Multivariate analysis of Cauvery River water quality around KRS

Symposium of Lake 2008
Multivariate analysis of Cauvery River
water quality around KRS Dam,
Dam
Karnataka, India
S.SRIKANTASWAMY*, SIAMAK GHOLAMI DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, UNIVERSITY OF MYSORE,
MANASAGANGOTRI,
MANASAGANGOTRI
MYSORE 570 006, KARNATAKA, INDIA
*Corresponding Author- E amil: [email protected]
Introduction
Ri
ti l for
f the
th survival
i l off any forms
f
lif
y Rivers
are essential
off life.
y Some loads of waste from industries, domestic sewage and agricultural
y
y
y
y
y
practices find their way into rivers, resulting in large scale deterioration
of the water quality
Increasing urbanization and industrialization has been deteriorating the
water quality of the reservoir resources as discharge of sewage and
municipal wastes into water bodies have negative impacts
In the present study water quality analysis of Cauvery River around
Krishna Raja Sagar (KRS) Dam has been carried out in order to
determine the sources responsible for deterioration of water quality for
various uses.
uses
More than 70 percent of the drinking water supply to Mysore city is from
the Cauvery River, hence it is important to monitor the water quality of
Cauveryy River
This river is also under environmental stress due to siltation, human
encroachment, high macrophytic population and sewage in put from
various sources
There are number of discharging loads of sewage, domestic waste water
and industrial effluents directly into the river
University Mysore
•The River basin of Cauvery is one of the major rivers of India.
•Cauvery River originates at Talakavery in the Western Gates in the state of Karnataka,
flows generally south and east through Karnataka, and there are many tributaries .
•Studies were carried out around the KRS dam and downstream. There are activities like
irrigation, agricultural and industrial basin around the dam and river
y
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
University Mysore
Location - Across River Cauvery near
Kannambadi Village
a)Latitude 120 25' 30" N
b)Longitude 760 34' 30" E
c)Taluk Srirangapatna
d)District Mandya
Level of Storages.
i) Full reservoir level (FRL) 124.80 Feet
ii) Minimum drawdown level (MDDL)
74.00 Feet
iii) Dead storage level 60.00 Feet
This river flows through Karnataka and Tamil Nadu and across the south of
Deccan plateau through the southeastern lowlands, emptying into the Bay of
g through
g two p
p mouths.
Bengal
principal
Fig re2: Locations map of water
Figure2:
ater quality
q alit monitoring Station around
aro nd K.R.S.
K R S Dam
University Mysore
Sampling collection Stations
y BD1 =Upstream of dam below the high way bridge of Hemavathi River
y BD2 =Upstream of dam below the high way bridge of Cauvery River
y BD3 =Upstream of dam below the high way bridge of Laxmanatheertha River.
y D1 = Upstream of dam below the railway bridge (Sagarakatte rail Station). y D2 =Upstream of dam at a distance of 5 Kms from the gate of the dam.
y R1 =At the gate of the dam.
y R2 =At KRS garden (Brindavan).
y R3 =Downstream of dam near bridge. y R4 =Downstream of River at Balamurikshetra.
y R5 =Downstream of River at Ranganathittu Bird Sanctuary.
y R6 =Downstream of River near first bridge at Srirangapathana Station.
y R7 =Downstream of River under the second bridge at Srirangapathana Station.
y R8 =Downstream of River at Sangam, at confluence of two tributaries of Cauvery river.
Materials and methods
y Water samples collection and analysis were carried out as per standard
y
y
y
y
y
y
method of sampling techniques, APHA, (1992).
Various physico-chemical parameters like
temperature,
temperature pH,
pH EC,
EC alkalinity,
alkalinity total hardness,
hardness total dissolved solids
(TDS), Ca+2, Mg+2, Na+, K+, chloride (Cl-), sulfate (SO4 -2), nitrate (NO3), phosphate (PO4-3), dissolved oxygen (DO) and COD were determined using
standard methods.
The temperature of the water was recorded using a thermoprobe on the spot.
Electrical conductivity and pH were also recorded in the lab, DO was
determined using Winkler’s method on the site itself.
Calcium and magnesium were estimated using EDTA Titrimetry, Sodium and
potassium by flame photometry, chlorides by Argentometry, sulfate by
Nephalometry, and phosphates by molybdenum-blue complex formation using
a spectrophotometer.
Nitrate was estimated by acid treatment followed by Spectrophotometry and
estimation of COD was done by reflux Titrimetry.
The q
quality
y assurance and q
quality
yp
procedure were also used as described in
APHA.
The data were statistically analyzed for t-test and inter correlations matrix
using the SPSS 15 software package
University Mysore
Results and Discussion
y Ca+2, which is a major component of natural waters comes mainly from the
y
y
II-Winter/2007-08
III-Summer/2008
II-Winter/2007-08
40
III-Summer/2008
40
Mg+2(mg
g/l)
y
Ca +2 (mg//l)
y
rocks, seepage, wastewater etc.
Ca+2 is varied from 8.8 to 38.5 mg/l in upstream, and in down stream remained
low (26.47 mg /l) during winter, But Mg+2 varied from 2.5 to 36.1 mg/l in the study area. Fig
study area Fig 3(a-d)
3(a d)
Ca+2, Mg+2levels in the summer were more than in the winter, belongs to same
sources. This indicated of precipitation of Mg+2 in downstream zones is due to vegetation, which is also shown by greater hardness of the g
yg
downstream at R8
This can be correlated to SO4-2, HCO3-, Cl- , which depends on mining sources.
The concentration of Mg+2 was more in upstream but the concentration was lower (10 to 20 mg /L) in the downstream.
30
20
30
20
10
10
0
0
stations
Figure 3a , variations of Ca +2
stations
Figure 3b , variations of Mg+2
University Mysore
y At the Station of BD3 the Na+ concentration increased sharply to 200 mg/l in
upstream and then decrease after mixing with Water in reservoir to 50 mg/l and
then increasingg in Cauveryy downstream,, after the influence of agricultural
wastes p
g
to 250 mg/l in station Sangam (R8) .
y The levels of Na+ were elevated in the range of 35.5– 250 mg /L. Such high levels
of Na+ would be a potential pollution for the crops if the water were used for
irrigation.
y The presence of K+ in the natural waters is very important since it is an essential
nutrient element for plant.
+
y The
Th concentration
t ti off K+,
was quite
it low
l in
i summer (2 to
t 14 mg /L) in
i the
th
downstream due to influence of agricultural waste water, which increased up to
14mg/l in the lower segment, the concentrations were higher during winter (Fig.3d).
II-Winter/2007-08
lll-Summer/2008
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
K + (mg/l)
Na + (mg/l)
ll-Winter/2007-08
III-Summer/2008
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
stations
stations
Figure 3d , variations of K +
Figure 3c , variations of Na+
University Mysore
•HCO3- and excess of Cl- in river water is usually taken as an index of pollution
Desirable recommended limit for chloride is 250 mg/l by ISI
• The HCO3- is compared with chloride ion, it is having less tolerance value due to
mineral sources as shown in correlation matrix (table 4).
p
g HCO3- maximum up
p to 181.65 mg/l
g ((Fig.3e
g and
•Upstream
at Station BD2 is having
table 2), but tended to remain within permissible limits.
•During the summer, the Cl ion of Cauvery River was between (27–133.5 mg /l). The
concentration of Cl- in the river water was slightly higher in the summer sampling
than in winter (Fig.3f),.
III-Summer/2008
300
II-Winter/2007-08
Cl - (mg/l)
C
HCO
O3- (mg/l)
II-Winter/2007-08
250
200
150
III-Summer/2008
300
250
200
150
100
100
50
50
0
0
stations
stations
Figure 3e, variations of HCO3-
figure 3f , variations of Cl - (2008)
University Mysore
-2
y The SO4 concentration in the river varied from 0.12 to 3.16 mg/l in Cauvery
upstream and increased from 0.41 to 3.16 mg/l in Cauvery downstream.
-2
y The concentration of SO4 was much lower during Winter (Fig.3g).
Summer-08
-2
SO
O 4 (mg/l)
Winte r-2007-08
10
1
0 .1
0 .0 1
stations
Figure 3g , variations of SO4
University Mysore
-2
•PO4-3 may enter into surface water from human-generated wastes and natural run-off. The
concentration of PO4-3 was low in the river water, ranging from (0.0048 to 0.05mg/l) in Cauvery
upstream.
•PO4-3 is correlated to K+ and is depended on pollutants in river water. This is due to agricultural
runoff containing fertilizers as well as waste water containing detergents etc. which to increase PO4-3
pollution in the downstream of water.
3
• The
during
3h)
Th concentration
t ti off PO4-3 was much
h lower
l
d i Summer(
S
( Figure
Fi
•Due to high activity of alga in summer NO3- is more than PO4-3
• Common sources of nitrate contamination include fertilizers,
fertilizers animal wastes
wastes, septic tanks
tanks, municipal
sewage treatment systems, and decaying plant debris.
•NO3- levels were quite low; varying from (0.0035 to 0.1 mg/l) during summer (Fig.3i)
• The Correlation matrix indicates that there are only EC and TDS correlated with nitrogen in the
Cauvery River main stream and some tolerance
II-Winter/2007-08
II-Winter/2007-08
III-Summer/2008
NO3- (mg/l)
PO4-3 (mg/l)
0 06
0.06
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
III-Summer/2008
0.12
0
12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0
stations
Figure 3h, variations of PO4-3 (2008)
University Mysore
stations
Figure 3i, variations of NO3- (2008)
y TDS is a measure of the solid materials dissolved in the river water. This 500
400
300
200
100
0
Figure 3j , variations of TDS
University Mysore
stations
Figure 3k , variations of EC
R8
R7
R6
R5
R4
R3
R2
R1
D2
BD
1
BD
2
BD
3
D1
R8
R7
R6
R5
stations
R4
R3
R2
R1
D2
3
D1
2
EC
600
400
200
0
BD
y
1
y
BD
y
T DS 9m
m g /l)
y
BD
y
includes salts, some organic materials, and a wide range of other material from nutrients to toxic materials. In the present study TDS ranged from minimum of 50 at station BD1 and maximum of 320 in BD3 in Laxmanatheertha River during summer( Figure 3j) Fi
j) EC is used as a basic index to select the suitability of water for agricultural purposes.
In the present study EC was minimum of 137 μmhos/cm at BD1
(Hemavathy) and maximum of 607.2 μs/cm of in BD3 (Laxmantheerth). In Figure 3k, The variations of EC are indicated that values are under all standard water quality permissible II-Winter/2007-08
III-Summer/2008
EC, TDS and all in behind Dam duo to runoff is more than the II-Winter/2007-08
III-Summer/2008
700
downstream
600
800
•Turbidity is a measure of the dispersion of light in a column of water. It is caused due to
presence of suspended matter, clay silt, colloidal organic particles, plankton and other
microscopic organisms.
•In the present study turbidity was minimum of 1(NTU) at BD1, R1, R8 and maximum of
22 in Winter at the same station (R8) (Figure 3l )
II-Winter/2007-08
III-Summer/2008
Turbidity (NTU)
25
20
15
10
5
0
stations
Figure 3l , variations of Turbidity (2008)
University Mysore
•DO is one of the water quality index and like
•DO in Summer is less than in Winter Duo to Alga activity and high turbidity
•In this study,
study it varied from 7.2-8.5
7 2-8 5 mg/l during summer and Winter
• The highest DO was 8.3 mg/l in the reservoir (D1) in winter
• Variations of DO in summer is compare with Correlation matrix (Pearson) is
dependent to Temperature and Turbidity , pH , TSS, TH , K + , Po4 -33
II-Winter/2007-08
III-Summer/2008
DO (mg/l)
9
8.5
8
7.5
7
6.5
stations
Figure 3p, variations of DO
University Mysore
•
Total Alkalinity in this study ranged from 50-181.65 mg/l. Alkalinity was
approximately constant in down stream and it is not more than150 mg/l (Figure 3n )
•
In the Summer AL< TH . Hence, Ca +2, Mg+2 are Also present in forms other
than carbonate hardness
•
In Winter AL>TH So, it means that all the hardness is presented as carbonate
hardness
•
In the present study, minimum of 32 mg/l and maximum of 240 mg/l of Total
hardness is recorded at upstream BD1 and BD3 Stations respectively
Average of Hardness was (143.73 mg/l) in summer (Figure 3o)
Alkalinity (mg/l)
II-Winter/2007-08
III-Summer/2008
II-Winter/2007-08
300
300
250
250
TH (mg//l)
•
200
150
100
200
150
100
50
50
0
0
stations
Figure 3n, variations of Alkalinity (2008)
University Mysore
III-Summer/2008
stations
Figure 3o , variations of TH (2008)
•The BOD test provides an estimate of how much biodegradable waste is present in the water
•Here
Here BOD varied from 11-3.5
3.5 mg/l during winter and summer.
• Average of BOD in summer was highest, 2.52 mg/l during Summer than winter (Figure 3q).
• The COD is a measure of oxygen equivalent to the organic matter content of the water susceptible
to oxidation by a strong chemical oxidant and thus is an index of organic pollution in the river
•The Highest COD level at station BD3 was 45 mg /l in winter. Also it was more during summer in
other stations.
• The Correlation matrix indicates that there are only Turbidity and K+, PO4-3 and nitrogen
correlated to COD in the Cauvery River (Figure 3r), which indicate that, there are discharges of
non-point detergents influents in river.
lll-Summer/2008
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
ll-Winter/2007-08
COD (m
mg/l)
BOD ((mg/l)
ll-Winter/2007-08
lll-Summer/2008
50
40
30
20
10
0
stations
stations
Figure 3r , variations of COD
Figure 3q , variations of BOD
University Mysore
Inter-relationships
4 presents the correlation matrix between various parameters
y Table 4,
parameters.
y Most of the parameters were found to bear statistically significant
correlation
association
l ti with
ith each
h other
th indicating
i di ti close
l
i ti off these
th
parameters with each other.
y The pH and DO of the water, however, showed a highly positive
correlation (r ~ 0.92, df ~ 30, p < 0.01). Both the parameters are
indicators of good quality water indicating the various favorable
conditions
diti
ffor hi
high
h primary
i
and
d secondary
d
production.
d ti
y TDS and EC also had a strong correlation with a number of parameters
+
like Cl2 (r ~ 0.9137), hardness (r ~ 0.9669), Mg (r ~ 0.9634), Na (r ~
+
-2
0.9915), K (r ~ 0.9724), and SO4 (r ~0.8374).
University Mysore
+
-
y Na is well correlated with Cl and SO4
-2
+2
bears a
. However, Ca
-2
-33
2
i ifi t correlation
l ti with
ith EC,
EC TDS,
TDS SO4 , PO4 and
d other
th cations.
ti
significant
This indicates the presence of calcium in the water in less soluble
forms, more likely in the form of carbonates, which is also indicated by
the high values of hardness in the river water.
water
y Dissolved oxygen showed significantly negative correlation with all the
parameters
t
exceptt pH
H with
ith which
hi h it had
h d a positive
iti correlation.
l ti
y Only Ca
+2
+2
and Mg did not show any significant correlation with DO.
Thus DO can serve as a single useful index of water quality of the river
because with increase in the value of most of these parameters, the DO
decreases.
University Mysore
Table 2: Descriptive Statistics of water Quality (SPSS) for Cauvery River (30 sample in summer)
N.
Parameter
Maximum
Descriptive Statistics
Minimum
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Std. Error Mean
1
Temperature
30
23.5
26.96667
2.864568
0.522996084
2
u b d ty
Turbidity
21.2
21 2
1
6.226667
6 226667
5.431196
5 431196
0.991596105
0 991596105
3
pH
8.6
7.3
8.1536
0.358474
0.065448016
4
EC
607.2
138
241.9379
80.12132
14.41303523
5
TS
490
190
307.5
69.01711
12.60074346
6
TSS
210
20
117.9167
61.17416
11.16882163
7
TDS
320
50
187 25
187.25
72 45792
72.45792
13 22894662
13.22894662
8
TH
240
32
117.2
43.55765
7.952502678
9
Ca+2
38.5
8.8
26.47933
7.770213
1.41864027
10
Mg +2
36.1
2.5
12.19626
7.197003
1.313986992
11
Na+
250
35.6
151.38
67.16432
12.26247186
12
K+
13.7
1.4
7.293333
4.429675
0.808744356
13
Alkalinity
181.65
60.55
151.4533
29.02336
5.298916032
14
HCO3 -
181.65
60.55
151.4533
29.02336
5.298916032
15
Cl -
133.5
27
72.764
36.17972
6.605483591
16
S04 -2
3.16
0.12
0.8925
0.970999
0.177279349
17
N 3No
0.1
0.0035
0.036663
0.019644
0.003586438
18
Po4 -3
0.05
0.0048
0.019392
0.016185
0.002954873
19
DO
11.7
2.42
6.122333
2.892024
0.528008987
20
BOD
3.5
1
2.03
0.700812
0.127950242
21
COD
45
10.5
23.935
12.52574
2.286875937
22
F
Fe
1.58
0.001
0.302377
0.437621
0.079898302
University Mysore
Table 4: Correlation matrix (Pearson) of water quality parameters for summer, 2008
Tempe
rature
Turbidity
pH
Tempe
rature
1
Turbid
ity
-0.8*
pH
-0.56
0.56
1
EC
0.14
0.14
0.15
EC
TS
TSS
TDS
TH
Ca+2
Mg+2
Na+
K+
Alkalinity
HCO3
Cl -
S04 -2
No3 -
Po4 -3
DO
BOD
COD
1
1
TS
0.3
-0.15
-0.3
0.51*
1
TSS
0.71
-0.54
-0.58
0.2**
0.4
1
TDS
-0.34
0.34
0.25
0.32*
0.59
-0.5
1
TH
0.72
-0.45
-0.23
0.65*
0.56
0.48
0.11
Ca+2
0.62
-0.42
-0.2
0.44*
0.37
0.31
0.08
0.8*
1
Mg+2
0.7
-0.38
-0.23
0.68*
0.58
0.55
0.08
0.93*
0.64
1
Na+
-0.32
0.34
0.38
0.01
0.2
-0.4
0.55
-0.03
-0
-0.06
1
1
K+
-0.93
0.8
0.57
-0.18*
-0.2
-0.7
0.37
-0.67
-0.59
-0.63
0.478
1
Alkali
nity
0.09
-0.02
0.18
0.31*
0.38
-0.1
0.47
0.52
0.61
0.35
0.28
-0.5
1
HCO3
-
0.09
-0.02
0.18
0.31*
0.38
-0.1
0.47
0.52
0.61
0.35
0.28
-0.3
0.99*
1
Cl -
0.89
-0.72
-0.49
0.34*
0.39
0.72
-0.3
0.75
0.65
0.69*
-0.32
-0.8
0.11
0.11
1
S04 -2
0.65
-0.43
-0.32
0.59*
0.5
0.47
0.08
0.83
0.73
0.78
-0.01
-0.7
0.31
0.31
0.67
1
No33 N
-0.07
0 07
0 12
0.12
0 19
0.19
0 34
0.34
0 25
0.25
0 06
0.06
02
0.2
0 19
0.19
0 12
0.12
0 21
0.21
-0.11
0 11
-0.2
02
0 21
0.21
0 21
0.21
0 05
0.05
03
0.3
1
Po4 -3
-0.91
0.8**
0.58
-0.16
-0.2
-0.6
0.37
-0.58
-0.44
-0.61
0.355
0.87
0.12
0.12
-0.8
-0.6
0.12
1
0.15*
0.31
0.66*
-0.3*
0.73*
0.64*
0.7*
-0.2
-0.9
0.1
0.1
0.81
0.7
-0.12
-0.8
1
DO
0.92
-0.76*
0.54**
BOD
0.81
-0.62*
-0.54
0.27
0.42
0.78
-0.3
0.67
0.51
0.7
-0.29
-0.8
0.18
0.18
0.79
0.62
0.08
-0.69
0.74
1
COD
-0.89
0.73
0.58
-0.24
-0.4
-0.8
0.31
-0.65
-0.47
-0.69
0.373
0.86
0.05
0.05
-0.9
-0.7
-0.13
0.89
-0.8
-0.73
correlations significant at the 0.01 level (1- tailed)
correlations significant at the 0.05 level (1- tailed)
University Mysore
1
Table 5: Physico-Chemical characteristics of the water samples collected at KRS Dam and
all Upstream & Downstream of CAUVERY River (Winter-2008)
Temperature
Turbidity
pH
EC
TS
TS
S
TDS
TH
Ca+2 Mg+2
Na+
K+
Alkalinity
HCO3
BD1
24
14
8.4
230
190
70
120
32
8.8
2.5
136
11.4
80
80
BD2
23.5
10
8.4
230
320 100 220
82
25
9.3
157
11.2
170
170
27
BD3
23.5
16.4
8.2
230
350 120 230 104 23.3
8.3
155.5 11.5
180
180
27
DR1
23.5
8.4
8.6
230
250
190 102 21.6
7.3
149
11.5
180
DR2
23.5
7.2
8.3
210
210 160
50
80
22.5
3.9
142
12.7
R1
24
7.2
8.4
210
290
20
270
84
20.1
7.3
157
R2
24
9
8.4
215
245
40
205
84
20.1
7.3
R3
24
15.2
8.5
219
250
50
200
84
20.1
R4
24
11.2
8.5
210
340
40
300
84
R5
24
5.6
8.2
210
300
70
230
R6
24
8.8
8.5
230
340
20
R7
24
9.6
8.5
230
340
20
R8
24
21.2
8.5
210
230
Winter
Cl -
S04 -2 No3 - Po4 -3
BOD
COD
3.3
1.5
35
0.02
0.02
0.19
0.05
0.05 4.37
2
41
0.19
0.05
0.05 3.52
2.5
45
180
56.8 0.19
0.04
0.04
3.2
1.5
33
140
140
42.6 0.19
0.04
0.04
3.6
1.5
35
12
160
160
34.1 0.12
0.03
0.03
3.6
1
36
250
11.8
160
160
0.13
0.03
0.03
3.6
1
35
7.3
248
11.6
100
100
34.1 0.19
0.04
0.04 3.02
1
36
20.1
7.3
242
11.6
160
160
34.1 0.15
0.03
0.03 2.57
1.5
37
84
25.7
5
245
13.1
160
160
34.1 0.12
0.02
0.02 2.42
1.5
38
320
84
22.5
5
150
12.3
160
160
39.8 0.15
0.04
0.04 2.99
1
39
320
84
22.5
5
207
12.2
160
160
39.8 0.15
0.04
0.04 2.99
1
37
67.
5 163
84
26.5
8.3
157
13.7
160
160
0.04
0.04 2.49
1
36
60
University Mysore
34.1 0.12
DO
34
27
0.14
Table 6: Physico-Chemical characteristics of the water samples collected at KRS
Dam and all Upstream & Downstream of CAUVERY River (Summer -2008)
Summer
T
t Turbidi
T bidi
Temperat
ure
ty
pH
EC
TS
TSS TDS TH
Ca+2 Mg+2
Na+
K+
Alk li i HCO
Alkalini
ty
3
S04 -
N 3 Po4
P 4No3
Cl -
2
-
3
DO
BO
D
CO
D
BD1
27
1
7.3
138
250
170
80
52
16
2.92
35.6
4.2
60.6
60.6
96.6
0.13
0.02
0.01
7
2.1
15.6
BD2
28
5
7.9
368
380
140
240
168
38.5
17.5
59.1
2.5
182
182
96.6
2.85
0.1
0.01
7.2
2.1
11.7
BD3
28
10
8.2
607
490
190
300
240
36.9
36.1
180
5.8
173
173
131
3.03
0.05
0.01
7.2
3
10.5
DR1
29
4.5
8.6
276
310
210
100
116
25.7
12.7
80.7
3.5
130
130
96.6
0.56
0.04
0.01
7.2
1.8
10.5
DR2
29
1.5
8.5
239
260
150
110
128
17.6
20.5
78.7
4.4
121
121
76.7
1.13
0.09
0.01
7
2.7
10.5
R1
29
2
7.6
210
320
180
140
116
22.4
14.6
54.6
2.5
130
130
56.8
1.06
0
0.01
7.2
2.5
10.5
R2
29
1
7.5
215
360
190
170
124
28.8
12.7
41.6
1.6
138
138
114
1.15
0.05
0.01
7
2.5
10.5
R3
30
2
8.1
219
340
190
150
116
25.7
12.7
168.5
4.4
173
173
125
1.21
0.05
0.01
6.1
3.5
10.5
R4
30
2
7.8
210
350
190
140
140
24
19.5
147.5
4.6
147
147
85.2
0.41
0.01
0.01
10.8
2.5
23.4
R5
30
2
7.6
210
360
170
140
132
32.1
12.7
159
5.6
156
156
99.4
1.39
0.04
0
7.8
2.5
10.5
R6
30
3
7.5
230
370
150
220
140
25.7
18.5
159
5.6
164
164
93.7
1.54
0.03
0.01
8.9
2.5
10.5
R7
30
3
8.1
210
380
200
180
152
33.6
16.6
163
6.7
156
156
134
0.9
0.03
0.01
9.2
2.6
10.5
R8
30
1
8.2
290
340
140
200
160
38.5
15.6
231
1.4
156
156
105
3.1
0.03
0.01
11.7
2.6
19.5
University Mysore
Conclusion
Th physico-chemical
h i
h i l parameters
t
t di d were all
ll within
ithi the
th d
i bl li
it for
f
y The
studied
desirable
limit
drinking water quality recommended by WHO (1996) and BIS (1991). From this
study, However, there is the need for routine checks to ascertain the suitability
or otherwise of these water sources so as to forestall outbreak of water borne
diseases.
y The above data on the water quality parameters of Cauvery River clearly
showed that river water was safe for drinking water supply, fishery, irrigation,
and industrial purposes, as most of the parameters are found within the
permissible limits.
y During the monsoon season runoff could not change water quality in bad
situation. Total Hardness was higher than Alkalinity (TH>TA) that is means its
Non-alkalinity water and it is suitable to water pipe line. The present study has
thus clearly revealed the extent of Phosphate, Nitrate in upstream and at
g
EC,, Sulphate
p
Total Hardness,, TDS
reservoir duringg monsoon time and highest
i Laxmantheerth
in
L
th th ( BD3) upstream
t
y Also the value of pH, EC, T. Alkalinity, TH, TDS, chloride was in lowest
condition. But, Nitrate, Phosphate and Turbidity were more during other times.
Finally, we compared the water quality index of three seasons. It provides a
simple representation of eextensive
tensi e and comple
complex variables
ariables (ph
(physical,
sical chemical)
that govern the overall quality of surface water that is intended for potable use
y Compromise between water resources development and the maintenance of a
river in ecologically acceptable or agreed condition is necessary.
University Mysore
University Mysore