EGU23-17217, updated on 06 Jan 2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-17217
EGU General Assembly 2023
© Author(s) 2024. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

An assessment of the most suitable DEM for tectonogeomorphic analysis in tectonic basins

Willem Viveen1, Maria del Rosario González-Moradas1,2, Raúl Andrés Vidal-Villalobos1, and Juan Carlos Villegas-Lanza3
Willem Viveen et al.
  • 1Grupo de Investigación en Geología Sedimentaria. Especialidad de Ingeniería Geológica, Departamento de Ingeniería, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, San Miguel, Lima, Perú.
  • 2Area de Ingenieria Cartografica, Geodesia y Fotogrametria del Departamento de Explotacion y Prospeccion de Minas, Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain.
  • 3Instituto Geofísico del Perú, Calle Badajoz 169, Ate, Lima, Perú.

Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) are a fundamental data source for the calculation of tectonogeomorphic indices in areas with active tectonic deformation. There are, however, hardly any studies available that compared the strength and weaknesses of the various, freely available medium-resolution DEMs for these kinds of applications. As such, it is difficult for researchers to make a well-informed choice regarding the most suitable DEM for their specific study. We have therefore carried out an exhaustive analysis of the five, most commonly used medium-resolution DEMs. These are the 30-m SRTM v.3.0, AW3D30, ASTER GDEM3, Copernicus and the 12-m TanDEM-X. We have analysed the performance of these DEMs by calculating the most commonly used tectonogeomorphic indices for 22 river basins in two geographically contrasting tectonic basins in the Peruvian Andes. Calculated metrics included drainage basin areas, fluvial network length and position, longitudinal profile and knickpoint representation, concavity indices θ and m/n, the normalised steepness index ksn and the Hypsometric integral. We also performed a mapping exercise of fluvio-tectonic landforms such as fluvial terraces, folds and fault traces. Statistical analysis were carried out to highlight similarities and differences in performance between the five DEMs. Copernicus and TanDEM-X were the best performing DEMs across the whole range of analysed metrics, closely followed by AW3D30. SRTM3 v. 3.0 and ASTER GDEM3 performed well in some of the tests, but lacked in other areas and are therefore not recommended. 

How to cite: Viveen, W., del Rosario González-Moradas, M., Vidal-Villalobos, R. A., and Villegas-Lanza, J. C.: An assessment of the most suitable DEM for tectonogeomorphic analysis in tectonic basins, EGU General Assembly 2023, Vienna, Austria, 23–28 Apr 2023, EGU23-17217, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu23-17217, 2023.