Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488
DOI 10.1007/s10661-011-2279-0
Groundwater quality assessment in the village of Lutfullapur
Nawada, Loni, District Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India
Vinod K. Singh & Devendra Singh Bikundia &
Ankur Sarswat & Dinesh Mohan
Received: 17 January 2011 / Accepted: 27 July 2011 / Published online: 27 August 2011
# Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011
Abstract The groundwater quality for drinking,
domestic and irrigation in the village Lutfullapur
Nawada, Loni, district Ghaziabad, U.P., India, has
been assessed. Groundwater samples were collected,
processed and analyzed for temperature, pH, conduc-
tivity, salinity, total alkalinity, carbonate alkalinity,
bicarbonate alkalinity, total hardness, calcium hard-
ness, magnesium hardness, total solids, total dissolved
solids, total suspended solids, nitrate-nitrogen, chlo-
ride, fluoride, sulfate, phosphate, silica, sodium,
potassium, calcium, magnesium, total chromium,
cadmium, copper, iron, nickel, lead and zinc. A
number of groundwater samples showed levels of
electrical conductivity (EC), alkalinity, chloride, cal-
cium, sodium, potassium and iron exceeding their
permissible limits. Except iron, the other metals (Cr,
Cd, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Zn) were analyzed below the
permissible limits. The correlation matrices for 28
variables were performed. EC, salinity, TS and TDS
had significant positive correlations among them-
selves and also with NO3−, Cl−, alkalinity, Na+, K+,
and Ca2+. Fluoride was not significantly correlated
with any of the parameters. NO3− was significantly
positively correlated with Cl−, alkalinity, Na+, K+ and
Ca2+. Chloride also correlated significantly with
alkalinity, Na+, K+ and Ca2+. Sodium showed a strong
V. K. Singh : D. S. Bikundia : A. Sarswat : D. Mohan (*)
School of Environmental Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru
University,
New Delhi 110067, India
e-mail: dm_1967@hotmail.com
and positive correlation with K+ and Ca2+. pH was
negatively correlated with most of the physicochem-
ical parameters. This groundwater is classified as a
normal sulfate and chloride type. Base-exchange
indices classified 73% of the groundwater sources
as the Na+-SO42− type. The meteoric genesis indices
demonstrated that 67% of groundwater sources
belong to a deep meteoric water percolation type.
Hydrochemical groundwater evaluations revealed
that most of the groundwaters belong to the Na+-
K+-Cl−-SO42− type followed by Na +-K+-HCO3−
type. Salinity, chlorinity and SAR indices indicated
that majority of groundwater samples can be con-
sidered suitable for irrigation purposes.
Keywords Groundwater . Heavy metal ions . Base-
exchange index . Meteoric genesis index . Chlorinity
index . Salinity index . Sodium absorption ratio
Introduction
Water is indispensable. Groundwater is highly valued
because it constitutes the major drinking water source
in most of the parts in India (Goel 2000). It occurs
beneath the surface in thousands of small aquifers and
compartments (Vasanthavigar et al. 2010). Ground-
waters are exploited on a far larger scale than surface
water (Soltan 1999). Groundwater accounts for about
88% of the safe drinking water in rural areas where
water treatment and transport do not exist (Ravikumar
et al. 2010).
4474
Surface water contamination has put enormous
pressure on groundwater resources leading to over-
exploitation. Furthermore, urban growth has led to
both over-exploitation and improper waste disposal
(Jameel and Sirajudeen 2006). According to the
Central Groundwater Board, the dynamic fresh
groundwater resources of India have been estimated
at 432 km3/year, of which 396 km3 is estimated to be
utilizable (planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/
committee/wrkgrp11/wg11_rivers.pdf). Groundwater
contamination problems due to arsenic, fluoride,
nitrate, chromium, iron, pesticides, and other indus-
trial chemicals/pollutants are emerging with national
dimensions. Depletion of groundwater levels and
deterioration of water quality requires immediate
attention. Therefore, many studies have been
conducted to ascertain groundwater quality in
Nainital, Uttarakhand (Jain et al. 2010), Haridwar,
Uttrakhand (Jain 2005), Uttar Pradesh (Singh et al.
2006), Jaipur, Rajasthan (Tank and Chandel 2010),
Tamilnadu (Vasanthavigar et al. 2010), Belgaum,
Karnataka (Ravikumar et al. 2010), Bangalore
(Shankar et al. 2008), Tiruchirappalli, Tamilnadu
(Jameel and Sirajudeen 2006), Andhra Pradesh
(Mondal et al. 2010), Delhi (Adhikary et al. 2009).
Groundwater quality studies for Ghaziabad are
inadequate. Furthermore, the aquifers in the alluvial
region of the densely populated northern Indo-
Gangetic plains are prone to anthropogenic contam-
ination from intensive agricultural and industrial
activities. An anthropogenic pollution database of
the groundwater aquifers in this region is needed.
This study’s objective was to evaluate the groundwa-
ter quality for drinking, domestic and irrigation in
Lutfullapur Nawada, Loni, located about 30 km from
Ghaziabad, U.P., India.
Materials and methods
Study area
The Lutfullapur Nawada, Loni is a settlement of ~250
households located ~30 km from Ghaziabad (Fig. 1).
The village lies adjacent to a drain carrying dying
industrial effluents from the Khekra area of Baghpat
in western Uttar Pradesh. These effluents are released
and percolate into the ground. This may degrade the
groundwater quality. Ghaziabad is a planned industri-
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488
al city along the Grand Trunk road ~2.5 km from the
Hindon River between 28°40′ to 28°67′N (latitude)
and 77°25′ to 77°42′E (longitude) (Fig. 1). Ghaziabad
district is densely populated, has many agricultural
industries in surrounding areas that have high use
rates of chemicals, fertilizers/pesticides. Ghaziabad
houses one of the largest and most modern electric
locomotive sheds. Urban and industrial waste disposal
sites exist in the region due to the close vicinity of
New Delhi and several big townships. Ganga,
Yamuna and Hindon are the major rivers flowing
through the district. The Ganga canal, a major
irrigation source also flows through the district. It
also carries drinking water for Ghaziabad and Delhi
(http://ghaziabad.nic.in/indexintro1.htm).
Sampling and analytical procedure
Sampling
Fifteen groundwater samples were collected in August
2010 from shallow and deep bore hand-pumps after
flushing water for 10–15 min to remove the stagnant
water. The sampling containers were washed, rinsed
with distilled water and dried before use. Groundwater
samples were collected from the India Desi (#1,2,8 and
13; depth ~40–60 ft) and India Mark-II (#3–7, 9–12, 14
and 15; depth ≥ ~40 ft) hand pumps. The water samples
for metal analysis were collected in acid washed
polyethylene bottles and preserved by nitric acid
addition at the site (pH <2). All samples were
immediately transported to the laboratory under low
temperature conditions. These samples were stored at
4°C in the laboratory until processed/analyzed.
Analytical procedures
The groundwater samples were processed and
analyzed for temperature, pH, EC, salinity, total
alkalinity (T-Alk, mg/l as CaCO3), carbonate alka-
linity (CO32−, mg/l as CaCO3), bicarbonate alkalin-
ity (HCO3−, mg/l as CaCO3), total hardness (T-hard,
mg/l as CaCO3), calcium hardness (Ca-hard, mg/l as
CaCO3), magnesium hardness (Mg-hard, mg/l as
CaCO3), total solids (TS, mg/l), total dissolved
solids (TDS, mg/l), total suspended solids (TSS,
mg/l), nitrate-nitrogen (NO3−-N, mg/l), chloride
(Cl−, mg/l), fluoride (F−, mg/l), sulfate (SO42−,
mg/l), phosphate (PO43−, mg/l), silica (SiO2, mg/l),
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488 4475

Ghaziabad

Uttar Pradesh

India

Sampling site

77.510 E
77.251 E 28.971 N Sample No. Long (E) Lat (N)
28.971 N 1. 77.255 28.971
2. 77.251 28.967
3. 77.253 28.963
4. 77.508 28.961
5. 77.502 28.961
6. 77.256 28.961
7. 77.510 28.955
8. 77.259 28.955
Sampling points 9. 77.254 28.946
IM - II 10. 77.500 28.943
Local Hand Pump 11. 77.264 28.959
28.938 N 12. 77.277 28.968
28.938 N
13. 77.286 28.970
77.251 E 77.510 E
14. 77.499 28.950
15. 77.506 28.938

Fig. 1 Location map of the study area

sodium (Na+, mg/l), potassium (K+, mg/l), calcium (FeT, μg/l), nickel (Ni2+, μg/l), lead (Pb2+, μg/l) and
(Ca2+, mg/l), magnesium (Mg2+, mg/l), hexavalent zinc (Zn2+, mg/l).
chromium (Cr6+, μg/l), total chromium (CrT, μg/l), Water temperature was measured on the site using
cadmium (Cd2+, μg/l), copper (Cu2+, μg/l), total iron mercury thermometer while other parameters were
4476
determined in laboratory within 48–72 h of the
sampling following the standard methods (APHA
2005). EC, pH, salinity, chloride, fluoride, and nitrate
were analyzed using multiple parameters ion meter
model Thermo Orion 5 Star. Sulfate, phosphate, silica
and hexavalent chromium were measured using a
double beam UV–Vis spectrophotometer model
Perkin Elmer Lambda 35 by turbidimetric, stannous
chloride, molybdosilicate and colorimetric methods,
respectively. Sodium, potassium and calcium were
analyzed using flame photometer model CL-378
(Elico, India). Hardness (total and calcium) was
determined by EDTA titrimetric method. Total, dis-
solved and suspended solids were measured gravi-
metrically. Total carbonate and bicarbonate alkalinities
were measured by acid–base titration. Total chromi-
um, cadmium, copper, iron, nickel, lead, zinc and
magnesium were measured using Ultima inductively
coupled plasma spectrometer/Perkin Elmer atomic
absorption spectrophotometer in the acid digested
samples. The digestion was carried out with nitric/
perchloric acid mixture (5:1).
The analytical data quality was controlled by
standardization, procedural blank measurements and
spiking the samples and necessary corrections were
applied. All observations were recorded in duplicate
and average values are reported.
Results and discussion
General parameters
The physicochemical characteristics along with the
standard deviation are presented in Table 1. The pH
values varies from 7.43 to 7.95 (mean, 7.74), indicat-
ing alkaline nature of groundwater samples (Table 1).
All pH values are within the permissible limit (6.5–8.5)
of Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) (1998). The
electrical conductivity (EC) varies from 598 to 5,660
μS/cm (mean, 2,167.6 μS/cm) (Table 1). EC exceeds
the BIS permissible limit (BIS 1998) of 3,000 μS/cm
in ~33% samples. The salinity varies from 0.30 to
3.1 ppt (mean, 1.13 ppt) (Table 1).
In natural waters, dissolved solids mainly consist
of carbonates, bicarbonates, chlorides, sulfates, phos-
phates and nitrates of calcium, magnesium, sodium
and potassium with traces of iron, manganese and
other minerals. Organic matter and various dissolved
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488
gases are also present in small amount (Jain et al.
2010). In the groundwater samples, the total solid
concentrations (TS) are in the range of 603.6–
3,467.4 mg/l (mean, 1,609.31 mg/l) (Table 1). The
TDS values are between 509.6 and 3,290.4 mg/l
(mean, 1,434.33 mg/l). About 33% samples exceed the
permissible limit of 2,000 mg/l (BIS 1998). Water
having high TDS values if used for drinking purposes
may induce an unfavorable physiological reaction in
the transient consumer and gastrointestinal irritation
(Shankar et al. 2008). The alkalinity is referred to as
the acid neutralizing capacity (ANC) of the water. This
is an expression of buffering capacity. The basic
species responsible for alkalinity in water are bicar-
bonate ions [HCO3−], carbonate ions [CO32−] and
hydroxide ions [OH−]. The total alkalinity values
vary from 150 to 1,000 mg/l (mean, 394 mg/l). About
27% of the samples exceed the BIS permissible limit of
600 mg/l (BIS 1998) (Table 1). The total hardness
caused primarily due to the polyvalent cations (mainly
calcium and magnesium) present in water. The
total hardness in the study area ranges from 228
to 458 mg/l (mean, 307.87 mg/l). In all samples,
hardness values are below the BIS permissible limit of
600 mg/l (BIS 1998). Nearly 60% samples have a total
hardness values greater than the total alkalinity
indicating the presence of only non-carbonated hard-
ness. These findings are in good agreement with the
results of Chow (1964) and Ravikumar et al. (2010). In
all the samples, calcium hardness values (range, 64–
164 mg/l; mean, 99.2 mg/l) are well below the BIS
guideline values (200 mg/l).
Cation chemistry
The major cations present in most of the ground-
waters having highest concentrations (all >1 mg/l)
are calcium, magnesium, sodium and potassium
(Younger 2007). The concentrations of various
cations analyzed in groundwater samples are pre-
sented in Table 1. Calcium and magnesium concen-
trations vary from 14 to 505 mg/l (mean, 138.27 mg/l)
and 11.68 to 14.86 mg/l (mean, 13.19 mg/l), respec-
tively. In groundwater, the calcium content generally
exceeds the magnesium content in accordance with
their relative abundance in rocks (Jain et al. 2010).
About 27% of the groundwater samples exceed the
calcium BIS permissible limit of 200 mg/l. None of
the samples exceeds the magnesium BIS permissible
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488 4477

Table 1 Physical and chemical characteristics of groundwater samples in village Lutfullapur, Navada, Loni, Ghaziabad, Uttar
Pradesh, India

Variables Min. Max. Range Mean Median Std. dev.

pH 7.43 7.95 0.52 7.74 7.73 0.14

Temperature, °C 25 27 2.0 26 26 0.755
EC, μs/cm 598.00 5,660.00 5,062.00 2,167.60 1,042.00 1,905.39
Salinity, ppt 0.30 3.10 2.80 1.13 0.50 1.03
Total solids, mg/l 603.60 3,467.40 2,863.80 1,609.31 1,215.60 1,070.55
Total dissolved solids, mg/l 509.60 3,290.40 2,780.80 1,434.33 841.20 1,067.23
Total suspended solids, mg/l 57.20 374.40 317.20 174.97 164.20 86.32
Fluoride, mg/l 0.15 0.61 0.46 0.35 0.38 0.13
Nitrate, mg/l NDa 15.20 15.20 2.94 NDa 4.35
Chloride, mg/l 77.90 1,370.00 1,292.10 451.77 174.00 479.97
Phosphate, mg/l NDa 0.01 0.01 0.002 NDa 0.004
Sulfate, mg/l 10.04 396.40 386.36 152.94 145.20 89.70
Silica, mg/l 4.56 15.07 10.51 10.79 10.58 2.70
Total Alkalinity, mg/l as CaCO3 150.00 1,000.00 850.00 394.00 220.00 307.22
Carbonate Alkalinity, mg/l as CaCO3 NDa NDa NDa NDa NDa NDa
Bicarbonate Alkalinity, mg/l as CaCO3 150.00 1,000.00 850.00 394.00 220.00 307.22
Total hardness, mg/l as CaCO3 228.00 458.00 230.00 307.87 284.00 80.95
Ca-Hardness, mg/l as CaCO3 64.00 164.00 100.00 99.20 98.00 26.87
Mg-Hardness, mg/l as CaCO3 116.00 336.00 220.00 208.67 174.00 68.48
Sodium, mg/l 28.60 1,620.00 1,591.40 442.20 72.90 583.66
Potassium, mg/l 5.60 625.00 619.40 129.99 7.50 198.39
Calcium, mg/l 14.00 505.00 491.00 138.27 20.70 181.82
Magnesium, mg/l 11.68 14.86 3.17 13.19 13.18 0.93
Hexavalent chromium, μg/l NDa NDa NDa NDa NDa NDa
Cadmium, μg/l NDa 0.50 0.50 0.43 0.50 0.18
Total chromium, μg/l 3.50 10.50 7.00 5.80 5.50 1.80
Copper, μg/l 1.00 20.00 19.00 4.60 2.50 5.17
Iron, μg/l 106.50 7,623.00 7,516.50 1,462.47 663.50 2,045.71
Nickel μg/l NDa 1.00 1.00 0.07 NDa 0.26
Lead, μg/l 5.00 23.50 18.50 9.27 8.00 5.02
Zn, μg/l 64.50 2,558.00 2,493.50 398.97 158.50 637.85
a
Not detected.

limit of 100 mg/l (BIS 1998). Sodium and potassium
concentrations vary from 28.6 to 1,620 mg/l (mean,
442.2 mg/l) and 5.6 to 625 mg/l (mean, 129.99 mg/l),
respectively. Nearly 33% samples exceed the BIS
permissible limit of 200 mg/l prescribed for sodium,
while 47% exceed the BIS permissible limit of 10 mg/
l set for potassium (BIS 1998). Low concentrations of
calcium versus sodium in groundwater samples
indicate the absence of readily soluble calcium
minerals, whereby calcium present in groundwater
samples has been exchanged by sodium due to base-
exchange reaction (Sharma and Rao 1997).
High Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+ and K+ concentrations are
mainly due to their mineralogical origin in the soils.
Weathering of Feldspar and montmorillonite generates
water soluble Na+ and K+ ions. In addition, cation-
exchange processes and agricultural and/or industrial
activities also contribute for high Na+ and K+
concentrations in the study area (Naidu et al. 1985;
Singh et al. 1997, 2006).
4478
Anion chemistry
The major anions having highest concentrations
(all >1 mg/l) present in majority of groundwaters are
bicarbonate, sulfate and chloride (Younger 2007). The
concentrations of various anions analyzed in ground-
water samples are presented in Table 1. Bicarbonate is
the predominant anion in the groundwater samples
ranging from 150 to 1,000 mg/l (mean, 394 mg/l)
followed by chloride in the range of 77.9–1,370 mg/l
(mean, 451.77 mg/l). The permissible of 1,000 mg/l and
desirable limit of 250 mg/l have been recommended by
BIS for chloride in drinking water supply. The chloride
limits have been laid down primarily from taste view
point. However, no adverse health effects on human
being have been reported by the use of water having
high chloride concentrations (Jain et al. 2010). Approx-
imately 27% of the groundwater samples in the study
area exceed the chloride BIS permissible limit of
1,000 mg/l.
The sulfate in groundwater generally presents as
calcium, magnesium, and sodium soluble salts.
Significant change in the sulfate concentration takes
place with time during rainfall infiltration and
groundwater recharge (Jain et al. 2010). The sulfate
concentrations in the samples vary from 10 to 396 mg/
l (mean, 152.94 mg/l) which is below the permissible
limit of 400 mg/l (BIS 1998). Sulfate when present
alone may not cause any adverse health effects while
presence of sulfate in excess of >400 mg/l with sodium
or magnesium may lead to gastrointestinal irritations
(Shankar et al. 2008).
High nitrate concentrations in the groundwater are
reported in many parts of India because of intensive
agricultural practices which utilize nitrogen fertilizers
changing the natural drainage patterns. Nitrate con-
centration >45 mg/l in drinking water has adverse
health effects on human resulting methemoglobinemia
commonly known as blue baby syndrome which
generally affects the infants (Jain et al. 2010) and gastric
carcinoma (Tank and Chandel 2010). The nitrate
concentrations ranges from ND to 15.2 mg/l (mean,
2.94 mg/l) in all the samples are within the BIS
permissible limit of 45 mg/l. The phosphate concen-
trations (ND to 0.01 mg/l) are also either very low or
not detected in the groundwaters. High fluoride
concentration in groundwater above the permissible
limit of 1.5 mg/l has been a major toxicological and
geo-environmental problem in India. Fluoride in the
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488
groundwater is generally occurs as a natural constituent.
The fluoride concentration in the study area varies from
0.15 to 0.61 mg/l (mean, 0.35 mg/l), which is within the
BIS permissible limit (1.5 mg/l) for drinking water.
Metal ions
Metal ions contamination in groundwater is mainly due
to the rock minerals weathering, sewage discharge and
other waste effluents on land and runoff water. Some
heavy metal ions viz., cobalt and copper are extremely
essential to humans, but if present in large quantities may
cause physiological disorders. Cadmium, chromium and
lead are highly toxic even in trace concentrations (Jain et
al. 2010). The distribution of various metal ions in
groundwater samples is shown in Fig. 2a–g. The
potability of groundwater is compared with the
standard values (desirable and permissible limits)
prescribed by BIS (1998). Except iron, all the metals
(Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn) are within their respective
desirable limits (10, 50, 50, 20, 50 and 5,000 μg/l,
respectively) as prescribed by BIS for drinking water
(BIS 1998). Iron exceeds the BIS desirable limit
(300 μg/l) in ~60% samples. Out of these samples,
iron exceeds its BIS permissible limit of 1,000 μg/l
in ~33% samples (BIS 1998). This water should be
treated for iron remediation prior to be consumed for
domestic purposes. High iron concentrations cause an
inky flavor, turbidity, bitter and astringent taste. Water
having soluble iron remains clear while pumped out.
Exposure to air causes precipitation of iron resulting in
rusty color and turbidity (Jain et al. 2010). High iron
concentrations in the aquifers may be due to the
interaction of oxidized Fe-bearing minerals and organic
matter and subsequent dissolution of Fe2CO3 at a lower
pH. Another possibility is that dissolved oxygen
removal by organic matter produces reduced condi-
tions, thereby increasing the solubility of Fe-bearing
minerals (Mondal et al. 2010). The high iron concen-
tration in the groundwater may also be due to the
rusting of pipes and/or some localized effects.
Correlation analysis
Correlation coefficient is a statistical measure of
interdependence of two or more random variables.
Correlation analysis measures the closeness and the
degree of linear association between independent and
dependent variables. The correlation analysis of the
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488 4479

a Cadmium e Nickel
12.0 25.0

10.0 20.0

Conc. (µg/L)
Conc. (µg/L)

8.0
15.0
6.0 Desirable limit Desirable limit
10.0
4.0
2.0 5.0

0.0 0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Sample number(s) Sample number(s)

b Chromium f Lead
60.0 60.0
50.0 50.0
Conc. (µg/L)

Conc. (µg/L)
40.0 40.0
30.0 Desirable limit 30.0 Desirable limit
20.0 20.0
10.0 10.0
0.0 0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Sample number(s) Sample number(s)

c Copper g Zinc
1600.0 16000.0
1400.0 14000.0
1200.0 12000.0
Conc. (µg/L)
Conc. (µg/L)

1000.0 10000.0
800.0 Desirable limit 8000.0 Desirable limit
600.0 Permissible limit 6000.0 Permissible limit
400.0 4000.0
200.0 2000.0
0.0 0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Sample number(s) Sample number(s)

d Iron
9000.0
8000.0
Conc. (µg/L)

7000.0
6000.0
5000.0 Desirable limit
4000.0 Permissible limit
3000.0
2000.0
1000.0
0.0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Sample number(s)

Fig. 2 Concentration of (a) cadmium, (b) chromium, (c) copper, (d) iron, (e) nickel, (f) lead and (g) zinc in groundwater samples

analyzed parameters was performed and the correla- constituents of TDS in water are these ionic species.
tion coefficient is presented by correlation matrix in Fluoride was not significantly correlated with any of
Table 2. It is clear from Table 2 that EC, salinity, TS the studied parameters (Table 2). Nitrate was posi-
and TDS show significantly positive correlations tively and significantly correlated with Cl−, alkalinity,
among themselves and also with NO3−, Cl−, alkalin- Na+, K+ and Ca2+. Chloride was also significantly
ity, Na+, K+, and Ca2+. The high correlation between correlated with alkalinity, Na+, K+ and Ca2+. Further-
EC and TDS is due to the fact that conductivity more, alkalinity was positively and significantly
depends on total dissolved solids and the main correlation with Na+, K+ and Ca2+. It is clear from
 4480

Table 2 Correlation matrix for physical and chemical parameters of groundwater samples in Village Lutfullapur Nawada, Loni, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India
pH EC Salinity TS TDS TSS F− NO3−-N Cl− PO43− SO42− SiO2 T. Alk. HCO3 Alk. T. Hard. Ca-Hard. Mg-Hard. Na+ K+ Ca2+ Mg2+ Cd2+ CrT Cu2+ Fe2+ Ni2+ Pb2+ Zn2+
as CaCO3 as CaCO3 as CaCO3 as CaCO3 as CaCO3

pH 1
EC −0.63 1.00
Salinity −0.62 1.00 1.00
TS −0.68 0.99 0.99 1.00
TDS −0.67 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
TSS −0.16 −0.02 −0.03 0.08 0.00 1.00
F− 0.21 0.29 0.30 0.25 0.26 −0.13 1.00
NO3−-N −0.35 0.71 0.71 0.72 0.71 0.17 −0.09 1.00
Cl− −0.63 1.00 1.00 0.99 0.99 −0.02 0.34 0.66 1.00
PO43− −0.01 0.04 0.07 −0.02 0.01 −0.29 0.32 −0.19 0.06 1.00
SO42− 0.01 −0.18 −0.18 −0.14 −0.16 0.18 −0.73 0.46 −0.25 −0.39 1.00
SiO2 −0.06 −0.54 −0.54 −0.50 −0.52 0.28 −0.14 −0.76 −0.50 0.23 −0.36 1.00
T. Alk. as CaCO3 −0.61 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.99 −0.06 0.33 0.65 1.00 0.10 −0.27 −0.49 1.00
HCO3 Alk. as CaCO3 −0.61 0.99 1.00 0.98 0.99 −0.06 0.33 0.65 1.00 0.10 −0.27 −0.49 1.00 1.00
T. Hard. as CaCO3 −0.45 0.40 0.41 0.44 0.40 0.58 0.29 0.22 0.42 0.22 −0.34 0.27 0.43 0.43 1.00
Ca-Hard. as CaCO3 −0.20 0.42 0.42 0.44 0.42 0.29 0.39 0.37 0.43 0.06 −0.21 −0.24 0.41 0.41 0.59 1.00
Mg-Hard. as CaCO3 −0.46 0.31 0.32 0.35 0.31 0.57 0.19 0.12 0.33 0.24 −0.33 0.41 0.34 0.34 0.95 0.31 1.00
Na+ −0.63 0.97 0.97 0.95 0.97 −0.09 0.36 0.58 0.98 0.05 −0.30 −0.48 0.98 0.98 0.43 0.47 0.33 1.00
K+ −0.39 0.80 0.80 0.78 0.78 0.01 −0.04 0.89 0.76 −0.09 0.28 −0.73 0.77 0.77 0.29 0.44 0.17 0.75 1.00
Ca2+ −0.48 0.88 0.89 0.87 0.87 0.00 0.06 0.86 0.85 −0.06 0.15 −0.69 0.86 0.86 0.36 0.48 0.23 0.85 0.98 1.00
Mg2+ 0.39 −0.71 −0.71 −0.67 −0.70 0.34 −0.22 −0.29 −0.72 −0.17 0.31 0.38 −0.74 −0.74 −0.06 0.04 −0.08 −0.75 −0.50 −0.58 1.00
Cd2+ 0.34 −0.66 −0.67 −0.64 −0.63 −0.06 −0.58 −0.25 −0.69 −0.35 0.56 0.09 −0.71 −0.71 −0.74 −0.63 −0.63 −0.75 −0.51 −0.61 0.45 1.00
CrT 0.43 −0.67 −0.66 −0.70 −0.68 −0.20 0.04 −0.68 −0.65 0.28 −0.10 0.52 −0.65 −0.65 −0.24 −0.47 −0.10 −0.61 −0.65 −0.68 0.29 0.29 1.00
Cu2+ −0.10 −0.15 −0.14 −0.15 −0.13 −0.18 0.07 −0.15 −0.14 0.27 0.03 0.15 −0.18 −0.18 −0.06 0.13 −0.12 −0.13 −0.20 −0.18 0.15 0.05 0.52 1.00
Fe2+ −0.07 0.26 0.25 0.26 0.27 −0.12 0.21 0.05 0.28 −0.02 −0.29 −0.10 0.25 0.25 −0.20 0.04 −0.26 0.17 −0.08 −0.03 −0.25 0.10 −0.05 0.33 1.00
Ni2+ −0.27 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.38 0.07 0.22 0.13 0.41 −0.11 −0.32 −0.10 0.42 0.42 0.51 0.67 0.34 0.56 0.43 0.49 −0.34 −0.68 −0.28 −0.03 −0.15 1.00
Pb2+ 0.24 −0.46 −0.46 −0.46 −0.45 −0.19 −0.03 −0.40 −0.45 0.20 0.06 0.22 −0.48 −0.48 −0.35 0.08 −0.45 −0.44 −0.43 −0.45 0.46 0.28 0.51 0.71 0.25 −0.21 1.00
Zn2+ −0.24 −0.15 −0.16 −0.07 −0.10 0.43 0.01 0.08 −0.15 −0.14 0.20 0.17 −0.21 −0.21 0.24 0.32 0.15 −0.20 −0.23 −0.22 0.53 0.20 0.003 0.45 0.10 −0.13 0.35 1.00

Italic values are significant at 0.05 level

Bold faced values are significant at 0.01 level
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488 4481

Table 2 that sodium shows a strong and positive
correlation with K+, and Ca2+, thereby indicating that
these soluble salts are predominant in water samples.
The pH was negatively correlated with most of the
physicochemical parameters.
Classification of groundwater samples
Groundwater samples were classified based on
Cl−, SO42−, and HCO3− concentrations as normal
chloride (<15 meq/l), normal sulfate (<6 meq/l) and
normal bicarbonate (2–7 meq/l) water types (APHA
1985; Soltan 1998). Based on the Soltan’s classifi-
cation, majority of the groundwater samples are of
normal sulfate type followed by normal chloride and
normal bicarbonate type.
Base-exchange indices
The base-exchange indices were estimated using
Eq. 1 (Soltan 1998, 1999) to further classify
groundwaters.
Naþ  Cl
r1 ¼ ð1Þ
SO2
4
where r1 is the base-exchange index and Na+, Cl−
and SO42− concentrations are expressed in meq/l. If
r1 <1, the groundwater sources are of Na+-SO42−
type, while r1 >1 indicates the sources are of Na+-
HCO3− type. The base-exchange indices (r1) are
presented in Table 3. Based on the base-exchange
indices (r1), about 73% groundwater samples are
classified as Na+-SO42− type (r1 <1) and rest are
Na+-HCO3− type (r1 >1).
Meteoric genesis indices
The groundwater sources can also be classified based
on meteoric genesis index and can be computed using
Eq. 2 (Soltan 1998, 1999).
ðKþ þ Naþ Þ  Cl
r2 ¼ ð2Þ
SO2
4
where r2 is the Meteoric genesis index and the
concentrations of K+, Na+, Cl− and SO42− are
expressed in meq/l. If r2 <1, the groundwater source
is of deep meteoric water percolation type while r2 >1
indicates that it is of shallow meteoric water
percolation type. The values of meteoric genesis
indices (r2) are also presented in Table 3. Based on
r2 values, ~67% groundwater sources are of deep
meteoric water percolation type and the rest are
shallow meteoric water percolation type. Further-
more, all Na + -SO 4 2− (except sample 13) type
groundwater samples are of deep meteoric water

Table 3 Groundwater
classification according Sample no. Base-exchange Water type Meteoric genesis Water type
to base-exchange index (r1) index (r1) index (r2)
and Meteoric genesis index
(r2) criteria 1 112.7021 Na+-HCO3− 151.86 Shallow meteoric
2 36.6701 Na+-HCO3− 47.60 Shallow meteoric
3 9.9661 Na+-HCO3− 13.21 Shallow meteoric
4 −0.3897 +
Na -SO4 2−
−0.32 Deep meteoric
5 −0.5388 Na+-SO42− −0.48 Deep meteoric
6 −0.5235 Na+-SO42− −0.47 Deep meteoric
7 −0.7693 Na+-SO42− −0.72 Deep meteoric
8 5.2380 Na+-HCO3− 6.83 Shallow meteoric
9 −0.0030 +
Na -SO4 2−
0.04 Deep meteoric
10 0.1854 Na+-SO42− 0.24 Deep meteoric
11 0.2212 Na+-SO42− 0.49 Deep meteoric
12 −0.4303 Na+-SO42− −0.34 Deep meteoric
13 0.6591 Na+-SO42− 2.60 Shallow meteoric
14 −0.1005 +
Na -SO4 2−
−0.05 Deep meteoric
15 0.2235 Na+-SO42− 0.28 Deep meteoric
4482
percolation type in nature. Similar findings were
reported earlier (Singh et al. 2006).
Hydrochemical facies
Hydrochemical facies concept has been used to
explain the distribution and genesis of principal
types of groundwater in the study area. Back and
Hanshaw (1965) have suggested two main types of
facies: cation facies and anion facies. The overall
water chemical character is determined by both
cation and anion facies. Groundwater aquifer hydro-
chemistry in the study area is summarized using the
trilinear plots (Fig. 3). The Piper trilinear diagrams
were generated using major cations and anions
(Hutchins et al. 1999; Piper 1944, 1953) to establish
the hydrogeochemical regime. The trilinear plot of
cations expresses abundance of each species (Ca2+,
Mg + , Na + +K + ) as a percentage of their sum.
Similarly, trilinear plot of anions expresses abun-
dance of each species (HCO3−, SO42−, and Cl−) as a
percentage of their sum. These trilinear diagrams are
useful in establishing the chemical relationships
among groundwater samples in more definite terms
Fig. 3 Piper trilinear
diagram for groundwater
samples
Cations
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488
than any other possible methods. The diamond-
shaped field of Piper diagram can be further
classified into (1) Ca2+-Mg2+-Cl−-SO42−, (2) Na+-
K+-Cl−-SO42−, (3) Na+-K+-HCO3− and (4) Ca2+-
Mg2+-HCO3−. The trilinear plots of the major cations
and anions in the groundwater samples of the
study area are shown in Fig. 3. A perusal of the
hydrochemical facies (Fig. 3) indicates that in the
groundwater, monovalent cations (Na + and K+)
predominate the Ca2+ and Mg2+. Among the anions,
chloride is dominant over other anions. It is evident
from Fig. 3, most of the samples belong to the Na+-
K+-Cl−-SO42− hydrochemical facies followed by
Na + -K + -HCO 3 − and Ca 2+ -Mg 2+ -Cl − -SO 4 2− . The
Na+ and K+ concentrations in the analyzed ground-
water samples may be due to the weathering of
sodium–potassium bearing minerals and/or some
cation-exchange processes and industrial/agricultur-
al activities in and around study area (Guo and
Wang 2004; Singh et al. 2006). Sodium and
potassium exchange by calcium and magnesium
adsorbed on the clay minerals surfaces may be
responsible for the high sodium and potassium
concentrations.
Anions
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488 4483

Evaluation of groundwater quality Salinity is related to TDS and EC. The total salt
content of water gives the salinity. High concentra-
Groundwater quality in the study area was also tions of TDS and EC in irrigation water may increase
evaluated for its suitability for drinking, domestic the soil salinity, which affects the plant salt intake.
and irrigation purposes. Furthermore, salts types responsible for make up this
salinity determine the water suitability for its intended
Suitability for drinking and domestic purposes use according to the following classification (Mills
2003; Singh et al. 2006):
To ascertain groundwater suitability for drinking and
domestic uses, the water quality parameters were Class Conductivity Salinity
compared with the prescribed limits recommended by Class I <650 Low salinity water, suitable for
the BIS for drinking water (BIS 1998). Standards use on all crops except
guideline values for drinking water were discussed tobacco
earlier. Except for iron, other metal ions (cadmium, Class II 650–1,300 Medium salinity, suitable for
chromium, copper, nickel, lead, and zinc) are within use on all but very low salt
tolerant crops
their desirable limits as prescribed by BIS for
Class III 1,300–3,000 High salinity — suitable for use
drinking water. Iron exceeds the BIS desirable limit on medium and high
of 300 μg/l in nearly 60% groundwater samples. Of salt tolerant crops
these samples, iron exceeds its BIS permissible limit Class IV 3,000–5,000 Very high salinity — suitable
of 1,000 μg/l in ~33% samples. for use only on high salt
tolerant crops
Suitability for irrigational purposes Class V 5,000–8,000 Extremely high salinity
generally unsuitable for
irrigation unless soils are
Groundwater in the study area is extensively used for permeable
irrigation. All natural waters contain water-soluble Class VI >8,000 Too saline for irrigation
salts. The concentration and dissolved constituents
composition determine waters quality for irrigation
use (Richards 1954). Dissolved ions high concentra- The salinity index was estimated using the measured
tion in irrigation water affects both plants and soil EC values. About 67% groundwater samples in the
physically and chemically (Ravikumar et al. 2010). study area are categorized as class I–III, and thus, may
Water suitability for irrigational purposes was be considered safe for irrigation. However, ~33% water
assessed using salinity, chlorinity and sodicity indices samples exhibit high to very high salinity (classes IV–
(Mills 2003). V) and may not be suitable for irrigation (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4 Salinity index for 10000

groundwater samples
9000 Class VI
8000
7000
EC (µS/cm)

6000 Class V

5000
Class IV
4000
3000
Class III
2000
ClassII
1000
Class I
0
Groundwater Samples
4484 Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488

The chloride ion can be toxic to plants having low
salt tolerance when taken up by their roots and
absorbed through their leaves. The chlorinity index
of the groundwater sources was computed using
measured chloride ion concentrations. Water samples
in the study area were classified (Mills 2003; Singh et
al. 2006) based on the following chlorinity index:
where the concentrations of Na+, Ca2+ and Mg2+ are
expressed in meq/l. The SAR is used to predict the
sodium hazard of high carbonate waters especially if
they contain no residual alkali (Mills 2003). Ground-
water samples were classified based on the SAR values
as given below (Mills 2003; Singh et al. 2006):
Class SAR Sodicity class

Class Chloride ion Suitability for irrigation Class I <3 No sodium problem
concentration Class II 3–6 Low sodium, few problems except
Class I <350 mg/l Suitable for all crops with sodium sensitive crops
Class II 350–750 mg/l Suitable for high, medium and Class III 6–8 Medium sodium, increasing problems
low salt tolerant crops Class IV 8–14 High sodium, not generally recommended
Class III 700–900 mg/l Suitable for high and medium Class V >14 Disregard, very high sodium — unsuitable
salt tolerant crops
Class IV 900–1,300 mg/l Suitable for high salt tolerant
crops Based on the above index, groundwater samples
Class V >1,300 mg/l Not suitable for any crops are classified and shown in Fig. 6. It is clear from
Fig. 6 that ~73% of samples can be considered
suitable for irrigation purposes.
Based on the above index, majority of the ground- Bicarbonate and carbonate concentrations also
water samples (67%) can be considered suitable (classes influence the suitability of water for irrigation
I and II) for irrigation (Fig. 5). purpose. When total carbonate concentrations exceed
Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) is most commonly the total calcium and magnesium concentrations, the
used to assess suitability of irrigation water. The SAR water quality may be diminished. Irrigation water can
measures sodicity in terms of the relative concentration also be examined by estimating residual sodium
of sodium ions to the sum of calcium and magnesium carbonate (RSC) as described by Eaton (Eaton
ions in a water sample. High sodium depositing waters 1950). The concept of RSC was proposed for the
are generally unsuitable for soils irrigation as high high carbonate waters and is based on the assumption
deposition of sodium may deteriorate the soil character- that all Ca2+ and Mg2+ precipitate as carbonate. RSC
istics (Singh et al. 2006). Sodicity index was calculated can be computed using Eq. 4.
using Eq. 3 (Kalra and Maynard 1991).    2þ 

RSC ¼ CO2 3 þ HCO3  Ca þ Mg2þ ð4Þ
Naþ
Sodium absorption ratio ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð3Þ where the concentrations of CO32−, HCO3−, Ca2+ and
ðCa2þ þ Mg2þ Þ=2 Mg2+ are expressed in meq/l.

Fig. 5 Chlorinity index for Class V

1400
groundwater samples
1200
Chloride (mg/L)

1000
Class IV
800

600
Class III
400
Class II
200
Class I
0
Groundwater Samples
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488 4485

Fig. 6 Sodicity index for 24

groundwater samples
21

18
Class IV
15

SAR
12
Class III
9
Class II
6
Class I
3
Class 0
0
Groundwater Samples

If RSC <1.25 meq/l, the water is considered safe. If
RSC lies between 1.25 and 2.5 meq/l, the water is of
marginal quality. If RSC >2.5 meq/l, the water is not
appropriate for irrigation. In the present study, RSC
values were calculated and presented in Fig. 7.
Figure 7 clearly shows that the RSC values in 80%
of the samples were <1.25 meq/l. Only ~20% of the
samples have RSC values in the range 1.2–2.1 meq/l.
Thus, based on RSC criteria, the majority of ground-
water samples can be considered safe for irrigation
purpose.
Suitability for industrial purposes
Water is considered safe for industrial use if it is
neither scale-forming nor scale-removing in nature. A
number of theoretical methods have been used to
predict the potential for scale formation from water.
The water saturation index can be use to predict if water
is precipitating out or dissolving or in equilibrium with
calcium carbonate. The Langelier Saturation Index
(LSI) (Degremont 1991; Langelier 1936), and the
Ryznar Saturation Index (RSI) (Ryznar 1944) were
determined to establish water suitability for industrial
purposes.
Langelier Saturation Index The LSI was given by
Langelier in 1936 to predict the water tendency to
precipitate or dissolve CaCO3. The LSI can be
calculated by taking the difference between the
measured pH of water (pHw) and saturation pH for
CaCO3 (pHs) using Eq. 5.
LSI ¼ pHw  pHs ð5Þ

Fig. 7 RSC values for 4

groundwater samples
2

-2

-4
RSC (meq/L)

-6

-8

-10

-12

-14

-16

-18

Groundwater Samples
4486 Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488

where pHs denotes the pH at saturation in calcium Ryznar Stability Index John Ryznar modified the LSI
carbonate can be calculated using Eq. 6. in 1944 (Ryznar 1944). Similar to LSI, the RSI is
based on CaCO3 saturation in water except that the
pHs ¼ ð9:3 þ A þ BÞ  ðC þ DÞ ð6Þ RSI gives only positive values. RSI values were
calculated using expression 7.
where constant A=(log10[TDS] −1/10, B=−13.12×log10
(°C+273)+34.55, C=log10 [Ca2+ as CaCO3]−0.4, and RSI ¼ 2ðpHs Þ  pHw ð7Þ
D=log10 [Alkalinity as CaCO3].
where pHs is the saturation pH for calcium carbonate
The LSI may be positive, negative or neutral. A and pHw is the measured pH of water.
negative LSI value indicates that solution is undersat-
urated with CaCO3 and thus dissolves CaCO3. A RSI indicates the corrosion scale potential as
positive value indicates that solution is supersaturated follows:
with CaCO3 and scaling may occur. A neutral LSI
value indicates that solution is at equilibrium with RSI rating Indication
CaCO3 and it is neither scale-forming nor scale- 4–5 Heavy scale
removing. The LSI value of groundwater samples are 5–6 Light scale
presented in Fig. 8a. It is clear that nearly 80% 6–7 Very light scale
samples deposit CaCO3, while only 20% dissolve >8 No scaling, corrosion
CaCO3 (Singh et al. 2006).

Fig. 8 Saturation index: a

LSI and b RSI for ground-
a
1.0
water samples
Scale-forming
0.5
LSI

0.0

-0.5
CaCO3-dissolving

-1.0
Groundwater Samples

b
8.5

8.0

7.5

7.0
RSI

6.5

6.0

5.5

5.0
Groundwater Samples
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488
The RSI values of the groundwater samples are
shown in Fig. 8b. Majority of groundwater samples
are CaCO3 depositing in nature which is in agreement
with the results obtained by LSI. Similar results were
reported earlier (Singh et al. 2006).
Conclusions
Groundwater quality varies from place to place
and also with the water table depth. High values
of chloride, alkalinity, bicarbonates, sodium and
potassium were found in most of the groundwater
samples in village Lutfullapur Nawada, Loni,
district Ghaziabad, U.P., India. These high concen-
trations might be due to mineral solutions that
change under redox conditions and also to natural
and anthropogenic influences of infiltration and
percolation during monsoon season. Except iron,
all other metals (Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn) are
within their respective desirable limits (10, 50, 50,
20, 50 and 5,000 μg/l, respectively) as prescribed
by BIS for drinking water. Iron exceeds the BIS
desirable limit of 300 μg/l in about 60% samples.
Out of these samples, iron exceeds its BIS
permissible limit of 1,000 μg/l in about 33%
samples. This water should be treated using low-
cost technologies for iron remediation before being
consumed for domestic purposes.
The groundwater was classified as a normal
sulfate and chloride type. Groundwaters were
classified as Na+-SO42− and Na+-HCO3− type from
base-exchange indices. The groundwater meteoric
genesis indices indicate that deep and shallow
meteoric water percolation types are present. Fur-
thermore, most of the samples were Na + -K + -
Cl−-SO42− types followed by Na+-K+-HCO3− and
Ca2+-Mg2+-Cl−-SO42− types.
Based on RSC criteria, majority of groundwater
samples can be considered safe for irrigation use.
About 80% samples deposit CaCO3, while only
20% dissolve CaCO3. Furthermore, the quality of
deep bore hand-pumped (India Mark-2) waters is
better than shallow hand-pumped water in this study
area. It is recommended that the shallow hand
pumps must be replaced by deep bore hand-pumps
(India Mark 2). Long-term study is also recommen-
ded to determine the variation and source of
contaminants.
4487
Acknowledgements Financial support (PAC/SES/DM/UGC/
0210113-491) provided by the University Grant Commission
New Delhi is gratefully acknowledged. One of the authors
(VKS) is also thankful to the UGC for providing Dr. D.S.
Kothari a postdoctoral fellowship.
References
Adhikary, P. P., Chandrasekharan, H., Chakraborty, D., Kumar,
B., & Yadav, B. R. (2009). Statistical approaches for
hydrogeochemical characterization of groundwater in West
Delhi, India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment,
154, 41–52.
APHA. (1985). Standard methods for the examination of water
and wastewater. Washington, DC: American Public Health
Association.
APHA. (2005). Standard methods for the examination of water
and wastewater (21st ed.). Washington, DC: American
Public Health Association.
Back, W., & Hanshaw, B. B. (1965). Chemical geohydrology.
Advances in Hydrosciene, 1, 48–109.
BIS. (1998). Drinking water specifications (revised 2003).
Bureau of Indian Standards.
Chow, V. T. (1964). Hand book of applied hydrology. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Degremont, G. (1991). Water treatment handbook (6th ed.).
Paris, France: Lavoisier Publishing.
Eaton, F. M. (1950). Significance of carbonates in irrigation
waters. Soil Science, 69, 123–133.
Goel, P. K. (2000). Water pollution — causes, effects and
control. New Delhi: New Age Int. (P) Ltd..
Guo, H., & Wang, Y. (2004). Hydrogeochemical processes
in shallow quaternary aquifers from the northern part
of the Datong basin, China. Applied Geochemistry, 19,
19–27.
http://ghaziabad.nic.in/indexintro1.htm. Accessed 26 March
2011.
Hutchins, M. G., Smiyh, B., Rawlins, B. G., & Lister, T. R.
(1999). Temporal and spatial variability of stream waters
in Wales, the Welsh borders and part of the west Midlands,
UK-1 major ion concentrations. Water Research, 33,
3479–3491.
Jain, C. K. (2005). Irrigation water quality in district Hardwar,
Uttranchal, India. In J. Lehr (Ed.), Water encyclopedia:
Ground water (pp. 204–210). USA: John Wiley.
Jain, C. K., Bandyopadhyay, A., & Bhadra, A. (2010).
Assessment of ground water quality for drinking purpose,
District Nainital, Uttarakhand, India. Environmental Mon-
itoring and Assessment, 166, 663–676.
Jameel, A., & Sirajudeen, J. (2006). Risk assessment of
physico-chemical contaminants in groundwater of
Pettavaithalai Area, Tiruchirappalli, Tamilnadu, India.
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 123, 299–
312.
Kalra, Y. P., & Maynard, D. G. (1991). Methods manual for
forest soil and plants analysis, Information Report NOR-
X-319. Northwest Region, Northern Forestry Centre,
forestry Canada.
4488
Langelier, W. F. (1936). The analytical control of anti-corrosion
water treatment. Journal American Water Works Association,
28(10), 1500–1521.
Mills, B. (2003). Interpreting water analysis for crop and
pasture. File No. FS0334, DPI’s Agency for Food and
Fiber Sciences, Toowoomba.
Mondal, N. C., Singh, V. S., Puranik, S. C., & Singh, V. P.
(2010). Trace element concentration in groundwater of
Pesarlanka Island, Krishna Delta, India. Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment, 163, 215–227.
Naidu, A. S., Mowati, T. C., Somayajulu, B. L., & Rao, K. S.
(1985). Characteristics of clay minerals in the bed loads of
major river of India. Mitteilungen aus dem Geologische-
Palaontologischen Instituts der Universitat Hamburg, 58,
559–568.
Piper, A. M. (1944). A graphic procedure in the geochemical
interpretation of water analyses. Transactions American
Geophysical Union, 25, 914–928.
Piper, A. M. (1953). A graphic procedure in the geochemical
interpretation of water analyses. US Geol. Survey Ground-
water, Note 12, Washington D.C.
planningcommission.nic.in/aboutus/committee/wrkgrp11/
wg11_rivers.pdf. (April 25, 2011).
Ravikumar, P., Somashekar, R. K., & Angami, M. (2010).
Hydrochemistry and evaluation of groundwater suit-
ability for irrigation and drinking purposes in the
Markandeya River basin, Belgaum District, Karnataka
State, India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment,
in press.
Richards, L. A. (1954). Diagnosis and improvement of saline
and alkali soils, U.S. Dept. of Agriculture.
Ryznar, J. W. (1944). A new index for determining the
amount of calcium carbonate scale formed by water.
Journal American Water Works Association, 36(3), 472–
494.
Environ Monit Assess (2012) 184:4473–4488
Shankar, B. S., Balasubramanya, N., & Reddy, M. T. M.
(2008). Impact of industrialization on groundwater
quality — a case study of Peenya industrial area,
Bangalore, India. Environmental Monitoring and As-
sessment, 142, 263–268.
Sharma, D. R. R., & Rao, S. L. N. (1997). Fluoride
concentration in groundwater of Vishakhapatanam, India.
Bulletin of Environmental Contaminant Toxicology, 58,
241–247.
Singh, K. P., Malik, A., Mohan, D., Singh, V. K., & Sinha, S.
(2006). Evaluation of groundwater quality in Northern
Indo-Gangetic alluvium region. Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment, 112, 211–230.
Singh, M., Ansari, A. A., Muller, G., & Singh, I. B. (1997). Heavy
metals in the freshly deposited sediments of the Gomti river
(a tributary of the Ganga river): effect of human activities.
Environmental Geology, 29, 246–252.
Soltan, M. E. (1998). Characterization, classification, and
evaluation of some groundwater samples in upper Egypt.
Chemosphere, 37, 735–745.
Soltan, M. E. (1999). Evaluation of groundwater quality in
Dakhla Oasis (Egyptian Western Desert). Environmental
Monitoring and Assessment, 57, 157–168.
Tank, D. K., & Chandel, C. P. S. (2010). A hydrochemical
elucidation of the groundwater composition under domestic
and irrigated land in Jaipur City. Environmental Monitoring
and Assessment, 166, 69–77.
Vasanthavigar, M., Srinivasamoorthy, K., Vijayaragavan, K.,
Ganthi, R. R., Chidambaram, S., Anandhan, P., et al.
(2010). Application of water quality index for groundwater
quality assessment: Thirumanimuttar sub-basin, Tamil-
nadu, India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment,
171, 595–609.
Younger, P. L. (2007). Groundwater in the environment: An
introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.