Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of the Indian Chemical Society

journal homepage: www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-the-indian-chemical-society

Multivariate statistical analysis approach to assess groundwater quality in

two selected mandals of Vizianagaram district, Andhra Pradesh, India
GVSRPavan Kumar a, *, KSrinivasa Rao a, Arunendra Yadav b, MLakshman Kumar a,
HSainadh Dora a
a
Department of Chemistry, MVGR College of Engineering (A), Vizianagaram, A.P, India
b
Department of Chemical Engineering, MVGR College of Engineering (A), Vizianagaram, A.P, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Groundwater quality is the major concern all over the world. Natural processes and manmade activities are the
Multivariate statistical analysis prime reasons for the contamination of available water resources. It is crucial to assess the quality of ground­
BIS water in areas surrounded by various industries. The present study was carried out to assess the groundwater
Water quality index
quality during pre-monsoon and post monsoon seasons of 2016, in two mandals of Vizianagaram district of
Vizianagaram
Andhra Pradesh via multivariate statistical analysis and water quality index method. The present work gains
Andhra Pradesh
importance in light of the construction of proposed international airport at Bhohapuram and the existence of
various industries in Pusapatirega mandal. A total of thirty-seven villages, eighteen from Bhogapuram mandal
and seventeen from Pusapatirega mandal were selected for the present study. Factor analysis, linear regression
analysis, correlation matrix analysis and cluster analysis tools were used to emphasize the parameters influencing
quality of water in the chosen study area. From the analysis reports, it was found that the groundwater of the two
mandals under investigation was strongly influenced by EC, TDS, total hardness(TH), Ca+2, Mg+2 and K+. During
the two seasons under study, the water quality index value was found to be greater than 100 indicating that the
water is unfit for human consumption. Concentration of Ca+2, Mg+2 and K+ were found to be beyond the
permissible limits prescribed by BIS (2012). Dissolution of calcium and magnesium bearing minerals, mixing of
industrial and household wastes may be the reasons for elevated concentration levels of these parameters.

1. Introduction Central Groundwater Board (2011–12), the active fresh groundwater

Groundwater, which is considered relatively free of waterborne
pathogens, is one of the most valuable freshwater sources being used for
the drinking purposes throughout the world. Groundwater comprises
only 0.61% of the entire world’s water resources, (including oceans and
permanent ice caps); however, it makes up 20% of the world’s fresh
water supply [1]. Groundwater resources are of the utmost importance
for irrigation, industrial and domestic use at a global scale [2,3]. In
particular, groundwater is often the only available water source in arid
and semiarid areas. Groundwater is a major concern for the community
as it is the most important and reliable source of freshwater supply on
earth. Groundwater is a renewable and finite natural resource, vital for
man’s life, socio-economic development and a valuable component of
the ecosystem, vulnerable to natural and human impacts [4]. Due to
insufficient accessibility and contamination of surface water, ground­
water is a suitable alternative [5]. According to the annual report of
resources of India have been estimated as 432 km3/year, in which 396
km3 is expected to be exploitable.
The quality, quantity and availability of groundwater are considered
as most important environmental, social and political issues at a global
level [6]. The suitability of groundwater for public water supply, irri­
gation, industrial purposes and power generation was directly linked to
the quality of the groundwater [7] Groundwater quality in an area is a
function of physico-chemical, biological parameters that are greatly
influenced by natural processes such as intermixing of water, water
chemistry in recharge area, flow path, rock-water interaction, climatic
conditions along with geological formations and anthropogenic activ­
ities. The contamination of groundwater is of serious concern. Lack of
access to clean drinking water is adversely affecting the general health
and life expectancy of a population over the globe. The cultural shift of
using groundwater instead of surface water for drinking in South and
Southeast Asia resulted in a decrease of waterborne diseases, however, it

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: prs_ganti@yahoo.co.in (G. Kumar).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jics.2021.100338
Received 11 June 2021; Received in revised form 18 November 2021; Accepted 31 December 2021
Available online 6 March 2022
0019-4522/© 2021 Indian Chemical Society. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
G. Kumar et al.
Fig. 1a. Andhra Pradesh state map.
has resulted in an increase chronic exposure to naturally occurring
inorganic toxic substances [8].
The protection of groundwater and its knowledge of the hydro
chemical conditions, spatial distribution of pollutants and their
adequate tracing [9] are important. However, only limited under­
standing of the environmental distribution of contaminants can be
gained solely by chemical analysis [10]. The interpretation of the hydro
chemical data of an aquifer is strongly dependent on the use of visual
presentation techniques, such as the use of cross-plot graphs, histograms
or tri-linear diagrams [11]. The main drawback of these techniques is
their vagueness to clarify the potential correlation between different
parameters (variables) and samples. Moreover, the limited number and
specified parameters that is included can further their reliability in the
determination of the hydro chemical processes in complex and large
aquifer systems. By contrast, multivariate methods such as factor
Fig. 1b. Bhogapuram and Pusapatirega mandals of Vizianagaram along with sampling locations
(source: Vizianagaram District official website https://vizianagaram.ap.gov.in/mandal-maps/).
2
Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338
analysis can overcome the aforesaid limitations by using a large number
of parameters which, when the results are combined with geographical
information system techniques, can make data interpretation easier and
more reliable [12,13]. Cluster analysis and factor analysis are the most
common tools for the analysis of multivariate environmental data [14].
They are used to detect and designate aquifer’s boundaries and deter­
mine groundwater flow paths [15–17] Moreover, factor analysis can be
used to identify geochemical factors that affect groundwater quality [18,
19] and distinguish anthropogenic from natural pollution [20], on a
variety of scales [21]. Hence, a large number of studies have been per­
formed using factor analysis is to determine the hydro chemical status of
aquifers and to determine the origin of chemical constituents in
groundwater [22–39].
In the state of Andhra Pradesh, government of India proposed to
construct an international airport in Bhogapuram. High quantity of good
quality water is a requisite for such establishments. And the other
location chosen is Pusapatirega mandal which is surrounded by various
chemical and pharmaceutical industry. In view of these facts to assess
the groundwater quality, the two mandals were chosen and conducted
the present investigation.
2. Experimental
2.1. Study area
Vizianagram district (Fig. 1(a) and (b)) covers geographical area of
6539 Sq.Km. The district is a part of the Northern Coastal plains of
Andhra Pradesh and lies in between 17.51 N and 19.15 N latitudes and
83.00–83.45 E longitudes (Fig. 1). The normal annual rainfall of the
district is 1131 mm. The district gets benefit from both the South West
and North East monsoon. The district was found to be with semi-arid and
hard rock structures. The district has rich sources of granite, mica and
manganese ore deposits. The district has a coastline of 28 Km; the two
coastal mandals of the district are Bhogapuram and Pusapatirega. From
the two mandals, thirty-seven sampling stations (from 37 villages) were
chosen for the present study.
3. Methodology
Groundwater samples from the selected locations were collected in
polypropylene bottles of volume 1000 mL. Composite sampling pro­
cedures were adopted for the collection of groundwater samples from
G. Kumar et al. Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338

Table 1a
Physico chemical characterization of ground water during pre-monsoon season in Bhogapuram.
S. No pH EC TDS THW Ca+2 Mg+2 Na+1 K+1 Fe+2 Cl-1 F-1

1 8.1 680 408 745 535 210 155 48 0.3 515 0.8
2 8.05 795 477 890 675 215 265 52 0.28 555 0.5
3 8.2 600 360 615 495 120 215.2 45 0.3 350 0.5
4 8.1 752.8 451.68 675 485 190 232.4 48 0.25 330 0.6
5 8.04 685.8 411.48 745 525 220 222.5 85 0.2 375 0.6
6 8.06 650 390 1020 685 335 118.5 54 0.2 485 1.3
7 8.05 625 375 555.2 455 100.2 148.2 65 0.2 495 1.2
8 7.8 635 381 685.5 395 290.5 135.8 75 0.3 520 1.2
9 7.9 732 439.2 835.4 585 250.4 125 54 0.31 510 0.5
10 7.8 785 471 935.5 695 240.5 201.5 25 0.32 656 0.5
11 7.9 962.5 577.5 695.5 525 170.5 138.5 52 0.33 679 0.6
12 8.1 575 345 1010.2 585 425.2 124.5 55.4 0.31 785 0.6
13 8.05 595 357 385.6 95.8 289.8 119.5 58.5 0.28 695 0.6
14 8.1 585 351 285.8 45.2 240.6 126.8 75.8 0.29 535 0.5
15 8.2 657 394.2 655.8 455 200.8 201 75.8 0.3 525 0.8
16 8.2 780 468 575.5 355 220.5 210 78.5 0.31 530 0.8
17 8.1 725 435 465.8 285 180.8 158 79.8 0.3 490 0.9
18 8.2 745 447 1400 998.2 401.8 151 79.5 0.29 490 0.8
BIS 6.5–8.5 500–2000 500–2000 300–600 70–100 30–70 200 12 0.3 250–1000 0.5–1.2
UNITS NIL μs/cm mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L

Table 1b
physico chemical characterization of groundwater during post monsoon season in Bhogapuram.
S. No pH EC TDS THW Ca+2 Mg+2 Na+1 K+1 Fe+2 Cl-1 F-1

1 7.79 650 390 710.1 530.1 180.0 150 45 0.21 458 0.776
2 7.08 785.5 471.3 880.1 660.1 220.0 255 48 0.25 548 0.464
3 7.24 585.8 351.48 590.1 490.0 100.0 205 58 0.29 258 0.407
4 7.37 758.5 455.1 660.1 470.0 190.0 225.8 65 0.2 325 0.537
5 7.57 585 351 740.1 570.1 170.0 212.5 75 0.21 365 0.545
6 7.22 625.5 375.3 1010.1 680.1 330.0 108.5 80 0.2 378 1.217
7 7.6 615.5 369.3 550.1 410.0 140.0 158.5 75.5 0.18 485 1.086
8 7.44 625.8 375.48 660.1 370.0 290.0 145.5 65.5 0.19 515 1.088
9 7.3 842.5 505.5 820.1 560.1 260.0 125.5 56.5 0.28 525 0.447
10 7.52 784.5 470.7 920.1 680.1 240.0 201.5 58.8 0.27 685 0.49
11 7.47 958.4 575.04 690.1 500.1 190.0 128.5 65.8 0.11 678 0.546
12 7.2 568 340.8 990.1 570.1 420.0 126.5 65.5 0.15 892 0.608
13 7.72 586.5 351.9 380.0 90.0 290.0 120 78.5 0.2 685 0.622
14 8.12 575.5 345.3 260.0 40.0 220.0 125 89.5 0.18 525 0.487
15 7.19 656 393.6 650.1 420.0 230.0 205 88.5 0.24 515 0.786
16 7.3 658 394.8 560.1 340.0 220.0 210 80 0.23 525 0.77
17 7.64 715 429 460.0 230.0 230.0 145.5 68.5 0.21 485 0.885
18 7.61 725 435 1390.1 990.1 400.0 150.5 75.5 0.19 485 0.667
BIS 6.5–8.5 500–2000 500–2000 300–600 70–100 30–70 200 12 0.3 250–1000 0.5–1.2
UNITS NIL μs/cm mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L

Table 2a
Physico chemical characterization of ground water during pre-monsoon in Pusapatirega mandal.
S. No pH EC TDS THW Ca+2 Mg+2 Na+1 K+1 Fe+2 Cl-1 F-1

1 7.56 650 390 590.1 420.0 170.0 158 20 0.28 325 0.556
2 7.681 545 327 680.1 380.0 300.0 185 50 0.3 450 0.967
3 7.43 580 348 640.1 510.1 130.0 198 55 0.25 365.8 1.187
4 7.38 1020 612 800.1 760.1 40.0 184 57 0.1 356.5 0.515
5 7.25 650 390 700.1 520.1 180.0 175 42 0.2 425.5 0.55
6 8.36 781 468.6 360.0 320.0 40.0 154 35 0.1 510.8 0.56
7 7.36 615.4 369.24 840.1 600.1 240.0 195 48 0.2 515 0.473
8 7.23 602.8 361.68 870.1 550.1 320.0 182 38 0.25 525.8 0.431
9 7.74 550 330 750.1 500.1 250.0 193 52 0.3 625.4 0.47
10 7.66 425 255 500.1 390.0 110.0 154 49 0.2 585 0.573
11 7.16 520 312 770.1 650.1 120.0 175 39 0.35 675 0.297
12 7.19 485 291 1220.1 680.1 540.1 142 28 0.3 545 0.401
13 7.31 458 274.8 760.1 450.0 310.0 168 50 0.28 325 0.546
14 6.94 500 300 2720.3 2400.2 320.0 150 45 0.25 353 0.283
15 7.59 515 309 380.0 200.0 180.0 142 39 0.3 650.8 0.813
16 7.54 525 315 480.0 370.0 110.0 281 45 0.3 325.8 0.722
17 7.44 425 255 340.0 180.0 160.0 140 35 0.35 345.6 1.122
18 7.93 435 261 570.1 530.1 40.0 185 58 0.25 333.5 0.724
19 7.31 510 306 470.0 250.0 220.0 132 32 0.3 515.8 0.428
BIS 6.5–8.5 500–2000 500–2000 300–600 70–100 30–70 200 12 0.3 250–1000 0.5–1.2
UNITS NIL μs/cm mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L

3
G. Kumar et al. Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338

Table 2b
Physico chemical characterization of ground water in Pusapatirega mandal during post monsoon season.
S. No pH EC TDS THW Ca+2 Mg+2 Na+1 K+1 Fe+2 Cl-1 F-1

1 8.2 700 420 650 435 215 165 25 0.32 325 0.556
2 8.3 645 387 715 385 330 175 55 0.28 450 0.967
3 8.1 585 351 655 525 130 195 65 0.3 365.8 1.187
4 8.08 985 591 815 780 35 185 65 0.31 356.5 0.515
5 7.98 785 471 755 525.8 229.2 185 45 0.325 425.5 0.55
6 7.85 625.5 375.3 400.8 335.5 65.3 165 40 0.33 510.8 0.56
7 7.86 605.1 363.06 845.8 615.5 230.3 185 50 0.28 515 0.473
8 8.04 605.8 363.48 888.8 585.5 303.3 175 45 0.33 525.8 0.431
9 7.95 545 327 755 515.5 239.5 185 55 0.35 625.4 0.47
10 7.94 475 285 515.56 400.5 115.06 155 50 0.35 585 0.573
11 8.15 505 303 775.8 655.5 120.3 180 45 0.28 675 0.297
12 8.08 455 273 1300.5 685.5 615 155 35 0.28 545 0.401
13 8.12 500 300 765.8 455.5 310.3 175 55 0.29 325 0.546
14 8.04 525 315 2820 2425 395 155 50 0.27 353 0.283
15 7.95 495 297 400.5 215.5 185 140 45 0.31 650.8 0.813
16 7.8 415 249 485.9 375 110.9 285 55 0.32 325.8 0.722
17 7.56 385 231 340.6 185 155.6 155 40 0.3 345.6 1.122
18 7.58 510 306 575 535.5 39.5 190 60 0.3 333.5 0.724
19 7.59 525 315 485 258 227 135 35 0.3 515.8 0.428
BIS 6.5–8.5 500–2000 500–2000 300–600 70–100 30–70 200 12 0.3 250–1000 0.5–1.2
UNITS NIL μs/cm mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L

Sodium and potassium were determined by ELICO CL 361 micropro­

Table 3
WQI in the two mandals during pre-monsoon and post monsoon seasons.
S. No Name of the location Pre monsoon
1 Pusapatirega mandal 119.32
2 Bhogapuram mandal 125.4
the chosen villages. Analysis of the groundwater samples from these
sampling stations was done during pre and post monsoons seasons.
Standard methods prescribed by APHA [40] were followed for the
analysis of water samples. EC, pH and TDS were measured using ELICO
water analyzer kit PE138 on the spot. TH, Ca+2 and Mg+2 were
measured using EDTA titration method. Chloride ion concentration in
the samples of water was determined by Mohr’s (titration) method.
cessor based flame photometer. Fluoride in the water samples was
analyzed by Thermo Fischer Accumet Fluoride ion selective electrode.
Post monsoon Water quality index (WQI) calculations:
120.2 The calculation of WQI was made using weighed Arithmetic index
122.2 method [41] in the following steps:
Let there be n water quality parameters and quality rating (qn) cor­
responding to nth parameter is a number reflecting relative value of this
parameter in the polluted water with respect to its standard permissible
value.
qn values are given by the relationship. qn = 100 (vn-vi)/(vs-vi) vs =
Standard value, vn = observed value vi = ideal value In most cases vi =
0 except in certain parameters like pH, dissolved oxygen etc., Calcula­
tion of quality rating for pH & DO (vi q pH = 100 (v pH – 7.0)/(8.5–1.0)

Table 4a
Correlation matrix Pusapatirega mandal post monsoon.
pH EC TDS THW Ca+2 Mg+2 Na+1 K+1 Fe+2 Cl-1 F-1

pH 1
EC 0.150838 1
TDS 0.150838 1 1
TH − 0.57947 − 0.05904 − 0.05904 1
Ca+2 − 0.49969 0.025995 0.025995 0.973211 1
Mg+2 − 0.52674 − 0.34562 − 0.34562 0.487976 0.274222 1
Na+1 0.089283 0.126365 0.126365 − 0.12956 − 0.07647 − 0.25158 1
Fe+2 − 0.3444 − 0.74384 − 0.74384 − 0.01384 − 0.11919 0.3946 − 0.02227 1
K+1 0.116588 0.08184 0.08184 0.058282 0.145486 − 0.30855 0.454847 − 0.28549 1
Cl-1 0.051837 − 0.11843 − 0.11843 − 0.13931 − 0.1965 0.163317 − 0.26906 0.132251 − 0.16496 1
F-1 0.326416 − 0.15577 − 0.15577 − 0.4705 − 0.44528 − 0.27749 0.157812 0.176425 0.231926 − 0.34276 1

Table 4b
Correlation matrix Pusaptirega mandal pre monsoon.
pH EC TDS THW Ca+2 Mg+2 Na+1 K+1 Fe+2 Cl-1 F-1

pH 1
EC 0.393622 1
TDS 0.393622 1 1
TH 0.304637 0.01965 0.01965 1
Ca+2 0.238544 0.085266 0.085266 0.970188 1
Mg+2 0.366003 − 0.21459 − 0.21459 0.563528 0.3465214 1
Na+1 − 0.008 − 0.003 − 0.003 − 0.14566 − 0.076794 − 0.30201 1
K+1 0.078241 0.18861 0.18861 0.043275 0.1511407 − 0.34769 0.470683 1
Fe+2 − 0.15344 0.137004 0.137004 − 0.46371 − 0.407449 − 0.40598 0.133805 − 0.03236 1
Cl-1 0.091756 − 0.1842 − 0.1842 − 0.14052 − 0.193503 0.115705 − 0.35924 − 0.22335 0.197581 1
F-1 − 0.14419 − 0.14612 − 0.14612 − 0.47087 − 0.446952 − 0.29902 0.153623 0.294771 0.012161 − 0.34276 1

4
G. Kumar et al. Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338

Table 5a
Correlation matrix for Bhogapuram mandal during pre-monsoon.
pH EC TDS TH Ca+2 Mg+2 Na+1 K+1 Fe+2 Cl-1 F-1

pH 1
EC − 0.291 1
TDS − 0.291 1 1
TH − 0.04 0.2381 0.2381 1
Ca+2 − 0.042 0.36515 0.36515 0.9515 1
Mg+2 − 0.016 − 0.2126 − 0.2126 0.6084 0.3346 1
Na+1 0.2334 0.30674 0.30674 0.0303 0.2035 − 0.43 1
K+1 0.3716 − 0.1936 − 0.1936 − 0.19 − 0.268 0.11 − 0.1 1
Fe+2 − 0.141 0.30531 0.30531 − 0.015 − 0.058 0.1 − 0.1 − 0.21 1
Cl-1 − 0.319 0.07488 0.07488 0.0804 − 0.077 0.44 − 0.5 − 0.23 0.47 1
F-1 − 0.027 − 0.2161 − 0.2161 0.0753 0.0631 0.07 − 0.4 0.32 − 0.5 − 0.14422 1

Table 5b
Correlation matrix for Bhogapuram mandal during post monsoon.
pH EC TDS TH Ca+2 Mg+2 Na+1 K+1 Fe+2 Cl-1 F-1

pH 1
EC − 0.2098 1
TDS − 0.2098 1 1
TH − 0.422 0.26332 0.2633 1
Ca+2 − 0.4499 0.3364 0.3364 0.954 1
Mg+2 − 0.1198 − 0.07567 − 0.0757 0.5866 0.31689 1
Na+1 − 0.4049 0.0935 0.0935 0.0292 0.20797 − 0.4695 1
K+1 0.25056 − 0.39949 − 0.3995 − 0.2585 − 0.3722 0.1875 − 0.233 1
Fe+2 − 0.0255 0.39197 0.392 − 0.0274 − 0.0882 0.1516 − 0.065 − 0.2927 1
Cl-1 0.00855 0.15 0.15 0.1039 − 0.0782 0.5399 − 0.345 − 0.0088 0.485 1
F-1 − 0.0155 − 0.30548 − 0.3055 0.0152 − 0.0522 0.1893 − 0.349 0.3082 − 0.426 − 0.1329 1

Table 6a
Factor analysis during Pre-monsoon in Pusapatirega mandal.
F1 F2 F3 F4 Initial communality Final communality Specific variance D1 D2

pH 0.380 − 0.303 − 0.129 − 0.250 0.484 0.315 0.685 pH 0.352 0.335

EC 0.118 ¡0.966 − 0.216 − 0.077 1.000 1.000 0.000 EC 0.034 0.973
TDS 0.118 ¡0.966 − 0.216 − 0.077 1.000 1.000 0.000 TDS 0.034 0.973
TH 0.968 0.035 0.232 0.092 1.000 1.000 0.000 TH 0.967 0.048
Ca+2 0.888 − 0.075 0.332 0.255 1.000 0.969 0.031 Ca+2 0.878 0.151
Mg+2 0.659 0.363 − 0.222 − 0.421 1.000 0.793 0.207 Mg+2 0.688 − 0.305
Na+1 − 0.230 − 0.183 0.464 0.119 0.488 0.315 0.685 Na+1 ¡0.245 0.162
K+1 − 0.093 − 0.343 0.547 0.074 0.521 0.431 0.569 K+1 − 0.122 0.334
Fe+2 ¡0.453 − 0.161 − 0.248 0.293 0.335 0.379 0.621 Fe+2 ¡0.465 0.121
Cl-1 − 0.016 0.248 ¡0.542 0.169 0.560 0.384 0.616 Cl-1 0.005 ¡0.249
F-1 ¡0.544 0.011 0.439 − 0.448 0.616 0.690 0.310 F-1 ¡0.541 − 0.058

Values in bold correspond for each variable to the factor for which the squared cosine is the largest.
Factor pattern after Varimax rotation.

Table 6b
Factor analysis Pusapatirega mandal during post-monsoon season.
Factor pattern:

F1 F2 F3 Initial communality Final communality pH D1 D2

pH 0.578 − 0.314 − 0.012 0.557 0.433 EC 0.248 ¡0.609

EC 0.723 0.608 0.214 1.000 0.938 TDS 0.944 0.012
TDS 0.723 0.608 0.214 1.000 0.938 TH 0.944 0.012
TH − 0.637 0.746 − 0.196 1.000 1.000 Ca+2 − 0.019 0.980
Ca+2 − 0.492 0.777 − 0.287 1.000 0.927 Mg+2 0.112 0.912
Mg+2 ¡0.674 0.099 0.233 1.000 0.518 Na+1 − 0.458 0.504
Na+1 0.258 − 0.015 ¡0.451 0.397 0.270 K+1 0.189 − 0.175
K+1 ¡0.625 − 0.524 − 0.022 0.755 0.666 Fe+2 ¡0.816 − 0.009
Fe+2 0.250 0.113 ¡0.611 0.511 0.449 Cl-1 0.265 − 0.072
Cl-1 − 0.122 − 0.134 0.440 0.414 0.226 F-1 ¡0.180 − 0.027
F-1 0.268 ¡0.497 − 0.391 0.568 0.471 0.529 − 0.108 ¡0.554

Values in bold correspond for each variable to the factor for which the squared cosine is the largest.
Factor pattern after Varimax rotation.

5
G. Kumar et al. Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338

Table 7a
Factor analysis Bhogapuram during pre monsoon season.
Factor pattern:

F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 Initial communality Final communality pH D1 D2

pH − 0.299 0.031 0.357 − 0.150 0.390 0.354 0.392 EC ¡0.247 − 0.172

EC 0.857 0.356 0.008 0.372 0.035 1.000 1.000 TDS 0.922 0.103
TDS 0.857 0.356 0.008 0.372 0.035 1.000 1.000 TH 0.922 0.103
TH 0.605 ¡0.705 0.349 − 0.103 0.060 1.000 1.000 Ca+2 0.189 0.910
Ca+2 0.682 − 0.483 0.482 − 0.123 − 0.057 1.000 0.949 Mg+2 0.363 0.752
Mg+2 0.079 ¡0.833 − 0.181 0.012 0.279 1.000 0.811 Na+1 − 0.334 0.768
Na+1 0.276 0.497 0.477 − 0.324 0.186 0.551 0.690 K+1 0.482 − 0.301
K+1 − 0.484 − 0.047 0.293 0.581 0.535 0.486 0.946 Fe+2 ¡0.447 − 0.193
Fe+2 0.343 0.084 ¡0.543 − 0.062 0.294 0.436 0.510 Cl-1 0.340 0.092
Cl-1 0.197 − 0.324 ¡0.738 0.073 0.059 0.580 0.698 F-1 0.016 0.379
F-1 − 0.316 − 0.333 0.301 0.499 − 0.417 0.480 0.724 0.276 ¡0.438 0.139

Values in bold correspond for each variable to the factor for which the squared cosine is the largest.
Factor pattern after Varimax rotation.
Factor patterns after varimax rotation.

Table 7b
Factor analysis Bhogapuram during pre monsoon seasoTable.7 (b) Factor analysis Bhopgapuram mandal during post-monsoon season.
Factor pattern:

F1 F2 F3 F4 Initial communality Final communality Specific variance D1 D2

pH ¡0.417 0.099 0.296 0.154 0.408 0.296 0.704 pH − 0.291 ¡0.315

EC 0.820 0.382 0.211 0.351 1.000 0.986 0.014 EC 0.894 0.141
TDS 0.820 0.382 0.211 0.351 1.000 0.986 0.014 TDS 0.894 0.141
TH 0.713 − 0.644 − 0.276 − 0.034 1.000 1.000 0.000 TH 0.232 0.932
Ca+2 0.741 − 0.420 − 0.462 − 0.007 1.000 0.939 0.061 Ca+2 0.381 0.762
Mg+2 0.216 ¡0.841 0.398 − 0.079 1.000 0.919 0.081 Mg+2 − 0.290 0.818
Na+1 0.209 0.409 ¡0.570 − 0.374 0.575 0.676 0.324 Na+1 0.401 − 0.223
K+1 ¡0.501 − 0.228 0.099 0.159 0.426 0.339 0.661 K+1 ¡0.543 − 0.091
Fe+2 0.385 0.230 0.597 − 0.366 0.510 0.692 0.308 Fe+2 0.448 0.023
Cl-1 0.204 − 0.231 0.664 − 0.214 0.541 0.582 0.418 Cl-1 0.040 0.306
F-1 − 0.322 ¡0.397 − 0.112 0.379 0.404 0.417 0.583 F-1 ¡0.488 0.150

Values in bold correspond for each variable to the factor for which the squared cosine is the largest.
Factor pattern after Varimax rotation.

Fig. 2a. Factor loadings after varimax rotation for Pusapatirega during pre-monsoon and postmonsoon seasons.

and q DO = 100 (VDO – 14.6) / (15.0–14.6) following equation.

Calculation of unit weight: The Unit weight (Wn) to various water
Quality parameters are inversely proportional to the recommended
standards for the corresponding parameters.
Wn = k/Sn. Where Wn = unit weight for nth parameter Sn = standard
permissible value for nth parameter k = proportionality constant.
The unit weight (Wn) values in the present study is calculated by the
The suitability of WQI values for human consumption according to
Mishra & Patel [42] are rated as 0–25 … … …. .Excellent; 26–50 … … …
Good; 51–75 … … … …Bad; 76–100 … … … Very Bad; 100 & above ….
Unfit.
Then the analyzed data was executed to statistical techniques like
factor cluster analysis in SPSS to know the parameters influencing the

6
G. Kumar et al. Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338

Fig. 2b. Factor loadings after varimax rotation in Bhogappuram mandal during pre-monsoon and post monsoon seasons.

Fig. 3a. Agglomerative Hierarchical cluster analysis in Pusapatirega mandal during the seasons under study.

Fig. 3b. Agglomerative Hierarchical cluster analysis in Bhogapuram mandal in the two seasons under study.

7
G. Kumar et al.
Fig. 4a. Linear Regression analysis during pre-monsoon season Pusapatirega mandal.
groundwater chemistry.
4. Results and discussion
Seasonal variation in the physico-chemical parameters analyzed was
presented in Table 1(a), (b)and 2(a), (b). EC is expressed in μs/cm and all
the other parameters were expressed in mg/L (pH has no units). The
results obtained after the WQI computations were presented in Table 3.
4.1. Physico chemical characterization
pH of the water samples analyzed was found to be in the range
6.5–8.5 for all the chosen locations during the course of study.
Electrical conductivity (EC) of the groundwater was found to be
beyond the acceptable limit and within the permissible limits prescribed
by BIS. Most of sampling locations found EC in the range 600–800 μS/
cm.
Total dissolved solids (TDS) in the groundwater was found to be in
the range 255–612 mg/L during pre-monsoon and post monsoon in the
two mandals. On the basis of TDS classification water with TDS <1000
mg/L is treated as non-saline, 1000–3000 mg/L slightly saline,
3000–10000 mg/L saline and >10000 mg/L very saline [44]. According
to this classification, the groundwater analyzed in the present study was
graded as non-saline during the two seasons under study.
Total hardness (TH) in the groundwater was found to be beyond
permissible limits prescribed in the two seasons in most of the locations.
The same trends were found in the concentration levels of calcium and
magnesium in the groundwater. Highest concentration levels of total
hardness, calcium and magnesium are due to the presence of calcium
and magnesium rich minerals in the locations. The highest value of TH
was found as 2720.5 mg/L during the post monsoon season in Pusapa­
tirega mandal. From the data obtained it can be inferred that the
groundwater is hard in nature and unsuitable for drinking. But for all the
villages under study groundwater is the only source available for
8
Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338
drinking. Prolonged usage of such water will result in severe epidemi­
ological issues in human such as hypertension, high blood pressure and
acute myocardial infraction [43]. In Bhogapuram mandal the value of
TH was found as 1400 mg/L it was found that the study area is rich with
mica genesis and is responsible for the relatively higher concentrations
of calcium and magnesium in the groundwater. Similar trends were
reported by Mattas [44], Chowdary et al. [45], Kazakis [46].
The concentration of Caþ2 and Mgþ2 in the study area was found to
be beyond the permissible limits during the course of study. The reasons
may be attributed to the leaching of calcium and magnesium bearing
minerals, over exploitation of groundwater and intrusion of industrial or
household wastes into the aquifer. Higher levels of Ca+2and Mg+2 in
groundwater is alarming in concern with cardiovascular and gastro in­
testinal ailments.
Iron in the water was found to be within the limits prescribed. In the
two seasons under the study, concentration of sodium and potassium in
the groundwater was found to be beyond the permissible limits pre­
scribed. Elevated concentration levels of potassium can be due to
dissolution of mica deposits in to the groundwater aquifer. Another
reason for the highest concentrations of potassium may be due to in­
dustrial and domestic wastes mixing in groundwater [43].
Fluoride in ground water originates from fluoride bearing rocks such
as fluorite, apatite and micas. As the study area is rich with mica deposits
there may be dissolution of the mineral resulting fluoride in the ground
water. But it was observed in the present study that higher concentra­
tions of calcium in the groundwater resulted a low fluoride concentra­
tion. Fluoride concentration in the study area during the course of study
was found to be within the standards prescribed.
4.2. Water quality index data
From the water quality index (WQI) computations it was inferred
that the groundwater of the two mandals is not suitable for human
consumption as the computed values of WQI for Pusapatirega mandal
G. Kumar et al.
Fig. 4b. Linear Regression analysis during post monsoon season in Pusapatirega mandal.
are 119.30 and 120.2 during pre-monsoon and post-monsoon seasons
respectively, and the same for Bhogapuram mandal was found as 125.4
and 122.2. These values were found to be greater than 100and the water
is ranked as unfit for consumption [46–48]. The details of WQI data was
presented in Table 3.
4.3. Correlation matrix
The statistical measure of two or more random variables revealing
closeness and degree of linear association between independent and
dependent parameters was measured in correlation analysis. The details
of correlation matrix analysis were presented in Table 4 (a), (b) and 5
(a), (b). A strong positive correlation was found between EC -TDS in the
two mandals during the course of study (R = 1). With an R value of 0.9
9
Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338
TH- Ca+2 were found to be highly correlated in the groundwater of the
study area. Ca+2 and Mg+2 in the ground water was positively correlated
with R value of 0.49, next comes Fe+2- Cl-1 (R = 0.47). Positive corre­
lation was found between K+1- F-1 and Cl-1- F-1. A negative correlation
was found between calcium-fluorides. This supports the experimental
data that fluoride concentration in the groundwater is influenced by
higher levels of calcium. Correlation analysis of the parameters analyzed
implicates that the quality of water is dominated by EC, TDS, TH, Ca+2,
Mg+2, K+1 and Fe+2. It was also found that calcium and magnesium also
contribute to TDS. This indicates that the surface leaching of minerals
due to anthropogenic sources. Similar trends were reported by Ref. [43].
G. Kumar et al.
Fig. 5a. linear regression analysis for parameters during pre-monsoon season in Bhogapuram mandal.
4.4. Factor analysis
Experimental results were subjected to factor analysis. This analysis
was carried out for the two seasons in the two mandals. The analysis
reports were presented in Table 6 (a), (b) and 7 (a), (b). Variance plots
after varimax rotation were presented in Fig. 2(A) And 2 (B). During pre-
monsoon season in Pusapatirega mandal after varimax rotation pH, TH,
Ca+2 and Mg+2 were found to be highly loaded with 53.3% variance.
Next comes EC, TDS and K+1.
During pre-monsoon season in Pusapatirega mandal, before varimax
rotation three factors were found with high loadings. Factor-I is highly
loaded with pH, TH, Ca+2 and Mg+2. Factor-II is loaded with EC and
TDS. Factor-III is loaded with Na+1 and K+1. Among the three factors,
Factor –I is loaded with high percentage of variance. After varimax
rotation TH, pH, Ca+2 and Mg+2 were found to be the first factor (D1)
10
Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338
and EC, TDS and K+1 as second factor (D2). The percent variance be­
tween D1 and D2 was found to be 47.55%. In Bhogapuram mandal
during the same season the highly loaded factor (Factor-I) comprises of
EC, TDS and Ca+2, Factor-II is with TH, Mg+2 and Na+1; factor-III with
Fe+2 and chloride. After varimax rotation D1 was loaded with EC, TDS,
Na+1 and Fe. D2 is loaded with TH, Ca+2, Mg+2 and chloride. These two
factors D1 and D2 were related with 46.88%. From these data it is
inferred that the ground water of the two mandals is hard in nature as
the earth crust is rich with Ca+2 and Mg+2 bearing minerals. Higher
levels of K+1 are due to contamination of groundwater by industrial and
household wastes. Pusapatirega mandal is surrounded by various
chemical and pharmaceutical industries.
During post-monsoon season in Pusapatirega mandal, Factor-I is
highly loaded with pH, EC and TDS. Factor-II is with TH, Ca+2 and Mg+2.
Factor-III with Na+1, K+1 and chloride. After varimax rotation D1 is
G. Kumar et al.
Fig. 5b. Linear regression analysis for parameters in Bhogapuram mandal during post monsoon.
loaded with EC, TDS and K+1. D2 is loaded with pH, TDS, Ca+2 and
Mg+2. These two factor loadings are related with 51.33%. Parameters
such as Ca+2, Mg+2, Na+1 and K+1 are found to be responsible for
elevated levels of EC and TDS. EC and TDS were found to be predomi­
nant in the mandal. This may be due to dissolution of rocks, anthropo­
genic activities and contamination by household wastes. In Bhogapuram
mandal EC, TDS, TH, Ca+2 and K+1 were found to be fit in as Factor-I
with high loadings. Mg+2and F-1 comes next as Factor-II. Factor-III
corresponds to Na+1, Fe+2 and chloride. Factor loadings after varimax
rotation, D1 is comprised with EC, TDS, Na+1 and Fe+2; D2 with TH,
Ca+2, Mg+2 and chloride. These two factor loadings were related with
48.1% of variance.
Factor analysis of the experimental data set revealed that the
groundwater of the two mandals under study is hard and unfit for
11
Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338
human consumption. Also the data reveals that the groundwater is
contaminated by industrial and household wastes.
4.5. Linear regression analysis
Linear regression analysis was conducted for those parameters which
has a positive R values. The regression plots were presented in Fig. 4(a)
and (b), 5 (a) and (b). These plots showed a strong positive R squared
value of 1 between EC and TDS. With an R squared value of 0.9 calcium
and total hardness were related. Third pair of parameters, magnesium
and total hardness with a positive R squared value of 0.37 was related.
Magnesium and chloride were related to each other with a positive R
squared value of 0.28. These data matches with the data obtained from
factor analysis, indicating that the ground water is of Ca–Mg–Cl type,
G. Kumar et al.
with rich ion content.
4.6. Cluster analysis
Hierarchical cluster analysis was conducted for the experimental
results during the two seasons for the two mandals. Fig. 3(a) and (b)
represents the dendrograms for the cluster analysis reports. During pre-
monsoon and post monsoon seasons in Puapatirega mandal parameters
were grouped into four clusters. In pre-monsoon season Ca+2, TDS and
chloride grouped into cluster-I, EC and TH grouped as cluster-II, Mg+2
and Na+1 in cluster –III and K+1, Fe+2 and F-1 grouped in cluster –IV.
During post monsoon season besides Ca+2, TDS, chloride, EC forms
cluster-I. In Bhogapuram mandal, during the two season’s similar cluster
formations were found and are as Cluster-I: Ca+2, TDS and Cl-1; Cluster-
II EC and TH; Cluster-III Mg+2 and Na+1; Cluster-IV K+1, Fe+2 and F-1.
From cluster analysis it is inferred that the ground water in the two
mandals if highly influenced by EC, TH, Ca+2 and Mg+2. The same trends
were observed in linear regression analysis and factor analysis too.
5. Conclusions
Anthropogenic activities, contamination of groundwater by indus­
trial and household wastes is responsible for the poor quality of
groundwater in the two mandals Pusapatirega and Bhogapuram in
Vizianagaram district of Andhra Pradesh, India. Physicochemical char­
acterization, water quality index analysis and multivariate statistical
analysis were performed for the groundwater samples of the study area.
Factor analysis, linear regression analysis and cluster analysis revealed
that the groundwater quality is influenced by parameters like EC, TDS,
TH, Ca+2 and Mg+2. Highest concentration levels of potassium were
found; this may be due to the mixing of household wastes into the
groundwater aquifer. From WQI computations it was found that the
water is not potable and ranked as poor in quality. Groundwater is the
only source of water available for use in the two mandals chosen for the
study. The results of experimentation, data interpretation of the study is
significant in view of health of the residents. Biological investigations of
groundwater quality and prediction of the same using different mathe­
matical models may help in assessing the overall quality of the
groundwater.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to the management and principal M VGR
College of Engineering (A), Vizianagaram for their constant support and
encouragement.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jics.2021.100338.
References
[1] Z. Khanam, V. Shing, Groundwater quality assessment near polluted canal area in
Kicha Town Uttarakhand India, Int. J. Recent Space Sci. Res. 5 (2014) 262–368.
[2] W. Aeschbach- Hertig, T. Gleeson, Regional strategies for accelerating global
problem of groundwater depletion, Nat. Geosci. 5 (2012) 853–861.
[3] B Wang Niu, H.A. H Loaiciga, S. Hong, W. Shao, Temporal variations of ground
water quality in the western Jianghan plain, China, Sci. Total Environ. 578 (2017)
542–550.
12
Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338
[4] H. Shang, W. Wang, Z. Dia, L. Duan, Y. Zhao, J. Zhang, AN ecology oriented
exploitation mode of groundwater resources in the northern Tianshan mountains,
China, J. Hydrol. 543 (2016) 386–394.
[5] Chander Kumer Singh, Anand Kumar, Shastri Satyanarayana, Alok Kumar,
Pankaj Kumar, Javed Mallick, Multivariate Statistical Analysis and Geochemical
Modeling for Geochemical Assessment of Groundwater of Delhi, 2017, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.gexplo.2017.01.001. India.
[6] H.M.A. Rossiter, T.A. Owusu, E. Awuah, A.M. Macdonald, A.I. Schafer, Chemical
drinking water quality in Ghana, water costs and scope for advanced treatment,
Sci. Total Environ. 408 (2010) 2378–2386.
[7] N.U. Kura, M.F. Ramli, W.N.A. Sulaiman, S. Ibrahim, A.Z. Aris, A. Musthapha,
Evaluation of factors influencing the groundwater chemistry in a small tropical
island of Malayasia, Int. J. Res. Public Health 10 (2013) 1861–1881.
[8] Mayuri CHabukdhara, Sanjay Kumar Gupta, Yatharth Kotecha, K. Aravind, Neema,
Groundwater Quality in Ghaziabad District, Uttar Pradesh, Multivariate and health
risk assessment, India, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/jchemosphere.2017.03.086.
[9] A. Masoud, Groundwater quality assessment of the shallow aquifers west of the
Nile delta Egypt Using Multivariate statistical and geo statistical techniques, J. Afr.
Earth Sci. 95 (2014) 123–137.
[10] J.W. Einax, H.W. Zwanziger, S. Geib, Chemometrics in Environmental Analysis,
VCH, Weinhem, Verlagsgesellschaft mbh, 1997.
[11] M.G. Dalton, S.B. Upchurch, Interpretation of Hydro Chemical Facies by Factor
Analysis Groundwater, 10, 1978, pp. 228–233.
[12] J.C. Davis, Statistics and Data Analysis in Geology, Willey, NewYork, 1986.
[13] J. Nardaez, P. Richter, M. Inestoral, Preliminary physical chemical characterization
of river water and sediments effected by copper mining activity, in central Chile
application of multivariate analysis, J. Chil. Chem. Soc. 52 (2007) 1261–1265.
[14] K. Voudouris, A. Panagopoulos, J. Koumantakis, Multivariate statistical analysis in
the assessment of hydro chemistry of the northern korinthia Prefecture lluvial
aquifer system, Greece, Nat. Resour. Res. 9 (2) (2000) 135–146.
[15] Davi JC Sattistics and Data Analysis in Geology, Wiley, New York, 2002.
[16] K.L. Locsey, M.E. Cox, Statistical and hydro chemical methods to compare basalt
and basement rock- hosted ground waters: Atheron table lands, north eastern
Australia, Environ. Geol. 43 (6) (2003) 698–713.
[17] L. Belkhiri, A. Boudoukha, l Mouni, D. Baouz, Application of multivariate statistical
methods and inverse geochemical modeling for charcaterization of groundwater –
a case study: Ain Azel plain Algeria, Geoderma 159 (2010) 390–398.
[18] W.D. Alberto, D.M. Del Pilar, A.M. Valeria, P.S. Fabiaana, H.A. Cecilia, Delos
Angles, B M, Pattern recognition techniques for the evaluation of spatial and
temporal variations in water quality , a case study, Suquia river basin (Cordoba-
Argentina), Water Resour. 35 (2011) 2881–2894.
[19] M. Lopez-Chicano, M. Bouamama, A. Vallejos, B.A. Pulido, Factors which
determine the hydro geo chemical behavior of Karstic springs: a case study from
the betic caordlleras Spain, Appl. Geo. Chem. 16 (9–10) (2001) 1179–1192.
[20] H.G. Pertira, S. Renca, J. Sataiva, A case study on geochemical anomaly
identification through principal component analysis supplementary projection,
Appl. Geochem. 18 (2003) 37–44.
[21] B.H. Brijkishore, G. Murali, Factor analysis for revealing hydro chemical
characteristics of water shed, Environ. Geol. 19 (1992) 3–9.
[22] I.C. Ezekwe, Odunn, G.N. Chima, A. Opigo, Assessing regional groundwater quality
and its health implications in Lokpaukw, Lekwesi and Ishiagu mining areas of
south eastern Nigeria using factor analysis, Environ. Earth Sci. 67 (2012) 971–986.
[23] Y. Cao, C. Tang, S. Song, C. Liu, Y. Zhang, Identifying the hydro chemical
characteristics of rivers and groundwater by multi variate statistical analysis in the
Sanjiang plain China, Appl. Water Sci. (2014), 10.1007/s 13201-014-0215-5.
[24] N. Kazakis, N. Kantiranis, K. Kalaitzidou, M. Kaprara, M. MItrakas, R. Frei,
G. Vargemezis, P. Tsourlos, A. Zouboulis, A. Filippidis, Origin of hexavalent
chromium in ground water the example of sarigkiol basin, Northern Greece, Sci.
Total Environ. 593–594 (2017) 552–566.
[25] B.K. Nayak, B.C. Acharya, U.C. Panda, B.B. Nayak, S.K. Acharya, Variation of water
quality in Chilika lake Orissa, Indian J. Mar. Sci. 33 (2) (2004) 164–169.
[26] G. Senthil Kumar, A.L. Ramanathan, H.C. Nainwal, S. Chidamambaram, Evaluation
of hydro geochemistry of groundwater using factor analysis in the Cuddalore
coastal region, India J. Marine Sci. 37 (2) (2008) 181–185. Chidamamabram,
India.
[27] Sasikanth Majaji, K. Vijay Kumar, M. Rajsekhar, B. Vasanth Kumar, Chemistry of
groundwater in Gulbarga district Karnataka India, Environ. Monit. Assess. 136
(1–3) (2008) 347–354.
[28] Punam Thyagi, D. Buddi, R.L. Sawhney, D. Richa Kothari, A correlation among
physic chemical parameters of groundwater in and around Pithampur industrial
area, Indian J. Environ. Protect. 23 (11) (2003) 1276–1282.
[29] J.K. Pathak, Mohd Alam, Shikha Sharma, Interpretation of groundwater quality
using multivariate statistical technique in Moradabad city, Western Uttar Pradesh
state, India, Environ. J. Chem. 5 (3) (2008) 607–619.
[30] S. Gangwar, Status, quality and management of groundwater in India, Int. J.
Inform. Compute Technol. 3 (2013) 717–722.
[31] V.K. Garg, S. Suthar, S. Singh, A. Sheoran, S. Garima Meenakshi Jain, Drinking
water quality in villages of south western Haryana India, Assessing human health
risks associated with hydrochemistry, Environ. Geol. 58 (2009) 1329–1340.
[32] P.P. Adhikary, H. Chnadrasekharan, D. Chakraborty, B. Kumar, B.R. Yadav,
Statistical approaches for hydro geo chemical characterization of groundwater in
west Delhi, India, Environ. Monit. Assess. 154 (2009) 41–52.
[33] S. Suthar, P. Bishnoy, S. Singh, P.K. Mutiyar, A.K. Neema, N.S. Patil, Nitrates
contamination in groundwater of some rural areas of Rajasthan, India, J. Hazard
Mater. 171 (2009) 189–199.
G. Kumar et al.
[34] D.K. Tank, C.P.S. Chandel, A hydro chemical elucidation of the groundwater
composition under domestic and irrigated land in Jaipur city, Enviorn Monitt
Assess 166 (2010) 69–77.
[35] N.C. Mondal, B.S. Singh, S.C. Puranik, V.P. Singh, Trace element concentration in
groundwater of Pesarlanka island Krishna delta, India, Environ. Monit. Assess. 163
(2010) 215–227.
[36] C.K. Jain, A. Bandyopadhyay, A. Bhadra, Assessment of groundwater quality for
drinking purpose district Nainital, Uttarkhand India, Environ. Monit. Assess. 166
(2010) 663–676.
[37] V.K. Singh, D.S. Bikundia, A. Saraswat, D. Mohan, Groundwater quality assessment
in the village of Lutfullapur Nawada, Loni district Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh India,
Environ. Monit. Assess. 184 (2012) 4473–4488.
[38] S.M. Yidana, A. Yidana, Assessing water quality using water quality index and
multivariate analysis, Environ. Earth Sci. 59 (7) (2010) 1461–1473.
[39] C.K. Singh, R. Kumari, R.P. Singh, S. Shashtri, V. Kamal, S. Mukherjee,
Geochemical modeling of high fluoride concentration in groundwater of Pokhran
area of Rajasthan, India, Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 86 (2) (2011) 152–158.
[40] APHA (American Public Health Association, Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater, nineteenth ed., American Public Health Association,
Washington, DC, 1995.
13
Journal of the Indian Chemical Society 99 (2022) 100338
[41] R.M. Brown, N.I. Mccleland, R.A. Denenger, R.G. Tozer, A water quality index do
we dare? Water Sewage Works 117 (1972) 339–343.
[42] P.C. Mishra, R.K. Patel, Quality of Drinking water in Rourkela, outside the steel
town ship, J. Environ. Pollut. 8 (2) (2001) 165–169.
[43] Chetan Ps Ahada, Surendra Suthar, Hydro chemistry of groundwater in North
Rajasthan, India: chemical and multivariate analysis, Environ. Earth Sci. 76 (2017)
203.
[44] Mattas C Hydrogeological Research of Gallikos Basin PhD Thesis Department of
Geology, Aristotle university of Thessaloniki, 2009.
[45] V.M. Chowdary, N.H. Rao, P.B.S. Sarma, Decision support frame work for
assessment of non –poin-source pollution of groundwater in large irrigation
projects, Agric. Water Manag. 75 (2005) 194–225.
[46] N. Kazakis, C. Mattas, A. Pavlo, O. Patrikaki, K. Voudouris, Multivariate statistical
analysis for the assessment of groundwater quality under different hydrological
regimes, Environ. Earth Sci. 76 (2017) 349.
[47] G.V.S.R. Pavan Kumar, K. Ramakrishna, Comparative study on water quality index
of Andra reservoir and Denkada anicut on Champavathi river, Vizianagaram,
Andhra Pradesh, Appl. Water Sci. 7 (3) (2017) 1497–1504.
[48] G.V.S.R. Pavan Kumar, Yerra Bharath, M. Komal Avinash, Fluoride contamination
in the groundwater in two villages of Visakhapatnam industrial area, Asian J.
Water Environ. Pollut. 14 (3) (2017) 91–101.