Assessment of physiochemical parameters, water quality index in selected water resources in Raipur city, Chhattisgarh

¹Vishnu Prasadin Sahoo, ²Kavita Das

^1,2Government Nagarjuna Post Graduate Autonomous College of Science, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

vishnusahoo65@gmail.com; drkavitadas6@gmail.com

Abstract

The present study investigates the water quality on different sources such as pond water, tap water, bore well, drinking purified water in Gudiyari region, Raipur Chhattisgarh. Water samples collected on January month 2026 in different sampling sites, after collection then analyzed multiple water quality parameters such as pH, EC, TH, TDS, temperature, alkalinity, turbidity, chloride, calcium, magnesium, nitrate by standard methods (APHA) and also calculated the water quality index. This findings highlights the water quality index of pond water, tap water, bore well are more than 100 value and it unfit for consumption because peak value of electrical conductivity (833.33 μs/cm) in pond water, maximum turbidity (33 NTU) in pond water, highest total hardness (400 mg/L) in bore well, and calcium was shown maximum in tap water, pond water, bore well and in drinking purified water the water quality index is below 50 and good condition it is safe for consumption. However, need to monitoring and remove the contamination in pond water, tap water, bore well.

Keywords- Aquatic ecosystem, Physiochemical parameters, Water quality index, Nemerow’s pollution index.

Introduction

Wetlands such as rivers, lakes, ponds and other natural sources becomes essential for drinking, irrigation, fisheries, industrial uses, household purposes (WHO, 2017; WHO, 2025). The assessment of physiochemical parameters is crucial for determining the quality of different water bodies. Parameters such as temperature, pH, electrical conductivity, turbidity, total dissolved solids, dissolved oxygen, biological oxygen demand, chemical oxygen demand, total hardness, alkalinity and nitrate are directly affects the environments and aquatic ecosystems. Fluctuations in these parameters reflects the water quality for domestic purposes, agricultural, pollution exposure and ecological health (Wetzel, 2001; APHA, 2017; Singh et al., 2020; Kumar et al., 2024). Water quality index is widely used to evaluate overall water quality by integrating multiple physiochemical parameters into a single value, enabling the comparison between different water bodies and seasonal variations (Horton, 1965; Brown et al., 1970; Tyagi et al., 2020; Uddin et al., 2021). Various types of microorganisms can also act as indicator in aquatic bodies and cause the water contamination also affects the human health. Pathogenic microorganisms such as bacteria, protozoa, algae, fungi, E. coli etc commonly related to fecal contamination resulting from human activities, sewage discharge, and surface run off. Their presence indicates microbial pollution and increase in risks of water borne diseases such as diarrhea, cholera, typhoid and dysentery (Edberg et al., 2000; Ashbolt, 2004; Bain et al., 2021; WHO, 2022; UNICEF 2025). However due to rapid industrialization, agricultural runoff, urbanization and untreated sewage discharge can significantly affect the fresh water bodies, needs to be continues monitoring the water quality so that to assess the fresh and hygienic water for utilization and to protect public health (APHA, 2017; UNESCO, 2020; Shukla et al., 2022).

The present study was undertaken due to lack of comprehensive research on water quality in Gudiyari region. This area is characterized by a high population density, and uses different water sources such as pond water, tap water, bore well etc, which led to increased anthropogenic activities and a consequent rise in environmental pollution. Now a days, the deterioration of water resources has become a significant concern, necessitating systematic assessment and monitoring. Water is a fundamental resource essential for human survival and public health; therefore, regular monitoring and assessment of its quality are critically important. In this context, the present study aims to evaluate the water quality of various sources in the Gudiyari region using standard physiochemical parameters. Furthermore, the study seeks to determine the overall water quality index(WQI) and pollution index(PI), which serve as effective tools for assessing the suitability of water for human consumption and environmental sustainability.  

Methods

Water samples were collected during January month 2026 from multiple sources including pond water, tap water, and bore well within the Gudiyari region of Raipur, Chhattisgarh, for the assessment of water quality. The selection of sampling sites was based on their representation of different water sources commonly utilized by local population. All samples were collected following standard sampling procedures to ensure accuracy. The collected samples were analyzed for various physiochemical parameters in accordance with standard methods prescribed by (APHA, 2017). The parameters evaluated included pH, temperature, TDS, electrical conductivity, turbidity, alkalinity, nitrate concentration, total hardness, calcium, magnesium, chloride. These parameters were selected due to their significant role in determining water quality and their impact on human health and aquatic ecosystems. The analysis of these variables provides the chemical characterstics of water from different sources. Furthermore, the obtained data were utilized for the calculation of the water quality index (WQI), and Nemerow’s pollution index which integrates the suitability of water for drinking and other domestic purposes.

Table 1. Methods of different parameters-

Table 2. Water quality index ranges

Results

This results highlights the water quality of different types water bodies analyzes with its physiochemical parameters such as pond water, tap water, bore well and drinking purified water has been analyzed with different parameters and results includes that pH varied from 6.6 to 7.35 of all water sources which is within the acceptable limit, chloride varied from 32.61 to 109.55 mg/L, alkalinity varied from 21.5 to 85 mg/L both chloride and alkalinity are below the acceptable limit, and TDS varied from 59 to 450 ppm maximum was bore well while other types of water bodies are below the acceptable limit, turbidity varied from 1 to 33 NTU maximum was pond water which above the acceptable limit (33 NTU), total hardness varied from 102 to 400 mg/L maximum was tap water and bore well which is above the acceptable limit, electrical conductivity varied from 102.89 to 833.33 μs/cm maximum was pond water, calcium varied from 73 to 260 mg/L, maximum was bore well however, the pond water, tap water, bore well which is above the acceptable limit, and magnesium varied from 29 to 140 mg/L maximum was bore well, tap water and bore well are above the acceptable limit and nitrate amount was shown maximum in bore well as compared to other water resources, almost all type of water bodies are not good for consumption and its affect the human health except the drinking purified water which is good for consumption and keeps healthy.

Table 3. Consequences of different types of water quality parameters

 Table 4. Results of water quality index in different water bodies-

Graph of water quality index

Table 5. NPI (Nemerow’s Pollution Index)

NPI (Nemerow’s pollution index) is to evaluate the presence of pollution in water bodies. Parameters such as pH, electrical conductivity, total alkalinity, total hardness, calcium, magnesium required for calculating the pollution index. However, yellow box of pond water, tap water, bore well which is more than 1 indicates pollution effect on water bodies.

Formula for calculation: NPI = Cn/Sn      Where, Cn = Concentration of the nth parameter.

                                                                    Sn = Prescribed standard limits of the nth parameter.

Results of NPI calculation will be

NPI values < 1,

NPI values > 1(if NPI value is more than 1 it indicates surplus amount or concentration and potential of contributing pollution to the water bodies).

Graph: These graphs represents the results of parameter from different water sources-

Discussion

The present study evaluated the physiochemical characterstics of water from multiple sources, including pond water, tap water, bore well, and purified water. The total dissolved solids (TDS) values ranged from (59 to 450 mg/L) across the sampled sources. Comparable findings were reported by (Rout and Sharma, 2011) who documented TDS values between (138.82 mg/L to 490.81 mg/L). In contrast, (Sajitha and Vijayamma, 2016) observed significantly lower TDS concentrations (25.44 mg/L to 89.5 mg/L) in 15 pond water samples, indicating lower mineralization and reduced levels of dissolved pollutants. Conversly, higher TDS concentrations (244 mg/L to 1108 mg/L) were reported by (Ghosh et al., 2015) suggesting greater ionic load and possible contamination and anthropogenic activites. Turbidity values in the present study ranged from (1 to 33 NTU). However, previous studies have documented substantially higher turbidity levels (4 to 232 NTU), exceeding permissible limits for potable water (Ghosh et al., 2015), which may be attributed to suspended particulates and organic matter. Total hardness (TH) in the analyzed samples varied from (102 to 400 mg/L), indicating moderate to high hardness levels. In comparison, (Sajitha and Vijayamma, 2016) reported significantly lower TH values (15 to 50 mg/L), which fall within acceptable limits for drinking water. Additionally, chloride concentrations in their study ranged from (7.1 to 28.24 mg/L), reflecting minimal anthropogenic influence and low salinity levels. The present study of water quality index varied from 49.01 to 363.51, good to extremely poor condition. But (Kate et al., 2020) evaluated water samples from 14 wards and reported elevated levels of TDS, electrical conductivity, hardness, particularly in old water supply lines. Despite these variations, the water quality index values ranges between (86 to 90), categorizing the water under good quality status. Similarly, (Karunanidhi et al., 2021; Singh et al., 2022) assessed WQI using GIS techniques and observed values ranging from (71.23 to 447.39). Their findings indicated that nearly 68% of the studied region exhibited poor water quality due to elevated fluoride, TDS, and pH levels. These studies also highlighted the prevalence of water – borne diseases such as gastroenteritis and fluorosis in affected regions. A regional investigation conducted by (Sahu and Ghosh, 2023) across 10 districts of Chhattisgarh revealed high TDS concentrations in most water samples, while calcium and magnesium levels frequently exceeded permissible limits. Likewise (Verma et al., 2024) analyzed 50 water samples and reported that most samples were alkaline in nature, with sodium carbonate and chloride as dominant anions, while calcium and sodium as major cations. Their calculated index values ranged from (105 – 185), indicating that water was unsuitable for drinking purposes. Furthermore, (Das, 2025) assessed water quality at 14 different locations and reported WQI values ranging from 43 to 223, categorizing the samples from excellent to poor quality. Approximately 61.54% of the water samples were classified under the poor quality, primarily due to elevated salinity, coliform contamination, turbidity, TDS, bicarbonate and sulphate.

Conclusion

This study concludes the physiochemical parameters of water quality from different sources such as pond water, tap water, bore well, drinking purified water in Gudiyari region and results indicates that drinking purified water comes within the acceptable limit and it is useful for consumption while the pond water, tap water, bore well not good for human health because of maximum TDS, turbidity, total hardness, electrical conductivity, calcium, magnesium indicating deterioration in water quality and making these sources are not safe for consumption. However, local communities use pond water for their daily needs such as agricultural purposes, bathing, washing and other type of anthropogenic activities etc and also the air pollution which cause the water pollution in pond. The water quality index was shown high in pond water, tap water, bore well which is unfit for consumption but less in mineral water and it comes under good for consumption.

Acknowledgement

I thankful to my research guide Dr. Kavita Das, for their valuable guidance, support throughout the study, also thankful to the head of department zoology of Govt. N.P.G. College of Science Raipur, Chhattisgarh  for providing necessary laboratory facilities.

References

Ali, S., Verma, S., Agarwal, M. B., Islam, R., Mehrotra, M., Deolia, R. K., & Fattahi, M. (2024). Groundwater quality assessment using water quality index and principal component analysis in the Achnera block, Agra district, Uttar Pradesh, Northern India. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 5381.

APHA (1998). Standard methods for examination of water and waste water 20^th edition. American public health association AWWA, WPCA, Washington D.C., U.S.A, 1193.

APHA (2017). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (23rd ed.). American Public Health Association, Washington, DC.

Ashbolt, N. J. (2004). Microbial contamination of drinking water and disease outcomes in developing regions. Toxicology, 198(1–3), 229–238.

Bain, R., Johnston, R., Mitis, F., Chatterley, C., Slaymaker, T., & WHO/UNICEF JMP. (2021). Estimation of global waterborne disease burden. World Health Organization.

 BIS (2012). Indian Standard Drinking Water Specification (IS 10500:2012). Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.

Brown, R. M., McClelland, N. I., Deininger, R. A., and O’Connor, M. F. (1970). A water quality index—Do we dare? Water and Sewage Works, 117(10), 339–343.

CPCB. (2025). Annual Report on Water Quality Status in India. Central Pollution Control Board, India.

CGWB. (2010). Ground Water Quality In Shallow Aquifers of India. Faridabad: Central Ground Water Board, Ministry of Water Resources, Government of India.

Cude, C.G. (2001).“Oregon Water Quality Index: A Tool for Evaluating Water Quality Management Effectiveness.”Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 37(1), 125–137.

Das, A. (2026). Prediction of Urban Surface Water Quality Scenarios Using Water Quality Index (WQI), Multivariate Techniques, and Machine Learning (ML) models in water resources, in Baitarani river basin, odisha: potential benefits and associated challenges. Earth Systems and Environment, 10(1), 605-641.

Edberg, S. C., Rice, E. W., Karlin, R. J., and Allen, M. J. (2000). Escherichia coli: The best biological drinking water indicator for public health protection. Journal of Applied Microbiology, 88(S1), 106S–116S.

Horton, R. K. (1965). An index number system for rating water quality. Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation, 37(3), 300–306.

Hota, R. N., Hota, S. R., Murkute, Y. A., Goswami, S., and Das, R. (2025). Comprehensive assessment of drinking water quality indices: A review. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 101(3), 291–299. https://doi.org/10.17491/jgsi/2025/174096

Karunanidhi, D., Aravinthasamy, P., Subramani, T., & Muthusankar, G. (2021). Revealing drinking water quality issues and possible health risks based on water quality index (WQI) method in the Shanmuganadhi River basin of South India. Environmental Geochemistry and Health, 43(2), 931-948.

Kate, S., Kumbhar, S., & Jamale, P. (2020). Water quality analysis of Urun-Islampur City, Maharashtra, India. Applied Water Science, 10(4), 95.

Kumar, S., Ghosh, N. C., Singh, R. P., Sonkusare, M. M., Singh, S., & Mittal, S. (2015). Assessment of water quality of lakes for drinking and irrigation purposes in Raipur City, Chhattisgarh, India. Int. J. Eng. Res. Appl, 5(2), 42-49.

Kumar, M., Dutta, V., & Prasad, D. (2021). Assessment of water quality using WQI: A case study of river systems in India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193, 1–15.

Lamare, R.E., and Singh, O.P. (2016). Water quality in the limestone mining areas of East Jaintia Hills District, Meghalaya, India. Journal of Enivironmental Science and Engineering, 58 (4), 45-52.

Manivasagam, N. (1984). Physiochemical Examination of Water, Sewage and Industrial Effluents, PragatiPrakashan, Meerut.

Mohan,A., Singh, R.K., Panday,K., Kumar, V., and Jain, V. (2007). Assessment of water quality in industrial zone of Moradabad: physiochemical parameters and water quality index, Indian Journal of Environmental Protection, 27(11), 1031-1033.

Patel, P. S., Pandya, D. M., and Shah, M. (2023). A systematic and comparative study of water quality index (WQI) for groundwater quality analysis and assessment. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(19), 54303–54323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25936-3

Patel, R., Singh, V., & Yadav, D. (2026). Integrated water quality assessment using physicochemical and microbial indicators. Journal of Environmental Management (in press).

Rout, C., & Sharma, A. (2011). Assessment of drinking water quality: A case study of Ambala cantonment area, Haryana, India. International journal of environmental sciences, 2(2), 933-945.

Sajitha, V., & Vijayamma, S. A. (2016). Study of physico-chemical parameters and pond water quality assessment by using water quality index at Athiyannoor Panchayath, Kerala, India. Emergent Life Sciences Research, 2, 46-51.

Sahu, S., & Ghosh, M. K. (2023). Monitoring the quality of drinking water in various district of Chhattisgarh. International journal of science and technology research archive, 5(2), 52-59.

Sharma, P., Gupta, S., & Verma, R. (2025). Seasonal variation of water quality index in freshwater systems. Environmental Science and Pollution Research.

Shukla, S., Mishra, P., & Tripathi, B. D. (2022). Impact of anthropogenic activities on water quality. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29, 12345–12360.

Singh, S., Sharma, B., & Kumar, A. (2020). Evaluation of physicochemical parameters of surface water: A review. Journal of Environmental Biology, 41(5), 1021–1030.

Singh, R., Upreti, P., Allemailem, K. S., Almatroudi, A., Rahmani, A. H., & Albalawi, G. M. (2022). Geospatial assessment of ground water quality and associated health problems in the Western Region of India. Water, 14(3), 296.

Singh, K. K., Singh, N. A., Singh, K. K., Tripathy, A., and Gouda, P. (2026). Investigating groundwater quality using water quality index (WQI), IWQIs and CSIs in the Sutlej River basin of eastern Punjab, India. Discover Geoscience, 4, 132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44288-026-00506-5

Swain, P. K., and Biswal, T. (2023). Assessment of groundwater quality in terms of water quality index (WQI) and fluoride contamination of Nuapada district, Odisha, India. Applied Water Science, 13, 218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-023-02030-0

Swati, S., and Umesh, S. (2015). Nemerow’s Pollution Index: For Ground Water Quality Assessment. Journal of Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 1(1), 23-31.

Tyagi, S., Sharma, B., Singh, P., & Dobhal, R. (2013).“Water Quality Assessment in Terms of Water Quality Index.” American Journal of Water Resources, 1(3), 34–38.

Tyagi, S., Sharma, B., Singh, P., & Dobhal, R. (2020). Water quality assessment in terms of water quality index. American Journal of Water Resources, 8(1), 34–38.

Uddin, M. G., Nash, S., & Olbert, A. I. (2021). A review of water quality index models and their application. Ecological Indicators, 122, 107218.

UNEP. (2024). Global Environment Outlook Report. United Nations Environment Programme.

UNICEF. (2025). Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene Global Update.

UNESCO. (2020). United Nations World Water Development Report 2020: Water and Climate Change. UNESCO Publishing.

Wetzel, R. G. (2001). Limnology: Lake and River Ecosystems (3rd ed.). Academic Press, San Diego.

 WHO (2017). Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality (4th ed.). World Health Organization, Geneva.

World Health Organization (WHO). (2022). Guidelines for drinking-water quality (4th ed., updated). WHO Press.

WHO. (2025). Progress on Household Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene.