Skip to main content
Log in

Granulometric analysis of beach sediments enriched in radioactivity along Podampata, east coast of Odisha, India

  • Published:
Journal of Earth System Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The nature and distribution of heavy minerals along beach placers have been studied along the coastal part of Podampata, Eastern Coast of Odisha, India. The primary objective of this study was to assess the heavy mineral placers along the NE–SW direction, the nature of the high background radiation area, and the geomorphic agents controlling the beach sediment distribution. In-situ total radiation counts were obtained using a Micro R survey meter, and the individual activity of 232U (in µg/g), 234Th (in µg/g), and 40K (in %) of the collected samples were measured with Gamma surveyor II instrument. The sediment characterization was undertaken using grain size statistical parameters, which shows dominant influence of river and wind actions on the sediments and their high transportation and modification rates. Nature of radioactive anomalies observed is due to the decays of 232U and 234Th. The meandering nature and subsequent erosion, primarily at the outer curvature of the river, seems to have primarily contributed to the heavy mineral deposition. The high wind velocity during the frequent cyclonic events could have a significant influence on distribution and transport of heavy minerals observed. The mixed geomorphic agents operating in the study area influence the distribution of heavy minerals along the NE–SW direction.

Research Highlights

  1. 1.

    The higher abundance of Th is basically along the outer curvature of the meandering part as compared to the U and K occurrences.

  2. 2.

    Fine sand sediments with negatively skewness contains higher abundance of radioactive= elements.

  3. 3.

    The meandering pattern of Rusikulya River along due to beach action, primarily fluvial and aeolian activity plays an important role in the distribution of the sediments along the coast.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alonso E, Sherman A M, Wallington T J, Everson M P, Field F R, Roth R and Kirchain R E 2012 Evaluating rare earth element availability: A case with revolutionary demand from clean technologies; Environ. Sci. Technol. 46 3406–3414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blott S J and Pye K 2001 GRADISTAT: A grain size distribution and statistics package for the analysis of unconsolidated sediments; Earth Surf. Process. Landf. 26 1237–1248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chetty T R K 1995 A correlation of Proterozoic shear zones between Eastern Ghats, India and Enderby Land, East Antarctica; Geol. Soc. India Mem. 34 205–222.

  • Eisma D 1981 Supply and deposition of suspended matter in the North Sea; Int. Assoc. Sedimentol. Spec. Publ. 5 415–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flemming B W 2007 The influence of grain-size analysis methods and sediment mixing on curve shapes and textural parameters: Implications for sediment trend analysis; Sedim. Geol. 202 425–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folk R L 1954 The Distinction between grain size and mineral composition in sedimentary-rock nomenclature; J. Geol. 62 344–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folk R L and Ward W C 1957 Brazos River bar: A study in the significance of grain size parameters; J. Sedim. Res. 27 3–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Folk R L 1974 Petrology of sedimentary rocks; Hemphill Publishing Company, Austin, Texas, 159p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman G M 1961 Distinction between dune, beach, and river sands from their textural characteristics; J. Sedim. Res. 31 514–529.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman G M 1967 Dynamic processes and statistical parameters compared for size frequency distribution of beach and river sands; J. Sedim. Res. 37 327–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman G M 1979 Address of the retiring President of the International Association of Sedimentologists: Differences in size distributions of populations of particles among sands of various origins; Sedimentology 26 3–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadgil S 2003 The Indian monsoon and its variability; Ann. Rev. Earth Planet. Sci. 31 429–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghosal S, Agrahari S, Guin R and Sengupta D 2017 Implications of modelled radioactivity measurements along coastal Odisha, Eastern India for heavy mineral resources; Estuar. Coast. Shelf Sci. 184 83–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kermani S, Boutiba M, Boutaleb A and Fagel N 2015 Distribution of heavy and clay minerals in coastal sediment of Jijel, East of Algeria: Indicators of sediment sources and transport and deposition environments; Arab. J. Geosci. 9 36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mandal U, Sahoo S, Munusamy S B, Dhar A, Panda S N, Kar A and Mishra P K 2016 Delineation of groundwater potential zones of coastal groundwater basin using multi-criteria decision making technique; Water Resour. Manag. 30 4293–4310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohanty A K, Das S K, Van K V, Sengupta D and Saha S K 2003 Radiogenic heavy minerals in Chhatrapur beach placer deposit of Orissa, southeastern coast of India; J. Radioanal. Nuclear Chem. 258 383–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nageswara Rao P V, Suryam R K and Ranga Rao V 2005 Depositional environment inferred from grain size parameters of the beach sediments between False Devi Point to Kottapatnam, Andhra Pradesh Coast; J. Geol. Soc. India 65 317–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajganapathi V C, Jitheshkumar N, Sundararajan M, Bhat K H and Velusamy S 2012 Grain size analysis and characterization of sedimentary environment along Thiruchendur coast, Tamilnadu, India; Arab. J. Geosci. 6 4717–4728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramakrishnan M, Nanda J K and Augustine P F 1998 Geological evolution of the Proterozoic Eastern Ghats mobile belt; Geol. Surv. India, Spec. Publ. 44 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramesh R, Purvaja R and Senthil V A 2011 National Assessment of shoreline change: Odisha coast; NCSCM/MoEF Report 2011–01 57, https://www.ncscm.res.in/cms/more/pdf/ncscm-publications/odisha_factsheet.pdf.

  • Rao P A, Anilkumar V, Yugandhar R A, Ravi G S and Krishnan S 2001 Grain size parameters in the interpretation of depositional environments of coastal sediments between Bendi creek and Vamsadhara River, East Coast, India; J. Indian Assoc. Sedim. 20 106–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao R G 2001 Heavy mineral sand deposits of Orissa; Explor. Res. Atom. Miner. 2 133–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahoo B and Bhaskaran P K 2016 Assessment on historical cyclone tracks in the Bay of Bengal, east coast of India; Int. J. Climatol. 36 95–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahu B K 1964 Depositional mechanisms from the size analysis of clastic sediments; J. Sedim. Res. 34 73–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta D, Mohanty A K, Das S K and Saha S K 2005 Natural radioactivity in the high background radiation area at Erasama beach placer deposit of Orissa, India; Int. Congress Series 1276 210–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer D W 1963 The interpretation of grain size distribution curves of clastic sediments; J. Sedim. Res. 33 180–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanner W F 1962 Geomorphology and the sediment transport system; Southeast. Geol. 4 113–126.

  • Udden J A 1914 Mechanical composition of clastic sediments; Bull. Geol. Soc. Am. 25 655–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesan S, Singarasubramanian S R and Suganraj K 2017 Depositional mechanism of sediments through size analysis from the core of Arasalar river near Karaikkal, east coast of India; Indian J. Geol. Mar. Sci. 46 2122–2131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatramanan S, Ramkumar T, Anithamary I and Ramesh G 2011 Variations in texture of beach sediments in the vicinity of the Tirumalairajanarriver mouth of India; Int. J. Sedim. Res. 26 460–470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wentworth C K 1922 A scale of grade and class terms for clastic sediments; J. Geol. 30 377–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to Dr Pulakesh Das, Senior Project Associate-Sustainable Landscape & Restoration, World Resources Institute India, New Delhi for his suggestions for the improvement of the manuscript. We acknowledge the DST (Department of Science and Technology) for financial support during the research work. The authors are grateful to the anonymous referee for his constructive comments and suggestions which led to significant improvements to the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Samikshya Mohanty and Debashish Sengupta conceived the ideas and experimental design of the study. Samikshya Mohanty and Somnath Adak collected data from the field and did the experiments. All authors together have done data analysis and interpretation. SM wrote the manuscript, and SA and DS did the revision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samikshya Mohanty.

Additional information

Communicated by Joydip Mukhopadhyay

Appendices

Appendices

Appendix 1. Summary of Grain size distribution statistical measures of samples of southern part of study mentioned in the paper.

Sample number

Folk and Ward method (φ)

Folk and Ward method (description)

Mean

Sorting

Skewness

Kurtosis

Mean

Sorting

Skewness

Kurtosis

PM 1

1.899

0.931

−0.144

1.099

Medium sand

Moderately sorted

Coarse skewed

Mesokurtic

PM 2

2.092

0.652

0.23

0.904

Fine sand

Moderately well sorted

Fine skewed

Mesokurtic

PM 3

2.348

0.635

−0.517

0.839

Fine sand

Moderately well sorted

Very coarse skewed

Platykurtic

PM 4

2.385

0.553

−0.371

0.644

Fine sand

Moderately well sorted

Very coarse skewed

Very platykurtic

PM 5

2.367

0.538

−0.407

0.604

Fine sand

Moderately well sorted

Very coarse skewed

Very platykurtic

PM 6

2.065

0.503

0.541

0.644

Fine sand

Moderately well sorted

Very fine skewed

Very platykurtic

PM 7

2.378

0.527

−0.427

0.596

Fine sand

Moderately well sorted

Very coarse skewed

Very platykurtic

PM 8

2.383

0.525

−0.445

0.597

Fine sand

Moderately well sorted

Very coarse skewed

Very platykurtic

PM 9

1.629

1.012

−0.206

1.282

Medium sand

Poorly sorted

Coarse skewed

Leptokurtic

PM 10

1.991

0.621

0.262

2.428

Medium sand

Moderately well sorted

Fine skewed

Very leptokurtic

PM 11

1.96

0.615

0.248

2.4

Medium sand

Moderately well sorted

Fine skewed

Very leptokurtic

PM 12

1.477

0.594

−0.641

2.499

Medium sand

Moderately well sorted

Very coarse skewed

Very leptokurtic

PM 13

2.121

0.519

0.448

0.591

Fine sand

Moderately well sorted

Very fine skewed

Very platykurtic

PM 14

1.548

0.567

−0.308

2.597

Medium sand

Moderately well sorted

Very coarse skewed

Very leptokurtic

PM 15

1.085

0.991

−0.433

0.696

Medium sand

Moderately sorted

Very coarse skewed

Platykurtic

Appendix 2. Summary of Grain size distribution statistical measures of samples of northern part of study mentioned in the paper.

Sample number

Folk and Ward method (φ)

Folk and Ward method (description)

Mean

Sorting

Skewness

Kurtosis

Mean

Sorting

Skewness

Kurtosis

PMN1

2.48

0.621

−0.751

0.852

Fine sand

Moderately well sorted

Very coarse skewed

Platykurtic

PMN2

2.218

0.464

0.688

0.504

Fine sand

Well sorted

Very fine skewed

Very platykurtic

PMN3

2.866

0.339

−0.074

4.044

Fine sand

Very well sorted

Symmetrical

Extremely leptokurtic

PMN4

2.208

0.461

0.722

0.514

Fine sand

Well sorted

Very fine skewed

Very platykurtic

PMN5

2.175

0.587

0.383

0.904

Fine sand

Moderately well sorted

Very fine skewed

Mesokurtic

PMN6

2.545

0.556

−0.434

0.752

Fine sand

Moderately well sorted

Very coarse skewed

Platykurtic

PMN7

2.233

0.468

0.652

0.501

Fine sand

Well sorted

Very Fine skewed

Very platykurtic

PMN8

2.215

0.46

0.714

0.508

Fine sand

Well sorted

Very fine skewed

Very platykurtic

PMN9

1.847

0.947

−0.142

0.667

Medium sand

Moderately sorted

Coarse skewed

Very platykurtic

PMN10

2.219

0.468

0.696

0.508

Fine sand

Well sorted

Very fine skewed

Very platykurtic

Appendix 3. Linear Discriminant Function (LDF) after Sahu (1964) of the samples collected from the southern part of study area.

Sample number

Mean

Standard deviation

Skewness

Kurtosis

Y1

Remarks Y1

Y2

Remarks Y2

Y3

Remarks Y3

PM1

1.899

0.931

−0.144

1.099

0.1520182

Beach

104.4087

Shallow marine

−6.293986

Shallow marine

PM2

2.092

0.652

0.23

0.904

−3.555379

Aeolian

81.572634

Shallow marine

−4.209306

Shallow marine

PM3

2.348

0.635

−0.517

0.839

−3.201136

Aeolian

69.413472

Shallow marine

−0.292538

Shallow marine

PM4

2.385

0.553

−0.371

0.644

−4.604093

Aeolian

62.626828

Beach

−0.152389

Shallow marine

PM5

2.367

0.538

−0.407

0.604

−4.650213

Aeolian

59.87771

Beach

0.1600684

Fluvial

PM6

2.065

0.503

0.541

0.644

−5.55138

Aeolian

70.661975

Shallow marine

−4.243702

Shallow marine

PM7

2.378

0.527

−0.427

0.596

−4.716211

Aeolian

58.769939

Beach

0.3633121

Fluvial

PM8

2.383

0.525

−0.445

0.597

−4.70135

Aeolian

58.40253

Beach

0.4712958

Fluvial

PM9

1.629

1.012

−0.206

1.282

2.3966828

Beach

112.78742

Shallow marine

−7.437529

Fluvial

PM10

1.991

0.621

0.262

2.428

1.3375167

Beach

106.17854

Shallow marine

−3.975525

Shallow marine

PM11

1.96

0.615

0.248

2.4

1.3625929

Beach

104.43437

Shallow marine

−3.852244

Shallow marine

PM12

1.477

0.594

−0.641

2.499

5.1466772

Beach

80.940202

Shallow marine

0.5872489

Fluvial

PM13

2.121

0.519

0.448

0.591

−5.662596

Aeolian

69.948352

Shallow marine

−3.918468

Shallow marine

PM14

1.548

0.567

−0.308

2.597

4.3908736

Beach

87.834896

Shallow marine

−0.742602

Shallow marine

PM15

1.085

0.991

−0.433

0.696

2.8292868

Beach

86.554216

Shallow marine

−6.141678

Shallow marine

Appendix 4. Linear Discriminant Function (LDF) after Sahu (1964) of the samples collected from the northern part of study area.

Sample number

Mean

Standard deviation

Skewness

Kurtosis

Y1

Remarks Y1

Y2

Remarks Y2

Y3

Remarks Y3

PMN1

2.48

0.62

−0.751

0.852

−3.210907

Aeolian

66.327787

Shallow marine

1.044786

Shallow marine

PMN2

2.218

0.46

0.688

0.504

−6.978156

Aeolian

70.65

Shallow marine

−4.595734

Shallow marine

PMN3

2.866

0.34

−0.074

4.044

2.9418732

Beach

125.90546

Shallow marine

0.367646

Shallow marine

PMN4

2.208

0.46

0.722

0.514

−6.992209

Aeolian

71.111807

Shallow marine

−4.740162

Shallow marine

PMN5

2.175

0.59

0.383

0.904

−4.467417

Aeolian

80.35037

Shallow marine

−4.228775

Shallow marine

PMN6

2.545

0.56

−0.434

0.752

−4.695702

Aeolian

66.207704

Shallow marine

0.177574

Shallow marine

PMN7

2.233

0.47

0.652

0.501

−6.952471

Aeolian

70.422396

Shallow marine

−4.448104

Shallow marine

PMN8

2.215

0.46

0.714

0.508

−7.022668

Aeolian

70.90498

Shallow marine

−4.691241

Shallow marine

PMN9

1.847

0.95

−0.142

0.667

−0.900364

Beach

97.611502

Shallow marine

−6.602657

Shallow marine

PMN10

2.219

0.47

0.696

0.508

−6.972084

Aeolian

71.129491

Shallow marine

−4.667060

Shallow marine

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mohanty, S., Adak, S. & Sengupta, D. Granulometric analysis of beach sediments enriched in radioactivity along Podampata, east coast of Odisha, India. J Earth Syst Sci 130, 108 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-021-01600-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12040-021-01600-7

Keywords

Navigation