تحلیل زیستگاه‌های حاشیه‌ای رودخانه طالقان بر اساس واحدهای ژئومورفیک رودخانه‌ای

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکترای ژئومورفولوژی، دانشکده علوم جغرافیایی، دانشگاه خوارزمی.

2 دانشیار گروه جغرافیای طبیعی، دانشکده علوم جغرافیایی، دانشگاه خوارزمی.

3 استاد جغرافیای طبیعی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، هنر، علوم اجتماعی و آموزش، دانشگاه نیوانگلند.

4 استادیار جغرافیای طبیعی، دانشکده علوم جغرافیایی، دانشگاه خوارزمی.

10.22034/gmpj.2020.118225

چکیده

واحدهای ژئومورفیک، نمود فیزیکی فرایندهای جریان آب و انتقال رسوب می­باشند که تحت تأثیر عوامل تاثیرگذار در مقیاس­های بزرگتر هستند. هدف پژوهش حاضر شناسایی و تقسیم­بندی واحدهای ژئومورفیک رودخانه طالقان در بازه­های مختلف، برای تشخیص تراکم و غنای واحدها و نقش عوامل انسانی بر تغییر واحدهای ژئومورفیک است. با استفاده از مطالعه­­ پروفیل طولی براساس اختلاف شیب و ارتفاع، رودخانه طالقان به 3 بخش بالادست، میان دست و پایین دست با میانگین ارتفاعی 1840، 1920 و 2000 متر و اختلاف شیب 17، 11 و 3 درصد تقسیم شده، سپس در هر بخش، بازه­هایی به­منظور مطالعه واحدهای ژئومورفیک با استفاده از روش GUS مورد بررسی قرار گرفت. شاخص­های مورد بررسی شامل تراکم و غنای کل واحدهای ژئومورفیک رودخانه در هر بازه ست. زیرشاخص­های مورد بررسی شامل تراکم و غنای واحدهای مطالعاتی دشت سیلابی و کانال پایه، تراکم واحدهای ژئومورفیک در 5 واحد مطالعاتی جریان اصلی رودخانه، رسوبات رودخانه­ای، پوشش گیاهی میان کانال، دشت سیلابی و منطقه آبگیر دشت سیلابی است. بر اساس نتایج، غنای واحدهای ژئومورفیک در واحد دشت سیلابی و کانال پایه در بازه­های بالادست ((R=0.28 بیشتر و تراکم واحدهای ژئومورفیک در بازه­­های پایین دست رودخانه (D=133.57) بیش از سایر بازه­هاست. در بازه­های بالادست به دلیل تنش هیدرولیک، تراکم واحدهای ژئومورفیک کمتر بوده و امکان تشکیل زیستگاه­های فیزیکی در میان بستر وجود نداشته اما به دلیل تاثیر کمتر عوامل آنتروپوژنیک پایداری واحدهای ژئومورفیک بیش از سایر بازه­ها است. در بازه­های پایین دست به دلیل کاهش شیب تنش هیدرولیکی و افزایش انعطاف پذیری اکولوژیک، شرایط مناسب برای ایجاد لندفرم­های تجمعی بیوژئومورفیک در میان بستر رودخانه وجود داشته اما این واحدها در مقیاس کوچک هستند زیرا تاثیر عوامل آنتروپوژنیک، تغییر کاربری اراضی و برداشت شن و ماسه بخصوص در پایین دست رودخانه سبب کاهش زیرشاخص غنای واحد دشت سیلابی شده و این امر تاثیر منفی بر ایجاد روزنه فرصت و لنگرگاه گیاهی به­منظور استقرار پوشش گیاهی وزیستگاه­های فیزیکی داشته است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Riparian Habitats Analysis of Taleqan River Based on Geomorphic Units Survey and Classification System

نویسندگان [English]

  • sahar Darabi Shahmari 1
  • Ezatollah Ghanavati 2
  • martin thomas 3
  • ali ahmadabadi 4
1 geography faculty, kharazmi university
2 Geography faculty, Kharazmi university
3 Faculty of Humanities, Arts, Social Sciences and Education; School of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences
4 Geography Faculty, Kharazmi university
چکیده [English]

Introduction
The study of the spatial scale of river geomorphic units, along with their hydraulic elements, is suitable for assessing the relationship between ecology and river physics.
In the present study, the classification of geomorphic units of Taleghan river and the comparison of different reaches of the river has been considered in order to analysis the condition of riparian physical habitats of the river. The results of this research can be applied for processes management of river considering the riparian ecologic situation of the river.
Case study
Taleghan river is located between 36°23′and 36°06′ N latitude and 51°10′ to 50°20′ E longitude. In this research, 7 reaches were investigated based on the difference of slope and elevation (Fig. 1).

Methodology
Recently, new approaches for river management have been developed in the REFORM project (REstoring rivers for effective catchment Management) funded by the European Commission within the FP7. In this project, a set of hydrogeomorphological assessment methods is defined by the stages used to assess the river conditions (Rinaldi et al, 2015 and 2016). The geomorphic unit classification and evaluation system (GUS) integrates these methods and utilizes it to classification, analysis and monitoring the set of geomorphic units at reach scale in the 3 space scale of the macro unit, unit, and subunit (Belletti et al, 2017). In the GUS method, the indices of geomorphic unit density (GUSI-R) and geomorphic unit richness are calculated. The designed sub-indices in GUS metho are the richness sub-indices of bankfull channel geomorphic units (GUSI-RBC), floodplain geomorphic units (GUSI-RFP), density sub-indices of baseflow channel geomorphic units (GUSI-DC), emergent sediment geomorphic units (GUSI-DE), in-channel vegetation geomorphic units (GUSI-DV), riparian zone geomorphic units (GUSI-DF) and floodplain aquatic zones geomorphic units (GUSI-DW). The definition of geomorphic units is based on the 3 levels of broad, basic and detail. The characteristic of macro units and units (in broad and basic level) were calculated using ArcGIS software and remote sensing data by Ultracam 10 cm satellite images. The detailed level was also studied by a combination of field studies and remote sensing.

Results & discussion
The total number of geomorphic units and their density in the A and B reach are lower than the probable units in other reaches. At A and B reaches, the lowest area is observed in the "emergent sediment units". In the upstream part of the river, the process of riverbank erosion is dominated, therefore sediment deposition around the bed or across the river channel is much less. The density of biogeomorphic units in the middle channel (C and D) reaches and any opportunity for the creation of cumulative biogeomorphic landforms at the macro scale is limited. In the case of biogeomorphic cumulative landforms establishment, these units are not stable due to the hydraulic stress gradient. Most of the richness of bankfull and floodplain geomorphic units are observed in the D and E reaches. The density of in-channel vegetation unit in F reach is lower than C, D and F reach. The highest rate of the richness of geomorphic units is observed in D, E and F reaches. The width of the river bed in these reaches is greater than A and B reaches. The highest rate of the density of in-channel vegetation unit was observed in the H reach. The number of vegetation islands in this reach is 30, which is greater than all the reaches. Suitable conditions for the creation of biogeomorphic cumulative landforms in this reach is more than other reaches. The aquatic vegetation unit is only visible at C reach.

Conclusion
There is a variety of geomorphic units and physical habitats in the downstream of the river as well as in the midstream compared to the upstream of the river. Although environmental aspects have not been studied in this research, these reaches have a habitat diversity due to decrease of the hydraulic stress gradient and increase of ecological flexibility. Although the mentioned diversity may not be important for macro-fauna and flora because the habitats have a small scale in most cases but they are significant for diatoms, algae, and smaller fauna and flora. The impact of anthropogenic interference, landuse change, and sand removal from the river bed, especially in downstream of the Taleqan River, reduced the density of the floodplain unit, and this has a negative impact on the formation of sedimentary islands and riparian vegetation (F reach). Anthropogenic factors have a negative impact on riverbed deposition and disturbed natural evolution of riparian and in-channel vegetation. Excessive deposition by sand removal destroys opportunity windows for plant anchorages and, in some cases, buries in channel physical habitats.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Ecogeomorphology
  • Biogeomorphic Feedback Windows
  • Biogeomorphic Cumulative Landforms
  • Taleghan River
  • Geomorphic Units Survey and Classification System
  • شریفی­کیا، م.، شایان، ش.، افتخاری، م.، و کرم، ا.، 1396. تحلیل تغییرات مورفولوژیکی رودخانه ناشی از احداث سد طالقان بر پایه تفاضل سنجی زمانی داده­های سنجش از دور، فصلنامه فضا در ژئومورفولوژی، دوره 21، شماره 2، صص263-243.
  • شهبازی، ع.، و احمدی، ح.، 1392. بررسی نحوه ته­نشست رسوبات در طول و میزان تاثیر بر حجم مخازن، نشریه آبیاری و زه­کشی ایران، شماره 2، جلد 7، صص 269-259.
  • قربانی، م.، نظری سامانی، ع.، کوهبنانی، ح.، اکبری، ف.، جلیلی، زهرا.، 1389. ارزیابی روند تغییرات کاربری اراضی حوزه آبخیز طالقان، چهارمین کنگره بین­المللی جغرافیدانان جهان اسلام، 25-27 فروردین 1389، زاهدان.
  • Balke, T. Bouma, T. Horstman, E. Webb, E. Erftemeijer, P. and Herman, P., 2011. Windows of opportunity: Thresholds to mangrove seedling establishment on tidal flats. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 440, pp.1–9.
  • Barbour, MT. Gerritsen, J. Snyder, BD. and Stribling, JB., 1999. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols for Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates, and Fish. second edition. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Office of Water; Washington, D.C.
  • Belletti, B. Dufour, S. and Piégay, H., 2013. Regional variability of aquatic pattern in braided reaches (example of the French Rhône basin). Hydrobiologia, 712, pp.25–41.
  • Brierley, GJ. Fryirs, K. Cullum, C. Tadaki, M. Huang, HQ. and Blue, B., 2013. Reading the landscape: Integrating the theory and practice of geomorphology to develop placebased understandings of river systems. Progress in Physical Geography, 37(5), pp.601–621
  • Clifford, NJ. Harmar, OP. Harvey, G. and Petts, G., 2006. Physical habitat, eco-hydraulics and river design: A review and re-evaluation of some popular concepts and methods. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. 16 (4), pp.389–408.
  • Corenblit, D. Steiger, J. and Peiry, JL., 2018. Niche construction within riparian corridors. Part I: Exploring biogeomorphic feedback windows of three pioneer riparian species (Allier River, France). Geomorphology, 305, pp.94-111.
  • Demarchi, L. Bizzi, S. and  Piégay, H., 2016. Remote sensing hierarchical object-basedmapping of riverscape units and in-stream mesohabitats using LiDAR and VHR imagery. Remote Sensing, 8 (2), pp.97.
  • Eichel, J. Corenblit, D. and Dikau, R., 2015. Conditions for feedbacks between geomorphic and vegetation dynamics on lateral moraine slopes: A biogeomorphic feedback window. Earth Surface Process and Landform, 41, pp.406–419.
  • Frissell, CA. Liss, WJ. Warren, CE. and Hurley, MD., 1986. A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context. Environment Management, 10 (2), pp.199–214.
  • Fryirs, KA. and Brierley, GJ., 2013. Geomorphic Analysis of River Systems: An Approach to Reading the Landscape: John Wiley and Sons. Chichester, UK.
  • Gurnell, AM. Corenblit, D. De Jalón, G. González Del Tánago, M. Grabowski, RC. O’Hare, MT. and Szewczyk, M., 2016. A conceptual model of vegetationhydromorphology interactions within river corridors. River Research and Application, 32, pp.142–163.
  • Gurnell, AM. Rinaldi, M. Belletti, B. Bizzi, S. Blamauer, B. and Braca, G., 2016. A multiscale hierarchical framework for developing understanding of river behaviour to support river management. Aquatic Sciences, 78(1), pp.1–16.
  • Kaless, G. Mao, L. Moretto, J. Picco, L. and Lenzi, MA., 2015. The response of a gravel-bed River planform configuration to flow variations and bed reworking: A modelling Study. Hydrological Processes, 29, pp.3812–3828.
  • Ladson, AR. White, LJ. Doolan, JA. Finlayson, BL. Hart, BT. Lake, PS. and Tilleard, JW., 1999. Development and testing of an index of stream condition for waterway management in Australia. Freshwater Biology. 41, pp.453–468.
  • Moretto, J. Rigon, E. Mao, L. Picco, L. Delai, F. and Lenzi, MA., 2014. Channel adjustments and vegetation cover dynamics in the Brenta River (Italy) over the last 30 years. River Research and application, 30, pp.719–732.
  • Picco, L. Comiti, F. Mao, L. Tonon, A. and Lenzi, MA., 2017, Mediumand short termriparian vegetation, island and channel evolution in response to human pressure in a regulated gravel bed river (Piave River, Italy). CATENA, 149(3), pp.760-769.
  • Platts, WS. Megahan,WF. and Minshall, GW., 1983. Methods for evaluating stream, riparian, and biotic conditions. US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Ogden, UT, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.
  • Poole, GC., 2010. Stream hydrogeomorphology as a physical science basis for advances in stream ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 29(1), pp.12–25.
  • Raven, PJ. Fox, PJA. Everard, M. Holmes, NTH. and Dawson, FH., 1997. River habitat survey: A new system for classifying rivers according to their habitat quality. Stationery Office, Edinburgh UK, pp.215–234.
  • Rinaldi, M. Belletti, B. Bussettini, M. Comiti, F. Golfieri, B. Lastoria, B. Marchese, E. Nardi, L. and Surian, N., 2016. Newtools for hydromorphological assessment andmonitoring of European streams. Jornal of Environmental Management, 202(2), pp.363-378.
  • Rinaldi, M. Belletti, B. Comiti, F. Nardi, L. Bussettini, M.  Mao, L. and Gurnell, AM., 2015. The Geomorphic Units Survey and Classification System (GUS), Deliverable 6.2, Part 4, of REFORM.
  • Rollet, AJ. Piégay, H. Dufour, S. Bornette, G. and Persat, H., 2014. Assessment of consequences of sediment deficit on a gravel river bed downstream of dams in restoration perspectives: application of a multicriteria, hierarchical and spatially explicit diagnosis. River Research and application, 30, pp.939–953.
  • Thomson, JR. Taylor, MP. Fryirs, KA. and Brierley, GJ., 2001. A geomorphological framework for river characterization and habitat assessment. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. 11, pp.373–389.
  • Vezza, P. Goltara, A. Spairani, M. Zolezzi, G. Siviglia, A. Carolli, M. Bruno, MC. Boz, B. Stellin, D. Comoglio, C. and Parasiewicz, P., 2015. Habitat indices for rivers: quantifying the impact of hydro-morphological alterations on the fish community. Engineering Geology for Society and Territory, 3, pp.357-360.
  • Wheaton, JM. Fryirs, KA. Brierley, G. Bangen, SG. Bouwen, N. and O'Brien, G., 2015. Geomorphicmapping and taxonomy of fluvial landforms. Geomorphology, 248, pp.273–295.
  • Wyrick, JR. and Pasternack, GB., 2014. Geospatial organization of fluvial landforms in a gravel–cobble river: beyond the riffle–pool couplet. Geomorphology, 213, pp.48–65.
  • Wyrick, JR. Senter, AE. and Pasternack, GB., 2014. Revealing the natural complexity of fluvial morphology through 2D hydrodynamic delineation of river landforms. Geomorphology, 210, pp,14–22.
  • Zavadil, EA. Stewardson, MJ. Turner, ME. and Ladson, AR., 2012. An evaluation of surface flow types as a rapidmeasure of channel morphology for the geomorphic component of river condition assessments. Geomorphology, 139–140, pp.303–312.