International Journal of Environment and Bioenergy, 2013, 5(2): 108-122 International Journal of Environment and Bioenergy ISSN: 2165-8951

Florida, USA Journal homepage: www.ModernScientificPress.com/Journals/IJEE.aspx Article

Water Quality Index: A Case Study of Vishav Stream, Kulgam, Kashmir

Aadil Hamid *, Naseer Ahmad Dar, Sami Ullah Bhat, Ashok K. Pandit Department of Environmental Science/Centre of Research for Development, University of Kashmir, Hazratbal Srinagar-190006, Jammu and Kashmir, India * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: aadilenvsc@gmail.com. Article history: Received 30 January 2013, Received in revised form 15 February 2013, Accepted 18 February 2013, Published 20 February 2013.

Abstract: There are several factors influencing the water quality based on its usage. The quality of drinking water is of the vital concern for human health and life. The present investigation was aimed at assessing the water quality index (WQI) for Vishav stream. The water samples were analyzed for 11 core parameters vital for drinking water purposes. Analysis of the data revealed that the WQI values ranged from a minimum of 1.085 to a maximum of 658.79. The higher values of WQI were found mainly due to the higher values of pH, sulphate and Calcium in the stream. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to identify the strength of relation between the variables. Carbon dioxide and oxygen were found to bear significant negative correlation with temperature. While as Chloride, Calcium and Magnesium were significantly interrelated indicating that the hardness of the water is permanent in nature. The results support that the water parameters are desirable and the water quality of Vishav stream falls within the excellent to good category of water quality class based on water quality index values. The results of analysis were used to develop predictive models for water quality. Keywords: stream; water quality index; physico-chemical parameters; permanent hardness.

1. Introduction
The operations involved in water quality assessment are many and complex. They can be
Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

109

compared to a chain of about a dozen links and the failure of any one of them can weaken the whole assessment. It is very important that the design of these operations must take into account the defined objectives of the water quality assessment. Attention on water contamination and its management has become a need of the hour because of far reaching impact on human health (Sinha and Srivastava, 1995; Vega et al., 1996). The degree of pollution is generally assessed by studying physical and chemical characteristics of the water bodies (Duran and Suicmez, 2007). There are a number of methods to analyze water quality data that vary depending on informational goals, the type of samples, and the size of the sampling area (Boyacioglu, 2007; Simeonov et al., 2003). Conventional approaches to assess water quality are based on a comparison of experimentally determined parameter values does not readily give an overall view of the spatial and temporal trends in the overall water quality in a watershed (Debels et al., 2005). Water quality index (WQI) is regarded as one of the most effective way to communicate water quality (Kannan, 1991; Pradhan et al., 2001; Sinha et al., 2004). Water quality is assessed on the basis of calculated water quality indices (Sinha and Ghosh, 1999; Sinha et al., 2004; Sinha and Ritesh, 2006). The water quality indices concept is based on the comparison of the water quality parameter with respective regulatory standards (Khan et al., 2003). Water quality indices assess the suitability of the quality of the water for a variety of uses (Cude, 2001). The use of water quality indices simplifies the presentation of results of an investigation related to a water body, as it summarises in one value or concept a series of parameters analysed (Almeida and Schwarzbold, 2003; Couillard and Lefebvre, 1985; Dwivedi and Pathak, 2007; Horton, 1965; Liou et al., 2004; Tiwari and Mishra, 1985). Indices are based on the values of various physico-chemical and biological parameters in a water sample. The use of indices in monitoring programs to assess ecosystem health has the potential to inform the general public and decision-makers about the state of the ecosystem (Nasirian, 2007; Simoes et al., 2008). This approach can also help to provide a benchmark for evaluating successes and failures of management strategies at improving water quality (Rickwood and Carr, 2009). The index is a numeric expression used to transform large number of variables data into a single number, which represents the water quality level (Adriano et al., 2006; Bordalo et al., 2006; Miller et al., 1986; Sanchez et al., 2007). Parameters are often then weighted according to their perceived importance to overall water quality and the index is calculated as the weighted average of all observations of interest (Liou et al., 2004; Pesce and Wunderlin, 2000; Sargaonkar and Deshpande, 2003; Stambuk-Giljanovic, 1999; Tsegaye et al., 2006). Water quality index can also be used to aggregate data on water quality parameters at different times and in different places and to translate this information into a single value defining the period of time and spatial unit involved (Shultz, 2001). The objective of the present investigation is to calculate water quality index and compare it with standards to assess drinking water contamination and variation of drinking water quality of
Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

110

Vishav stream on the basis of calculated values of water quality indices.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Description of the Study Area and Sites Vishav stream drains most of the northern face of Pir Panjal and is the main left bank tributary of river Jhelum with an average altitude of 2,250 m. It has a catchment area of 1,230 km2. While passing through volcanic strata of the Pir Panjal Range, the Vishav forms the famous cataract of Aharbal. It is fed by an perennial Oligotrophic Kaunsarnag lake having an area of 1.37 km2 at an elevation of about 3,670 metres above sea level and extending between the geographical co-ordinates of 330 30 12.30 N latitude and 740 49 59.30 E in Pir Panjal Range. It merges with the river Jhelum at sangam (Fig. 1).

Figure 1. Location map of Vishav stream. The study area revealed a variegated topography due to the combined action of glaciers and rivers. The valley possesses distinctive climatic characteristics because of its high altitudinal location
Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

111

and its geophysical setting. The valley is characterized by sub-Mediterranean type of climate with nearly 70 per cent of its annual precipitation concentrated in winter and spring months. Five sites selected for the collection of water samples along with their general characteristics are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. General characteristics of five study sites

Site Aharbal Nohama Pombay Brazaloo Ashmuji Code I II III IV V Altitude ( m.a.s.l) 2187 1969 1882 1662 1637 Latitude 330 39 19 33 37 55 33 37 26 330 38 38 330 40 01
0 0

Longitude 740 47 08 74 53 13 74 55 25 750 03 04 750 04 17

0 0

Specific features Coniferous trees Orchards and paddy fields Gravel tract with willow plantation Orchards, rural settlements Paddy fields, rural settlements

2.2. Sample Collection and Analysis A total of 60 surface water samples were collected from 5 different locations of the stream using spot sampling procedure during March-August, 2011. The samples were collected in the precleaned polythene bottles with necessary precautions. The samples were put for examination in the laboratory to determine the physico-chemical parameters using standard methodology (APHA, 2005). These include total dissolved solids (TDS), free carbon dioxide, dissolved oxygen, alkalinity, hardness, calcium, magnesium, chloride, sulphate, nitrate, and iron. However, the parameters like water temperature, pH and conductivity were measured on spot with the help of digital thermometer, pH meter and conductivity meter (APHA, 2005). The quality of the analytical data was ensured through careful standardization, blank measurements and triplicate samples. For the validity of the determination procedure, the standard deviation methodology was used. 2.3. Calculation of WQI Water quality index was calculated by weighed index method to determine the suitability of stream water for drinking purposes. The index developed by Horton (1965) and modified by Tiwari and Mishra (1985). For computing WQI, three steps were followed. In the first step, each of the 14 parameters was assigned a weight (wi) according to its relative importance in overall quality of water for drinking purpose (Table 2). The maximum weight of 5 was assigned to the parameter nitrate due to its major importance in water quality assessment. Magnesium was given the minimum weight of 1 as

Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

112

magnesium by itself may not be harmful. In the second step, the relative weight (Wi) was computed from the following equation: Wi = wi / ni=1wi Where, Wi is the relative weight, wi is the weight of each parameter and n is the number of parameters. Calculated relative weight (Wi) values of each parameter are given in Table 3. In the third step, a quality rating scale for each parameter was assigned by dividing its concentration in each water sample by its respective standard according to the guidelines laid down in the BIS and the result multiplied by 100: qi = (Ci / Si) 100 Where qi is the quality rating, Ci is the concentration of each chemical parameter in each water sample in mg/L, and Si is the Indian and WHO drinking water standards for each chemical parameter in mg/L. SIi = Wi qi WQI = SIi SIi is the subindex of ith parameter; qi is the rating based on concentration of ith parameter and n is the number of parameters. The computed WQI values were classified into five types, excellent water to water unsuitable for drinking.

Table 2. Relative weight of chemical parameters

Chemical parameters pH Electrical conductivity Total dissolved solids Total alkalinity Total hardness Calcium Magnesium Chloride Nitrate Sulphate Iron BIS/WHO standards 6.5-8.5 750-1500 600-1000 200-600 300-600 100-200 50-150 250-600 50-100 250-400 0.3-1 Weight (wi) 4 2 4 2 2 2 1 3 5 4 4 wi=33 Relative weight (Wi) 0.12121 0.06061 0.12121 0.06061 0.06061 0.06061 0.03030 0.09091 0.15152 0.12121 0.12121 Wi=1.000

Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

113

Table 3. Normal statistics of water quality parameters of stream water samples

Parameters Temperature pH Free carbon dioxide Dissolved oxygen Electrical conductivity Total dissolved solids Total alkalinity Total hardness Calcium Magnesium Chloride Nitrate Sulphate Iron Min. 2 7.1 1 9 86.9 59 44 47 33 14 4 42 3 10 Max. 21 8.6 14.6 13.1 193 115.8 111 86 64 27 8.4 190 6 56 Mean 10.9 7.7 5.3 10.9 137.4 82.5 73.2 65.7 45.9 19.8 6.3 119.5 4.4 28.7 mg/L mg/L S/cm mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L g/L mg/L g/L Units
o

SD() 3.9 0.4 3.2 0.9 20.8 11.9 15.8 9.7 6.8 2.9 0.9 44.8 1.2 15.1

Var. 11.7 0.1 7.7 0.5 467.4 155.3 256.0 36.2 17.2 3.6 0.8 2059.3 1.4 236.3

CV 35.8 5.2 60.4 8.3 15.1 14.4 21.6 14.8 14.8 14.6 14.3 37.5 27.3 52.6

Q1 7.7 7.4 2.5 10.1 121.7 73.4 61.5 58.0 41.0 17.0 5.5 78.5 3.0 13.0

Med. 10.6 7.7 4.1 10.8 135.3 80.7 72.5 65.0 45.0 20.0 6.2 125.0 4.5 29.5

Q3 13.8 8.0 7.7 11.7 156.0 93.1 84.0 72.5 50.5 22.0 7.1 151.0 5.6 41.0

Note: Min = Minimum, Max = Maximum, SD = Standard deviation, CV = Coefficient of variation, Med = Median, Q1 = Median of lower half, Q3 = Median of lower half.

2.4. Statistical Analysis The data obtained was subjected to statistical analysis (Table 3) for obtaining The Pearsons Correlation Coefficient and regression coefficient was done by using SPSS statistical tools (Table 4). The regression model was obtained by considering a known value of TDS which is used to determine the percentage contribution of each ion by substituting an average ionic value for the entire study area (Table 5). Table 4. Pearsons correlation coefficient between various water quality parameters
Temp.
pH CO2 DO EC TA TH Ca2+ Mg2+ ClNO3SO42Fe .861 -.913(*) -.997(**) .759 -.692 .996(**) .996(**) .995(**) .970(**) -.800 .721 -.667 -.958(*) -.850 .769 -.767 .899(*) .901(*) .899(*) .922(*) -.861 .799 -.690 .892(*) -.882(*) .613 -.934(*) -.935(*) -.932(*) -.920(*) .749 -.859 .840 -.709 .705 -.992(**) -.992(**) -.991(**) -.977(**) .805 -.714 .612 -.416 .778 .776 .778 .675 -.572 .632 -.970(**) -.730 -.732 -.741 -.749 .982(**) -.277 .211 1.000(**) 1.000(**) .978(**) -.836 .730 -.680 1.000(**) .979(**) -.838 .732 -.678 .977(**) -.845 .719 -.676 -.840 .789 -.586 -.419 .386 -.696

pH

CO2

DO

EC

TA

TH

Ca2+

Mg2+

Cl-

NO3-

SO42-

Note: * Correlation at 0.05(2-tailed), ** Correlation at 0.01(2-tailed).

Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

114

Table 5. Regression models obtained from the results of analysis of water samples
Ca2+ = 0.541TDS + 1.343 Mg2+ = 0.235TDS + 0.429 Cl- = 0.077TDS 0.102 NO3- = 3.131TDS 138.2 SO42- = 0.077TDS 1.985 Total hardness = 0.490TDS + 25.28 Conductivity = 1.735TDS 5.416

3. Results and Discussion

The chemical analysis of the stream water and the percent compliance with the Indian Standards (2003) and WHO (2004) are summarized in Table 6. Normal statistics of water quality parameters of 60 water samples is given in Table 3.

Table 6. Comparison of stream water quality with BIS and WHO standards
Chemical parameters Temperature pH Free Carbon Dioxide Dissolved Oxygen Electrical Conductivity Total Dissolved Solids Total Alkalinity Total Hardness Calcium Magnesium Chloride Nitrate Sulfate Iron mg/L mg/L S/cm mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L >5 750 500 200 300 75 30 250 45 200 1 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Units
o

BIS

Percent compliance

WHO 30-35

Percent compliance 100 96.7 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

C 6.5-8.5 96.7

6.5-8.5 22 5.0-7.00 750 600 200 300 100 50 250 50 250 1

Note: BIS = Bureau of Indian Standards; WHO = World Health Organization.

The pH is an important variable in water quality assessment as it influences many biological and chemical processes within a water body and all processes associated with water supply and treatment (Gray, 1999). The pH of most natural waters ranges between 6.0 and 8.5, although lower values can occur in dilute waters having higher concentration of dissolved organic substances, and
Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

115

higher values in eutrophic waters, groundwater brines and salt lakes. The pH was recorded to be varying from 7.1 (minimum) to 8.6 (maximum) with an average value of 7.70.4 from all the sites. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is highly soluble in water and atmospheric CO2 is absorbed at the airwater interface. In addition, CO2 is produced within water bodies by the respiration of aquatic biota, during aerobic and anaerobic heterotrophic decomposition of suspended and sediment of organic matter (Richey et al., 1990). Carbon dioxide dissolved in natural water is part of an equilibrium involving bicarbonate and carbonate ions. The concentrations of these forms are depends on the pH of water. In the present study the concentration of free CO2 varied from 1 mg/L (minimum) to 14.6 mg/L (maximum) with an average value of 5.33.2 mg/L from all the sites. The oxygen content of natural waters varies with temperature, salinity, turbulence, the photosynthetic activity of algae and plants, and atmospheric pressure (Wetzel and Likens, 1991). The solubility of oxygen decreases as temperature and salinity increase. In fresh-waters dissolved oxygen (DO) at sea level ranges from 15 mg/L at 0 C to 8 mg/L at 25 C. Concentrations in unpolluted waters are usually close to, but less than, 10 mg/L. During the study period dissolved oxygen concentration ranged between 9 mg/L (minimum) to 13.1 mg/L (maximum) from all the sites with an average value of 10.90.9 mg/L. Conductivity or specific conductance is a measure of the electric current carrying ability of water and is related to the concentration of dissolved ions present (Berg et al., 1958). Conductivity measurements can be used as a simple and effective means of monitoring temporal or spatial changes in salt concentrations such as those that occur in catchments undergoing salinization (Mc Tainsh and Boughton, 1994). The values of conductivity from all the sites was recorded as 86.9 S/cm (minimum) to 193 S/cm (maximum) with an average value of 137.420.8 S/cm. The total dissolved solids (TDS) content of fresh water is the sum of the concentrations of the dissolved major ions (Allan and Castillo, 2007). Total dissolved solid depends on various factors such as geological nature of watershed, rainfall and amount of surface runoffs and gives an indication of the degree of dissolved substances (Fatoki et al., 2001). The observed TDS values were ranging from 59 mg/L (minimum) to 115.8 mg/L (maximum) with an average value of 82.511.9 mg/L. Chlorides occur naturally in all types of water. Most chlorine occurs as chloride (Cl -) in solution (CCME, 2011). It enters surface waters, with the weathering of some sedimentary rocks (mostly rock salt deposits) and from industrial and sewage effluents, and agricultural and road run-off (Link and Inman, 2003; Mooers and Alexander, 1994). Chloride is chemically and biologically unreactive, and so is useful as a tracer in nutrient release experiments. The levels of chloride in the present study were ranging from 4 mg/L (minimum) to 8.4 mg/L (maximum) with an average value of 6.30.9 mg/L at all the sites.
Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

116

Alkalinity of water is a measure of weak acid present in water and of the cations balanced against them (Lewenthall and Marais, 1976). Alkalinity in most natural waters is usually (but not always) due to the bicarbonate ion (HCO3-) (Dallas and Day, 2004). Other sources of alkalinity include the carbonate ion (CO32-), the hydroxide ion (OH-) and a few other minor ions. Alkalinity ranged between 44 mg/L (minimum) to 111 mg/L (maximum) with average value of 73.215.8 mg/L from all the sites. The hardness of natural waters depends mainly on the presence of dissolved calcium and magnesium salts (USEPA, 2000). Hardness may vary over a wide range. Seasonal variations of river water hardness often occur, reaching the highest values during low flow conditions and the lowest values during floods (USEP, 2000). The variation in total hardness during study period at all the sites was recorded as 47 mg/L (minimum) to 86 mg/L (maximum) with average value of 65.79.7 mg/L. Calcium is present in all waters as Ca2+ and is readily dissolved from rocks rich in calcium minerals, particularly as carbonates and sulphates, especially limestone and gypsum (Chapman, 1996). The cation is abundant in surface and ground water. The salts of calcium, together with those of magnesium, are responsible for the hardness of water. In this study calcium concentration of water samples ranges from 33 mg/L (minimum) to 64 mg/L (maximum) with average value of 45.96.8 mg/L. Magnesium is common in natural waters as Mg2+, and along with calcium, is a main contributor to water hardness (Chapman, 1996). Magnesium arises principally from the weathering of rocks containing ferromagnesium minerals and from some carbonate rocks. Organometallic compounds and organic matter is a source of magnesium, since it is an essential element for living organisms (Chapman and Kimstach, 1992). In the present study, magnesium concentration of water samples ranges from 14 mg/L (minimum) to 27 mg/L (maximum) with average value of 19.82.9 mg/L. Sulphate is naturally present in surface waters as SO42-. Atmospheric deposition of oceanic aerosols and the leaching of sulphur compounds, either sulphate minerals such as gypsum or sulphide minerals such as pyrite, from sedimentary rocks (Chapman, 1996). It is the stable, oxidised form of sulphur and is readily soluble in water (with the exception of lead, barium and strontium sulphates which precipitate). In the studied stream, sulphate concentration of water samples ranges from 3 to 6 mg/L with average value of 4.41.2 mg/L. Nitrate, the most highly oxidized form of nitrogen compounds, is commonly present in surface and ground waters, because it is the end product of the aerobic decomposition of organic nitrogenous matter (Jaji et al., 2007). Natural sources of nitrate to surface waters include igneous rocks, land drainage and plant and animal debris. Nitrate is an essential nutrient for aquatic plants and seasonal
Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

117

fluctuations can be caused by plant growth and decay. Nitrate concentration ranged from 42 to190 g/L with average value of 119.544.8 g/L. Iron generally in minor concentrations in natural water systems. The form and solubility of iron in natural waters are strongly dependent upon the pH and the oxidation-reduction potential of the water. Fe2+ [ferrous iron] or Fe3+ [ferric iron] are usually not abundant in natural waters because such ions tend to be rapidly precipitated as highly insoluble iron oxides and hydroxides. Ferrous iron is more soluble that ferric, but this ion tends to be rapidly oxidized to the insoluble ferric state in well oxygenated waters (Stumm and Morgan, 1996). Iron may be fairly abundant in solution in anoxic waters. The results of iron (Fe) concentration showed a range of 10 g/L (minimum) to a 56 g/L (maximum) with an average value of 28.715.1 g/L. In this study, the computed water quality index values ranged from 1.085 to 658.79 and therefore, can be categorized into five types excellent water to water unsuitable for drinking (Table 7). The high values of water quality index have been found to be mainly from the higher values of pH, sulphate and calcium in the stream water.

Table 7. Water quality classification based on WQI values

WQI 0-50 50-100 100-200 200-300 >300 Water quality excellent very good poor water very poor water water unsuitable for drinking Percentage of water samples 63.6 27.3 0 0.0 9.09

Correlation is the mutual relationship between two variables. Direct correlation exists when increase or decrease in the value of one parameter is associated with a corresponding increase or decrease in the value of the other. The correlation is said to be positive when increase in one parameter causes the increase in the other parameter and it is negative when increase in one parameter causes the decrease in the other parameter. The degree of a linear association between any two of the water quality parameters, as measured by the Pearsons correlation coefficient, is presented in Table 4. In the present study, carbon dioxide shows a strong negative correlation with temperature and pH, indicating carbon dioxide dependence on temperature and pH. Dissolved oxygen shows strong negative correlation with temperature and positive correlation with carbon dioxide. It shows that the increase or decrease in temperature results in corresponding increase or decrease in dissolved oxygen.
Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

118

Electrical conductivity bears strong negative correlation with carbon dioxide indicating that the increase in value of one parameter is associated with decrease in value of another parameter. Calcium bears positive correlation with temperature, pH and total hardness. Calcium shows negative correlation with carbon dioxide and oxygen. While as, magnesium bears positive correlation with temperature, pH, total hardness and calcium. In this case, it shows that total hardness, calcium and magnesium are very much interrelated. Chloride shows positive correlation with temperature, pH, total hardness, calcium and magnesium. It is suggested that the calcium, magnesium and chloride are highly interrelated indicating that the hardness is permanent in nature. Chlorine shows negative correlation with carbon dioxide and dissolved oxygen. Nitrate bears strong negative correlation with total alkalinity. While as iron bears strong negative correlation with electrical conductivity. It is suggested that the increase in value of one parameter is associated with decrease in value of another parameter.

4. Conclusions
The WQI for 60 samples ranged from 1.085 to 658.79. Almost 90% of the samples exceeded 100, the upper limit for drinking water. The high values of WQI were found to be mainly from the higher values of pH, sulphate and calcium. About 9% of water samples were poor in quality. In this part, the stream water quality may improve due to increase in the flow of stream. The analysis revealed that all the physico-chemical parameters of Vishav stream were well within the highest desirable limit or maximum permissible limit prescribed by BIS and WHO. From the results of present study we concluded that the water of Vishav stream falls within the excellent to good category of water quality class based on water quality index values and is suitable for irrigation and drinking purposes.

References
Allan, J. D., and Castillo, M. M. (2007). Stream Ecology: Structure and Function of Running Waters, 2nd ed. Chapman and Hall, New York. Almeida, M. A. B., and Schwarzbold, A. (2003). Avaliao sazonal da qualidade das guas do arroio da Cria Montenegro, RS com aplicao de um ndice de qualidade da gua (IQA). RBRH, 8: 81-97. APHA. (2005). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water, 21st ed. Amer. Pub. Health Assoc. Inc., Washington D.C. Berg, K., Anderson, K., Christene, T., Ebert, F., Lyshede, E. J. M., Mthiesen, H., Nygaard, G., Olsen, S., Roson, U., Otterson, C. V., Skadhauge, A., and Nielsen, R. S. (1958). Furresundergelezer, 195054 Limnologiske studies over Fures Kultupavirkning. Folia Limnol. Scand., 10: 189.
Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

119

BIS. (2003). Bureau of Indian Standards IS: 10500. Manak Bhavan, New Delhi, India. Bordalo, A., Teixeira, R., and Wiebe, W. J. (2006). A water quality index applied to an international shared river basin: The case of the Douro River. J. Environ. Manage., 38: 910-920. Boyacioglu, H. (2007). Development of a water quality index based on a European Classification Scheme. Water S.A., 33: 101-106. CCME (Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment). (2011). Canadian Water Quality Guidelines: Chloride Ion. Scientific Criteria Document, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, Winnipeg. Chapman, D., and Kimstach, V. (1992). The selection of water quality variables: An introduction to water quality. In: Water Quality Assessments: A Guide to the Use of Biota, Sediments and Water in Environmental Monitoring, Chapman, D. (ed.). Chapman and Hall Ltd., London. Chapman, D. (1996). Water Quality Assessments: A Guide to the Use of Biota, Sediments and Water in Environmental Monitoring, 2nd ed. UNESCO, London. Couillard, D., and Lefebvre, Y. (1985). Analysis of water quality indices. J. Environ. Manage., 21: 161-179. Cude, C. (2001). Oregon water quality index: a tool for evaluating water quality management effectiveness. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 37: 125-137. Dallas, F. H., and Day, J. A. (2004). The Effect of Water Quality Variables on Aquatic Ecostems: Review. Report to the Water Research Commission, WRC Report No. TT224/04. Debels, P., Figueroa, R., UrrutiaBarra, R. R., and Niell, X. (2005). Evaluation of water quality in the Chillan River (Central Chile) using physicochemical parameters and a modified water quality index. Environ. Monit. Assess., 110: 301-322. Dodds, W. K. (2002). Freshwater Ecology: Concepts and Environmental Applications. Academic Press, USA. Duran, M., and Suicmez, M. (2007). Utilization of both benthic macroinvertebrates and physicochemical parameters for evaluating water quality of the stream Cekerek (Tokat, Turkey). J. Environ. Biol., 28: 231-236 Dwivedi, S. L., and Pathak, V. (2007). A preliminary assignment of water quality index to Mandakini River, Chitrakoot. Indian J. Environ. Protec., 27: 1036-1038. Fatoki, S. O., Muyima, N. Y. O., and Lujiza, N. (2001). Situation analysis of water quality in the Umtata river catchment. Water S.A., 27: 467-474. Gray, N. F. (1999). Water Technology: an Introduction for Environmental Scientists and Engineers, 1st ed., Arnold Publishers, London. Hem, J. D. (1985). Study and interpretation of the chemical characteristics of natural water. USGS,
Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

120

Water Supply Paper. No. 2254, p. 264. Horton, R. K. (1965). An index number system for rating water quality. J. Water Pollution Control Federation, 37: 300-306. Jaji, M. O., Bamgbose, O., Odukoya, O. O., and Arowlo, T. A. (2007). Water quality assessment of Ogun River, south west Nigeria. Environ. Monit. Assess., 133: 447-482. Kannan, K. (1991). Fundamentals of Environmental Pollution. S. Chand & Co. Ltd., New Delhi. Khan, F., Husain, T., and Lumb, A. (2003). Water quality evaluation and trend analysis in selected watersheds of the Atlantic Region of Canada. Environ. Monit. Assess., 88: 221-242. Lewenthall, R. E., and Marais, G. R. (1976). Carbonate Chemistry of Aquatic Systems. Ann Arbor Science Publishers. Link, M., and Inman, D. (2003). Ground water monitoring at livestock waste control facilities in Nebraska. Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality, pp. 1-14. Liou, S. M., Lien, S., and Wang, S. H. (2004). Generalized water quality index for Taiwan. Environ. Monit. Assess., 96: 35-52. McTainsh, G. H., and Boughton, W. C. (1994). Land Degradation Processes in Australia. Longman Cheshire, Melbourne, Australia. Miller, W. W., Joung, H. M., Mahannah, C. N., and Garrett, J. R. (1986). Identification of water quality differences in Nevada through index application. J. Environ. Qual., 15: 265-272. Mooers, H. D., and Alexander, J. (1994). Contribution of spray irrigation of wastewater to groundwater contamination in the Karst of Southeastern Minnesota, USA. Hydrogeol. J., 2: 34-44. Nasirian, M. (2007). A new water quality index for environmental contamination contributed by mineral processing: a case study of Amang (tin tailing) processing activity. J. Appl. Sci., 7: 29772987. Pesce, S. F., and Wunderlin, D. A. (2000). Use of water quality indices to verify the impact of Crdoba City (Argentina) on Suqua River. Water Res., 34: 2915-2926. Pradhan, S. K., Patnaik, D., and Rout, S. P. (2001). Ground water quality index for ground water around a phosphatic fertilizer plant. Indian J. Environ. Protec., 21: 355-358. Richey, J. E., Victoria, R. L., Salati, E., and Forsberg, B. R. (1990). Biogeochemistry of a major river system: the Amazon case study. In: Biogeochemistry of Major World River, Degens, E. T. (ed.). SCOPE Wiley, New York, pp. 57-74. Rickwood, C. J., and Carr, G. M. (2009). Development and sensitivity analysis of a global drinking water quality index. Environ. Monit. Assess., 156: 73-90. Snchez, E., Colmenarejo, M. F., Vicente, J., Rubio, A., Garca, M. G., Travieso, L., and Borja, R. (2007). Use of the water quality index and dissolved oxygen deficit as simple indicators of
Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

121

watershed pollution. Ecol. Indicators, 7: 315-328. Sargaonkar, A., and Deshpande, V. (2003). Development of an overall index of pollution for surface water based on a general classification scheme in Indian context. Environ. Monit. Assess., 89: 4367. Shultz, M. T. (2001). A critique of EPAs index of watershed indicators. J. Environ. Manage., 62: 429442. Simeonov, V., Stratis, J. A., Samara, C., Zahariadis, G., Voutsa, D., Anthemidis, A., Sofoniou, M., and Kouimtzis, T. (2003). Assessment of the surface water quality in Northen Greece. Water Res., 37: 4119-4124. Simoes, F. S., Moreira, A. B., Bisinoti, M. C., Gimenez, S. M. N., and Yabe, M. J. S. (2008). Water quality index as a simple indicator of aquaculture effects on aquatic bodies. Ecol. Indicators, 8: 476-484. Singh. A. P., and Ghosh, S. K. (1999). Water quality index for River Yamuna. Poll. Res., 18: 435-439. Sinha, D. K., and Srivastava, A. K. (1995). Physicochemical characteristics of River Sai at Rae bareli. Indian J. Environ. Health, 37: 205-210. Sinha, D. K., Saxena, S., and Saxena, R. (2004).Water quality index for Ram Ganga river at Mordabad. Poll. Res., 23: 527-531. Sinha, D. K., and Ritesh, S., (2006). Statistical assessment of underground drinking water contamination and effect of monsoon at Hasanpur, J. P. Nagar (Uttar Pradesh, India). J. Env. Sci. Eng., 48: 157-163. Smith, R. K., and Stieg, S. (1998). Nitrogen. In: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 20th ed., Clesceri, L. S., Greenberg, A. E., and Eaton, A. D. (ed.). American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C., Part 4000, pp. 99-100. Stambuk-Giljanovic, N. (1999). Water quality evaluation by index in Dalmatia. Water Res., 33: 34233440. Stoddard, J. L., Jeffries, D. S., Lukewille, A., Clair, T. A., Dillon, P. J., Driscoll, C. T., Forsius, M., Johannessen, M., Kahl, J. S., Kellogg, J. H., Kemp, A., Mannio, J., Monteith, D. T., Murdoch, P. S., Patrick, S., Rebsdorf, A., Skjelkvale, B. L., Stainton, M. P., Traaen, T., Van Dam, H., Webster, K. E., Wieting, J., and Wilander, A. (1999). Regional trends in aquatic recovery from acidification in North America and Europe. Nature, 401: 575-578. Stumm, W., and Morgan, J. J. (1996). Aquatic Chemistry: Chemical Equilibria and Rates in Natural Waters. John Wiley and Sons, New York. Tiwari, T. N., and Mishra, M. (1985). A preliminary assignment of water quality index of major Indian Rivers. Indian J. Environ. Protec., 5: 276-279.
Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA

Int. J. Environ. Bioener. 2015, 5(2): 108-122

122

Tsegaye, T., Sheppard, D., Islam, K. R., Johnson, A., Tadesse, W., Atalay, A., and Marzen, L. (2006). Development of chemical index as a measure of in-stream water quality in response to land-use and land cover changes. Water Air Soil Pollut., 174: 161-179. USEPA (United States Environment Protection Agency). (2000). Newport Bay Toxics TMDL. Freshwater Flow and Seasonal Variation. Technical Support Document, Part B: 1-6. Wetzel, R. G., and Likens, G. E. (1991). Limnological Analyses, 2nd ed. Springer Verlag, New York. WHO (World Health Organization). (2004). Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality, 3rd ed. World Health Organization, Geneva.

Copyright 2013 by Modern Scientific Press Company, Florida, USA