INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Volume 2, No 2, Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing Association

Transcription

1 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL CIENCE Volume 2, No 2, 2011 Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing Association Research article IN ABTRACT Biomonitoring of pollution in river utlej Department of Zoology, Panjab University, Chandigarh doi: /ijes Biomonitoring of river utlej was conducted at 1 (Ropar Head Works), 2 (U/ of Budha Nallah at Phillaour), and 3 (D/ of Budha Nallah in district Ludhiana (Pb.). Total 43 species of phytoplankton and 41 species of zooplankton were recorded. impson and hannon- Wiener species diversity indices for three stations have been calculated. The order of degree of plankton abundance in the different stretches of the river was 2 > 1 > 3, whereas species diversity was 1 > 2 > 3. On the basis of pollution load and Palmer s algal index, 1 could be designated as oligo-mesosaprobic, 2 as meso-polysaprobic and 3 as polysaprobic. On the basis of the absence, frequency of appearance and disappearance and abundance or organisms in relation to saprobity, different species were designated as bioindicators of pollution. Organisms like Ankistrodesmus falcatus, Chlorella vulgaris, Chlamydomonas sp., Closterium acerosum, Euglena viridis, Navicula cryptocephala, Nitzschia palea, Oscillatoria brevis, pirulina sp., tigeoclonium tenue and ynedra ulna among phytoplankton, and forms like Aspidisca sp., Bodo sp., Brachionus angularis, Colpoda sp., larvae of Chironomus sp. and Eristalis tenax, Daphnia pulex, Mesocyclops sp., Tubifex tubifex, Rotaria rotatoria and tylonychia sp. were found to be tolerant to polysaprobic conditions. On the basis of water quality standards given by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), the water quality was between A-B at 1, B-C at 2, and D-E at 3. Keywords: Biomonitoring, River utlej, Water Pollution, aprobity, Bioindicators. 1. Introduction Fresh water is perhaps most vulnerable habitat and most likely to be changed by the anthropogenic activities. Chemical analyses of water provide a good indicator of the chemical quality of the aquatic system, but do not integrate ecological factors such as altered riparian vegetation or altered flow region and therefore, do not necessarily reflect the ecological state of the system (Karr and Benke, 2000). Qualitative and quantitative analyses of different groups of organisms lead to the establishment of bioindicators, indices and systems which can be used to assess the pollution and trophic status of water bodies. Relatively little attention has been paid on the biomonitoring of North Indian rivers (Rai, 1978; Jindal and Rumana, 2000; Jindal and ingh, 2006). Keeping this in view present investigations have been under taken to asses pollution load, bioindicators of pollution and water quality in river utlej. 1.1 tudy Area The utlej enters Punjab near Nangal, moves on to plains at Ropar, passes through district Ludhiana and joins Beas at Harike before crossing over to Pakistan. Ludhiana city was founded on a ridge of Budha Nallah a tributory of river utlej. Ludhiana district has a population of more than 30 lacs and the untreated sewage of the city is discharged into Budha Received on eptember 2011 Published on November

2 Nallah. In addition to the city sewage, the nallah receives the treated, partially treated and untreated toxic effluents from a multitude of industries located in Ludhiana city. As a result of perennial flow of sewage in Budha Nallah, it has become an open sewer. The Budha Nallah falls into river utlej near village Wallipur Kalan after traversing about 55 km from its originating point at Machhiwara. The average flow in the river is found to be only 1430 mld, whereas the flow in Budha Nallah averages 440 mld, indicating that the dilution available is only three times. This severely affects the water quality. For the present investigation, following three observation sites ( 1, 2 and 3 ) have been set up on the river: 1 : 2 : 3 : It is located at Ropar Head Works (30 32 N; E). It is situated at Phillaour, which is 15 km from Ludhiana city, on Jalandhar bypass road, where river utlej crosses Ludhiana district (30 9 N; E). It is 17 km down stream 2, where Budha Nallah joins river utlej, bringing sewage and industrial effluents of Ludhiana district (30 9 N; E). 2. Materials and Method Physico-chemical parameters of the water were analyzed according to the standard methods (APHA 1998). For plankton study, the water samples were collected with the help of plankton net made up of bolting silk No. 25 (0.3 mm mesh) and fitted with a wide mouthed bottle. As much as 100 litres of water was filtered through the net. Plankton was preserved in 4% formaldehyde solution. The books consulted for the identification of plankton and insect larvae were: mith (1950), Ward and Whipple (1959), Kudo (1986) and Pennak (1989). Counting of plankton was done with the help of edgwick-rafter counting cell (Wetzel and Likens, 1991) and biodiversity indices were calculated (impson, 1949; hannon-wiener, 1949). 3. Results Fluctuations in physico-chemical characteristics at different observation sites on the river have been given in Table 1.The monthly average value of BOD 5 (mg L 1 ) in different stretches of the river under present investigation was 1.50± 0.67 ( ) at 1, 2.23± 0.84 ( ) at 2 and 25.14± 4.56 ( ) at 3. Higher values of BOD 5, 2.29 ( ) at 1, 3.20 ( ) at 2 and ( ) at 3 were observed in the late summer (May-June) and monsoon (July-August). These were due to higher values of temperature ( at 1, at 2, C at 3 ) and turbidity ( at 1, at 2, NTU at 3 ). Lower values of BOD 5, 1.86 ( ) at 1, 3.29 ( ) at 2 and ( ) at 3, were observed during winter (December-February). The monthly average value of Palmer s Algal Index was 5.6± 2.39 (4-6) at 1, 20.08± 1.88 (16-23) at 2 and ± 3.39 (25-34) at 3. Data on the Palmer s Algal Index values (Table 5) revealed that 3 was grossly polluted, 1 least polluted, whereas at 2 there were chances of medium degree of organic pollution. The order of degree of organic pollution in different stretches of the river under study was as follows: 3 > 2 > 1. The analysis of the data on the abundance and species diversity of organisms (Tables 2-4) determined at various stations on the river revealed that the order of abundance was 2 > 1 > 3, whereas species diversity was 1 > 2 > 3. This was because of the elimination of sensitive forms, and flourishing of tolerant forms at 2 and 3 having higher pollution load. 864

3 Further, the abundance of organisms at 2 could be associated to the richness of nutrients caused by mineralization of salts. It was noticed that members of Cyanophyceae and Euglenophyceae among phytoplankton, and colourless flagellates among zooplankton were found to be abundant at 2 and 3, and minimum at 1 (Table 4). Heavy metals like zinc (Zn), lead (Pb) and mercury (Hg) have been detected at 2 and 3, whereas these could not be detected at 1. Presence of heavy metals at 2 and 3 could be due to the addition of effluents from Rishab Paper Mill, waraj Mazda and sewage at 2, and effluents from electroplating, dye and finishing units, vanaspati and chemical industries brought through Budha Nallah at 3. On the basis of saprobic classification (ladecek, 1973) and by the Palmer s Algal Index (Palmer, 1969), pollution load at 1 could be categorized as oligo-mesosaprobic, 2 as meso-polysaprobic and 3 as polysaprobic. 3.1 Water quality On the basis of the classification of waters for various uses given by Central Pollution Control Board*, the water at the Ropar Head Works ( 1 ) can be categorized as A-B, water at U/ Budha Nallah at Phillaour ( 2 ) as B-C, and water at D/ Budha Nallah at Wallipur ( 3 ) as D-E (* and harma, 2011). 3.2 Bioindicators of water pollution Based on the presence, absence, frequency of appearance and disappearance and abundance of organisms at different stations having variation in pollution load, saprobic value has been assigned to various organisms: among phytoplankton, Coelastrum cambricum, Cosmarium sp., Cymbella affinis, Gyrosigma acuminatum, Meridion sp., Phacus sp., Phormidium sp., Pinnularia viridis and elenastrum sp.; and zooplankton like, Bosmina sp., Gerris sp., Keratella tropica, Notholca longispina, Ranatara sp. and Trichocerca sp. indicated oligo-mesosaprobic conditions. Among phytoplankton, Anabaena sp., Ankistrodesmus falcatus, Chlamydomonas sp., Chlorella vulgaris, Closterium acerosum, Euglena viridis, Microcystis aeruginosa, Navicula cryptocephala, Nitzschia palea, Oscillatoria brevis, pirulina sp., tigeoclonium tenue and ynedra ulna, and zooplankton like Asplanchna brightwelli, Brachionus angularis, Chironomus larvae, Colpidium sp., Colpoda sp., Eristalis tenax larvae, Filinia longisita, Mesocyclops sp., Rotaria rototoria and tylonychia sp. were found to be tolerant to polysaprobic conditions. 4. Discussion Relatively higher values of conductivity recorded at 2 and 3 as compared to 1, were because of increase in the pollution load by addition of nutrients, agricultural run-off, industrial effluents and organic matter in the water (harpley and Menzel, 1987; Gupta, 2003; anap et al., 2006). Data on the seasonal fluctuations in the hydrobiological factors revealed higher values of BOD were observed during late summer (May-June 2007). These were due to higher rate of decomposition of organic matter at higher temperature, turbidity and less water current (anap et al., 2006). A slight decrease in BOD values recorded during monsoon (July- August 2007) could be attributed to decrease in temperature and dilution in the concentration of dissolved organic matter due to heavy rains. Minimum value of BOD was 865

4 observed during winter (December 2006-January 2007). Further, relatively higher BOD values were recorded at 3, which receives untreated or partially treated effluents from various industries like hosiery goods, vanaspati, beer, sugar, dairy, flour, rice bran oil and cattle feed etc. along with city sewage brought by Budha Nallah. BOD showed an inverse correlation with DO (r = at 1, r = at 2, r = at 3 ). This was because of utilization of DO in oxidation of organic pollutants (Mohan and Omana, 2007; Jindal and harma, 2011). Higher values of chlorides and lower values during monsoon (July-August 2007) have been recorded. Minimum values of chlorides during monsoon could be attributed to dilution effect of heavy rains. As suggested by Dwivedi and Odi (2003) and anap et al. (2006), relatively higher values of chlorides observed at 2 and 3 were due to the addition of city sewage and domestic waste in the river water. Positive correlations between BOD and chloride (r = at 1, r = at 2, r = at 3 ) have been noticed (Mohan and Omana, 2007). During present studies, at 3 least number of diatoms was observed. This was because of higher pollution load in it as compared to 1 and 2. Pollution tolerant forms like Navicula cryptocephala, Nitzschia palea and ynedra ulna indicated high pollution load which is in concurrence with the findings of Abubacker et al. (1996), Bhatt et al. (2001), Jindal and Vatsal (2005) and Ghavzan et al. (2006). Other pollution tolerant species like Melosira granulata was also present. Chlorococcales like Chlorella vulgaris and Ankistrodesmus falcatus indicators of paper and pulp mill wastes (Kar et al., 1987), and sewage and distillery wastes (Paramasivam and reenivasan, 1981), were found in abundance at 3 receiving these types of wastes. Euglenoids were represented by 4 species i.e. Chlamydomonas sp., Euglena viridis, Lepocinclis sp. and Phacus pleuronectes. At 1 and 2 (Table 2) relatively low abundance of only two species of euglenoids was recorded and thus indicating less pollution load. Whereas at 3, four species were recorded and among them Euglena viridis showed dominance (May 07). Vyas and Kumar (1968) reported the presence of euglenoids during rainy season. Contrary to this, during present investigation, these were present throughout the year at 2 and 3 and were found in low numbers during winter. Their presence throughout the year at these stations (Rai, 1978), could be attributed to higher organic pollution. This is further confirmed by the dominance of Euglena viridis at 3 (ampoorani et al., 2002). Data on the monthly percentage composition of Protozoa at different stations (Table 4) revealed that station 3 of the river had maximum abundance of protozoans. This could be attributed to higher tolerance of protozoans to organic pollution (Jindal and Vatsal, 2005). Brachionus angularis and Rotatoria rotatoria have been reported as indicators of polysaprobic conditions (ladecek, 1983; Jindal and ingh, 2006). During present investigations, apart from Rotaria rotatoria, Brachionus calyciflours and Filinia longiseta were also found to be indicators of polysaprobic condition. At 1, Gerris sp. and Ranatra sp. were observed having slight organic pollution, whereas Hydrophilus sp. (water scavenger beetle), larvae of Chironomus sp., Eristalis tenax and Psychoda sp. were recorded during certain months at 2, and maximum at 3 indicating polysaprobic condition. Paramisvam and reenivasan (1981) have also reported the presence of Eristalis tenax larvae in sewage waters. 866

5 Table 1: Monthly average value and range of various Physico-chemical parameters at three observation stations ( 1, 2 and 3 ) on river utlej (November 2006 to October 2007). Parameters Average Range Average Range Average Range Water temp ± ( C) 5.86 Water ± current (cm sec -1 ) Turbidity ± (NTU) 3.87 Conductivity ± (µ cm -1 ) ph 7.40 ± 0.27 Dissolved 8.95 ± oxygen (mg 0.66 L 1 ) Carbon 8.49 ± Dioxide (mg 2.95 L 1 ) BOD (mg L 1 ) Total alkalinity (mg L 1 ) Total hardness (mg L 1 ) T.D.. (mg L 1 ) Chloride (mg L 1 ) Phosphate (mg L 1 ) Nitrate (mg L -1 ) 1.50 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ±

6 Table 2: Frequency and abundance of organisms encountered at 1, 2 and 3 on river utlej (November 2006 to October 2007).. No. Name of the organism Abundance Frequency AbundanFrequencyAbundanceFrequency PHYTOPLANKTON Bacillariophyceae 1. Achnanthes lanceola + R ++ C 2. Anomoeoneis sp. + R 3. Amphora sp. + R 4. Caloneis sp. + R 5. Cocconeis sp. + R 6. Cymbella affinis ++ C 7. Diatoma sp. + R 8. Fragilaria sp. +++ C +++ C 9. Gomphonema parvul + R ++ C 10. Gyrosigma acuminat++ C 11. Melosira varians + R + R 12. Meridion sp. + R 13. Navicula cryptoceph +++ F +++ F +++ F 14. Nitzschia palea +++ R 15. Pinnularia virids +++ C ++ R 16. ynedra ulna +++ C +++ F Chlorophyceae 17. Ankistrodesmus falcatus +++ F + C 18. Characium sp. + R 19. Chlorella vulgaris +++ F 20. Cladophora glomerata + F + R 21. Closterium acerosum + R + C ++ C 22. Coelasterom cambricum + R 23. Cosmarium sp. + C + C 24. Eudorina sp. + R 25. Pandorina morum + R + R + C 26. Pediastrum simplex + C + R 27. cenedesmus dimorphus + F +++ F ++ F 28. elenanstrum sp. + R 29. pirogyra sp. + R + R 30. tigeoclonium tenue + C 31. Tetraedron sp. + R 32. Ulothrix sp. + R + R 33. Zygnema sp. + R + R Cyanophyceae 34. Anabaena sp. + C ++ C 35. Merismopedia sp. + R + R 36. Microcystis aeruginosa ++ R ++ C 37. Oscillatoria brevis ++ F ++ F +++ F 38. Phormidium sp. + R + R + R 39. pirulina glomontii + R + C Euglenophyceae 40. Chlamydomonas sp. + R 868

7 . No. Name of the organism Abundance Frequency AbundanFrequencyAbundanceFrequency 41. Euglena virids ++ F 42. Lepocincilis fusiform+ R + F + F 43. Phacus pleuronectes + C + F + R - = absent; + = abundant; C = common; F = frequent; R = rare. 1 = Ropar Head Works, 2 = U/ Budha Nallah at Phillaour, 3 = D/ Budha Nallah at Wallipur Table 3: Frequency and abundance of organisms encountered at 1, 2 and 3 (November 2006 to October 2007).. No. Name of the organism Abundance Frequency Abundance Frequency Abundance Frequency ZOOPLANKTON Protozoa 1. Actinophrys sp. + R + R 2. Aspidisca sp. + R 3. Bodo sp. + C 4. Ceratium sp. + C 5. Centropyxis sp. + R + R 6. Coleps sp. ++ F ++ C 7. Colpoda sp Colpidium sp. ++ C + R + F 9. Difflugia sp. ++ C + R 10. Epistylis sp. + C 11. Mallomonas sp. + R 12. Oikomonas sp. + R 13. Peridinium sp. ++ C 14. tylonychia sp. + C 15. Vorticella sp. ++ F ++ F ++ C Rotifera 16. Asplanchna brighwelli + C + C 17. Branchionus angularis ++ C 18. Branchionus ++ F + F ++ C calyciflorus 19. Epiphanes senta ++ C 20. Filinia longiseta + C + R 21. Keratella tropica ++ F + F 22. Monostyla lunaris + C 23 Mytilinia sp. + R 24. Notholca longispina + F 25. Polyarthra platyptera + R + R 26. Rotaria rotatoria ++ F 27. Trichocera sp. ++ C Crustacea 28. Bosmina longirostris ++ C 29. Ceriodaphnia sp. ++ C 30. Cyclops brevicornis ++ F ++ F + C 31. Cypridiopsis vidua Daphnia pulex + F + C ++ F 33. Moina macrocopa ++ R + R 34. Mesocyclops sp. + R + C ++ F 869

8 . No. Name of the organism Abundance Frequency Abundance Frequency Abundance Frequency Insecta 35. Chironomus sp. + R + R 36. Eristalis tenax + R ++ C 37. Gerris sp. + R 38. Hydrophilus sp. + R 39. Psychoda sp. + R 40. Ranatara sp. + R + R 41. Tubifix tubifex ++ C - = absent; + = abundant; C = common; F = frequent; R = rare. 1 = Ropar Head Works, 2 = U/ Budha Nallah at Phillaour, 3 = D/ Budha Nallah at Wallipur Table 4: Monthly average percentage and range of Phytoplankton and Zooplankton at three stations on river utlej ( 1, 2 and 3 ) November 2006 to October Phytoplankton Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Bacillariophyceae Chlorophyceae Cyanophyceae Euglenophyceae Zooplankton Mean Range Mean Range Mean Range Protozoa Rotifera Crustacea Diversity Index impson index hannon-wiener index Table 5: Monthly fluctuations in the BOD 5 and Palmer s algal index (Palmer, 1969) at 1, 2 and 3 (November 2006 to October 2007). Factors BOD (mg L 1 ) Palm No v. 06 De c. 06 Jan. 07 Feb. 07 Ma r. 07 Ap r. 07 Ma y 07 Ju n. 07 Jul. 07 Au g. 07 ep. 07 Oct

9 er s Alga l Inde x Acknowledgement The authors are thankful to the Chairperson, Department of Zoology, Panjab University, Chandigarh for providing necessary research facilities, Professor A.. Ahluwalia, Department of Botany Panjab University, Chandigarh for his help in the identification of phytoplankton and to the Chairman, Punjab Pollution Control Board, Patiala (Punjab) for the technical guidance and help rendered during the study period. 5. References 1. Abubacker, M.N. Kanan, V. ridharan, V.T. Chandramohan, M. and Rajavelu, (1996), Physico-chemical and biological studies on Uyyakondan Canal water of river Cauvery. Poll. Res, 15(3), pp APHA (1998), standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water. 24th ed. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC. 3. Bhatt, J.P. Jain, A. Bhaskar, A. and Pandit, M.K Pre-impoundment study of biotic communities of Kistobazar Nala in Purulia (West Bengal). Curr. ci, 81, p Dwvedi, P. and Odi, P (2003), evolution of potable water quality in streams and the Dickrong river in the district Papum Pore, Arunachal Pradesh, India. Eco. Envi. and Cons, 9(4), pp Ghavzan, N.J. Gunale, V.R. and Trivedy, R.K (2006), Limnological evaluation of an urban fresh water river with special reference to phytoplankton. Poll. Res, 25(2), pp Gupta, T.K. Datta,. and anyal,.k (2003), assessment of industrial effluent quality using water quality index. Journal IAEM, 30, pp Jindal, R. and Rumana, H. (2000), Biomonitoring of water pollution in Western Yamuna Canal at Yamunanagar, Haryana. JPA, 2(1), pp Jindal, R. and ingh, H (2006), ecological surveillance of river Beas. Proc. ymp. New Trends in Life ciences, pp Jindal, R. and Vatsal, P Plankton as biomonitors of saprobity. AQUACULT, 6(1), pp Jindal, R. and harma, C (2011), studies on water quality of utlej river around Ludhiana with reference to Physico-chemical parameters. Environ. Moni. Assess., 174, pp

10 11. Karr, J.R. and Benke, A.C (2000), river conservation in the United tates and Canada. In: P.J. Boon, B.R. Davies and G.E. Petts (Eds), Global perspectives on river conservation: cience, Policy and Practice, Wiley, New York: pp Kudo, R.R (1986), Protozoology. 1st Indian ed. Books and Periodical corporation (India), New Delhi, 1174 pp. 13. Mohan, M. and Omana, P.K (2007), statistical analysis of water quality data from a Ramsar site Vembanadu backwaters, outheast coast of India. Asian J. Microbiol Biotech. Environ. ci., 9(2), pp Palmer, C.M (1969), a composite rating of algae tolerating organic pollution. J. Phycol., 5, pp Paramasivam, M. and reenivasan, A (1981), change in algal flora due to pollution in Cauvery river. Indian J. Environ. Hlth., 23(3), pp Pennak, R.W (1989), freshwater Invertebrates of United tates. John Wiley and ons, New York, 803 pp. 17. Rai, L.C (1978), ecological studies of algal communities of the Ganga river at Varanasi. Indian J. Ecol., 5(1), pp ampoorani, V. Dhanapakiam, P. Kavitha, R. Eswari,. and Rajalakshmi, R (2002), assessment of biota in the river Cauvery. Poll. Res., 21(3), pp anap, R.R. Mohite, A.K. Pingle,.D. and Gunale, V.R (2006, evaluation of water qualities of Godawari river with reference to physico-chemical parameters, dist. Nasik (M..), India. Poll. Res., 25(4), pp hannon, C.E. and Wiener, W (1949), the Mathematical Theory of communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, 117pp. 21. impson, G.H Measurement of diversity. Nature, 163: ladecek, V (1973), system of water quality from biological point of view. Ergebn. Limnology., 7 (1), p ladecek, V Rotifera as indicators of water quality. Hydrobiologia, 133, pp Trivedy, R.K. and Goel, P.K (1986), Chemical and Biological Methods for Water Pollution tudies. Environmental Publications, Karad, India, 215pp. 25. Vyas, L.N. and Kumar, H.D (1968), studies on phytoplankton and other algae of Indra agar tank, Udaipur, India. Hydrobiologia, 31, pp Ward, G.B. and Whipple, G.C (1959), freshwater Biology. John Willey and ons, New York, 1248 pp. 27. Wetzel, R.G. and Likens, G.E (1991), Limnological Analysis. 2nd ed. pringer- Verlag, New York, 391 pp. 872