A quantitative morphometric comparison of cockpit and doline karst landforms

doi:10.1007/s11442-014-1139-6

Abstract

Abstract:

This study presented a quantitative comparison of cockpit and doline karst by examining the numbers and characteristics of typical types of landform entities that are developed in Guilin (Guangxi, China), La Alianza (PR, USA), Avalton (KY, USA), and Oolitic (IN, USA). Five types of landform entities were defined: isolated hill (IH), clustered hills (CHs), isolated sinkhole (IS), clustered sinkholes (CSs), and clustered hills with sinkholes (CHSs). An algorithm was developed to automatically identify these types of landform entities by examining the contour lines on topographic maps of two cockpit karst areas (Guilin and La Alianza) and two doline karst areas (Oolitic and Avalton). Within each specific study area, the CHSs is the least developed type yet with a larger size and higher relief. The IH and IS entities are smaller in size, lower in relief, and outnumber their clustered counterparts. The total numbers of these types of entities are quite different in cockpit and doline karst areas. Doline karst is characterized by more negative (IS and CSs) than positive (IH and IHs) landforms and vice versa for cockpit karst. For example, the Guilin study area has 1192 positive landform entities in total, which occupy 9.81% of the total study area. It has only 622 negative landform entities occupying only 3.91% of the total study area. By contrast, the doline karst in Oolitic has 130 negative while only 10 positive landform entities. The positive and negative landforms in Oolitic occupy 12.68% and 2.61% of the total study area, respectively. Furthermore, average relief and slope of the landform entities are much higher and steeper in the cockpit karst than the doline karst areas. For instance, the average slope of CHs in Alvaton is 3.90 degrees while it is 19.78 degrees in La Alianza. The average relief of CSs is 4.07 m and 34.29 m in Oolitic and Guilin respectively. Such a difference within a specific area or between the cockpit and doline karst may reveal different controls on the development of karst landscape.

Key words: cockpit, doline, contours, morphometric characteristics, topographic map, karst

Fuyuan LIANG, Yunyan DU, Yong GE, Ce LI. A quantitative morphometric comparison of cockpit and doline karst landforms[J].Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2014, 24(6): 1069-1082.

Figures/Tables 8

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Table 1

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

References 34

1	Bishop M P, Shroder J Fet al., 2003. Remote sensing and geomorphometry for studying relief production in high mountains.Geomorphology, 55: 345-361.
2	Chai H, Zhou C, Chen Xet al., 2009. Digital regionalization of geomorphology in Xinjiang.Journal of Geographical Sciences, 19(5): 600-614.
3	Cheng W, Zhou C, Chai Het al., 2011. Research and compilation of the Geomorphologic Atlas of the People’s Republic of China (1:1,000,000).Journal of Geographical Sciences, 21(1): 89-100.
4	Clark C D, Hughes A L, Greenwood S Let al., 2009. Size and shape characteristics of drumlins, derived from a large sample, and associated scaling laws.Quaternary Science Reviews, 28: 677-692.
5	Cronin T, 2000. Classifying hills and valleys in digitized terrain.Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 66: 1129-1137.
6	Evans I S, 1972. General geomorphometry, derivatives of altitude, and descriptive statistics.Spatial Analysis in Geomorphology, 17-90.
7	Evans I S, 2012. Geomorphometry and landform mapping: What is a landform?Geomorphology, 137: 94-106.
8	Fenneman N M, 1938. Physiography of Eastern United States. New York: StatesMcGraw Hill Book Co.
9	Ford D C, Williams P, 2007. Karst Hydrogeology and Geomorphology. John Wiley & Sons.
10	Gao D, Zhang S, Bi K et al., 1986. Research on Karst Landscapes in Southern Guizhou. Guiyang: Guizhou Peoples’ Publishing House. (in Chinese)
11	Grund A, 1914. Der geographische Zyklus im Karst.Gesellschaft für Erdkunde, 52: 621-640.
12	Hammond E H, 1954. Small-scale continental landform maps.Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 44: 33-42.
13	Hengl T, Rossiter D G, 2003. Supervised landform classification to enhance and replace photo-interpretation in semi-detailed soil survey.Soil Science Society of America Journal, 67: 1810-1822.
14	Iwahashi J, Pike R J, 2007. Automated classifications of topography from DEMs by an unsupervised nested-means algorithm and a three-part geometric signature.Geomorphology, 86: 409-440.
15	Kweon I S, Kanade T, 1994. Extracting topographic terrain features from elevation maps. CVGIP: image understanding, 59: 171-182.
16	Liang F, Brook G A, Shi Y, 2011. Mapping cockpit karst in southern China from ASTER stereo images: DEM validation and accuracy assessment.Carsologica Sinica, 30: 233-242.
17	Liang F, Du Y, 2013. An automated method to extract typical karst landform entities from contour lines on topographic maps. In: Proceedings of Geomorphometry 2013, Nanjing, China, 46-49.
18	Liang F, Xu B, 2014. Discrimination of tower-, cockpit-, and non-karst landforms in Guilin, southern China, based on morphometric characteristics.Geomorphology, 204: 42-48.
19	Lyew-Ayee P, Viles H A, Tucker G E, 2007. The use of GIS-based digital morphometric techniques in the study of cockpit karst.Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 32: 165-179.
20	MacMillan R A, Jones R K, McNabb D H, 2004. Defining a hierarchy of spatial entities for environmental analysis and modeling using digital elevation models (DEMs).Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 28: 175-200.
21	MacMillan R A, Pettapiece W W, Nolan S Cet al., 2000. A generic procedure for automatically segmenting landforms into landform elements using DEMs, heuristic rules and fuzzy logic.Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 113: 81-109.
22	MacMillan R A, Shary P A, 2009. Landforms and landform elements in geomorphometry.Developments in Soil Science, 33: 227-254.
23	Meijerink A M J, 1988. Data acquisition and data capture through terrain mapping units.ITC-Journal, 1: 23-43.
24	Miliaresis G C, Argialas D P, 2000. Extraction and delineation of alluvial fans from digital elevation models and Landsat Thematic Mapper images.Photogrammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing, 66: 1093-1101.
25	Minár J, Evans I S, 2008. Elementary forms for land surface segmentation: The theoretical basis of terrain analysis and geomorphological mapping.Geomorphology, 95: 236-259.
26	Pike R J, 1988. The geometric signature: Quantifying landslide-terrain types from digital elevation models.Mathematical Geology, 20: 491-511.
27	Tang T, Day M J, 2000. Field survey and analysis of hillslopes on tower karst in Guilin, southern China.Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 25: 1221-1235.
28	Tribe A, 1991. Automated recognition of valley heads from digital elevation models.Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 16: 33-49.
29	Van Asselen S, Seijmonsbergen A C, 2006. Expert-driven semi-automated geomorphological mapping for a mountainous area using a laser DTM.Geomorphology, 78: 309-320.
30	Veni G, 2002. Revising the karst map of the United States.Journal of Cave and Karst Studies, 64(1): 45-50.
31	White W B, 1988. Geomorphology and Hydrology of Karst Terrains. New York: Oxford University Press.
32	Williams P, 2004. Polygonal karst and palaeokarst of the King Country, North Island, New Zealand.Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie Suppl., 136: 45-67.
33	Zhou Y, Tang G A, Yang Xet al., 2010. Positive and negative terrains on northern Shaanxi Loess Plateau.Journal of Geographical Sciences, 20(1): 64-76.
34	Zhu X, 1988. Guilin Karst. Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific and Technical Publishers. (in Chinese)

Study area	Type of landscape	Total area (km²)	Landform entities	IH	CHs	IS	CSs	CHS	Total
Guilin, Guangxi, China	Cockpit karst	2537.14	Number	865	327	503	119	171	1985
Guilin, Guangxi, China		2537.14	Area (%)	3.10	6.71	1.86	2.05	32.91	46.64
La Alianza, PR, USA		278.72	Number	819	520	455	159	91	2044
La Alianza, PR, USA		278.72	Area (%)	3.01	10.77	2.60	3.21	18.04	37.63
Alvaton, KY, USA	Doline karst	149.51	Number	103	31	320	103	35	592
Alvaton, KY, USA		149.51	Area (%)	2.22	3.79	3.09	3.91	24.08	37.10
Oolitic, IN, USA		9.72	Number	8	2	85	45	2	142
Oolitic, IN, USA		9.72	Area (%)	2.27	0.34	4.01	8.67	4.58	19.86

[1]	Wenjuan HOU, Jiangbo GAO. Simulating runoff generation and its spatial correlation with environmental factors in Sancha River Basin: The southern source of the Wujiang River [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2019, 29(3): 432-448.
[2]	Huan WANG, Jiangbo GAO, Wenjuan HOU. Quantitative attribution analysis of soil erosion in different geomorphological types in karst areas: Based on the geodetector method [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2019, 29(2): 271-286.
[3]	Xianwei SONG, Yang GAO, Xuefa WEN, Dali GUO, Guirui YU, Nianpeng HE, Jinzhong ZHANG. Carbon sequestration potential and its eco-service function in the karst area, China [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2017, 27(8): 967-980.
[4]	Zhongfa ZHOU, Shaoyun ZHANG, Kangning XIONG, Bo LI, Zhonghui TIAN, Quan CHEN, Lihui YAN, Shizhen XIAO. The spatial distribution and factors affecting karst cave development in Guizhou Province [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2017, 27(8): 1011-1024.
[5]	Ali Hamdi ABU SALIM. Geomorphological analysis of the morphometric characteristics that determine the volume of sediment yield of Wadi Al-Arja, South Jordan [J]. , 2014, 24(3): 457-474.
[6]	JIANG Yongjun, YUAN Daoxian, XIE Shiyou,LI Linli, ZHANG Gui, HE Raosheng. Groundwater quality and land use change in a typical karst agricultural region: a case study of Xiaojiang watershed, Yunnan [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2006, 16(4): 405-414.
[7]	ZHAO Jingbo, CHEN Baoqun, YUE Yingli, DU Juan. Karst subzone division in vertical cycle zone and its significance [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2006, 16(4): 472-478.
[8]	LI Yangbing, XIE Deti, WANG Shijie, WEI Chaofu. Impact of land cover types on the soil characteristics in karst area of Chongqing [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2006, 16(2): 143-154.
[9]	Jiang Yongjun. The impact of land use on soil properties in a karst agricultural region of Southwest China:a case study of Xiaojiang watershed, Yunnan [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2006, 16(1): 69-77.
[10]	JIA Yanan, YUAN Daoxian. The influence of land use change on karst water quality of Shuicheng Basin in Guizhou Province [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2004, 14(2): 143-150.
[11]	GAO Quan-zhou, CUI Zhi-jiu, TAO Zhe1, LIU Geng-nian,HONG Yun. The property, age and formation environment of the palaeokarst in Qinghai-Xizang Plateau [J]. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 2002, 12(2): 144-152.