ARTICLE INFO

Article Type

Original Research

Authors

Arian Tabar   H. (1)
Jabbari   E. (*1)
Farahpour   MM. (2)






(1) Department of Geography, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran
(2) Department of Geology, Faculty of Basic Sciences, Lorestan University, Khoramabad, Lorestan , Iran

Correspondence

Address: Department of Geography, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, Razi University, Abrisham Garden, Kermanshah, Iran Postal Code: 6714414941
Phone: +98 (83) 34283907
Fax: +98 (83) 34283907
Ir_jabbari@yahoo.com

Article History

Received:  October  10, 2020
Accepted:  February 6, 2021
ePublished:  June 16, 2021

BRIEF TEXT


As the hidden active fault of Khorram Abad is located in Khorram Abad plain, this region is highly influenced by the neo-tectonic activities of the fault.

Rivers' system reaction to the neo-tectonic activities, land-use changes, and climate changes are among the most important geomorphology studies. Geomorphological changes caused by geological activities are not specific to the unhidden faults and hidden ones' activity can have a great impact on the region [Bonforte et al., 2012; Rezauki et al. 2020, Aliyannezhadi et al., 2020; Bottari et al., 2020]. Hidden faults activity in Kumroj in the Kamchatka peninsula of Russia had increased the river width and depth [Cevera, 2013].

This study aimed to evaluate the geological activities of the hidden fault of Khorram Abad in the formation of the geomorphological characteristics of the Khorram Abad river.

The current research is an empirical study in terms of its purpose.

The current research is carried out along the Khorram Abad river

The sampling method and the number of samples are not mentioned.

Aerial images of 1955 and Google earth images of 2016 in the GIS environment, as well as the field studies, were used in this study.

Stream length-gradient index (SL) The analysis of the SL index shows that the amount of this index varies in different parts of the river. The lowest and highest values of the SL index are recorded in zone number 2 and 4, respectively (Graph 1). Decreasing SL in zones 2 and 5 show the gentle slope of the river in these zones. Figure 3 shows two main reasons for this issue. Lithological combination of the rivers' bedrock in different times is the most common explanation for the vulnerable rivers' bedrock. However, this bedrock lithological combination is almost the same along the river. Hence, lithology does not have a considerable impact. Khorram Abad, on the other hand, is an alluvial river that minimizes lithological impact on rivers' behavior. Zone 2 is located in the upper parts of the fault's anticline while zone 5 is in the lower parts. It explains the reason for the smaller SL in zone 5. There is a rise in the amount of SL in zone 3 and 4. Increased SL in zone 4 is mainly because it is located adjacent to the main axis of evolution. Increased SL in zone 3 is because of tilting to the back of the eastern edge of the anticline. Maunders and sinuosity amounts in various zones of the Khorram Abad river The minimum and the maximum number of the maunders both in 1955 and 2016 are detected in zones 1 and 5, respectively (Table 1). Fewer changes in the number of the maunders in zone 1 are because of its stone bedrock. While maunders are more abundant in zone 5 because this zone is located in the lower parts of the evolution axis of the hidden fault of Khorram Abad and the vertical movements of the fault increased the overall slope of the river. The river stroke a balance by creating new waves. The fewer number of the maunders in zones 3 and 4 that are located in the upper parts of the evolution axis is because of two reasons: the movements of the hidden thrust fault of Khorram Abad, human activities such as the construction of the walls in the riverbank, dredging, flattering the bedrock, and constructions near the river. The evaluation of the sinuosity amounts in different zones of Khorram Abad river in 1955 and 2016 shows that zone 1 in the first period had the lowest values which are mainly because the river is surrounded by strong stone walls. Hence, zone 2 and zones 5 have the lowest and highest sinuosity, respectively in the alluvial part of the river. A comparison between the S value in the first and second period shows that the S value has been almost consistent but had increased insignificantly in zone 2 and considerably in zone 5. S value had decreased in zones 3 and 4 (Figure 4). Khorram Abad river longitudinal profile According to the river's profile, the river has a concave profile. The transformation seen between 18 and 29 km from the beginning of the river's route shows turbulence in the river's bedrock (Graph 2). Mentioned turbulence made the river flow much faster and turbulent in comparison to the upstream and downstream of the river. The average speed of the river flow is 1.6 m/s in the middle of the river which is much faster than upperparts with 0.8m/s and lower parts with 0.56 m/s. Fluvial terraces near the river Some spots in the upper parts (anticline), middle parts, and lower parts of the Khorram Abad river were selected to analyze the fluvial terraces (Figure 5). For the estimation of the relative age of these terraces, geomorphological features, sequences, sedimentological features, and stratigraphic connections were used. Three types of old, middle-aged, and new terraces can be seen in the lower parts of the river. Figure 6 shows the alluvial terraces in Khorram Abad river. Differences in the height of the terraces in different parts of a river, similar to that of the Khorram Abad river, approves the tectonic activities such as Khorram Abad's hidden thrust fault activities (Table 2).

Human activities in the Khorram Abad river have increased the overall slope of the river and consequently sinuosity coefficient and formation of the new maunders. Other researchers such as Silva et al. (2003) in the southern parts of Spain, Malik et al. (2014) along the Aegean coast, and Ramesht et al. (2012) in the Jajrood basin used this index (SL) to evaluate the impact of neo-tectonic activities in the formation of the geomorphological features of the river.

There is no suggestion reported.

There is no limitation reported.

Among three main factors of tectonic, water flow rate, and sediment flow rate, tectonic plays the most important role in the geomorphological features of the Khorram Abad river in the last decades. Since the flow rate and sediment flow rate in the Khorram Abad river have been decreasing but such changes just occur when the trend is increasing. Then, the hidden thrust fault of the Khorram Abad is the main factor changing the morphological features of Khorram Abad river in the studied period.

We thank Razi University, the Iranian geological organization, and the regional water company in Lorestan that provided needed information for the researchers.

None.

None.

This study is carried out on Razi University of Kermanshah expense.

TABLES and CHARTS

Show attach file


CITIATION LINKS

[1]Aliyannezhadi A, Mehrnia R, Kimiagar S, Rahimi H, Sadrmohammad N (2020). Evaluation of GPR method in identification hidden faults of Alluvial deposits in north of Persian Gulf artificial lake, twenty-two district of Tehran. Journal of Applied Geophysics. 179.
[2]Azizi G, Rowshani M (2008). Using mann-kendall test to recognize of climate change in caspian sea southern coasts. Physical Geography Research Quarterl. (64):13-28. [Persian]
[3]Bahrami Sh (2013). Analyzing the drainage system anomaly of Zagros basins: Implications for active tectonics. Tectonophysics. 608: 914-928.
[4]Brooks GR (2003). Holocene lateral channel migration and incision of the red river, manitoba, canada. Geomorphology. 54(3):197–215.
[5]Bottari C, Giammanco S, Cavallaro D, Sortino F, Scudero S, .Amari S, Bonfanti P, Daolio M, Groppelli G ( 2020). How to reveal unknown hidden faults and historical earthquake damage applying multidisciplinary methods in archaeological sites: The case of mid-third century CE Mt. Etna earthquake (Eastern Sicily, Italy). Tectonophysics. 790.
[6]Bonforte A, Cinzia F, Salvatore G, Francesco G, Marco L, Marco N (2012). Soil gases and SAR measurements reveal hidden faults on the sliding flank of Mt. Etna (Italy). Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. 251:27–40.
[7]Carvalho J, Rabeh T, Cabral J, Carrilho F, Miranda JM (2008). Geophysical characterization of the Ota–Vila franca de Xira–lisbon–sesimbra fault zone, Portugal. Geophysical Journal International. 174(2):567–584.
[8]Corrêa Alves F, Fátima Rossetti D, Valeriano MM (2020). Detecting neotectonics in the lowlands of amazonia through the analysis of river long profiles. Journal of South American Earth Sciences. 100.
[9]Elamin HI, Abdelsalam MG (2012). Morpho-tectonic analysis of the Tekeze River and the Blue Nile drainage systems on the Northwestern Plateau, Ethiopia. Journal of African Earth Sciences. 69:34-47.
[10]Jafari GH, Mehdi A (2018), Investigating the role of tectonics in the process of geomorphological evolution of Ghezel Ozan river barracks, Journal of Geography and Planning , pp 1-27.
[11]Jain V, Sinha R (2005). Response of active tectonics on the alluvial Baghmati River, Himalayan foreland basin, eastern India. Geomorphology. 70(3-4):339–356.
[12]Keller EA, Pinter N (2002). Active Tectonics: Earthquakes, Uplift, and Landscape. 2end ed. Upper Saddle River Publisher, New Jersey.
[13]Liu J, Chen X, Shi W, Chen P, Zhang Y, Hu J, Dong Sh, Li T (2019). Tectonically controlled evolution of the Yellow river drainage system in the weihe region, North China: Constraints from sedimentation, mineralogy and geochemistry. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences. 179:350-364.
[14]Malik JN, Shah AA, Naik SP, Sahoo S, Okumura K, Patra NR (2014). Active fault study along foothill zone of Kumaun Sub-Himalaya: influence on landscape shaping and drainage evolution. Current Science Association. 106(2):229-236.
[15]Merritts D, Vincent K, Wohl E (1994). Long river profiles, tectonism, and eustasy: A guide to interpreting fluvial terraces. Journal of Geophysical Research. 99:14031-14050.
[16]Pérez JV, Azor A, Azañón JM, Keller EA (2010). Active tectonics in the sierra nevada (Betic Cordillera, SE Spain): Insights from geomorphic indexes and drainage pattern analysis. Geomorphology. 119(1-2):74–87.
[17]Peters G, Van Balen R (2007). Tectonic geomorphology of the northern upper Rhine Graben, Germany. Global and Planetary Change. 58(1-4):310–334.
[18]Petrovszki J, Timar G, Molnar G (2014). Is sinuosity a function of slope and bankfull discharge? A case study of the meandering rivers in the Pannonian Basin. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. 11:12271–12290.
[19]Phan DP, Tokarski AK, Świerczewska A, Strzelecki PJ, Waliczek M, Krąpiec M, Cuong NQ (2019). Neotectonic (Miocene to recent) vertical movements in the Lao Cai Basin (Red river fault zone, Vietnam): An approach to seismic hazard assessment. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences. 181.
[20]Radoane M, Radoane N, Dumitriu D (2003). Geomorphological evolution of longitudinal river profiles in the Carpathians. Geomorphology. 50(4):293–306.
[21]Ramesht, Ara H, Shayan S, Yamani M (2012). Assessing the accuracy of geomorphological indicators using geodynamic data (Case study: Jajroud watershed in the northeast of Tehran). Geography and Environmental Planning. 23(2):35-52. [Persian]
[22]Rebecca A H, Trevor B, Leonard S S (2011). Bed load transport in bedrock rivers: The role of sediment cover in grain entrainment, translation, and deposition, Journal of Geophysical Research. 116.
[23]Resmi MR, Achyuthan H, Kumar Jaiswal M (2017). Middle to late holocene paleochannels and migration of the Palar River, Tamil Nadu: Implications of neotectonic activity. Quaternary International.443:211-222.
[24]Repka J L, Anderson R S, Finkel RC (1997). Cosmogenic dating of fluvial terraces, Fremont River, Utah. Earth and Planetary Science Letters. 152(4):59–73.
[25]Rezouki I, Boujamaoui M, Hafid M, NaitBba A, Amiri A, Hédi Inoubli M, Manar A, Rouai M, Baidder L, Asebriy L (2020). Contribution of gravity and aeromagnetic data to the structural modeling of the hidden faults in Guercif Basin, northeastern Morocco. Journal of African Earth Sciences. 164.
[26]Cervera Heinlein SN (2013). Spatial patterns of geomorphic surface features and fault morphology based on diffusion equation modeling of the Kumroch Fault Kamchatka Peninsula, Russia. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. 263:209–223.
[27]Schoenbohm LM, Whipple KX, Burchfiel BC, Chen LZ (2004). Geomorphic constraints on surface uplift, exhumation, and plateau growth in the Red River region, Yunnan province, China. Geological Society of America Bulletin. 116(7):895–909.
[28]Silva PG, Goy JL,Zazo C, Bardaj T (2003). Fault-generated mountain fronts in southeast Spain: geomorphologic assessment of tectonic and seismic activity. Geomorphology. 50(1-3):203–225.
[29]Simpson C J (1999). Fluvial geomorphology of the sand bed Milk River, northern Montana. University of Calgary, Alberta.
[30]Zamolyi A, Szekely B, Draganits E, Timár G (2010). Neotectonic control on river sinuosity at the western margin of the little hungarian plain. Geomorphology. 122(3-4):231-243.
[31]Zhang T, Fan Sh, Chen Sh, Li s, Lu Y (2019). Geomorphic evolution and neotectonics of the Qianhe River Basin on the southwest margin of the Ordos Block, North China. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences. 176:184-195.
[32]Woolderink H.A.G, Cohen KM, Kasse C, Kleinhans MG, Van Balen RT (2021). Patterns in river channel sinuosity of the Meuse, Roer and Rhine rivers in the lower rhine embayment rift-system, are they tectonically forced. Geomorphology. 375.