GLOBAL ENGINEERS & TECHNOLOGISTS REVIEW

www.getview.org

WATER QUALITY INDEX OF WATER BODIES ALONG

FARIDPUR-BARISAL ROAD IN BANGLADESH

RUMMAN MOWLA CHOWDHURY1, SARDAR YAFEE MUNTASIR2 and M. MONOWAR HOSSAIN3

1, 3
Institute of Water Modelling
Dhaka, BANGLADESH
1
rmc@iwmbd.org
2
Department of Civil Engineering
Stamford University Bangladesh
51, Siddeswari Road, Dhaka – 1217, BANGLADESH
2
yafeebd@yahoo.com
3
Department of Water Resources Engineering
Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology
Dhaka-1000, BANGLADESH
3
mnh@iwmbd.org

ABSTRACT
Water quality parameters of 34 different water stations along the Faridpur-Barishal road in
Bangladesh were collected to determine water quality index (WQI). Six most important parameters -
pH, total dissolved solids, dissolves oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand, electrical conductivity and
temperature difference were considered for WQI. The WQI was assessed using a weighted arithmetic
index method and National Sanitation Foundation method. According to the arithmetic mean
method WQI values vary between 19 and 96, wherein NSF Method WQI values vary between 55
and 91. In weighted arithmetic index method highest favourable value gives a low statistical value to
the index whereas lowest favourable value gives a low statistical value to the index in NSF method.
The values of the WQI showed that the water of the maximum stations are poor and very poor in
condition, few of them can be referred to as good, and among all water stations only one of the
stations Id(p-7) contains excellent water quality parameter for human consumption and other uses.
The results revealed that although WQI of most of the water bodies are beyond acceptable limit but
could be used for domestic and household purpose after purification.

Keywords: Water Quality Index, Pre-Monsoon, Dissolved Oxygen, Biochemical Oxygen Demand,
Total Dissolved Solids.

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Water is a unique resource because it is essential for all life and it constantly cycles between the land and the
atmosphere. The same water that is used for crop and animal production can also be shared with the public and
the aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems (Cooper et al., 1998). Water resources are of great environmental issues
and studied by a wide range of specialists including hydrologists, engineers, ecologists, geologists and geo
morphologists (Kumar and Dua, 2009). It has become an important issue for them as it affects not only human
uses but also plant and animal life.
For healthy living, potable safe water is absolutely essential. It is a basic need of all human being to get the
adequate supply of safe and fresh drinking water. One of the most effective ways to communicate water quality
is Water Quality Index (WQI), where the water quality is assessed on the basis of calculated water quality
indices. Quality of water is defined in terms of its physical, chemical, and biological parameters. However, the
quality is difficult to evaluate from a large number of samples, each containing concentrations for many
parameters (Almeida, 2007). Horton (1965) proposed the first WQI, a great deal of consideration has been given
to the development of index methods. A water quality index provides a single number that expresses overall
water quality at a certain location on several water quality parameters and turns complex water quality data
into information that is understandable and useable by the general people. WQI is a mathematical instrument
used to transform large quantities of water quality data into a single number which represents the water quality
level while eliminating the subjective assessments of water quality and biases of individual water quality
experts. Basically a WQI attempts to provide a mechanism for presenting a cumulatively derived, numerical
expression defining a certain level of water quality (Miller et al., 1986). Comparison can be made through the
-
G.L.O.B.A.L E.N.G.I.N.E.E.R.S. .& . .T.E.C.H.N.O.L.O.G.I.S.T.S R.E.V.I.E.W

1
 Global Engineers & Technologists Review, Vol.2 No.3 (2012)

WQI among the water bodies and a general analysis of water quality on different levels can be made. A water
quality index is a means to summarize large amounts of water quality data into simple terms (e.g., poor, good
etc.) for reporting to management and the public in a consistent manner.
Importance of water bodies along the roadside is evident in terms of water quality, biodiversity
conservation and use for aquaculture, as maximum of the water bodies of Bangladesh are expected to be
productive. So utilization of the existing resources is very much vital. In the way to improving the condition of
these water resources, its proper management is very much necessary and for doing this all information on the
resources namely physico-graphic, chemical and biological characteristic of these water resources must be
collected. The objective of this paper is to determine the WQI of 34 water bodies along Faridpur-Barishal road.
Drinking water contamination and variation of drinking water quality in pre-monsoon is the basis of calculated
values of WQI as concentrations of different water quality parameters tend to be at its worse condition during
pre-monsoon season. Based on the WQI an assessment was made whether these water bodies are acceptable for
domestic use and even for drinking purpose. Local people living along this road are completely dependent on
these water bodies as there is no proper water supply made to meet their needs. For this reason, this analysis is
extremely necessary so that people living in these areas can mark out the best water source available. Also if
they need more water badly they can also determine which water bodies can used after proper treatment is
done. Similar type of studies have been done in India by Chauhan and Singh, (2010), where WQI values were
determined in several stations along Ganges River so that quality of water can be seen along the river. Also
several studies have been performed to determine water qualities along streams (Abrahão et al., 2010) where
effluents come from industries. But this study has its individual significance as WQI values of 34 stations were
taken along a road’s length of a specific region in Bangladesh. Although in some places a confined research may
be done like determining WQI of local ponds, but along roadside water bodies this type of study is not available.

2.0 STUDY AREA AND METHODOLOGY

The present study was conducted along the priority road which is of 128 km in length, touching 4 districts
namely - Barishal, Madaripur, Gopalngonj and Faridpur. The parameters - water temperature, pH, dissolved
oxygen, total dissolved solids (TDS) and electrical conductivity (EC) of 34 different locations along Faridpur-
Barishal road during pre monsoon (March until April in 2011) was collected and analyzed immediately at the
sampling site using standard equipment. The study area is shown on a satellite image with 34 sampling stations
in Figure 1. Sampling stations were numbered arbitrarily for convenience of records. Sampling date, place and
time were recorded on the sampling bottles. For BOD measurement, a 500ml bottle was used for collection of
water samples and the oxygen was fixed at the sampling site before being carried to the laboratory for further
analysis.

Figure 1: Index map of study area

The examination and analysis of the water bodies including laboratory analysis was done as per the
standard methods of USEPA, (2004) and (Trivedi and Goel, 1986). The calculation of WQI was made using
weighted arithmetic index method (Brown et al., 1972) and National Sanitation Foundation method. Finally
assessment of surface water quality based on water quality index was done. Table 1 shows the details of analysis
methods and necessary equipments used in the study.

© 2012 GETview Limited. All rights reserved

2
 Global Engineers & Technologists Review, Vol.2 No.3 (2012)

Table 1: Details of physic-chemical parameters, analysis methods and the equipments

Serial Number Temperature Methodology Equipments
1 Temperature Visible Centigrade Thermometer
2 Salinity Visible Sensaso-CL 410,HACH,USA
3 pH Visible Sensaso-CL 410,HACH,USA
4 Transparency Visible Secchi Disk
5 Dissolved Oxygen Visible Dissolved Oxygen Meter, (Model-YK22 DO),USA
6 BOD Laboratory Dissolved Oxygen Meter, (Model-YK22 DO),USA
7 Conductivity Visible Conductivity Meter, (Model-CD4302,USA)
8 TDS Visible Sensaso-CL 410,HACH,USA

3.0 WQI COMPUTATION EQUATIONS

The calculation of WQI, selection of parameters has great value. The water quality index will widen if too many
parameters are used. Importance of various parameters depends on the intended use of water. Four parameters
which is pH, TDS, δT, DO were used to calculate WQI by national sanitation foundation method. Five physico-
chemical parameters namely pH, TDS, EC, DO, BOD were used to calculate wqi by the weighted arithmetic index
method. Several steps of weighted arithmetic index method are given (brown et al., 1972) in the following steps:

3.1 Calculation of Sub Index of Quality Rating (qn)

Let there be n water quality parameters where the quality rating or sub index (qn) corresponding to the
nth parameter is a number reflecting the relative value of this parameter in the polluted water with
respect to its standard permissible value. The value of qn is calculated using the following expression.

qn = 100[(Vn - Vio) / (Sn - Vio)] (1)

Where,
qn = quality rating for the nth water quality parameter.
Vn = estimated value of the nth parameter at a given sampling station.
Sn = standard permissible value of nth parameter
Vio = ideal value of nth parameter in pure water.

All the ideal values (Vio) are taken as zero for drinking water except for pH = 7.0 and dissolved
oxygen=14.6mg/L. (Tripaty and Sahu, 2005).

3.2 Calculation of Quality Rating for pH

For pH the ideal value is 7.0 (for natural water) and a permissible value is 8.5 (for polluted water).
Therefore, the quality rating for pH is calculated from the following relation:

qpH = 100 [(VpH -7.0)/(8.5 -7.0)] (2)

Where,
VpH = observed value of pH during the study period.

3.3 Calculation of Quality Rating for Dissolved Oxygen

The ideal value (VDO) for dissolved oxygen is 14.6 mg/L and standard permitted value for drinking water
is 5 mg/L. Therefore, quality rating is calculated from following relation:

qDO = 100 [(VDO - 14.6)/(5 – 14.6)] (3)

Where,
VDO = measured value of dissolved oxygen

3.4 Calculation of Unit Weight (Wn)

Calculation of unit weight (Wn) for various water quality parameters are inversely proportional to the
recommended standards for the corresponding parameters.

Wn = K/Sn (4)

Where,
Wn = unit weight for nth parameters

© 2012 GETview Limited. All rights reserved

3
 Global Engineers & Technologists Review, Vol.2 No.3 (2012)

Sn = standard value for nth parameters

K = constant for proportionality

3.5 Calculation of WQI

WQI is calculated from the following equation:

n n
WQI =∑ qn Wn / ∑ Wn (5)
n=1 n-1

3.6 Calculation of WQI by NSF method

The NSF water quality index was developed by the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) in 1970. An
equation of NSF water quality index was found by using weighted factor of individual parameter and sub-
index of each water quality parameter based on their respective testing values which can be found by
water quality index calculator or water quality index curve of respective parameters. The water quality
index of individual parameter was calculated from water quality index calculator used by Environmental
Engineering and Earth Sciences, Center of Environmental Quality, Wilkes University (Islam et al., 2011).

WQI = 0.17IDO + 0.11IpH + 0.10I ΔT + 0.07ITDS (6)

4.0 RESULTS OF SUB-WATER QUALITY INDEX

Sub water quality index of five parameters for the former method (Brown arithmetic mean method) are given in
Table 2 and Sub water quality index of four parameters by the NSF method are given in Table 3.

Table 2: Sub water quality Index of the physico-chemical parameters according to Brown Method.
Sub water quality Sub water quality Sub water quality Sub water quality Sub water quality
Station Index Index Index Index Index
(PH) (TDS) (EC) (BOD) (DO)
P-1 5.125 0.334 0.087 7.687 36.433
P-2 4.371 0.264 0.070 9.224 38.035
P-3 4.974 0.278 0.073 4.612 26.824
P-4 -25.925 0.122 0.032 18.449 26.024
P-5 16.429 0.116 0.031 3.843 28.025
P-6 10.701 0.073 0.020 4.612 46.843
P-7 21.252 0.056 0.015 9.993 29.627
P-8 20.800 0.104 0.028 16.911 27.625
P-9 15.073 0.117 0.031 15.374 40.437
K-1 3.768 0.142 0.038 15.374 45.241
R-1 11.757 0.079 0.020 21.524 32.830
R-2 15.073 0.078 0.021 26.904 30.428
P-10 17.936 0.116 0.031 3.843 41.237
BP-1 8.441 0.118 0.031 3.843 44.440
P-11 22.458 0.098 0.026 18.449 41.638
P-12 33.612 0.124 0.033 23.830 38.035
K-2 20.197 0.132 0.035 4.612 26.024
P-13 4.522 0.171 0.045 3.843 32.429
K-3 0.301 0.148 0.039 29.979 45.641
K-4 5.426 0.137 0.036 20.755 36.433
K-5 9.044 0.165 0.044 26.136 42.038
R-3 12.209 0.123 0.031 16.143 34.431
K-6 7.536 0.159 0.042 26.136 50.446
K-7 8.139 0.151 0.040 12.299 46.042
R-4 7.536 0.083 0.022 23.830 41.638
R-5 9.044 0.126 0.033 5.381 52.047
P-14 26.678 0.113 0.030 7.687 34.431
R-6 6.029 0.086 0.022 12.299 45.641
B-1 -3.165 0.589 0.151 5.381 52.047
B-2 1.507 0.410 0.107 6.150 48.444
P-15 4.522 0.115 0.040 9.224 46.042
R-7 20.046 0.229 0.060 17.680 35.232
P-16 0.000 0.361 0.094 9.224 45.641
P-17 18.087 0.119 0.034 9.993 32.830

© 2012 GETview Limited. All rights reserved

4
 Global Engineers & Technologists Review, Vol.2 No.3 (2012)

4.1 pH
pH is one of the most important factors that serves as an index for the pollution. The experimental water
bodies were found to be approximately neutral or slightly alkaline. The highest value of pH was 9.23 at P-
12 and lowest was 5.28 at P-4. The lowest mean value of pH was 7.67 ± 0.05. A pH between 6.7 and 8.4 is
suitable, while pH below 5.0 and above 8.3 is detrimental. In the present investigation pH values were
within the ICMR standards (7.0 - 8.5) (Tripaty and Sahu, 2005). Maximum Sub water quality index for pH
was found 36 at P-12 station and Minimum was found as -36 at station P-4 according to Brown’s method.
The maximum and minimum values are 35 (P-4) and 95 (P-1) respectively.

Table 3: Sub water quality Index of the physico-chemical parameters according to NSF Method.

Sub water quality Index Sub water quality Index Sub water quality Index Sub water quality Index
Station
(PH) (TDS) (ΔT) (DO)
P-1 93 42 84 78
P-2 92 54 84 66
P-3 93 52 89 99
P-4 35 78 91 99
P-5 81 79 87 99
P-6 91 84 88 25
P-7 69 86 77 98
P-8 70 80 70 99
P-9 84 79 85 53
K-1 92 75 85 33
R-1 90 83 81 84
R-2 84 83 89 93
P-10 77 79 74 53
BP-1 92 79 82 33
P-11 67 81 79 53
P-12 41 77 73 68
K-2 72 76 84 99
P-13 93 70 82 88
K-3 88 74 87 30
K-4 93 75 89 75
K-5 92 71 83 46
R-3 90 78 89 87
K-6 93 72 85 15
K-7 92 73 81 27
R-4 93 83 84 45
R-5 92 77 85 11
P-14 57 79 73 87
R-6 93 82 86 30
B-1 83 20 77 11
B-2 90 20 84 20
P-15 93 79 87 30
R-7 72 60 74 87
P-16 88 36 68 30
P-17 77 78 83 88

4.2 Total Dissolved Solids

The TDS level found to fluctuate from 73.1 mg/l to 766 mg/l within the water bodies. The TDS content
was maximum in B-1 and minimum in P-7 with average of 219.61 ± 1.79 mg/l. The amounts of total solids
are influenced by the activity of the plankton and organic materials. Slightly high value of TDS were
recorded at only one sampling stations and other values were less than the WHO limit. Water containing
more than 500 mg/L of TDS is not considered desirable for drinking water supply. Maximum Sub water
quality index for TDS is found close to 1 (Brown Method) at B-1 station. Minimum Sub water quality index
for TDS was found almost 0 at rest of the 33 stations (Brown Method). Maximum Sub water quality index
for TDS is found 86 (Station P-7) and minimum Sub water quality index for TDS was found as 20(Station
B-1, 2). (NSF method)

4.3 Dissolved Oxygen

The value of DO varied from 1.6 mg/l to 8.1mg/l. The maximum DO value (8.1mg/l) was recorded in K-2
and minimum value (1.6mg/l) was recorded in B-1. The mean value of DO was 4.90 ± 0.16mg/l.
Concentrations below 5 mg/L may adversely affect the performance and survival of biological
communities and below 2 mg/L may lead to fish mortality. Water without adequate DO may be
considered wastewater. Maximum Sub water quality index for DO was found 52 at B-1 and minimum sub
water quality index for DO was found 26 at P-4 (Brown Method). Maximum Sub water quality index for

© 2012 GETview Limited. All rights reserved

5
 Global Engineers & Technologists Review, Vol.2 No.3 (2012)

DO was found 99 at (P-3, 4, 5 and K-2) and minimum sub water quality index for DO was found 11 at B-1,
R-5.

4.4 Biochemical Oxygen Demand

BOD varied between 0.5 mg/l to 3.9 mg/l among the different sampling stations. The minimum values
were found in P-5, P-10, BP-1 and P-13. The Maximum value was recorded in K-3. The mean value of BOD
was 1.76±0.14 mg/l. Maximum Sub water quality index for BOD was found 30 at K-3. Minimum Sub water
quality index for DO was found 4 at P-5 (Brown Method).

4.5 Electrical Conductivity

Conductivity is measured in terms of conductivity per unit length, and meters typically use the unit micro
Siemens /cm. The values of water conductivity (2ms) varied from 154 μs /cm to 1544 μs/cm among the
water bodies. The value of conductivity was recorded lowest in R-1 and maximum in B-1. The mean value
was 452.67±2.51μs/cm. The mean value was 365.17μs/cm. Sub water quality index for Electrical
Conductivity is almost 0 at all stations (Brown Method).

4.6 Temperature Difference

Surface water temperature varied between 26.3˚C and 33.3˚C and water temperature varied between
23.8˚C and 34.2˚C.Maximum difference in temperature was 5.6˚C and minimum was 0.5˚C, 2.43˚C was the
average difference. Maximum Sub water quality index of temperature difference is 91 at station number
P-5, and the minimum was at P-17 and the value was 68.

5.0 ASSESSMENT OF WATER QUALITY

WQI has been classified into 5 classes. Table 4 and Table 5 represent the 5 classes of water quality based on WQI
of two methods respectively.

Table 4: Status of water quality based on Arithmetic WQI method (Brown et al., 1972)

Water quality index Status

0-25 Excellent
26-50 Good
51-75 Poor
76-100 Very poor
Above 100 Unsuitable for drinking and propagation of fish culture

Table 5: Status of water quality based on National Sanitation Foundation WQI

Water quality index Status

0-25 Very Bad
26-50 Bad
51-75 Medium
76-100 Good
Above 100 Excellent

The observed range of water quality index along the road in pre monsoon is 19 to 96 by the arithmetic
mean method. Maximum WQI was 96 at station P-12 and minimum is 19 at station P-4. Only one single station’s
water quality can be expressed as excellent (P-4). Water quality of station P-1, P-3, P-5 and P-13 can be called as
good water. P-2, P-6, P-7, P-8, P-9, P-10, P-14, P-16, P-17, K-1, K-2, K-7, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5, R-6, R-7, B-1, B-2,
BP-1 have been classified as poor water. Rest of the stations P-11, P-12, K-3, K-5, K-6 have been classified as
containing very poor water, but all of them can be used for domestic purpose by taking proper disinfection
procedure. Stations with WQI values more than 90 can be classified as unsuitable for both domestic and
aquaculture purposes. 1 of the stations turned out to be unsuitable as WQI value is more than 90.
According to the NSF, WQI varied between 55 and 91. As the lowest value indicates the best value most of
the water stations fall within medium to good water quality range. Among the stations P-5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16,
R-4, 5, 6 BP-1, K-3, 5, 6, 7 have been classified as medium water. And rest of the stations water has been
classified as good water. There is a little difference in categorization of the stations according to the two
methods as the parameters selected for the methods are different and this is because of the unavailability of the
parameters. One point is noticeable that according to the arithmetic mean method by brown WQI ranges from
51-75 has been classified as poor where according to NSF WQI this range has been classified as medium. So it
will be better to count acceptable range between 0-50 for Browns method and 75- to more than 100 for the NSF
method. Table.3 shows the WQI values of the 34 stations measured in pre monsoon period. Station P-1, 3, 4, 5,

© 2012 GETview Limited. All rights reserved

6
 Global Engineers & Technologists Review, Vol.2 No.3 (2012)

13 can be classified as the best stations among all. Table 6 represents WQI value of the 34 stations by two
methods. Table 7 represents the maximum, minimum and average value of different parameters. Standard and
ideal values of different water quality parameters have been shown in Table 8. Guidelines are recommended by
World Health Organization (WHO) and Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR).

Table 6: Location wise calculated values of Water Quality Index for pre monsoon period

Water quality Water quality

index index
Station* Station name (weighted (National
arithmetic Sanitation
index) Foundation WQI)
P-1 Right(Education Board pond1, Barisal) 50 81
P-2 Right(Education Board pond2, Barisal) 52 78
P-3 Left(Roads and Highways pond, Barishal) 37 90
P-4 Right(Forest Office pond) 19 77
P-5 Right(Opposite of Ansar VDP pond) 48 91
P-6 Left(opposite of Madrasha) 62 71
P-7 Right(Tri-road More) 61 87
P-8 Right(pond) 65 84
P-9 Right(Andipur pond, Purbopansha, Babuganj, Barisal 71 73
K-1 Rajguber khal, babuganj, Barisal 65 68
R-1 Duarika (Sugandha) River, Mohiuddin Jahangir bridge, Babuganj, Barisal 66 81
R-2 Shikerpur river, Babuganj, Barisal(M.A. Jalil bridge) 73 84
P-10 Left(Kaler dighi, Dakhin Shikerpur, Ujirpur, Barishal) 63 74
BP-1 Left(Batazor khal), Gournodi, Barisal 57 72
P-11 Right(Shamsul Howlader pond), Batazor, Giurnodi Barishal 83 68
P-12 Left(Mahilara A.N. High School pond), Gournodi, Barishal 96 64
K-2 Ashukathi khal, Gournodi, Barishal 51 88
P-13 Right(Gournodi Busstand pond), Gournodi, Barisal 41 88
K-3 Southern Khal, Koltokshal, Gournodi, Barishal 76 63
K-4 Bhurghata Khal, Kalkini, Maderpur 63 80
K-5 Kornapara khal, Kalkini, Maderipur 77 68
R-3 Mostofapur River, Maderipur 63 85
K-6 Srinerdi khal, Maderipur 84 60
K-7 Kamerer khal, Rajore, Faridpur 67 67
R-4 Kumer nodi(river), Moksudpur, Tekerhat, Gopalgonj 73 70
R-5 Kumer nodi, Dignagar, Moksudpur, Gopalgonj 67 65
P-14 Sagor Mollah pond, Dignagar, Moksudpur, Gopalgonj 69 79
R-6 Kumer nodi, Bhanga bazar, Bhanga, Faridpur 64 70
B-1 Bhanga beel, Bhanga,Faridpur 55 77
B-2 Nurpur Beel, opposite to bhanga beel, Bhanga, Faridpur 57 55
P-15 Sagordi river, Bhanga, Faridpur 60 71
R-7 Hasan shaheb pond, Shontoshi, Nagorkanda, Faridpur 73 76
P-16 Kumer nodi, Bakunda, Faridpur 55 61
P-17 Polishfari pond, Goalchamot, Faridpur 61 84

Table 7: Maximum, minimum and average values of diffrent water quality parameters

Groups Maximum Minimum Average

pH 9.23 5.28 7.67
DO(mg/l) 8.1 1.6 4.89
BOD(mg/l) 3.9 .5 1.73
Conductivity(2ms) 1544 154 448.22
TDS 766 73.1 215.635
Air Temperature 33.3 26.8 29.5
Water Temperature 34.2 23.8 27.43

Table 8: Drinking water standards and unit weight

Parameter Recommending Agency Standard value (S) Ideal value 1/S Assigned weightage factor
pH ICMR 8.5 7 0.117647 0.226087822
TDS WHO 500 0 0.002 0.003843493
EC WHO 1400 0 0.000714 0.001372676
DO WHO 5 14.6 0.2 0.384349297
BOD ICMR 5 0 0.2 0.384349297
K 0.52036 1

© 2012 GETview Limited. All rights reserved

7
 Global Engineers & Technologists Review, Vol.2 No.3 (2012)

4.0 CONCLUSION
WQI have some margins as it may not carry enough information about the actual situation of the water bodies.
Also many other uses of water quality data cannot be met with an index. Despite of having such problem WQI
are more recompense than its drawback. WQI of the stations along the Faridpur –Barishal road for the pre
monsoon season was found fairly high according to the Brown method, as concentration of water quality
parameters are maximum during pre monsoon and due to the same reason according to NSF method the values
were low. In accordance with Brown method it is found from the calculation that parameter which shows the
highest favorable value gives a low statistical value to the index and compliant with NSF method the favorable
value has descending order. BOD, DO was found to be the most important parameter as it contributes the most
for the WQI calculation among the five parameters for the former method. Out of the 34 stations almost 5
stations were found suitable for domestic and aquaculture purpose. So if proper treatment is done then all the
34 water bodies could become useful and could help people in rural areas during time of crisis. The study result
is expected to provide valuable information in connection with the use of water bodies by the local people of the
study region.

REFERENCES
[1] Abrahão, R., Carvalho, M., Da Silva Jr., W., Machado, T., Gadelha, C. and Hernandez. M. (2010): Use of Index
Analysis to Evaluate the Water Quality of a Stream Receiving Industrial Effluents. WaterSA, Vol.33, No.4,
pp.459-466.
[2] Almeida, C.A. (2007): Influence of Urbanization and Tourist Activities on the Water Quality of the Potrero
De Los Funes River (San Luis – Argentina). Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, Vol.133, No.1-3,
pp.459-465.
[3] Brown, R.M., McCleiland, N.J., Deininger, R.A. and O’Connor, M.F. (1972): A Water Quality Index - Crossing
the Psychological Barrier (Jenkis, S.H., ed.) Proc. Int. Conf. on Water Poll. Res., Jerusalem, Vol.6, pp.787-797.
[4] Chauhan, A. and Singh, S. (2010): Evaluation of Ganga Water for Drinking Purpose by Water Quality Index
at Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, India. Report and Opinion, Vol.2, No.9, pp.53-61.
[5] Cooper, J., Rediske, R., Northup, M., Thogerson, M. and Van Denend, J. (1998): Agricultural Water Quality
Index. Scientific Technical Reports. paper 11.
[6] Horton, R.K. (1965): An Index Number for Rating Water Quality. Journal of Water Pollution Control
Federation, Vol.37, No.3, pp.300-306.
[7] Islam, S., Rasul, M.T., Alam, M.J.B. and Haque, M.A. (2011): Evaluation of Water Quality of the Titas River
Using NSF Water Quality Index. Journal of Scientific Research, Vol.3, No.1, pp.151-159.
[8] Kumar, A. and Dua, A. (2009): Water Quality Index for Assessment of Water Quality of River Ravi at
Madhopur, India. Global Journal of Environmental Sciences, Vol.8, No.1, pp.49-57.
[9] Miller, W.W, Young, H.M., Mahannah, C.N. and Garret, J.R. (1986): Identification of Water Quality Differences
in Nevada through Index Application. Journal of Environmental Quality, Vol.15, pp.265-272.
[10] Tripaty, J.K. and Sahu, K.C. (2005): Seasonal Hydrochemistry of Groundwater in the Barrier Spit System of
the Chilika Lagoon, India. Journal of Environmental Hydrology, Vol.13, pp.1-9.
[11] Trivedi, R.K. and Goel, P.K. (1986): Chemical and biological method for water pollution studies.
Environmental Publications, Karad (Maharashtra), India. p.248.
[12] USEPA. (2004): National Wadeable Stream Assessment: Water Chemistry Laboratory Manual. EPA841-B-04-
008. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water and Office of Research and Development,
Washington, DC.

© 2012 GETview Limited. All rights reserved

8