Journal of Geography and Cartography (2022) Volume 5 Issue 2 doi:10.24294/jgc.v5i2.1673 58 Original Research Article Geomorphology of the Guacimal River catchment, Costa Rica Adolfo Quesada-Román Escuela de Geografía, Universidad de Costa Rica, Costa Rica. E-mail: adolfo.quesadaroman@ucr.ac.cr ABSTRACT The Guacimal River catchment has an area of 181 km2 and is located in the NW of Costa Rica, between the coordi- nates 84.745° W-10.016° N and 84.909° W-10.325° N. In this territory, as in most of the country, detailed geomorpholog- ical studies are scarce; therefore, the objective of this paper is to present the geomorphological mapping at a scale of 1:25,000 of the Guacimal River, which allows us to explain the dynamics of the agents involved in the modeling of the catchment. The work methodology consisted of three stages: pre-mapping, field activity and post-mapping, which resulted in a map in which ten relief forms are represented, ordered according to their morphogenesis in endogenous modeled and exogenous (fluvial, gravitational and littoral). This document will be the base line for land use planning, both continental and coastal, and for local risk management. Keywords: Geomorphology; Dynamics; Morphogenesis; Landforms; Mapping ARTICLE INFO Received: 7 May 2022 Accepted: 20 June 2022 Available online: 25 June 2022 COPYRIGHT Copyright © 2022 by author(s). Journal of Geography and Cartography is published by EnPress Publisher LLC. This work is licensed under the Creative Com- mons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 In- ternational License (CC BY-NC 4.0). https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by- nc/4.0/ 1. Introduction Geomorphological mapping comprises a group of techniques that allow the evaluation of the terrain, considering aspects such as landforms (morphology), processes and forming agents, as well as the materials that constitute the relief of the Earth’s surface. In general, geomorphological maps can be identified in three types: the first consists of the elaboration of regional base surveys for land use planning and environmental impact management at scales of 1:25,000 or higher. The second are general geo- hazard or natural resource management maps at scales between 1:10,000 and 1:50,000. The third type is associated with geomorphological map- ping with a specific objective to delineate and categorize particular land- forms[1]. Geomorphological maps should contain all the basic elements of representation (morphography, morphometry, genesis and age of the relief) and can be classified thematically as morphostructural, morpho- metric, morphographic, morphogenetic, morphochronological, and mor- phodynamic[2,3]. Advances in geomorphological mapping prior to the 2000s were not really very new, because detailed mapping was time consuming and costly, and the focus was on specific themes or applications rather than holistic and scientific maps[4]. On the other hand, in recent years there has been a growing body of research involving spatio-temporal databases, GIS technology and modeling of various aspects of geomorphological systems to solve conceptual and practical problems such as natural haz- ard modeling, landscape evolution, shape relationships, geomorphic pro- cesses and patterns, and digital geomorphological mapping[5,6]. In many countries of the world and Latin America there are geomor- 59 phological maps from national scales (small scales at 1:1,000,000), regional scales (medium scales such as 1:200,000) and even detailed or large scales (1:25,000 or higher), according to the base cartog- raphy of each country[3]. In the case of Costa Rica, there are maps for the whole country at small scales of 1:1,000,000[7], medium scales of 1:350,000 and 1:100,000[8–10], and few at large scales of 1:50,000 [11,12]. However, there is no geomorphological map- ping at 1:50,000 scale for the whole country (base mapping), in addition to very few maps at scales 1:25,000 or larger[13–21]. This absence of detailed ge- omorphological cartography for Costa Rica creates the need to generate new maps that integrate the var- iables of genesis, formation processes, morphology, evolution and age of the relief, at scales that can be useful as instruments for land-use planning and risk management. Costa Rica is a country influenced by both en- dogenous and exogenous agents; while the former are governed by tectonics and volcanism, the latter by solar radiation, gravity, hydrometeorological events and human beings[22]. Given these tectonic, geological, geomorphological, climatological and even ecological conditions, the country is considered a political-administrative unit with intense geody- namics both internally and externally, which con- stantly shapes its relief through natural processes that could become dangerous for the population. Cur- rently, in the absence of effective land use planning in the country, factors such as the growth of the per- centage of urban vs. rural population, as well as the urban pressure that this generates, the change in land use and overuse, the demand for services and public and private infrastructure, water vulnerability with the contamination of surface and groundwater, as well as the development of rings of poverty and slums must be added[23,24]. Practically 90% of the in- cidences and records of disasters in the last four dec- ades for Costa Rica are associated with floods and landslides[24,25]. Therefore, the need to develop detailed geomor- phological studies for baseline studies for the envi- ronmental viability required to grant endorsements for cantonal (municipal) regulatory plans, as a nec- essary input in the process of land use planning at the local level in the country[24]. On the other hand, it is imperative to use detailed geomorphology to deter- mine the areas susceptible to floods and landslides, since it favors risk management based on suscepti- bility models and probability of occurrence of haz- ardous processes. The objective of this work was to carry out geomorphological mapping at a scale of 1:25,000 of the Guacimal River catchment, which is accompanied by an analysis of the physical-geo- graphical characteristics that explain its morpholog- ical dynamics, and of each of the mapped land- forms based on their tectonic, gravitational and fluvial morphogenesis. 2. Physical-geographical characteri- zation The Guacimal River catchment is a complex territorial unit in a reduced geographic space, with an extension of 181 km2, located in the NW of Costa Rica, between the coordinates 84.745° W 10.016° N and 84.909° W 10.325° N. This territory presents di- verse types of lithology, in addition to tectonic, geo- morphologic, hydrographic, edaphic, and land use changes in an intense dynamic that model this relief in multiple ways, given the tropical characteristics of climatic and ecological transition between the Cen- tral Pacific and Northern Costa Rica. This catchment is located on the Pacific slope, specifically in the Puntarenas canton, and its three main tributaries are the San Luis, Veracruz and Acapulco rivers, forming the Guacimal River that flows into the Gulf of Ni- coya (Figure 1). The endogenous and exogenous dynamics of the Guacimal watershed are explained based on a physical-geographical analysis of the variables that compose it, and make it a region with a constant modeling of its morphologies, processes that could be dangerous for the population intervene. The characteristics studied were geology, precipitation, soils, vegetation and land use. In this sense, the ge- ology of the study area is composed of several for- mations, lithodems and geological groups, which have been studied by the Directorate of Geology and Mines (DGM) in conjunction with the Czech Geo- logical Survey[26,27]. The formations that make up the catchment are Monteverde, Aguacate Group, Punta 60 Carballo, Descartes, San Buenaventura, Bagaces and Quaternary fluvial deposits[28]. Figure 1. Location in the regional context of the Guacimal River catchment. The Monteverde formation of Lower Pleisto- cene age, is mainly located at altitudes above 1,000 masl; it corresponds to the upper parts of the Tilarán mountain range and is composed of fresh andesitic to andesite-basaltic undisturbed lavas; in smaller quantities there are pyroclastic rocks (breccias and tuffs) and lahars deposits[28]. The Miocene-Pliocene Guacimal Granite-Gabbro formation is located at northwest of the study area and outcrops as an intru- sive body of granites, quartz monzodiorites and gab- bros[29]. The Aguacate Group, of Miocene Pliocene age, is part of the ancient volcanic arc composed mainly of basaltic to basaltic-andesitic lavas, pyro- clastic rocks, breccias and subordinate volcanoclas- tic sediments; its origin is eminently volcanic, both extrusive and intrusive, related to fault zones or in- trusions that give rise to hydrothermal alteration of regional character[28,30]. The Holocene fluvial sedi- ment deposits correspond to the marine-coastal tran- sition part, with depositional formations during re- cent periods; they are mainly composed of fluvial deposits, sands, gravels and blocks, in which a sedi- mentation regime fed by material coming from the fluvial system predominates[30]. According to the climatic classification of Costa Rica by Solano and Villalobos[31], the Guaci- mal River catchment belongs to the Tropical Pacific Region; part of the area of this catchment corre- sponds to the Central Subregion of the North Pacific (SCPN), and another part coincides with the Western Subregion of the Nicoya Peninsula (SOPN). The first portion has a total annual rainfall of up to 1,800 mm, while the second reaches 2,385 mm, which contrib- utes to lush vegetation, especially in the SOPN. The distribution of the soils is explained by the parental material that gave rise to them, basically a Miocene volcanism that has developed deep weath- ering crusts containing ultisols, practically through- out the catchment. In the higher altitude areas, there are small sectors where ultisols predominate, while the entisols are linked to fluvial activity and the reju- venation of the parent material. Inceptisols are found in the lower catchment and in the town of San Mar- cos; here the weathering processes have a moderate intensity[32]. Vegetation is determined by Holdridge’s classi- fication of life zones, based on variables such as al- titude, temperature and humidity. In the upper and middle part of the catchment, there are low montane rainforests, very humid low montane, very humid premontane, humid premontane and humid tropical forests. In the lower part of the catchment, there are tropical humid transition to dry and premontane hu- mid forests with basal transition[33]. In the lower catchment, near the mouth of the Guacimal River, there is mangrove forest in the transition between the continental part and the Gulf of Nicoya. This forest is composed of five mangrove species: red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle), salt mangrove (Rhizophora racemosa and Avicenia germinans), piñuela man- grove (Pelliciera rhizophorae), and the mangrove mariquita or Laguncularia racemosa[34,35]. Land uses in the catchment are varied and are developed according to its altitude, geomorphology, soil types and climatic conditions[36]. The predomi- nant uses of the watershed are secondary forests and pastures. On the other hand, other uses such as pri- mary forest, rice cultivation, coffee, sugarcane, for- est plantations, charral and tacotal, wetlands and ur- ban areas are dispersed and in small extensions. Livestock and shrimp farming are also developed. 3. Methodology The development of the geomorphological mapping of the Guacimal River catchment was based 61 on three phases: pre-mapping, field work and post- mapping[36]. The pre-mapping phase identified the region of interest and the purpose of the map. Re- mote sensing information was obtained (for this work we used the Quick Bird 2013 satellite image, scale 1:5,000), as well as geological[27,28,37–39]; and edaphological information[32]. As a first step, all the rivers and tributaries of the catchment were digitized in order to have a better knowledge of the erosive/accumulative characteris- tics of the study area. An initial legend was prepared based on a morphogenetic classification[2,40,41], which separates the landforms according to their origin into endogenous, endogenous modeled and exogenous; the preliminary geomorphological map was made from this legend. Subsequently, the relief forms were digitized based on an interpretation of aerial images (i.e. aerial photographs or satellite im- ages), in this case the QuickBird satellite image (2013). Subsequent analysis resulted in the initial ge- omorphological map, which was corroborated in the field. In the next stage, a geospatial database was de- signed with all the variables organized in a geo- graphic information systems program (digitized riv- ers, geology, landforms, towns, roads, and others), and a preliminary fieldwork map was constructed at an appropriate scale (1:25,000). A fieldwork sheet was then created with relevant information for each geoform: slope, cover, dominant processes, soil type and anthropogenic activities that could modify the local dynamics. All the necessary permits were also requested, as well as access to the places of geomor- phological interest, and the geomorphological sur- vey was carried out. During the fieldwork phase, the routes to be used were delimited at times and distances consistent with the work plan. A satellite navigation device was used to mark the routes and points of interest. The cards prepared in the previous phase were completed, in which the consecutive numbers of the photographs taken for each point of interest were also noted. Field work was optimized to include a large number of landforms, especially those that generated doubts in the preliminary cartography. The post-mapping phase involved downloading the information from the satellite navigator and pro- cessing it in the pre-existing database. The field data were compared with the preliminary results of the analysis of the remote sensing information (aerial photographs and satellite images). On the other hand, the photographs containing the forms, processes and dynamics corroborated in the field were integrated, and in parallel, a description of each of the relief forms was begun, based on the morphogenetic clas- sification made in the first preliminary legend, as an aid to the analysis of the study area. Finally, the final geomorphological map was edited and published, ac- companied by a legend containing colors according to their genesis, dynamics, morphology, evolution and age[4]. The output scale, given the extension of the catchment and for reasons of space in this paper, for the final product was 1:200,000. 4. Results and discussion Geomorphology is explained on the basis of the morphogenetic classification of landforms, whose origin can be “endogenous”, “endogenous modeled” and “exogenous”[2]. Those of endogenous origin de- velop from the internal dynamics of the Earth and its representation on the surface of tectonic and volcanic processes that keep their original morphologies. The modeled endogenous character is linked to geoforms that have been modified by exogenous agents and that still keep some characteristics of the original en- dogenous relief. On the other hand, relief forms of exogenous origin are those that have been modeled entirely by exogenous agents: water, ice, sea forces, wind, dissolution of carbonate rocks and gravity. The morphogenetics of the Guacimal River catchment includes reliefs of endogenous origin, modeled by volcanism configured by fluvial and Mi- ocene mass removal processes, as well as tectonic geoforms modified by gravitational and fluvial dy- namics. On the other hand, with an even wider de- velopment in its extension, the morphologies of ex- ogenous origin have been generated by fluvial dynamics, product of a tropical rainfall pattern that hovers around or even exceeds 2,000 mm per year, in addition to changing temperature conditions throughout the day that favor physical and chemical weathering processes, forming extensive weathering 62 crusts (weathering profiles). In addition to the re- gional climatological conditions of the catchment, there are particular characteristics of slopes, weath- ered substrates and the presence of disjunctive struc- tures (including faults, fractures and diaclases), which favor the development of mass removal pro- cesses that shape the slopes of the upper and middle catchment. The inventory of landforms carried out explains each of the morphologies based on their en- dogenous modeled and exogenous origin, which fa- cilitated the analysis of the particular characteristics of genesis, morphology, dynamics, evolution and age of the landforms that make up the catchment (Figure 2). Figure 2. Geomorphology of the Guacimal River catchment. 4.1 Endogenous modeled relief These are morphologies inherited by volcanic dynamics or generated by regional tectonics[42] that have been modeled by exogenous agents and are composed of three geoforms: mountain slopes of volcanic origin modeled by fluvial action with for- ests, mountain slopes of volcanic origin config- ured by hillside processes with pastures, and tectonic hillsides modeled by fluvial and gravitational action. The slopes modeled by fluvial action with forests are located in the mountain zone; they have a volcanic origin dating back to the Miocene and form the regions with the highest slopes and altitudes in the study area (Figure 3a). These slopes are concave and straight with a high density of forests that confer certain apparent stability on soils that are highly weathered from this igneous material (Figure 3b). Precipitation in the regions associated with these morphologies easily exceeds 2,500 mm per year, which explains their morphologies of well-devel- oped canyons and V-shaped valleys, a product of 63 erosion and its alternation with sporadic slope pro- cesses such as landslides and slides that occur during periods of extraordinary rainfall or due to the effect of local and regional seismicity. The density, as well as the depth of the dissection, is high, as a result of the presence of disjunctive structures such as faults and fractures, slope and continuous geomorphologi- cal evolution, from ancient volcanic cones reduced to their relict stage, even volcanic necks can be ob- served in the middle catchment. Figure 3. Endogenous modeled reliefs: (a) panoramic view from the upper part of the watershed; (b) slopes modeled by fluvial ac- tion with forests in the Monteverde Biological Reserve; (c) slopes configured by reptation and creeping; (d) tectonic hillsides. These morphologies are characterized by wide V-shaped valleys, slopes of more than 45°, and highly altered edaphic material, as a result of the weathering of the materials contributed by constant slope movements, especially reptation and stream, due to intense surface and subsurface runoff (Figure 3c). These vulnerable conditions of the slopes are ex- plained by changes in land use from forest to pasture and agriculture, especially during the last 100 years. The usual process of degradation of these land- forms begins with the generation of arroyos that erode the surface layers of the soil which, in their most advanced stage, cause creeping; subsequently, furrows are created, which, if they continue to grow, could develop gullies or even badlands. It is im- portant to emphasize that these areas are the ones that present the greatest number of hillside processes such as landslides and landslides that can constantly affect the road network, aqueducts, electrical and tel- ephone networks of the catchment. The tectonic hills are a group of hills not ex- ceeding 300 m of relative relief, located in the middle catchment of the Guacimal River, which are mod- eled by fluvial and gravitational action (Figure 3d). Their location and origin are due to sedimentary ma- terials from the Miocene and Plio-Pleistocene that have been deformed by the action of a transcurrent dextral fault[27], which generates a series of shutter 64 ridges or compression domes, product of the ten- sion/pressure generated by one block with respect to the other in its relative movement. These morpholo- gies mark the transition between the upper and lower catchment, since there are no alluvial fans or a devel- oped piedmont, what describes the middle catchment are these tectonic ridges, which have smoothed slopes, with concave slopes which, in some cases, have semi-flat surfaces on their summits. At present, vast extensions of these landforms are used for ex- tensive cattle ranching (pastures) and, to a lesser ex- tent, for forest protection, which causes these geoforms to suffer from creeping processes and, in some cases, other types of mass movements such as landslides. 4.2 Exogenous relief The exogenous reliefs present are fluvial, grav- itational and littoral. The first ones concentrate flu- vial valleys, flood plains and subhorizontal sedimen- tary surfaces; on the other hand, the gravitational reliefs concentrate a large sector of a debris ava- lanche and other types of particular mass movements such as landslides, landslides and flows, and the lit- toral reliefs only consist of the land-sea transition de- fined by an estuary. Fluvial reliefs are composed of morphologies that are mostly due to erosional processes and those in which sedimentation dominates their dynamics[43]. Erosive fluvial reliefs are composed of rivers and flu- vial valleys (in V); the former is located throughout the Guacimal River catchment and tend to have very different drainage patterns or architectures, depend- ing on tectonic, lithological and slope conditions. In the mountain zone, dendritic and subdendritic drain- age patterns dominate, especially near the towns of Monteverde, Santa Elena, San Luis and Guacimal. In the transition to the middle and lower zones there are rectangular drains associated with the tectonic hills associated with the diaclases and faults that exert structural control. In the flood plains and subhorizon- tal sedimentary surfaces, accumulation forms domi- nate with parallel, braided and meandering patterns, the latter in the vicinity of the mouth with estuary morphology in the Gulf of Nicoya. On the other hand, the fluvial valleys are located in the mountain zone and in the fluvial headwaters of the tectonic hills, both in the high mountain zone and in the mid- dle part, respecting the drainage patterns drawn by the rivers from their tectonic, structural and exoge- nous modeling control. The cumulative fluvial reliefs are repre- sented by flood plains (intermontane and broad-sur- face) and subhorizontal sedimentary surfaces. The intermontane floodplains mark an important change in slope between the fluvial valleys and mountain slopes, which indicates a deposition process predom- inantly on slopes of less than 15°, starting from the Guacimal settlement in the middle-upper catchment; their development is associated with the slopes mod- eled by reptation and stream, which is linked to an enormous contribution of sediments from the erosion of these adjacent morphologies. On the other hand, flood plains with wide surfaces (Figure 4a) define slopes of less than 2°, in which seasonal and extraor- dinary flooding processes occur, which could even affect human activities on the banks of the bodies of water; it is important to take into account that these morphologies begin when the change in slope of the terrain descends considerably and the width of the alluvial plains increases; their location includes com- munities such as Judas de Chomes and extends to the estuary and Coco beach. Subhorizontal sedimentary surfaces (Figure 4b) are morphologies with slopes less than 2° that define large alluvial plains and mark the most depressed part of the Guacimal River catch- ment; in these areas it is common to develop sugar cane, pineapple and pasture crops, taking advantage of the fertility of these nutrient-rich alluvial soils. The gravitational relief consists basically of a segment of the deposits of an ancient debris ava- lanche, associated with andesites and lahars of the Monteverde formation, which in turn draws its mar- gins near the communities of Santa Elena, Monte- verde and around the Monteverde Biological Re- serve. They are reliefs softened by the emplacement of poorly classified material, which originally were sediments that varied from sands to angular mega- blocks, which have been highly weathered by heavy rainfall and temperature changes in the region, which has favored the development of deep weathering crusts (weathering profiles), and soils that harbor a 65 high ecological diversity and have a slight apparent stability of their slopes. The coastal relief only highlights the develop- ment of an estuary (Figure 4c), a morphology that outlines the land-sea transition, in which fluvial, tidal and wave dynamics alternate. This geoform has particular edaphic characteristics, with constantly flooded soils in anoxic conditions, covered by highly biodiverse mangrove vegetation, which also provides important ecosystem and functional ser- vices such as carbon sinks and barriers against storms that may affect the coasts[44]. Figure 4. Exogenous reliefs: (a) broad floodplains; (b) subhorizontal sedimentary surfaces; (c) estuary: mouth of the Guacimal River in the Gulf of Nicoya, providing fresh water to the Chomes Mangrove. 5. Conclusions A geomorphological map was developed with ten landforms classified as endogenous modeled and exogenous (fluvial, gravitational and coastal). This map at a scale of 1:25,000 is an instrument that facil- itates the understanding of the geoforms that make up a catchment that marks an intense transition be- tween mountainous zones, in which fluvial-gravita- tional modeling dominates towards a middle catch- ment with a predominance of the tectonic effects of a system of transcurrent faults that model the lomer- ios that function as the transition between the upper and lower parts of the catchment; on the other hand, the lower zone is drawn from the development of broad flood plains, subhorizontal sedimentary sur- faces and the estuary that mark the boundary with the Gulf of Nicoya as well as the Pacific Ocean. The un- derstanding of the geomorphology of the Guacimal River catchment requires not only a description of the relief forms that characterize it, but also the ex- planation of its dynamics from its morphogenesis, the architectures as well as its resulting morpholo- gies and how it has evolved over time, specified in its relative ages. The absence of geomorphological maps at de- tailed scales such as 1:25,000 or higher in Costa Rica, make this study a novel contribution to the understanding of the relief forms of watersheds, with a rapid transition and intense dynamics between their mountainous areas and their mouths. In addition, the scarcity of detailed geomorphological cartography increases the backwardness in fundamental issues such as land use planning and risk management in a country with severe problems in the planning of its territory and constantly affected by earthquakes, vol- canic eruptions, hydro-meteorological phenomena such as storms, volcanic eruptions and volcanic erup- tions, hydro-meteorological phenomena such as tropical storms (tropical cyclones and low pressure systems), cold fronts, easterly waves and the Inter- tropical Convergence Zone, which can generate dis- asters that impact the population directly or indi- rectly, but with high intensity. On the other hand, the knowledge of the forms and processes of the relief also has an added value for the regulation of the ter- ritory, explanation of the ecosystems and the great biodiversity of one of the most important tour- ist destinations in the country, such as the area of Monteverde and Santa Elena. Conflict of interest The author declared no conflict of interest. References 1. Griffits J. Geomorphological mapping. In: Goudie 66 A (editor). England: Encyclopedia of Geomorphol- ogy. Routledge: Taylor & Francis Group; 2004. 2. Lugo J. Elements of applied geomorphology (Car- tographic methods) (in Spanish). Ciudad de México, México: Instituto de Geografía, UNAM; 1988. 3. Peña-Monné JL. Geomorphological cartography: Fundamentals and applications (in Spanish). Lo- groño: Geoforma Ediciones; 1997. 4. Gustavsson M, Kolstrup E, Seijmonsbergen AC. A new symbol-and-GIS based detailed geomorpholog- ical mapping system: Renewal of a scientific disci- pline for understanding landscape development. Ge- omorphology 2006; 77(1–2): 90–111. 5. Bishop MP, James LA, Shroder Jr JF, et al. Geospa- tial technologies and digital geomorphological map- ping: Concepts, issues and research. Geomorphol- ogy 2012; 137(1): 5–26. 6. Bishop MP. Remote sensing and GIScience in geo- morphology: Introduction and overview. In: Shroder JF (editor). Treatise on geomorphology. USA: Elsevier and Academic Press; 2013. 7. Bergoeing JP, Brenes LG. Geomorphologic map of Costa Rica 1:1,000,000 (in Spanish). San Jose: Instituto Geográfico Nacional; 1978. 8. Bergoeing JP, Brenes LG, Malavassi E. Geomor- phology of the North Pacific of Costa Rica. Scale 1:100,000 (in Spanish). Costa Rica: Instituto Geográfico Nacional; 1982. 9. Bergoeing JP, Brenes LG, Salas D. Geomorpho- logic Atlas of Costa Rica. Scale 1:350,000 (in Spanish). San José: Editorial SIEDIN, Universidad de Costa Rica; 2010. 10. Bergoeing JP, Brenes LG, Protti R. Geomorphologi- cal atlas of the Caribbean of Costa Rica. Scale 1:100,000. San José, Costa Rica: Editorial SIEDIN, Universidad de Costa Rica; 2010. 11. Bergoeing JP, Malavassi E. Geomorphologic chart of the Central Valley. Scale 1:50,000 (9 sheets plus text) (in Spanish). Costa Rica: National Geographic Institute; 1981. 12. Bergoeing JP, Brenes LG, Malavassi E. Geomor- phology of the Barranca sheet. Scale 1:50,000 (in Spanish). Costa Rica: Instituto Geográfico Nacional; 1982. 13. Quesada-Román A, Zamorano-Orozco JJ. Geomor- phology of the upper general river basin, Costa Rica. Journal of Maps 2019; 15(2): 95–101. doi: 10.1080/17445647.2018.1548384. 14. Quesada-Román A, Stoffel M, Ballesteros-Cánovas JA, et al. Glacial geomorphology of the Chirripó National Park, Costa Rica. Journal of Maps 2019; 15(2): 538–545. doi: 10.1080/17445647.2019.1625822. 15. Quesada-Román A, Pérez-Briceño PM. Geomor- phology of the Caribbean coast of Costa Rica. Jour- nal of Maps 2019; 15(2): 363–371. doi: 10.1080/17445647.2019.1600592. 16. Camacho ME, Quesada-Román A, Mata R, et al. Soil-geomorphology relationships of alluvial fans in Costa Rica. Geoderma Regional 2020; 21: e00258. doi: 10.1016/j.geodrs.2020.e00258. 17. Quesada-Román A, Mata-Cambronero E. The geo- morphic landscape of the Barva volcano, Costa Rica. Physical Geography 2020; 42(3): 265–282. doi: 10.1080/02723646.2020.1759762. 18. Granados-Bolaños S, Quesada-Román A, Alvarado G. Low-cost UAV applications in dynamic tropical volcanic landforms. Journal of Volcanology and Ge- othermal Research 2021; 410: 107143. doi: 10.1016/j.jvolgeores.2020.107143. 19. Quesada-Román A. Landslides and floods zonation using geomorphological analyses in a dynamic catchment of Costa Rica. Revista Cartográfica 2021; 102: 125–138. doi: 10.35424/rcarto.i102.901. 20. Arroyo-Solórzano M, Quesada-Román A, Vargas- Bolaños C. Morphotectonic-volcanic units of the northwest sector of Poás volcano, Costa Rica. In- vestigaciones Geográficas, Boletín del Instituto de Geografía 2021; 105: e60279. doi: 10.14350/rig.60279. 21. Quesada-Román A, Castro-Chacón JP, Feoli-Bo- raschi S. Geomorphology, land use, and environ- mental impacts in a densely populated urban catch- ment of Costa Rica. Journal of South American Earth Sciences 2021; 112(1): 103560. doi: 10.1016/j.jsames.2021.103560 22. Quesada-Román A. Geomorphological hazards: Floods and slope processes in the upper catchment of the General River, Pérez Zeledón, Costa Rica (in Spanish) [MSc thesis]. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México; 2016. 23. Alfaro E, Pérez-Briceño PM, Facio R. Analysis of the impact of meteorological phenomena in Costa Rica, Central America, originating in the surround- ing seas (in Spanish). Revista de Climatología 2014; 14: 1–11. 24. Quesada-Román A. Implications in disaster and en- vironmental risk management in the Central Valley in the last thirty years (1985–2015) (in Spanish). In: Vigesimoprimer Informe Estado de la Nación en Desarrollo Humano Sostenible. Consejo Nacional de Rectores; 2015. 25. Red De Estudios Sociales En PrevenciÓN De Desastres En AmÉ-Rica Latina (La Red). DesIn- ventar: Costa Rica disaster effects inventory sys- tem between 1970 and 2015 (in Spanish). Ciudad de Panamá, Panamá; 2016. 26. Chinchilla-Ramos R. Determination of land use and forest fragmentation in the Pájaro Campana Biolog- ical Corridor: Promoting conservation and inte- grated management strategies (in Spnaish) [BSc thesis]. San José: Escuela de Geografía, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Costa Rica; 2013. 27. Denyer P, Alvarado GE. Geological map of Costa Rica. Scale 1:400,000 (in Spanish). San José: Libre- ría Francesa; 2007. 28. Zácek V, Vorel T, Kycl P, et al. Geology and stratig- raphy of sheet 3246-II, Miramar, Costa Rica (in 67 Spanish). Revista Geológica de América Central 2012; (47): 7–54. 29. Kussmaul S. Petrology of the Neogene intrusive rocks of Costa Rica (in Spanish). Revista Geológica de América Central 1987; 7: 83–111. 30. Kussmaul S. Stratigraphy of igneous rocks (in Spanish). In: Denyer P, Kussmaul S (editors). Cartago: Editorial Tecnológica de Costa Rica, Geología de Costa Rica; 2000. p. 63–86. 31. Solano JR, Villalobos R. Physiographic aspects ap- plied to a sketch of Geographical-Climate Regional- ization of Costa Rica. Tópicos de Meteorología y Oceanografía 2001; 8: 26–39. 32. Mata R, Sandoval D. Digital soil map of Costa Rica. Scale 1:200,000 (in Spanish). Laboratorio de Recursos Naturales. Centro de Investigaciones Agronómicas. San José: Universidad de Costa Rica; 2013. 33. Bolaños R, Watson VY, Tosi J. Ecological map of Costa Rica (Life Zones), according to the world life zone classification system by L.R. Holdridge). Scale 1:750,000 (in Spanish). San José, Costa Rica: Centro Científico Tropical; 2005. 34. Zamora P. Mangroves (in Spanish). In: Nielsen Muñoz V, Quesada Alpízar M (eds.). San José, Costa Rica: Informe Técnico Žáček: Ambientes Marino Costeros de Costa Rica (Capítulo III); 2006. 35. Cortés J, Wehrtmann IS. Diversity of marine habi- tats of the Caribbean and Pacific of Costa Rica (in Spanish). Marine Biodiversity of Costa Rica, Cen- tral America. Dordrecht: Springer; 2009. p. 1–45. 36. Otto JC, Smith MJ. Geomorphological mapping. In: Clarke L, Nield J (editors). Geomorphological tech- niques. (Chap. 2, Sec. 6). London: British Society for Geomorphology; 2013. 37. Žáček V, Vorel T, Kycl P, et al. Geological map 1:50,000, Sheet 3246-II Miramar. Transverse Mer- cator projection (in Spanish). Praga: Servicio Geo- lógico Checo; 2010. 38. Žáček V, Vorel T, Kycl P, et al. Geological map 1:50,000, Sheet 3246-III Chapernal. Transverse Mercator Projection (in Spanish). Praga: Servicio Geológico Checo; 2010. 39. Žáček V, Vorel T, Kycl P, et al. Geological map 1:50,000, Sheet 3246-IV Boards. Transverse Merca- tor Projection (in Spanish). Praga: Servicio Geo- lógico Checo; 2010. 40. Quesada-Román A, Tefogoum GZ, Pérez-Umaña D. Geomorphosites comparative analysis in Costa Rica and Cameroon volcanoes. Geoheritage 2020; 12(4): 1–14. doi: 10.1007/s12371-020-00515-x. 41. Quesada-Román A. Review of the geomorphologi- cal effects of the 1991 Limón earthquake. Revista Geológica de América Central 2021; 65: 1–13. doi: 15517/rgac.v0i65.46697. 42. Quesada-Román A. Landslide risk index map at the municipal scale for Costa Rica. International Jour- nal of Disaster Risk Reduction 2021; 56: 102144. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102144. 43. Quesada-Román A, Villalobos-Portilla E, Campos- Durán D. Hydrometeorological disasters in urban areas of Costa Rica, Central America. Environmen- tal Hazards 2021; 20(3): 264–278. doi: 10.1080/17477891.2020.1791034 44. Acuña-Piedra JF, Quesada-Román A. Multide- cadal biogeomorphic dynamics of a deltaic man- grove forest in Costa Rica. Ocean and Coastal Man- agement 2021; 211: 105770. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2021.105770.