Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 17

See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235915690

Fundamental classic and modern field


techniques in Geomorphology - an overview

Chapter · March 2013

CITATION READS

1 387

4 authors:

Lothar Schrott Jan-Christoph Otto


University of Bonn University of Salzburg
124 PUBLICATIONS 1,155 CITATIONS 78 PUBLICATIONS 301 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Joachim Götz Martin Geilhausen


University of Salzburg Zurich University of Applied Sciences
47 PUBLICATIONS 83 CITATIONS 75 PUBLICATIONS 104 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Martin Geilhausen
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 20 May 2016
Author's personal copy

14.2 Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology:


An Overview
L Schrott, J-C Otto, J Götz, and M Geilhausen, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria
r 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

14.2.1 Introduction 6
14.2.2 Classic Field Techniques in Geomorphology Revisited 7
14.2.2.1 Geomorphological Mapping 7
14.2.2.1.1 Remote sensing and geomorphological mapping 7
14.2.2.2 Shallow Coring and Sampling 8
14.2.2.2.1 Coring 8
14.2.2.2.2 Sampling 8
14.2.3 Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology 9
14.2.3.1 Principles of GPS and Applications in Geomorphology 9
14.2.3.2 LiDAR in Geomorphology 9
14.2.3.2.1 Principles of LiDAR 10
14.2.3.2.2 Airborne or terrestrial laser scanning 10
14.2.3.2.3 LiDAR – principles of data acquisition and processing 11
14.2.3.3 Geophysical Applications in Geomorphology 11
14.2.3.3.1 Ground-penetrating radar 11
14.2.3.3.1.1 Principle and geomorphic context 11
14.2.3.3.1.2 Advantages and disadvantages of GPR in
geomorphological applications 12
14.2.3.3.2 Geoelectrical resistivity 13
14.2.3.3.2.1 Principle and geomorphic context 13
14.2.3.3.2.2 Advantages and disadvantages in geomorphological applications 15
14.2.3.3.3 Seismic refraction 15
14.2.3.3.3.1 Principle and geomorphic context 15
14.2.3.3.3.2 Advantages and disadvantages in geomorphological studies 18
14.2.4 Conclusions 18
14.2.5 Disclaimer 18
References 18

Glossary reflection is characterized by many angles of outgoing rays


Geomorphometry It is quantitative analysis of land octree approaches.
surface and central theme in theoretical and applied Morhodynamics This refers to dynamic changes in
geomorphology. morphology, landform/landscape changes due to erosion
Laser beam reflection (specular, diffuse) Specular and sedimentation.
reflection is the mirror-like reflection of light and other Morphogenetic This refers mostly to a theoretical area
kinds of waves and describes a reflection of a single reflected devised by geomorphologists to relate climate, geomorphic
incoming into a single outgoing direction, whereas a diffuse processes, and landforms.

Abstract

Over the past three decades field techniques in geomorphology have evolved enormously. The advent of new technologies
influenced even classic techniques such as mapping, because remote sensing, in combination with high-resolution digital
elevation models, has significantly enhanced digital landform mapping and analysis. High-accuracy surveys of surface and
subsurface structures using light detection and ranging (LiDAR), differential global positioning systems (DGPS), and
geophysical techniques offer a wide range of challenges for geomorphological studies. Besides, field geophysics has become
increasingly efficient to capture quantitative subsurface data and provides a better understanding of form–process rela-
tionships. This chapter introduces some classic and modern field techniques in a geomorphological context.

Schrott, L., Otto, J.-C., Götz, J., Geilhausen, M., 2013. Fundamental classic
and modern field techniques in geomorphology: an overview. In: Shroder, J.
(Editor in Chief), Switzer, A.D., Kennedy, D.M. (Eds.), Treatise on
Geomorphology. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, vol. 14, Methods in
Geomorphology, pp. 6–21.

6 Treatise on Geomorphology, Volume 14 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374739-6.00369-9


Author's personal copy
Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview 7

14.2.1 Introduction (Evans, 1990; de Graaff et al., 1987; Gustavsson et al., 2006)
and legends that additionally emphasize the genetic aspects of
landforms (Barsch and Liedtke, 1980; Schoeneich et al., 1998;
ythe real test of geomorphic validity is outdoors, where all the Reynard et al., 2005; Tricart, 1965). For example, specialized
evidence must be pieced together into a lucid picture showing why legend systems exist for mapping high mountain environ-
landforms are the way we find them and why they are located ments (Kneisel et al., 1998) or natural hazards (Bundesamt für
where they are. A prime requisite for a geomorphologist is to be a
Wasser und Geologie, 2002). New approaches also include
careful observer of relevant field relationships.
(Ritter, 1986, p. 3). sediment storages within the geomorphological map. This
extends geomorphological maps into a third dimension and
serves as a basis for sediment budget studies (e.g., Otto et al.,
Since about 1980 field techniques in geomorphology have
2009).
been evolved enormously. This led to new branches in geo-
Traditionally, geomorphological maps are field based. Field
morphology and to new insights commonly connected with
mapping and the accurate delineation of landforms require
the need and use of much larger data sets. As Church (2010)
a lot of user experience. The mapping procedure strongly
pointed out, the bases for these changes are largely techno-
benefits from a detailed preparation involving literature
logical, and this had consequences for the whole discipline of
research, air-photo interpretation, and the consultation
geomorphology. The major changes include: (1) improved
of geological and topographic maps (cf. Chapter 14.4).
and new technological equipment (e.g., high-capacity data
Geomorphological maps are complex thematic maps that re-
loggers, light detection and ranging (LiDAR) techniques, dif-
quire careful application of cartographic design principles to
ferential global positioning system (DGPS), geophysical
preserve legibility and usability. A clear hierarchical organiza-
methods, etc.); (2) new possibilities to gather and store large
tion, thoughtful application of color, contrast, and symbol
data sets in the field using data loggers or field laptops; and (3)
density as well as a balanced arrangement of map items are
the advent of computer facilities that allow the analysis of
preconditions for well-designed maps that deliver the message
large amounts of field data.
intended (Otto et al., 2011).
The advent of new technologies also influenced classic
Field mapping approach can be technically enhanced by
methods in geomorphology such as mapping. This is because
using tablet PCs or hand-held computers and mobile GIS
digital mapping tools using tablet PCs or handheld computers
software. Portable computers provide direct access to digital
can now be used to display digital orthophotos and maps,
maps, orthophotos, and other types of data (e.g., borehole
which can in turn facilitate and potentially improve geo-
information and geophysical data) and when combined with a
morphological mapping in the field.
GPS on-the-fly georegistration of map data is enabled. A pre-
This introductory chapter describes some classic but fun-
requisite for using mobile GIS is the generation of a database
damental methods in geomorphology and provides some case
structure and digital map symbols prior to the field campaign.
studies of modern branches and aims to demonstrate the
This facilitates and improves the mapping procedure in the
application of classic and modern techniques in different
field and directly links geomorphological field data to GIS.
natural environments and to illustrate and assess the advances
Modern geomorphological maps can also incorporate new
and limitations of three different modern branches of field
remote sensing data, high-resolution digital elevation models
techniques in geomorphology (Global Positioning System
(DEMs), and subsurface information derived from geophysics
(GPS), terrestrial laser scanning, geophysical field techniques).
if GIS analysis techniques are used. Enhanced computer
Note that although sophisticated technology may be ap-
graphics and visualization tools as well as new ways of digital
plied to solve a scientific problem, search for suitable field
map dissemination through web mapping are valuable in-
sites still much depends on observation skills and experience.
struments to overcome technical constraints of paper-based
Thus the efficient and appropriate use of a particular techni-
maps leading to a reenchantment of geomorphological
que remains a great challenge for geomorphologists.
maps (see Chapters 3.11 and 14.8). WebGIS applications are
powerful GIS tools to present geomorphological maps as a
scientific result to the general public. The user receives spatially
14.2.2 Classic Field Techniques in Geomorphology
registered geographical information in an interactive web
Revisited
viewer according to the request. GIS processing is performed
on the WebGIS server and transferred to the user’s web brow-
14.2.2.1 Geomorphological Mapping
ser. Standardized data protocols such as Keyhole Markup
Geomorphological maps are classical tools to capture and Language (KML) enable a fast and easy publication of geo-
visualize landform assemblages and process distribution morphological maps within virtual globes like Google Earth
on a single map sheet. Generally, geomorphological maps are (see Chapters 3.11 and 14.5; Tooth, 2009; Mantovani et al.,
complex, multilayer maps covering geomorphometry, proces- 2010).
ses and process domains (morphodynamics), subsurface
material, morphogenetics, and hydrological features. Numer- 14.2.2.1.1 Remote sensing and geomorphological
ous guidelines and legends have evolved in the 20th century mapping
mostly representing country- or region-specific schools of Some high mountain regions, inaccessible or expansive
geomorphology (see Chapter 14.4). Differences bet- on Earth, or planets like Mars cannot be observed from the
ween the legend guidelines can be summarized to those ground. More recently improved satellite and sensor technol-
legends focusing on morphology and current processes ogy, such as High Resolution Stereo Camera (HRSC) or
Author's personal copy
8 Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview

LiDAR technology (see Section 14.2.3.2), offer interesting


possibilities for geomorphological mapping applications
(Otto et al., 2007; Smith and Pain, 2009). These remote
sensing applications, in combination with high-resolution
DEMs, enhance digital landform mapping through improved
visualization possibilities leading to less biased, reproducible
maps (Smith et al., 2006; Smith and Clarke, 2005; Hillier and
Smith, 2008). Furthermore, these new data allow the auto-
matic or semiautomatic detection and classification of
landforms or geomorphic process units to a great extent
(Schneevoigt et al., 2008; Schneevoigt and Schrott, 2006;
Van Asselen and Seijmonsbergen, 2006; Seijmonsbergen et al.,
2011). For example, Advanced Spaceborn Thermal Emission
and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) and shuttle radar topo-
graphy mission (SRTM) DEMs are now frequently used to
quantify the distribution of glaciers or rock glaciers over
large areas (Bolch and Kamp, 2006; Brenning and Azocar,
2010).

14.2.2.2 Shallow Coring and Sampling


14.2.2.2.1 Coring
Shallow coring (normally between 1 and 20 m) is frequently
applied in geomorphological research, basically for the fol-
lowing reasons: Figure 1 Sediment coring in a high alpine bog. A specially
constructed mounting rack has been developed to facilitate the
1. to analyze stratigraphic sequences of different sediment removal of the vibro-corer and the sediment cores.
and rock properties (e.g., soil depth, bulk density, water/ice
content, pollen, etc.);
2. to measure sediment thicknesses and total depth to
bedrock; surface, to outcrops, or in excavated pits (trenches) and tun-
3. to extract and analyze organic material or specific sedi- nels (see also Chapter 14.12). Apart from clastic sediment,
ment/ice layers (e.g., peat, fossil organic layers, macro- sampling of water and ice is also common in many geo-
fossils, feldspar, or quartz grains) for dating purposes (14C, morphological studies. After a first analysis in the field (e.g.,
Optically Stimulated Luminescence); and Munsell charts and photo documentation) the samples are
4. to instrument boreholes with sensors for measurement and normally taken to the laboratory for further analysis
monitoring purposes (e.g., temperature, inclinometer, etc.). (e.g., grain-size distribution (see Chapter 14.19), bulk density,
Various techniques and equipment for shallow coring are organic carbon content, chemical analysis, etc. (see also
available (see Chapters 14.11 and 14.15). The hand or soil Chapter 14.23).
auger is the most basic of the mechanical drills. Sophisticated Most samples, and specifically the changes in volume and
techniques are generally driven by engines and hydraulic physical/chemical properties of earth material, are used as
components (see Figure 1). Numerous and various systems proxies to interpret variations (temperature, humidity, and
(hammer, weights, etc.), rods, and drill points are used for sedimentation) through time. Many studies have shown that
specific purposes. continental sedimentary deposits (glacial, periglacial, fluvial,
In periglacial geomorphology, for instance, coring and aeolian, and lacustrine) carry to some degree a paleoclimatic
borehole instrumentation is very common since thermal signal (Souch, 2003).
subsurface conditions are important sources of information The number of necessary samples and the design of sample
(e.g., thermal state of permafrost), whereas in fluvial geo- selection can vary considerably from task to task. Bias and
morphology sequences of different sediment layers may dis- measurement errors in sampling are crucial issues and should
play changing sedimentation patterns (see also Chapter 14.7). be minimized through careful sampling strategies and treat-
In landslide research, coring is an in situ testing method to ments. Rice (2003) pointed out that a good sample fulfils two
measure geotechnical properties with the cone penetration test criteria: the sample provides unbiased and precise estimates of
(CPT). In sediment budget studies coring allows, in combin- the parameter of interest. Accuracy of age-depth profiles, for
ation with dating results of organic samples, estimates of example, strongly correlates with the size of sufficient and
sedimentation rates. correctly dated samples (see also Chapter 14.31). In general,
drawing conclusions from only a few samples should be
avoided. A short overview regarding sampling strategy and
14.2.2.2.2 Sampling further literature is given by Rice (2003) and a good practice
Sampling of soils, sediment, or debris is frequently combined guide for sampling in glacial and periglacial environments is
with coring (core sampling) and is also applied directly at the given by Hubbard and Glasser (2005).
Author's personal copy
Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview 9

14.2.3 Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology codes, enabling a more accurate positioning of up to a few
millimeters (Abidin, 2002).
This section presents modern techniques that have been most Application of GPS in the field depends on the research
applied and influenced by advances in geomorphological re- question and the accuracy demands. In general, two techni-
search over the past two decades. Given the developments ques of high-accuracy GPS measurement can be distinguished:
(essentially technical), various fields within geomorphology static and kinematic surveying (Rizos, 2002). Both techniques
have changed and improved dramatically in terms of quantity require two dual-frequency receivers for signal correction,
and quality of data, namely: allowing for a differential positioning (referred to as differ-
ential GPS). What distinguishes them is the timing of the
1. surveys of high accuracy in spatial positioning and refer-
signal correction, which is either performed in real time dur-
encing of landforms, objects, or processes by using DGPS;
ing the survey or after the survey as postprocessing. Static
2. spatial coverage and digital high-resolution representation
survey involves postprocessing correction of two receiver
of relief with DEMs using LiIDAR technology;
signals. One receiver needs to be located at a known position
3. subsurface investigation (bedrock, sediment, water, and
(base station), whereas the other must be positioned on the
ice) using field geophysics; and
location measured (rover station). Both receivers record at the
4. surveys combining the above-mentioned techniques to
same rate over a longer period of time (usually minutes
investigate comparative capabilities and to improve the
to hours). Later the signal is corrected by comparing the
accuracy of data.
two recorded data sets. From the distance between the two
The intention is to give an overview to advances in typical receivers (i.e., the baseline) and the known position of the
applications rather than to discuss the technical specification base station, the exact position of the rover can be calculated.
of the different manufacturers (please refer to technical Static survey mode is applied for the exact positioning of
handbooks). single objects or repeated monitoring, for example, in land-
slide monitoring (Squarzoni et al., 2005; Gili et al., 2000).
In kinematic survey mode, correction of the signal is delivered
in real time (real-time kinematic). Thus, the rover can move
14.2.3.1 Principles of GPS and Applications in
independently and it receives both the satellite signal and the
Geomorphology
correction signal from a reference station or base station. Several
Global referencing is fundamental to most mapping and other methods exist to transmit the correction signal, ranging from
applications in geomorphology. Within the past few years GPS short-distance radio transmission of nearby base stations to
receivers have been widely distributed, ranging from car navi- long-distance signals of permanent recording stations. The latter
gation systems to portable (mobile) phones. Precise and more- is commonly provided as a commercial service and inherently
or-less accurate positioning on the Earth’s surface is now comes with extra cost. The accuracy of this signal correction
available almost globally thereby largely benefiting geo- generally declines with increasing distance to the reference
morphological research. Applications of GPS in geomorphology station (baseline). Applications of real-time kinematic GPS
range from digital field mapping to landform monitoring and survey include, for example, landform mapping (Higgitt and
more recently kinematic analysis. Due to the technical prin- Warburton, 1999) or measurement of surface movement from
ciples of GPS, the local position can be accurately determined creeping mountain permafrost (Lambiel and Delaloye, 2004).
from several meters to a few millimeters. Although low-accuracy Even though GPS technology should grant the user their
positioning is performed by low-cost commercial handheld global position, some surface conditions can reduce the
GPS devices (e.g., Garmin or Magellan) and mobile phone re- availability of satellites and data accuracy. GPS accuracy in
ceivers, higher accuracy requires more sophisticated and costly areas close to steep rock faces, for example in high relief areas,
equipment and the use of several receivers or reference data. and under dense vegetation, satellite signals are commonly
Global positions are determined by triangulation using lost or jammed when the elevation angle to the satellite be-
radio signals from 24 orbiting satellites. The radio waves comes too small. Additionally, the received signal may be re-
broadcast different codes consisting of a pseudorandom bin- flected by surrounding walls, leading to multipath effects and
ary sequence that is unique to each satellite, with information delayed travel times. In remote terrain, commercial corrections
on satellite identification and a carrier phase for data trans- signals are generally not available.
mission (Abidin, 2002).
The pseudorandom codes have a fixed frequency and
timing determined by the satellites atomic clock. GPS receivers
14.2.3.2 LiDAR in Geomorphology
generate an identical code, which is correlated to the trans-
mitted satellite code. The time delay between the two signals is LiDAR surveys (terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) or airborne
used to calculate the distance between the two devices. This laser scanning (ALS)) are increasingly being used to generate
delay between the codes represents the travel time of the radio DEMs of high accuracy and resolution. These DEMs can be
waves, which allows for the calculation of the distance range. represented as regular raster information (grids) or as trian-
The code is transmitted at two different frequencies, the gulated irregular networks (TINs) (Hofle and Rutzinger, 2011;
‘Coarse Acquisition Code’ (C/A-code) and the ‘Precision Code’ Liu, 2008). They enable one to answer not only established
(P-Code). Low-accuracy receivers (single-frequency receivers) geomorphological research questions with a higher level of
use only the C/A-code allowing for an accuracy of up to precision, but also formerly unsolved geomorphological
3–5 m, whereas dual-frequency receivers can process both problems can be addressed today using LiDAR technology, as
Author's personal copy
10 Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview

for example, in snow depth modeling (Grünewald et al., 2010) reflected waveform. A single laser beam strikes, for example, a
Current geomorphological studies dealing with LiDAR data leaf of a tree producing a first peak in the reflected waveform
operate on a variety of spatial scales and cover a wide range of (first echo), whereas secondary echoes (of lower, higher, or
topics. For example, LiDAR data enable semiautomated geo- equal intensities) might be received from branches, shrubs or
morphological mapping (van Asselen and Seijmonsbergen, finally from the reflected proportion of the ground surface
2006) and the determination of size, shape, or roughness of underneath. Whereas most popular TLS systems only receive
different land surfaces with a high level of detail (e.g., gravel the last peak exceeding a certain energy threshold (the so-
bar grain sizes (Entwistle and Fuller, 2009) or mass movement called last pulse systems), full range or full wave LiDAR sys-
morphology (Glenn et al., 2006; McKean and Roering, tems record more (up to five) echoes.
2004)). LiDAR data are commonly also used as accurate base Technical specifications of modern laser scanning systems
data for different modeling approaches (e.g., flood modeling are quite remarkable. With an operating distance of up to
(Overton et al., 2009) or for the reconstruction of relict gla- several kilometers, ten or more thousands of points can be
ciation patterns (Kovanen and Slaymaker, 2004)). Further- measured per second with an accuracy of millimeters to
more, repeated laser scan surveying provides a tool for centimeters. Factors controlling the accuracy of LiDAR data are
multiple process monitoring strategies of large areas. As many (Baltsavias, 1999) and can be differentiated in range
probably one of the fastest growing fields in geomorphology, accuracy issues (energy thresholds of returned signals, beam
recently monitoring studies using LiDAR data are focusing on divergence, scan angles, object distance, reflectivity, and
numerous Earth’s surface processes, for example, landslide topography of target) and position accuracy problems using
and mass movement activity (e.g., Prokop and Panholzer, (differential) GPS systems.
2009; Staley et al., 2006), rockfall on steep rock walls and cliffs
(e.g., Oppikofer et al., 2008; Rosser et al., 2005; Rabatel et al.,
2008 Heckmann et al., 2012), glacier or rock glacier creep 14.2.3.2.2 Airborne or terrestrial laser scanning
(e.g., Kennett and Eiken, 1997; Baltsavias et al., 2001; Geist The appropriate mode of data acquisition (i.e., airborne or
et al., 2003; Tamburini et al., 2005; Avian et al., 2009; Haas terrestrial) naturally depends on the geomorphologic research
et al., 2010) and others. Analysis of debris-flow depositional question, but the following aspects are of particular import-
patterns using LiDAR data was also conducted by Staley et al. ance in this regard.
(2006). Geist et al. (2009) gives an overview of principles and Size of area under investigation: Small-scale studies (ap-
laser scanning applications focusing on the significance of proximately o1–5 km2) and especially repetitive small-scale
high-resolution topographic data for natural hazard manage- investigations using identical survey designs will be typically
ment. LiDAR data in hydrological research are used to analyze carried out using TLS systems. If (due to resolution) TLS have
erosion and deposition of river systems (Lane et al., 2003) and to be applied on larger scales (45–10 km2) intensive field
for hydrologic modeling (French, 2003). However, the cap- work incorporating many scan positions is required. There-
ability of the LiDAR system strongly depends, among other fore, larger spatial scales are typically handled using ALS data.
factors, on the wavelength of the laser type applied. This may Data resolution: Subject to the phenomenon to be studied,
cause limitations in the applicability in wetlands or on snow- the desired data resolution should be determined first.
covered surfaces, due to weak reflectivity conditions. Besides Whereas TLS surveys generally achieve 1000 or more points
these limitations and in spite of the obvious wide field of per square meter, ALS typically delivers just 1–10 point m2.
application, it is should be mentioned that LiDAR technology, Final gridded DEM resolution ranges between approximately
especially portable TLS systems, is among the most expensive 1 m (ALS) and 1–50 cm (TSL).
field tools in geomorphology (Rayburg et al., 2009). Topography of the study site: Due to acute angles of impact,
ALS is unfavorable to reproduce vertical rock faces or over-
14.2.3.2.1 Principles of LiDAR hangs. If possible, right angles of impact should be sought and
LiDAR data acquisition is generally based on the two-way the area of interest should be in the near vicinity of the laser
travel time or time-of-flight principle. Emitted laser pulses scanner’s position. Heterogeneous relief conditions generally
propagate through space with the constant velocity of light. complicate the decision of scan positions owing to shadowing
After a certain time (or distance, respectively) laser beams will effects.
strike a surface and get reflected (specular, diffuse, or mixed), Remoteness and accessibility of the study site, availability of
transmitted, or absorbed. Parts of the reflected proportions energy supply, and transport facilities: These critical factors
will be received again by the instrument allowing for exact commonly control the feasibility of a survey design to a large
distance measurements relative to the scanner’s position. part. TLS equipment typically weighs approximately 20 kg and
Combined with the vertical and horizontal angles of each laser can be transported in the field using special carrying devices.
pulse, the typical output of laser scanners are point clouds Energy supply also has to be guaranteed (generator, solar
containing X, Y, Z triples in a scanner’s own coordinate system panel).
commonly supplemented by intensity, timestamp, and add- Weather conditions: Clear and dry conditions are best suited
itional RGB (color) information if a (calibrated) camera is for scanning surveys. Rain, snow, and fog may produce in-
used (Heritage and Large, 2009). creased noise in the point cloud because of reflections at water
Due to their diverging behavior, the footprints of laser droplets. Local wind speed is another crucial factor. Due to
beams grow as distance to target increases. This effect (1) unstable conditions, some laser scanners stop the actual
causes lower data accuracy and resolution with increasing measurement if a certain threshold of wind speed is exceeded.
object distance; and (2) might produce multiple peaks in the Scanning at night is possible but may cause problems in terms
Author's personal copy
Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview 11

of defining the area to be scanned. Furthermore, RGB infor- questions these ‘raw’ LiDAR data have to be further processed
mation using a calibrated camera cannot be acquired. in order to gain regular gridded elevation data with a homo-
Availability of equipment, financial scope, and available time geneous resolution or TINs, which is usually done using dif-
frame: In some countries, area or nation-wide ALS data ac- ferent filtering and thinning options (e.g., 2.5-D filter, octree
quisition currently takes place through public authorities. approaches). If required, removing vegetation is another im-
Resulting ALS products are frequently available for research portant issue to be managed using specific filters.
institutions at reduced prices. Private companies can also be
commissioned with ALS surveys. If ALS data are not available,
not affordable, or show too low a resolution, TLS should be 14.2.3.3 Geophysical Applications in Geomorphology
considered.
Although geomorphology has always been interested in sub-
surface structures because it is an important component in
14.2.3.2.3 LiDAR – principles of data acquisition and
understanding landforms in space and time, subsurface in-
processing
formation is generally limited to very shallow insights (e.g.,
As ALS data acquisition is generally done by private companies
using a soil auger) reaching not more than 1 m depth.
or public authorities, this section – dealing with practical
Recently, the use of geophysical techniques has become
issues regarding data acquisition and processing – focuses on
increasingly important in many geomorphological studies.
TLS systems. TLS surveys commonly comprise several scan
One reason for the interest in geophysical field methods is
positions. Their locations have to be chosen carefully and (if
certainly related to technical innovations as improved com-
possible) prior to laser scanning measurements. The locations
puter power and the availability of lightweight equipment that
should ensure that shadowing effects are limited to a min-
allows for relatively user-friendly, efficient, and nondestructive
imum, that angles of impact are as large as possible, and that
data gathering. However, correct handling of the geophysical
the whole area of interest is covered homogeneously. This
instruments and subsequent data processing are still difficult
decision demands some experience, but GIS tools, as, for ex-
tasks and the methods generally require advanced math-
ample, viewshed analyses (ArcGIS), might help in this regard.
ematical treatment for interpretation. However, without close
At each scan position, the area to be scanned and the desired
collaboration between geomorphologists and geophysicists
scanning resolution have to be defined. Scanning designs
the accurate and effective use of geophysical techniques and
using reflectors (in many cases fixed in the field with known
their geophysical and geomorphological interpretation are
GPS coordinates) commonly demand separate fine scans of
generally very limited. In addition, correct description and
them with the highest possible resolution. Reflectors are used
interpretation of geomorphological settings and, thus, the
for many purposes. Besides an accurate registration process,
choice of adequate and meaningful field sites are not easy
fixed reflectors in the field can simplify the comparison of
tasks.
repeated scan series (e.g., cut and fill analyses) and – if
Although several potential applications for geophysical
installed on ‘moving objects’ – the assessment of geomor-
methods exist, many of them have not yet been fully inte-
phologic processes (e.g., rates of permafrost creep, solifluction,
grated into geomorphological research. The most common
and landslides). Some systems also capture overlapping digital
geophysical applications are currently focusing on permafrost
photographs covering the area of interest using a calibrated
mapping, sediment thickness determination of talus slopes,
camera. These photographs allow for colorizing point clouds,
block fields, alluvial fans, coastal sedimentary structures
texturing of meshes, or for creating orthorectified photographs
and, increasingly, on the depth and internal structures of
of the study site.
landslides (Hecht, 2000; Tavkhelidse et al., 2000; Hauck,
After data acquisition, each scan position’s point cloud has
2001; Leatherman, 1987; Hoffmann and Schrott, 2002; Hauck
to be merged with each other (often called the registration
and VonderMühll, 2003; Israil and Pachauri, 2003; Kneisel
process). This implies a rotation and translation of the point
and Hauck, 2003; Schrott et al., 2003; Bichler et al., 2004; Sass
clouds to be registered as a whole, but one which would not
et al., 2008). Other landforms such as karst and colluvium are
change the relative positions of points within them. The
comparatively rarely investigated (Hecht, 2003). Currently, the
registration of point clouds can be done in different ways, as
most common geophysical methods in geomorphological re-
for example with (a minimum of three) reflectors visible in
search are ground-penetrating radar, DC resistivity, and seis-
two overlapping scenes. Additional tools, depending on the
mic refraction (Gilbert, 1999). Each geophysical technique is
software package used, enable further (stepwise) registration
based on the interpretation of contrasts in specific physical
processes without using reflectors, as for example the coarse
properties of the subsurface (e.g., dielectric constant, electrical
registration by the manual setting of identical points or
conductivity, and density). The type of physical property to
by using north angles (back sighting orientation) and the
which a particular geophysical method responds determines
subsequent semiautomatic matching of polygon normals.
and limits the range of applications.
The latter is probably the most accurate way and also recom-
mended for point clouds already registered by means of re-
flectors. In contrast to the different locations relative to each 14.2.3.3.1 Ground-penetrating radar
scan position, all points are referred to one common project 14.2.3.3.1.1 Principle and geomorphic context
coordinate system after the registration process. Incorporating Ground-penetrating radar uses high-frequency electro-
GPS data of reflectors or scan positions finally allows for data magnetic waves to acquire information on subsurface com-
conversion in a global coordinate system of choice (e.g., position (see also Chapter 14.16). The electromagnetic pulse is
UTM). To answer numerous geomorphological research emitted from a transmitter antenna and propagates through
Author's personal copy
12 Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview

the subsurface at a velocity determined by the dielectric indicator of potential target depth. As the reflectivity at a layer
properties of the subsurface materials. The pulse is reflected by boundary is determined by the contrast in the dielectric
inhomogeneities and layer boundaries and is received by a properties of the subsurface units, no distinct reflection is
second antenna after a measured travel time. Wide-angle re- found when this contrast is low. Small-scale spatial differences
flection and refraction (WARR) or common midpoint (CMP) in water content and grain-size composition may yield
is measured to calculate depth/resistance/velocity relation- stronger reflections than the target of the investigation (e.g.,
ships. These signal travel time measurements are made with a the bedrock surface or palaeosols). This problem may be
stepwise increase in the distance between the two antennas. overcome by using the radar facies of the sediments for in-
From the distance/travel time diagram, the propagation vel- terpretation. Different sediment units and bedrock yield
ocity of the radar waves in the subsurface can be derived. One typical reflection patterns that can be derived from, for ex-
common mode of GPR data collection is fixed-offset reflection ample, reference profiles. The reconnaissance of these patterns
profiling (Jol and Bristow, 2003). In this step-like procedure, significantly facilitates the interpretation of the radargram.
the antennas are moved along a profile line and the meas- Considering the major restrictions arising from ‘clayey or
urement is repeated at discrete intervals resulting in a 2-D silty subsurface’ and ‘wooded terrain’ it is clear that GPR shows
image of the subsurface. The possible working frequencies can its potential particularly in arctic or alpine areas above the
range from 10 MHz to 1 GHz depending on the aim of in- tree-line and where there is limited soil development. How-
vestigation. Higher frequencies allow higher spatial resolution ever, shallow subsurface investigations are also possible in
of the ground information, but lead to a lower penetration fluvial deposits and even in peat when the electrical con-
depth. ductivity of the groundwater is low.
Correct choice of antenna and measurement strategy has There is a broad range of successful applications of GPR in
important implications in geomorphological applications. geomorphological studies. These include the detection of
Knowledge about the geomorphological context (expected buried structures, assessment of internal sediment structures,
maximum depth and grain-size composition of a sediment and estimation of depth to bedrock (Table 2). Various types of
body) is essential for choosing the appropriate frequencies. A sediments have been investigated for geomorphological pur-
comprehensive ‘good practice guide’ for the application of poses (Bristow et al., 2000). The internal structures of flood-
GPR in sediments is provided by Jol and Bristow (2003). plain deposits and deltaic sediments have been visualized by,
The maximum depth of investigation depends mainly on for example, Leclerc and Hickin (1997); Jol (1996), and Büker
the dielectric constant (e) and the electrical conductivity (s) of et al. (1996). Overgaard and Jakobsen (2001) have investi-
the subsurface. A higher groundwater and/or clay content gated internal deformation structures of push moraines and
(high e, high s) leads to a stronger attenuation and, therefore, Berthling et al. (2000) clearly detected internal structures as
a markedly reduced penetration depth. However, very pure well as the bedrock base of rock glaciers. Sass and Wollny
groundwaters that have a low conductivity (e.g., glacial melt- (2001) and Sass (2006) achieved a penetration depth of up to
water and bogs) are characterized by relatively low levels of 50 m on talus slopes using 25-MHz antennas. Application of
GPR signal loss. Again, geomorphological expertise about GPR on landslides has repeatedly been tested but with limited
possible water and clay layers can help to avoid disappointing success. Bichler et al. (2004) obtained very good results, dis-
measurements. On dry and electrically high-resistive debris, tinguishing seven different facies of loose sediments. GPR
penetration between 30 and 60 m can be achieved (e.g., Smith measurements at landslide sites are only worthwhile where
and Jol, 1995). Sandy sediments are also favorable for GPR comparatively coarse and dry deposits (debris, displaced
measurements at depths of between 15 and 30 m. Due to the blocks) superimpose the silty or clayey material of the slip
strong attenuation in materials that have a high electrical surface. Another possible field of application is the investi-
conductivity the penetration depth in wet, silty, or clayey gation of permafrost features. The active layer thickness has
sediments diminishes rapidly to, for example, less than 5 m in been determined, for example, by Arcone et al. (1998) and
silt (Doolittle and Collins, 1995); in clayey soil the appli- Hinkel et al. (2001). Moorman et al. (2003) provided in-
cation of GPR may be altogether impossible (see Table 1). structive pictures of typical reflection patterns in frozen and
This is, however, only a very rough guide, because the pene- unfrozen ground. Although the presence or absence of
tration depth depends on the device and antenna frequency permafrost is more difficult to establish with GPR than with
used. Vertical resolution of GPR data is a function of frequency electrical resistivity techniques, GPR is superior in detecting
and propagation velocity. With higher velocities, resolution spatially confined structures such as ice wedges (Hinkel et al.,
decreases and vice versa. As a rule of thumb, in the medium- 2001). Thickness and internal structure of glacier ice (unfrozen
velocity range (0.1 m ns1) the resolution is approximately water content and cavities) have also been investigated using
1 m using 25 MHz antennae, 0.25 m using 100 MHz GPR (e.g., Moorman and Michel, 2000). Investigation of quasi
antennae, and 2.5 cm using 1 GHz antennae (Figure 2). point-shaped or linear buried structures in high resolution
is the aim of many studies in the relatively new field of
14.2.3.3.1.2 Advantages and disadvantages of GPR in geoarchaeology that is closely related to geomorphology
geomorphological applications (Baker et al., 1997; Fuchs and Zöller, 2006). Leckebusch
The available antenna frequencies allow for a broad variety of (2003) has provided a detailed description of the GPR method
possible applications. However, the extremely variable pene- for archeological purposes with numerous examples. The
tration depth requires careful assessment of the subsurface working frequencies for these applications are commonly ra-
parameters in the study area to minimize the risk of poor ther high (c. 200 MHz); the target depth is generally between
results. Electric conductivity of the soil provides a rough 1 and 5 m.
Author's personal copy
Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview 13

Table 1 Comparison of common field geophysical methods in geomorphology. Examples of applications and some technical considerations and
advice

Geophysical Geomorphological application Technical considerations and practical advice


technique

Ground-penetrating • Delineation of the boundaries of massive ice in rock • Small penetration depth in case of conductive near-
radar (GPR) glaciers, moraines and other periglacial phenomena surface layers
• Determining the thickness of a permafrost layer • Less successful in, for example, wooded terrain with
• Active layer thickness many surface reflectors and in electrically conductive
• Glacial ice thickness sediments (e.g., clay-rich)
• Delineation of aquifers • Experience in data processing and interpretation
• Fracture mapping within massive bedrock is needed
• Mapping of internal structures in sediment storage • Correlate radar data with geomorphic/geologic control
types (e.g., talus slopes and rock glaciers) and site observations such as exposures or
borehole logs
DC resistivity • Determining sediment thickness, internal • Obtaining good electrical contact between electrodes
sounding, 2-D DC differentiation and groundwater and ground is essential
resistivity profiling • Depth and extension of landslide bodies • Blocky and dry material is very problematic due to poor
• Detection of massive ice or permafrost in rock glaciers, electrode coupling
moraines and other periglacial phenomena • Experience in data inversion is needed for data
• Ice thickness processing. A priori information influences (improves)
• Determining the altitudinal permafrost limit iterative modeling significantly
• Moisture distribution in rock walls • Differentiation between ice, air, and special rock types
• Seasonal variation in fluid content can sometimes be difficult
• Correlate resistivity data with geomorphic/geologic
control and site observations such as exposures or
borehole logs
Seismic refraction • Sediment thickness (talus, alluvial fans, etc.) • Number of geophones should be at least 12, with shots
(2-D sounding, • Detection of massive ice in rock glaciers, moraines, at every other receiver location
tomography) and other periglacial phenomena • Sledge hammer as source is sufficient for most
• Differentiation between ice, air, and special rock types shallow applications (o30 m)
• Mapping active layer thickness • Experience in data processing and inversion is needed
for data interpretation
• Correlate seismic data with geomorphic/geologic
control and site observations such as exposures or
borehole logs

Source: Reproduced from Schrott, L., Sass, O., 2008. Application of field geophysics in geomorphology: advances and limitations exemplified by case studies. Geomorphology 93,
55–73.

14.2.3.3.2 Geoelectrical resistivity principle of operation is based on a stepwise iteration process


14.2.3.3.2.1 Principle and geomorphic context that tries to minimize the deviation between the measured
Resistivity is measured by applying a constant current into the apparent resistivity and the simulated apparent resistivity
ground through two ‘current electrodes’ and measuring the values calculated from a subsurface model. The 2-D section
resulting voltage differences at two ‘potential electrodes.’ can also be conducted in a Schlumberger array, which
From the current and voltage values, an apparent resistivity provides particularly good resolution for lateral inhomo-
value is calculated. Generally, the two potential electrodes geneities. The Wenner array shows a good signal–noise
remain in position in the middle of the profile, whereas the ratio and is favorable for the detection of horizontal
current electrodes move stepwise to both sides (Schlumberger layers, whereas the Dipole–Dipole array is favorable for the
array). The wider the electrodes are apart, the deeper the delimitation of spatially confined objects in the shallow
electrical field penetrates into the ground. Thus, a depth subsurface. For a comprehensive description of these con-
profile under the approximate middle of the section is cre- figurations, refer to geophysical textbooks (Milsom, 1996;
ated. This array has been widely used in geomorphologic Reynolds, 1997; Kearey et al., 2002).
research (Etzelmüller et al., 2003). Two-dimensional arrays The maximum amount of a priori information on the
represent a further development of the 1-D technique, using geomorphological context should be obtained (e.g., layer
50 or more electrodes at a time. A microcontroller unit thickness, bedrock type, and expected resistivity value) before
automatically switches between numerous electrode con- starting the inversion of the raw data. The a priori estimate
figurations, thus creating a 2-D pseudosection of the sub- (e.g., maximum resistivity value of an expected type of sedi-
surface. Inversion of the gathered data using sophisticated ment) can be set as a fixed parameter and helps to improve the
computer programs produces a 2-D section of the subsurface model. The required information can be derived from test
resistivity. The Res2Dinv-software provided by Loke and profiles of, for example, bedrock or sediment units of known
Barker (1995) is most commonly used in geosciences. The composition (Figure 3).
Author's personal copy
14 Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview

Fixed-offset reflection mode


T1 T2 R1 R2 Tn Rn
Control unit &
antennas

Depth
T R Profile direction Amplitude Layer 1
Layer 2
r1
I WARR mode
T R1 R2 Rn
Layer 1
1 1

Travel time [ns]

Depth
d1 t1
r2 r1
Layer 1
Depth

Layer 2
Layer 2
2 2 CMP mode
d2 t2
Tn T2 T1 R1 R2 Rn
Layer 3 r2
3 3

Depth
Layer 1
Layer 2
(a) (b) Common midpoint

Offset [m]
0 10 20
0
1
100
Travel time [ns]

200 2
300 1 air wave ν = 0.3 m/ns
3
4
400 2 Ground wave ν = 0.12 m/ns 5
500 3 ν = 0.058 m/ns 6
600 4 ν = 0.064 m/ns
5 ν = 0.08 m/ns
Location of CMP measurement
700
6 ν = 0.084 m/ns

Profile distance
0 100 200 300
0 0

1D velocity model]
Travel time [ns]

Depth [m, using


200
10
400
20
600

800 30

0 100 200 300


2080 0
Elevation a.s.l. [m]

2070
Depth [m]

10

2060 20

2050 30
(c)

Figure 2 (a) Principle of a GPR survey (T – transmitter, R – receiver, d1 – depth to reflector 1, d2 – depth to reflector 2, e – permittivity,
s – conductivity, t1 – two-way travel time of the electromagnetic pulse to reflector 1, t2 – two-way travel time of the electromagnetic pulse to
reflector 2). Modified from Blindow, 2005. (b) GPR survey modes. The fixed-offset reflection mode is common for GPR profiling where
transmitter and receiver are moved along a profile line. Pulse radiation and measurement are repeated in a discrete trigger interval resulting in a
2-D radargramm of the subsurface. To estimate the depth of reflections and boundaries, the subsurface propagation velocity of the EM wave is
needed and derived by CMP or WARR measurements. When performing a CMP measurement, the distance between transmitter and receiver is
stepwise increased over a CMP whereas in WARR mode just the receiver is moved whereas the transmitter remains stationary. With both
measurements a distance/travel time diagram is created for the depth calculation. (c) Results of the GPR measurement at a sandur in the
forefield of Pasterze glacier (Austria). Processed radargramm (top) and geomorphological interpretation (bottom) including supposed bedrock
surface (red line) and prominent reflections indicating internal structures (black lines). Migration and time–depth conversion is based on the
propagation velocities of a nonlinear 1-D velocity model derived from a CMP measurement (top left).
Author's personal copy
Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview 15

Table 2 Common geophysical techniques in geomorphological applications and qualitative assessment in terms of suitable detection of
thickness and/or internal structure. Note: the indication of suitable application may be incorrect under specific or extreme local conditions (e.g.,
wet, dry and blocky)

Physical property Ground-penetrating radar 2-D DC resistivity 2-D seismic refraction

Dielectrical properties Resistivity Elastic moduli, density

Geomorphic context
Talus slopes, debris cones þþa/þþb 7/ þ þþ/7
Block fields þ/þ 7/o þ /o
Alluvial fans, floodplain þ /þþ þ/þ þþ/7
Colluvial þ/þo þ /o 7/ 
Landslides  c/7c þ /þþ 7/7
Karst features 7 o o
Permafrost lenses þ þþ 7
Active layer thickness 7 þþ þþ
Permafrost occurrence (widespread) þ þþ þ
Rock glaciers 7/ þ 7/þþ d
/7
Rock/soil moisture distribution 7 þ 
a
Thickness, depth-to-bedrock.
b
Internal structure/distribution.
c
Only suitable in dry sediments.
d
Unsuitable on active rock glaciers with a permafrost body.
Source: Reproduced from Schrott, L., Sass, O., 2008. Application of field geophysics in geomorphology: advances and limitations exemplified by case studies. Geomorphology 93,
55–73.

14.2.3.3.2.2 Advantages and disadvantages in geomorphological gravel, and bedrock, at different velocities. The denser the
applications material, the faster the waves travel. A prerequisite for the
A great advantage of the method is the high variability of successful application is that each successive underlying layer
electrode spacing and configuration. The distances between of sediment or bedrock must increase in density and therefore,
the electrodes can range from some centimeters to several tens velocity. The seismic velocity of P waves depends on the elastic
or hundreds of meters, allowing a penetration depth from modulus and the density, r, of the material, through which
decimeters to hundreds of meters. The electrode array (e.g., the seismic waves propagate.
Schlumberger, Wenner, and Dipole–Dipole) can be chosen Propagation of seismic waves through layered ground is
according to the aim of the investigation. Almost no re- determined by the reflection and refraction of the waves at the
strictions regarding topography, subsurface features, and interface between different layers. When the wave reaches the
vegetation apply. However, very dry or extremely blocky sub- interface, some energy of the wave is refracted into the deeper
strates are basically unfavorable. Special measures have to be layer, whereas the reflected wave transmits the energy back
taken to improve the electrode-to-ground coupling such as into the overburden layer.
watering of the electrodes or inserting them through wet The critical refracted wave that travels along the interface
sponges. It is also possible to insert electrodes into hard rock produces oscillation stresses, which in turn generate upward
using a hammer drill. However, the best results are generally moving waves, known as head waves. Since the propagation
obtained on loamy and relatively wet subsurface. velocity V2 is faster within the lower layer, at a certain distance
Geoelectrical surveys always integrate the electrical prop- from the shotpoint (crossover distance) these head waves
erties of a certain volume of the subsurface. The extent of this reach the surface (geophones) faster than the direct wave
volume increases in the deeper subsurface. Thus, accurate providing the first arrivals at the geophones. In seismic re-
detection of sharp boundaries is rarely possible especially in fraction studies, it is the first arrivals of the P-waves that are
the deeper parts of a profile. Accurate assessment of depth to utilized.
bedrock is only possible where there is a very sharp resistivity The arrival of a seismic wave is detected by geophones,
contrast between overlying loose sediments and bedrock. which are placed firmly in the ground using a spacing of be-
A further, significant problem is related to significant tween 1 and 5 m. If the expected depths of the interfaces are
overlapping ranges of resistivities for different substrata. Ac- shallower than 30 m the geophone spacing may be reduced
cording to textbook tables, resistivity values of almost every (i.e., between 1 and 3 m) to gain a higher resolution record of
subsurface unit (regardless of loose sediment or bedrock) may the underground. To detect a layer within the time–distance
cover a range of several orders of magnitude, depending on plot the geophone spacing must be smaller than the difference
water content and jointing. Thus, a measured resistivity cannot between two following crossover distances. At the crossover
be directly assigned to a certain substrate. distance, the direct wave is overtaken by a refracted wave.
Beyond this offset distance the first arrival is always a refracted
14.2.3.3.3 Seismic refraction wave. In refraction surveying, recording ranges are chosen
14.2.3.3.3.1 Principle and geomorphic context to be sufficiently large enough to ensure that the crossover
The principle of seismic refraction is based on elastic waves distance is well exceeded to detect a sufficient number of first
traveling through different subsurface materials, such as sand, arrivals of refracted waves. In cases of thin subsurface layers,
Author's personal copy
16 Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview

ΔV

A M N B

Current lines
Potential lines
 Resistivity [Ωm]

(a) (b)

Resistivity [Ωm]
10 Point of intersection
35000
Depth [m]

5 20000
East West
17500
0 Rock glacier Profile length: 96 m 15000
coarse, blocky iterations: 4
–5 RMS error: 5.1%
12500
model reflnment applied 10000
–10 smoothed inversion
7500
6000
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
5000
Profile distance [m] 4500
4000
10 Point of intersection 3500
3000
5 Rock glacier 2500
Depth [m]

North South
coarse, blocky 2000
0 1500
Fine grained
Profile length: 96 m 1000
–5
iterations: 4 0
abs. error: 3.7%
–10 robust inversion
Array type: wenner
number of electrodes: 25
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 unit electrode spacing: 4 m
Profile distance [m] inversion software: res2dinv
(c) date of data acquisition: 24.07.2009

Figure 3 (a) Configuration of a four-point array. With resistivity measurements a constant current (I) is conducted into the ground by two
current electrodes and the resulting potential difference (DV) is measured by two potential electrodes. For 2-D measurements an array of
electrodes is used at a time and a controller unit switches between the electrode configurations resulting in a linear depth profile or
pseudosection of the resistivity variation with depth and along the profile line. When applying a Wenner configuration (cf. section C) the
minimum electrode spacing is used initially and the array moves along the profile until the last electrode is reached. Electrode spacing is then
stepwise increased and the process is repeated providing a pseudosection. (b) Electrical resistivity measurement at the Gradental
(Schobergruppe, Austria) with the controller unit (red case) and field notebook. (c) Intersecting electrical resistivity tomographies at a high alpine
periglacial test site (approximately 2800 m asl; Glatzbach catchment, Austria; date of acquisition: 24 July 2009). Large resistivity contrasts are
based on different grain sizes. Note also very large resistivity values above 35 kO indicating subsurface permafrost or solid ice.

where the distance between crossover points is small, a narrow by hitting a metal plate placed on the ground. To improve the
geophone spacing (between 1 and 3 m) is necessary. This in signal-to-noise ratio the sledge hammer ‘shot’ is usually re-
turn may result in a lower penetration depth due to a reduced peated several times (typically between 5 and 10 times) at the
total spread. same source spot. The resulting seismograms of each shot are
The most common seismic source in geomorphological stacked (summed) manually or automatically to obtain a
studies is a 5-kg sledge hammer which generates seismic waves single seismogram per shot location.
Author's personal copy
Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview 17

Generally, a sledge hammer is sufficient to measure the be used for longer surveys with larger penetration depths. To
first arrivals along offset distances of approximately 50 m apply seismic surveys in geomorphic studies it is highly rec-
and seldom more than 90 m. This corresponds to penetration ommended to use instruments with several single light units
depths of 10–30 m and is suitable for many landforms. rather than to use an all-in-one (heavy) seismograph
More powerful sources (e.g., drop weights and explosives) must (Figure 4).

Shot location Geophone

Offset
Surface
Hea
dw
ave
Z
V1 < V2
ic
V1

i Critically refracted wave V2

Xc Profile distance [m]


Travel time [m]

ti

Direct wave Critically refracted wave


(a) slope: 1/v1 slope: 1/v2 (b)

Profile distance [m]


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 v (m/s)
0 p
300

600
Depth [m]

10

900

20 1200

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0

20
Travel time [ms]

40

60

80
(c)

Figure 4 (a) Principle of seismic wave refraction and reflection and travel time–distance plot (ic – angle of incidence, ti – intercept time,
xc – crossover point, v1 – velocity layer 1, v2 – velocity layer 2). Modified from Brückl et al., 2005. (b) Refraction seismic survey at the Reintal
basin (Bavarian Alps, Germany). (c) Seismic travel times and modeled refractor surfaces at the Reintal basin. Refractors have been modeled
using tomography (top graph, raster image in background) and network-ray tracing (bottom graph) methods.
Author's personal copy
18 Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview

14.2.3.3.3.2 Advantages and disadvantages in geomorphological extend the possibilities of landform detection and process
studies modeling.
In coarse-grained surface conditions (i.e., on talus slopes and There is a need for studies coupling the geophysical back-
debris cones) and hummocky topography (i.e., on rock glaciers ground with geomorphologic approaches in different natural
or rockfall deposits) difficulties may arise from the poor environments and for different landforms. Further investi-
coupling of geophones to the surface. On talus slopes with gations using integrated approaches are required. Only an
larger block sizes directly on the talus surface, it is advisable to appropriate combination of differing methods allows for
improve the coupling of the geophones by removing the upper much more sophisticated data interpretation. For example,
layer of larger boulders and pushing the spike of the geophone attention should be paid, not only to the thickness, but also to
into the fine-grained material underneath. Coupling to larger the internal structure of loose deposits – a task that can only
boulders or to compact bedrock may be established by drilling be achieved in sufficient accuracy with the combination of
into the rock and plunging the spike within the drill hole. several methods. Furthermore, a multimethod approach
In the vicinity of torrents and under strong wind or rainfall, allows for cross-checking of results and determination of the
detection of seismic waves may be impossible due to strong suitable methods for achieving valuable and reliable results in
noise in the seismic record. Special attention should be drawn a particular environment.
to the obtained velocities of materials that are common in However, these new types and amounts of data require a
particular landforms (e.g., talus deposit, till, and rock glacier). complex suite of processing steps and lots of technical skills. It
The large range of observed velocity values, spanning from needs to be verified whether our analysis tools composed for
c. 400 m s1 (loose debris) up to 6500 m s1 (compact rocks), data of lower resolution can still be adequately applied for
are generally conducive to the application of refraction seis- high-resolution data.
mics, as large velocity contrasts between the underlying ma-
terials are necessary. However, ranges of P-wave velocities for
rocks and sediments can overlap significantly. For instance, 14.2.5 Disclaimer
seismic velocities of dolomite and limestone can vary between
2000 and 6500 m s1 depending on the grade of fracturing Section 14.2.3.3 contains parts relating to a previously pub-
and weathering, whereas, for example, glacial sediments lished paper by Schrott, L., Sass, O., 2008. Application of field
compacted by overlying ice possibly range from 1500 to geophysics in geomorphology: advances and limitations ex-
3500 m s1. Consequently, there is no unambiguous rela- emplified by case studies. Geomorphology 93, 55–73.
tionship between certain subsurface units and the linked P-
wave velocities. As a result, it is not always possible to identify
subsurface materials simply based on seismic velocities. To References
differentiate glacial till (without ice) from frozen ground or
solid rock, cross checks with other geophysical methods and Abidin, H., 2002. Fundamentals of GPS signals and data. In: Bossler, J. (Ed.),
evidence from borehole logging are needed. Generally, land- Manual of geospatial science and technology. Taylor & Francis, London,
forms consisting of similar sediments but deposited by dif- New York.
Arcone, S.A., Lawson, D.E., Delaney, A.J., Strasser, J.C., Strasser, J.D., 1998.
ferent geomorphic processes cannot be distinguished Ground-penetrating radar reflection profiling of groundwater and bedrock in an
(Hoffmann and Schrott, 2003). Another very common dis- area of discontinuous permafrost. Geophysics 63, 1573–1584.
advantage in seismic refraction is the ‘hidden layer’ problem, Avian, M., Kellerer-Pirklbauer, A., Bauer, A., 2009. LiDAR for monitoring mass
which may lead to incorrect interpretations (Pullan and movements in permafrost environments at the cirque Hinteres Langtal, Austria,
Hunter, 1990; Hecht, 2001). The hidden layer is caused by a between 2000 and 2008. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 9,
1087–1094.
sandwiched layer with lower velocities between higher velocity
Baker, A., Caseldine, C., Hawkesworth, C., Latham, A., Hatton, J., 1997. A
units of refracted first P-wave arrivals. Cromerian Complex stalagmite from the Mendip Hills, England. Journal of
Quaternary Science 12, 533–537.
Baltsavias, E.P., 1999. Airborne laser scanning: basic relations and formulas.
Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 54, 199–214.
Baltsavias, E.P., Favey, E., Bauder, A., Bösch, H., Pateraki, M., 2001. Digital surface
14.2.4 Conclusions
modelling by airborne laser scanning and digital photogrammetry for glacier
monitoring. Photogrammetric Record 17, 243–273.
New techniques such as LiDAR, GPS, or field geophysics have Barsch, D., Liedtke, H., 1980. Principles, scientific value and practical applicability
rendered it possible to obtain new and stimulating solutions of the geomorphological map of the Federal Republic of Germany at the scale of
for geomorphological problems during the past decades. 1:25 000 (GMK 25) and 1:100 000 (GMK 100). Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie.
These techniques have become very common within geo- Berthling, I., Etzelmüller, B., Isaksen, K., Sollid, J.L., 2000. Rock glaciers on Prins
Karls Forland. II: GPR soundings and the development of internal structures.
morphology, but should not marginalize the geomorpho-
Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 11, 357–369.
logical question. Although advanced geomorphological Bichler, A., Bobrowsky, P., Best, M.G., Douma, M., Hunter, J., Calvert, T., Burns, R.,
mapping and stratigraphic analysis will continue to play an 2004. Three-dimensional mapping of a landslide using a multi-geophysical
important role in geomorphology, new high-resolution sur- approach: the Quesnel Forks landslide. Landslides 1, 29–40.
face and subsurface information from DGPS, LiDAR, or field Blindow, N., 2005. Georadar. In: Knödel, K., Krummel, H., Lange, G. (Eds.),
Handbuch zur Erkundung des Untergrundes von Deponien und Altlasten, Band
geophysics can strongly support the geomorphologists’ cap-
3: Geophysik, 2nd ed. Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 389–424.
abilities to assess spatial relationships and landform changes Bolch, T., Kamp, U., 2006. Glacier Mapping in high mountains using DEMs,
in three dimensions. Extremely detailed surface and sub- Landsat and ASTER data. Grazer Schriften für Geographie und Raumforschung
surface data will change our perspective on landforms and 41, 37–48.
Author's personal copy
Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview 19

Brenning, A., Azocar, G.F., 2010. Statistical Analysis of topographic and Hecht, S., 2003. Investigation of the shallow subsurface with seismic refraction
climatic controls and multispectral signatures of rock glaciers in the dry Andes, methods – application potentials and limitations with examples from
Chile (27 degrees–33 degrees S). Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 21, various field studies. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie N.F., Supplement Band 132,
54–66. 19–36.
Bristow, C.S., Bailey, S.D., Lancaster, N., 2000. The sedimentary structure of linear Heckmann, T., Bimböse, M., Krautblatter, M., Haas, F., Becht, M., Morche, D., 2012.
sand dunes. Nature 406, 56–59. From geotechnical analysis to quantification and modelling using LIDAR data: a
Brückl, E., Kirchheimer, F., Krummel, K., Liebhardt, G., Reimers, L., Sandmeier, K.J., study on rockfall in the Reintal catchment, Bavarian Alps, Germany. Earth
Utrecht, T., 2005. Refraktionsseismik. In: Knödel, K., Krummel, H., Lange, G. Surface Processes and Landforms 37(1), 119–133.
(Eds.), Handbuch zur Erkundung des Untergrundes von Deponien und Altlasten, Heritage, G.L., Large, A.R.G., 2009. Principles of 3D laser scanning. In: Heritage,
Band 3: Geophysik, 2nd ed. Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 530–619. G.L., Large, A.R.G. (Eds.), Laser Scanning for the Environmental Sciences.
Bundesamt Für, Wasser, Geologie, B., 2002. Naturgefahren Symbolbaukasten zur Blackwell, London.
Kartierung der Phänomene-EDV-Legende für die digitale Karthographie. Bern: Higgitt, D.L., Warburton, J., 1999. Applications of differential GPS in upland fluvial
Bundesamt für Umwelt, Switzerland. geomorphology. Geomorphology 29, 121–134.
Büker, F., Gurtner, M., Horstmeyer, H., Green, A.G., Huggenberger, P., 1996. Three- Hillier, J.K., Smith, M., 2008. Residual relief separation: digital elevation model
dimensional mapping of glaciofluvial and deltaic sediments in Central enhancement for geomorphological mapping. Earth Surface Processes and
Switzerland using ground penetrating radar. Proceedings of the Sixth Landforms 33, 2266–2276.
International Conference on Ground Penetrating Radar, Sendai, pp. 45–50. Hinkel, K.M., Doolittle, J.A., Bockheim, J.G., Nelson, F.E., Paetzold, R., Kimble,
Church, M., 2010. The trajectory of geomorphology. Progress in Physical J.M., Travis, R., 2001. Detection of subsurface permafrost features with ground-
Geography 34, 265–286. penetrating radar, Barrow, Alaska. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 12,
De Graaff, L.W.S., De Jong, M.G.G., Rupke, J., Verhofstad, J., 1987. A 179–190.
geomorphological mapping system at scale 1:10 000 for mountainous areas Hoffmann, T., Schrott, L., 2002. Modelling sediment thickness and rockwall retreat
(Austria). Zeitschrift fur Geomorphologie 31, 229–242. in an Alpine valley using 2D-seismic refraction (Reintal, Bavarian Alps).
Doolittle, J.A., Collins, M.E., 1995. Use of soil information to determine application Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie, Supplement Band 127, 153–173.
of ground-penetrating radar. Journal of Applied Geophysics 33, 101–108. Hoffmann, T., Schrott, L., 2003. Determining sediment thickness of talus slopes and
Entwistle, N., Fuller, I., 2009. Terrestrial laser scanning to derive facies character of valley fill deposits using seismic refaction – a comparison of 2D interpretation
gravel bars. In: Heritage, G.L., Large, A.R.G. (Eds.), Laser Scanning for the tools. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie, Supplement Band 132, 71–87.
Environmental Sciences. Blackwell, London. Hofle, B., Rutzinger, M., 2011. Topographic airborne LiDAR in geomorphology: a
Etzelmuller, B., Berthling, I., Sollid, J.L., 2003. Aspects and concepts on the technological perspective. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie 55, 1–29.
geomorphological significance of Holocene permafrost in southern Norway. Hubbard, B., Glasser, N., 2005. Field Techniques in Glaciology and Glacial
Geomorphology 52, 87–104. Geomorphology. J. Wiley & Son, Chichester.
Evans, I.S., 1990. Cartographic techniques in geomorphology. In: Goudie, A. (Ed.), Israil, M., Pachauri, A.K., 2003. Geophysical characterization of a landslide site
Geomorphological techniques. Unwin Hyman, London. in the Himalayan foothill region. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 22,
French, J.R., 2003. Airborne LiDAR in support of geomorphological and hydraulic 253–263.
modelling. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 28, 321–335. Jol, H.M., 1996. Three-dimensional GPR imaging of a fan-foreset delta: an example
Fuchs, M., Zöller, L., 2006. Geoarchäologie aus geomorphologischer Sicht. Eine from Brigham City, Utah, USA. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference
konzeptionelle Betrachtung. Erdkunde 60, 139–146. on Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR 0 96), Sendai, Japan, pp. 33–37.
Geist, T., Höfele, B., Rutzing, M., Pfeifer, N., Stötter, J., 2009. Laserscanning – a Jol, H.M., Bristow, C.S., 2003. GPR in sediments: advice on data collection, basic
paradigm change in topographic data acquisition for natural hazard processing and interpretation, a good practice guide. In: Bristow, C.S., Jol, H.M.
management. In: Veulliet, E., Stötter, J., Weck-Hannemann, H. (Eds.), (Eds.), Ground-Penetrating Radar in Sediments. Geological Society London,
Sustainable Natural Hazard Management in Alpine Environments. Springer, London.
Heidelberg, Berlin. Kearey, P., Brooks, M., Hill, I., 2002. An Introduction to Geophysical Exploration.
Geist, T., Lutz, E., Stötter, J., 2003. Airborne laser scanning technology and its Blackwell, London.
potential for applications in glaciology. ISPRS Workshop on 3-D Reconstruction Kennett, M., Eiken, T., 1997. Airborne measurement of glacier surface elevation by
from Airborne Laserscanner and INSAR Data, Dresden. scanning laser altimeter. Annals of Glaciology 24, 293–296.
Gilbert, R., 1999. A Handbook of Geophysical Techniques for Geomorphic and Kneisel, C., Hauck, C., 2003. Multi-method geophysical investigation of a sporadic
Environmental Research. Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa. permafrost occurrence. Zeitschrift für Geomorphologie, Supplementary 132,
Gili, J.A., Corominas, J., Rius, J., 2000. Using global positioning system 145–159.
techniques in landslide monitoring. Engineering Geology 55, 167–192. Kneisel, C., Lehmkuhl, F., Winkler, S., Tressel, E., Schröder, H. (Eds.), 1998.
Glenn, N.F., Streutker, D.R., Chadwick, D.J., Thackray, G.D., Dorsch, S.J., 2006. Legende für geomorphologische Kartierungen im Hochgebirge. Geographische
Analysis of LiDAR-derived topographic information for characterizing and Gesellschaft Trier, Trier.
differentiating landslide morphology and activity. Geomorphology 73, 131–148. Kovanen, D.J., Slaymaker, O., 2004. Relict shorelines and ice flow patterns of the
Grünewald, T., Schirmer, M., Mott, R., Lehning, M., 2010. Spatial and temporal northern Puget Lowland from LiDAR data and digital terrain modelling.
variability of snow depth and ablation rates in a small mountain catchment. Geografiska Annaler, Series A: Physical Geography 86, 385–400.
Cryosphere 4, 215–225. Lambiel, C., Delaloye, R., 2004. Contribution of real-time kinematic GPS in the
Gustavsson, M., Kolstrup, E., Seijmonsbergen, A.C., 2006. A new symbol-and-GIS study of creeping mountain permafrost: examples from the Western Swiss Alps.
based detailed geomorphological mapping system: renewal of a scientific Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 15, 229–241.
discipline for understanding landscape development. Geomorphology 77, Lane, S.N., Westaway, R.M., Hicks, D.M., 2003. Estimation of erosion and
90–111. deposition volumes in a large, gravel-bed, braided river using synoptic remote
Haas, F., Heckmann, T., Klein, T., Becht, M., 2010. Analysing rockfall processes on sensing. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 28, 249–271.
alpine rockfaces and the corresponding talus cones using Terrestrial Leatherman, S.P., 1987. Coastal geomorphological applications of ground-
Laserscanning. Geophysical Research Abstracts 12, 1607–7962. penetrating radar. Journal of Coastal Research 3(3), 397–399.
Hauck, C., 2001. Geophysical methods for detecting permafrost in high mountains. Leckebusch, J., 2003. Ground-penetrating radar: a modern three dimensional
VAW Mitteilungen 171. Versuchsanstalt für Wasserbau, Hydrologie und prospection method. Archaeological Prospection 10, 213–240.
Glaziologie der Eidgenössischen Technischen Hochschule Zürich. Leclerc, R.F., Hickin, E.J., 1997. The internal structure of scrolled floodplain
Hauck, C., Vonder Mühll, D., 2003. Inversion and interpretation of two-dimensional deposits based on ground-penetrating radar, North Thompson River, British
geoelectrical measurements for detecting permafrost in mountainous regions. Columbia. Geomorphology 21(17–25), 29–38.
Permafrost and Periglacial Processes 14, 305–318. Liu, X., 2008. Airborne LiDAR for DEM generation: some critical issues. Progress
Hecht, S., 2000. Fallbeispiele zur Anwendung refraktionsseismischer Methoden bei in Physical Geography 32(1), 31–49.
der Erkundung des oberflächennahen Untergrundes. Zeitschrift für Loke, M.H., Barker, R.D., 1995. Least-squares deconvolution of apparent resistivity
Geomorphologie N.F., Supplement Band 123, 111–123. pseudosections. Geophysics 60, 1682–1690.
Hecht, S., 2001. Anwendung refraktionsseismischer Methoden zur Erkundung des Mantovani, F., Gracia, F.J., De Cosmo, P.D., Suma, A., 2010. A new approach to
oberflächennahen Untergrundes. Mit acht Fallbeispielen aus Südwestdeutschland. landslide geomorphological mapping using the Open Source software in the
Stuttgarter Geographische Studien, 131. Olvera area (Cadiz, Spain). Landslides 7, 69–74.
Author's personal copy
20 Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview

Mckean, J., Roering, J., 2004. Objective landslide detection and surface Sass, O., Bell, R., Glade, T., 2008. Comparison of georadar, 2D-resistivity and
morphology mapping using high-resolution airborne laser altimetry. traditional techniques for the subsurface exploration of landslides.
Geomorphology 57, 331–351. Geomorphology 93, 89–103.
Milsom, J., 1996. Field Geophysics. Wiley. Sass, O.K.W., 2001. Investigations regarding alpine talus slopes using ground-
Moorman, B.J., Michel, F.A., 2000. Glacial hydrological system characterization penetrating radar (GPR) in the Bavarian Alps, Germany. Earth Surface Processes
using ground-penetrating radar. Hydrological Processes 14, 2645–2667. and Landforms, 26
Moorman, B.J., Robinson, S.D., Burgess, M.M., 2003. Imaging periglacial Schneevoigt, N.J., Schrott, L., 2006. Linking geomorphic systems theory and
conditions with ground-penetrating radar. Permafrost and Periglacial Processes remote sensing. A conceptual approach to Alpine landform detection (Reintal,
14, 319–329. Bavarian Alps, Germany). Geographica Helvetica 61, 181–190.
Oppikofer, T., Jaboyedoff, M., Keusen, H.R., 2008. Collapse at the eastern Eiger Schneevoigt, N.J., vander Linden, S., Thamm, H.P., Schrott, L., 2008. Detecting
flank in the Swiss Alps. Nature Geoscience 1, 531–535. Alpine landforms from remotely sensed imagery. A pilot study in the Bavarian
Otto, J.C., Gustavsson, M., Geilhausen, M., 2011. Cartography: design, Alps. Geomorphology 93, 104–119.
symbolisation and visualisation of geomorphological maps. In: Smith, M.J., Schoeneich, P., Reynard, E., Pierrehumbert, G., 1998. Geomorphological mapping in
Paron, P., Griffiths, J. (Eds.), Geomorphological Mapping: A Handbook of the Swiss Alps and Prealps. In: Kriz, K. (Ed.), Hochgebirgskartographie Silvretta
Techniques and Applications. Elsevier, London. ’98. Wiener Schriften zur Geographie und Kartographie 11, pp. 145–153.
Otto, J.C., Kleinod, K., König, O., et al., 2007. HRSC – A data: a new high- Schrott, L., Hördt, A., Dikau, R. (Eds.), 2003. Geophysical Applications in
resolution data set with multi-purpose applications in physical geography. Geomorphology. Gebr. Bornträger, Berlin, Stuttgart.
Progress in Physical Geography 31, 179–197. Schrott, L., Sass, O., 2008. Application of field geophysics in geomorphology:
Otto, J.C., Schrott, L., Jaboyedoff, M., Dikau, R., 2009. Quantifying sediment advances and limitations exemplified by case studies. Geomorphology 93,
storage in a high alpine valley (Turtmanntal, Switzerland). Earth Surface 55–73.
Processes and Landforms 34, 1726–1742. Seijmonsbergen, A.C., Hengl, T., Anders, N.A., 2011. Semi-automated identi-
Overgaard, T., Jakobsen, P.R., 2001. Mapping of glaciotectonic deformation in an fication and extraction of geomorphological features using digital elevation
ice marginal environment with ground penetrating radar. Journal of Applied data. In: Smith, M.J., Paron, P., Griffiths, J. (Eds.), Geomorphological
Geophysics 47, 191–197. Mapping: A Professional Handbook of Techniques and Applications. Elsevier,
Overton, I.C., Siggins, A., Gallant, J.C., Penton, D., Byrne, G., 2009. Flood London.
modelling and vegetation mapping in large river systems. In: Heritage, G.L., Smith, D.G., Jol, H.M., 1995. Ground penetrating radar – antenna frequencies and
Large, A.R.G. (Eds.), Laser Scanning for the Environmental Sciences. Blackwell, maximum probable depths of penetration in quaternay sediments. Journal of
London. Applied Geophysics 33, 93–100.
Prokop, A., Panholzer, H., 2009. Assessing the capability of terrestrial laser Smith, M.J., Clark, C.D., 2005. Methods for the visualization of digital elevation
scanning for monitoring slow moving landslides. Natural Hazards and Earth models for landform mapping. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 30,
System Sciences 9, 1921–1928. 885–900.
Pullan, S.E., Hunter, J.A., 1990. Delineation of buried bedrock valleys using the Smith, M.J., Pain, C.F., 2009. Applications of remote sensing in geomorphology.
optimum offset shallow seismic reflection technique. In: Ward, S.H. (Ed.), Progress in Physical Geography 33, 568–582.
Geotechnical and Environmental Geophysiscs. Geotechnical. Society of Smith, M.J., Rose, J., Booth, S., 2006. Geomorphological mapping of
Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, Oklahoma. glacial landforms from remotely sensed data: an evaluation of the principal
Rabatel, A., Deline, P., Jaillet, S., Ravanel, L., 2008. Rock falls in high-alpine rock data sources and an assessment of their quality. Geomorphology 76,
walls quantified by terrestrial LiDAR measurements: a case study in the Mont 148–165.
Blanc area. Geophysical Research Letters 35, L10502. doi:10.1029/ Souch, C., 2003. Getting information about the past: palaeo and historical data
2008GL033424. sources. In: Clifford, N., Valentine, G. (Eds.), Key Methods in Geography. Sage,
Rayburg, S., Thoms, M., Neave, M., 2009. A comparison of digital elevation models London.
generated from different data sources. Geomorphology 106(3–4), 261–270. Squarzoni, C., Delacourt, C., Allemand, P., 2005. Differential single-frequency GPS
Reynard, E., Holzmann, C., Lambiel, C., Phillips, M., 2005. Légende monitoring of the La Valette landslide (French Alps). Engineering Geology 79,
géomorphologique de l’IGUL et Guide pratique pour le levé de cartes 215–229.
géomorphologiques. Lausanne, Institut de Géographie, 33 p. Staley, D.M., Wasklewicz, T.A., Blaszczynski, J.S., 2006. Surficial patterns of debris
Reynolds, J.M., 1997. An Introduction to Applied and Environmental Geophysics. flow deposition on alluvial fans in Death Valley, CA using airborne laser swath
John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK. mapping data. Geomorphology 74, 152–163.
Rice, S., 2003. Sampling in geography. In: Clifford, N., Valentine, G. (Eds.), Key Tamburini, A., Deline, P., Mortara, G., 2005. Time-space modelling with terrestrial
Methods in Geography. Sage, London. LiDAR: monitoring ice cliff evolution of the Miage Glacier, Italy, with ILRIS-3D.
Ritter, D.F., 1986. Process Geomorphology. Dubuque, Iowa, W.C., Brown. GIM International 19, 31–33.
Rizos, C., 2002. Making sense of the GPS technique. In: Bossler, J. (Ed.), Tavkhelidse, T., Schulte, A., Stumböck, M., 2000. Aufbau und Entwicklung der
Manual of Geospatial Science and Technology. Taylor & Francis, London, Schuttkegel im Finkenbachtal, südlicher Odenwald. Jenaer Geographische
New York. Schriften 9, 95–110.
Rosser, N.J., Petley, D.N., Lim, M., Dunning, S.A., Allison, R.J., 2005. Terrestrial Tooth, S., 2009. Arid geomorphology: emerging research themes and new frontiers.
laser scanning for monitoring the process of hard rock coastal cliff erosion. Progress in Physical Geography 33, 251–287.
Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology 38, 363–375. Tricart, J., 1965. Principes et Methodes de la Geomorphologie. Masson, Paris.
Sass, O., 2006. Determination of the internal structure of alpine talus deposits Van Asselen, S., Seijmonsbergen, A.C., 2006. Expert-driven semi-automated
using different geophysical methods (Lechtaler Alps, Austria). Geomorphology geomorphological mapping for a mountainous area using a laser DTM.
80, 45–58. Geomorphology 78, 309–320.
Author's personal copy
Fundamental Classic and Modern Field Techniques in Geomorphology: An Overview 21

Biographical Sketch

Lothar Schrott was born in 1962. He studied geology at the Universities of Tübingen and Geography, Geology and
Physical Education in Heidelberg, Germany. He received his PhD in 1993 from the University of Heidelberg
investigating the role of solar radiation within the geosystem of the semiarid high Andes.
He is a professor for physical geography and head of the research group Geomorphology and Environmental
Systems at the Department of Geography and Geology, University of Salzburg (Austria). His research interests
focus mainly on geomorphic processes in mountain areas (European Alps, Rocky Mountains, Andes, German
upland). Current research projects are related to sediment budgets, high mountain permafrost, and mass
movements. His numerous teaching activities in physical geography focus specifically on theoretical and applied
approaches in geomorphology, global environmental change issues, and natural hazards. Application of quan-
titative methods (lab and field) in geomorphology (e.g., mapping and field geophysics) is of primary concern. He
is associate editor of Geografiska Annaler (Series A, Physical Geography) and member of the editorial board of
Geomorphology. He is also a member of the Executive Committee of the International Association of Geo-
morphologists. Lothar Schrott edited a number of special issues and books on landslides, geophysical appli-
cations in geomorphology and sediment fluxes, and published more than 70 papers mainly in peer-reviewed
journals.

Jan-Christoph Otto was born in 1974. He studied geography, geology, and soil science at the Universities of Bonn
and Grenoble. He received his diploma and PhD in geography from the University of Bonn.
He is currently a postdoctoral researcher in the Department of Geography and Geology, University of Salzburg,
within the Geomorphology and Environmental Systems Research Group. His main research interests include
landscape change in high mountain environments with special focus on sediment budgets and the dynamics and
consequences of permafrost changes in mountain areas. His recent interests include the creation of digital geo-
morphological maps and the combination of high-resolution surface and subsurface data within a Geo-
morphological Information System.

Joachim Götz was born in 1977. He studied geography at the Universities of Augsburg and Bonn, Germany. He
received his diploma thesis from the University of Bonn in 2006 working on sediment budgets in the
German Alps.
He is currently preparing a PhD thesis at the University of Salzburg continuing his research in the field of
sediment budgets. In his thesis he investigates postglacial sediment fluxes and storage in nested Alpine catch-
ments, a project which is embedded into the ESF Topoeurope research framework. Joachim is applying a com-
bined field and modeling approach using geophysical techniques, high-resolution digital terrain data, and GIS
tools for the quantification of sediment storage and fluxes in the Möll catchment, Austrian Alps.

Martin Geilhausen was born in 1979. He studied geography at the University of Bonn and received a diploma
investigating fluvial and glacial deposits using geophysics.
After working for a geoinformation company, where he developed webGIS and web mapping applications, he
enrolled as a PhD student in the Department of Geography and Geology, University of Salzburg (Geomorphology
and Environmental Systems Research Group). His research involves the quantification of recent and postglacial
sediment dynamics in glacier forefields, Austrian Alps. Martin is applying a suite of field techniques ranging from
fluvial erosion measurement and geophysics (ground-penetrating radar, seismic refraction, and resistive tomo-
graphy) to terrestrial laser scanning.

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi