Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:45:19.330Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Channel morphology, hydrology and geomorphic positioning of a Middle Miocene river system of the Siwalik foreland basin, India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2014

PRADEEP K. GOSWAMI  and
TANUJA DEOPA
PRADEEP K. GOSWAMI*
Affiliation:
Centre of Advanced Study, Department of Geology, Kumaun University, Nainital 263002, India
TANUJA DEOPA
Affiliation:
Centre of Advanced Study, Department of Geology, Kumaun University, Nainital 263002, India
*
†Author for correspondence: drpgoswami@yahoo.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Systematic lithofacies, palaeocurrent, palaeomorphological and palaeohydrological analyses have provided detailed information about a hitherto unstudied river system of the Siwalik foreland basin of the Himalaya. Three distinct lithofacies associations, each representing a specific depositional setting, have been identified and named as ‘Facies Association A’, ‘Facies Association B’ and ‘Facies Association C’. The ‘Facies Association A’ comprises pebbly sandstone, cross-bedded sandstone, ripple-laminated sandy siltstone and bioturbated mudstone lithofacies and represents deposits of a braided channel. The ‘Facies Association B’ comprises cross-bedded sandstone, bioturbated mudstone, fine sandstone–mudstone alternation and lensoid to prismatic sandstone lithofacies and represents deposits of a channel, natural levee, crevasse-splay and flood plain of a meandering stream. The ‘Facies Association C’ comprises mottled siltstone–mudstone heterolith and fine sandstone lithofacies and represents deposits of the upland interfluve region. The braided stream had a maximum depth of 4.15 m, maximum width of 305 m and maximum discharge of 7045 cumec, whereas the meandering stream had a sinuosity of 1.26, maximum depth of 3.71 m, maximum width of 180 m and maximum discharge of 4070 cumec. The area had a regional radial outward flow pattern, but dominantly towards the SSW. However, the braided river had a bimodal flow pattern due to an active basement-high-induced bend along its course. A comparison of the sediment characters and morphological and hydrological parameters of these streams with those of the modern rivers of the Ganga (Gangetic) basin has enabled us to infer that this river system was located in the medial-distal megafan-interfan setting of the basin.

Keywords

lithofaciespalaeohydrologypalaeocurrentfluvial depositsLower Siwalikforeland basin
Type
Original Articles
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 152 , Issue 1 , January 2015 , pp. 12 - 27
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, J. R. L. 1968. Current Ripples. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing, 433 pp.Google Scholar
Allen, J. R. L. 1970. Physical Processes in Sedimentology. London: Allen and Unwin, 248 pp.Google Scholar
Allen, J. R. L. 1982. A theoretical and experimental study of climbing-ripple cross-lamination, with a field application to Uppsala esker. Geografiska Annaler 53A, 157–87.Google Scholar
Auden, J. B. 1934. Geology of the Krol Belt. Records of the Geological Survey of India 67, 357–454.Google Scholar
Batschelet, E. 1981. Circular Statistics in Biology. London: Academic Press, 371 pp.Google Scholar
Bhargava, D. N., Agarwal, B. L., Bhargava, A. N. & Pal, M. 1985. A study of meander loops in alluvial rivers based on field data. Proceedings of the 52nd Research and Development Session, New Delhi, pp. 39–51. New Delhi: Central Board for Irrigation and Power.Google Scholar
Bridge, J. S. 1984. Large-scale facies sequence in alluvial overbank environments. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 54, 583–8.Google Scholar
Bridge, J. S. 1993. Description and interpretation of fluvial deposits: a critical perspective. Sedimentology 40, 801–10.Google Scholar
Bridge, J. S. & Tye, R. S. 2000. Interpreting the dimensions of ancient fluvial channel bars, channels, and channel belts from wireline-logs and cores. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin 84, 1205–28.Google Scholar
Bristow, C. S. 1993. Sedimentary structures exposed in bar tops in the Brahmaputra River Bangladesh. In Braided Rivers (eds Best, J. L. & Bristow, C. S.), pp. 277–89. Geological Society of London, Special Publication no. 75.Google Scholar
Brozovic, N. & Burbank, D. W. 2000. Dynamic fluvial systems and gravel progradation in the Himalayan foreland. Geological Society of America Bulletin 112, 394–412.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burbank, D. W. & Beck, R. A. 1991. Models of aggradation versus progradation in the Himalayan Foredeep. Geologische Rundschau 80, 623–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burbank, D. W., Beck, R. A. & Mulder, T. 1996. The Himalayan foreland basin. In The Tectonic Evolution of Asia (eds Yin, A. & Harrison, T. M.), pp. 149–88. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chakraborty, T., Kar, R., Ghosh, P. & Basu, S. 2010. Kosi megafan: historical records, geomorphology and the recent avulsion of the Kosi River. Quaternary International 227, 143–60.Google Scholar
Cotter, E. 1971. Paleoflow characteristics of a Late Cretaceous river in Utah from analysis of sedimentary structures in the Ferron sandstone. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 41, 131–8.Google Scholar
Coleman, J. M. 1969. Brahmaputra River: channel processes and sedimentation. Sedimentary Geology 3, 129–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Critelli, S. & Ingersoll, R. V. 1994. Sandstone petrology and provenance of the Siwalik Group (northwestern Pakistan and western-southesatern Nepal). Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 4, 815–23.Google Scholar
Davis, J. C. 2002. Statistics and Data Analysis in Geology. Singapore: John Wiley & Sons, 639 pp.Google Scholar
Dewey, J. F. & Bird, J. M. 1970. Mountain belts and new global tectonics. Journal of Geophysical Research 40, 695–707.Google Scholar
Dott, R. H. Jr. 1973. Palaeocurrent analysis of trough cross-stratification. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 43, 779–83.Google Scholar
Ethridge, F. G. & Schumm, S. A. 1978. Reconstructing palaeochannel morphology and flow characteristics: methodology, limitation and assessment. In Fluvial Sedimentology (ed. Miall, A. D.), pp. 703–21. Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 5.Google Scholar
Friend, P. E., Raza, S. M., Geehan, G. & Sheikh, K. A. 2001. Intermediate scale architectural features of the fluvial Chinji Formation (Miocene) Siwalik Group, northern Pakistan. Journal of the Geological Society, London 158, 163–77.Google Scholar
Gardner, T. W. 1983. Paleohydrology and paleomorphology of a Carboniferous meandering fluvial sandstone. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 53, 991–1005.Google Scholar
Garzanti, E., Critelli, S. & Ingersoll, R. V. 1996. Palaeogeographic and palaeotectonic evolution of the Himalayan Range as reflected by detrital modes of Tertiary sandstones and modern sands (Indus transect, India and Pakistan). Geological Society of America Bulletin 108, 631–42.2.3.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibling, M. R. 2006. Width and thickness of fluvial channel bodies and valley fills in the geological record: a literature compilation and classification. Journal of Sedimentary Research 76, 731–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goswami, P. K. 2012. Geomorphic evidences of active faulting in the northwestern Ganga Plain, India: implications for the impact of basement structures. Geosciences Journal 16, 289–99.Google Scholar
Goswami, P. K. & Yhokha, A. 2010. Geomorphic evolution of the Piedmont Zone of the Ganga Plain, India: a study based on remote sensing, GIS and field investigation. International Journal of Remote Sensing 31, 5349–64.Google Scholar
Huyghe, P., Mugnier, J. L., Gajurel, A. P. & Delcaillau, B. 2005. Tectonic and climatic control of the changes in the sedimentary record of the Karnali River section (Siwaliks of western Nepal). The Island Arc 14, 311–27.Google Scholar
Jain, V. & Sinha, R. 2003. River systems in the Gangetic plains and their comparison with the Siwaliks: a review. Current Science 84, 1025–33.Google Scholar
Jain, V. & Sinha, R. 2005. Response of active tectonics on the alluvial Baghmati River, Himalayan foreland basin, eastern India. Geomorphology 70, 339–56.Google Scholar
Karunakaran, C. & Ranga Rao, A. 1979. Status of exploration for hydrocarbons in the Himalayan region – contributions to stratigraphy and structure. Miscellaneous Publications of the Geological Survey of India 41, 1–66.Google Scholar
Khan, Z. A. & Tewari, R. C. 2011. Paleochannel and paleohydrology of a Middle Siwalik (Pliocene) fluvial system, northern India. Journal of Earth System Science 120, 531–43.Google Scholar
Kotlia, B. S., Phartiyal, B., Kosaka, T. & Bora, A. 2008. Magnetostratigraphy and lithology of Miocene-Pliocene Siwalik deposits between Tanakpur and Sukhidhang, southeastern Uttarakhand Himalaya, India. Himalayan Geology 29, 127–36.Google Scholar
Kumar, R., Ghosh, S. K., Mazari, R. K. & Sangode, S. J. 2003. Tectonic impacts on the fluvial deposits of Plio-Pleistocene Himalayan Foreland Basin, India. Sedimentary Geology 158, 209–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kumar, S., Singh, I. B., Singh, M. & Singh, D. S. 1995. Depositional pattern in upland surfaces of central Gangetic Plain near Lucknow. Journal of the Geological Society of India 46, 545–55.Google Scholar
Leclair, S. F. & Bridge, J. S. 2001. Quantitative interpretation of sedimentary structures formed by river dunes. Journal of Sedimentary Research 71, 713–6.Google Scholar
Leier, A. L., Decelles, P. G. & Pelletier, J. D. 2005. Mountains, monsoons and megafans. Geology 33, 289–92.Google Scholar
Leopold, L. B. & Maddock, T. Jr. 1953. The Hydraulic Geometry of Stream Channels and Some Physiographic Implications. United States Geological Survey Professional Paper, 352 pp.Google Scholar
Leopold, L. B. & Wolman, M. G. 1960. River meanders. Geological Society of America Bulletin 71, 769–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyon-Caen, H. & Molnar, P. 1985. Gravity anomalies, flexure of the Indian Plate and the structure, support and evolution of the Himalaya and Ganga basin. Tectonics 4, 513–38.Google Scholar
Miall, A. D. 1976. Palaeocurrent and palaeohydrological analysis of some vertical profiles through a Cretaceous braided stream deposit, Banks Island, Arctic Canada. Sedimentology 23, 459–84.Google Scholar
Miall, A. D. 1978. Lithofacies types and vertical profile models in braided river deposits: a summary. In Fluvial Sedimentology (ed. Miall, A. D.), pp. 597–604. Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 5.Google Scholar
Najman, Y. 2006. The detrital record of orogenesis: a review of approaches and techniques used in the Himalayan sedimentary basins. Earth Science Reviews 74, 1–72.Google Scholar
Nakayama, K. & Ulak, P. D. 1999. Evolution of the fluvial styles in the Siwalik group in the foothills of the Nepal Himalaya. Sedimentary Geology 125, 205–24.Google Scholar
Parkash, B., Bajpai, I. P. & Saxena, H. P. 1974. Sedimentary structures and palaeocurrents of the Siwalik exposed between the Yamuna and Gola rivers, U.P. Geological Magazine 111, 1–14.Google Scholar
Pilgrim, G. E. 1910. Preliminary note on a revised classification of the Tertiary freshwater deposits of India. Records of the Geological Survey of India 403, 185–8.Google Scholar
Postma, G. 1990. Depositional architecture and facies of river and fan deltas: a synthesis. In Coarse-grained Deltas (eds Colella, A. & David, B. P.), pp. 13–28. International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication no. 10.Google Scholar
Potter, P. E. & Pettijohn, F. J. 1963. Palaeocurrent and Basin Analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag, 296 pp.Google Scholar
Raiverman, V., Kunte, S. V. & Mukherjea, A. 1983. Basin geometry, Cenozoic sedimentation and hydrocarbon prospects in northwestern Himalaya and Indo-Gangetic plains. Petroleum Asia Journal 6, 67–92.Google Scholar
Raymo, M. E. & Ruddiman, W. F. 1992. Tectonic forcing of late Cenozoic climate. Nature 359, 117–22.Google Scholar
Reineck, H. E. & Singh, I. B. 1980. Depositional Sedimentary Environments. 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer, 549 pp.Google Scholar
Rust, B. R. 1978. A classification of alluvial channel systems. In Fluvial Sedimentology (ed. Miall, A. D.), pp. 187–98. Canadian Society of Petroleum Geologists Memoir 5.Google Scholar
Schumm, S. A. 1963. Sinuosity of alluvial rivers on the Great Plains. Geological Society of America Bulletin 74, 1089–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumm, S. A. 1968. River adjustment to altered hydrologic regimen—Murrambidgee river and palaeochannels, Australia. United States Geological Survey Professional Paper 598, 65 pp.Google Scholar
Schumm, S. A. 1972. Fluvial palaeochannels. In Recognition of Ancient Sedimentary Environments (eds Rigby, J. K. & Hamblin, W. K.), pp. 98–107. Society of Economic Palaeontologists and Mineralogists Special Publication 16.Google Scholar
Sengupta, S. 2007. Introduction to Sedimentology. New Delhi: CBS, 314 pp.Google Scholar
Sharma, S., Sharma, M. & Singh, I. B. 2001. Facies characteristics and cyclicity of Lower Siwalik sediment, Jammu area: a new perspective. Geological Magazine 138, 455–70.Google Scholar
Shukla, U. K. & Singh, I. B. 2004. Signatures of palaeofloods in sandbar-levee deposits, Ganga Plain, India. Journal of the Geological Society of India 64, 455–60.Google Scholar
Shukla, U. K., Bora, D. S. & Singh, C. K. 2009. Geomorphic positioning and depositional dynamics of river systems in lower Siwalik basin, Kumaon Himalaya. Journal of the Geological Society of India 73, 335–54.Google Scholar
Singh, I. B., Srivastava, P., Sharma, S., Sharma, S., Singh, D. S., Rajagopalan, G. & Shukla, U. K. 1999. Upland interfluve (Doab) deposition: alternate model to muddy overbank deposits. Facies 40, 197–210.Google Scholar
Sinha, R. & Friend, P. F. 1994. River systems and their sediment flux, Indo-Gangetic plains, northern Bihar, India. Sedimentology 41, 825–45.Google Scholar
Sinha, R., Kumar, R., Sinha, S., Tandon, S. K. & Gibling, M. R. 2007. Late Cenozoic fluvial successions in northern and western India: an overview and synthesis. Quaternary Science Reviews 26, 2801–22.Google Scholar
Smith, G. H. S., Ashworth, P. J., Best, J. L., Woodwords, J. & Simpson, C. J. 2006. The sedimentology and alluvial architecture of the sandy braided South Saskatchewan River, Canada. Sedimentology 53, 413–34.Google Scholar
Tandon, S. K. 1976. Siwalik sedimentation in a part of the Kumaun Himalaya, India. Sedimentary Geology 16, 131–54.Google Scholar
Tandon, S. K. 1991. The Himalayan Foreland: focus on Siwalik Basin. In Sedimentary Basins of India: Tectonic Context (eds Tandon, S. K., Pant, C. C. & Casshyap, S. M.), pp. 177–201. Nainital: Gyanodaya Prakashan.Google Scholar
Tandon, S. K. & Kumar, R. 1984. Active intra-basinal highs and palaeodrainage reversals in the late orogenic hominoid bearing Siwalik basin. Nature 308, 635–7.Google Scholar
Tewari, R. C. 2005. Fluvial facies models of Triassic Gondwana rocks of Koel–Damodar, Son and Satpura basins of eastern and central India. Gondwana Geological Magazine 20, 109–18.Google Scholar
Tewari, R. C. & Gaur, R. P. 1991. Structures and sequences in fine-grained point bars of Yamuna River near Etawah, Uttar Pradesh. Journal of the Geological Society of India 38, 303–11.Google Scholar
Tewari, R. C., Hota, R. N. & Maejima, W. 2012. Fluvial architecture of Early Permian Barakar rocks of Korba Gondwana basin, eastern-central India. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 52, 43–52.Google Scholar
Ulak, P. D. 2005. Palaeohydrological reconstruction of Siwalik Group in Surai Khola section of west Nepal. Journal Nepal Geological Society 31, 33–42.Google Scholar
Valdiya, K. S. 1998. Dynamic Himalaya. Hyderabad: University Press, 178 pp.Google Scholar
Walker, R. G. & Cant, D. J. 1984. Sandy fluvial systems. In Facies Models. 2nd ed. (ed. Walker, R. G.), pp. 71–89. St Johns, Newfoundland: Geological Association of Canada.Google Scholar
Williams, G. P. 1986. River meanders and channel size. Journal of Hydrology 88, 147–64.Google Scholar
Willis, B. 1993. Ancient river systems in the Himalayan Foredeep, Chinji village area, northern Pakistan. Sedimentary Geology 88, 1–76.Google Scholar
Zaleha, M. J. 1997. Intra and extra basinal control on fluvial deposition in the Miocene Indo-Gangetic foreland basin, northern Pakistan. Sedimentology 44, 269–390.Google Scholar