SWS Academic Research eLibraryEarth & Planetary Sciences

Scholarly record

COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT DEM DERIVED LANDFORM ANALYSIS (CASE OF KAKHETI, GEORGIA)

Mariam Tsitsagi, D. Svanadze, Giorgi Lominadze, Merab Gongadze, Levan Koroglishvili

First published: 2020-09-20https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2020/1.1/s01.007View metrics

Abstract

Topography plays an unraveled role in many biophysical processes and phenomena. The main problem, however, is that measurement, representation, and characterization of such a vast and continuous feature are very challenging. The accuracy of Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) has a direct influence on the results of the further landform analysis. In this paper, we use existing approaches of landform analysis with the use of global DEMs in the large-scale regional study. A detailed comparison was made between landforms derived from SRTM 1 Arc-Second (30 m) and ASTER GDEM v3 (30 m) to quantitively and qualitatively assess their accuracy over the Kakheti Region, Georgia which is characterized by the complex terrain and then to compare it with a reference model derived from laser scanning (LiDAR-5m). The approach was based on landform analysis developed by Weiss and updated by Jenness for the GIS interface. The landform analysis process involves combining primary terrain attributes (slope, aspect, curvature, topographic wetness index) to secondary attributes (Topographic Position Index). 10 different landforms were derived from each DEM. Approximately 400 ground control points (GCPs) were used for comparison. The results demonstrated that SRTM DEM is characterized by better elevation accuracy. According to the percentage metric of landform analysis, SRTM DEM has better results especially in the case of plains. Only a few areas especially mountain tops and high ridges where ASTER GDEM V3 had a small advantage. We have demonstrated that this comparison is one among wide research results which can be an answer for which DEM is more suitable for landform analysis.

Publication Impact Profile

PlumX
  • Captures
  • Mendeley - Readers: 3
PLUMX see details

Publication details

Title
COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT DEM DERIVED LANDFORM ANALYSIS (CASE OF KAKHETI, GEORGIA)
Authors
Mariam Tsitsagi, D. Svanadze, Giorgi Lominadze, Merab Gongadze, Levan Koroglishvili
Proceedings
SGEM International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference EXPO Proceedings; 20th SGEM International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference Proceedings 2020, Science and Technologies in Geology, Exploration And Mining
Publisher
STEF92 Technology
Year
2020
Pages
67-74
SWS Citekey
Tsitsagi202016774
ISSN
1314-2704
ISBN
978-619-7603-04-0
Language
en
Publication type
Conference Paper
Keywords
DEMlandformsASTERSRTMGeorgia
References12

  1. Evans, I. S. (2012). Geomorphometry and landform mapping: What is a landform? Geomorphology, Volume 137, Issue 1, 94-106.

  2. Li, Z., Zhu, Q., & Gold, C. (2004). Digital terrain modeling: Principles and methodology. In Digital Terrain Modeling: Principles and Methodology.

  3. Szypu?a, B. (2017). Digital Elevation Models in Geomorphology. In D. Shukla, Hydro-Geomorphology - Models and Trends (pp. 81-103). BoD – Books on Demand.

  4. Szypu?a, B. (2019). Quality assessment of DEM derived from topographic maps for geomorphometric purposes. Open Geoscience, 11, 843–865.

  5. Guth, P. L. (2010). Geomorphometric Comparison of ASTER GDEM and SRTM. A special joint symposium of ISPRS Technical Commission IV & AutoCarto in conjunction with ASPRS/CaGIS 2010 Fall Specialty Conference, (pp. 1-10). Orlando.

  6. Mondal, A., Khare, D., Kundu, S., Mukherjee, S., Mukhopadhyay, A., & Mondal, S. (2017). Uncertainty of soil erosion modelling using open source high resolution and aggregated DEMs. Geoscience Frontiers, 8(3), 425–436.

  7. Kovalchuk, I. P., Lukianchuk, K. A., & Bogdanets, V. A. (2019). Assessment of open source digital elevation models (SRTM-30, ASTER, ALOS) for erosion processes modeling. Journal of Geology, Geography and Geoecology, 28(1).

  8. B?hner, J., K?the, R., Conrad, O., Gross, J., Ringeler, A., & Silige, T. (n.d.). Soil regionalisation by means of terrain analysis and process parameterisation. EUROPEAN SOIL BUREAU, RESEARCH REPORT NO. 7.

  9. Weiss, A. D. (2001). Topographic Position and Landforms Analysis. The Nature Conservancy.

  10. Deng, Y. (2007). New trends in digital terrain analysis: landform defi nition, representation, and classification. Progress in Physical Geography, 31(4), 405-419.

  11. Kvirkvelia, N., Tsitsagi, M., & Chaladze, T. (2017). Chapter twnty-six Terrain Morphometric Analysis to Support Tourism Develeopment in the Tusheti Protected Area. In R. Efe, & M. ?zt?rk, Contemporary Studies in Environment and Tourism (pp. 427-434). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

  12. Jenness, J. 2006. Topographic Position Index (tpi_jen.avx) extension for ArcView 3.x, v. 1.3a. Jenness Enterprises.

View or Download full articleAccess options
Full paper accessChoose SWS login, librarian support, or instant article download.

SWS access login

Login as SWS Scientific Committee

Authors and approved SWS contributors will read and export their own linked papers after identity matching by SWS profile, email and SGEM GlobalID.

For librarian assistance: [email protected]

Purchase Instant Access

48-hour online accessComing soon
Online-only accessComing soon
Download the full article in PDF formatEUR 35
  • Article can be downloaded after successful payment.
  • Article may be used according to SWS library access terms.
  • Article cannot be redistributed.
Get full paper

Back to publication list