statistical interpretation and groundwater …

www.wjpps.com Vol 3, Issue 6, 2014.

1376

Jayalakshmi et al. World Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences

STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION AND GROUNDWATER

MANAGEMENT PLAN AT THE EXTREME ENDS OF PAMBAN

BRIDGE, TAMIL NADU, INDIA

B. Jayalakshmi*1, T. Ramachandramoorthy2, A. Paulraj3, S.Rajathi1,

S. Amala Fatima Rani4

*1Syed Ammal Engineering College, Ramanathapuram-623 502, Tamil Nadu, India. 2Bishop Heber College (Autonomous), Tiruchirappalli-620 017, Tamil Nadu, India.

3St.Joseph’s College (Autonomous), Tiruchirappalli-620 002, Tamil Nadu, India. 4Holy Cross College (Autonomous), Tiruchirappalli-620 002, Tamil Nadu, India.

ABSTRACT

Pamban bridge is a cantilever bridge that connect an island

(Rameswaram) to the mainland (Mandapam) in Tamil Nadu, India.

The objective of the present study is to examine the water quality

parameters namely pH, electrical conductivity (EC), total dissolved

solids (TDS), salinity (SAL), total alkalinity (TA), calcium hardness

(CH), magnesium hardness (MH), total hardness (TH), chloride (Cl),

and fluoride (F) at the extreme ends of the Pamban bridge for the year

2014. The Langelier Saturation Index (LSI) values confirm the

corrosion tendency in most of the groundwater samples. The Water

Quality Index (WQI) value proves the groundwater with potable nature

though the area is seashore. The Principal Component Analysis (PCA) identifies the

seawater intrusion by loading factors. The scatter diagram confirms the correlation of Cl with

CH and TDS.

KEY WORDS: Pamban, Water quality, LSI, WQI, PCA.

INTRODUCTION

Groundwater is used for domestic and industrial water supply and irrigation all over the

world. In the last few decades, there has been an increase in the demand for freshwater

because of rapid growth of population and the hastened pace of industrialization1. With rapid

increase in population and growth of industrialization, groundwater quality is being

WWOORRLLDD JJOOUURRNNAALL OOFF PPHHAARRMMAACCYY AANNDD PPHHAARRMMAACCEEUUTTIICCAALL SSCCIIEENNCCEESS SSJJIIFF IImmppaacctt FFaaccttoorr 22..778866

VVoolluummee 33,, IIssssuuee 66,, 11337766--11339900.. RReesseeaarrcchh AArrttiiccllee IISSSSNN 2278 – 4357

Article Received on 25 March 2014, Revised on 20 April 2014, Accepted on 15 May 2014

*Correspondence for Author

B. Jayalakshmi

Syed Ammal Engineering

College, Ramanathapuram-623

502, Tamil Nadu, India.


1377


increasingly threatened by agricultural, chemicals and disposal of urban and industrial

wastes. In many coastal towns or cities, groundwater is the only source of freshwater to meet

domestic, agricultural and industrial needs. But groundwater is under constant threat of salty

water intrusion, which has become a worldwide concern2. Salinization is the most widespread

form of groundwater contamination, especially in coastal aquifers and is represented by the

increase of total dissolved solids (TDS)3. The major problems in the groundwater of coastal

areas are the ever-increasing freshwater demands, declining sustainability of tube wells and

salinity ingress in coastal aquifers4. Groundwater quality were assessed by multivariate

analysis and have been reported by various authors5-16. The present study has an objective to

characterize the quality of groundwater samples for their potable status at the extreme ends of

pamban bridge, Ramanathapuram District, Tamilnadu. Table 1. Methods Of Analysis And Instrumental Details

Parameters Method Physical parameters 1. pH pH meter 2. EC Water Quality Analyser (Systronics

Model 371) 3. TDS 4. Salinity Chemical parameters 1. Calcium Hardness Volumetry - EDTA method 2. Total Hardness Volumetry - EDTA method 3. Total Alkalinity Volumetry - HCl method 4. Chloride Volumetry – Argentometric method 5. Fluoride Spectrophotometry – SPADNS

STUDY AREA

The pamban bridge (Fig 1) is a cantilever bridge that connects an island (Rameswaram) to

mainland (Ramanathapuram, India). It was India’s first sea bridge.

Fig.1 Pictures of the study area


1378


MATERIALS AND METHODS

109 groundwater samples were collected during February 2014 at the extreme ends of

Pamban Bridge Bridge (49 km from Pamban bridge west end (PBWE) and 60 km from

Pamban bridge east end (PBEE)) and examined for water quality profile. Water samples were

collected from open wells, bore wells, hand pumps and ponds. All the samples were analyzed

by following the standard guidelines17.

WATER QUALITY INDEX

Water quality index18 expresses overall water quality based on several water quality

parameters. To determine the suitability of the ground water for drinking purpose, Water

Quality Index is calculated with the following formula

WQI = Antilog [SWnn=1 log 10qn]

where, Wn , Weightage = K/Sn and K, constant = 1/ (Sn, n=1 1 /Si)

Sn and Si correspond to the WHO / ICMR standard value of the parameters.

Quality rating (Q) is calculated as

Qni= [(Vactual – V ideal)/ (Vstandard - V ideal)] x 100

Where Qni = quality rating of ith parameter for ‘n’ water samples

Vactual = value of the water quality parameter obtained from the laboratory analysis

Vstandard = value of the water quality parameter obtained from the standard Tables

V ideal for pH =7 and for the other parameters it is equivalent to zero.

Langelier Saturation Index

The Langelier Saturation Index (LSI; also called Langelier Stability Index) is a calculated

number used to predict the calcium carbonate stability of water; that is, whether water will

precipitate, dissolve, or be in equilibrium with calcium carbonate. Usually, the LSI value

ranges from -3 to +3. The LSI is expressed as the difference between the pH and the

saturation pH.

LSI = pH - pHs

pHs = (9.3 + a + b) - (c + d)

Where pH = -log[H+],

a = (log10 [TDS] - 1) / 10

b = -13.12 x log10 (T + 273) + 34.55

c = log10 [Ca+2 as CaCO3] - 0.4

d = log10 [alkalinity as CaCO3]


1379


pHs = pH for a saturated solution of CaCO3,

T= Temperature in ˚C.

If the pH of the water is below the calculated saturation pH, the LSI is negative, which makes

the CaCO3 dissolve in water and the water has a limited scaling potential. If the pH exceeds

pHs, the LSI is positive and it is being supersaturated with CaCO3 and the water has a

tendency to form a scale. At increasing positive index values, the scaling potential increases.

According to Langelier, the corrosive action of water is mainly because of the presence of

excess of free CO2 and carbonates of calcium and magnesium. The interaction of free CO2

with calcium and magnesium carbonates affects the carbonate equilibrium that leads to

corrosion. The lower the pH with high free carbon dioxide, the higher the potential level of

corrosion compared with the higher pH with low free CO2 19.

Data Processing

Data obtained from the laboratory analysis were used as variable inputs for Factor Analysis

(FA) and was performed using the SPSS package version 20.

Factor Analysis can be considered as data reduction technique because it reduces a large no,

of variables that often overlap to a smaller number of factors. Usually, the minor pcs can be

eliminated to simplify the analysis because of their poor interpretation of the data structures.

Though the significant PCs are fewer, they can still provide information on the most

meaningful parameters which describes a whole data set affording data reduction with

minimum loss of original information.

In this study, the Eigen value one criterion was used to determine the numbers of PCs based

on the assumption that only Eigen values greater than one were considered important and the

higher Eigen values are more significant. Varimax normalization was then applied as the

rotation method in the analysis on the PCs for better interpretation of results. Varimax factor

loadings of 0.75 were considered strong, although the terms ‘strong’, ‘moderate’ and ‘weak’

as applied to loadings, refer to absolute loading values of >0.75, 0.75-0.50 and 0.50-0.30,

respectively.


1380


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The summaries of results are presented in table 2. The mean pH values of the groundwater

samples collected from PBWE and PBEE were 7.88 and 7.97 respectively. This approves the

nature of the groundwater vary from moderately alkaline to alkaline4. Alkalinity of water is

the measure of its capacity for neutralization20. The high mean alkalinity was shown by

PBWE (296.7 mg/l) and PBWE (301.7mg/l) proves the high loads of carbonate and

bicarbonates. The higher mean value of Chloride of 256.8 mg/l in PBWE compared to

220.2mg/l in PBEE points out the intrusion of seawater in to groundwater. Chloride is higher

because of the impact of salty water and base exchange reactions2. Because of the same

reason, the mean salinity also high in the present study area (712.6 mg/l for PBWE and 758

mg/l for PBEE).The high mean EC was noted from 1393 µmho cm-1 to 1433 µmho cm-1 for

PBWE and PBEE. The higher value shows the effective leaching of ions in to the

groundwater21 and may be due to enrichment of salt because of high evaporation20. The mean

value of fluoride varied from 1.02 mg/l to 1.23 mg/l.

Though maximum numbers of samples are well within the permissible limit of WHO, the

groundwater samples of PBEE recorded more fluoride compared to PBWE. This may be due

to the presence of fluoride rich rocks in PWEE. TDS, which is the sum of dissolved ion

concentration2 varies between the mean value of 748 and 759 mg/l respectively.

Fig 2 Variation of EC value Fig 3 Variation of TA value


1381


Fig 4 Variation of TH value Fig 5 Variation of TDS value

The high TDS content may be deduced due to the possibility of seawater percolation into the

groundwater through small pockets of waterlogged areas as reported earlier22. Again the

value of EC may be an approximate index of the total content of dissolved substance in

water. The mean value of total hardness for PBWE and PBEE varies from 328 to 314 mg/l

respectively. The hardness of the water is due to the presence of alkaline earth such as

calcium and magnesium23. Calcium and magnesium are the most abundant elements in the

natural surface and groundwater and exists mainly as bicarbonate and chloride. The higher

mean value of calcium in PBWE (313 mg/l) and PBEE (348 mg/l) may be due to dissolution

of calcium from soil (coral) during infiltration. The mean value of magnesium hardness

seems to be 28.8 mg/l in PBWE and 28.9 mg/l in PBEE. Though both the mean values are

below the permissible level of WHO, some of the groundwater samples have high

magnesium hardness that may be due to the dissolution of magnesium rich minerals,

especially leaching of clays. The 3D density graphs that describe the variation of EC, TA,

TH, TDS, F, Cl & Sal were given from Fig 2 to Fig 8.

Fig 6 Variation of F value Fig 7 Variation of Cl value


1382


Fig 8 Variation of Sal value

Fig 9 Variation of noncarbonate hardness at the extreme ends of Pamban Bridge

Table 2. Summary of chemical composition of groundwater samples at the extreme ends

of Pamban Bridge

Quality Parameters

PBWE (N=49) PBEE (N=60)

Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum Mean Std.

Deviation

pH 6.85 8.82 7.87 0.45 6.97 8.86 7.96 0.40

TA 25 788 296 135 99.00 616 301 118

Sal 90 2580 712 569.43 140 2720 758 555

EC 0.16 4.87 1.39 1.07 0.28 5.18 1.43 1.05

TDS 83.9 2580 748 580 163 2740 759 554

CH 0 785 313 171 10.10 831 295 171

MH 0.5 191 28.86 35.75 1.30 226 28.95 33.64

TH 39.9 802 328 166 60.00 901 314 172

Cl 15 1115 256 251 10.40 852 220 179

F 0.06 2.5 1.02 0.58 0.03 2.96 1.23 0.65


1383


Table 3. Distribution of the groundwater samples of PBWE and PBEE according to

water quality index

WQI PBWE

(N=49)

PBEE (N= 60)

Excellent 8 4 Good 9 7 Poor 15 23 Very Poor 13 13 Unfit 9 13

Fig.10 Pie chart representing the percentage distribution of groundwater samples based

on WQI

The domination of noncarbonate hardness (TH>TA) is higher in PBEE compared to

PBWE24,25. This may be due to the increased concentration of sulphate, chloride etc.,

suggesting the extensive evaporation of the aquifers in PBEE (Fig 9).

About the water quality index (WQI), 33.6 % in PBWE and 18 % in PBEE comes under

excellent and good category. Similarly 36.7% in PBWE and 60 % in PBEE falls under poor

and very poor category. Around 44.9 % in PBWE and 43.3 % in PBEE are unfit (Fig 10).

Langeleir Saturation Index (LSI) determines the corrosive or incrusting ability of the water

sample. Most of the groundwater samples in PBWE and PBEE have positive LSI value (Fig

11). The positive LSI value is attributed to heavy deposition of CaCO3 resulting in the

formation of sludges and then scales. The positive LSI value evidences the dissolution of salt

contents.


1384


Fig 11 Evaluation of Langeleir saturation index for the PBWE and PBEE

Fig 12 Scatter diagrams of CH and TDS with chloride for groundwater samples

collected from PBWE

Correlation Coefficient is a commonly used measure to establish the relationship between

two variables. It is simply a measure to exhibit how one variable predicts the other.

Correlation matrices have been calculated to know the interrelationship between the variables

and are presented in Table 4 for PBWE and PBEE. The correlation diagrams for CH, TDS

and Cl were prepared and given in Fig 12 and Fig. 13 for PBWE and PBEE. The positive

nature of ‘r’ values calculated for TDS and Cl in PBWE and PBEE approve that the elements

behave conservatively. The elevated concentration level of TDS is a reflection of impounded

calcium and chloride. The interdependency of calcium and chloride is revealed through the

positive ‘r’ values obtained during correlation. A poor correlation between fluoride and

calcium in groundwater was observed both in PBEE and PBWE.


1385


Fig 13 Scatter diagrams of CH and TDS with chloride for groundwater samples

collected from PBEE

Factor analysis[table 6], a multivariate statistical method, yields the general relationship

between measured chemical variables by showing multivariate patterns that may be help to

classify the original data3. Three factors are extracted to statistically represent the

contributions influencing chemical composition of ground water for both PBWE & PBEE.

The results of factor analysis based on the three most significant factors indicate that three

factors explain about 82 % for PBWE and 77 % for PBEE of total sample variance. The

PBWE shows the percentage variance explanation of 50% for factor 1, 20 % for factor 2 and

11 % for factor 3. Similarly the PBEE shows the percentage variance explanation of 49 % for

factor 1, 16 % for factor 2 and 11 % for factor 3.

Each variable has high communality that shows variation in common with others and are

clarified for its inclusion in the analysis, In order to make the interpretation easier, varimax

rotation is carried out to distinguish the PCs which come under same range of loadings. Most

significant variables in the components represented by loadings higher that 0.6, are taken in

to consideration for the interpretation. An interpretation of the rotated three principal

components was made by examining the component loadings noting the relationship to the

original variables for the samples in PBWE and PBEE. The high loadings of Sal, EC, TDS,

CH, TH and Cl show the salt water signature in PBWE and PBEE. Also the loading in the

second component for fluoride proves the possibility of fluoride bearing minerals in PBWE

and PBEE.


1386


Table 4. Karl pearson correlation matrix for groundwater samples at the extreme ends of pamban bridge (PBWE & PBEE)

PBEE

PBW

E

pH TA Sal EC TDS CH MH TH Cl F

Ph 1 -0.094 -0.054 -0.057 -0.059 -0.145 -0.076 -0.072 -0.11 0.09

TA 0.532 1 .432** .430** .428** 0.161 -0.13 .296* 0.116 .479**

Sal 0.035 0.331 1 1.000** 1.000** .309* -0.096 .633** .710** 0.178

EC 0.05 0.391 0.964 1 1.000** .309* -0.096 .632** .708** 0.175

TDS 0.031 0.368 0.961 0.996 1 .309* -0.093 .629** .706** 0.171

CH 0.087 0.425 0.709 0.736 0.732 1 -0.016 .395** .263* 0.001

MH -0.153 -0.204 -0.104 -0.127 -0.121 -0.1 1 0.19 0.123 -0.144

TH -0.096 0.209 0.792 0.818 0.814 0.822 0.165 1 .766** 0.123

Cl 0.169 0.251 0.715 0.727 0.726 0.77 -0.073 0.748 1 0.173

F 0.468 0.49 0.172 0.216 0.203 0.289 -0.036 0.135 0.182 1

Table 5. Distribution of ground water samples (%) exceeding the drinking water

standards.

Chemical Consitituents, mg/l

WHO No. of ground water samples

exceeding the permissible limit (%) PBWE PBEE

pH 6.5-8.5 12 6 TA 300 78 80 Sal 200 94 95 EC 300 96 98 TDS 500 55 72 CH 75 98 95 MH 30 29 38 TH 100 59 75 Cl 200 41 51 F 1.5 18 23

MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

People in the study area should be given awareness about the problems such as high

blood pressure, kidney stones etc., caused due to high hardness.

As the aquifers are enriched mainly with hardness imparting calcium species, hence

treatment techniques such as water softening or desalination may be employed.

Monitoring should be regular as the water sources are regularly consumed by the people

for domestic as well as internal consume purposes.

Defluoridation techniques have to be employed in the sources where the fluoride level

crosses the permissible level of WHO26.


1387


Table 6. Factor analysis of the water quality parameters of the groundwater samples at

the extreme ends of Pamban Bridge.

Principal components

PBWE PBEE

PC-1 PC-2 PC-3 Communality

PC-1 PC-2 PC-3 Communality

Principal component loadings Principal component loadings

pH 0.157 0.83 0.106 .724 -0.091 0.237 -0.729 .596 TA 0.481 0.688 0.016 .705 0.491 0.592 0.411 .761 Sal 0.929 -0.152 -0.095 .894 0.957 0.031 -0.128 .932 EC 0.955 -0.11 -0.094 .933 0.956 0.028 -0.128 .931 TDS 0.95 -0.131 -0.097 .928 0.954 0.025 -0.128 .928 CH 0.874 -0.01 0.043 .766 0.933 -0.086 -0.05 .881 MH -0.11 -0.329 0.912 .953 -0.037 -0.633 0.408 .568 TH 0.875 -0.316 0.209 .908 0.811 -0.285 0.095 .748 Cl 0.838 -0.075 0.017 .709 0.805 -0.298 -0.002 .737 F 0.326 0.678 0.342 .683 0.262 0.684 0.322 .640 Eigen value 5.282 1.887 1.034

5.236 1.455 1.031

Per. var 50.578 20.426 11.027 49.6 16.122 11.495 Cum. per. var

50.578 71.004 82.031 49.6 65.722 77.217 Rotated component matrix

pH -0.063 0.84 -0.121

-0.022 -0.191 -0.748

TA 0.289 0.765 -0.189 0.283 0.823 0.055 Sal 0.938 0.068 -0.1 0.937 0.214 -0.099 EC 0.953 0.113 -0.111 0.936 0.212 -0.098 TDS 0.953 0.091 -0.108 0.935 0.208 -0.096 CH 0.847 0.222 -0.001 0.926 0.149 0.027 MH -0.038 -0.093 0.971 0.033 -0.33 0.677 TH 0.923 -0.018 0.239 0.827 0.025 0.252 Cl 0.829 0.146 -0.007 0.84 -0.035 0.176 F 0.135 0.804 0.136 0.057 0.794 -0.075

CONCLUSION

The groundwater samples at the extreme ends of the pamban bridge have been found with

more Sal, TDS, CH, TA and Cl in majority of the samples and beyond the drinking level

standards of WHO 2006 [table 5 ]. The higher noncarbonate hardness in PBEE compared to

PBWE witnessed the greater input of chloride in the groundwater samples of PBEE and

proves the seawater intrusion. LSI inferred that scale forming tendency dominate at both the

ends of pamban bridge which may cause severe corrosion. The principal component analysis

indorses the seawater intrusion and the presence of fluoride bearing minerals in the study

area. The WQI revealed that the groundwater samples at PBWE shows 33% and PBEE show

18 % of found to have good quality though the study area is seashore. It seems that maximum


1388


number of samples in PBWE and PBEE recorded below permissible value for fluoride hence

there is very less risk for dental fluorosis, skeletal fluorosis etc., Very Higher standard

deviation of quality parameters in PBWE compared to PBEE suggests local variations in

point sources, soil type and multiple aquifer system.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Authors thank the Principals and Managements of Bishop Heber College, Tiruchirappalli,

St.Joseph’s College,Tiruchirappalli and Syed Ammal Engineering College, Ramanathapuram

for their encouragement and support.

REFERENCES

1. Amadi A.N, Olasehinde P.I, YisaJ . Characterization of Groundwater Chemistry in the

Coastal plain-sand Aquifer of Owerri using Factor Analysis. Int. J. Phys. Sci, 2010 ; 5(8):

1306-1314.

2. Chidambaram S, Karmegam U , Prasanna M.V , Sasidhar P , Vasanthavigar M. A study on

hydrochemical elucidation of coastal groundwater in and around Kalpakkam region,

Southern India. Environ Earth Sci, 2011 ; 64 : 1419–1431.DOI 10.1007/s12665-011-0966-

3.

3. Md. Mezbaul Bahar , Md. Salim Reza. Hydrochemical characteristics and quality

assessment of shallow groundwater in a coastal area of Southwest Bangladesh. Environ

Earth Sci , 2010 ; 61 : 1065–1073. doi: 10.1007/s12665-009-0427-4.

4. Ramachandramoorthy T, Sivasankar V, Subramanian V. A seasonal quality assessment

along the Rameswaram–Dhanushkodi coastal tract, India. Environmental Monitoring and

Assessment, 2009 ; 159: 511–520.

5. Cattel R. B. Factor analysis: introduction to essentials. Biometrics, 1965 ; 21: 190–215.

doi:10.2307/2528364.

6. Helena B, Pardo R, Vega M, Barrado E, Fernandez J. M, Fernandez L. Temporal

evolution of groundwater composition in an alluvial (Pisuerga river, Spain) by principal

component analysis. Water Research, 2000 ; 34 : 807–816. doi:10.1016/S0043-

1354(99)00225-0.

7. Anazawa K, Ohmori H. Chemistry of surface water at a volcanic summit area, Norikura,

Central Japan: multivariate statistical approach. Chemosphere, 2001 ; 45 : 807–

816.doi:10.1016/S0045-6535 (01)00104-7.


1389


8. Kuppusamy M. R, Giridhar V. V. Factor analysis of water quality characteristics

including trace metal speciation in the coastal environmental system of Chennai, Ennore.

Environment International, 2006 ; 32 : 174–179.doi:10.1016/j.envint.2005.08.008.

9. Panda U. C, Sundaray S. K, Rath P, Nayak B. B, Bhatta D. Application of factor and

cluster analysis for characterization of river and estuarine water systems—a case

study:Mahanadi River (India). Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam), 2006 ; 331: 434–445.

doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2006.05.029.

10. Laluraj C. M, Gopinath G, Dineshkumar P. K. Groundwater chemistry of shallow

aquifers in the coastal zones of Cochin, India. Applied Ecology and Environmental

Research, 2005 ; 3 : 133–139.

11. Praus P. Water quality assessment using SDV based principal component analysis of

hydrological data. Water South Africa, 2005 ; 31(4) : 417–422.

12. Petalas C, Lambrakis N, Zaggana E. Hydrogeochemistry of waters of volcanic rocks: The

case of the volcano sedimentary rocks of Thrace, Greece. Water, Air and Soil Pollution,

2006 ; 169 : 375–394.

13. Pujari P. R, Soni A. K. Seawater intrusion studies near kovaya limestone mine, Saurashtra

coast, India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2008 ; 154 : 93–

109.doi:10.1007/s10661-008-03809.

14. Nayak A. K, Chinchmalatpure A. R, Gururaja Rao G, Jha S.K, Khandelwal M. K. An

assessment of fluoride in the coastal aquifer of the Bara tract in Bharuch District,Gujarat

(India). Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 2009 ; 158 : 315–317.

doi:10.1007/s10661-008-0585-y.

15. Sivasankar V, Ramachandramoorthy T. An Investigation on the Pollution Status of

Holywater samples of Ramanathasamy temple, Rameswaram, India. Environmental

Monitoring and Assessment, 2009 ; 156 : 307–315.

16. Krishna kumar S, Chandrasekar N, Seralathan P, Godson P.S, Magesh N. S.

Hydrochemical study of shallow carbonate aquifers, Rameswaram Island,

India.Environmental Monitoring and Assessment ,2011; doi:10.1007/s10661-011-2249-6.

17. APHA. (2005). Standard methods for examination of water andwastewater (21st ed.).

Washington DC: American PublicHealth Association. information (2nd edition). Geneva

18. Tiwari T. N. Mishra M. A preliminary assessment of water quality Index of major Indian

rivers. Indian Journal of Environmental Protection, 1985 ; 5 : 276–279.

19. Langeleir W. F. Chemical equilibria in water treatment. Journal of American Water Works

Association, 1946 ; 38: 169.


1390


20. Manish Kumar, Kalpana Kumari , AL. Ramanathan , Rajinder Saxena. A comparative

evaluation of groundwater suitability for irrigation and drinking purposes in two

intensively cultivated districts of Punjab. India Environ Geol ; 2007 : 53,553–574. doi

:10.1007/s00254-007-0672-3.

21. Srinivasamoorthy K, Chidambaram S, Prasanna MV, Vasanthavihar M, Peter J, Anandhan

P. Identification of major sources controlling groundwater chemistry from a hard rock

terrain—a case study from Mettur taluk, Salem district, Tamil Nadu, India. J Earth Sys

Sci, 2008 ; 117: 49–58.

22. Palanivelu K, Nisha Priya M, Muthamil Selvan A, Natesan U. Water quality assessment

in the tsunami-affected coastal areas of Chennai. Current Science, 2006 ;91: 583–584.

23. Sarath Prasanth SV, Magesh NS, Jitheshlal KV, Chandrasekar N, Gangadhar K.

Evaluation of groundwater quality and its suitability for drinking and agricultural use in

the coastal stretch of Alappuzha District, Kerala, India. Appl Water Sci, 2012 ; 2: 165–

175.

24. Rengaraj S, Elampooranan T, Elango L, Ramalingam V. Groundwater quality in the

Suburban regions of Madras City, India. Pollution Research, 1996 ;15 : 325–328.

25. Shanmugam P, Neelamani S, Ahn Yu-Hwan Philip L, Hong Gi-Hoon. Assessment of the

levels of coastal marine pollution of Chennai city, Southern India. Water Resource

Management, 2007 ; 21: 1187–1206.

26. World Health Organisation (2006). Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality Health Criteria

and other supporting information.

statistical interpretation and groundwater …

Documents