Influence of natural dams on the river profile of the Yalong River Basin

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2020.9.1

Abstract

Abstract:

Natural dams are known to impose pronounced and long-lasting perturbations on the river profiles in mountaineous areas. In some cases, the steepened profiles caused by natural dams are easily confused with the migrating knickpoints associated with relative base-level fall linked to tectonism. However, the degree to which natural dams may compromise geomorphometry-based tectonics has not been systematically investigated. In this research, we studied the Yalong River Basin on the eastern edge of the Tibetan Plateau. Our investigation of the relation between river dams and the river longitudinal profile relies on the interpretation and analysis of remote sensing imagery and digital elevation models (DEM). Through such analysis and field work, we identified 34 natural dams in the Yalong River Basin. We extracted the river longitudinal profile from 30 m SRTM DEM and calculated the locations of convex knickpoints, the channel steepness index, and other geomorphic parameters using TopoToolbox. Our analysis reveals 18 natural dams with locations coinciding with knickpoints that are over 30 m high. Among them, eight have a significant influence on the river longitudinal profile as they can form knickpoints with heights exceeding 100 m. Moreover, we show that landslide dams have bigger influence on the river profile than mudslide dams. Further analysis of the Yalong River and its tributary Liqiu River shows that the river steepness index attains higher values at the dams. Excluding the influence of variable lithology and fault activity on the river profile, there are several knickpoints along the river that can still be attributed to dams. Therefore, we conclude that to accurately and reliably extract and analyze information on regional tectonics from DEMs, the potential occurrence of river knickpoints due to dams must be taken into consideration.

Key words: river longitudinal profile, dam, river knickpoint, remote sensing interpretation, Yalong River Basin

CLC Number:

P642.2

LIU Weiming, ZHOU Liqin, CHEN Xiaoqing, ZHOU Zhen, Wolfgang SCHWANGHART, HU Xudong, LI Xuemei, ZHANG Xiaogang. Influence of natural dams on the river profile of the Yalong River Basin[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2021, 28(2): 58-70.

Figures/Tables 14

References 55

[1]	WHIPPLE K X. Bedrock rivers and the geomorphology of active orogens[J]. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 2004,32:151-185. DOI URL
[2]	BEAUMONT C, JAMIESON R A, NGUYEN M H, et al. Himalayan tectonics explained by extrusion of a low-viscosity crustal channel coupled to focused surface denudation[J]. Nature, 2001,414(6865):738-742. DOI URL
[3]	KIRBY E, WHIPPLE K X. Quantifying differential rock-uplift rates via stream profile analysis[J]. Geology, 2001,29(5):415-418. DOI URL
[4]	KIRBY E, WHIPPLE K X. Expression of active tectonics in erosional landscapes[J]. Journal of Structural Geology, 2012,44:54-75. DOI URL
[5]	WHIPPLE K X, HANCOCK G S, ANDERSON R S. River incision into bedrock: mechanics and relative efficacy of plucking, abrasion, and cavitation[J]. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 2000,112(3):490-503. DOI URL
[6]	WILLETT S D, MCCOY S W, PERRON J T, et al. Dynamic reorganization of river basins[J]. Science, 2014,343(6175):1248765. DOI URL
[7]	GOREN L, FOX M, WILLETT S D. Tectonics from fluvial topography using formal linear inversion: theory and applications to the Inyo Mountains, California[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 2014,119(8):1651-1681. DOI URL
[8]	HU X F, PAN B T, KIRBY E, et al. Spatial differences in rock uplift rates inferred from channel steepness indices along the northern flank of the Qilian Mountain, northeast Tibetan Plateau[J]. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2010,55(27/28):3205-3214. DOI URL
[9]	WANG Y, ZHANG H, ZHENG D, et al. How a stationary knickpoint is sustained: new insights into the formation of the deep Yarlung Tsangpo Gorge[J]. Geomorphology, 2017,285:28-43. DOI URL
[10]	YANG R, WILLETT S D, GOREN L. In situ low-relief landscape formation as a result of river network disruption[J]. Nature, 2015,520(7548):526-529. DOI URL
[11]	KORUP O, DENSMORE A L, SCHLUNEGGER F. The role of landslides in mountain range evolution[J]. Geomorphology, 2010,120(1/2):77-90. DOI URL
[12]	KORUP O. Rock-slope failure and the river long profile[J]. Geology, 2006,34(1):45-48. DOI URL
[13]	KORUP O, STROM A L, WEIDINGER J T. Fluvial response to large rock-slope failures: examples from the Himalayas, the Tien Shan, and the Southern Alps in New Zealand[J]. Geomorphology, 2006,78(1/2):3-21. DOI URL
[14]	KORUP O, MONTGOMERY D R. Tibetan Plateau river incision inhibited by glacial stabilization of the Tsangpo gorge[J]. Nature, 2008,455(7214):786-789. DOI URL
[15]	KORUP O, MONTGOMERY D R, HEWITT K. Glacier and landslide feedbacks to topographic relief in the Himalayan syntaxes[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2010,107(12):5317-5322.
[16]	OUIMET W B, WHIPPLE K X, ROYDEN L H, et al. The influence of large landslides on river incision in a transient landscape: eastern margin of the Tibetan Plateau (Sichuan, China)[J]. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 2007,119(11/12):1462-1476. DOI URL
[17]	WALSH L S, MARTIN A J, OJHA T P, et al. Correlations of fluvial knickzones with landslide dams, lithologic contacts, and faults in the southwestern Annapurna Range, central Nepalese Himalaya[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 2012,117(F1):F01012.
[18]	LIU W M, CARLING P A, HU K H, et al. Outburst floods in China: a review[J]. Earth-Science Reviews, 2019,197:102895. DOI URL
[19]	CLARK M K, SCHOENBOHM L M, ROYDEN L H, et al. Surface uplift, tectonics, erosion of eastern Tibet from large-scale drainage patterns[J]. Tectonics, 2004,23(1): TC1006.
[20]	刘静, 曾令森, 丁林, 等. 青藏高原东南缘构造地貌、活动构造和下地壳流动假说[J]. 地质科学, 2009,44(4):1227-1255.
[21]	黄来斌, 白军红, 严登华, 等. 雅砻江流域湿地景观格局变化分析[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2012,21(增刊):140-147.
[22]	常晓军, 魏伦武, 王德伟. 雅砻江流域地质灾害分布特征及其影响因素分析[J]. 灾害学, 2009,24(3):83-88.
[23]	李峥嵘, 彭涛, 董晓华, 等. 雅砻江流域径流极值变化规律及影响因素分析[J]. 水力发电, 2020,46(5):33-37, 84.
[24]	张建岭. 雅砻江中游构造地貌特征及演化[D]. 成都: 成都理工大学, 2012.
[25]	张培震. 青藏高原东缘川西地区的现今构造变形、应变分配与深部动力过程[J]. 中国科学: D辑, 2008,38(9):1041-1056.
[26]	WHIPPLE K X, TUCKER G E. Implications of sediment-flux-dependent river incision models for landscape evolution[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 2002, 107(B2): ETG 3-1 - ETG 3-20.
[27]	WHIPPLE K X, TUCKER G E. Dynamics of the stream-power river incision model: implications for height limits of mountain ranges, landscape response timescales, and research needs[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 1999,104(B8):17661-17674.
[28]	BURBANK D W. Rates of erosion and their implications for exhumation[J]. Mineralogical Magazine, 2002,66(1):25-52. DOI URL
[29]	WHIPPLE K X. Fluvial landscape response time: how plausible is steady-state denudation?[J]. American Journal of Science, 2001,301(4/5):313-325. DOI URL
[30]	MONTGOMERY D R, FOUFOULA-GEORGIOU E. Channel network source representation using digital elevation models[J]. Water Resources Research, 1993,29(12):3925-3934. DOI URL
[31]	WHITTAKER A C, BOULTON S J. Tectonic and climatic controls on knickpoint retreat rates and landscape response times[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 2012,117(F2):F02024.
[32]	STOCK J, DIETRICH W E. Valley incision by debris flows: evidence of a topographic signature[J]. Water Resources Research, 2003,39(4):1089.
[33]	SCHLUNEGGER F, ZEILINGER G, KOUNOV A, et al. Scale of relief growth in the forearc of the Andes of Northern Chile (Arica latitude, 18°S)[J]. Terra Nova, 2006,18(3):217-223. DOI URL
[34]	SCHWANGHART W, SCHERLER D. TopoToolbox 2: MATLAB-based software for topographic analysis and modeling in Earth surface sciences[J]. Earth Surface Dynamics, 2014,2(1):1-7. DOI URL
[35]	STOCK J D, MONTGOMERY D R. Geologic constraints on bedrock river incision using the stream power law[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 1999,104(B3):4983-4993.
[36]	KIRBY E, JOHNSON C, FURLONG K, et al. Transient channel incision along Bolinas Ridge, California: evidence for differential rock uplift adjacent to the San Andreas fault[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 2007, 112(F3): F03S07.
[37]	PAN B T, LI Q, HU X F, et al. Bedrock channels response to differential rock uplift in eastern Qilian Mountain along the northeastern margin of the Tibetan Plateau[J]. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 2015,100:1-19. DOI URL
[38]	胡小飞, 潘保田, 李琼. 基岩河道水力侵蚀模型原理及其最新研究进展[J]. 兰州大学学报(自然科学版), 2014,50(6):824-831.
[39]	王一舟, 张会平, 郑德文, 等. 基岩河道河流水力侵蚀模型及其应用: 兼论青藏高原基岩河道研究的迫切性[J]. 第四纪研究, 2016,36(4):884-897.
[40]	ZHANG HP, KIRBY E, PITLICK J, et al. Characterizing the transient geomorphic response to base-level fall in the northeastern Tibetan Plateau[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface, 2017,122(2):546-572. DOI URL
[41]	KIRBY E, WHIPPLE K X, TANG WQ, et al. Distribution of active rock uplift along the eastern margin of the Tibetan Plateau: inferences from bedrock channel longitudinal profiles[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 2003,108(B4):2217.
[42]	SCHWANGHART W, SCHERLER D. Bumps in river profiles: uncertainty assessment and smoothing using quantile regression techniques[J]. Earth Surface Dynamics, 2017,5(4):821-839. DOI URL
[43]	XU C, SHYU J B H, SHYU J B H . Landslides triggered by the 12 January 2010 Port-au-Prince, Haiti, M_w=7.0 earthquake: visual interpretation, inventory compiling, and spatial distribution statistical analysis[J]. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2014,2:1789-1881.
[44]	李松, 邓宝昆, 徐红勤, 等. 地震型滑坡灾害遥感快速识别方法研究[J]. 遥感信息, 2015,30(4):25-28.
[45]	王孔伟, 邓成进, 张帆. 中国西南雅砻江流域唐古栋滑坡及雨日堆积体形成机理分析[J]. 工程地质学报, 2012,20(6):955-970.
[46]	武运泊. 雅砻江卡拉地区滑坡发育规律与成因机制分析[D]. 成都: 成都理工大学, 2015.
[47]	王治华. 滑坡遥感[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2012.
[48]	严祖文, 魏迎奇, 蔡红. 堰塞坝形成机理及稳定性分析[J]. 中国地质灾害与防治学报, 2009,20(4):55-59.
[49]	LARSEN I J, MONTGOMERY D R, KORUP O. Landslide erosion controlled by hillslope material[J]. Nature Geoscience, 2010,3(4):247-251. DOI URL
[50]	周丽琴, 刘维明, 赖忠平, 等. 河流堰塞的地貌响应[J]. 第四纪研究, 2019,39(2):366-380.
[51]	FAN X M, YUNUS A P, JANSEN J D, et al. Comment on ‘Gigantic rockslides induced by fluvial incision in the Diexi area along the eastern margin of the Tibetan Plateau’ by Zhao et al. (2019) Geomorphology 338, 27-42[J]. Geomorphology, 2019, 106963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2019.106963.
[52]	LIU WM, LAI Z P, HU K H, et al. Age and extent of a giant glacial-dammed lake at Yarlung Tsangpo gorge in the Tibetan Plateau[J]. Geomorphology, 2015,246:370-376. DOI URL
[53]	CLARK M K, HOUSE M A, ROYDEN L H, et al. Late Cenozoic uplift of southeastern Tibet[J]. Geology, 2005,33(6):525-528. DOI URL
[54]	OUIMET W B, WHIPPLE K X, GRANGER D E. Beyond threshold hillslopes: channel adjustment to base-level fall in tectonically active mountain ranges[J]. Geology, 2009,37(7):579-582. DOI URL
[55]	PENNA I M, HERMANNS R L, DAICZ S, et al. Effects of tectonic deformation and landslides in the erosion of a mountain plateau in the transitional zone between the central and Patagonian Andes[J]. American Journal of Science, 2015,315:257-274. DOI URL

堰塞坝编号	纬度(N)	经度(E)	堰塞坝类型	滑坡方量/(10⁴ m³)	坝高/m	堰塞坝面积/(10⁴ m²)
1	31°33'1.12″	100° 5'15.49″	泥石流坝		101	30.784 1
2	30°54'15.11″	100°16'13.70″	泥石流坝		66	22.769 6
3	30°40'24.65″	100°11'42.45″	泥石流坝		65	64.094 1
4	30°35'10.42″	100°18'17.51″	滑坡坝	139.80	78	6.474 2
5	30°33'51.14″	100°18'51.38″	泥石流坝		70	27.373 3
6	30°26'8.77″	100°31'39.11″	泥石流坝		58	23.909 7
7	29°39'0.32″	101° 5'28.15″	滑坡坝	1436.86	121	33.795 3
8	29°24'42.21″	101° 7'44.28″	滑坡坝	1 916.57	168	41.455 9
9	29°24'14.76″	101° 7'16.66″	滑坡坝	1 303.98	157	31.547 7
10	28°26'11.71″	101°15'48.76″	滑坡坝	1 352.19	161	32.370 4
11	28°22'29.28″	101°18'23.60″	滑坡坝	4 016.52	158	70.061
12	28°18'51.37″	101°21'34.04″	滑坡坝	3 509.83	107	63.671 0
13	28°16'59.87″	101°22'33.08″	滑坡坝	9 588.13	261	129.861 2
14	27°52'4.12″	101°23'22.44″	滑坡坝	2 544.84	119	50.689 4
15	26°49'54.09″	101°45'39.97″	滑坡坝	16 620.72	232	191.833
16	29°44'18.84″	101°30'47.57″	泥石流坝		67	143.871 5
17	29°37'8.12″	101°21'59.32″	滑坡坝	8 196.56	197	116.193
18	29°34'26.27″	101°20'46.83″	滑坡坝	10 229.79	258	135.966 5
19	29°25'21.52″	101°17'29.67″	滑坡坝	5 542.83	189	88.040 7
20	30°33'58.77″	100° 7'41.00″	滑坡坝	1 137.345	128	28.639 8
21	31°20'17.31″	100°10'23.95″	泥石流坝		39	21.892 8
22	30°36'57.68″	100°10'59.78″	滑坡坝	846.42	82	23.219 7
23	30°33'51.65″	100° 0'58.10″	泥石流坝		89	53.939 9
24	30°25'34.16	100° 5'39.77″	泥石流坝		57	27.258 1
25	28°29'58.50″	100°58'59.29″	滑坡坝	3 083.79	170	58.087 5
26	28°21'22.76″	100°52'38.55″	滑坡坝	1 024.85	117	26.593 5
27	27°38'46.09″	101°40'36.33″	泥石流坝		92	14.639 3
28	27°25'22.17″	101°43'23.85″	泥石流坝		90	6.201 4
29	29°32'8.77″	101°23'58.48″	泥石流坝		148	49.483 2
30	27°12'6.38″	102°17'9.62″	泥石流坝		98	85.678 8
31	26°52'22.12″	102°17'34.08″	泥石流坝		41	18.313
32	27°50'5.98″	102°24'33.18″	泥石流坝		76	33.188 7
33	27°56'16.05″	102°22'8.59″	滑坡坝	70.15	36	3.969 9
34	27°55'30.28″	102°23'34.35″	滑坡坝	123.02	68	5.912 9

堰塞坝编号	纬度(N)	经度(E)	堰塞坝类型	滑坡方量/(10⁴ m³)	坝高/m	堰塞坝面积/(10⁴ m²)
1	31°33'1.12″	100° 5'15.49″	泥石流坝		101	30.784 1
2	30°54'15.11″	100°16'13.70″	泥石流坝		66	22.769 6
3	30°40'24.65″	100°11'42.45″	泥石流坝		65	64.094 1
4	30°35'10.42″	100°18'17.51″	滑坡坝	139.80	78	6.474 2
5	30°33'51.14″	100°18'51.38″	泥石流坝		70	27.373 3
6	30°26'8.77″	100°31'39.11″	泥石流坝		58	23.909 7
7	29°39'0.32″	101° 5'28.15″	滑坡坝	1436.86	121	33.795 3
8	29°24'42.21″	101° 7'44.28″	滑坡坝	1 916.57	168	41.455 9
9	29°24'14.76″	101° 7'16.66″	滑坡坝	1 303.98	157	31.547 7
10	28°26'11.71″	101°15'48.76″	滑坡坝	1 352.19	161	32.370 4
11	28°22'29.28″	101°18'23.60″	滑坡坝	4 016.52	158	70.061
12	28°18'51.37″	101°21'34.04″	滑坡坝	3 509.83	107	63.671 0
13	28°16'59.87″	101°22'33.08″	滑坡坝	9 588.13	261	129.861 2
14	27°52'4.12″	101°23'22.44″	滑坡坝	2 544.84	119	50.689 4
15	26°49'54.09″	101°45'39.97″	滑坡坝	16 620.72	232	191.833
16	29°44'18.84″	101°30'47.57″	泥石流坝		67	143.871 5
17	29°37'8.12″	101°21'59.32″	滑坡坝	8 196.56	197	116.193
18	29°34'26.27″	101°20'46.83″	滑坡坝	10 229.79	258	135.966 5
19	29°25'21.52″	101°17'29.67″	滑坡坝	5 542.83	189	88.040 7
20	30°33'58.77″	100° 7'41.00″	滑坡坝	1 137.345	128	28.639 8
21	31°20'17.31″	100°10'23.95″	泥石流坝		39	21.892 8
22	30°36'57.68″	100°10'59.78″	滑坡坝	846.42	82	23.219 7
23	30°33'51.65″	100° 0'58.10″	泥石流坝		89	53.939 9
24	30°25'34.16	100° 5'39.77″	泥石流坝		57	27.258 1
25	28°29'58.50″	100°58'59.29″	滑坡坝	3 083.79	170	58.087 5
26	28°21'22.76″	100°52'38.55″	滑坡坝	1 024.85	117	26.593 5
27	27°38'46.09″	101°40'36.33″	泥石流坝		92	14.639 3
28	27°25'22.17″	101°43'23.85″	泥石流坝		90	6.201 4
29	29°32'8.77″	101°23'58.48″	泥石流坝		148	49.483 2
30	27°12'6.38″	102°17'9.62″	泥石流坝		98	85.678 8
31	26°52'22.12″	102°17'34.08″	泥石流坝		41	18.313
32	27°50'5.98″	102°24'33.18″	泥石流坝		76	33.188 7
33	27°56'16.05″	102°22'8.59″	滑坡坝	70.15	36	3.969 9
34	27°55'30.28″	102°23'34.35″	滑坡坝	123.02	68	5.912 9