Book contents
- Fluvial Megafans on Earth and Mars
- Fluvial Megafans on Earth and Mars
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Regional Studies
- Part III Applications in Other Sciences
- Part IV Megafans in World Landscapes
- 17 Megafans in World Landscapes
- 18 Some Future Megafan Research Directions
- Index
- References
17 - Megafans in World Landscapes
Results of a Global Survey
from Part IV - Megafans in World Landscapes
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 April 2023
Book contents
- Fluvial Megafans on Earth and Mars
- Fluvial Megafans on Earth and Mars
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Regional Studies
- Part III Applications in Other Sciences
- Part IV Megafans in World Landscapes
- 17 Megafans in World Landscapes
- 18 Some Future Megafan Research Directions
- Index
- References
Summary
Major morphological characteristics of megafans and the associated drainage networks of multi-megafan landscapes are outlined. Such landscapes differ significantly from well-known erosional landscapes with dendritic drainage in eroded valleys: megafan landscapes display partial cone morphology; longitudinal profiles can be convex, concave or both; interfluves and tributaries are lacking; the fan-forming river behaviour is highly avulsive; fan-margin rivers display three discharge regimes; convergent drainage zones of various types are widespread despite the broad partial-cone morphology; avulsions often occur at subapexes distant from the prime apex; perirheic zones differ significantly from the model developed for valley-confined floodplains. These and other attributes bespeak the complexity that arises as fan-like features increase to megafan proportions. Controls of megafan formation are presented. Megafans are distinguished from small alluvial fans, midsize distributive fluvial systems (DFS) (30–80 km long), valley-confined floodplains, deltas, major avulsive fluvial systems (MAFS), and large accretionary fluvial systems (LAFS) – the latter two relatively new to the geomorphic lexicon. Megafan nesting patterns and several wider continental lowland drainage models that encompass megafans (e.g., central South America) are described. Megafans show striking similarities with attributes of large axial floodplains despite being formed by smaller rivers. Terms with confusing meanings are clarified.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Fluvial Megafans on Earth and Mars , pp. 339 - 371Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Ashworth, P. J. and Lewin, J. (2012). How do big rivers come to be different? Earth-Science Reviews, 114, 8–107.Google Scholar
Ashworth, P. J. and Lewin, J. (2014). The negative relief of large river floodplains. Earth-Science Reviews, 129, 1–29.Google Scholar
Assine, M. L. (2005). River avulsions on the Taquari megafan, Pantanal wetland, Brazil. Geomorphology, 70, 357–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Assine, M. L., Corradini, F. A., Pupim, F. N., and McGlue, M. M. (2014). Channel arrangements and depositional styles in the São Lourenço fluvial megafan, Brazilian Pantanal wetland. Sedimentary Geology, 301, 172–184.Google Scholar
Bernal, C., Christophoul, F., Darrozes, J., et al. (2013). Crevassing and capture by floodplain drains as a cause of partial avulsion and anastomosis (lower Rio Pastaza, Peru). Journal of South American Earth Sciences, 44, 63–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blair, T. C. and McPherson, J. G. (1994). Alluvial fans and their natural distinction from rivers based on morphology, hydraulic processes, sedimentary processes, and facies assemblages. Journal of Sedimentary Research, A64, 450–489.Google Scholar
Blair, T. C. and McPherson, J. G. (2009). Process and Forms of Alluvial Fans, In Parsons, A. J. and Abrahams, A. D., eds., Geomorphology of Desert Environments. Springer, Dordrecht, 2nd edn, p. 354–402.Google Scholar
Blum, M., Martin, J., Milliken, K., and Garvin, M. (2013). Paleovalley systems: Insights from Quaternary analogs and experiments. Earth-Science Reviews, 116, 128–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridge, J. and Demicco, R. (2008). Earth Surface Processes, Landforms and Sediment Deposits. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 815 pp.Google Scholar
Burt, T. P. and Allison, R. J. (2010). Sediment Cascades: An Integrated Approach. Wiley, Chichester, 471 pp.Google Scholar
Chakraborty, T., Kar, R., Ghosh, P., and Basu, S. (2010). Kosi megafan: Historical records, geomorphology and the recent avulsion of the Kosi River. Quaternary International, 227, 143–160.Google Scholar
Coleman, J. M. and Wright, L. D. (1975). Modern river deltas: variability of processes and sand bodies. In Broussard, M. L., ed., Deltas: Models for Exploration. Houston Geological Society, 99–149.Google Scholar
Cooke, R. U., Warren, A., and Goudie, A. S. (2006). Desert Geomorphology. University College London Press, London, 2nd edn, 526 pp.Google Scholar
Cordini, R. (1947). Los Ríos Pilcomayo en la Región del Patiño. Anales I, Dirección de Minas y Geología (Buenos Aires), 82 pp.Google Scholar
Davidson, S. K., Hartley, A. J., Weissmann, G. S., Nichols, G. J., and Scuderi, L. A. (2013). Geomorphic elements on modern distributive fluvial systems. Geomorphology, 180–181, 82–95.Google Scholar
Davidson, S. K. and Hartley, A. J. (2014). A quantitative approach to linking drainage area and distributive-fluvial-system area in modern and ancient endorheic basins. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 84, 1005–1020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DeCelles, P. G., Gray, M. B., Ridgway, K. D., et al. (1991). Controls on synorogenic alluvial-fan architecture, Beartooth Conglomerate (Paleocene), Wyoming and Montana. Sedimentology, 38, 569–590.Google Scholar
DeCelles, P. G. and Cavazza, W. (1999). A comparison of fluvial megafans in the Cordilleran (Upper Cretaceous) and modern Himalayan foreland systems. Geological Society of America Bulletin, 111, 1315–1334.Google Scholar
Drew, F. (1873). Alluvial and lacustrine deposits and glacial records of the Upper-Indus Basin. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 29, 441–471.Google Scholar
Dunne, T. and Aalto, R. E. (2013). Large river floodplains. In Shroder, J. (Editor in Chief), Wohl, E., ed., Treatise on Geomorphology, vol. 9, Fluvial Geomorphology, 645–678. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
Edmonds, D. A., Hajek, E., Downton, N., and Bryk, A. B. (2016). Avulsion flow-path selection on rivers in foreland basins. Geology, 44, 695–698.Google Scholar
Fielding, C. R., Ashworth, P. J., Best, J. L., Prokocki, E. W., and Sambrook Smith, G. H. (2012). Tributary, distributary and other fluvial patterns: what really represents the norm in the continental rock record? Sedimentary Geology, 261–262, 15–32.Google Scholar
Fontana, A., Mozzi, P., and Bondesan, A. (2008). Alluvial megafans in the Venetian-Friulian Plain (north-eastern Italy): evidence of sedimentary and erosive phases during Late Pleistocene and Holocene. Quaternary International, 189, 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ganti, V., Chu, Z., Lamb, M. P., Nittrouer, J. A., and Parker, G. (2014). Testing morphodynamic controls on the location and frequency of river avulsions on fans versus deltas: Huanghe (Yellow River), China. Geophysical Research Letters, 41, 7882–7890.Google Scholar
Geddes, A. (1960). The alluvial morphology of the Indo-Gangetic plains. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 28, 253–276.Google 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, 731–770.Google Scholar
Gilbert, G. K. (1877). Report on the Geology of the Henry Mountains. US Geological Survey, Washington, DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gupta, A. (2007). Large Rivers: Geomorphology and Management. Wiley, Chichester, 720 pp.Google Scholar
Hartley, A. J., Weissmann, G. S., Nichols, G. J., and Warwick, G. L. (2010a). Large distributive fluvial systems: characteristics, distribution, and controls on development. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 80, 167–183.Google Scholar
Hartley, A. J., Weissmann, G. S., Nichols, G. J., and Scuderi, L. A. (2010b). Fluvial form in modern continental sedimentary basins: distributive fluvial systems: reply. Geology, 38, e231.Google Scholar
Hartley, A. J., Weissmann, G. S., Bhattacharayya, P., et al. (2013). Soil development on modern distributive fluvial systems: preliminary observations with implications for interpretation of paleosols in the rock record. In Driese, S., ed., New Frontiers in Paleopedology and Terrestrial Paleoclimatology, SEPM Special Publication, 104, 149–158.Google Scholar
Hartley, A. J., Owen, A. E., Swan, A., et al. (2015). Recognition and importance of amalgamated sandy meander belts in the continental rock record. Geology, 43, 679–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartley, A. J., Owen, A., Weissmann, G. S., and Scuderi, L. (2018). Modern and ancient amalgamated sandy meander-belt deposits: recognition and controls on development. In Ghinassi, M., Colombera, L., Mountney, N. P, and Reesink, A. J. H., eds., Fluvial Meanders and Their Sedimentary Products in the Rock Record. International Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication, 48, 349–384.Google Scholar
Hashimoto, A., Oguchi, T., Hayakawa, Y., et al. (2008). GIS analysis of depositional slope change at alluvial-fan toes in Japan and the American Southwest. Geomorphology, 100, 120–130.Google Scholar
Holbrook, J., Scott, R. W., and Oboh-Ikuenobe, F. E. (2006). Base-level buffers and buttresses: a model for upstream and downstream control on fluvial geometry and architecture within sequences. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 76, 162–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iriondo, M. H. (1984). The Quaternary of northeastern Argentina. Quaternary of South America, 2, 51–78.Google Scholar
Iriondo, M. H. (1987). Geomorfolgía y Cuaternario de la Provincia Santa Fé (Argentina). D’Orbignyana, 4, 54 pp.Google Scholar
Iriondo, M. (1993). Geomorphology and late Quaternary of the Chaco (South America). Geomorphology, 7, 289–303.Google Scholar
Jain, V. and Sinha, R. (2003). River systems in the Gangetic Plains and their comparison with the Siwaliks: a review. Current Science, 84, 1024–1033.Google Scholar
Jain, V. and Sinha, R. (2004). Fluvial dynamics of an anabranching river system in Himalayan foreland basin, Baghmati River, north Bihar plains, India. Geomorphology, 60, 147–170.Google Scholar
Jain, V. and Sinha, R. (2005). Response of active tectonics on the alluvial Baghmati River, Himalayan foreland basin, eastern India. Geomorphology, 70, 339–356.Google Scholar
Klausen, T. G., Ryseth, A. E., Helland-Hansen, W., Gawthorpe, R., and Laursen, I. (2014). Spatial and temporal changes in geometries of fluvial channel bodies from the Triassic Snadd Formation of offshore Norway. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 84, 567–585.Google Scholar
Kumar, R., Jain, V., Prasad, Babu G., and Sinha, R. (2014). Connectivity structure of the Kosi megafan and role of rail-road transport network. Geomorphology, 227, 73–86.Google Scholar
Latrubesse, E. M. (2008). Patterns of anabranching channels: The ultimate end-member adjustment of mega rivers. Geomorphology, 101, 130–145.Google Scholar
Latrubesse, E. M. (2015). Large rivers, megafans and other Quaternary avulsive fluvial systems: A potential “who’s who” in the geological record. Earth-Science Reviews, 146, 1–30.Google Scholar
Latrubesse, E., Stevaux, J. C., Cremon, S., et al. (2012). Late Quaternary megafans, fans and fluvio–aeolian interactions in the Bolivian Chaco, Tropical South America. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 356–357, 75–88.Google Scholar
Leier, A. L., DeCelles, P. G., and Pelletier, J. D. (2005). Mountains, monsoons, and megafans. Geology, 33, 289–292.Google Scholar
Lewin, J. and Ashworth, P. J. (2014). The negative relief of large river floodplains. Earth-Science Reviews, 129, 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, S. A. (1992). The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology, 73, 1943–1967.Google Scholar
Martín-Vide, J. P., Amarilla, M., and Zarate, F. J. (2014). Collapse of the Pilcomayo River. Geomorphology, 205, 155–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, T. S. (2013). The Okavango Delta and its place in the geomorphological evolution of Southern Africa. South African Journal of Geology, 116, 1–54.Google Scholar
Mertes, L. A. K. (1997). Documentation and significance of the perirheic zone on inundated floodplains. Water Resources Research, 33, 1749–1762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, L. A. (1996). El Río Pilcomayo: un caso de estudio, In Atti del Corso: Sviluppo e Gestione dei Bacini Idrografici (Course text: Watershed development and management). Cuaderno ILLA, Serie Cooperación No. 6 (Istituto Italo-Latino Americano), Rome, 303–314.Google Scholar
Miall, A. D. (2015). Updating uniformitarianism: stratigraphy as just a set of ‘frozen accidents’. In Smith, D. G., Bailey, R. J., Burgess, P. M., and Fraser, A. J., eds., Strata and Time: Probing the Gaps in our Understanding. Geological Society of London, Special Publication, 404, 11–36.Google Scholar
Miall, A. D., Holbrook, J. M., and Bhattacharya, J. P. (2021). The stratigraphic machine. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 91, 595–610.Google Scholar
Moscariello, A. (2018). Alluvial fans and fluvial fans at the margins of continental sedimentary basins: geomorphic and sedimentological distinction for geoenergy exploration and development. In Ventra, D. and Clarke, L. E., eds., Geology and Geomorphology of Alluvial and Fluvial Fans: Terrestrial and Planetary Perspectives. Geological Society of London, Special Publication, 440, 215–243.Google Scholar
New South Wales Dept. of Environment and Conservation (2006). Warrego River. <http://wiserivers.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/Multimedia/vBlob.jsp?id=668> accessed June 2020.+accessed+June+2020.>Google Scholar
Ori, G. G. (1982). Braided to meandering channel patterns in humid-region alluvial fan deposits, River Reno, Po Plain (northern Italy). Sedimentary Geology, 31, 231–248.Google Scholar
Pupim, F. N., Assine, M. L., and Sawakuchi, A. O. (2017). Late Quaternary Cuiabá megafan, Brazilian Pantanal: Channel patterns and paleoenvironmental changes. Quaternary International, 438, 108–125.Google Scholar
Ralph, T. J. and Hesse, P. P. (2010). Downstream hydrogeomorphic changes along the Macquarie River, southeastern Australia, leading to channel breakdown and floodplain wetlands. Geomorphology, 118, 48–64.Google Scholar
Räsänen, M., Neller, R., Salo, J., and Jungner, H. (1992). Recent and ancient fluvial deposition systems in the Amazonian foreland basin, Peru. Geological Magazine, 129, 293–306.Google Scholar
Saito, K. (2003). Model of alluvial fan development based on channel pattern and gravel size. Report of Research Project, Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research, 138 (in Japanese).Google Scholar
Saito, K. and Oguchi, T. (2005). Slope of alluvial fans in humid regions of Japan, Taiwan and the Philippines. Geomorphology, 70, 147–162.Google Scholar
Shanley, K. W. and McCabe, P. J. (1994). Perspectives on the sequence stratigraphy of continental strata. American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 78, 544–568.Google Scholar
Sinha, R. and Friend, P. F. (1994). River systems and their sediment flux, Indo-Gangetic plains, Northern Bihar, India. Sedimentology, 41, 825–845.Google Scholar
Slingerland, R. and Smith, N. D. (2004). River avulsions and their deposits. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 32, 257–285.Google Scholar
Stanistreet, I. G. and McCarthy, T. S. (1993). The Okavango fan and the classification of subaerial fan systems. Sedimentary Geology, 85, 115–133.Google Scholar
Straub, K. M., Paola, C., Mohrig, D., and Wolinsky, G. T. (2009). Compensational stacking of channelized sedimentary deposits. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 79, 673–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thoms, M. C., Rayburg, S. C., and Neave, M. R. (2007). The physical diversity and assessment of a large river system: The Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. In Gupta, A., ed., Large Rivers: Geomorphology and Management. Wiley, Chichester, 861–890.Google Scholar
Ventra, D. and Clarke, L. E. (eds.), 2018. Geology and geomorphology of alluvial and fluvial fans: Terrestrial and planetary perspectives. In Ventra, D. and Clarke, L. E., eds., Geology and Geomorphology of Alluvial and Fluvial Fans: Terrestrial and Planetary Perspectives. Geological Society of London, Special Publication, 440, 1–21.Google Scholar
Ventra, D. and Nichols, G. J. (2014). Autogenic dynamics of alluvial fans in endorheic basins: Outcrop examples and stratigraphic significance. Sedimentology, 61, 767–791.Google Scholar
Weissmann, G. S., Hartley, A. J., Nichols, G. J., et al. (2010). Fluvial form in modern continental sedimentary basins: distributive fluvial systems. Geology, 38, 39–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weissmann, G. S., Hartley, A. J., Nichols, G. J., et al. (2011). Alluvial facies distributions in continental sedimentary basins—distributive fluvial systems. In Davidson, S. K., Leleu, S., and North, C. P., eds., From River to Rock Record: The Preservation of Fluvial Sediments and their Subsequent Interpretation. SEPM Special Publication, 97, 327–355.Google Scholar
Weissmann, G. S., Hartley, A. J., Scuderi, L. A., et al. (2013). Prograding distributive fluvial systems—Geomorphic models and ancient examples. In Driese, S. G., and Nordt, L. C., eds., New Frontiers in Paleopedology and Terrestrial Paleoclimatology. SEPM Special Publication, 104, 131–147.Google Scholar
Weissmann, G. S., Hartley, A. J., Scuderi, L. A., et al. (2015). Fluvial geomorphic elements in modern sedimentary basins and their potential preservation in the rock record: a review. Geomorphology, 250, 187–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitehouse, F. W. (1944).The natural drainage of some very flat monsoonal lands. Australian Geographer, 4, 183–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J. (1996). Large subaerial distributary systems: global distribution and implications. Internal Report, Earth Sciences & Image Analysis Laboratory, NASA-Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, 33 pp.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J. (1998). River behavior on large fluvial distributary systems and putative dynamics for fish speciation in South America. Internal Report, Earth Sciences & Image Analysis Laboratory, NASA-Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, 48 pp.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J. (1999). Fluvial dynamics in the Andean foreland: Megafans and mechanisms for biodiversity in aquatic biota. Geological Society of America, Fall Meeting Abstracts, 25–28 October 1999, Denver, Colorado.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J. (2001). Where large fans form: interim report of a global survey. Fluvial Sedimentology 2001, 7th International Conference on Fluvial Sedimentology, Program and Abstracts, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska (USA), 6–10 August 2001, p. 282. (University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Conservation and Survey Division, Open-file Report 60). www.unl.edu/geosciences/ICFS/ICFS.html 29 November 2003.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J. (2002). Modern river and sedimentation patterns in Africa – subbasin-scale models derived from astronaut photography, Poster, Petroleum Exploration Society of Great Britain and Houston Geological Society, First Annual International Symposium, 17–18 September 2002.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J. (2003). A geomorphic classification of sedimentary subbasin types in the south American foreland—tectonic and drainage pattern controls. Alluvial Fans 2003, Conference Abstracts, Sorbas, Almería, Spain, 8–13 June 2003. <http://alluvialfans.net/Abstracts.htm>, 29 November 2003.,+29+November+2003.>Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J. (2005). Large fluvial fans and exploration for hydrocarbons. NASA Tech Briefs 29, 64 [NASA Tech Briefs Online, No. MSC-23424 www.nasatech.com/Briefs/ps.html 30 March 2004].Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J. (2006). ‘Method for Identifying Sedimentary Bodies from Images and Its Application to Mineral Exploration’ – US Patent Office, #6,851,606, issue date 10 January 2006.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J. (2015). Large fluvial fans: Aspects of the attribute array. AAPG Annual Convention and Exhibition (American Association of Petroleum Geologists), Conference Abstracts, Theme 4: Large Fluvial Fans, Denver, Colorado, 31 May–3 June 2015. http://ace.aapg.org/2015Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J. and Cameron, N. R. (2002). Global geomorphic survey of large modern fans: distribution and exploration implications, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Program and Abstracts, Annual Meeting, Houston, Texas, 11–15 March 2002.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J., Cameron, N. R., and Burke, K. (2002). Global geomorphic survey of large modern subaerial fans. Houston Geological Society Bulletin, 44, 11–13.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J., Marshall, L. G., and Lundberg, J. G. (2006). River behavior on megafans and potential influences on diversification and distribution of aquatic organisms. Journal of South American Earth Sciences, 21, 151–172.Google Scholar
Wilkinson, M. J., Marshall, L.G., Lundberg, J. G., and Kreslavsky, M. H. (2010). Megafan environments in northern South America and their impact on Amazon Neogene aquatic ecosystems. In Hoorn, C., and Wesselingh, F. P., eds., Amazonia, Landscape and Species Evolution: A Look into the Past. Blackwell, London, 162–184.Google Scholar
Willett, S. D., McCoy, S. W., and Beeson, H. W. (2018). Transience of North American High Plains landscape and its impact on surface water. Nature, 561, 528–532.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, B. H. and Dincer, T. (1976). An Introduction to the hydrology and hydrography of the Okavango Delta. Symposium on the Okavango Delta and Its Future Utilization, Proceedings, National Museum, Gaborone, Botswana, 33–48.Google Scholar
Wright, L. D. (1985). River Deltas. In Davis, R. A., ed., Coastal Sedimentary Environments. Springer, New York, 2nd edn, 1–76.Google Scholar