Skip to main content
Log in

Comparative analysis of SHALSTAB and SINMAP for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Cunha River basin, southern Brazil

  • PROGRESS IN EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION IN LATIN AMERICA
  • Published:
Journal of Soils and Sediments Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The Shallow Landsliding Stability Model (SHALSTAB) and Stability Index Mapping (SINMAP) models have been applied to various landslide management and research studies. Both models combine a hydrological model with an infinite slope stability model for predicting landslide occurrence. The objectives of the present study were to apply these two models to the Cunha River basin, Santa Catarina State, southern Brazil, where many landslides occurred in November 2008, and perform a comparative analysis of their results.

Materials and methods

Soil samples were collected to determine the input parameters. The models were calibrated with a landslide scar inventory, and rainfall data were obtained from three rain gauges. A comparison of their results obtained from the models was undertaken with the success and error index.

Results and discussion

Based on the maps of stability and instability areas for the study basin, the models performed well. Since the initial equations of both models are not particularly different, their results are similar. Locations with steep slopes, as well as areas with concave relief that tend to have larger contribution areas and moisture, have lower stability indexes. SHALSTAB classified only ~13 % of the total area of the Cunha River basin as unstable, while SINMAP classified ~30 % as unstable.

Conclusions

The analysis of maps based on the results of the two models shows that if SHALSTAB is correctly calibrated, based on hydrological parameters, its results could be more accurate than SINMAP in the prediction of landslide areas. Although SINMAP showed better calibration of the landslide scars, its classification over the basin results in an overestimation of stability areas. The conclusion is that SHALSTAB is more suitable than SINMAP for the prediction of landslides in the Cunha River basin, Brazil.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Andriola P, Chirico GB, De Falco M, Crescenzo G, Santo A (2009) A comparison between physically-based models and a semiquantitative methodology for assessing susceptibility to flowslides triggering in pyroclastic deposits of southern Italy. Geogr Fis Dinam Quat 32:213–226

    Google Scholar 

  • Bathurst JC, Moretti G, El-Hames A, Moaven-Hashemi A, Burton A (2005) Scenario modelling of basin-scale, shallow landslide sediment yield, Valsassina, Italian Southern Alps. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 5:189–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beven KJ, Kirkby MJ (1979) A physically based, variable contributing area model of basin hydrology. Bull Hydrol Sci 24:43–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cendrero A, Dramis F (1996) The contribution of landslides to landscape evolution in Europe. Geomorphology 15:191–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen CY, Chen LK, Yu FC, Lin SC, Lin YC, Lee CL, Wang YT (2010) Landslides affecting sedimentary characteristics of reservoir basin. Environ Earth Sci 59:1693–1702

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claessens L, Heuvelink GBM, Schoorl JM, Veldkamp A (2005) DEM resolution effects on shallow landslide hazard and soil redistribution modelling. Earth Surf Proc Landforms 30:461–477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corominas J, Moya J (2008) A review of assessing landslide frequency for hazard zoning purposes. Eng Geol 102:193–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corsini A, Borgatti L, Cervi F, Dahne A, Ronchetti F, Sterzai P (2009) Estimating mass-wasting processes in active earth slides—earthflows with time-series of high-resolution DEMs from photogrammetry and airborne LiDAR. Nat Hazards Earth Syst Sci 9:433–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crozier MJ (2010) Landslide geomorphology: an argument for recognition, with examples from New Zealand. Geomorphology 120:3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dietrich WE, Montgomery DR (1998) SHALSTAB: a digital terrain model for mapping shallow landslide potential. NCASI (National Council of the Paper Industry for Air and Stream Improvement), Technical Report, 29 p

  • Dietrich WE, Bellugi D, Real de Asua R (2001) Validation of the shallow landslide model, SHALSTAB, for forest management. In: Wigmosta MS, Burges SJ (ed) Land use and watersheds: human influence on hydrology and geomorphology in urban and forest areas. Water Sci Appl, AGU, Washington DC, vol 2 pp 195–227

  • EMBRAPA Centro Nacional de Pesquisa de Solos (2009) Sistema brasileiro de classificação de solos. EMBRAPA-SPI, Rio de Janeiro, 412 p

    Google Scholar 

  • IBGE Gerencia de Recursos Naturais e Estudos Ambientais (2003) Reconhecimento de Solos (mapa). Folha Blumenau. Escala 1:100000

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobiyama M, Goerl RF, Correa GP, Michel GP (2010) Debris flow occurrences in Rio dos Cedros, Southern Brazil: meteorological and geomorphic aspects. In: Wrachien D, Brebbia CA (eds) Monitoring, simulation. Prevention and remediation of dense debris flows III. WIT Press, Southampton, pp 77–88

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kobiyama M, Almeida AA, Grison F, Giglio JN (2011) Landslide influence on turbidity and total solids in Cubatão do Norte River, Santa Catarina, Brazil. Nat Hazards 59:1077–1086

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korup O (2005) Large landslides and their effect on sediment flux in South Westland, New Zealand. Earth Surf Proc Landforms 30:305–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meisina C, Scarabelli S (2007) A comparative analysis of terrain stability models for predicting shallow landslides in colluvial soils. Geomorphology 87:207–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michel GP, Goerl RF, Kobiyama M, Higashi RAR (2011) Estimativa da quantidade de chuva necessária para deflagrar escorregamentos. In: Anais do XIX Simpósio Brasileiro de Recursos Hídricos. Maceió: ABRH, 2011. CD-rom. 20 p

  • Montgomery DR, Dietrich WE (1994) A physically based model for the topographic control on shallow landsliding. Water Resour. Res. 30:1153–1170

    Google Scholar 

  • Mota AA, Kobiyama M (2011) Avaliação da dinâmica da água na zona vadosa em solos de diferentes usos com o modelo Hydrus-1D. In: XIX Brazilian Symposium of Water Resoureces, Maceió, ABRH, Procedings, 16 p

  • O’Loughlin EM (1986) Prediction of surface saturation zones in natural catchments by topographic analysis. Water Resour Res 22:794–804

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pack RT, Tarboton DG, Goodwin CN (1998) Terrain stability mapping with SINMAP, technical description and users guide for version 1.00. Report Number 4114–0, Terratech Consulting Ltd., Salmon Arm, Canada, 68 p

  • Petley D (2010) Landslide hazards. In: Alcantara-Ayala I, Goudie A (eds) Geomorphological hazards and disaster prevention. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 63–74

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Petley D (2012) Global patterns of loss of life from landslides. Geol 40:927–930

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Safaei M, Omar H, Huat BK, Yousof ZBM, Ghiasi V (2011) Deterministic rainfall induced landslide approaches, advantage and limitation. Electron J Geotech Eng 16:1619–1650

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaap MG, Leij FJ (2000) Improved prediction of unsaturated hydraulic conductivity with the Mualem-van Genuchten model. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:843–851

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schaap MG, Leij FJ, van Genuchten MT (2001) Rosetta: a computer program for estimating soil hydraulic parameters with hierarchical pedotransfer functions. J Hydrol 251:163–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selby M (1993) Hillslope materials and processes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 289 p

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorbino G, Sica C, Cascini L (2010) Susceptibility analysis of shallow landslides source areas using physically based models. Nat Hazards 53:313–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steijn H (1996) Debris-flow magnitude-frequency relationship of mountainous regions of Central and Northwest Europe. Geomorphology 15:256–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilcock PR, Schmidt JC, Wolman MG, Dietrich WE, Dominick D, Doyle MW, Grant GE, Iverson RM, Montgomery DR, Pierson TC, Schilling SP, Wilson RC (2003) When models meet managers: examples from geomorphology. In: Wilcock PR, Iverson RM (eds) Prediction in geomorphology, Geophys Monogr Ser, vol 135. AGU, Washington, pp 27–40

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wu S, Li J, Huang GH (2008) A study on DEM-derived primary topographic attributes for hydrologic applications: sensitivity to elevation data resolution. Appl Geogr 28:210–223

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gean Paulo Michel.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Cristiano Poleto

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Michel, G.P., Kobiyama, M. & Goerl, R.F. Comparative analysis of SHALSTAB and SINMAP for landslide susceptibility mapping in the Cunha River basin, southern Brazil. J Soils Sediments 14, 1266–1277 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-014-0886-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-014-0886-4

Keywords

Navigation