain/landscape analysis (Fielding et al., 1994; Lave
and Avouac, 2000; D’Agostino et al., 2001; Riquelme et al., 2003; Molin
et al., 2004; Grohmann, 2005; Bookhagen and Burbank, 2006; Molin
et al., 2012; Paola Scotti et al., 2014; Aza~
no
n et al., 2015; P
erez-Pe~ na
et al., 2017).
The availability of the open-source digital topographic data such as
the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM), Advanced Spaceborne
Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) GDEM (htt
ps://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/) and other thematic datasets aided by
mathematical tools (Schwanghart and Kuhn, 2010; Shahzad and Gloa-
guen, 2011a, 2011b; Jaiswara et al., 2019a) on different GIS platforms
(Burbank, 1992; P
erez-Pe~ na et al., 2009a, 2009b; Schwanghart and
Kuhn, 2010; Shahzad and Gloaguen, 2011a, 2011b; Kirby and Whipple,
2012; Perron and Royden, 2013) has greatly enhanced the capability of
extracting morphometric parameters, which are essential for the spatial
landscape pattern characterisation. The Hi, SL, and ksn indices are the

* Corresponding author. Academy of Scientific & Innovative Research, CSIR-National Geophysical Research Institute, Hyderabad, 500007, India.
E-mail address: akpandey@ngri.res.in (A.K. Pandey).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acags.2020.100033
Received 19 February 2019; Received in revised form 22 June 2020; Accepted 22 June 2020
Available online 27 June 2020
2590-1974/© 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
N.K. Jaiswara et al.
Fig.1. Hillshade of Himalaya terrain overlaid with the TRMM precipitation data (after Bookhagen and Burbank, 2010) and marked with the locations of the case
studies along the Kameng, Umiam and Birahi Ganga catchments.
primary reconnaissance tools to find the signatures of the uplift by
comparing different river profiles and hypsometric curves of basins
across different tectonic settings (Seeber and Gornitz, 1983; Merritts and
Vincent, 1989; Chen et al., 2003; Harkins et al., 2005; Goldrick and
Bishop, 2007; Troiani and Della Seta, 2008; P
erez-Pe~ na et al., 2009a,
2009b; Font et al., 2010). The tools to calculate these preliminary indices
on one platform are hard to find. Here, we present interactive MATLAB
functions to extract hypsometry curves with integral values for a given
catchment, SL-index and ksn along river profiles and swath profiles from
the spatial data. The functions have options to reduce artefacts in DEMs
for the rugged landscapes by smoothing the data to get better constraints
on the topographic features. We present the results from three catch-
ments of varying scale and degree of uplift and erosion to demonstrate
the applicability and robustness of the MATLAB functions. The test sec-
tions include the Kameng river catchment in the tectonically active
eastern Himalaya, the Umiam river catchment in Shillong plateau
experiencing the highest precipitation in the world and the
landslide-affected Birahi Ganga catchment in western Himalaya (Fig. 1).
We tested the accuracy and consistency of the derived parameters in
three different DEM datasets and briefly analysed the morphometric re-
sults in conjunction with the tectonic-climatic forcing in the landscape
evolution.
2. Geomorphic indices
Morphometry provides a quantitative characterisation of basin
morphology by identifying variations in the spatial and linear attributes
of a drainage catchment and helps in characterising the stages of erosion
in comparison to the basins of varying topographic relief (Keller and
Pinter, 2002; Bull, 2007; Anderson and Anderson, 2010; Burbank and
Anderson, 2011). The hypsometry, SL index, ksn, Chi (χ) and swath
profiles are important preliminary tools (Strahler, 1952; Schumm, 1956;
Hack, 1973) for any morphometric analysis that broadly defines the
stages of river evolution (i.e. young, mature, old) and are helpful in
identifying the zones of localized erosion based on stream gradient along
the profiles.
i) Hypsometry curves and integrals
The hypsometric curve is an area-altitude curve that defines the dis-
tribution of elevation of the area in a drainage basin vide Eq. (1)
(Strahler, 1952; Schumm, 1956).
fx ¼ f ðyÞg (1)
where ‘x’ is a function of the cumulative area (a/A) and ‘y’ is the cu-
mulative height (h/H). The variable ‘a’ is the surface area within the
2
Applied Computing and Geosciences 7 (2020) 100033
contour, ‘A’ is the total drainage basin area, ‘h’ is the height of the basin
within the contour and ‘H’ is the total height of the basin (Fig. 2a). The
range of x-axis and y-axis are scaled from 0 to 1 (Fig. 2b). The shape of the
curve indicates the degree of dissection and evolutionary stage of the
basin (Fig. 2b; Strahler, 1952). They can be quantified as Hypsometric
integral (Hi), which defines the area below the hypsometric curve that
represents the un-eroded volume of the basin (Strahler, 1952; Schumm,
1956). Hi is calculated using Eq (2).
Emean  Emin
Hi ¼ (2)
Emax  Emin
where Emin, Emean, and Emax are the minimum, mean, and maximum el-
evations of the drainage basin.
The values of Hi range between 0 and 1 indicating the high to low
eroded region (Delcaillau et al., 1998; Keller and Pinter, 2002). The
shape of hypsometry curve and Hi value holds clues to the tectonic,
climate and lithological factor in the evolution of basin landscape
(Moglen and Bars, 1995; Willgoose and Hancock, 1998; Huang and
Niemann, 2006).
ii) Stream length-gradient index
The rivers tend to attain an erosion-sedimentation equilibrium or
steady-state, which is characterized by a concave longitudinal river
profile (Schumm et al., 2002). Often the substrate tectonic, lithological
variation and/or climatic factors tend to produce deviation from
steady-state river profile (Hack, 1973; Burbank and Anderson, 2011).
The Stream Length-Gradient (SL) index defines the change in stream
slope along a longitudinal river profile and effectively demarcates the
zones of topographic break. Considering the stream profile as a straight
line Hack (1973) proposed the following equation (Eq. (3)) to define its
behaviour.
H ¼ C  k loge L (3)
where H is the elevation above a given datum, C is the river head
elevation L is the length from the river head, and k is the slope of the
straight line (Fig. 2c).
The stream profile slope (S) at a point represents the tangent to the
profile that can be calculated using Eq. (4) and Eq. (5).
ΔH
S¼ ¼ kL1 (4)
ΔL
or
ΔH
k¼ L ¼ SL (5)
ΔL
N.K. Jaiswara et al. Applied Computing and Geosciences 7 (2020) 100033

Fig.2. a) Schematic representation of a catchment for defining the various components of Hypsometric calculations (after Strahler, 1952) and (b) Schematic diagram
showing various Hypsometric curves for the different stages of the river evolutionary cycle (after Ohmori, 1993). Arrows indicate a direction of change in the curves
during a geomorphic cycle. (d) The schematic diagram for extracting parameters for calculating SL-Index in map view (based on Keller and Pinter, 2002) and along
profile segments (after Hack, 1973). (d) Schematic diagram of log-log Slope and Area plot as a straight line where θ and log(ksn) are slope and y-intercept of the
straight line (modified after Wang et al., 2017). (e) Schematic plot of χ-profile for a steady state river (modified after mud et al., 2014). The slope of the straight line
represents χ-gradient.

3
N.K. Jaiswara et al.
Fig.3. Flowchart of the sequence required to generate the drainage network, Hypsometry Curve with integral value, river profile with SL-index, ksn and Swath profile
from a catchment DEM (see User Manual).
where SL (k) index represents the steepness/gradient of the profile for the
local reach, ΔL is the length of the local reach, ΔH is the drop in the
elevation and L is the total length of the channel from the water divide to
the centre of the local reach measured along the channel (Fig. 2c).
The SL index can be calculated by keeping either ΔH or ΔL constant
along the river profile. We used constant ΔL spacing based on the ad-
vantages shown by the comparative study of ΔH vs. ΔL methodologies
(P
erez-Pe~
na et al., 2009b). An abrupt change in SL-index along the river
is often associated with either a sharp lithological variation and/or the
differential uplift across active structure/tectonics (Strahler, 1952; Hack,
1973; Seeber and Gornitz, 1983; Keller and Pinter, 2002; Whittaker et al.,
2007).
iii) Channel steepness index
In a bedrock channel, the shape of river profiles tend to attain a
graded profile by adjusting upstream discharge and transport load
4
Applied Computing and Geosciences 7 (2020) 100033
(Mackin, 1948; Gilbert, 1877). The graded river profiles can be defined
by a power-law relationship between the channel slope (S; Eq. (4)) and
the contributing upstream drainage area (A) (Flint, 1974; Howard and
Kerby, 1983) following Eq. (6) (Fig. 2d). Prior to the availability of DEMs,
the channel length was considered approximation of the basin shape and
the accumulation area (Eqs. (4) and (6)).
S ¼ ks Aθ (6)
where ks ¼ ðU=KÞ1=n is the channel steepness index, θ ¼ m=n is the
concavity index, U is the rock uplift/erosion (E) rate at a steady state, K is
the erosional efficiency representing a suite of factors that govern the
river erosion and m and n are positive constants, whose ratio for a typical
basin is ~0.5 (Tucker and Whipple, 2002; Whipple et al., 2013).
The θ and ks can be estimated by a linear regression of the channel
slope against the drainage area on a log-log plot (Fig. 2d; Wobus et al.,
2006; Kirby and Whipple, 2012). However, a small variation and/or
N.K. Jaiswara et al. Applied Computing and Geosciences 7 (2020) 100033

Fig.4. (a) The DEM of the Kameng catchment used to extract geomorphic indices from ASTER, SRTM (30 m) and SRTM (90 m) DEM data sets. (b) The hypsometry
curves with integral values, (c) river profiles with SL-index values from raw data, (d) river profiles with SL-index values from 1 km smoothed data. Note that the SL
index derived from different DEMs are largely consistent.

uncertainties in the θ can lead to wide variations in ks;, therefore it is where zb is elevation at the drainage network’s base level at x ¼ xb and A0
imperative for normalized steepness index (ksn) with a reference con-
1n
cavity (θref) to correlate the catchments of various shapes and sizes (Eq. is an arbitrary reference area and KAUm defines the chi(χ)-gradient and
0

(7); Wobus et al., 2006). zb as the intercept (Fig. 2e). The χ represents the integral function of
location from base level ‘xb’ to the upstream location ‘x’ in the drainage
S ¼ ksn Aθref (7)
network
The average of concavity indices for all the channel in a basin can be Z x
m
considered the θref, which lies between a restricted range of 0.4  θ  0.6 A0 n
χ¼ dx (9)
for steady-state channels (Wobus et al., 2006; Kirby and Whipple, 2012). xb AðxÞ
The θref can alternatively be calculated by linear fitting of channel profiles
The χ -gradient represents the magnitude of the tectonic force and
(Perron and Royden, 2013; Mudd et al., 2014) and least scatter
erosivity, which becomes equal to the steepness index ksn, when the
χ-elevation analysis (Goren et al., 2014; Jaiswara et al., 2019a) as well.
threshold area is assumed to be 1. Further, the χ -coordinate in spatial
The ksn can be estimated by regression of a selected data range of up-
map with transformed distance variable provides a useful metric for
stream and downstream limits as well as the entire channel (Snyder et al.,
interpreting the dynamics and relative stability of the drainage divide
2003). A slope-area analysis is extremely useful for extracting the pa-
(Willett et al., 2014; Jaiswara et al., 2019a, b).
rameters; nevertheless, noise embedded in a DEM occasionally does not
resolve small features of interest when calculating the local slope. Here
iv) Swath profile
we have estimated the ksn with a fixed window (e.g. 0.5 km) so that the
effect of litho-tectonic variations can be identified along the channel.
The swath profile forms an essential component of regional landscape
The chi (χ) - provides an alternate integral approach where the hor-
characterisation and correlations with the other spatial data such as
izontal coordinate (x) of the river profile can be transformed into the
geological structures, precipitation etc. (Fielding et al., 1994; D’Agostino
χ-coordinate with the given threshold drainage area for river profile
et al., 2001; Riquelme et al., 2003; Molin et al., 2004; Grohmann, 2005;
analysis (Perron and Royden, 2013; Willett et al., 2014; Whipple et al.,
Bookhagen and Burbank, 2006; Molin et al., 2012; Paola Scotti et al.,
2013) by integrating Eq. (6) after separating the variables and treating U
2014; Aza~ no
n et al., 2015; P
erez-Pe~na et al., 2017). Of late, several
and K as constants in space and time, following steady-state equation as
customized tools have been developed to produce swath profile and we
Eq. (8):
also present an interactive MATLAB function to plot additional features

1n such as, user defined swath profile with minimum, maximum, mean, 1σ
U
zðxÞ ¼ zb þ χ (8) standard deviation and relief profiles along the swath from different
KAm0
spatial dataset namely DEMs and Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission
(TRMM) precipitation data.

5
N.K. Jaiswara et al.
Fig.5. Top row shows the different DEM datasets with the extracted spatial ksn for the trunk channel. Bottom two rows represent river profile with the ksn and chi-
gradient respectively. Note the pattern of ksn and chi-gradient derived from different DEMs are largely consistent.
3. MATLAB source code and study regions
We present a set of MATLAB functions, which provide workable so-
lutions to calculate above geomorphic indices to characterize landscape
from different catchments and identify anomalies for further analysis.
Though there are some GIS, MATLAB and other programing language
functions available to extract these indices (P
erez-Pe~
na et al., 2009a,
2009b; Schwanghart and Kuhn, 2010; Shahzad and Gloaguen, 2011a,
2011b); we present them together on one platform with stepwise user
manual (Supplementary material) for beginners and non-field specific/-
multidisciplinary users.
The present MATLAB functions to compute the river profiles and
geomorphic indices involve the extraction of the drainage network and
catchment boundary from DEMs constituting part-A of the work-flow
(Fig. 3). The drainage network extraction involves the generation of
the flow accumulation (fac) grid using either the TopoToolbox MATLAB
function (Schwanghart and Kuhn, 2010; Schwanghart and Scherler,
2014) or any GIS application (Fig. 3). The part-B of the work-flow con-
stitutes the drainage network generation by profiler51_chandata_mod.m
(modified after Wobus et al., 2006) using the standard D8-method where
flow direction is determined by tracking each pixel to one of its neigh-
bouring pixels (O’Callaghan and Mark, 1984; Molin et al., 2004). The Hi,
SL, ksn, chi (χ ) and swath profiles can be generated from the extracted
drainage network and DEM using the following functions ‘hi_profiler.m,
sl_profiler.m’, ‘ksn_chi_profiler.m’, and ‘swath_profiler.m’ in MAT-
LAB platform through interactive diagram of drainage network over DEM
constitutes the Part-C of the work-flow (Fig. 3; Supplementary data &
User manual). We tested the MATLAB function on DEMs of different
spatial resolutions, i.e. ASTER-GDEM (30 m) and SRTM (30 & 90 m) data,
6
Applied Computing and Geosciences 7 (2020) 100033
and the results from the Kameng section are presented for comparison
(Figs. 4 and 5). The results for similar resolution DEMs are comparable
and the details are explicit in the higher resolution datasets (Figs. 4 and
5). The calculation of hypsometry requires a predefined drainage divide
shapefile as input to generate the Hi value (Fig. 4a and b). The SL index
function calculates the gradient by the local reach (ΔL), the reach length
(L) and the drainage divide (Dd) distance (Fig. 2d). The user can define
Dd and ΔL to obtain a constant or user defined interval based on the
channel length or requirements of the study. The SL-index can be
generated for a channel by selecting the channel in the interactive map
for a given dl length and smoothening window (Fig. 4c and d). The DEM
data often has small-scale artefacts in the rugged landscape that some-
times leads to the erroneous calculations of the indices (Fig. 4c). To
rectify such problems, a user-defined smoothness parameter for the river
profile is incorporated that enables the user to change values based on
the resolution of their data/study (Fig. 4d). The smoothness parameter is
defined by a number of data points, which will automatically be multi-
plied by the resolution of the DEM data. Similarly, the ksn and
chi-gradient profile can be generated for selected channel from the
interactive map in the MATLAB window with a predefined reference
concavity (θref) and channel length (dl) window (Fig. 5). The output is
generated in the map and overlaid onto the channel profile (Fig. 5). To
generate the swath profile, the length and width of the swath are defined
on the interactive map (Fig. 4a) or from a predefined line file generated
in a GIS application (Supplementary material). The swath is calculated
along the defined line with the user defined swath range.
To demonstrate the operational capability of the proposed MATLAB
functions in identifying the landscape anomalies we choose three
catchments of varying tectono-geomorphic setting and scale, namely
N.K. Jaiswara et al. Applied Computing and Geosciences 7 (2020) 100033

Fig.6. (a) The DEM of the Kameng river catchment overlaid with the regional tectonic elements and the ksn of the trunk channel. (b) The hypsometry curves of the
Kameng and its tributary catchments with integral values. (c) The Kameng trunk channel profile with ksn and SL-index extracted from 1 km smoothed data and plotted
with tectonic elements and (d) the swath profile of elevation and TRMM precipitation data in the Kameng catchment. Swath area marked in Fig. 5a. (STDS-South
Tibetan Detachment System, MCT-Main Central Thrust, MBT-Main Boundary Thrust, TT- Tipi Thrust and MFT-Main Frontal Thrust).

Kameng, Umiam and Birahi Ganga from the dynamically active Hima-
layan and adjoining terrain (Fig. 1). These regions are undergoing active
deformation, as reflected in the form of recurrent seismicity and receive
focused orographic precipitation that varies laterally (Fig. 1). These
competing gradational processes have produced zones of enhanced
focused erosion in the form of landslide zones, large-scale tectonic
forcing or drainage migrations with modified relict landscapes (Seeber
and Gornitz, 1983; Clark et al., 2004; Jaiswara et al., 2019b). The basic
results from the MATLAB functions on these test catchments are sum-
marized as under.
4. Results and discussions
i) Kameng catchment
The ~230 km long 7th-order Kameng river, originates from a glacial
lake at ~6000 m in the eastern Himalaya, forms multiple loops parallel
and transverse to the regional structural trend with average sinuosity of
~1.96 before debouching to the Brahmaputra plains at ~50 masl (Figs. 1
and 6). The Kameng catchment receives focused precipitation along the
neotectonically active Sub Himalayan mountain front, thereby making it
an ideal case for exploring the spatially varying interaction of
precipitation-driven gradation processes with the substrate. The Kameng
and its tributary catchments (Fig. 6a) were analysed using ASTER-GDEM
(30 m) and SRTM (30 & 90 m) data (Figs. 4 and 5; test data_Kameng;
Supplementary data). The aerial indices such as hypsometry curves and
integrals (Hi), which represent an average picture of the catchment, show
consistent results across the different datasets (Fig. 4b). The different
sub-catchments within the Kameng catchment show a marked variation,
with Hi ¼ 0.28, 0.48, 0.42, 0.32, 0.41 and 0.32 (Fig. 6b), pointing to-
wards spatial variability in the gradation processes. Paradoxically, the
tributary channels flowing parallel to the structural trend in the hanging
wall of the MBT have a higher Hi suggesting structural control and
rejuvenation of the landscape. The channels (T4 & T5) in the frontal belt
also show complex catchment behaviour (Fig. 6b). The linear indices
such as tream profiles and SL index from different datasets show a
marked variation due to artefacts in the DEMs causing elevation variation
along the profiles leading to the variation in SL index (Fig. 4c). Since the
aim is to get a regional picture of different indices, we smoothed the data
at 1 km intervals and the patterns became consistent with the respective
data sets (Figs. 4d and 5). For further landscape characterisation of the
test catchments, we chose SRTM 90 m data for calculation of SL index, ksn
and χ-gradient using interactive tool of the MATLAB functions. These
indices are plotted in map as well as along the profile overlaid with
structures to compare and understand the variation along the profile
(Fig. 6c). The spike or transition of SL index, ksn and χ-gradient clearly
corresponds to the zone of topographic breaks across the active structures
(Fig. 6c). The SL index, ksn and χ-gradient show an increase in the stream
gradient value along the transverse stretch of the channel at the lower
altitudes and low values in the segments running parallel to the structural
trend or in the zone of abandoned misfit channel (Fig. 6a; T4).
The topographic swath profile across the Kameng catchment from the
SRTM (30 m) DEM is plotted along with the TRMM annual precipitation
data and structures (Fig. 6d) to understand spatial correlation of the two
datasets. The relief along the swath suggests there is very high incision in
the tectonically active Sub Himalayan front, which is also the locus of
high annual precipitation (Fig. 6d) facilitating high landscape erosion.
The same is reflected in the SL index, ksn and χ-gradient (Fig. 6c) and may

7
N.K. Jaiswara et al.
Fig.7. (a) The DEM of the Umiam river catchment overlaid with the drainage network with ksn highlighted for the trunk channel. (b) Hypsometry curve of the Umiam
landscape with the integral value. (c) The trunk channel profile plotted with SL-index and ksn. (d) Swath profile of DEM with mean precipitation in the region. The
location of the swath is shown in Fig. 6a.
suggest tectonic-climate coupling. The channel segment in the Lesser
Himalayan zone lies parallel to the regional structural trend and show
steady growth of relief with low SL index, ksn and χ-gradient (Fig. 6a, c,
d). However, these indices is high towards Higher Himalayan zone in the
north as the landscape gradation is dominated by the slope processes in
glacio-fluvial regime (Figs. 5 and 6).
ii) Umiam catchment
The ~80 km long, 4th-order Umiam river originating at the crest of
the Shillong plateau at ~2000 m elevation flows south to the Bengal
plains at ~10 m amsl (Figs. 1 and 7). The region experienced the 1897
great intra-plate earthquake and has been undergoing an active tectonic
uplift since Late Miocene as reflected by the development of pop-up
structure (Bilham and England, 2001). The southern front of the
plateau with >1000 m relief is bordered by the steeply dipping Dauki
Fault and is undergoing immense bedrock erosion and associated hazards
as it lies in the wettest place on earth receiving an intense precipitation
(Fig. 1). The narrow elongated Umiam catchment (Fig. 7a; test data_-
Umiam; Supplementary data) has a convex hypsometric curve corre-
sponding to Hi ¼ 0.69 (Fig. 7b) suggesting a young active channel
undergoing high bedrock incision. The SL, ksn and chi (χ) indices of the
trunk channel show a sharp increase as the channel starts descending
from the plateau at ~1500 m towards the Bengal plain (Fig. 7c). These
high values (Fig. 7c) delineate the zone of enhanced erosion where the
landscape is in gradational disequilibrium and is clearly marked by the
high relief zone of ~1000 m in the swath profile (Fig. 7d). This zone
coincides with a high annual precipitation (Fig. 7d) which in couple with
the active tectonics along Dauki Fault zone is sculpturing the landscape.
8
Applied Computing and Geosciences 7 (2020) 100033
The precipitation also sees a sharp decline at the plateau top with the
lower relief (~200 m; Fig. 7d) and other indices (Fig. 7c) suggesting a
low erosion-potential of the channel in the headward region.
iii) Birahi Ganga catchment
The 4th-order Birahi Ganga River in the western Himalaya (Figs. 1
and 8) is a small landslide-prone catchment, which has experienced
landslide lake outburst floods (LLOF) in 1894 and 1970 causing massive
devastation in the downstream region (Pulford et al., 1894; Shah, 2014).
The hypsometric curve and integral (Hi ¼ 0.37) of the Birahi Ganga
catchment suggest the youthful stage (Fig. 8a and b; test data_Birahi;
supplementary data). The SL and ksn indices of the catchment were
calculated using dl ¼ 1000 m for a better resolution and the discrimi-
nation of slope changes in the landslide-affected zone. The high values of
SL, ksn and chi (χ ) indices (Fig. 8c, c’) clearly show multiple zones of high
erosion potential that coincides with the observed active/past landslide
zones (Fig. 8e). The swath profile and relief do not show any unique
localized pattern (Fig. 8d), though the zones of higher relief coincide
with the higher erosion potential/landslide-prone zones. The massive
landslide in September 1893 formed a ~150 m high dam that tempo-
rarily blocked channel flow, producing a lake in the upstream section
(Fig. 8e). This landslide dam partially breached in August 1894 and again
in July 1970 (Fig. 8e; Shah, 2014) resulting in LLOFs. The evidence of
several old landslides with toe debris and lacustrine sediment associated
with another blocked channel are observed at adjacent locations in the
valley, which suggest that the zone is prone to recurrent landslides. Since
the catchment is very small and does not show a marked spatial variation
in the precipitation pattern, it is not considered for the present analysis.
N.K. Jaiswara et al. Applied Computing and Geosciences 7 (2020) 100033

Fig.8. (a) DEM of the Birahi Ganga catchment with ksn highlighted for the trunk channel. (b) Hypsometry curve with Hi for the catchment. (c) In 1894, Gohna Lake
was formed by a landslide dam, which breached in 1896 and 1970. (c) The present condition of the Gohna landslide zone. (d) Multiple landslide events in a composite
landslide zone are observed in an adjoining section suggesting recurrent slope instability in the region. (e) Birahi Ganga channel profile with SL-index and ksn derived
from 1 km smoothed data show the zone of high erosion and landslides (box). (f) Swath profile of Birahi Ganga landscape. The location of the swath is shown
in Fig. 7a.

Though, the seasonal or monthly precipitation pattern is essential for
hazard analysis, which is not in the scope of the present study.
Clearly, the above assertions regarding landscape evolution require
further analysis but these indices unequivocally point towards the
landscape anomalies and form an important component of the compre-
hensive landform modelling using other complex indices presented
elsewhere (Jaiswara et al., 2019a).
robustness and importance of the basic morphometric parameters in the
present analysis. The comprehensive MATLAB functions provide the
automation with user-defined input parameters for the new practitioners
of the tectonic-geomorphology, environmental and hazard studies on a
single platform.
Link to the code

5. Conclusions Mendeley Data Link, also uploaded as supplementary data.

The developed MATLAB functions are an efficient algorithm for

Authorship statement
extracting hypsometric curves with integral values (Hi), SL, ksn and chi
(χ) indices along with swath profiles from DEM and other spatial data.
NKJ and KSK have developed the code and carried out the numerical
The computed swath profiles on two raster datasets, namely DEM and
analysis of the study area. The results are part of their PhD thesis. AKP &
precipitation in the present study, show a multi-parametric correlation.
PP initiated and supervised the research work. All authors participated in
The MATLAB functions were tested with various raster data, namely
the interpretation and writing of the manuscript. The authors have no
ASTER and SRTM of 30 m and 90 m spatial resolutions and spatially
competing interests. All the data is available in the manuscript and in the
resampled TRMM precipitation data, at varying scale to demonstrate the
supplementary materials.

9
N.K. Jaiswara et al.
Credit author statement
Nilesh K Jaiswara and K. Sravan Kumar have developed and tested
the function and carried out the numerical analysis of the study area. The
results are part of their PhD thesis.
Prabha Pandey and Anand K Pandey have initiated and supervised
the research work.
All authors participated in the interpretation and writing and revi-
sion of the manuscript.
All the data is available in the manuscript and in the supplementary
materials.
The authors have no competing interests.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare no competing interest.
Acknowledgements
The work presented here constitutes part of the Ph.D. research of NKJ
& KSK. The authors acknowledge the financial support of the research
work from the NMHS, MoEF&CC. NKJ also acknowledges CSIR-NET
research fellowship to pursue PhD. We highly appreciate three anony-
mous reviewers and editor for their exhaustive constructive criticism and
suggestions that significantly improved the manuscript.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.acags.2020.100033.
References
Anderson, R.S., Anderson, S.P., 2010. Geomorphology. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511794827.
Aza~no
n, J.M., Galve, J.P., P
erez-Pe~
na, J.V., Giaconia, F., Carvajal, R., Booth-Rea, G.,
Jabaloy, A., V
azquez, M., Azor, A., Rold
an, F.J., 2015. Relief and drainage evolution
during the exhumation of the Sierra Nevada (SE Spain): is denudation keeping pace
with uplift? Tectonophysics 663, 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.tecto.2015.06.015.
Bilham, R., England, P., 2001. Plateau ‘pop-up’ in the great 1897 Assam earthquake.
Nature 410, 806–809. https://doi.org/10.1038/35071057.
Bookhagen, B., Burbank, D.W., 2010. Toward a complete Himalayan hydrological budget:
spatiotemporal distribution of snowmelt and rainfall and their impact on river
discharge. J. Geophys. Res. 115, F03019. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JF001426.
Bookhagen, B., Burbank, D.W., 2006. Topography, relief, and TRMM-derived rainfall
variations along the Himalaya. Geophys. Res. Lett. 33, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1029/
2006GL026037.
Bull, W.B., 2007. Tectonic Geomorphology of Mountains : a New Approach to
Paleoseismology. Blackwell Pub.
Burbank, D.W., 1992. Causes of recent Himalayan uplift deduced from deposited patterns
in the Ganges basin. Nature 357, 680–683. https://doi.org/10.1038/357680a0.
Burbank, D.W., Anderson, R.S., 2011. Tectonic Geomorphology, second ed. John Wiley &
Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444345063. Tectonic
Geomorphology: Second Edition.
Chen, Y.C., Sung, Q., Cheng, K.Y., 2003. Along-strike variations of morphotectonic
features in the Western Foothills of Taiwan: tectonic implications based on stream-
gradient and hypsometric analysis. Geomorphology. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-
555X(03)00059-X.
Clark, M.K., Schoenbohm, L.M., Royden, L.H., Whipple, K.X., Burchfiel, B.C., Zhang, X.,
Tang, W., Wang, E., Chen, L., 2004. Surface uplift, tectonics, and erosion of eastern
Tibet from large-scale drainage patterns. Tectonics 23, 1–21. https://doi.org/
10.1029/2002TC001402.
D’Agostino, N., Jackson, J.A., Dramis, F., Funiciello, R., 2001. Interactions between
mantle upwelling, drainage evolution and active normal faulting: an example from
the central Apennines (Italy). Geophys. J. Int. 147, 475–497. https://doi.org/
10.1046/j.1365-246X.2001.00539.x.
Delcaillau, B., Deffontaines, B., Floissac, L., Angelier, J., Deramond, J., Souquet, P.,
Chu, H., Lee, J., 1998. Morphotectonic evidence from lateral propagation of an active
frontal fold; Pakuashan anticline, foothills of Taiwan. Geomorphology 24, 263–290.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0169-555X(98)00020-8.
England, P., Molnar, P., 1990. Surface uplift, uplift of rocks, and exhumation of rocks.
Geology 18, 1173–1177. https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(1990)018<1173:
SUUORA>2.3.CO.
Fielding, E., Isacks, B., Barazangi, M., Duncan, C., 1994. How flat is tibet? Geology, 22,
163–167. https://doi.org/10.1130/0091-7613(1994)022<0163:HFIT>2.3.CO;2.
10
Applied Computing and Geosciences 7 (2020) 100033
Flint, J.J., 1974. Stream gradient as a function of order, magnitude, and discharge. Water
Resour. Res. 10, 969–973. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR010i005p00969.
Font, M., Amorese, D., Lagarde, J.-L.L., 2010. DEM and GIS analysis of the stream
gradient index to evaluate effects of tectonics: the Normandy intraplate area (NW
France). Geomorphology 119, 172–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.geomorph.2010.03.017.
Gilbert, G.K., 1877. Geology of the Henry Mountains (Utah). United States Government
Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
Goldrick, G., Bishop, P., 2007. Regional analysis of bedrock stream long profiles:
evaluation of Hack’s SL form, and formulation and assessment of an alternative (the
DS form). Earth Surf. Process. Landforms 32, 649–671. https://doi.org/10.1002/
esp.1413.
Goren, L., Fox, M., Willett, S.D., 2014. Tectonics from fluvial topography using formal
linear inversion: theory and applications to the Inyo Mountains, California.
J. Geophys. Res. F Earth Surf. 119, 1651–1681. https://doi.org/10.1002/
2014JF003079.
Grohmann, C.H., 2005. Trend-surface analysis of morphometric parameters: a case study
in southeastern Brazil. Comput. Geosci. 31, 1007–1014. https://doi.org/10.1016/
J.CAGEO.2005.02.011.
Hack, J.T., 1973. Stream-profile analysis and stream-gradient index. J. Res. U. S. Geol.
Surv. 56 (1–2), 109–137.
Harkins, N.W., Anastasio, D.J., Pazzaglia, F.J., 2005. Tectonic geomorphology of the Red
Rock fault, insights into segmentation and landscape evolution of a developing range
front normal fault. J. Struct. Geol. 27, 1925–1939. https://doi.org/10.1016/
J.JSG.2005.07.005.
Howard, A.D., Kerby, G., 1983. Channel changes in badlands. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 94 (6),
739–752.
Huang, X., Niemann, J.D., 2006. An evaluation of the geomorphically effective event for
fluvial processes over long periods. J. Geophys. Res.: Earth Surf. 111 (F3).
Jaiswara, N.K., Kotluri, S.K., Pandey, A.K., Pandey, P., 2019a. Transient basin as indicator
of tectonic expressions in bedrock landscape: approach based on MATLAB
geomorphic tool (Transient-profiler). Geomorphology 346, 106853. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.geomorph.2019. 106853.
Jaiswara, N.K., Pandey, P., Pandey, A.K., 2019b. Mio-Pliocene piracy, relict landscape and
drainage reorganization in the Namcha Barwa syntaxis zone of eastern Himalaya. Sci.
Rep. 9 (1), 1–11.
Keller, E.A., Pinter, N., 2002. Active Tectonics : Earthquakes, Uplift, and Landscape.
Prentice Hall.
Kirby, E., Whipple, K.X., 2012. Expression of active tectonics in erosional landscapes.
J. Struct. Geol. 44, 54–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsg.2012.07.009.
Lave, J., Avouc, J.P., 2000. Active folding of fluvial terraces across theSiwalik Hills,
Himalayas of Central Nepal. J. Geophys. Res. 105 (B3), 5735–5770.
Mackin, J.H., 1948. Concept of the graded river. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 101, 1373e1388.
Merritts, D., Vincent, K.R., 1989. Geomorphic response of coastal streams to low,
intermediate, and high rates of uplift, Medocino triple junction region, northern
California. Geol. Soc. Am. Bull. 101, 1373–1388. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-
7606(1989)101<1373:GROCST>2.3.CO, 2.
Moglen, G.E., Bras, R.L., 1995. The effect of spatial heterogeneities on geomorphic
expression in a model of basin evolution. Water Resour. Res. 31 (10), 2613–2623.
Molin, P., Fubelli, G., Nocentini, M., Sperini, S., Ignat, P., Grecu, F., Dramis, F., 2012.
Interaction of mantle dynamics, crustal tectonics, and surface processes in the
topography of the Romanian Carpathians: a geomorphological approach. Glob.
Planet. Change 90–91, 58–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GLOPLACHA.2011.05.005.
Molin, P., Pazzaglia, F.J., Dramis, F., 2004. Geomorphic expression of active tectonics in a
rapidly-deforming forearc, Sila Massif, Calabria, southern Italy. Am. J. Sci. 304,
559–589. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.3.53.32.
Mudd, S.M., Attal, M., Milodowski, D.T., Grieve, S.W.D., Valters, D.A., 2014. A statistical
framework to quantify spatial variation in channel gradients using the integral
method of channel profile analysis. J. Geophys. Res. Earth Surf. 119, 138–152.
https://doi.org/10.1002/2013JF002981.
O’Callaghan, J.F., Mark, D.M., 1984. The extraction of drainage networks from digital
elevation data. Comput. Vis. Graph Image Process 28 (3), 323–344.
Ohmori, H., 1993. Changes in the hypsometric curve through mountain building resulting
from concurrent tectonics and denudation. Geomorphology 8, 263–277. https://
doi.org/10.1016/0169-555X(93)90023-U.
P
erez-Pe~na, J.V., Aza~
no
n, J.M., Azor, A., 2009a. CalHypso: an ArcGIS extension to
calculate hypsometric curves and their statistical moments. Applications to drainage
basin analysis in SE Spain. Comput. Geosci. 35, 1214–1223. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.cageo.2008.06.006.
P
erez-Pe~na, J.V., Aza~
no
n, J.M., Azor, A., Delgado, J., Gonz
alez-Lodeiro, F., 2009b. Spatial
analysis of stream power using GIS: SLk anomaly maps. Earth Surf. Process.
Landforms 34, 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.1684.
P
erez-Pe~na, J.V.V., Al-Awabdeh, M., Aza~
n, J.M.M., Galve, J.P.P., Booth-Rea, G.,
no
Notti, D., 2017. SwathProfiler and NProfiler: two new ArcGIS Add-ins for the
automatic extraction of swath and normalized river profiles. Comput. Geosci. 104,
135–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2016.08.008.
Perron, J.T., Royden, L., 2013. An integral approach to bedrock river profile analysis.
Earth Surf. Process. Landforms 38, 570–576. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.3302.
Pulford, Lt, Col, R.R., Crookshank, Lt, Holland, T.H., 1894. A Narrative Report on the
Gohna Lake and Flood,in November ,1894. Published by Govt. of United Provinces,
Allahabad.
Riquelme, R., Martinod, J., H
erail, G., Darrozes, J., Charrier, R., 2003.
A geomorphological approach to determining the Neogene to Recent tectonic
deformation in the Coastal Cordillera of northern Chile (Atacama). Tectonophysics
361, 255–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-1951(02)00649-2.
N.K. Jaiswara et al.
Schumm, S.A., 1956. Evolution of drainage systems and slopes in badlands at Perth
Amboy, New Jersey. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 67, 597–646 https://doi.org/10.1130/
0016-7606(1956)67[597:EODSAS]2.0.CO;2.
Schumm, S.A., Dumont, J.F., Jean, F., Holbrook, J.M., 2002. Active Tectonics and Alluvial
Rivers. Cambridge University Press.
Schwanghart, W., Kuhn, N.J., 2010. TopoToolbox: a set of Matlab functions for
topographic analysis. Environ. Model. Software 25, 770–781. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.envsoft.2009.12.002.
Schwanghart, W., Scherler, D., 2014. Short Communication: TopoToolbox 2 - MATLAB-
based software for topographic analysis and modeling in Earth surface sciences. Earth
Surf. Dyn. 2, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-2-1-2014.
Scotti, V.N., Molin, P., Faccenna, C., Soligo, M., Casas-Sainz, A., 2014. The influence of
surface and tectonic processes on landscape evolution of the Iberian Chain (Spain):
quantitative geomorphological analysis and geochronology. Geomorphology 206,
37–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GEOMORPH.2013.09.017.
Seeber, L., Gornitz, V., 1983. Research Paper River profiles along the Himalayan arc as
indicators of active tectonics. Tectonophysics 92, 335–367.
Shah, N.C., 2014. An historical fallstruz lake, Gohna, dist. Chamoli (uttarakhand), India
(1893-1970). Earth Sci. India, Popular Issue VII (III), 1–14.
Shahzad, F., Gloaguen, R., 2011a. TecDEM: a MATLAB based toolbox for tectonic
geomorphology, Part 1: drainage network preprocessing and stream profile analysis.
Comput. Geosci. 37, 250–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2010.06.008.
Shahzad, F., Gloaguen, R., 2011b. TecDEM: a MATLAB based toolbox for tectonic
geomorphology, Part 2: surface dynamics and basin analysis. Comput. Geosci. 37,
261–271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cageo.2010.06.009.
Snyder, N.P., Whipple, K.X., Tucker, G.E., Merritts, D.J., 2003. Importance of a stochastic
distribution of floods and erosion thresholds in the bedrock river incision problem.
J. Geophys. Res.: Solid Earth 108 (B2).
11
View publication stats
Applied Computing and Geosciences 7 (2020) 100033
Strahler, A.N., 1952. Hypsometric (area - altitude) analysis of erosional topography. Geol.
Soc. Am. Bull. 63, 1117–1142. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(1952)63.
Troiani, F., Della Seta, M., 2008. The use of the Stream Length–Gradient index in
morphotectonic analysis of small catchments: a case study from Central Italy.
Geomorphology 102, 159–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/
J.GEOMORPH.2007.06.020.
Tucker, G.E., Whipple, K.X., 2002. Topographic outcomes predicted by stream erosion
models: sensitivity analysis and intermodel comparison. J. Geophys. Res.: Solid Earth
107 (B9), ETG-1.
Wang, Y., Zhang, H., Zheng, D., Yu, J., Pang, J., Ma, Y., 2017. Coupling slope-area
analysis, integral approach and statistic tests to steady-state bedrock river profile
analysis. Earth Surf. Dyn. 5 (1), 145.
Whittaker, A.C., Cowie, P.A., Tucker, G.E., Roberts, G.P., 2007. Bedrock Channel
Adjustment to Tectonic Forcing : Implications for Predicting River Incision Rates
103–106. https://doi.org/10.1130/G23106A.1.
Willgoose, G., Hancock, G., 1998. Revisiting the hypsometric curve as an indicator of
form and process in transport-limited catchment. Earth Surf. Process. Landforms: J.
Br. Geomorphol. Group 23 (7), 611–623.
Wobus, C., Whipple, K.X., Kirby, E., Snyder, N., Johnson, J., Spyropolou, K., Crosby, B.,
Sheehan, D., 2006. Tectonics from topography: procedures, promise, and pitfalls.
Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Pap. 398, 55–74. https://doi.org/10.1130/2006.2398(04.
Whipple, K.X., Dibiase, R.A., Crosby, B.T., 2013. Bedrock rivers. In: Treatise on
Geomorphology. Elsevier Inc, pp. 550–573.
Willett, S.D., McCoy, S.W., Perron, J.T., Goren, L., Chen, C.Y., 2014. Dynamic
reorganization of river basins. Science 343 (6175), 1248765.