Department of Geography and Environmental Sciences, University of Venda, Limpopo Province, South Africa
Abstract
The emerging broad science of geodiversity defined in terms of geomorphological diversity assesses geomorphological features of territory by comparing them in an extrinsic and intrinsic way. This paper uses SRTM (Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission) data and GIS (Geographical Information System) techniques to assess the geomorphological diversity of Komati Gorge, in Mpumalanga Province of South Africa. Factors used to assess geomorphological diversity are relative height, insolation, hydrography, geology, soil erodibility, ruggedness, slope position, and land use/land cover. Each factor was normalized to five classes by applying natural breaks, and all were weighted before overlaying. The weighting reveals that hydrography, ruggedness, relative heights, and geology carry more weight, respectively. Slope position, insolation, land use/land cover, and soil carry the least weight in that order. The final geomorphodiversity map reveals that the south-western parts of Komati Gorge have medium to very high geomorphological diversity. The north-eastern parts have low to medium geomorphological diversity. This indicates that factor-specific research can add more information to geomorphodiversity research and education.
Biswas SS (2016). Analysis of GIS-based morphometric parameters and hydrological changes in Parbati River Basin, Himachal Pradesh, India. Journal of Geographic Natural Disasters. 6(2): 1–8.
Bouyoucos GJ (1935). The clay ratio as a criterion of susceptibility of soils to erosion. Journal of the American Society of Agronomy. 27: 738–741.
Cay T and Uyan M (2013). Evaluation of reallocation criteria in land consolidation studies using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Land use policy. 30(1): 541-548.
Chethan BJ and Vishnu B (2018). Determination of the Geomorphologic parameters of the Thuthapuzha River Basin in Central Kerala, India, Using GIS and Remote sensing. Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 7(9): 1245-1260.
Dann JJ (2000). The 3.5 Ga Komati Formation, Barberton greenstone belt, South Africa, part I: new maps and magmatic architecture. South African Journal of Geology.103(1): 47-68.
De Reu J, Bourgeois J, Bats M, et al. (2013). Application of the topographic position index to heterogeneous landscapes. Geomorphology. 186: 39-49.
IAG/AIG (2019). Geodiversity assessment in mountain areas: Computer training tutorial. Krakow-Zakopane, Poland: Workshop of the IAG/AIG Working Group on Landform Assessment for Geodiversity.
Jenks GF (1967). The data model concept in statistical mapping. International Yearbook of Cartography. 7: 186-190.
Kori E, Onyango Odhiambo BD and Chikoore H (2019). A geomorphodiversity map of the Soutpansberg Range, South Africa. Landform analysis. 38: 13-24.
Kot R (2018). A comparison of results from geomorphological diversity evaluation methods in the Polish Lowland (Toruń Basin and Chełmno Lakeland). Danish Journal of Geography. 118(1): 17-35.
Magesh NS, Jitheshlal KV, Chandrasekar N, and Jini KV (2013). Geographical information system-based morphometric analysis of Bharathapuzha river basin, Kerala, India. Applied Water Science. 3(2): 467-477.
Mahlathi S (2018). The net economic benefits from eradication of invasive alien vegetation: The case of the Inkomati Catchment Mpumalanga Province in South Africa. Dissertation, University of Pretoria.
Minár J, Mentlík P, Jedlicka K, and Barka I (2005). Geomorphological information system: idea and options for practical implementation. Geograficky Casapis. 57(3): 247.
Najwer A and Zwoliński Zb (2014). The landform geodiversity assessment method– a comparative analysis for Polish and Swiss mountainous landscape. EGU General Assembly. 1201.
Nkomo S and van der Zaag P (2004). Equitable water allocation in a heavily committed international catchment area: the case of the Komati Catchment. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C. 29(15-18): 1309-1317.
Oparaku LA, Aho IM and Iwar RT (2016). Relative vulnerability to gully erosion of three geological sediments: A texture-based assessment. Journal of Environment and Earth Science. 6(2).
Panizza M (2009). The geomorphodiversity of the Dolomites (Italy): a key of geoheritage assessment. Geoheritage. 1(1): 33-42.
Panizza M (2011). The Geomorphology of the Dolomites from a geomorphodiversity viewpoint. Geogr. Fis. Dinam. Quat. 34: 25-32.
Price SJ, Ford JR, Cooper AH and Neal C (2011). Humans as major geological and geomorphological agents in the Anthropocene: the significance of artificial ground in Great Britain. Philosophical Transactions: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences. 369(1938): 1056-1084.
Romano M (1965). A contribution to the hydrological survey of the Incomati River drainage basin (Rivers Komati and Crocodile; Rep. Of South Africa and Swaziland). South African Journal of Science. 61(7): 268-275.
Svoray T and Shoshany M (2004). Multi-scale analysis of intrinsic soil factors from SAR-based mapping of drying rates. Remote Sensing of Environment. 92(2): 233-246.
Wang G, Gertner G, Liu X and Anderson A (2001). Uncertainty assessment of soil erodibility factor for revised universal soil loss equation. Catena. 46(1): 1-14.
Zwoliński Z (2008). Designing a map of the geodiversity of landforms in Poland. IAG and AIGEO International Meeting Environmental Analysis and Geomorphological Mapping for a Sustainable Development, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (pp. 18-22).
Zwoliński Z (2009). The routine of landform geodiversity map design for the Polish Carpathian Mts. Landform Analysis. 11: 77-85.
1
