(243)

J. Env. Bio-Sci., 2019: Vol. 33 (2): 243-250 ISSN 0973-6913 (Print), ISSN 0976-3384 (On Line)

HEAVY METAL AND PHYSICO-CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF RIVER GANGA

FROM RISHIKESH TO BRIJGHAT, INDIA
Ajay Kumar* and Vandana Garg
Department of Zoology, D.N. College, C.C.S. University, Meerut 250004
E-mail*: ajaymavey11@gmail.com

Received: 21-10-2019 Accepted: 30-01-2020

Ganga is the life line of millions of people, provides water for their life but pollutants effects its nature of water and also effects the
aquatic organism specially fish, which is the food source of millions of people. These pollutants are different types like heavy
metals, sewage, industrial effluents and untreated sewage which are being dumped into the river at numerous places and the
residues of pesticides and insecticides used in the farms arewashed directly and indirectly in to the river Ganga. The present study
deals with the water quality of Ganga river in Brijghat (Hapur). In this study, water samples of river Ganga were monitored for pH,
dissolved oxygen, total hardness, heavy metals likes As, Fe, Mn, Cu, Pb, Cd, Hg, Cr, Zn, Ni, nitrate, nitrogen, phosphate and
phosphorous at different sampling locations. The study of physico-chemical parameters indicates that the quality of water has
substantially declined and destroys water quality of river. This creates potential health risks to drinking water consumers and
organisms in Ganga River basin.
Key words: Heavy metal, As, Fe, Mn, Cu, Pb, Cd, Hg, Cr, Zn, Ni, Physico-chemical characteristics etc.

Now-a-days Water Pollution is the biggest problem of India.
Water pollutants destroy the neutrality of water and these
pollutants abrade the natural history of river and degrade the
water quality. Water is a very essential and valuable natural
resource for life on this planet. Ganga is the major river of India
(Abed and Jazie 2014). It is the life line of about 20% of total
population because it provides water as an essential
requirement of life directly and indirectly. Water is one of the
prime requirements for agricultural practices. India is a land of
farmers, and agriculture is the backbone of Indian economy
(Chopra et al., 2012). In the present day Ganga river pollution
is a serious and emerging problem in India. The Ganges River
Catchment Basin covers an area of 390,000 sq miles
(1,000,000 sq km) and supplies to one of the maximum
populated areas in the world and through the states of
Uttarakhand, Bihar, Jharkhand, and West Bengal. There are
223 urban areas/towns (districts/partnerships) creating huge
measure of sewage in the Ganga Basin (Kumar and Chopra
2012). The Ganga River emerges in the western Himalayas in
the Uttarakhand and stream south and east through the
Gangetic Plain of India and Bangladesh, in the long run
discharging into the Bay of Bengal. The present study deals
with the river Ganga in Brajghat (Hapur). Gajroula is a town of
district Amroha, UP. It has many types of industries. Due to
the rapid industrialization, there has been an increase in the
amount of effluents being deposit to the water bodies. These
NAAS Rating (2019)-4.43
industries directly and indirectly discharge wastes in to the
Ganga water body. Industrial effluents and sewage entering
the water bodies are one of the prime sources of environmental
toxicity, which endangers aquatic biota and deteriorates water
quality (Kumar et al. 2015, Sinha and Paul 2012, Khatun and
Jamal 2018, Mitra et al. 2014). From year to year Ganga and
its tributaries have increase in pollutant loads due to
commercial and domestic sources, sewage discharge and
industrial effluents (Murty et al. 2000). Heavy metals is a
common term that embed to metal and metalloid with atomic
density greater than 4g/ cm3 and 5 time or more then water
(Hawkes 1997). Mostly heavy metals have positive valencies
and thirty five elements are considered as heavy metals
(Hussain et al. 2017). This heavy metal affects the aquatic life
of different river organism. Different researchers use fish as a
bio-indicator of harmful effects of these heavy metals (Srivastava
et al. 2016, Rasul 2017, Janaydeh et al. 2019, Matta 2016,
Singh et al. 2016, Shukla et al. 2017, Dhanakumar et al. 2015,
Paul 2017, Kabir et al. 2019,Singh 2005, Singh et al. 2010,Singh
2011). Monitoring of the water is an essential step to understand
the trends and pattern of pollutants and their effect on living
aquatic systems (Authman et al. 2015). The few issues
centered in above tests make it important for organizers to
consider the effect of various types of toxins that have been
constantly released into waterway in unmannered manner and
afterward apply best accessible strategy to deal with the stream
 KUMAR AND GARG
water quality.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Sample of the water were collected at selected site of the
Ganga River like Garudchatti at Rishikesh, Trivanighat,
Haridwar, Roorkee canal, Bijnor Barrage and Brijghat
(Gardhmukteswar) at Hapur District Uttar Pradesh, India. In
this study we focus mainly the Brajghat because in this region
different types of Industries are established Gajroula town near
to Brijghat has a broad spectrum of the Industries. So the
water directly collected at this site in Pyrex glass specimen
bottles and examine some parameters on present. Parameters
like pH, temperature, EC, DO were estimated on the spot
immediately after the collection of the samples with the help
of HACH multi meter model No. HQ40D, Color by Colorimeter
HACH, Turbidity by turbidity meter HACH, TS and TDS by
Gravimetric analysis method, Alkalinity and Hardness by
titrimetric analysis, COD determine by Close reflux method,
BOD by multitube method, Silicate by U.V. spectrometer and
heavy metals Arsenic, Iron, Manganese, Copper, Lead,
Cadmium, Mercury, Chromium, Zinc and Nickel with the help
of Inductive coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) was
done in the laboratory at IIT Hydrology Department Roorkee. It
is a type of mass spectrometry that uses an Inductive coupled
plasma to ionize the sample. The mean value of the
observations was taken for determine the physico-chemical
characteristics of water standard methods (APHA 2005) for
examination of water characteristics.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The physicochemical characteristics of various constituents
are present in Table no. 1-2. The pH of the sea-going framework
is a significant pointer of the water quality. The chemical and
biochemical reaction are influenced by the pH. The pH value
of Ganga water varies between the slightly acidic to moderately
alkaline in the present study which is well within the permissible
limit of pH (6.5 to 8.5) for multiple uses of water as prescribed
by BIS 1992. The pH values of the Ganga river is averagely
8.41 indicate the moderately alkaline nature of the river water
and close to permissible limit. Electrical conductivity (EC) of
Ganga water is estimated the total amount of solids dissolve
in the water. It is the ability to conduct an electric current.
Salts or other chemicals that dissolve in the water can break
(244)
down into the positively and negatively charged ions. In fresh
water, the range of it may vary from 100 to 200 μ S. In the
Ganga water it is found averagely 206.05 μ S. The EC is relative
to temperature. The temperature of Ganga water was recorded
directly in the different sampling sites using digital thermometer.
An average temperature was recorded 23°C. The digital
thermometer had a thermocouple was immersed in the water
for the desired level. Temperature influence the chemical,
biochemical and biological characteristic of the aquatic system.
The temperature indirectly regulates the coloration in aquatic
organism specially fishes. Generally the low temperature brings
about the darkening effect while its rise results in the
concentration of pigments with consequent lightning of the
color. The pH meter HACH HQ40D was used method for an
accurate and quick measure of the pH. It is the major
determinant of the corrosivity of water. Exposure to extreme
pH values results in irritation to the eyes, skin, mucous
membranes, gastrointestinal irritation and in low pH, same
effects occur. The pH meter has a temperature control system
to avoid the different temperature variations. The platinum-
cobalt color as visual color scale is based on stable liquid
color standards made from chloroplatinate solution. The scale
ranges from distilled water at to a stock solution of 500ppm.
The shade of water fluctuates with the surrounding conditions
in which that water is available. Pure water has a slightly blue
color that becomes a deeper blue as the thickness of the
observed sample increases. The estimation of turbidity is a
key trial of water quality. Turbidity is the darkness or cloudiness
of a liquid brought about by huge number of individual particles
that are commonly imperceptible to the unaided eye like smoke
in air. Temperatures play an important role in determining DO
in an aquatic body. Dissolved oxygen data are useful in
assessing the water quality criteria of an aquatic system. In
the system where respiration level and organic decomposition
are high, DO values remain lower than system value where
photosynthesis rate are high. A high pollution load may also
decrease the DO values to significant level. The average DO
values of this data is 7.93 mg/L. Biological Oxygen demand
has been used as a measure of the amount of organic
materialism an aquatic solution which support the growth of
microorganism. The BOD values range from 2.94 mg/L. No
significant variation was observed between these sites. DO
and BOD were calculated using the standard method. Alkalinity
is an important parameter in determine the water quality. A
(245) HEAVY METAL AND PHYSICOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF RIVER GANGA

variation in alkalinity valueswere recorded as a minimum of to accumulate in large in aquatic organisms. Arsenite As III
87.14 mg/L. No significant variation was noticed. Furthermore (third oxidation state of As) are rapidly absorbed into fish and
the total alkalinity was significantly higher in sample no 3 than it is more toxic then arsenate AsV (V oxidation state of As).
that of other sites. Several study are reported that As is highly toxic heavy metal
it produce carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, skin pigmentation loss
Heavy Metal Concentrations in water sample: The
or skin cancer, lung cancer and several other disease after
concentrations of the heavy metals in all the six different site
acute and chronic exposer (Zaki 2014). In the river Ganga As
samples and its considered tributaries were measured as
has been reported high level to the permissible limits. In the
dissolved pollutants. The dissolved concentrations of heavy
six different sites, Brijghat have high level (13.6 ppb) and
metals (As, Fe, Cu, Pb, Cd, Hg, Cr, Zn and Ni) in water samples
Haridwar has lower level (0.63 ppb),Trivanighat 3.44ppb, Song
taken from the 7 sites along the River Ganga were found to the
river 10.21 ppb, Roorkee canal 6.83 ppb, Bijnore barrage
below of WHO standards for the various metals in fresh natural
10.041ppb. Iron (Fe) is an essential element in the human
waters comparatively measured dissolved concentrations of
diet. The toxicity of Fe to the human body is governed by the
heavy metals from all the sampling sites were below the WHO,
absorption rate, when it absorb in high amount to the
CPCB, ISI, ICMR, USEPA standards. Fe, Cu, Zn, Cr and Mn
permissible limits than it show toxic effects. The Fe
heavy metal are essential as a micronutrient for plants,
concentration observed may be related to the continual
microbes and human beings (Singh et al. 2005 & 2006). But
discharging of mining waste generated from Small Scale mining
when these exposed in high amount it produce different side
activities. It was found to be more than the accepted limit in all
effect of the flora and fauna (Zaki 2014). Cadmium is one of
six samples because it has 300 ppb permissible limit.
the most toxic heavy metals and is considered nonessential
Maximum Iron concentration was found in Garudchatti water
for living organisms. When it exposed into the environment via
samples (5405.77 ppb). Mn was analysed more than
food chain, it cause various toxic effect. This element is found
permissible limit in six water samples. Highest concentration
at low concentrations in natural environments, but human
of Mn (330.59 ppb) was found in water sample of Brijghat.
activities have resulted in increased levels in all over the
Concentration of Cu was observed in six water samples, the
countries (Kocaoba et al 2005). The maximum concentration
highest observed in Garudchatti (26.00 ppb) and lowest in
of the Cd (1.253ppb) was recorded in the water sample of the
Haridwar (1.72 ppb). Pb content was highest were recorded in
Brijghat and lowest in the water sample of Song River
the water samples of Roorkee canal (5.58 ppb) and lowest in
(0.106ppb). Cadmium is a human health risk factor because it
Haridwar. Lead (Pb) has 10 ppb permissible limit in water.
causes testicular degeneration (Benoff et al., 2000) and cancer
Several health problems are reported due to Pb high limit
of the prostate (Ye et al., 2000). It also damages each kidney
exposure, these problems are convulsion, renal failure and at
nephron's proximal tubules. The impacted individual suffers
higher concentration death may occur. Pb produces neurotoxic
from leakage into urine and eventually kidney failure of low
effects on developing foetuses. It has been reported that lead
molecular weight proteins and vital ions such as Ca (Satarug
stored in the maternal bone are mobilized at high rate especially
et al., 2000). Because of Cd the individuals endure frail bone
during pregnancy and lactation period (Gulson et al., 1997).
because of loss of Ca (Staessen et al., 1999). Utilization of
Pb affects fetus birth weight, growth rate and mental
heavy metals like Cr, Cd and Pb containing Ganga water for
development (Gonzalez-Cossio et al., 1997). Mercury (Hg) was
drinking has reason for carcinoma of nerve bladder in the
analyzed in the six different sites water samples. The highest
individuals of eastern Uttar Pradesh and Western Bihar of India
concentration in the water was found Song river and lowest in
(Shukla et al. 1998, Strobel et al. 2001, Namasivayam and
Haridwar. Chromium (Cr) (10.321 ppb) and Zn (376.69 ppb)
Rangnathan 1995). Arsenic (As) has a great environmental
concentration also recorded in six different sites samples, it
importance, the main source of its pollution in surface water
has highest in BrijghatGnaga river water sample and also Nickel
by biological activity, weathering of rocks and volcanic activity
(Ni) highest value was recorded in the water samples of Song
as well as anthropogenic activities includes industrial effluents
river. In this experiment we have used numerous chemicals
(Kinniburg and Smedley 2001, Kapaja et al. 2006) and is able
and required for determination of water parameters of Ganga
 KUMAR AND GARG (246)

river. Preparation of solutions is done in distillated water. Thepollution sources that would aggravate the pollution levels of
research therefore indicates that Ganga water is extremely river water. Regular monitoring and strict law enforcement is
needed to develop a strategy to manage the environmental
polluted at Brijghat and other sites and these industrial effluents
are the main cause of heavy metal emissions. For the protection hazards due to these elements and to improve environmental
of Ganga water, the pressing need for sewage treatment plant, protection of this area. Our current information will serve as
industrial effluent treatment plant and government awareness the basis for future reference. In order to evaluate the physico-
is suggested. chemical characteristics, present data deals with the effect of
contamination on the River water Ganga at different sites.
CONCLUSION
Although in the research topic the toxicity of these elements
Thus, we can conclude that the Ganga river get seriously has been discussed. The analysis of Ganga River water
polluted due to discharge to untreated sewage, industrial samples reveals that the contamination at selected points
effluents, pesticides residues and insecticides used by farmers which are not suitable for drinking. Thus, this study suggests
where are washed in to it from the point and non-point sources. that Ganga water is highly polluted at Brijghat and some
These toxic substances do not degrade easily and remain selected point in this study, industrial effluents are the major
persistent in the environment, and also have the ability to bio- source of heavy metal pollution. For the cleaning of river Ganga
accumulate in the food chain, which might pose potential in 1989 launched Ganga Action Plan and in July 2014 Namami
hazards in long run. This present data indicate further water Gange project were launched by central government, for this
quality deterioration and pollution from nearby anthropogenic about 2,968 crore have been spent for various effort in cleaning
inputs. Therefore, any future pollution should be reduced and up of river. Therefore, urgent need of sewage treatment and
this, of course, should involve the authority to control the industrial effluent treatment plant and also required public
awareness.
Table 1: Ganga river water Quality analysis report
Samples Numbers
S.N Parameters 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Average
1 pH 8.49 8.37 8.22 8.46 7.93 8.93 8.47 8.41
2 EC (µS/cm) 85.10 104.10 395.00 162.50 161.60 269.00 265.00 206.04
3 Colour (Pt -Co) 54.00 70.00 12.00 246.00 10.00 45.00 28.00 66.43
4 Turbidity (NTU) 2.90 3.90 1.72 5.15 2.00 3.67 3.07 3.20
5 DO (mg/L) 8.14 8.12 7.04 8.14 8.38 7.56 8.16 7.93
6 Temperature (°C) 18.00 24.30 27.50 23.40 21.10 26.50 26.00 23.83
7 TS (mg/L) 101.00 118.20 283.00 107.40 101.00 159.20 157.60 146.77
8 TDS (mg/L) 52.80 62.20 234.00 51.40 65.20 108.60 118.00 98.89
9 Alkalinity (mg/L) -- -- 10.00 -- -- 10.00 8.00 9.33
56.00 64.00 152.00 62.00 62.00 108.00 106.00 87.14
10 Hardness (mg/L) 34.00 46.00 104.00 47.00 41.00 61.00 63.00 56.57
11 COD (mg/L) 150.00 140.00 160.00 80.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 92.86
12 BOD (mg/L) 3.40 2.60 2.80 2.20 1.60 5.60 2.40 2.94
13 MPN 500.00 350.00 1600.00 1600.00 ≥1600 34.00 300.00 730.67
14 Silicate (mg/L) 3.01 3.18 8.43 3.17 3.64 3.90 4.59 4.27
15 Total Phosphorous
<0.15 0.28 1.03 0.20 <0.15 0.21 0.91 0.53
(mg/L)
16 Total Nitrogen
0.56 0.84 3.36 1.12 0.84 1.12 1.96 1.40
(mg/L)
17 Fluoride(mg/L) 0.43 0.35 0.20 0.36 0.35 0.40 0.41 0.36
18 Chloride (mg/L) 1.32 2.01 3.05 1.24 1.22 3.00 3.25 2.16
19 Nitrite(mg/L) -- -- -- -- -- -- --
20 Nitrate(mg/L) -- -- 8.25 3.41 3.35 1.13 1.64 3.55
21 Phosphate(mg/L) -- -- 14.63 -- -- -- -- 14.63
22 Sulphate(mg/L) 23.30 26.61 192.14 28.69 26.45 23.70 24.97 49.41
23 TC (mg/L) 17.09 35.09 67.22 35.33 37.13 50.84 51.62 42.05
24 IC (mg/L) 10.21 22.22 44.00 28.32 23.83 38.73 33.86 28.74
25 TOC (mg/L) 6.88 12.87 23.22 7.01 13.30 12.11 17.76 13.31
26 TN (mg/L) 1.36 1.00 1.87 2.05 1.85 1.32 1.18 1.52
EC: Electrical Conductivity, TS: Total Solids, TDS: Total Dissolved Solid, MPN: Most Probable Number, TC: Total Carbon, IC: Ion
Chromatography, TOC: Total Organic Carbon, TN: Total Nitrogen / Total Bound Nitrogen, BOD: Biochemical Oxygen Demand, COD:
Chemical Oxygen Demand.
(247) HEAVY METAL AND PHYSICOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF RIVER GANGA

Table 2: Heavy Metals Analysis (Conc.-ppb)

Samples Arsenic Iron Manganese Copper Lead Cadmium Mercury Chromium Zinc Nickel

S.N. AL- 10 AL- 300 AL- AL- AL- 10 AL- 3 AL- 1 AL- 50 AL- AL- 20
100 50 5000
-10 PL- No PL- No PL- No PL - PL- No PL- No
relaxation PL- 300 PL-1500 relaxation relaxation No relaxation PL- relaxation
relaxation 15000
1 10.60 5405.77 217.60 26.00 4.11 0.83 3.18 7.09 28.67 8.55

2 3.45 635.60 40.20 10.06 1.64 0.36 2.87 3.71 19.80 10.32

3 10.21 822.59 32.28 2.28 1.83 0.11 5.04 6.43 18.07 22.32

4 0.63 369.36 13.47 1.72 0.62 0.33 2.46 2.45 10.10 2.78

5 6.83 446.67 45.72 7.92 5.59 0.94 3.39 6.59 109.96 8.65
6 13.79 3408.66 330.59 16.36 4.34 1.25 3.71 10.32 376.69 10.96

7 10.04 398.78 34.17 4.28 0.94 0.21 2.36 1.90 14.65 5.27

Table 3: Sample collection site

1 GarudChatti (Rishikesh)
2 TrivaniGhat
3 Song River (Tributary)
4 Haridwar
5 Roorkee Canal
6 Brijghat (Garhhmukteswar)
7 Bijnore Barrage

Table 4: Permissible limits of drinking water quality:

Parameters CPCB WHO ISI ICMR USEPA
Arsenic (mg/l) No relaxation 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
Iron (mg/l) 1.0 0.1 0.3 1.0 -
Manganese(mg/l) 100 50 30 - -
Copper (mg/l) 1.5 1.0 0.05 1.5 1.3
Lead (mg/l) No relaxation 0.05 0.10 0.05 -
Cadmium (mg/l) No relaxation - 0.05 - 0.1
Mercury (mg/l) No relaxation 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002
Chromium (mg/l) No relaxation - 0.05 - 0.1
Zinc (mg/l) 15.0 5.0 5.0 0.10 -
Nickel (mg/l) 0.07 0.07 0.02 0.07 0.1
Fluoride (mg/l) 1.5 1.5 0.6-1.2 1.5 4.0
pH(mg/l) 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 6.5-8.5 6.5-9.2 6.5-8.5
Turbidity NTU 10 - 10 25 -
Conductivity(mg/l) 2000 - - - -
Alkalinity (mg/l) 600 - - - -
Total hardness(mg/l) 600 500 300 600 -
Iron (mg/l) 1.0 0.1 0.3 1.0 -
Chlorides(mg/l) 1000 200 250 1000 250
Nitrate (mg/l) 100 - 45 100 -
Sulphate (mg/l) 400 - 150 400 -
Calcium (mg/l) 200 75 75 200 -
 KUMAR AND GARG (248)

Figure 1: Ganga river water Quality analysis report

Figure 2: Heavy Metals Analysis (Conc.-ppb)

Figure 3: Ganga river map and sample collection site

(249) HEAVY METAL AND PHYSICOCHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF RIVER GANGA
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author thankfully acknowledges CSIR for provide me funding
for this study and also thank of Hydrology Department IIT
Roorkee for provide me instrumentation facility.
REFERENCES
1. Abed, A. A. and Jazie, A. A. (2014). Assessment of some
physicochemical properties for water in Ganga river at varanasi,
India. Al-Qadisiya Journal For Engineering Sciences,7(2).
2. Chopra, A. K., Srivastava, S., Kumar, V., & Pathak, C. (2012). Agro-
potentiality of distillery effluent on soil and agronomical
characteristics of Abelmoschusesculentus L. (okra). Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment
3. Kumar, V., & Chopra, A. K. (2012). Monitoring of physico-chemical
and microbiological characteristics of municipal wastewater at
treatment plant, Haridwar City (Uttarakhand) India. Journal of
Environmental Science and Technology, 5: 109-118.
4. Kumar, P., Kaushal, R. K., Nigam, A.K.(2015).Assessment and
Management of Ganga River Water Quality Using Multivariate
Statistical Techniques in India. Asian Journal of Water, Environment
and Pollution, 12 (4): 61-69.
5. Sinha, S. N. and Paul, D. (2012). Detoxification of heavy metals by
biosurfactants, Bull. Environ. Sci. Res., 1: 1-3.
6. Khatun, H. and Jamal, A. (2018). Heavy Metal Pollution of River
Ganga Water. International Journal for Research in Applied Science
& Engineering Technology (IJRASET), IC: 45-98.
7. Mitra, A., Zaman, S. and Bhattacharyya, S. (2014). Heavy metal
pollution in the lower Gangetic mangrove ecosystem, water
insecurity: A social dilemma (community, environment and disaster
risk management). Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 13: 97-113.
8. Murty, M.N., James, A.J., Misra, S., (2000). Economics of water
pollution: The Indian experience. Oxford university press, New
Delhi.
9. Hawkes, J. S. (1997). What is a "heavy metal", J. Chem. Educ. 74:
1374.
10. Hussain, J., Husain, I., Arif, M., Gupta, N. (2017). Studies on heavy
metal contamination in Godavari river basin. Appl water sci., 7:4539-
4548.
11. Srivastava, V., Prasad, C., Gaur, A., Goel, D.K., Verma, A.(2016).
Physico-chemical and biological parameters investigation of river
Ganga: from source to plain of Allahabad in India. EurExp Biol., 6:6.
12. Janaydeh, M., Ismail, A., Zulkifli, S. Z., Omar, H. (2019).Toxic heavy
metal (Pb and Cd) content in tobacco cigarette brands in Selangor
state, Peninsular Malaysia. Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment, 191: 637.
13. Matta, G. (2016). A study on physico-chemical Characteristics to
assess the pollution status of river Ganga in Uttarakhand. Journal
of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences., 7(3): 210-217.
14. Singh, Y. V., Sharma, P. K., Meena, R., Kumar, M. and Verma, S. K.
(2016). Physico-chemical analysis of river Ganga at Varanasi city
in Uttar Pradesh, India. Indian Journal of Agriculture and Allied
Sciences, 2(3).
15. Shukla, A. K., Ojha, C. S. P., & Garg, R. D. (2017). Surface water
quality assessment of Ganga River Basin, India using index mapping.
IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium
(IGARSS).
16. Dhanakumar, S., Solaraj, G., Mohanraj, R. (2015). Heavy metal
partitioning in sediments and bioaccumulation in commercial fish
species of three major reservoirs of river Cauvery delta region,
India. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf., 113: 145-151.
17. Rasul, M. G., Islam, M. S., Yunus, R. B. M., Mokhtar, M. B., Alam, L.,
&Yahaya, F. M. (2017). Spatial and Temporal Variation of Water
Quality in the Bertam Catchment, Cameron Highlands, Malaysia.
Water Environment Research, 89(12), 2088-2102.
18. Paul, D. (2017). Research on heavy metal pollution of river Ganga:
A review. Annals of Agrarian Science, 15 :278-286
19. Kabir, M. A., Bakar, M. A., Bhuyan, M. S., Goswami, B. (2019).
Temporal variation of water quality parameters of the Dhanuriver,
Bangladesh. J Water Technol Treat Methods, 2(1): 121
20. Singh, K. P., Mohan, D., Singh, V. K., and Malik, A. (2005). Studies on
distribution and fractionation of heavy metals in Gomti river sediments
a tributary of the Ganges, India. Journal of Hydrology, 312: 14-27
21. Singh, V., Bhadauriya, G., and Matta, G. (2010). Water quality
assessment of VikramVatikaSarovar, Ujjain degraded due to idol
immersion. ESSENCE-International Journal for Environmental
Rehabilitation and Conservation, I (1): 83-90.
22. Singh, A. L. (2011). Toxicity of heavy metals in the water of Ganga
river at Varanasi, India: environmental implication.Poll Res.,30(2) :
107-110.
23. Authman, M. M. N., Zaki, M. S., Khallaf, E. A., and Abbas, H. H.(2015).
Use of Fish as Bio-indicator of the Effects of Heavy Metals Pollution.
J Aquac Res Development, 6:328.
24. APHA(2005). Standard methods for the examination of water and
wastewater.American Public Health Association Washington, 21st
ed.
25. ISI (1992). Indian Standard specification for Drinking Water, ISI New
Delhi.
26. Singh, A. L. and Sarma, P.N. (2005). Removal and reuse of iron from
industrial waste water using microorganisms. A chapter in Bio-
technological applications in environmental management, Editor-
R.K. Trivedi,:311-320.
27. Singh, A. L., Krishna, M. P., Rao, T. N. and Sarma, P.N. (2006).
Uptake of Cr (VI) in the presence of sulphate by Bacillus mycoides
in aerobic culture. Indian J of Biotechnology, New, Delhi. 5: 506-
509.
 KUMAR AND GARG
28. Zaki, M. S., Authman, M. M. N., Hammam, A. M. M. andShalaby, S.
I.(2014). Aquatic environmental pollution in the Egyptian countryside
and its effect on fish production (Review). Life Sci J., 11: 1024-
1029.
29. Benoff, S., Jacob, A. and Hurley, I.R. (2000). Male infertility and
environmental exposure to lead and cadmium. Hum Reprod Update.
6: 107-21.
30. Ye, J., Wang, S., Barger, M., Castranova, V. and Shi, X. (2000).
Activation of androgen response element by cadmium: a potential
mechanism for a carcinogenic effect of cadmium in the prostrate. J
Environ PatholToxicolOncol 19: 275-80.
31. Satarug, S., Haswell-Elkins, M.R. and Moore, M.R. (2000). Safe
level of cadmium intake to prevent renal toxicity in human subjects.
Br J Nutr., 84 : 791-802.
32. Staessen, J.A., Roels, H.A., Emelianov, D., Kuznetsova, T., Thijs, L.
and Vangronsveld, J. (1999). Environmental exposure to cadmium,
forearm bone density and risk of fractures: Prospective population
study. Public Health and Environmental Exposure to cadmium Study
Group. Lancet., 353 : 1140-4.
33. Shukla, V.K., Prakash, A., Tripathi, B.D., Reddy, D.C.S. and Singh, S.
(1998). Biliary heavy metal concentrations in carcinoma of the gall
bladder: case -control study. BJM, 317:1288-1289.
(250)
34. Strobe, l. B. W., Hansen, H.C.B., Borggaard, O.K., Andersen, M.K.
and Raulund-Rasmussen, K. (2001). Cadmium and copper release
kinetics in relation to afforestation of cultivated soil.
GeochimCosmochimActa., 65: 1233-1242.
35. Namasivayam, C. and Ranganathan, K. (1995). Removal of Cd (II)
from wastewater by adsorption on "waste" Fe (III)/Cr (III) hydroxide.
Water Res., 29: 1737-1744.
36. Kinniburg, D.G., Smedley, P.L.(2001). Arsenic contamination of
groundwater in Bangladesh. Final report of British Geological Survey,
University of Michigan, Michigan, (2).
37. Kapaj, S. Peterson, H. Liber, K. and Bhattacharya, P. (2006). Human
health effects from chronic arsenic poisoning. J Environ SciHealth,
A 41(10):2399-2428
38. Gulson, B.L., Jameson, C.W., Mahaffey, K.R., Mizon, K.J., Korsch,
M. J. and Vimpani, G. (1997). Pregnancy increases mobilization of
lead from maternal skeleton. J Lab Clin Med., 30:51-62.
39. Gonzalez-Cossio, T., Peterson, K.E., Sanin, L., Fishbein, S.E.,
Palazuelos, E., Aro., A. and HernandezAvila, M. Hu. H. (1997).
Decrease in birth weight in relation to maternal bone -lead burden.
Pediatrics, 100: 856-62.