skip to main content


Search for: All records

Creators/Authors contains: "Overeem, I."

Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher. Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?

Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.

  1. The morphology of deltas is determined by the spatial extent and variability of the geomorphic processes that shape them. While in some cases resilient, deltas are increasingly threatened by natural and anthropogenic forces, such as sea level rise and land use change, which can drastically alter the rates and patterns of sediment transport. Quantifying process patterns can improve our predictive understanding of how different zones within delta systems will respond to future change. Available remotely sensed imagery can help but appropriate tools are needed for pattern extraction and analysis. We present a method for extracting information about the nature and spatial extent of active geomorphic processes across deltas from ten parameters quantifying the geometry of each of 1239 islands and the channels around them using machine learning. The method consists of a two-step unsupervised machine learning algorithm that clusters islands into spatially continuous zones based on the ten morphological metrics extracted from remotely sensed imagery. By applying this method to the Ganges–Brahmaputra–Meghna Delta, we find that the system can be divided into six major zones. Classification results show that active fluvial island construction and bar migration processes are limited to relatively narrow zones along the main Ganges River and Brahmaputra and Meghna corridors, whereas zones in the mature upper delta plain, with smaller fluvial distributary channels stand out as their own morphometric class. The classification also shows good correspondence with known gradients in the influence of tidal energy with distinct classes for islands in the backwater zone and in the purely tidally-controlled region of the delta. Islands at the delta front, under the mixed influence of tides, fluvial-estuarine construction, and local wave reworking have their own characteristic shape and channel configuration. The method does not distinguish between islands with embankments (polders) and natural islands in the nearby mangrove forest (Sundarbans), suggesting that human modifications have not yet altered the gross geometry of the islands beyond their previous natural morphology. These results demonstrate that machine learning and remotely sensed imagery are useful tools for identifying the spatial patterns of geomorphic processes across delta systems. 
    more » « less
  2. Abstract

    Arising from the non‐uniform dispersal of sediment and water that build deltaic landscapes, morphological change is a fundamental characteristic of river delta behavior. Thus, sustainable deltas require mobility of their channel networks and attendant shifts in landforms. Both behaviors can be misrepresented as degradation, particularly in context of the “stability” that is generally necessitated by human infrastructure and economies. Taking the Ganges‐Brahmaputra‐Meghna Delta as an example, contrary to public perception, this delta system appears to be sustainable at a system scale with high sediment delivery and long‐term net gain in land area. However, many areas of the delta exhibit local dynamics and instability at the scale at which households and communities experience environmental change. Such local landscape “instability” is often cited as evidence that the delta is in decline, whereas much of this change simply reflects the morphodynamics typical of an energetic fluvial‐delta system and do not provide an accurate reflection of overall system health. Here we argue that this disparity between unit‐scale sustainability and local morphodynamic change may be typical of deltaic systems with well‐developed distributary networks and strong spatial gradients in sediment supply and transport energy. Such non‐uniformity and the important connections between network sub‐units (i.e., fluvial, tidal, shelf) suggest that delta risk assessments must integrate local dynamics and sub‐unit connections with unit‐scale behaviors. Structure and dynamics of an integrated deltaic network control the dispersal of water, solids, and solutes to the delta sub‐environment and thus the local to unit‐scale sustainability of the system over time.

     
    more » « less