For verification of this paper, please visit on http://www.socialresearchfoundation.com/innovation.php#8

Water is one of the most important as well as one of the most bountiful of all compounds that is vital to living organisms (Tortora et al., 2002). Diseases caused by contaminated water include gastroenteritis, eye, ear, and skin infections, malaria, yellow fever, schistosomiases, dengue fever, diarrhea, dysentery, pyogenic infections, dyspepsia, and urinary tract infections. (Bharti et al., 2003). The high prevalence of diarrhea among children and toddlers can be traced to the usage of polluted water and unhygienic practices (Tortora et al., 2002). The major sources of fecal pollution of water and water-borne E. coli infections are wild and farm animals feeding in water catchments (Chalmers et al., 2000). Surface water bodies are presumed to be more susceptible to fecal contamination than groundwater reservoirs due to the absence of natural soil protection, filtration, and possibly short distances between the point of contamination and water procurement. It is opined that during heavy rainfall the microbial loads of running water may suddenly and substantially increase and reach reservoir bodies (Kistemannet al., 2001). In rural India, a lack of safe water and sanitation facilities results in worsening public health conditions, deteriorating quality of life, and increased economic costs to society (Pokhrel and Viraraghavan 2004). The quality of water can be deteriorated in the course of collection, transport, and home storage. This paper comparatively identified the different water bodies' physicochemical and microbial loads.

Physiochemical parameter: Physical analysis was first carried out. A small quantity of the water sample was poured into the beaker and the temperature, pH, and electrical conductivity were taken at the site of collection. All the physicochemical parameters were analyzed by the methods given by Trivedi and Goel (1992) and APHA (2005). Determination of residual chlorine, alkalinity, total hardness, calcium and chloride were performed using titrimetric methods described below (Chhabra, 2008 and Hossain, 2006). 

Based on the method used by Chessbrough (2000), the samples underwent serial dilution. Three test tubes were sterilized and filled with 9 ml of distilled water each. The first test tube received 1ml of the water sample via pipette. and was shaken vigorously to have a homogeneous mixture (stock) . Collection times were the pre-monsoon (February to May), post-monsoon (October to January) , and monsoon (June to September) seasons. Biological Parameters: Analysis of biological parameters commenced immediately after the sample reached the laboratory according using standard methods. Total Coliform (TC) Counts: Most Probable Number Method Total coliform count performed by the Most Probable Number (MPN)method is commonly used as an indicator of the potability of water. It is based on the ability of the coliform group of organisms to ferment lactose and produce carbon dioxide. The quantitative aspect of this test is a statistical procedure based on the probability of one bacterium being present in a given volume of sample (WHO, 1996 a1 Chhabra2008). E. coli Testing for Drinking Water: E. coli is an indicator organism of fecal contamination. The only natural habitat of E. coli is the intestinal tract of warm-blooded animals. The guideline for recreational water is below a certain level, The average plate count for 126 MPN per 100 ml was calculated from 5 collected samples.. IMViCtest: - The IMViC series of tests (Indole, methyl-red, Vogus-Proskauer, and citrate utilization) can be adopted for discerning the types of bacterial contaminants in water. There are various types of bacterial contaminants that can be found in water. Conducting tests to detect these contaminants can prove to be helpful in identifying and addressing any issues. After conducting tests to detect any contaminants, it can be helpful in identifying and addressing any issues to distinguish members of the Enterobacteriaceae group.

Figure 1: shows the Graphical physicochemical properties of water quality from different sources of the water bodies in three seasons. These are pH, temperature, turbidity, electrical conductivity, dissolved oxygen, hardness and total dissolved solids respectively.

As shown in Fig 1.1 pH in Sabela was found highest in winter and summer and in Margia dam, also it was on the alkaline side. In Dimia Talab and AdwardSamand maximum pH recorded was 8.10. One notable feature of pH profiles of all water bodies is that the value was highest in summer and lowest in winter. Only in Margiya Dam the pH in summer was higher than permissible value.

In Fig 1.2 turbidity values have been depicted season-wise in the water-bodies. According to BIS (2012), acceptable turbidity for drinking water is 1 and permissible limit is 5 NTU. However, in water body survey limit of this parameter is not defined. As shown in the graph in summer and winter turbidity in all water bodies are less than 5 NTU, but in rainy season it was 8.0 or more. Highest turbidity of 19.2 was recorded in Gaipsagar. These values are as expected. The percolation of water in the rainy season makes all the water bodies turbid and as anthropogenic disturbances is more in Gaipsagar and least in Margiya Dam, so turbidity was also highest in Gaipsagar and least in Margia Dam.   

 PH 

 

Figure 1.1: Graphical representation of pH in the water bodies in three seasons

Regarding temperature no any guidelines has been prescribed. The lowest summer temperature was 33.00C in Dimia Talab. The water temperature was found to be varying according to season in sampling stations. (Fig 1.3).

Figure 1.2: Graphical representation of Turbidity in the water bodies in three seasons

Figure 1.3: Graphical representation of Temperature in the water bodies in three seasons            

 

Figure 1.4: Graphical representation of Total alkalinity in the water bodies in three seasons

Total alkalinities of water samples were found to be lowest in rainy season and highest in summer. Highest value in summer was recorded 400 mg/L as CaCOз in sample of Sabela talab. Still, it was lesser than the permissible limit of 600 mg/L. The Margiya Dam samples recorded least values in all seasons in comparison to others. (Fig 1.4)

Total hardness as illustrated in Fig 1.5 varied both between seasons as well as between water bodies substantially. And the pattern in seasonal fluctuation in this parameter was also not consistent.  Though, the least value was recorded in rainy season in all samples but highest annual value was either in summer or in winter. In Margiya dam level of total hardness was equal in summer and winter and less in rainy season. In Sabela talab highest value of total hardness was observed to be 380 (as CaCO₃) mg/L in summer, less in winter and least in rainy season. In all other water-bodies highest values were recorded in winter and lowest in rainy season. Minimum value of hardness was 150 (as CaCO₃) mg/L in rainy season in Margiya dam. Still, total hardness in all samples in all seasons was much under permissible value of 600 (as CaCO₃) mg/L.

Figure 1.5: Graphical representation of Total Hardness in the water bodies in three seasons

Figure 1.6: Graphical representation of Calcium Hardness in the water bodies in three seasons

Calcium hardness value exhibited an unpredictable pattern in samples collected in three different seasons. In Dimia talab and Adwardsamand no seasonal fluctuation was noted. And, in Sabela pond interestingly this value was highest in rainy season with substantial fluctuation in three different seasons. (Fig 1.6).

Magnesium Hardness

Figure 1.7: Graphical representation of Magnesium Hardness in the water bodies in three seasons

Magnesium hardness also displayed varied seasonal pattern of fluctuation and least magnesium value was shown in rainy season in all samples. Maximum magnesium hardness was recorded either in summer or in winter. In Sabela pond the trend of seasonal fluctuation was just opposite to that of calcium hardness. (Fig 1.7).

Figure 1.8: Graphical representation of Chloride value in the water bodies in three seasons

Chloride value was found to be exceptionally high in Sabela pond where it recorded the value of 700 mg/L. In rainy and winter season also the chloride value was greater than the highest seasonal value in any other water body. Maximum chloride value was noted in summer and minimum in rainy season. Still, it was within the prescribed acceptable limit (Fig 1.8).

Seasonal fluctuation patter was same as that of chloride in all sampling stations. Highest values were observed in Sabela pond and then in Gap sagar. All values were very much below the permissible limit (Fig 1.9).   

Maximum permissible limit of fluoride in drinking water is 1.5 mg/ L for drinking water. And, Dungarpur district is known for high fluoride values in ground water (Choubisa, 200), but, in all these open water bodies the maximum fluoride content was found to be as 0.5 mg/ml.  The seasonal variations were also rather strange as the minimum of fluoride content were noted in winter and maximum in summer. Gaipsagar samples recorded the highest fluoride, followed by Sabela pond. Adwardsamand samples were found to be having least fluoride load (Fig 1.10)

Figure 1.9: Graphical representation of Nitrate value in the water bodies in three seasons

Figure 1.10: Graphical representation of Fluoride value in the water bodies in three seasons

Figure 1.11: Graphical representation of TDS value in the water bodies
in three seasons

Total dissolved solids (TDS) were found to be as high as 1700 mg/L in summer in Sabela pond. Except for Adwardsamand and Margiya dam TDS values were found to be considerably high (Fig. 1.11). Seasonal variation in this parameter value was familiar, that is highest in summer and least in rainy season. All values are within the permissible limit.

Total coliform value as illustrated in Fig 1.12 was the real matter of concern. It was from over 200 MPN/ 100 ml in winter to more than 1600 (over the measurable limit) in rainy season in three water bodies. The lowest coliform value was measured in winter and highest in rainy season.

Figure 1.12: Graphical representation of Total coliform in the water bodies in three seasons

Figure 1.13:  Graphical representation of E. coli organism in the water bodies in three seasons

Figure 1.14:  Graphical representation of seasonal variation in different parameters in the water bodies

The comparative analysis of the seasonal variation in all tested parameters of water bodies is graphically illustrated in figure 1.14.  Basically, the pattern of variation is different for various indicators of physicochemical and microbial properties. E. coli and Total coliform and turbidity is highest in the rainy season whereas most of the other physicochemical specifications were highest in summer.

Discussion

pH of the surveyed reservoirs was found to be in the permissible range except for Sabela talab and Margia dam where it was above 8.5 in summer.Turbidity was much higher than permissible limit in all reservoirs in rainy season.Temperature of water was found to be high in summer.Chloride content in samples of all seasons was 50 to 700 mg/ l and it was lowest in rainy season and highest in summer.Total dissolved solids (TDS) were within permissible limit in samples but in Gaipsagar and Sabela pond TDS content is very high making the water not potable.The counts of total coliform as well as E. coli were highest in rainy season and lowest in winter in all water-bodies. Total coliform in Adwardsamand was from 500 to >1600, in Dimia talab 280 to 900, in Gaipsagar 900 to 1600, in Sabela pond >1600 to 900 and in Margia Dam 220 to 900 MPN/ 100 ml. The E. coli is the true indicator of faecal pollution in water as it cannot grow outside of the intestine of warm-blooded animals normally, whereas the origin of another coliform may be non-fecal also. E. coli count in Adwardsamand was 60 – 170, in Dimia talab 17 – 70, in Gaipsagar 90- 110, in Sabela pond 240 – 500 and in Margia dam 30 – 80 MPN/ 100 ml.The microbial profile also indicated that Gaipsagar and Sabela talab are categorically polluted with faecal and animal or human waste while other water bodies are contaminated with faecal coliform primarily in rainy months only.

1. Bharti, A. R., Nally, J. E., Ricaldi, J. N., Matthias, M. A., Diaz, M. M., Lovett, M. A., Levett, P. N., Gilman, R. H., Willig, M. R., Gotuzzo, E. &Vinetz, J. M. (2003). Leptospirosis: a zoonotic disease of global importance. Lancet. Infect. Dis. 3: 757571.

2. BIS (2012). Indian Standard: Drinking water- Specification, 2nd revision. IS10500:2012; 1-18.

3. Chalmers, R. M., Aird, A. & Bolton, F. J. (2000). Water borne Escherichia coli O157. J. Appl. Microbiol., 88: 124132.

4. Chessbrough, M. (2000). District Laboratory Practice in Tropical Countries, 2nd Ed., Cambridge University Press, New York: 143155

5. Chhabra, V. K. (2008). A manual on water, waste water and material analysis, Indian Water Works Association (IWWA), Jaipur.

6. Tortora, J.G., Funke, R.B., Case, L.C (2002). Microbiology An introduction. Media update of 7 Edn.including bibliography and index publisher. Daryl Fox; pp: 258-260

7. WHO (1996). Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality. Second Edition, Volume 2 Health criteria and other supporting information. World Health Organization, Geneva.

8. World Health Organization. (2010). Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality, Incorporating 1st and 2nd Agenda, 1(3), WHO, Geneva.

9. Wolf, J., Johnston, R., Freeman, M. C., Ram, P. K., Slaymaker, T., Laurenz, E., and Prüss-Ustün, A. (2018). Handwashing with soap after potential faecal contact: global, regional and country estimates. International Journal of Epidemiology, 48(4), 1204–1218. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyy253

10. Prüss-Ustün A, Wolf J, Bartram J, Clasen T, Cumming O, Freeman MC, et al. Burden of disease from inadequate water, sanitation and hygiene behaviours for selected adverse health outcomes: an updated analysis with a focus on lowand middle-income countries. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2019;222(5):765–77.

11. Global Health Observatory (GHO) data. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2018

(http://www.who.int/gho/en/,accessed May 2019); Maternal Child Epidemiology Estimates;

https://www.who.int/healthinfo/global_burden_disease/estimates/en/index2.html

12. Cholera: fact sheet. 2019 (https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cholera, accessed May 2019).

13. Wolf J, Hunter PR, Freeman MC, Cumming O, Clasen T, Bartram J, et al. Impact of drinking water, sanitation and handwashing with soap on childhood diarrhoeal disease: updated meta-analysis and meta-regression. Trop Med Int Health.2018;23(5):508–25.

14. Wolf J, Johnston R, Freeman MC, Ram PK, Slaymaker T, Laurenz E, et al. Handwashing with soap after potential faecal contact: global, regional and country estimates for handwashing with soap after potential faecal contact. Int JEpidemiol. 2019; https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyy253.

15. WHO, UNICEF. Progress on drinking water, sanitation and hygiene: 2017 update and SDG baselines. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017

(https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/258617/9789241512893-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y, accessed May 2019).

16. Choubisa, S. L. (2012). Fluoride in drinking water and its toxicosis in tribals of Rajasthan, India. Proceedings of National academy of Sciences. India section B: Biological Sciences. 82(2), 325-330.