Ground Water Qualityof Sukkur 2021
Ground Water Qualityof Sukkur 2021
Ground Water Qualityof Sukkur 2021
net/publication/356633611
CITATION READS
1 294
17 authors, including:
All content following this page was uploaded by Nabi Bux Bhatti on 30 November 2021.
Email address:
*
Corresponding author
Received: April 29, 2021; Accepted: September 3, 2021; Published: September 14, 2021
Abstract: Groundwater contamination issues are rising globally, including the Sukkur, Sindh, Pakistan. Due to gravity of the
problem and concerns of the people of Sukkur City, the present study was planned to assess the quality of groundwater of
Sukkur City based on an integrated indexical approach, i.e., the water quality index (WQI) model. The WQI was calculated
using analysis results of various physicochemical parameters of thirty (30) georeferenced groundwater samples randomly
collected from the study area. Groundwater samples were analyzed for various physical and chemical parameters such as pH,
electrical conductivity (EC), turbidity, total dissolved solids (TDS), calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), total hardness (TH),
chlorides, nitrates, nitrites, etc. The observed level of pH in the groundwater samples of the study area ranged in between 7.6 to
8.8. The chloride concentration ranged between 32 to 2280 mg/l. The calcium level ranged between 8 to 440 mg/l. The
magnesium concentration observed between 32 to 1710 mg/l The total hardness level ranged between 40 to 2150 mg/l. The EC
and TDS ranged between 0.28 to 8.13 dS/m, and between 180 to 5200 mg/l respectively. The estimations of the WQI model
showed that 2% of the water samples were excellent, 52% good, 22% poor, and 24% unsuitable for drinking purpose. Overall
water quality analysis indicated that some of the areas of the Sukkur city have poor quality groundwater, thus it should be
treated before its use for domestic purposes.
Keywords: Groundwater, Physicochemical Analysis, WQI, Sukkur, Pakistan
Water quality assessment is essential to fulfilling the basic water including synthetic organic materials and significant
requirement of human health in providing the best quality of metals like Zn, Pb, Cd, Cu, Ni, and Cr.
water [5-11] according to the standards recommended by the Groundwater quality assessment is an important part of
World Health Organization (WHO) [12]. It is additionally ecological quality and manageability in any society, such type
important that the supply of groundwater resources within the of assessment is significant toward the improvement of human
world ought to be taken into full consideration [13]. Other than health and the whole biological system of the body. To
the shortage of water resources, such as high demand of accomplish this system, water quality assessments are
groundwater assets in the parched and semi-arid areas in which generally done to examine and investigate the degree of
the wastage of water also constantly increasing with the different contaminants found in water. At present, the quality
utilization of the water and is responsible for shortage in the of the water is a significant research focused area of numerous
groundwater in future, so it is very important to study about scientists around the globe. These quality assessment tests
the control of groundwater wastage to overcome the shortage. have demonstrated to help sort the water quality of various
The key factor is that there is a risk of incredible danger of regions in a straightforward way [15].
defilement in the natural resources of groundwater which is the Literature reveals that there is a need to consider the
most important challenge of any country since at every quality of groundwater for drinking and irrigation purposes.
different location there is a different type of soil and chemical Thus, the current study has been conducted to determine the
composition in the water which greatly impact on the quality overall quality of groundwater collected from Sukkur City
of groundwater [14]. The anthropogenic components which for drinking purposes based on an indexical approach namely
mostly impact the quality and accessibility of safe drinking the Water Quality Index (WQI).
Sukkur is a city in Pakistan's Sindh province, situated on the 2.2. Groundwater Sample Collection and Analysis
western bank of the Indus River. It is Sindh's third-largest
metropolis, after Karachi and Hyderabad, with a total area of About thirty (30) georeferenced groundwater samples
51,65 km2. During the British era, New Sukkur was founded. (Figure 2) were randomly collected from different Union
It was also known as the "Gate of Sindh" at one time. Councils (UCs) of the study area. Properly washed half litre
Location of the study area is shown in Google Map (Figure capacity bottles were used to collect water samples from
1). Lansdowne Bridge connects the study area with Rohri hand pumps, electric motors, boreholes installed in the city.
across the Indus River. Its climate is hot, wind speed is low The collected water samples were analysed for various
93 Muhammad Haseeb Ansari et al.: An Integrated Indexical Assessment of Groundwater
Quality of Sukkur City, Pakistan
physical and chemical parameters such as turbidity, EC Table 1. Physicochemical parameters, their assigned and relative weights.
(electrical conductivity), pH, TDS (total dissolved solids), Ca Parameter WHO Standard Weight (wi) Relative weight (Wi)
(calcium), Mg (magnesium), TH (total hardness), etc. using pH 8.6 3 0.10
standard available laboratory and field methods. Results of Chloride 250 4 0.13
the water quality parameters were compared with WHO Nitrates 10 5 0.16
Nitrites 0.02 2 0.06
drinking water quality benchmarks.
Calcium 50 2 0.06
Sulphates 400 2 0.06
TDS 500 4 0.13
TH 500 3 0.10
EC 0.7 4 0.13
Mg 75 2 0.06
∑ wi 31
The hydrogen ion concentration (pH) is a determination of UC-08, UC-02, UC-24, UC-22, UC-07, UC-03, UC-01, UC-
whether water is acidic or basic. Allowable concentration of 11, UC-21, UC-10 have an excess amount of Mg.
pH in drinking water ranges from 6.5 to 8.5. An excess Nitrites and Nitrates are some sort of salts which can be
amount of pH in the drinking water will damage the mucous natural as well as artificially present in the groundwater,
membrane and supply of the water system. In this study, pH Nitrites come from the fertilizers mainly, run-off water,
in the analyzed groundwater varied from 7.6 to 8.9 with a mineral deposits, and sewage. In the study amount of nitrites
mean value of 7.78. However, groundwater collected from in the groundwater ranged from 0 to 4 mg/l with its mean
union council (UC)-09, UC-23, UC-04, UC-13, UC-03, UC- value of 0.34 mg/l. However, nitrates amount in the
25, UC-16, UC-17, UC-14, UC-25, UC-07, UC-08, UC-02, groundwater of the study area ranged from 0 to 20 mg/l with
UC-24, UC-22, UC-07, UC-03, UC-01, UC-11, UC-21, UC- its average value of 4.13 mg/l. In this way, it was found that
10 have the desirable limit of pH and the UC-20 have pH UC-09, UC-23, UC-04, UC-13, UC-04, UC-25, UC-07, UC-
above 8.5. 24, UC-22, UC-03, UC-23, UC-01, UC-08, UC-21, UC-10
EC is a measurement of an aquatic solution of water to have the desirable limit of nitrites in the groundwater.
carry an electric current. It is used for many purposes related Whereas, UC-16, UC-17, UC-14, UC-08, UC-02, UC-11,
to the quality of water, this helps to determine and analyze UC-20 have an excess amount of nitrites in the ground water.
the mineralization, natural water changes, and wastewater. Similarly, it was found that UC-09, UC-23, UC-04, UC-03,
Also, it is used for the determination of chemical reagents to UC-25, UC-16, UC-14, UC-07, UC-08, UC-23, UC-24, UC-
be mixed in water. In this study, EC values ranged between 22, UC-03, UC-01, UC-08, UC-21, UC-10 have groundwater
0.28 to 8.13 dS/m, with its mean value as 1.56 dS/m. having desirable limit of nitrates. However, UC-13, UC-17,
However, its allowable limit for drinking water is 0.7 dS/m. UC-25, UC-04, UC-02, UC-11 have an excess amount of
In this study, water collected from UC-09, UC-13, UC-03, nitrates in the groundwater.
UC-25, UC-17, UC-14, UC-25, UC-08, UC-02, UC-23, UC- The calcium (Ca) amount ranged between 8 mg/l to 440
03, UC-11, UC-20 have a desirable limit of EC. Whereas, mg/l with its mean value of 74.47 mg/l. WHO have
groundwater of UC-23, UC-04, UC-04, UC-16, UC-25, UC- suggested the desirable value of 75 mg/l. From this study, it
07, UC-24, UC-22, UC-01, UC-08, UC-21, UC-10 have an was found that UC-23, UC-04, UC-03, UC-25, UC-16, UC-
excess amount of EC. 07, UC-08, UC-24, UC-22, UC-07, UC-01, UC-21, UC-10
TDS in the water may develop from natural sources, such have the desirable calcium level in the drinking water
as water in livestock, sewages, soil nature, and industrial whereas, UC-09, UC-13, UC-17, UC-14, UC-02, UC-11,
waste. In the study area, TDS values ranged from 180 to UC-20 have an excess amount of lime calcium in the
5200 mg/l with its mean value of 998.3 mg/l. The desirable groundwater.
limit of TDS in drinking water as per WHO is 1000 mg/l. In Chloride is the mixture of the chlorine gas with metal and
this study, it was found that UC-09, UC-04, UC-16, UC-25, some minor materials of earth crust but major dissolved
UC-07, UC-04, UC-08, UC-24, UC-22, UC-07, UC-01, UC- minerals of most natural water. There are many sources
21, UC-10 have the desirable limit of TDS in the through which chloride dissolve in water, which are heavy
groundwater. Whereas, UC-23, UC-13, UC-03, UC-25, UC- industrial waste, waste obtained from the treatment plants,
17, UC-14, UC-02, UC-03, UC-11, UC-20 have an excess Chloride can harm freshwater and lake water. In the study
amount of TDS in drinking water. area, the chloride content ranged from 32 mg/l to 2280 mg/l
The magnesium (Mg) ranged from 32 mg/l to 1710 mg/l with a mean value of 327.73 mg/l. WHO has suggested its
with its mean value of 303.53 mg/l. WHO (2006) has desirable limit of 250 mg/l. From this study, it was found that
recommended its permissible limit as 50 mg/l. In the study UC-23, UC-04, UC-13, UC-03, UC-25, UC-16, UC-17, UC-
area, groundwater collected from UC-23 and UC-01 have the 14, UC-07, UC-08, UC-23, UC-24, UC-22, UC-07, UC-01,
desirable limit of Mg, whereas UC-09, UC-23, UC-04, UC- UC-11, UC-20, UC-21, UC-10 have the desirable limit of the
13, UC-03, UC-25, UC-16, UC-17, UC-14, UC-25, UC-07, chloride in the drinking water, whereas, UC-09, UC-11, UC-
95 Muhammad Haseeb Ansari et al.: An Integrated Indexical Assessment of Groundwater
Quality of Sukkur City, Pakistan
20, UC21 have an excess amount of chloride in the drinking The Sulfate can be natural or artificial, Naturally, it
water. originates from rocks or soil. Artificially it is formed from
Total hardness is the percentage of calcium and the fertilized land runoff. Sulfur is one of the most important
magnesium present in the water. Generally, surface water as nutrients for the plant. WHO has suggested its desirable limit
compared to groundwater is softer. WHO has suggested its as 400 mg/l. In this study, the sulfate ranged from 50 mg/l to
desirable limit as 300 mg/l. In the study area, the hardness in 1800 mg/l with a mean value of 348.33 mg/l. Present study
the groundwater ranged from 40 mg/l to 2150 mg/l with its revealed that UC-23, UC-04, UC-03, UC-25, UC-16, UC-07,
mean value of 378 mg/l. From this study, it was found that UC-08, UC-24, UC-22, UC-23, UC-01, UC-21, UC-10 have
UC-23, UC-04, UC-03, UC-25, UC-16, UC-07, UC-24, UC- the desirable limit of sulfate in the drinking water, whereas,
22, UC-03, UC-01, UC-08, UC-21 have the desirable limit of UC-09, UC-13, UC-17, UC-14, UC-02, UC-03, UC-11, UC-
total hardness in the drinking water, whereas, UC-09, UC-13, 20 have an excess amount of hardness in the drinking water.
UC-17, UC-14, UC-25, UC-08, UC-02, UC-23, UC-11, UC- Analysis based on the WQI
20, UC-10 have an excess amount of hardness in the drinking Table 3 presents the classifications of the sampled
water. groundwater, based on the application of the WQI model.
Table 3. Classifications of Sampled Groundwater based on the WQI model.
Sample No. WQI=∑ Wi*qi Category of water Sample No. WQI=∑ Wi*qi Category of water
S:01 674.97 Unsuitable for drinking S:16 55.22 Good water
S:02 57.27 Good water S:17 511.12 Unsuitable for drinking
S:03 60.18 Good water S:18 101.61 Poor water
S:04 188.10 Poor water S:19 49.57 Good water
S:05 42.15 Good water S:20 42.06 Good water
S:06 147.67 Poor water S:21 39.84 Good water
S:07 113.81 Good water S:22 59.21 Good water
S:08 67.66 Good water S:23 141.28 Poor water
S:09 1379.32 Unsuitable for drinking S:24 65.16 Good water
S:10 1060.86 Unsuitable for drinking S:25 35.02 Good water
S:11 139.02 Poor water S:26 48.02 Good water
S:12 36.48 Excellent water S:27 749.33 Unsuitable for drinking
S:13 39.40 Excellent water S:28 519.19 Unsuitable for drinking
S:14 93.74 Good water S:29 138.25 Poor water
S:15 395.53 Unsuitable for drinking S:30 82.96 Good water
The WQI of Sukkur City ranged from 35.31 to 1379.47 with its mean value of 238.22. However, estimations of the WQI
revealed that 2% of the water samples were excellent, 52% good, 22% poor, and 24% unsuitable for drinking purpose as
depicted in Figures 3 and 4.
4. Conclusion
The analysis revealed that pH in the groundwater samples References
gathered from the study area ranged from 7.6 to 8.8. The [1] Solangi, G. S., Siyal, A. A., Babar, M. M., Siyal, P. (2020).
chloride concentration ranged between 32 to 2280 mg/l. The Groundwater Quality Evaluation using the Water Quality
calcium level ranged between 8 to 440 mg/L. The Index (WQI), the Synthetic Pollution Index (SPI) and
magnesium concentration observed between 32 to 1710 mg/l. Geospatial tools: a case study of Sujawal District, Pakistan.
The TH level ranged between 40 to 2150 mg/l. The EC and Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International
Journal, Volume 26, No. 6, pp. 1529-1549.
TDS ranged between 0.28 to 8.13 dS/m, and 180 to 5200
mg/l respectively. [2] Santhosh, P., Revathi, D. (2014). Hydrogeochemical Analysis
In the study, we found out that groundwater in the UC-09, of Ground Water Parameters in Coimbatore District,
UC-14 have excessive amount of chlorides, UC-13, UC-17, Tamilnadu, India Research Journal of Chemical and
Environmental Sciences. Res J. Chem. Environ. Sci. Vol 2
UC-25, UC-4 have excessive amount of Nitrates, UC-03, April 2014: 89-93.
UC-17, UC-16, UC-14, UC-08 have excessive amount of
Nitrites, UC-09 have excessive amount of lime calcium, UC- [3] Arulbalaji, P., Gurugnanam, B. (2017). Groundwater quality
09, UC-13, UC-17, UC-14, UC-02, UC-03, UC-11, UC-20 assessment using geospatial and statistical tools in Salem District,
Tamil Nadu, India. Appl Water Sci (2017) 7: 2737–2751.
have excessive amount of Sulfates, UC-23, UC-13, UC-03,
UC-25, UC-17, UC-14, UC-02, UC-03, UC-11, UC-20 have [4] Ouyang, Y., 2005. Evaluation of river water quality
excessive amount of TDS, UC-09, UC-13, UC-17, UC-14, monitoring stations by principal component analysis. Water
UC-25, UC-08, UC-02, UC-23, UC-11, UC-20, UC-10 have Res. 39, 2621–2635.
excessive amount of hardness, UC-09, UC-23, UC-04, UC- [5] Solangi, G. S., Siyal, A. A., Babar, M. M., Siyal, P. (2019).
13, UC-03, UC-25, UC-16, UC-17, UC-14, UC-25, UC-07, Application of water quality index, synthetic pollution index, and
UC-08, UC-02, UC-24, UC-22, UC-07, UC-03, UC-01, UC- geospatial tools for the assessment of drinking water quality in the
11, UC-21, UC-10 have excessive amount of Magnesium, Indus Delta, Pakistan. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment.
Moreover, analysis based on the WQI revealed that the [6] Solangi, G. S., Siyal, A. A., Babar, M. M., Siyal, P. (2019).
UC-25, UC-07 have excellent water quality, UC-23, UC-04, Evaluation of Drinking water quality using the Water Quality
UC-25, UC-16, UC-24, UC-22, UC-07, UC-01, UC-08, UC- Index (WQI), the Synthetic Pollution Index (SPI) and
10 have good water quality, UC-13, UC-03, UC-25, UC-03, Geospatial tools in Thatta District, Pakistan. Desalination and
Water Treatment Journal, Vol. 160, pp. 202-213.
UC-21 have poor water quality, and UC-09, UC-17, UC-14,
UC-02, UC-11, UC-20 having water unsuitable for drinking [7] Bhatti, N. B., Siyal, A. A., Qureshi, A. A., Solangi, G. S.,
purposes. Overall status of water quality reveals that at some Memon, N. A., Bhatti, I. A. (2019). Impact of small dam’s
of the areas of the Sukkur city have poor quality groundwater, construction on groundwater quality and level using water
quality index (WQI) and GIS: Nagarparkar area of Sindh,
thus it should be treated before its use for domestic purposes. Pakistan. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An
International Journal.
97 Muhammad Haseeb Ansari et al.: An Integrated Indexical Assessment of Groundwater
Quality of Sukkur City, Pakistan
[8] Solangi, G. S., Siyal, A. A., Babar, M. M., Siyal, P. (2018). subtropical region using numerical indices, earth observation
Evaluation of surface water quality using the Water Quality datasets, and X-ray diffraction technique: a case study of
Index (WQI), and the Synthetic Pollution Index (SPI): A case Allahabad district, India, Environ. Geochem. Health, 37 (2015)
study of Indus Delta region of Pakistan. Desalination and 157–180.
Water Treatment Journal, Vol. 118, pp. 39-48.
[17] Ketata-Rokbani M, Gueddari M, and Bouhlila R. 2011. Use of
[9] Solangi, G. S., Siyal, A. A., Siyal, P. (2019). Analysis of geographical information system and water quality index to
Indus Delta Groundwater and Surface water Suitability for assess groundwater quality in El Khairat Deep Aquifer
Domestic and Irrigation Purposes. Civil Engineering Journal, (Enfidha, Tunisian Sahel). Iranica. J. Energy Environ. 2 (2):
Volume 5, Issue 7, pp. 1599-1608. 133-144.
[10] Akram, P., Solangi, G. S., Shehzad, F. R., Kandhro, A. A., [18] Shabbir R, and Ahmad SS. 2015. Use of Geographic
Arain, S. S., Kamboh, M. A. (2020). Groundwater Quality Information System and Water Quality Index to Assess
Assessment using a Water Quality Index (WQI) in Nine Major Groundwater Quality in Rawalpindi and Islamabad. Arab J. of
Cities of Sindh, Pakistan. International Journal of Research in Sci. Eng., 40: 2033-2047.
Environmental Science (IJRES) Volume 6, Issue 3, 2020, pp.
18-26 [19] Ewaid SH, and Abed SA. 2017. Water quality index for Al-
Gharraf River, southern Iraq. Egyptian Journal of Aquatic
[11] Solangi, G. S., Siyal, A. A., Babar, M. M., Siyal, P. (2017). Research.
Groundwater Quality Mapping using Geographic Information
System: A Case Study of District Thatta, Sindh, Pakistan. [20] Khangembam S, and Kshetrimayum KS. 2019. Evaluation of
Mehran University Research Journal of Engineering & hydrogeochemical controlling factors and water quality index
Technology, Vol. 36, 4, pp. 1059-1072. of water resources of the Barak valley of Assam, Northeast
India. Groundwater for Sustainable Development, Available
[12] Pesce, S. F., Wunderlin, D. A. (2000). Use of water quality online 12 February 2019.
indices to verify the impact of Cordoba city (Argentina) on
Suquia river. Water Res. 34 (11), 2915–2926. [21] R. K. Horton, An index number system for rating water
quality, J. Water Pollut. Control Fed., 37 (1965) 300–306.
[13] Subramani, T., Rajmohan, N., Elango, L. (2009).
Groundwater geochemistry and identification of [22] R. M. Brown, N. I. McClelland, R. A. Deininger, R. G. Tozer,
hydrogeochemical processes in a hard rock region, Southern Water quality index-do we dare? Water Sewage Works, 117
India. Environ. Monit. Assess. 162 (1–4), 123–137. (1970) 339–343.
[14] Abbasnia, A., Alimohammadi, M., Mahvi, AH., et al. (2018). [23] C. Cude, Oregon water quality index: a tool for evaluating
Assessment of groundwater quality and evaluation of scaling water quality management effectiveness, J. Am. Water Res.
and corrosiveness potential of drinking water samples in Assoc., 37 (2001) 125–137.
villages of Chabahr city, Sistan and Baluchistan province in
Iran. Data Brief 16: 182–92. [24] S. Tyagi, B. Sharma, P. Singh, R. Dobhal, Water quality
assessment in terms of water quality index, Am. J. Water Res.,
[15] Egbueri, J. C., & Unigwe, (2019). An integrated indexical 1 (2013) 34–38.
investigation of selected heavy metals in drinking water
resources from a coastal plain aquifer in Nigeria. Springer [25] E. Hoseinzadeh, H. Khorsandi, C. Wei, M. Alipour,
Nature Switzerland AG 2019. Evaluation of Aydughmush river water quality using the
national sanitation foundation water quality index (NSFWQI),
[16] S. K. Singh, P. K. Srivastava, D. Singh, D. Han, S. K. Gautam, river pollution index (RPI), and forestry water quality index
A. C. Pandey, modelling groundwater quality over a humid (FWQI), Desalin. Water Treat. 54 (11) (2014) 2994-3002.