essay of quality of water

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Drinking Water Quality and Human Health: An Editorial

Patrick levallois.

1 Direction de la santé environnementale et de la toxicologie, Institut national de la santé publique du Québec, QC G1V 5B3, Canada

2 Département de médecine sociale et préventive, Faculté de médecine, Université Laval, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada

Cristina M. Villanueva

3 ISGlobal, 08003 Barcelona, Spain; [email protected]

4 Universitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), 08002 Barcelona, Spain

5 Consortium for Biomedical Research in Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Carlos III Institute of Health, 28029 Madrid, Spain

6 IMIM (Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute), 08003 Barcelona, Spain

Drinking water quality is paramount for public health. Despite improvements in recent decades, access to good quality drinking water remains a critical issue. The World Health Organization estimates that almost 10% of the population in the world do not have access to improved drinking water sources [ 1 ], and one of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals is to ensure universal access to water and sanitation by 2030 [ 2 ]. Among other diseases, waterborne infections cause diarrhea, which kills nearly one million people every year. Most are children under the age of five [ 1 ]. At the same time, chemical pollution is an ongoing concern, particularly in industrialized countries and increasingly in low and medium income countries (LMICs). Exposure to chemicals in drinking water may lead to a range of chronic diseases (e.g., cancer and cardiovascular disease), adverse reproductive outcomes and effects on children’s health (e.g., neurodevelopment), among other health effects [ 3 ].

Although drinking water quality is regulated and monitored in many countries, increasing knowledge leads to the need for reviewing standards and guidelines on a nearly permanent basis, both for regulated and newly identified contaminants. Drinking water standards are mostly based on animal toxicity data, and more robust epidemiologic studies with an accurate exposure assessment are rare. The current risk assessment paradigm dealing mostly with one-by-one chemicals dismisses potential synergisms or interactions from exposures to mixtures of contaminants, particularly at the low-exposure range. Thus, evidence is needed on exposure and health effects of mixtures of contaminants in drinking water [ 4 ].

In a special issue on “Drinking Water Quality and Human Health” IJERPH [ 5 ], 20 papers were recently published on different topics related to drinking water. Eight papers were on microbiological contamination, 11 papers on chemical contamination, and one on radioactivity. Five of the eight papers were on microbiology and the one on radioactivity concerned developing countries, but none on chemical quality. In fact, all the papers on chemical contamination were from industrialized countries, illustrating that microbial quality is still the priority in LMICs. However, chemical pollution from a diversity of sources may also affect these settings and research will be necessary in the future.

Concerning microbiological contamination, one paper deals with the quality of well water in Maryland, USA [ 6 ], and it confirms the frequent contamination by fecal indicators and recommends continuous monitoring of such unregulated water. Another paper did a review of Vibrio pathogens, which are an ongoing concern in rural sub-Saharan Africa [ 7 ]. Two papers focus on the importance of global primary prevention. One investigated the effectiveness of Water Safety Plans (WSP) implemented in 12 countries of the Asia-Pacific region [ 8 ]. The other evaluated the lack of intervention to improve Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) in Nigerian communities and its effect on the frequency of common childhood diseases (mainly diarrhea) in children [ 9 ]. The efficacies of two types of intervention were also presented. One was a cost-effective household treatment in a village in South Africa [ 10 ], the other a community intervention in mid-western Nepal [ 11 ]. Finally, two epidemiological studies were conducted in industrialized countries. A time-series study evaluated the association between general indicators of drinking water quality (mainly turbidity) and the occurrence of gastroenteritis in 17 urban sites in the USA and Europe. [ 12 ] The other evaluated the performance of an algorithm to predict the occurrence of waterborne disease outbreaks in France [ 13 ].

On the eleven papers on chemical contamination, three focused on the descriptive characteristics of the contamination: one on nitrite seasonality in Finland [ 14 ], the second on geogenic cation (Na, K, Mg, and Ca) stability in Denmark [ 15 ] and the third on historical variation of THM concentrations in french water networks [ 16 ]. Another paper focused on fluoride exposure assessments using biomonitoring data in the Canadian population [ 17 ]. The other papers targeted the health effects associated with drinking water contamination. An extensive up-to-date review was provided regarding the health effects of nitrate [ 18 ]. A more limited review was on heterogeneity in studies on cancer and disinfection by-products [ 19 ]. A thorough epidemiological study on adverse birth outcomes and atrazine exposure in Ohio found a small link with lower birth weight [ 20 ]. Another more geographical study, found a link between some characteristics of drinking water in Taiwan and chronic kidney diseases [ 21 ]. Finally, the other papers discuss the methods of deriving drinking water standards. One focuses on manganese in Quebec, Canada [ 22 ], another on the screening values for pharmaceuticals in drinking water, in Minnesota, USA [ 23 ]. The latter developed the methodology used in Minnesota to derive guidelines—taking the enhanced exposure of young babies to water chemicals into particular consideration [ 24 ]. Finally, the paper on radioactivity presented a description of Polonium 210 water contamination in Malaysia [ 25 ].

In conclusion, despite several constraints (e.g., time schedule, fees, etc.), co-editors were satisfied to gather 20 papers by worldwide teams on such important topics. Our small experience demonstrates the variety and importance of microbiological and chemical contamination of drinking water and their possible health effects.

Acknowledgments

Authors want to acknowledge the important work of the IJERPH staff and of numbers of anonymous reviewers.

Author Contributions

P.L. wrote a first draft of the editorial and approved the final version. C.M.V. did a critical review and added important complementary information to finalize this editorial.

This editorial work received no special funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Essay on Water Quality

Students are often asked to write an essay on Water Quality in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Water Quality

What is water quality.

Water quality tells us how clean or dirty water is. It is important because it affects the health of people, animals, and plants. Clean water is safe to drink and supports life.

Why Water Quality Matters

Good water quality is crucial for our health. Drinking dirty water can make us very sick. It also matters for fish and other water animals to live.

Things That Pollute Water

Many things can make water dirty. Chemicals from factories, waste from homes, and oil spills are big problems. These pollutants harm water quality.

Keeping Water Clean

To keep water clean, we should not throw trash or chemicals into water. Everyone can help by being careful about what goes down the drain.

250 Words Essay on Water Quality

Water quality: the foundation of life, water is the elixir of life, sustaining all living organisms on our planet. its quality directly impacts our health and well-being. good water quality ensures clean drinking water, healthy ecosystems, and thriving communities., sources of water pollution, numerous factors contribute to water pollution. industrial waste, agricultural runoff, sewage discharge, and littering are major culprits. these pollutants contaminate water sources, making them unsafe for consumption and damaging aquatic life., consequences of poor water quality, poor water quality leads to a range of health issues, including waterborne diseases like cholera, typhoid, and dysentery. contaminated water also affects aquatic ecosystems, leading to biodiversity loss and disrupting the food chain. additionally, it hinders economic activities like fishing and tourism, which rely on clean water., water treatment and conservation, to ensure access to clean water, water treatment facilities employ various methods like filtration, disinfection, and reverse osmosis. these processes remove impurities and harmful substances, making water safe for consumption. water conservation practices such as rainwater harvesting, leak detection, and efficient irrigation techniques help reduce demand and preserve water resources., individual and collective action, improving water quality requires collective efforts. as individuals, we can reduce our water footprint by taking shorter showers, fixing leaky faucets, and using water-saving appliances. additionally, supporting policies that promote water conservation, pollution control, and sustainable development is crucial. in conclusion, water quality is paramount to life on earth. by understanding the sources of pollution, its consequences, and the importance of water treatment and conservation, we can work together to protect this vital resource and ensure a healthy future for generations to come., 500 words essay on water quality.

Various human activities contribute to water pollution, contaminating our precious water sources. Industrial waste, agricultural runoff, sewage discharge, and littering are major culprits. These pollutants, when released into water bodies, can cause severe damage to aquatic ecosystems and pose health risks to humans.

Effects of Water Pollution

Polluted water has numerous detrimental effects. It can cause a range of waterborne diseases, such as diarrhea, typhoid, and cholera, when consumed. Additionally, it harms aquatic life, leading to a decline in biodiversity and disruption of the food chain. Water pollution also affects the aesthetics of water bodies, making them unpleasant for recreational activities like swimming and fishing.

Importance of Water Quality

Maintaining good water quality is essential for several reasons. It ensures safe drinking water, preventing waterborne diseases and promoting public health. Healthy water bodies support thriving aquatic ecosystems, providing habitat for diverse plants and animals. Clean water is also vital for various economic activities, including agriculture, fishing, and tourism, contributing to sustainable livelihoods.

Water Quality Monitoring

Monitoring water quality is crucial for assessing its health and taking appropriate action to protect it. Regular testing for various parameters, such as pH, dissolved oxygen, and the presence of pollutants, helps identify potential problems and track water quality trends over time. This information is essential for developing effective water management and pollution control strategies.

Water Conservation and Preservation

Conserving water and preventing pollution are critical steps in maintaining water quality. Reducing water consumption, using water-efficient appliances, and fixing leaky faucets can help conserve precious water resources. Additionally, implementing pollution control measures, such as wastewater treatment plants and proper waste disposal systems, helps minimize the discharge of pollutants into water bodies.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 11 April 2022

Water quality assessment and evaluation of human health risk of drinking water from source to point of use at Thulamela municipality, Limpopo Province

• N. Luvhimbi 1 ,
• T. G. Tshitangano 1 ,
• J. T. Mabunda 1 ,
• F. C. Olaniyi 1 &
• J. N. Edokpayi 2  

Scientific Reports volume  12 , Article number:  6059 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

24k Accesses

33 Citations

78 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Environmental sciences
• Risk factors

Water quality has been linked to health outcomes across the world. This study evaluated the physico-chemical and bacteriological quality of drinking water supplied by the municipality from source to the point of use at Thulamela municipality, Limpopo Province, South Africa; assessed the community practices regarding collection and storage of water and determined the human health risks associated with consumption of the water. Assessment of water quality was carried out on 114 samples. Questionnaires were used to determine the community’s practices of water transportation from source to the point-of-use and storage activities. Many of the households reported constant water supply interruptions and the majority (92.2%) do not treat their water before use. While E. coli and total coliform were not detected in the water samples at source (dam), most of the samples from the street taps and at the point of use (household storage containers) were found to be contaminated with high levels of E. coli and total coliform. The levels of E. coli and total coliform detected during the wet season were higher than the levels detected during the dry season. Trace metals’ levels in the drinking water samples were within permissible range of both the South African National Standards and World Health Organisation. The calculated non-carcinogenic effects using hazard quotient toxicity potential and cumulative hazard index of drinking water through ingestion and dermal pathways were less than unity, implying that consumption of the water could pose no significant non-carcinogenic health risk. Intermittent interruption in municipal water supply and certain water transportation and storage practices by community members increase the risk of water contamination. We recommend a more consistent supply of treated municipal water in Limpopo province and training of residents on hygienic practices of transportation and storage of drinking water from the source to the point of use.

Similar content being viewed by others

Access to basic drinking water services, safe water storage, and household water treatment practice in rural communities of northwest Ethiopia

Assessment of groundwater quality for human consumption and its health risks in the Middle Magdalena Valley, Colombia

Ecological and health risk assessment of trace metals in water collected from Haripur gas blowout area of Bangladesh

Introduction.

Water is among the major essential resources for the sustenance of humans, agriculture and industry. Social and economic progress are based and sustained upon this pre-eminent resource 1 . Availability and easy access to safe and quality water is a fundamental human right 2 and availability of clean water and sanitation for all has been listed as one of the goals to be achieved by the year 2030 for sustainable development by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) 3 .

The physical, chemical, biological and aesthetic properties of water are the parameters used to describe its quality and determine its capability for a variety of uses including the protection of human health and the aquatic ecosystem. Most of these properties are influenced by constituents that are either dissolved or suspended in water and water quality can be influenced by both natural processes and human activities 4 , 5 . The capacity of a population to safeguard sustainable access to adequate quantities and acceptable quality of water for sustaining livelihoods of human well-being and socioeconomic growth; as well as ensuring protection against pollution and water related disasters; and for conserving ecosystems in a climate of peace and political balance is regarded to as water security 6 .

Although the world’s multitudes have access to water, in numerous places, the available water is seldom safe for human drinking and not obtainable in sufficient quantities to meet basic health needs 7 . The World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that about 1.1 billion people globally drink unsafe water and most diarrheal diseases in the world (88%) is attributed to unsafe water, poor sanitation and unhygienic practices. In addition, the water supply sector is facing enormous challenges due to climate change, global warming and urbanization. Insufficient quantity and poor quality of water have serious impact on sustainable development, especially in developing countries 8 .

The quality of water supplied by the municipality is to be measured against the national standards for drinking water developed by the federal governments and other relevant bodies 9 . These standards considered some attributes to be of primary importance to the quality of drinking water, while others are considered to be of secondary importance. Generally, the guidelines for drinking water quality recommend that faecal indicator bacteria (FIB), especially Escherichia coli ( E. coli ) or thermo tolerant coliform (TTC), should not be found in any 100 mL of drinking water sample 8 .

Despite the availability of these standards and guidelines, numerous WHO and United Nations International Children Emergency Fund (UNICEF) reports have documented faecal contamination of drinking water sources, including enhanced sources of drinking water like the pipe water, especially in low-income countries 10 . Water-related diseases remain the primary cause of a high mortality rate for children under the age of five years worldwide. These problems are specifically seen in rural areas of developing countries. In addition, emerging contaminants and disinfection by-products have been associated with chronic health problems for people in both developed and developing countries 11 . Efforts by governmental and non-governmental organizations to ensure water security and safety in recent years have failed in many areas due to a lack of sustainability of water supply infrastructures 12 .

Water quality, especially regarding the microbiological content, can be compromised during collection, transport, and home storage. Possible sources of drinking water contamination are open field defecation, animal wastes, economic activities (agricultural, industrial and businesses), wastes from residential areas as well as flooding. Any water source, especially is vulnerable to such contamination 13 . Thus, access to a safe source alone does not ensure the quality of water that is consumed, and a good water source alone does not automatically translate to full health benefits in the absence of improved water storage and sanitation 14 . In developing countries, it has been observed that drinking-water frequently becomes re-contaminated following its collection and during storage in homes 15 .

Previous studies in developing countries have identified a progressive contamination of drinking water samples with E. coli and total coliforms from source to the point of use in the households, especially as a result of using dirty containers for collection and storage processes 16 , 17 , 18 . Also, the type of water treatment method employed at household levels, the type of container used to store drinking water, the number of days of water storage, inadequate knowledge and a lack of personal and domestic hygiene have all been linked with levels of water contamination in households 19 , 20 .

In South Africa, many communities have access to treated water supplied by the government. However, the water is more likely to be piped into individual households in the urban than rural areas. In many rural communities, the water is provided through the street taps and residents have to collect from those taps and transport the water to their households. Also, water supply interruptions are frequently experienced in rural communities, hence, the need for long-term water storage. A previous study of water quality in South Africa reported better quality of water at source than the water samples obtained from the household storage containers, showing that water could be contaminated in the process of transporting it from source to the point of use 21 .

This study was conducted in a rural community at Thulamela Municipality, Limpopo province, South Africa, to describe the community’s drinking water handling practices from source to the point of use in the households and evaluate the quality of the water from source (the reservoir), main distribution systems (street taps), yard connections (household taps) and at the point of use (household storage containers). Water quality assessment was done by assessing the microbial contamination and trace metal concentrations, and the possible health risks due to exposure of humans to the harmful pathogens and trace metals in the drinking water were determined.

The study was conducted at Lufule village in Thulamela municipality, Limpopo Province, South Africa. The municipality is situated in the eastern subtropical region of the province. The province is generally hot and humid and it receives much of its rainfall during summer (October–March) 22 . Lufule village is made up of 386 households and a total population of 1, 617 residents 23 . The study area includes Nandoni Dam (main reservoir) which acquires its raw water from Luvuvhu river that flows through Mutoti and Ha-Budeli villages just a few kilometers away from Thohoyandou town. Nandoni dam is where purification process takes place to ensure that the water meets the standards set for drinking water. This dam is the main source of water around the municipality, and it is the one which supplies water to selected areas around the dam, including Lufule village. Water samples for analysis were collected from the dam (D), street taps (ST), household taps (HT) and household storage containers (HSC) (Fig.  1 ).

Map of the study area showing water samples’ collection areas.

Research design

This study adopted a quantitative design comprising of field survey and water analysis.

Field survey

The survey was done to identify the selected households and their shared source of drinking water (street taps). The village was divided into 10 quadrants for sampling purposes. From each quadrant, 6 households were randomly selected where questionnaires were distributed and household water samples were also collected for analysis.

Quantitative data collection

A structured interviewer-administered questionnaire was employed for data collection in the selected households. The population of Lufule village residents aged 15–69 years is 1, 026 (Census, 2011). About 10% of the adult population (~ 103) was selected to complete the questionnaires to represent the entire population. However, a total of 120 questionnaires were distributed, to take care of those which might be lacking vital information and therefore would not qualify to be analysed. Adults between the ages of 18 and 69 years were randomly selected to complete the questionnaire which includes questions concerning demographic and socio-economic statuses of the respondents, water use practices, sanitation, hygiene practices as well as perception of water quality and health. The face validity of the instrument was ensured by experts in the Department of Public Health, University of Venda, who reviewed questionnaire and confirmed that the items measure the concepts of interest relevant to the study 24 . Respondents were given time to go through the questionnaire and the researcher was present to clear any misunderstanding that may arise.

Water sampling

Permission to collect water samples from the reservoir tank at the Nandoni water treatment plant and households was obtained from the plant manager and the households’ heads respectively. Two sampling sites were identified at the dam, from where a water sample each was collected during the dry and the wet season. Similarly, 8 sampling sites were identified from the street and household taps, while 60 sampling sites were targeted for the household storage containers. However, only 39 household sites were accessible for sample collection, due to unavailability of the residents at the times of the researcher’s visit. Thus, water samples were collected from a total of 57 sites. Samples were collected from each of the sites during the dry (12th–20th April, 2019) and wet seasons (9th–12th December, 2019) between the hours of 08h00 and 14h30. A total of 114 samples were collected during the sampling period: 4 from the reservoir, 16 from street taps, 16 from household taps and 78 from households’ storage systems. Water samples were collected in 500 mL sterile polyethylene bottles. After collection, the containers were transported to the laboratory on ice in a cooler box. Each of the samples was tested for physico-chemical parameters, microbial parameters and trace metals’ concentration.

Physicochemical parameters’ analysis

Onsite analysis of temperature, pH, Electrical conductivity (EC) and Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) were performed immediately after sampling using a multimeter (model HI “HANNA” instruments), following the standards protocols and methods of American Public Health Association (APHA) 25 . The instrument was calibrated in accordance with the manufacturer’s guideline before taking the measurements. The value of each sample was taken after submerging the probe in the water and held for a couple of minutes to achieve a reliable reading. After measurement of each sample, the probe was rinsed with de-ionized water to avoid cross contamination among different samples.

ICP-OES and ICP-MS analyses of major and trace elements

An inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrophotometer (ICP-OES) was used to analyse the major metals (Calcium (Ca), Sodium (Na), Potassium (K) and Magnesium (Mg)) in the water samples while inductively coupled plasma mass spectrophotometer (ICP-MS) was used to analyze the trace metals. The instrument was standardized with a multi-element calibration standard IV for ICP for Copper (Cu), Manganese (Mn), Iron (Fe), Chromium (Cr), Cadmium (Cd), Arsenic (As), Nickel (Ni), Zinc (Zn), Lead (Pb) and Cobalt (Co) and analytical precision was checked by frequently analysing the standards as well as blanks. ICP multi Standard solution of 1000 ppm for K, Ca, Mg and Na was prepared with NH 4 OAC for analysis to verify the accuracy of the calibration of the instrument and quantification of selected metals before sample analysis, as well as throughout the analysis to monitor drift.

Microbiological water quality analysis

Analysis of microbial parameters was conducted within 6 h of collection as recommended by APHA 25 . Viable Total coliform and E. coli were quantified in each sample using the IDEXX technique approved by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). Colilert media was added to 100 mL sample and mixed until dissolved completely. The solution was poured into an IDEXX Quanti-Tray/2000 and sealed using the Quanti-Tray sealer 26 . The samples were incubated at 35 °C for 24 h. Trays were scanned using a fluorescent UV lamp to count fluorescent wells positive for E. coli concentration and counted with the most probable number (MPN) table provided by the manufacturer 27 .

Health risk assessment

Risk assessment have been estimated for ingestion and dermal pathways. Exposure pathway to water for ingestion and dermal routes are calculated using Eqs. ( 1 ) and ( 2 ) below:

where Exp ing : exposure dose through ingestion of water (mg/kg/day); BW: average body weight (70 kg for adults; 15 kg for children); Exp derm : exposure dose through dermal absorption (mg/kg/day); C water : average concentration of the estimated metals in water (μg/L); IR: ingestion rate in this study (2.0 L/day for adults; 1.0 L/day for children); ED: exposure duration (70 years for adults; and 6 years for children);AT: averaging time (25,550 days for an adult; 2190 days for a child); EF: exposure frequency (365 days/year) SA: exposed skin area (18.000 cm 2 for adults; 6600 cm 2 for children); K p : dermal permeability coefficient in water, (cm/h), 0.001 for Cu, Mn, Fe and Cd, while 0.0006 for Zn; 0.002 for Cr and 0.004 for Pb; ET: exposure time (0.58 h/ day for adults; 1 h/day for children) and CF: unit conversion factor (0.001 L/cm 3 ) 28 .

The hazard quotient (HQ) of non-carcinogenic risk by ingestion pathway can be determined by Eq. ( 3 )

where RfD ing is ingestion toxicity reference dose (mg/kg/day). An HQ under 1 is assumed to be safe and taken as significant non-carcinogenic, but HQ value above 1 may indicate a major potential health concern associated with over-exposure of humans to the contaminants 28 .

The total non-carcinogenic risk is represented by hazard index (HI). HI < 1 means the non-carcinogenic risk is acceptable, while HI > 1 indicates the risk is beyond the acceptable level 29 . The HI of a given pollutant through multiple pathways can be calculated by summing the hazard quotients by Eq. ( 4 ) below.

Carcinogenic risks for ingestion pathway is calculated by Eq. ( 5 ). For the selected metals in the study, carcinogenic risk (CR ing ) can be defined as the probability that an individual will develop cancer during his lifetime due to exposure under specific scenarios 30 .

where CRing is carcinogenic risk via ingestion route and SF ing is the carcinogenic slope factor.

Data analysis

Data obtained from the survey were analysed using Microsoft Excel and presented as descriptive statistics in the form of tables and graphs. The experimental data obtained was compared with the South African National Standards (SANS) 31 and Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) 32 guidelines for domestic water use.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The ethical clearance for this study was granted by the University of Venda Health, Safety and Research Ethics’ Committee (SHS/19/PH/14/1104). Permission to conduct the study was obtained from the Department of Water affairs, Limpopo province, Vhembe district Municipality and the selected households. Respondents were duly informed about the study and informed consent was obtained from all of them. The basic ethical principles of voluntary participation, informed consent, anonymity and confidentiality of respondents were duly complied with during data collection, analysis and reporting.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Socio-demographic characteristics of respondents

A total of 120 questionnaires were distributed but only 115 were completed, making a good response rate of 95%. The socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents are presented in Table 1 .

Household water supply

Many households (68.7%) had their primary water source from the municipality piped into their yards, but only 5.2% have the water flowing within their houses. The others have to fetch water at their neighbours’ yards or use the public taps on the streets. When the primary water supply is interrupted (i.e. when there is no water flowing through the pipes within the houses, yards or the public taps due to water rationing activities by the municipality, leakage of water distribution pipes, vandalization of pipes during road maintenance, etc.), the interruption usually lasts between a week or two, during which the respondents resort to other alternative sources. A return trip to the secondary source of water usually takes between 10 and 30 min for more than half of the respondents (53.0%) (Table 2 ).

Water storage and treatment practices at the household

Household water was most frequently stored in plastic buckets (n = 78, 67.8%), but ceramic vessels, metal buckets and other containers are also used for water storage (Fig.  2 ). Most households reported that their drinking water containers were covered (n = 111, 96.5%). More than half (53.9%) of the respondents used cups with handles to collect water from the storage containers whereas 37.4% used cups with no handles. Only 7.8% households reported that they treat their water before use mainly by boiling. Approximately 82.6% of respondent are of the opinion that one cannot get sick from drinking water and only 17.4% knew the risks that come with untreated water, and cited diarrhoea, schistosomiasis, cholera, fever, vomiting, ear infections, malnutrition, rash, flu and malaria as specific illnesses associated with water. Despite these perceptions, the majority (76.5%) were satisfied with their current water source. The few (23.5%) who were not satisfied cited poor quality, uncleanness, cloudiness, bad odour and taste in the water as reasons for their dissatisfaction (Table 3 ).

Examples of household water storage containers, some with lids and others without lids (photo from fieldwork).

Sanitation practices at the household level

More than half of the respondents (67%) use pit toilets, whereas only 26.1% use the flush to septic tank system, most of the toilets (93.9%) have a concrete floor. About 76.5% of households do not have designated place to wash their hands, however, all respondents indicated that they always wash their hands with soap or any of its other alternatives before preparing meals and after using the toilet (Table 4 ).

Water samples analysis

The water samples analyses comprise of microbial analysis, physico-chemical analysis and trace metals' parameters.

Microbial analysis

The samples from the reservoir during dry and wet season had 0 MPN/100 mL of total coliform and E. coli and were within the recommended limits of WHO and SANS for drinking water. During the wet season, seven out of the eight water samples collected from the street taps were contaminated with total coliform, while four of the samples taken from the same source were contaminated with total coliform during the dry season. Water samples from street taps 3 and 7 (ST 3 and ST7) were contaminated with total coliform during both seasons, however, the total coliform counts during the wet season were more than the counts during the dry season. None of the samples was contaminated with E. coli during the dry season, however, 2 samples from the street taps (ST3 & ST6) were found to be contaminated with E. coli during the wet season. Samples from household taps showed a similar trend with the street taps—with all samples being contaminated with total coliform during the wet season. Though 7 of the 8 samples taken from the household taps were contaminated with total coliform during the dry season, the samples from the same sources showed a higher level of total coliform in the wet season, with almost all the samples showing contamination at maximum detection levels of more than 2000 MPN/100 mL, except one sample (HT8) which showed a higher level of contamination with total coliform during the dry compared with the wet season. Only one sample (HT4) was found to be contaminated with E. coli during both dry and wet season. This shows that total coliform contamination levels are higher during the wet season than the dry season (Table 5 ).

Water samples from household storage containers (HSC) showed a higher level of total coliform during the wet season than the dry season and more samples were contaminated with E. coli during the wet season also (Table 6 ). A higher level of contamination was recorded for the HSCs compared to the street and household taps.

Physico-chemical analysis

In the reservoir samples, the pH value ranged from 8.37 to 8.45, EC ranged between 183 and 259 µS/cm whereas TDS varied between 118 and 168 mg/L. Similarly, in the street tap samples, pH value ranged from 7.28 and 9.33, EC ranged between 26 and 867 µS/cm whereas TDS varied between 16 and 562 mg/L (Fig.  3 ).

EC and TDS levels for the street taps and reservoir samples.

In the household taps, pH value ranged from 7.70–9.98, EC range between 28–895 µS/cm and TDS varied between 18 and 572 mg/L (Fig.  4 ).

EC and TDS levels for household taps.

In household storage container samples, the pH value ranges from 7.67–9.77, EC ranged between 19–903 µS/cm and TDS values ranged from 12–1148 mg/L (Fig.  5 ).

EC and TDS levels for household storage container samples.

Analysis of cations and trace metals in water

To detect the cations’ and trace metals’ concentrations in the water samples, representative samples from each of the sources were selected for analysis. The concentration of Calcium ranged between 2.14 and 31.65 mg/L, Potassium concentration ranged from 0.14 to 1.85 mg/L, Magnesium concentration varied from 1.32 to 16.59 mg/L, Sodium ranged from 0.18 to 12.96 mg/L (Table 7 ).

Trace metals’ analysis

The minimum and maximum concentrations of trace metals (Al, Mn, Fe, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, As and Pb) present in water samples from selected street taps, household taps and household storage containers are presented in Table 8 .

Hazard quotient (HQ) and carcinogenic risk assessment

Table 9 presents the exposure dosage and hazard quotient (HQ) for ingestion and dermal pathway for metals. The HQ ing and HQ derm for all analyzed trace metals in both children and adults were less than one unit, indicating that there are no potential non-carcinogenic health risks associated with consumption of the water. Table 10 presents the total Hazard Quotient and Health risk index (HI) for trace metals in the water samples, showing that residents of the study area are not susceptible to non-cancer risks due to exposure to trace metals in drinking water. Table 11 presents the cancer risk associated with the levels of Ni, As and Pb in the drinking water samples. The table shows that only the maximum levels of lead had the highest chance of cancer risks for both adults and children.

This study provides information about the quality of drinking water in a selected rural community of Thulamela municipality of Limpopo province, South Africa, taking into consideration the physicochemical, microbiological and trace metals’ parameters of the treated water supplied to the village by the government, through the municipality. Many participants in the study have their primary source of water piped into their yards, while very few have water in their houses. This implies that getting water for household use would involve collecting the water from the yard and then into the storage containers. Those who do not have the taps in their yards have to collect water from the neighbours’ yards or the street taps. This observation is not restricted to the study area, as a similar situation has been observed in other rural communities of Limpopo Province 21 . This need to pass water through multiple containers before the point of use increases the risk of contamination.

Residents of the study area, just like residents of other settlements in Thulamela Municipality 21 , store their drinking water in plastic buckets, ceramic vessels, jerry cans and other containers. Almost all the respondents (96.5%) claim that their water storage vessels are covered and that their drinking water usually stays for less than a week in the storage containers (87.8%). Covering of water storage containers reduces the risk of water contamination from dust or other airborne particles. However, intermittent interruption of municipal water supply lasting for a week or more in the study area and the consequent use of alternative sources of water predispose the residents to various health risks as intermittent interruption in water supply has been linked to higher chances of contamination in the distribution systems, compared with continuous supply; in addition, the alternative sources of water may not be of a good quality as the treated municipal water 33 , 34 , yet, more than half of the respondents in this study (53%) use water directly from source without any form of treatment. This is because many residents in rural communities of Limpopo province believe that the water they drink is of good quality and thus do not need any further treatment 21 . The few who treat their water before drinking mostly use the boiling method. While boiling and other home-based interventions like solar disinfection of water have been reported to improve the quality of drinking water; drinking vessels, like cups, have also been implicated in water re-contamination of treated water at the point of use 16 and most respondents (91.3%) in this study admittedly use cups to collect water from the storage containers. The risk of contamination is even increased when cups without handles are used, where there is a higher chance that the water collector would touch the water in the container with his/her fingers. The Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends that containers for drinking water should be fitted with a small opening with a cover or a spigot, through which water can be collected while the container remains closed, without dipping any potentially contaminated object into the container 35 . However, it is noteworthy that all the respondents claim to always wash their hands with soap (or its equivalents) and water after using the toilets, a constant practice of hand washing after using the toilet has been associated with a reduced risk of water contamination with E. coli 19 .

Treated water from the dam tested negative for both total coliform and E. coli hence complied with regulatory standards of SANS 31 and WHO 8 . The results could probably be due to the use of chlorine as a disinfectant in the treatment plant. Using disinfectants, pathogenic bacteria from the water can be killed and water made safe for the user. Similar studies have also reported that treated water in urban water treatment plants contains no total coliforms and E. coli 36 . In contrast, treated water sources in rural areas have been reported to have considerable levels of total coliform and E. coli 37 . The reason alluded to this include lack of disinfectant, no residual chlorine in the treated water, high prevalence of open defecation and unhygienic practices in proximity to water sources 38 .

From the water samples collected from the street taps, 62.5% were found to be contaminated with total coliform during the dry season, while the percentage rose to 87.5% during the wet season. The street tap which is about 13 km from the reservoir recorded high levels of total coliform ranging from 1.0 -2000 MPN/100 mL with most of the sites exceeding the WHO guidelines of 10 MPN/100 mL 8 . In both seasons, all the samples tested negative for E. coli , this complies with the WHO guideline of 0 MPN/100 mL. While the water leaving the treatment plant met bacteriological standards, the detection of coliform bacteria in the distribution lines suggest that the water is contaminated in the distribution networks. This could be due to the adherence of bacteria onto biofilms or accidental point source contamination by broken pipes, installation and repair works 39 . Furthermore, the water samples from households’ storage containers were contaminated by total coliform (73% and 85%) and E. coli (10.4% and 13.2%) during the dry and wet season, respectively. Microbiological contamination of household water stored in containers could be due to unhygienic practices occurring between the collection point and the point-of-use 40 , 41 .

Generally, higher levels of contamination were recorded in the wet season than in the dry season. The wet season in Thulamela Municipality is often characterized with increased temperature which could lead to favourable condition for microbial growth. Also, the treatment plant usually makes use of the same amount of chlorine for water purification during both seasons, even though influent water would be of a higher turbidity during the wet season, hence reducing the levels of residual chlorine 42 .

The pH of the analyzed samples from the study area ranged from 7.15 to 9.92. Most of the samples were within the values recommended by SANS (5 to 9.7) and comparable to results from previous similar studies 31 , 43 . Also, the electrical conductivity of all water samples from this study ranged from 28 µS/cm to 903 µS/cm which complied with the recommended value of SANS: < 1700 µS/cm 31 . The presence of dissolved solids such as calcium, chloride, and magnesium in water samples is responsible for its electrical conductivity 44 .

Total dissolved solids are the inorganic salts and small amounts of organic substance, which are present as solution in water 45 . Water has the ability to dissolve a wide range of inorganic and some organic minerals or salts such as potassium, calcium, sodium, bicarbonates, chlorides, magnesium, sulphates, etc. These minerals produced unwanted taste and colour in water 46 . A high TDS value indicates that water is highly mineralised. The recommended TDS value set for drinking water quality is ≤ 1200 mg/L 31 . In this study, the TDS values ranged from 18 mg/L to 572 mg/L. Hence, the TDS of all the household’s storage samples complied with the guidelines and consistent with previous studies 47 .

The analysis of magnesium (1.32 to 16.59 mg/L) and calcium (2.14 to 31.65 mg/L) concentrations showed that they were within the permissible range recommended for drinking water by SANS 31 and WHO 8 . All living organisms depend on magnesium in all types of cells, body tissues and organs for variety of functions while calcium is very important for human cell physiology and bones. Similar studies in Ethiopia and Turkey also showed acceptable levels of these metals in drinking water 46 , 48 . Likewise, the levels of potassium (0.14 to 1.85 mg/L) and sodium (0.18 to 12.96 mg/L) were within the permissible limit of WHO and SANS and may not cause health related problems. Sodium is essential in humans for the regulation of body fluid and electrolytes, and for proper functioning of the nerves and muscles, however, excessive sodium in the body can increase the risk of developing a high blood pressure, cardiovascular diseases and kidney damage 49 , 50 . Potassium is very important for protein synthesis and carbohydrate metabolism, thus, it is very important for normal growth and body building in humans, but, excessive quantity of potassium in the body (hyperkalemia) is characterized with irritability, decreased urine production and cardiac arrest 51 .

Metals like copper (Cu), cobalt (Co) and zinc (Zn) are essential requirements for normal body growth and functions of living organisms, however, in high concentrations, they are considered highly toxic for human and aquatic life 42 . Elevated trace metal(loids) concentrations could deteriorate water quality and pose significant health risks to the public due to their toxicity, persistence, and bio accumulative nature 52 . In this study, the concentrations of Manganese, Cobalt, Nickel and Copper all complied with the recommended concentration by SANS for domestic water use.

Aluminum concentration in the drinking water samples ranged from 1.25—13.46 µg/L. All analysed samples complied with the recommended concentration of ≤ 300 µg/L for domestic water use 31 . The recorded levels of Al in water from this study should not pose any health risk. At a high concentration, aluminium affects the nervous system, and it is linked to several diseases, such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases 53 . Iron (Fe) is an essential element for human health, required for the production of protein haemoglobin, which carries oxygen from our lungs to the other parts of the body. Insufficient or excess levels of iron can have negative effect on body functions 54 . The recommended concentration of iron in drinking water is ≤ 2000 µg/L 31 . In this study, the concentration of iron in the samples ranged from 0.96 to 73.53 µg/L. Similar results were reported by Jamshaid et al. in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province 55 . A high concentration of Fe in water can give water a metallic taste, even though it is still safe to drink 56 .

The levels of Pb, As and Zn were in the range of 0.02–0.57 µg/L, 0.02–0.17 µg/L, and 2.54–194.96 µg/L, respectively whereas Cr was not detected in the samples collected. The levels recorded complied with the SANS 31 and WHO 8 guidelines for drinking water. Similar results were reported by Mohod and Dhote 57 . Lead is not desirable in drinking water because it is carcinogenic and can cause growth impairment in children 41 . Inorganic arsenic is a confirmed carcinogen and is the most significant chemical contaminant in drinking-water globally 44 . Zinc deficiency can cause loss of appetite, decreased sense of taste and smell, slow wound healing and skin sores 58 . Cr is desirable at low concentration but can be harmful if present in elevated levels.

The hazard quotient (HQ) takes into consideration the oral toxicity reference dose for a trace metal that humans can be exposed to 59 . Health related risk associated with the exposure through ingestion depends on the weight, age and volume of water consumed by an individual. HQ ing and HQ derm for all analyzed trace metals in both children and adults were less than one unit (Table 9 ), indicating that there are no potential non-carcinogenic health risks associated with the consumption of the water from the study area either by children or adults. The calculated average cumulative health risk index (HI) for children and adult was 3.88E-02 and 1.78E-02, respectively. HQ across metals serve as a conservative assessment tool to estimate high-end risk rather than low end-risk in order to protect the public. This served as a screen value to determine whether there is major significant health risk 60 . The results in this study signifies that the population of the investigated area are not susceptible to non-cancer risks due to exposure to trace metals in drinking water. Similar observation has been reported by Bamuwamye et al. after investigating human health risk assessment of trace metals in Kampala (Uganda) drinking water 61 . It should be noted that the hazard index values for children were higher than that of adult, suggesting that children were more susceptible to non-carcinogenic risk from the trace metals.

Drinking water with trace metals such as Pb, As, Cr and Cd could potentially enhance the risk of cancer in human beings 62 , 63 . Long term exposure to low amounts of toxic metals might, consequently, result in many types of cancers. Using As, Ni and Pb carcinogens, the total exposure risks of the residents in Table 11 . For trace metals, an acceptable carcinogenic risk value of less than 1 × 10 −6 is considered as insignificant and the cancer risk can be neglected; while an acceptable carcinogenic risk value of above 1 × 10 –4 is considered as harmful and the cancer risk is worrisome. Amongst the studied trace metals, only the maximum levels of lead for both adults and children had the highest chance of cancer risks (1.93E−03 and 4.46E−03) while Arsenic and Nickel have no chance of cancer risk with values of 3.34E−06; 7.72E−06 and 2.24E−05; 5.18E−05, in both adults and children respectively. The only cancer risk to residents of the studied area could be from the cumulative ingestion of lead in their drinking water. The levels of Pb recorded in this study complied to the SANS guideline value for safe drinking water. While the levels of Pb from the dam and the street pipes were relatively low, higher levels where recorded at household taps and storage containers and this may be due to the kind of storage containers and pipes used in those households. Generally, the water supply is of low Pb levels which should not pose any health risk to the consumers. However, the residents in rural areas should be properly educated on the kind of materials to be used for safe storage of water which should not pose an additional health burden. The likelihood of cancer risk was only associated with the consumption of the highest levels of Pb reported for a life time for adults (set at 70 years) and 6 years for children. Consistent consumption of water from the same source throughout an adult’s lifetime is unlikely as residents in those communities may change their locations at some points, hence reducing the possible risk associated with consistent exposure to the same levels of Pb.

Conclusions

The study shows that as distance increases from the treatment reservoir to distribution points, the cross-contamination rate also increases, therefore, good hygienic practices is required while transporting, storing and using water. Unhygienic handling practices at any point between collection and use contribute to the deterioration of drinking water quality.

The physicochemical, bacteriological quality and trace metals’ concentration of water samples from treated source, street taps and household storage containers were majorly within the permissible range of both WHO and SANS drinking water standards. HQ for both children and adults were less than unity, showing that the drinking water poses less significance health threat to both children and adults. Amongst the studied trace metals, only the maximum level of lead for both adults and children has the highest chance of cancer risks.

We recommend that appropriate measures should be taken to maintain residual free chlorine at the distribution points, supply of municipal treated water should be more consistent in all the rural communities of Thulamela municipality, Limpopo province and residents should be trained on hygienic practices of transportation and storage of drinking water from the source to the point of use.

Data availability

The datasets used and analysed during the current study are available from the first author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

American Public Health Association

Centres for Disease Control and Prevention

Department of Water Affairs and Forestry

Electrical conductivity

Health risk index

Hazard quotient

Household storage containers

Household taps

Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrophotometer

Inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrophotometer

Most probable number

South African National Standards

Street taps

Total Dissolved Solids

United Nations General Assembly

United Nations International Children Emergency Fund

United States Environmental Protection Agency

World Health Organization

Taiwo, A.M., Olujimi, O.O., Bamgbose, O. & Arowolo, T.A. Surface water quality monitoring in Nigeria: Situational analysis and future management strategy. In Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment (ed. Voudouris, K) 301–320 (IntechOpen, 2012).

Corcoran, E., et al. Sick water? The central role of wastewater management in sustainable development: A rapid response assessment. United Nations Enviromental Programme UN-HABITAT, GRID-Arendal. https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/9156 (2010).

United Nations, The 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals: An opportunity for Latin America and the Caribbean (LC/G.2681-P/Rev.3), Santiago (2018).

Hubert, E. & Wolkersdorfer, C. Establishing a conversion factor between electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids in South African mine waters. Water S.A. 41 , 490–500 (2015).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Department of Water Affairs (DWA). Groundwater Strategy. Department of Water Affairs: Pretoria, South Africa. 64 (2010).

Lu, Y., Nakicenovic, N., Visbeck, M. & Stevance, A. S. Policy: Five priorities for the UN sustainable development goals. Nature 520 , 432–433 (2015).

Article   ADS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Shaheed, A., Orgil, J., Montgomery, M. A., Jeuland, M. A. & Brown, J. Why, “improved” water sources are not always safe. Bull. World Health Organ. 92 , 283–289 (2014).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

WHO. Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality 4th Edn (World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2011). http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/44584/1/9789241548151_eng.pdf .

Patil, P. N., Sawant, D. V. & Deshmukh, R. N. Physico-chemical parameters for testing of water—a review. Int. J. Environ. Sci. 3 , 1194–1207 (2012).

CAS   Google Scholar  

Bain, R. et al. Fecal contamination of drinking-water in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med. 11 , e1001644 (2014).

Younos, T. & Grady, C.A. Potable water, emerging global problems and solutions. In The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry 30 (2014).

Tigabu, A. D., Nicholson, C. F., Collick, A. S. & Steenhuis, T. S. Determinants of household participation in the management of rural water supply systems: A case from Ethiopia. Water Policy. 15 , 985–1000 (2013).

Article   Google Scholar  

Oljira, G. Investigation of drinking water quality from source to point of distribution: The case of Gimbi Town, in Oromia Regional State of Ethiopia (2015).

Clasen, T., Haller, L., Walker, D., Bartram, J. & Cairncross, S. Cost-effectiveness of water quality interventions for preventing diarrhoeal disease in developing countries. J. Water Health 5 , 599–608 (2007).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Too, J. K., Sang, W. K., Ng’ang’a, Z. & Ngayo, M. O. Fecal contamination of drinking water in Kericho District, Western Kenya: Role of source and household water handling and hygiene practices. J. Water Health 14 , 662–671 (2016).

Rufener, S., Mausezahl, D., Mosler, H. & Weingartner, R. Quality of drinking-water at source and point-of-consumption—drinking cup as a high potential recontamination risk: A field Study in Bolivia. J. Health Popul. Nutri. 28 , 34–41 (2010).

Google Scholar  

Nsubuga, F. N. W., Namutebi, E. N. & Nsubuga-ssenfuma, M. Water resources of Uganda: An assessment and review. Water Resour. Prot. 6 , 1297–1315 (2014).

Rawway, M., Kamel, M. S. & Abdul-raouf, U. M. Microbial and physico-chemical assessment of water quality of the river Nile at Assiut Governorate (Upper Egypt). J. Ecol. Health Environ. 4 , 7–14 (2016).

Agensi, A., Tibyangye, J., Tamale, A., Agwu, E. & Amongi C. Contamination potentials of household water handling and storage practices in Kirundo Subcounty, Kisoro District, Uganda. J. Environ. Public Health. Article ID 7932193, 8 pages (2019).

Mahmud, Z. H. et al. Occurrence of Escherichia coli and faecal coliforms in drinking water at source and household point-of-use in Rohingya camps, Bangladesh. Gut Pathog. 11 , 52. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13099-019-0333-6 (2019).

Edokpayi, J. N. et al. Challenges to sustainable safe drinking water: A case study of water quality and use across seasons in rural communities in Limpopo Province, South Africa. Water 10 , 159 (2018).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Musyoki, A., Thifhulufhelwi, R. & Murungweni, F. M. The impact of and responses to flooding in Thulamela Municipality, Limpopo Province, South Africa, Jàmbá. J. Disaster Risk Stud. 8 , 1–10 (2016).

Census 2011. Main Place: Lufule. Accessed from Census 2011: Main Place: Lufule (adrianfrith.com) on 30/01/2022.

Bolarinwa, O. A. Principles and methods of validity and reliability testing of questionnaires used in social and health science researches. Niger. Postgrad. Med. J. 22 , 195–201 (2015).

Association, A. P. H. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water 16th edn. (American Public Health Association, Washington, 1992).

Bernardes, C., Bernardes, R., Zimmer, C. & Dorea, C. C. A simple off-grid incubator for microbiological water quality analysis. Water 12 , 240 (2020).

Rich CR, Sellers JM, Taylor HB, IDEXX Laboratories Inc. Chemical reagent test slide. U.S. Patent Application 29/218,589. (2006).

Naveedullah, et al. Concentrations and human health risk assessment of selected heavy metals in surface water of siling reservoir watershed in Zhejiang Province, China. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 23 , 801–811 (2014).

Wu, J. & Sun, Z. Evaluation of shallow groundwater contamination and associated human health risk in an alluvial plain impacted by agricultural and industrial activities, mid-west China. Expos. Health. 8 , 311–329 (2016).

Wu, L., Zhang, X. & Ju, H. Amperometric glucose sensor based on catalytic reduction of dissolved oxygen at soluble carbon nanofiber. Biosens. Bioelectron. 23 , 479–484 (2007).

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

South African National Standard (SANS). 241-1: Drinking Water, Part 1: Microbiological, Physical, Aesthetic and Chemical Determinants. 241-2: 2015 Drinking Water, Part 2: Application of SANS 241-1 (2015).

Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF). South African Water Quality Guidelines (second edition). Volume 1: Domestic Use, (1996).

Drake, M.J. & Stimpfl, M. Water matters. In Lunar and Planetary Science Conference , Vol. 38, 1179 (2007).

Kumpel, E. & Nelson, K. L. Intermittent water supply: prevalence, practice, and microbial water quality. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50 , 542–553 (2016).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The safe water system: Safe storage of drinking water. Accessed from CDC Fact Sheet on 30/01/2022 (2012).

Hashmi, I., Farooq, S. & Qaiser, S. Chlorination and water quality monitoring within a public drinking water supply in Rawalpindi Cantt (Westridge and Tench) area, Pakistan. Environ. Monit. Assess. 158 , 393–403 (2009).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Onyango, A. E., Okoth, M. W., Kunyanga, C. N. & Aliwa, B. O. Microbiological quality and contamination level of water sources in Isiolo country in Kenya. J. Environ. Public Health . 2018 , 2139867 (2018).

Gwimbi, P., George, M. & Ramphalile, M. Bacterial contamination of drinking water sources in rural villages of Mohale Basin, Lesotho: Exposures through neighbourhood sanitation and hygiene practices. Environ. Health Prev. Med. 24 , 33 (2019).

Karikari, A. Y. & Ampofo, J. A. Chlorine treatment effectiveness and physico-chemical and bacteriological characteristics of treated water supplies in distribution networks of Accra-Tema Metropolis, Ghana. Appl. Water Sci. 3 , 535–543 (2013).

Article   ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Thompson, T., Sobsey, M. & Bartram, J. Providing clean water, keeping water clean: An integrated approach. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 13 , S89–S94 (2003).

Cronin, A. A., Breslin, N., Gibson, J. & Pedley, S. Monitoring source and domestic water quality in parallel with sanitary risk identification in Northern Mozambique to Prioritise protection interventions. J. Water Health 4 , 333–345 (2006).

Edokpayi, J. N., Enitan, A. M., Mutileni, N. & Odiyo, J. O. Evaluation of water quality and human risk assessment due to heavy metals in groundwater around Muledane area of Vhembe District, Limpopo Province, South Africa. Chem. Cent. J. 12 , 2 (2018).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Edimeh, P. O., Eneji, I. S., Oketunde, O. F. & Sha’Ato, R. Physico-chemical parameters and some heavy metals content of Rivers Inachalo and Niger in Idah, Kogi State. J. Chem. Soc. Nigeria 36 , 95–101 (2011).

Rahmanian, N., et al . Analysis of physiochemical parameters to evaluate the drinking water quality in the State of Perak, Malaysia. J. Chem. 1–10. Article ID 716125 (2015).

WHO/FAO. Diet, Nutrition, and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases (World Health Organisation, Geneva, 2003).

Meride, Y. & Ayenew, B. Drinking water quality assessment and its effects on resident’s health in Wondo genet campus, Ethiopia. Environ. Syst. Res. 5 , 1 (2016).

Mapoma, H. W. & Xie, X. Basement and alluvial aquifers of Malawi: An overview of groundwater quality and policies. Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 8 , 190–202 (2014).

Soylak, M., Aydin, F., Saracoglu, S., Elci, L. & Dogan, M. Chemical analysis of drinking water samples from Yozgat. Turkey Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 11 , 151–156 (2002).

Munteanu, C. & Iliuta, A. The role of sodium in the body. Balneo Res. J. 2 , 70–74 (2011).

Strazzullo, P. & Leclercq, C. Sodium. Adv. Nutr. 5 , 188–190 (2014).

Pohl, H. R., Wheeler, J. S. & Murray, H. E. Sodium and potassium in health and disease. Met. Ions Life Sci. 13 , 29–47 (2013).

Muhammad, S., Shah, M. T. & Khan, S. Health risk assessment of heavy metals and their source apportionment in drinking water of Kohistan region, northern Pakistan. Microchem. J. 98 , 334–343 (2011).

Inan-Eroglu, E. & Ayaz, A. Is aluminum exposure a risk factor for neurological disorders?. J. Res. Med. Sci. 23 , 51 (2018).

Milman, N. Prepartum anaemia: Prevention and treatment. Ann. Hematol. 87 , 949–959 (2008).

Jamshaid, M., Khan, A. A., Ahmed, K. & Saleem, M. Heavy metal in drinking water its effect on human health and its treatment techniques—a review. Int. J. Biosci. 12 , 223–240 (2018).

Tagliabue, A., Aumont, O. & Bopp, L. The impact of different external sources of iron on the global carbon cycle. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41 , 920–926 (2014).

Mohod, C. V. & Dhote, J. Review of heavy metals in drinking water and their effect on human health. Int. J. Innov. Res. Technol. Sci. Eng. 2 , 2992–2996 (2013).

Bhowmik, D., Chiranjib, K. P. & Kumar, S. A potential medicinal importance of zinc in human health and chronic. Int. J. Pharm. 1 , 05–11 (2010).

Mahmud, M. A. et al. Low temperature processed ZnO thin film as electron transport layer for efficient perovskite solar cells. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells. 159 , 251–264 (2017).

Rajan, S. & Ishak, N. S. Estimation of target hazard quotients and potential health risks for metals by consumption of shrimp ( Litopenaeus vannamei ) in Selangor, Malaysia. Sains Malays. 46 , 1825–1830 (2017).

Bamuwamye, M. et al. Human health risk assessment of heavy metals in Kampala (Uganda) drinking water. J. Food Res. 6 , 6–16 (2017).

Saleh, H. N. et al. Carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risk assessment of heavy metals in groundwater wells in Neyshabur Plain, Iran. Biol. Trace Elem. Res. 190 , 251–261 (2019).

Tani, F. H. & Barrington, S. Zinc and copper uptake by plants under two transpiration rates Part II Buckwheat ( Fagopyrum esculentum L.). Environ. Pollut. 138 , 548–558 (2005).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank the University of Venda Health, Safety and Research Ethics’ Committee, the Department of Water affairs, Limpopo province and Vhembe district Municipality for granting the permission to conduct this study. We also thank all the respondents from the selected households in Lufule community.

The study was funded by the Research and Publication Committee of the University of Venda (Grant number: SHS/19/PH/14/1104).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Public Health, School of Health Sciences, University of Venda, Thohoyandou, 0950, South Africa

N. Luvhimbi, T. G. Tshitangano, J. T. Mabunda & F. C. Olaniyi

Department of Hydrology and Water Resources, School of Environmental Sciences, University of Venda, Thohoyandou, 0950, South Africa

J. N. Edokpayi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

L.N. and J.N.E. conceptualized the study, L.N. collected and analysed the data, T.G.T., J.T. M., and J.N.E. supervised the data collection and analysis. F.C.O. drafted the original manuscript, J.N.E. reviewed and edited the original manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F. C. Olaniyi .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Luvhimbi, N., Tshitangano, T.G., Mabunda, J.T. et al. Water quality assessment and evaluation of human health risk of drinking water from source to point of use at Thulamela municipality, Limpopo Province. Sci Rep 12 , 6059 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10092-4

Download citation

Received : 02 December 2021

Accepted : 30 March 2022

Published : 11 April 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10092-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

• Boris Lora-Ariza
• Adriana Piña
• Leonardo David Donado

Scientific Reports (2024)

Characterization of Natural Zeolite and Determination of its Ion-exchange Potential for Selected Metal Ions in Water

• G. M. Wangi
• P. W. Olupot
• R. Kulabako

Environmental Processes (2023)

Relations between personal exposure to elevated concentrations of arsenic in water and soil and blood arsenic levels amongst people living in rural areas in Limpopo, South Africa

• Thandi Kapwata
• Caradee Y. Wright
• Angela Mathee

Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2023)

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Water Inequality

Lack of safe drinking water and adequate sanitation effects countries around the globe.

Anthropology, Biology, Health, Conservation, Geography, Human Geography, Social Studies

Water Bucket Woman

A woman carries buckets full of water in a small village in northern India.

Photograph by Sean Gallagher

More than 70 percent of Earth’s surface is covered in water, yet lack of access to clean water is one of the most pressing challenges of our time. As of 2015, 29 percent of people globally suffer from lack of access to safely managed drinking water. More than double that number are at risk for water contamination from improper wastewater management. Poor water quality affects various aspects of society, from the spread of disease to crop growth to infant mortality. In some regions of the world, lack of sanitation infrastructure , water treatment facilities, or sanitary latrines lead to dire clean water crises. In several countries around the world, a major contributor to water contamination is open defecation—the practice of using fields, forests, lakes, rivers, or other natural, open areas to deposit feces. Almost one billion people worldwide still practice open defecation rather than using a toilet. It is particularly common in South Asian countries like India and Nepal, where it is practiced by about 32 percent of people in the region. A landlocked country in the Himalayas, Nepal has access to clean water from mountain rivers, but over 20 percent of the population lives below the poverty line. In a disturbing study, 75 percent of drinking water samples from schools in Nepal were contaminated with fecal bacteria. While open defecation is most common in rural communities, it still occurs in areas with sanitation access, indicating a need for awareness campaigns to teach the dangers of the practice. Moreover, pollution from open defecation is further complicated by contamination from natural disasters such as recurring floods. In sub-Saharan Africa, the proportion of the population practicing open defecation is slightly smaller—around 23 percent—but 40 percent of the population lacks safe drinking water. Moreover, the gender inequality in this region is more prominent than in South Asia. In sub-Saharan Africa, more than 25 percent of the population must walk 30 minutes or more to collect water, a burden that falls on women and girls the vast majority of the time. This trend of women tasked with the responsibility of water collection spans many developing nations and takes critical quality time away from income generation, child care, and household chores. Moreover, Africa has a high risk for desertification , which will reduce the availability of fresh water even further, and increase the threat of water inequality in the future. While South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa represent the largest percentage of people that lack access to safe drinking water, the water crisis is not limited to these areas, nor is it limited to developing countries. For example, the Arctic nations are deemed developed, but several suffer from water and sanitation challenges. Alaska in the United States, Russia, and Greenland all contain rural areas that lack safe in-house water and sanitation facilities. Some people living in these areas must not only carry their own water into their homes, they must also remove human waste themselves, collecting it and hauling it out of the home. The process is time consuming and risks contamination of household surfaces and drinking water. Furthermore, hauling water into homes is physically demanding, and storage capacity is limited, so households often function on inadequate water supplies. Several studies have connected these water-quality constraints with high disease rates in Arctic communities. Even in the United States and many nations in Europe, where advanced wastewater treatment facilities and expansive pipelines supply quality water to both cities and rural areas, poor system maintenance, infrastructure failures, and natural disasters reveal the very serious effects of poor water quality (even short-term) on developed nations. In a recent example, drinking water in Flint, Michigan, was inadequately treated beginning in 2014, and residents bathed in, cooked with, and drank water with toxic lead levels. Additionally, some communities in the contiguous United States chronically lack clean water and sanitation. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in the Navajo Nation, the largest Native American reservation in the United States, almost 8,000 homes lack access to safe drinking water, and 7,500 have insufficient sewer facilities. Luckily, global organizations are committed to addressing the water-quality crisis. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development from the United Nations tackles water inequality within one of its seventeen priority goals, to “ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.” This initiative is a continuation of the United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals from the 2000s, which also included goals to reduce the portion of the population that lacked access to infrastructure for quality water and sanitation. These goals have resulted in access to improved sources of drinking water for more than 90 percent of the world—and the 2030 Agenda seeks to continue to improve these numbers alongside greater strides in the area of sanitation. National Geographic Explorers are also committed to global water equality and are combatting these issues with diverse methods. Explorer Sasha Kramer is helping to implement sustainable sanitation practices in Haiti by recycling human waste into soil. Explorer Ashley Murray develops economically advantageous approaches to improving water quality in Ghana, exploring next-generation technologies and new business models to make waste management profitable. Explorer Alexandra Cousteau, granddaughter of the late and legendary Jacques Cousteau, uses storytelling and digital assets to educate people around the globe about the importance of water quality. Moreover, complementing these examples and the many other Explorer-driven efforts dedicated to improving water quality, Explorer Feliciano dos Santos uses music to educate remote villages in Mozambique about the importance of sanitation and hygiene.

Media Credits

The audio, illustrations, photos, and videos are credited beneath the media asset, except for promotional images, which generally link to another page that contains the media credit. The Rights Holder for media is the person or group credited.

Production Managers

Program specialists, last updated.

January 26, 2024

User Permissions

For information on user permissions, please read our Terms of Service. If you have questions about how to cite anything on our website in your project or classroom presentation, please contact your teacher. They will best know the preferred format. When you reach out to them, you will need the page title, URL, and the date you accessed the resource.

If a media asset is downloadable, a download button appears in the corner of the media viewer. If no button appears, you cannot download or save the media.

Text on this page is printable and can be used according to our Terms of Service .

Interactives

Any interactives on this page can only be played while you are visiting our website. You cannot download interactives.

Related Resources

Water Quality Importance Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Quality of water and public health

Water quality and quantity concerns in the us, works cited.

Having accessibility to high-quality water is essential for the survival of humans. We all use water, not only for drinking but for other purposes such as cleaning, cooking, bathing, and so forth. We are constantly in contact with water, hence one must ensure that the water does not contain substances harmful to one’s health.

The human body is 70% water. Water in other words is an essential component of all processes that take place within our system. Therefore, a component that is so significant must be safe, such that it does not harm one’s health.

However, this is not the case. In a lot of areas, the water available to the public is contaminated; that is it has substances that can be of great harm to public health. Health risks due to the quality of water may include Water-contact diseases, Water Borne diseases, Vector-Borne diseases, and Poisoning. (water quality and health)

Dirty water when accumulates in an area, is the start of numerous harmful diseases. This is usually what happens in slums, and the reason behind the death of many innocent people.

For instance, due to the immense increase in industrialization, most of the waste products are dumped into the seas and oceans for their convenience. This waste contains heavy metals, which can be fatal for the human body. If they make their way into the public drinking or cooking water supply, our health is immediately at great risk. Metals such as mercury and lead can destroy one’s immune system, making one vulnerable to any diseases. Metals such as arsenic and cadmium can cause human poisoning. Not only this, if these metals are dumped into the sea, and go into the bodies of the fish we eat, we too will be indirect victims of the harmful effects. Already the quantity of water available in the world is decreasing as it is, polluting it just leaves us with no options. (water quality information).

Water-Borne diseases can be fatal for human health. If our drinking water or say the water we normally go swim in, is contaminated with pathogenic organisms, we can acquire certain diseases which may include: diarrhea, malaria, polio, dengue, typhoid, and many others. These can destroy human lives, and examples can be seen in areas with low water maintenance. (Water Borne Diseases).

Water quality concerns can be found all over the world. In some areas, they are on a larger scale as compared to others. In the United States, let us look at a report from 2002. In that year 695, 540 miles of rivers and streams, or 19% of the nation’s approximately 3.7 million stream miles were assessed for their quality by the state. It was identified that 45% of it was contaminated, that is not suitable for its appropriate use, 55% was suitable for usage and 5% was heavily contaminated. In 2000 99% of all fish advisories were affected by toxic substances such as mercury lead and so on. Now, whoever had those fish had been at risk, hence, stating that there are quality concerns in the US. (water quality report 2002) (water quality facts)

As far as water quantity is concerned, the United States never really faced such a serious problem. However, more recently, with the increase in industrialization and urbanization, water shortage problems in certain areas have been identified. The state has established rights given to each area regarding their quantity limits; which is a good thing. (Water Quantity and policy)

If one compares these concerns with the developing countries, one will find stark differences. Since these countries have an increasing population, their resources are limited. Not only do they have a shortage of quality water, but even the contaminated water for cleaning and reuse is scarcely available. This is mainly because of industrialization and the race to develop their industries to fit into the world market. Then again there are natural causes such and drought which unfortunately strike some areas more than others.

Findings. Web.

Water Borne Diseases . Web.

Water quality and health. Web.

Water quality facts. Web.

Water quality information. Web.

Water quality report 2002. Web.

Water Quantity and policy. Web.

• Treatment of Wastewater
• The Issue of the Sustainability in Packaging
• Planet Mercury and Its Exploration
• Investigation of a Food Poisoning Incident
• Plastic Waste and Its Adverse Effects
• "Save the Rhino, Save the Plant" Summary
• For Locusts, Overgrazed Land Is a Treat
• Environmental Risk Report on Nanoparticles
• Comparison Radiation Regulation Between USA and Europe
• Ecology: Definition & Ecological Fallacy
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, May 28). Water Quality Importance. https://ivypanda.com/essays/water-quality-importance/

"Water Quality Importance." IvyPanda , 28 May 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/water-quality-importance/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Water Quality Importance'. 28 May.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Water Quality Importance." May 28, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/water-quality-importance/.

1. IvyPanda . "Water Quality Importance." May 28, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/water-quality-importance/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Water Quality Importance." May 28, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/water-quality-importance/.

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

A comprehensive review of water quality indices (WQIs): history, models, attempts and perspectives

• Review paper
• Published: 11 March 2023
• Volume 22 , pages 349–395, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

• Sandra Chidiac   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1822-119X 1 ,
• Paula El Najjar 1 , 2 ,
• Naim Ouaini 1 ,
• Youssef El Rayess 1 &
• Desiree El Azzi 1 , 3  

25k Accesses

58 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Water quality index (WQI) is one of the most used tools to describe water quality. It is based on physical, chemical, and biological factors that are combined into a single value that ranges from 0 to 100 and involves 4 processes: (1) parameter selection, (2) transformation of the raw data into common scale, (3) providing weights and (4) aggregation of sub-index values. The background of WQI is presented in this review study. the stages of development, the progression of the field of study, the various WQIs, the benefits and drawbacks of each approach, and the most recent attempts at WQI studies. In order to grow and elaborate the index in several ways, WQIs should be linked to scientific breakthroughs (example: ecologically). Consequently, a sophisticated WQI that takes into account statistical methods, interactions between parameters, and scientific and technological improvement should be created in order to be used in future investigations.

Similar content being viewed by others

Water quality indices: challenges and applications—an overview

Water Quality Index: An Important Tool to Assess Water Quality of Lake Waters for Sustainable Development

Evaluation of the surface water quality using global water quality index (WQI) models: perspective of river water pollution

Explore related subjects.

• Environmental Chemistry

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Water is the vital natural resource with social and economic values for human beings (Kumar 2018 ). Without water, existence of man would be threatened (Zhang 2017 ). The most important drinking sources in the world are surface water and groundwater (Paun et al. 2016 ).

Currently, more than 1.1 billion people do not have access to clean drinking water and it is estimated that nearly two-thirds of all nations will experience water stress by the year 2025 (Kumar 2018 ).

With the extensive social and economic growth, such as human factors, climate and hydrology may lead to accumulation of pollutants in the surface water that may result in gradual change of the water source quality (Shan 2011 ).

The optimal quantity and acceptable quality of water is one of the essential needs to survive as mentioned earlier, but the maintenance of an acceptable quality of water is a challenge in the sector of water resources management (Mukate et al. 2019 ). Accordingly, the water quality of water bodies can be tested through changes in physical, chemical and biological characteristics related to anthropogenic or natural phenomena (Britto et al. 2018 ).

Therefore, water quality of any specific water body can be tested using physical, chemical and biological parameters also called variables, by collecting samples and obtaining data at specific locations (Britto et al. 2018 ; Tyagi et al. 2013 ).

To that end, the suitability of water sources for human consumption has been described in terms of Water Quality Index (WQI), which is one of the most effective ways to describe the quality of water, by reducing the bulk of information into a single value ranging between 0 and 100 (Tyagi et al. 2013 ).

Hence, the objective of the study is to review the WQI concept by listing some of the important water quality indices used worldwide for water quality assessment, listing the advantages and disadvantages of the selected indices and finally reviewing some water quality studies worldwide.

2 Water quality index

2.1 history of water quality concept.

In the last decade of the twentieth century, many organizations involved in water control, used the water quality indices for water quality assessment (Paun et al. 2016 ). In the 1960’s, the water quality indices was introduced to assess the water quality in rivers (Hamlat et al. 2017 ).

Horton ( 1965 ), initially developed a system for rating water quality through index numbers, offering a tool for water pollution abatement, since the terms “water quality” and “pollution” are related. The first step to develop an index is to select a list of 10 variables for the index’s construction, which are: sewage treatment, dissolved oxygen (DO), pH, coliforms, electroconductivity (EC), carbon chloroform extract (CCE), alkalinity, chloride, temperature and obvious pollution. The next step is to assign a scale value between zero and 100 for each variable depending on the quality or concentration. The last step, is to designate to each variable is a relative weighting factor to show their importance and influence on the quality index (the higher the assigned weight, the more impact it has on the water quality index, consequently it is more important) (Horton 1965 ).

Later on, Brown et al. ( 1970 ) established a new water quality index (WQI) with nine variables: DO, coliforms, pH, temperature, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total phosphate, nitrate concentrations, turbidity and solid content based on a basic arithmetic weighting using arithmetic mean to calculate the rating of each variable. These rates are then converted not temporary weights. Finally, each temporary weight is divided by the sum of all the temporary weights in order to get the final weight of each variable (Kachroud et al. 2019a ; Shah and Joshi 2017 ). In 1973, Brown et al., considered that a geometric aggregation (a way to aggregate variables, and being more sensitive when a variable exceeds the norm) is better than an arithmetic one. The National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) supported this effort (Kachroud et al. 2019a ; Shah and Joshi 2017 ).

Steinhart et al. ( 1982 ) developed a novel environmental quality index (EQI) for the Great Lakes ecosystem in North America. Nine variables were selected for this index: biological, physical, chemical and toxic. These variables were: specific conductance or electroconductivity, chloride, total phosphorus, fecal Coliforms, chlorophyll a , suspended solids, obvious pollution (aesthetic state), toxic inorganic contaminants, and toxic organic contaminants. Raw data were converted to subindex and each subindex was multiplied by a weighting factor (a value of 0.1 for chemical, physical and biological factors but 0.15 for toxic substances). The final score ranged between 0 (poor quality) and 100 (best quality) (Lumb et al. 2011a ; Tirkey et al. 2015 ).

Dinius ( 1987 ), developed a WQI based on multiplicative aggregation having a scale expressed with values as percentage, where 100% expressed a perfect water quality (Shah and Joshi 2017 ).

In the mid 90’s, a new WQI was introduced to Canada by the province of British Columbia, and used as an increasing index to evaluate water quality (Lumb et al. 2011b ; Shah and Joshi 2017 ). A while after, the Water Quality Guidelines Task Group of the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) modified the original British Columbia Water Quality Index (BCWQI) and endorsed it as the CCME WQI in 2001(Bharti and Katyal 2011 ; Lumb et al. 2011b ).

In 1996, the Watershed Enhancement Program (WEPWQI) was established in Dayton Ohio, including water quality variables, flow measurements and water clarity or turbidity. Taking into consideration pesticide and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) contamination, is what distinguished this index from the NSFWQI (Kachroud et al. 2019a , b ).

Liou et al. (2003) established a WQI in Taiwan on the Keya River. The index employed thirteen variables: Fecal coliforms, DO, ammonia nitrogen, BOD, suspended solids, turbidity, temperature, pH, toxicity, cadmium (Cd), lead (Pb), copper (Cu) and zinc (Zn). These variables were downsized to nine based on environmental and health significance: Fecal coliforms, DO, ammonia nitrogen, BOD, suspended solids, turbidity, temperature, pH and toxicity. Each variable was converted into an actual value ranging on a scale from 0 to 100 (worst to highest). This index is based on the geometric means (an aggregation function that could eliminate the ambiguous caused from smaller weightings) of the standardized values (Akhtar et al. 2021 ; Liou et al. 2004 ; Uddin et al. 2021 ).

Said et al. ( 2004 ) implemented a new WQI using the logarithmic aggregation applied in streams waterbodies in Florida (USA), based on only 5 variables: DO, total phosphate, turbidity, fecal coliforms and specific conductance. The main idea was to decrease the number of variables and change the aggregation method using the logarithmic aggregation (this function does not require any sub-indices and any standardization of the variables). This index ranged from 0 to 3, the latter being the ideal value (Akhtar et al. 2021 ; Kachroud et al. 2019a , b ; Said et al. 2004 ; Uddin et al. 2021 ).

The Malaysian WQI (MWQI) was carried out in 2007, including six variables: DO, BOD, Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Ammonia Nitrogen, suspended solids and pH. For each variable, a curve was established to transform the actual value of the variable into a non-dimensional sub-index value.

The next step is to determine the weighting of the variables by considering the experts panel opinions. The final score is determined using the additive aggregation formula (where sub-indices values and their weightings are summed), extending from 0 (polluted) to 100 (clean) (Uddin et al. 2021 ).

The Hanh and Almeida indices were established respectively in 2010 on surface water in Vietnam and 2012 on the Potrero de los Funes in Argentina, based on 8 (color, suspended solids, DO, BOD, COD, chloride, total coliforms and orthophosphate) and 10 (color, pH, COD, fecal coliforms, total coliforms, total phosphate, nitrates, detergent, enterococci and Escherichia coli .) water quality variables. Both indices were based on rating curve- based sum-indexing system (Uddin et al. 2021 ).

The most recent developed WQI model in the literature was carried out in 2017. This index tried to reduce uncertainty present in other water quality indices. The West Java Water Quality Index (WJWQI) applied in the Java Sea in Indonesia was based on thirteen crucial water quality variables: temperature, suspended solids, COD, DO, nitrite, total phosphate, detergent, phenol, chloride, Zn, Pb, mercury (Hg) and fecal coliforms. Using two screening steps (based on statistical assessment), parameter (variable) redundancy was determined to only 9: temperature, suspended solids, COD, DO, nitrite, total phosphate, detergent, phenol and chloride. Sub-indices were obtained for those nine variables and weights were allocated based on expert opinions, using the same multiplicative aggregation as the NSFWQI. The WJWQI suggested 5 quality classes ranging from poor (5–25) to excellent (90–100) (Uddin et al. 2021 ).

2.2 Phases of WQI development

Mainly, WQI concept is based on many factors as displayed in Fig.  1 and described in the following steps:

Phases of WQI development

Parameter selection for measurement of water quality (Shah and Joshi 2017 ):

The selection is carried out based on the management objectives and the environmental characteristics of the research area (Yan et al. 2015 ). Many variables are recommended, since they have a considerable impact on water quality and derive from 5 classes namely, oxygen level, eutrophication, health aspects, physical characteristics and dissolved substances (Tyagi et al. 2013 ).

Transformation of the raw data parameter into a common scale (Paun et al. 2016 ):

Different statistical approach can be used for transformation, all parameters are transformed from raw data that have different dimensions and units (ppm, saturation, percentage etc.) into a common scale, a non-dimensional scale and sub-indices are generated (Poonam et al. 2013 ; Tirkey et al. 2015 ).

Providing weights to the parameters (Tripathi and Singal 2019 ):

Weights are assigned to each parameter according to their importance and their impact on water quality, expert opinion is needed to assign weights (Tirkey et al. 2015 ). Weightage depends on the permissible limits assigned by International and National agencies in water drinking (Shah and Joshi 2017 ).

Aggregation of sub-index values to obtain the final WQI:

WQI is the sum of rating and weightage of all the parameters (Tripathi and Singal 2019 ).

It is important to note that in some indices, statistical approaches are commonly used such as factor analysis (FA), principal component analysis (PCA), discriminant analysis (DA) and cluster analysis (CA). Using these statistical approaches improves accuracy of the index and reduce subjective assumptions (Tirkey et al. 2015 ).

2.3 Evolution of WQI research

2.3.1 per year.

According to Scopus ( 2022 ), the yearly evolution of WQI's research is illustrated in Fig.  2 (from 1978 till 2022).

Evolution of WQI research per year (Scopus 2022 )

Overall, it is clear that the number of research has grown over time, especially in the most recent years. The number of studies remained shy between 1975 and 1988 (ranging from 1 to 13 research). In 1998, the number improved to 46 studies and increased gradually to 466 publications in 2011.The WQI's studies have grown significantly over the past decade, demonstrating that the WQI has become a significant research topic with the goal of reaching its maximum in 2022 (1316 studies) (Scopus, 2022 ).

2.3.2 Per country

In Fig.  3 , the development of WQI research is depicted visually per country from 1975 to 2022.

Evolution of WQI research per country (Scopus 2022 )

According to Scopus ( 2022 ), the top three countries were China, India and the United States, with 2356, 1678 and 1241 studies, respectively. Iran, Brazil, and Italy occupy the fourth, fifth, and sixth spots, respectively (409, 375 and 336 study). Malaysia and Spain have approximately the same number of studies, respectively 321 and 320 study. The studies in the remaining countries decrease gradually from 303 document in Spain to 210 documents in Turkey. This demonstrates that developing nations, like India, place a high value on the development of water quality protection even though they lack strong economic power, cutting-edge technology, and a top-notch scientific research team. This is because water quality is crucial to the long-term social and economic development of those nations (Zhang 2019 ).

2.4 Different methods for WQI determination

Water quality indices are tools to determine water quality. Those indices demand basic concepts and knowledge about water issues (Singh et al. 2013 ). There are many water quality indices such as the: National Sanitation Foundation Water Quality Index (NSFWQI), Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment Water Quality Index (CCMEWQI), Oregon Water Quality Index (OWQI), and Weight Arithmetic Water Quality Index (WAWQI) (Paun et al. 2016 ).

These water quality indices are applied in particular areas, based on many parameters compared to specific regional standards. Moreover, they are used to illustrate annual cycles, spatio-temporal variations and trends in water quality (Paun et al. 2016 ). That is to say that, these indices reflect the rank of water quality in lakes, streams, rivers, and reservoirs (Kizar 2018 ).

Accordingly, in this section a general review of available worldwide used indices is presented.

2.4.1 National sanitation foundation (NSFWQI)

The NSFWQI was developed in 1970 by the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) of the United States (Hamlat et al. 2017 ; Samadi et al. 2015 ). This WQI has been widely field tested and is used to calculate and evaluate the WQI of many water bodies (Hamlat et al. 2017 ). However, this index belongs to the public indices group. It represents a general water quality and does not take into account the water’s use capacities, furthermore, it ignores all types of water consumption in the evaluation process (Bharti and Katyal 2011 ; Ewaid 2017 ).

The NSFWQI has been widely applied and accepted in Asian, African and European countries (Singh et al. 2013 ), and is based on the analysis of nine variables or parameters, such as, BOD, DO, Nitrate (NO 3 ), Total Phosphate (PO 4 ), Temperature, Turbidity, Total Solids(TS), pH, and Fecal Coliforms (FC).

Some of the index parameters have different importance, therefore, a weighted mean for each parameter is assigned, based on expert opinion which have grounded their opinions on the environmental significance, the recommended principles and uses of water body and the sum of these weights is equal to 1 (Table 1 ) (Ewaid 2017 ; Uddin et al. 2021 ).

Due to environmental issues, the NSFWQI has changed overtime. The TS parameter was substituted by the Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) or Total Suspended Solids (TSS), the Total Phosphate by orthophosphate, and the FC by E. coli (Oliveira et al. 2019 ).

The mathematical expression of the NSFWQI is given by the following Eq. ( 1 ) (Tyagi et al. 2013 ):

where, Qi is the sub-index for ith water quality parameter. Wi is the weight associated with ith water quality parameter. n is the number of water quality parameters.

This method ranges from 0 to 100, where 100 represents perfect water quality conditions, while zero indicates water that is not suitable for the use and needs further treatment (Samadi et al. 2015 ).

The ratings are defined in the following Table 2 .

In 1972, the Dinius index (DWQI) happened to be the second modified version of the NSF (USA). Expended in 1987 using the Delphi method, the DWQI included twelve parameters (with their assigned weights): Temperature (0.077), color (0.063), pH (0.077), DO (0.109), BOD (0.097), EC (0.079), alkalinity (0.063), chloride (0.074), coliform count (0.090), E. coli (0.116). total hardness (0.065) and nitrate (0.090). Without any conversion process, the DWQI used the measured variable concentrations directly as the sub-index values (Kachroud et al. 2019b ; Uddin et al. 2021 ).

Sukmawati and Rusni assessed in 2018 the water quality in Beratan lake (Bali), choosing five representative stations for water sampling representing each side of the lake, using the NSFWQI. NSFWQI’s nine parameters mentioned above were measured in each station. The findings indicated that the NSFWQI for the Beratan lake was seventy-eight suggesting a good water quality. Despite this, both pH and FC were below the required score (Sukmawati and Rusni 2019 ).

The NSFWQI indicated a good water quality while having an inadequate value for fecal coliforms and pH. For that reason, WQIs must be adapted and developed so that any minor change in the value of any parameter affects the total value of the water quality index.

A study conducted by Zhan et al. ( 2021 ) , concerning the monitoring of water quality and examining WQI trends of raw water in Macao (China) was established from 2002 to 2019 adopting the NSFWQI. NSFWQI's initial model included nine parameters (DO, FC, pH, BOD, temperature, total phosphates, and nitrates), each parameter was given a weight and the parameters used had a significant impact on the WQI calculation outcomes. Two sets of possible parameters were investigated in this study in order to determine the impact of various parameters. The first option was to keep the original 9-parameter model, however, in the second scenario, up to twenty-one parameters were chosen, selected by Principal Component Analysis (PCA).

The latter statistical method was used to learn more about the primary elements that contributed to water quality variations, and to calculate the impact of each attribute on the quality of raw water. Based on the PCA results, the 21-parameter model was chosen. The results showed that the quality of raw water in Macao has been relatively stable in the period of interest and appeared an upward trend overall. Furthermore, the outcome of environmental elements, such as natural events, the region's hydrology and meteorology, can have a significant impact on water quality. On the other hand, Macao's raw water quality met China's Class III water quality requirements and the raw water pollution was relatively low. Consequently, human activities didn’t have a significant impact on water quality due to effective treatment and protection measures (Zhan et al. 2021 ).

Tampo et al. ( 2022 ) undertook a recent study in Adjougba (Togo), in the valley of Zio River. Water samples were collected from the surface water (SW), ground water (GW) and treated wastewater (TWW), intending to compare the water quality of these resources for irrigation and domestic use.

Hence, WQIs, water suitability indicators for irrigation purposes (WSI-IPs) and raw water quality parameters were compared using statistical analysis (factor analysis and Spearman’s correlation).

Moreover, the results proposed that he water resources are suitable for irrigation and domestic use: TWW suitable for irrigation use, GW suitable for domestic use and SW suitable for irrigation use.

The NSFWQI and overall index of pollution (OPI) parameters were tested, and the results demonstrated that the sodium absorption ratio, EC, residual sodium carbonate, Chloride and FC are the most effective parameters for determining if water is suitable for irrigation.

On the other hand, EC, DO, pH, turbidity, COD, hardness, FC, nitrates, national sanitation foundation's water quality index (NSFWQI), and overall index of pollution (OPI) are the most reliable in the detection of water suitability for domestic use (Tampo et al. 2022 ).

Following these studies, it is worth examining the NSFWQI. This index can be used with other WQI models in studies on rivers, lakes etc., since one index can show different results than another index, in view of the fact that some indices might be affected by other variations such as seasonal variation.

Additionally, the NSFWQI should be developed and adapted to each river, so that any change in any value will affect the entire water quality. It is unhelpful to have a good water quality yet a low score of a parameter that can affect human health (case of FC).

2.4.2 Canadian council of ministers of the environment water quality index (CCMEWQI)

The Canadian Water Quality Index adopted the conceptual model of the British Colombia Water Quality Index (BCWQI), based on relative sub-indices (Kizar 2018 ).

The CCMEWQI provides a water quality assessment for the suitability of water bodies, to support aquatic life in specific monitoring sites in Canada (Paun et al. 2016 ). In addition, this index gives information about the water quality for both management and the public. It can furthermore be applied in many water agencies in various countries with slight modification (Tyagi et al. 2013 ).

The CCMEWQI method simplifies the complex and technical data. It tests the multi-variable water quality data and compares the data to benchmarks determined by the user (Tirkey et al. 2015 ). The sampling protocol requires at least four parameters sampled at least four times but does not indicate which ones should be used; the user must decide ( Uddin et al. 2021 ). Yet, the parameters may vary from one station to another (Tyagi et al. 2013 ).

After the water body, the objective and the period of time have been defined the three factors of the CWQI are calculated (Baghapour et al. 2013 ; Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment 1999 ):

The scope (F1) represents the percentage of variables that failed to meet the objective (above or below the acceptable range of the selected parameter) at least once (failed variables), relative to the total number of variables.

The frequency (F2) represents the percentage of tests which do not meet the objectives (above or below the acceptable range of the selected parameter) (failed tests).

The amplitude represents the amount by which failed tests values did not meet their objectives (above or below the acceptable range of the selected parameter). It is calculated in three steps.

The excursion is termed each time the number of an individual parameter is further than (when the objective is a minimum, less than) the objective and is calculated by two Eqs. ( 4 , 5 ) referring to two cases. In case the test value must not exceed the objective:

For the cases in which the test value must not fall below the objective:

The normalized sum of excursions, or nse , is calculated by summing the excursions of individual tests from their objectives and diving by the total number of tests (both meetings and not meeting their objectives):

F3 is then calculated an asymptotic function that scales the normalized sum of the excursions from objectives (nse) to yield a range between 0 and 100:

Finally, the CMEWQI can be obtained from the following equation, where the index changes in direct proportion to changes in all three factors.

where 1.732 is a scaling factor and normalizes the resultant values to a range between 0 and 100, where 0 refers to the worst quality and one hundred represents the best water quality.

Once the CCME WQI value has been determined, water quality in ranked as shown in Table 3

Ramírez-Morales et al. ( 2021 ) investigated in their study the measuring of pesticides and water quality indices in three agriculturally impacted micro catchments in Costa Rica between 2012 and 2014. Surface water and sediment samples were obtained during the monitoring experiment.

The specifications of the water included: Pesticides, temperature, DO, oxygen saturation, BOD, TP, NO3, sulfate, ammonium, COD, conductivity, pH and TSS.

Sediment parameters included forty-two pesticides with different families including carbamate, triazine, organophosphate, phthalimide, pyrethroid, uracil, benzimidazole, substituted urea, organochlorine, imidazole, oxadiazole, diphenyl ether and bridged diphenyl.

WQIs are effective tools since they combine information from several variables into a broad picture of the water body's state. Two WQIs were calculated using the physicochemical parameters: The Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) WQI and the National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) WQI.

These were chosen since they are both extensively used and use different criteria to determine water quality: The NSF WQI has fixed parameters, weights, and threshold values, whereas the CCME has parameters and threshold values that are customizable.

The assessment of water quality using physico-chemical characteristics and the WQI revealed that the CCME WQI and the NSF WQI have distinct criteria. CCME WQI categorized sampling point as marginal/bad quality, while most sampling locations were categorized as good quality in the NSF WQI. Seemingly, the water quality classifications appeared to be affected by seasonal variations: during the wet season, the majority of the CCME WQI values deteriorated, implying that precipitation and runoff introduced debris into the riverbed. Thus, it’s crucial to compare WQIs because they use various factors, criteria, and threshold values, which might lead to different outcomes (Ramírez-Morales et al. 2021 ).

Yotova et al. ( 2021 ) directed an analysis on the Mesta River located between Greece and Bulgaria. The Bulgarian section of the Mesta River basin, which is under the supervision of the West-Aegean Region Basin Directorate, was being researched. The goal was to evaluate the surface water quality of ten points of the river using a novel approach that combines composite WQI developed by the CCME and Self organizing map (SOM) on the required monitoring data that include: DO, pH, EC, ammonium, nitrite, nitrate, total phosphate, BOD and TSS.

The use of WQI factors in SOM calculations allows for the identification of specific WQI profiles for various object groups and identifying groupings of river basin which have similar sampling conditions. The use of both could reveal and estimate the origin and magnitude of anthropogenic pressure. In addition, it might be determined that untreated residential wastewaters are to blame for deviations from high quality requirements in the Mesta River catchment.

Interestingly, this study reveals that WQI appear more accurate and specific when combined with a statistical test such as the SOM (Yotova et al. 2021 ).

2.4.3 Oregon water quality index (OWQI)

The Oregon Water Quality Index is a single number that creates a score to evaluate the water quality of Oregon’s stream and apply this method in other geographical region (Hamlat et al. 2017 ; Singh et al. 2013 ). The OWQI was widely accepted and applied in Oregon (USA) and Idaho (USA) (Sutadian et al. 2016 ).

Additionally, the OWQI is a variant of the NSFWQI, and is used to assess water quality for swimming and fishing, it is also used to manage major streams (Lumb et al. 2011b ). Since the introduction of the OWQI in 1970, the science of water quality has improved noticeably, and since 1978, index developers have benefited from increasing understanding of stream functionality (Bharti and Katyal 2011 ). The Oregon index belongs to the specific consumption indices group. It is a water classification based on the kind of consumption and application such as drinking, industrial, etc. (Shah and Joshi 2017 ).

The original OWQI dropped off in 1983, due to excessive resources required for calculating and reporting results. However, improvement in software and computer hardware availability, in addition to the desire for an accessible water quality information, renewed interest in the index (Cude 2001 ).

Simplicity, availability of required quality parameters, and the determination of sub-indexes by curve or analytical relations are some advantages of this approach (Darvishi et al. 2016a ). The process combines eight variables including temperature, dissolved oxygen (percent saturation and concentration), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), pH, total solids, ammonia and nitrate nitrogen, total phosphorous and bacteria (Brown 2019 ). Equal weight parameters were used for this index and has the same effect on the final factor (Darvishi et al. 2016a ; Sutadian et al. 2016 ).

The Oregon index is calculated by the following Eq.  9 (Darvishi et al. 2016a ):

where,n is the number of parameters (n = 8) SI i is the value of parameter i.

Furthermore, the OWQI scores range from 10 for the worse case to 100 as the ideal water quality illustrated in the following Table 4 (Brown 2019 ).

Kareem et al. ( 2021 ) using three water quality indices, attempted to analyze the Euphrates River (Iraq) water quality for irrigation purposes in three different stations: WAWQI, CCMEWQI AND OWQI.

For fifteen parameters, the annual average value was calculated, which included: pH, BOD, Turbidity, orthophosphate, Total Hardness, Sulphate, Nitrate, Alkalinity, Potassium Sodium, Magnesium, Chloride, DO, Calcium and TDS.

The OWQI showed that the river is “very poor”, and since the sub-index of the OWQI does not rely on standard-parameter compliance, there are no differences between the two inclusion and exclusion scenarios, which is not the case in both WAWQI and CCMEWQI (Kareem et al. 2021 ).

Similarly, the OWQI showed a very bad quality category, and it is unfit for human consumption, compared to the NSFWQI and Wilcox indices who both showed a better quality of water in Darvishi et al., study conducted on the Talar River (Iran) (Darvishi et al. 2016b ).

2.4.4 Weighted arithmetic water quality index (WAWQI)

The weighted arithmetic index is used to calculate the treated water quality index, in other terms, this method classifies the water quality according to the degree of purity by using the most commonly measured water quality variables (Kizar 2018 ; Paun et al. 2016 ).This procedure has been widely used by scientists (Singh et al. 2013 ).

Three steps are essential in order to calculate the WAWQI:

Further quality rating or sub-index was calculated using the following equation (Jena et al. 2013 ):

Qn is the quality rating for the nth water quality parameter.

Vn is the observed value of the nth parameter at a given sampling station.

Vo is the ideal value of the nth parameter in a pure water.

Sn is the standard permissible value of the nth parameter.

The quality rating or sub index corresponding to nth parameter is a number reflecting the relative value of this parameter in polluted water with respect to its permissible standard value (Yogendra & Puttaiah 2008 ).

The unit weight was calculated by a value inversely proportional to the recommended standard values (Sn) of the corresponding parameters (Jena et al. 2013 ):

Wn is the unit weight for the nth parameter.

K is the constant of proportionality.

Sn is the standard value of the nth parameter.

The overall WQI is the aggregation of the quality rating (Qn) and the unit weight (Wn) linearly (Jena et al. 2013 ):

After calculating the WQI, the measurement scale classifies the water quality from “unsuitable water” to “excellent water quality” as given in the following Table 5 .

Sarwar et al. ( 2020 ) carried out a study in Chaugachcha and Manirampur Upazila of Jashore District (Bangladesh). The goal of this study was to determine the quality of groundwater and its appropriateness for drinking, using the WAWQI including nine parameters: turbidity, EC, pH, TDS, nitrate, ammonium, sodium, potassium and iron. Many samplings point was taken from Chaugachcha and Manirampur, and WQI differences were indicated (ranging from very poor to excellent). These variations in WQI were very certainly attributable to variances in geographical location. Another possibility could be variations in the parent materials from which the soil was created, which should be confirmed using experimental data. It is worth mentioning that every selected parameter was taken into consideration during calculation. Similarly, the water quality differed in Manirampur due to the elements contained in the water samples that had a big impact on the water quality (Sarwar et al. 2020 ).

In 2021, García-Ávila et al. undertook a comparative study between the CCMEWQI and WAWQI for the purpose of determining the water quality in the city of Azogues (Ecuador). Twelve parameters were analyzed: pH, turbidity, color, total dissolved solids, electrical conductivity, total hardness, alkalinity, nitrates, phosphates, sulfates, chlorides and residual chlorine over 6 months. The average WAWQI value was calculated suggesting that 16.67% of the distribution system was of 'excellent' quality and 83.33% was of 'good' quality, while the CCMEWQI indicated that 100% of the system was of ‘excellent’ quality.

This difference designated that the parameters having a low maximum allowable concentration have an impact on WAWQI and that WAWQI is a valuable tool to determine the quality of drinking water and have a better understanding of it (García-Ávila et al. 2022a , b ).

2.4.5 Additional water quality indices

The earliest WQI was based on a mathematical function that sums up all sub-indices, as detailed in the 2.1. History of water quality concept section (Aljanabi et al. 2021 ). The Dinius index (1972), the OWQI (1980), and the West Java index (2017) were later modified from the Horton index, which served as a paradigm for later WQI development (Banda and Kumarasamy 2020 ).

Based on eleven physical, chemical, organic, and microbiological factors, the Scottish Research Development Department (SRDDWQI) created in 1976 was based on the NSFWQI and Delphi methods used in Iran, Romania, and Portugal. Modified into the Bascaron index (1979) in Spain, which was based on 26 parameters that were unevenly weighted with a subjective representation that allowed an overestimation of the contamination level. The House index (1989) in the UK valued the parameters directly as sub-indices. The altered version was adopted as Croatia's Dalmatian index in 1999.

The Ross WQI (1977) was created in the USA using only 4 parameters and did not develop into any further indices.

In 1982, the Dalmatian and House WQI were used to create the Environmental Quality Index, which is detailed in Sect.  2.1 . This index continues to be difficult to understand and less powerful than other indices (Lumb et al. 2011a ; Uddin et al. 2021 ).

The Smith index (1990), is based on 7 factors and the Delphi technique in New Zealand, attempts to eliminate eclipsing difficulties and does not apply any weighting, raising concerns about the index's accuracy (Aljanabi et al. 2021 ; Banda and Kumarasamy 2020 ; Uddin et al. 2021 ).

The Dojildo index (1994) was based on 26 flexible, unweighted parameters and does not represent the water's total quality.

With the absence of essential parameters, the eclipse problem is a type of fixed-parameter selection. The Liou index (2004) was established in Taiwan to evaluate the Keya River based on 6 water characteristics that were immediately used into sub-index values. Additionally, because of the aggregation function, uncertainty is unrelated to the lowest sub-index ranking (Banda and Kumarasamy 2020 ; Uddin et al. 2021 ).

Said index (2004) assessed water quality using only 4 parameters, which is thought to be a deficient number for accuracy and a comprehensive picture of the water quality. Furthermore, a fixed parameter system prevents the addition of any new parameters.

Later, the Hanh index (2010), which used hybrid aggregation methods and gave an ambiguous final result, was developed from the Said index.

In addition to eliminating hazardous and biological indicators, the Malaysia River WQI (MRWQI developed in the 2.1 section) (2007) was an unfair and closed system that was relied on an expert's judgment, which is seen as being subjective and may produce ambiguous findings (Banda and Kumarasamy 2020 ; Uddin et al. 2021 ).

Table illustrated the main data of the studies published during 2020–2022 on water quality assessments and their major findings:

2.5 Advantages and disadvantages of the selected water quality indices

A comparison of the selected indices is done by listing the advantages and disadvantages of every index listed in the Table 7 below.

2.6 New attempts of WQI studies

Many studies were conducted to test the water quality of rivers, dams, groundwater, etc. using multiple water quality indices throughout the years. Various studies have been portrayed here in.

Massoud ( 2012 ) observed during a 5-year monitoring period, in order to classify the spatial and temporal variability and classify the water quality along a recreational section of the Damour river using a weighted WQI from nine physicochemical parameters measured during dry season. The WWQI scale ranged between “very bad” if the WQI falls in the range 0–25, to “excellent” if it falls in the range 91–100. The results revealed that the water quality of the Damour river if generally affected by the activities taking place along the watershed. The best quality was found in the upper sites and the worst at the estuary, due to recreational activities. If the Damour river is to be utilized it will require treatment prior any utilization (Massoud 2012 ).

Rubio-Arias et al. ( 2012 ) conducted a study in the Luis L. Leon dam located in Mexico. Monthly samples were collected at 10 random points of the dam at different depths, a total of 220 samples were collected and analyzed. Eleven parameters were considered for the WQI calculation, and WQI was calculated using the Weighted WQI equation and could be classified according to the following ranges: < 2.3 poor; from 2.3 to 2.8 good; and > 2.8 excellent. Rubio-Arias et al., remarked that the water could be categorized as good during the entire year. Nonetheless, some water points could be classified as poor due to some anthropogenic activities such as intensive farming, agricultural practices, dynamic urban growth, etc. This study confirms that water quality declined after the rainy season (Rubio-Arias et al. 2012 ).

In the same way, Haydar et al. ( 2014 ) evaluated the physical, chemical and microbiological characteristics of water in the upper and lower Litani basin, as well as in the lake of Qaraaoun. The samples were collected during the seasons of 2011–2012 from the determined sites and analyzed by PCA and the statistical computations of the physico-chemical parameters to extract correlation between variables. Thus, the statistical computations of the physico-chemical parameters showed a correlation between some parameters such as TDS, EC, Ammonium, Nitrate, Potassium and Phosphate. Different seasons revealed the presence of either mineral or anthropogenic or both sources of pollution caused by human interference from municipal wastewater and agricultural purposes discharged into the river. In addition, temporal effects were associated with seasonal variations of river flow, which caused the dilution if pollutants and, hence, variations in water quality (Haydar et al. 2014 ).

Another study conducted by Chaurasia et al., ( 2018 ), proposed a groundwater quality assessment in India using the WAWQI. Twenty-two parameters were taken into consideration for this assessment, however, only eight important parameters were chosen to calculate the WQI. The rating of water quality shows that the ground water in 20% of the study area is not suitable for drinking purpose and pollution load is comparatively high during rainy and summer seasons. Additionally, the study suggests that priority should be given to water quality monitoring and its management to protect the groundwater resource from contamination as well as provide technology to make the groundwater fit for domestic and drinking (Chaurasia et al. 2018 ).

Daou et al. ( 2018 ) evaluated the water quality of four major Lebanese rivers located in the four corners of Lebanon: Damour, Ibrahim, Kadisha and Orontes during the four seasons of the year 2010–2011. The assessment was done through the monitoring of a wide range of physical, chemical and microbiological parameters, these parameters were screened using PCA. PCA was able to discriminate each of the four rivers according to a different trophic state. The Ibrahim River polluted by mineral discharge from marble industries in its surroundings, as well as anthropogenic pollutants, and the Kadisha river polluted by anthropogenic wastes seemed to have the worst water quality. This large-scale evaluation of these four Lebanese rivers can serve as a water mass reference model (Daou et al. 2018 ).

Moreover, some studies compared many WQI methods. Kizar ( 2018 ), carried out a study on Shatt Al-Kufa in Iraq, nine locations and twelve parameters were selected. The water quality was calculated using two methods, the WAWQI and CWQI. The results revealed the same ranking of the river for both methods, in both methods the index decreased in winter and improved in other seasons (Kizar 2018 ).

On the other hand, Zotou et al. ( 2018 ), undertook a research on the Polyphytos Reservoir in Greece, taking into consideration thirteen water parameters and applying 5 WQIs: Prati’s Index of Pollution (developed in 1971, based on thirteen parameter and mathematical functions to convert the pollution concentration into new units. The results of PI classified water quality into medium classes (Gupta and Gupta 2021 ). Bhargava’s WQI (established in 1983, the BWQI categorize the parameters according to their type: bacterial indicators, heavy metals and toxins, physical parameters and organic and inorganic substances. The BWQI tends to classify the water quality into higher quality classes, which is the case in the mentioned study (Gupta and Gupta 2021 ). Oregon WQI, Dinius second index, Weighted Arithmetic WQI, in addition to the NSF and CCMEWQI. The results showed that Bhargava and NSF indices tend to classify the reservoir into superior quality classes, Prati’s and Dinius indices fall mainly into the middle classes of the quality ranking, while CCME and Oregon could be considered as “stricter” since they give results which range steadily between the lower quality classes (Zotou et al. 2018 ).

In their study, Ugochukwu et al. ( 2019 ) investigated the effects of acid mine drainage, waste discharge into the Ekulu River in Nigeria and other anthropogenic activities on the water quality of the river. The study was performed between two seasons, the rainy and dry season. Samples were collected in both seasons, furthermore, the physic-chemistry parameters and the heavy metals were analyzed. WQI procedure was estimated by assigning weights and relative weights to the parameters, ranking from “excellent water” (< 50) to “unsuitable for drinking” (> 300). The results showed the presence of heavy metals such as lead and cadmium deriving from acid mine drainage. In addition, the water quality index for all the locations in both seasons showed that the water ranked from “very poor” to “unsuitable for drinking”, therefore the water should be treated before any consumption, and that enough information to guide new implementations for river protection and public health was provided (Ugochukwu et al. 2019 ).

The latest study in Lebanon related to WQI was carried out by El Najjar et al. ( 2019 ), the purpose of the study was to evaluate the water quality of the Ibrahim River, one of the main Lebanese rivers. The samples were collected during fifteen months, and a total of twenty-eight physico-chemical and microbiological parameters were tested. The parameters were reduced to nine using the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Pearson Correlation. The Ibrahim WQI (IWQI) was finally calculated using these nine parameters and ranged between 0 and 25 referring to a “very bad” water quality, and between 91 and 100 referring to an “excellent” water quality. The IWQI showed a seasonal variation, with a medium quality during low -water periods and a good one during high-water periods (El Najjar et al. 2019 ).

3 Conclusion

WQI is a simple tool that gives a single value to water quality taking into consideration a specific number of physical, chemical, and biological parameters also called variables in order to represent water quality in an easy and understandable way. Water quality indices are used to assess water quality of different water bodies, and different sources. Each index is used according to the purpose of the assessment. The study reviewed the most important indices used in water quality, their mathematical forms and composition along with their advantages and disadvantages. These indices utilize parameters and are carried out by experts and government agencies globally. Nevertheless, there is no index so far that can be universally applied by water agencies, users and administrators from different countries, despite the efforts of researchers around the world (Paun et al. 2016 ). The study also reviewed some attempts on different water bodies utilizing different water quality indices, and the main studies performed in Lebanon on Lebanese rivers in order to determine the quality of the rivers (Table 6 ).

As mentioned in the article (Table 7 ); WQIs may undergo some limitations. Some indices could be biased, others are not specific, and they may not get affected by the value of an important parameter. Therefore, there is no interaction between the parameters.

Moreover, many studies exhibited a combination between WQIs and statistical techniques and analysis (such as the PCA, Pearson’s correlation etc.). with a view to obtain the relation between the parameters and which parameter might affect the water quality.

In other research, authors compared many WQIs to check the difference of water quality according to each index. Each index can provide different values depending on the sensitivity of the parameter. For that reason, WQIs should be connected to scientific advancements to develop and elaborate the index in many ways (example: ecologically). Therefore, an advanced WQI should be developed including first statistical techniques, such as Pearson correlation and multivariate statistical approach mainly Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Cluster Analysis (CA), in order to determine secondly the interactions and correlations between the parameters such as TDS and EC, TDS and total alkalinity, total alkalinity and chloride, temperature and bacteriological parameters, consequently, a single parameter could be selected as representative of others. Finally, scientific and technological advancement for future studies such as GIS techniques, fuzzy logic technology to assess and enhance the water quality indices and cellphone-based sensors for water quality monitoring should be used.

Akhtar N, Ishak MIS, Ahmad MI, Umar K, Md Yusuff MS, Anees MT, Qadir A, Ali Almanasir YK (2021) Modification of the Water Quality Index (WQI) process for simple calculation using the Multi-Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) Method: a review. Water 13:905. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13070905

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Alexakis DE (2020) Meta-evaluation of water quality indices application into groundwater resources. Water 12:1890. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12071890

Article   Google Scholar  

Aljanabi ZZ, Jawad Al-Obaidy AHM, Hassan FM (2021) A brief review of water quality indices and their applications. IOP Conf Ser: Earth Environ Sci 779:012088. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/779/1/012088

Al-Kareem SA, ALKzwini RS (2022) Statistical analysis for water quality index for Shatt-Al-Hilla river in Babel city. Water Pract Technol 17:567–586. https://doi.org/10.2166/wpt.2022.004

Baghapour MA, Nasseri S, Djahed B (2013) Evaluation of Shiraz wastewater treatment plant effluent quality for agricultural irrigation by Canadian Water Quality Index (CWQI). Iran J Environ Health Sci Eng 10:27. https://doi.org/10.1186/1735-2746-10-27

Banda T, Kumarasamy M (2020) Development of a universal water quality index (UWQI) for South African River Catchments. Water 12:1534. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12061534

Betis H, St-Hilaire A, Fortin C, Duchesne S (2020) Development of a water quality index for watercourses downstream of harvested peatlands. Water Qual Res J 55:119–131. https://doi.org/10.2166/wqrj.2020.007

Bharti N, Katyal D (2011) Water quality indices used for surface water vulnerability assessment. Int J Environ Sci 2:154–173

CAS   Google Scholar  

Britto FB, do Vasco AN, Aguiar Netto ADO, Garcia CAB, Moraes GFO, Silva MGD (2018) Surface water quality assessment of the main tributaries in the lower São Francisco River, Sergipe. RBRH 23:6–23. https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0331.231820170061

Brown D (2019) Oregon Water Quality Index: background, analysis and usage. State of Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, Laboratory and Environmental Assessment Program

Brown RM, McClelland NI, Deininger RA, Tozer RG (1970) A water quality index-do we dare. Water Sew Work 117:339–343

Calmuc M, Calmuc V, Arseni M, Topa C, Timofti M, Georgescu LP, Iticescu C (2020) A comparative approach to a series of physico-chemical quality indices used in assessing water quality in the lower Danube. Water 12:3239. https://doi.org/10.3390/w12113239

Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment 2001 (1999) Canadian water quality guidelines for the protection of aquatic life: CCME Water Quality Index 1.0, Technical Report. Canadian environmental quality guidelines, Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment, Winnipeg

Chaurasia AK, Pandey HK, Tiwari SK, Prakash R, Pandey P, Ram A (2018) Groundwater quality assessment using Water Quality Index (WQI) in parts of Varanasi District, Uttar Pradesh, India. J Geol Soc India 92:76–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594-018-0955-1

Chen L, Tian Z, Zou K (2020) Water quality evaluation based on the water quality index method in Honghu Lake: one of the largest shallow lakes in the Yangtze River Economic Zone. Water Supp 20:2145–2155. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2020.111

Choi B, Choi SS (2021) Integrated hydraulic modelling, water quality modelling and habitat assessment for sustainable water management: a case study of the Anyang-Cheon stream. Korea Sustain 13:4330. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084330

Choque-Quispe D, Froehner S, Palomino-Rincón H, Peralta-Guevara DE, Barboza-Palomino GI, Kari-Ferro A, Zamalloa-Puma LM, Mojo-Quisani A, Barboza-Palomino EE, Zamalloa-Puma MM, Martínez-Huamán EL, Calla-Florez M, Aronés-Medina EG, Solano-Reynoso AM, Choque-Quispe Y (2022) Proposal of a water-quality index for high Andean Basins: application to the Chumbao River, Andahuaylas. Peru Water 14:654. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14040654

Cong Thuan N (2022) Assessment of surface water quality in the Hau Giang province using geographical information system and statistical Aaproaches. J Ecol Eng 23:265–276. https://doi.org/10.12911/22998993/151927

Cristable RM, Nurdin E, Wardhana W (2020) Water quality analysis of Saluran Tarum Barat, West Java, based on National Sanitation Foundation-Water Quality Index (NSF-WQI). IOP Conf Ser: Earth Environ Sci 481:012068. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/481/1/012068

Cude CG (2001) Oregon Water Quality Index a tool for evaluating water quality management effectiveness. J Am Water Resour as 37:125–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.2001.tb05480.x

Da Silveira VR, Kunst Valentini MH, dos Santos GB, Nadaleti WC, Vieira BM (2021) Assessment of the water quality of the Mirim Lagoon and the São Gonçalo channel through qualitative indices and statistical methods. Water Air Soil Poll 232:217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-021-05160-w

Daou C, Salloum M, Legube B, Kassouf A, Ouaini N (2018) Characterization of spatial and temporal patterns in surface water quality: a case study of four major Lebanese rivers. Environ Monit Assess 190:485. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-018-6843-8

Darvishi G, Kootenaei FG, Ramezani M, Lotfi E, Asgharnia H (2016a) Comparative investigation of river water quality by OWQI, NSFWQI and Wilcox indexes (Case study: The Talar River – IRAN). Arch Environ Prot 42:41–48. https://doi.org/10.1515/aep-2016-0005

Darvishi G, Kootenaei FG, Ramezani M, Lotfi E, Asgharnia H (2016b) Comparative investigation of river water quality by OWQI, NSFWQI and Wilcox indexes (Case study: The Talar River – IRAN). Arch Environ Prot. https://doi.org/10.1515/aep-2016-0005

De Oliveira MD, de Rezende OLT, de Fonseca JFR, Libânio M (2019) Evaluating the surface water quality index fuzzy and its influence on water treatment. J Water Process Eng 32:100890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2019.100890

Deep A, Gupta V, Bisht L, Kumar R (2020) Application of WQI for water quality assessment of high-altitude snow-fed sacred Lake Hemkund. Garhwal Himal Sustain Water Resour Manag 6:89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-020-00449-w

Deng L, Shahab A, Xiao H, Li J, Rad S, Jiang J, GuoYu Jiang P, Huang H, Li X, Ahmad B, Siddique J (2021) Spatial and temporal variation of dissolved heavy metals in the Lijiang River, China: implication of rainstorm on drinking water quality. Environ Sci Pollut R 28:68475–68486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-15383-3

Dinius SH (1987) Design of an index of water quality. Water Resour Bull 23:833–843

Doderovic M, Mijanovic I, Buric D, Milenkovic M (2020) Assessment of the water quality in the Moraca River basin (Montenegro) using water quality index. Glas Srp Geogr Drus 100:67–81. https://doi.org/10.2298/GSGD2002067D

El Najjar P, Kassouf A, Probst A, Probst JL, Ouaini N, Daou C, El Azzi D (2019) High-frequency monitoring of surface water quality at the outlet of the Ibrahim River (Lebanon): a multivariate assessment. Ecol Indic 104:13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.04.061

En-nkhili H, Najy M, Etebaai I, Talbi FZ, El Kharrim K, Belghyti D (2020) Application of water quality index for the assessment of Boudaroua lake in the Moroccan pre-rif. Conference GEOIT4W-2020: 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3399205.3399248

Ewaid SH (2017) Water quality evaluation of Al-Gharraf river by two water quality indices. Appl Water Sci 7:3759–3765. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-016-0523-z

Fadel A, Kanj M, Slim K (2021) Water quality index variations in a Mediterranean reservoir: a multivariate statistical analysis relating it to different variables over 8 years. Environ Earth Sci 80:65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-020-09364-x

Fraga MDS, da Silva DD, Reis GB, Guedes HAS, Elesbon AAA (2021) Temporal and spatial trend analysis of surface water quality in the Doce River basin, Minas Gerais, Brazil. Environ Dev Sustain 23:12124–12150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-01160-8

Frîncu RM (2021) Long-term trends in water quality indices in the lower Danube and tributaries in Romania (1996–2017). Int J Environ Res Pub He 18:1665. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041665

Fu D, Chen S, Chen Y, Yi Z (2022) Development of modified integrated water quality index to assess the surface water quality: a case study of Tuo River. China Environ Monit Assess 194:333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-09998-3

Galarza E, Cabrera M, Espinosa R, Espitia E, Moulatlet GM, Capparelli MV (2021) Assessing the quality of Amazon aquatic ecosystems with multiple lines of evidence: the case of the Northeast Andean foothills of Ecuador. B Environ Contam Tox 107:52–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00128-020-03089-0

Gamvroula DE, Alexakis DE (2022) Evaluating the performance of water quality indices: application in surface water of lake union, Washington State-USA. Hydrology 9:116. https://doi.org/10.3390/hydrology9070116

García-Ávila F, Jiménez-Ordóñez M, Torres-Sánchez J, Iglesias-Abad S, Cabello Torres R, Zhindón-Arévalo C (2022a) Evaluation of the impact of anthropogenic activities on surface water quality using a water quality index and environmental assessment. J Water Land Dev 53:58–67. https://doi.org/10.24425/JWLD.2022.140780

García-Ávila F, Zhindón-Arévalo C, Valdiviezo-Gonzales L, Cadme-Galabay M, Gutiérrez-Ortega H, del Pino LF (2022b) A comparative study of water quality using two quality indices and a risk index in a drinking water distribution network. Environ Technol Rev 11:49–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622515.2021.2013955

Ghani J, Ullah Z, Nawab J, Iqbal J, Waqas M, Ali A, Almutairi MH, Peluso I, Mohamed HRH, Shah M (2022) Hydrogeochemical characterization, and suitability assessment of drinking groundwater: application of geostatistical approach and geographic information system. Front Environ Sci 10:874464. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.874464

Giao NT, Nhien HTH, Anh PK, Van Ni D (2021) Classification of water quality in low-lying area in Vietnamese Mekong delta using set pair analysis method and Vietnamese water quality index. Environ Monit Assess 193:319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-09102-1

Gomes FDG (2020) Climatic seasonality and water quality in watersheds: a study case in Limoeiro River watershed in the western region of São Paulo State, Brazil. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27:30034–30049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-09180-7

Gruss L, Wiatkowski M, Pulikowski K, Kłos A (2021) Determination of changes in the quality of surface water in the river reservoir system. Sustainability 13:3457. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063457

Gupta S, Gupta SK (2021) A critical review on water quality index tool: genesis, evolution and future directions. Ecol Inform 63:101299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2021.101299

Hachi T, Hachi M, Essabiri H, Boumalkha O, Doubi M, Khaffou M, Abba EH (2022) Statistical assessment of the water quality using water quality index and organic pollution index—Case study, Oued Tighza, Morocco. Mor J Chem 10:500–508. https://doi.org/10.48317/IMIST.PRSM/MORJCHEM-V10I3.33139

Hamlat A, Guidoum A, Koulala I (2017) Status and trends of water quality in the Tafna catchment: a comparative study using water quality indices. J Water Reuse Desal 7:228–245. https://doi.org/10.2166/wrd.2016.155

Haydar CM, Nehme N, Awad S, Koubaissy B, Fakih M, Yaacoub A, Toufaily J, Villeras F, Hamieh T (2014) Water quality of the upper Litani river Basin, Lebanon. Physcs Proc 55:279–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phpro.2014.07.040

Horton RK (1965) An index-number system for rating water quality. J Water Pollut Con F 37:292–315

Google Scholar  

Hu L, Chen L, Li Q, Zou K, Li J, Ye H (2022) Water quality analysis using the CCME-WQI method with time series analysis in a water supply reservoir. Water Supply 22:6281–6295. https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2022.245

Jena V, Dixit S, Gupta S (2013) Assessment of water quality index of industrial area surface water samples. Int J Chemtech Res 5:278–283

Kachroud M, Trolard F, Kefi M, Jebari S, Bourrié G (2019a) Water quality indices: challenges and application limits in the literature. Water 11:361. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11020361

Kachroud M, Trolard F, Kefi M, Jebari S, Bourrié G (2019b) Water quality indices: challenges and application limits in the literature. Water. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11020361

Kareem SL, Jaber WS, Al-Maliki LA, Al-husseiny RA, Al-Mamoori SK, Alansari N (2021) Water quality assessment and phosphorus effect using water quality indices: Euphrates river- Iraq as a case study. Groundw Sustain Dev 14:100630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2021.100630

Khan I (2022) Hydrogeochemical and health risk assessment in and around a Ramsar-designated wetland, the Ganges River Basin, India: implications for natural and human interactions. Environ Monit and Asses 194:1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10154-0

Khan R, Saxena A, Shukla S, Sekar S, Goel P (2021) Effect of COVID-19 lockdown on the water quality index of river Gomti, India, with potential hazard of faecal-oral transmission. Environ Sci Pollut R 28:33021–33029. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13096-1

Kizar FM (2018) A comparison between weighted arithmetic and Canadian methods for a drinking water quality index at selected locations in shatt al-kufa. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng 433:012026. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/433/1/012026

Kothari V, Vij S, Sharma S, Gupta N (2021) Correlation of various water quality parameters and water quality index of districts of Uttarakhand. Environ Sustain Indic 9:100093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2020.100093

Kulisz M, Kujawska J (2021) Application of artificial neural network (ANN) for water quality index (WQI) prediction for the river Warta. Poland. J Phys Conf Ser 2130:012028. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2130/1/012028

Kumar A, Bojjagani S, Maurya A, Kisku GC (2022) Spatial distribution of physicochemical-bacteriological parametric quality and water quality index of Gomti river, India. Environ Monit Assess 194:159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-09814-y

Kumar P (2018) Simulation of Gomti River (Lucknow City, India) future water quality under different mitigation strategies. Heliyon 4:e01074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e01074

Kunst Valentini MH, dos Santos GB, Duarte VH, Franz HS, Guedes HAS, Romani RF, Vieira BM (2021) Analysis of the influence of water quality parameters in the final WQI result through statistical correlation methods: Mirim lagoon, RS, Brazil, case study. Water Air Soil Pollut 232:363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11270-021-05321-x

Lencha SM, Tränckner J, Dananto M (2021) Assessing the water quality of lake Hawassa Ethiopia—trophic state and suitability for anthropogenic uses—applying common water quality indices. Int J Environ Res Pub He 18:8904. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18178904

Liou SM, Lo SL, Wang SH (2004) A generalized water quality index for Taiwan. Environ Monit Assess 96:35–52. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EMAS.0000031715.83752.a1

Losa MS, González ARM, Hurtado DC (2022) Assessment of water quality with emphasis on trophic status in bathing areas from the central-southern coast of Cuba. Ocean Coast Res 70:e22019. https://doi.org/10.1590/2675-2824070.21096msl

Lumb A, Sharma TC, Bibeault JF (2011) A review of genesis and evolution of Water Quality Index (WQI) and some future directions. Water Qual Expos Hea. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12403-011-0040-0

Lumb LA, Sharma TC, Bibeault JF (2011) A review of genesis and evolution of Water Quality Index (WQI) and some future directions. Water Qual Expos Hea 3:11–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12403-011-0040-0

Luo P, Xu C, Kang S, Huo A, Lyu J, Zhou M, Nover D (2021) Heavy metals in water and surface sediments of the Fenghe river basin, China: assessment and source analysis. Water Sci Technol 84:3072–3090. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2021.335

Maity S, Maiti R, Senapati T (2022) Evaluation of spatio-temporal variation of water quality and source identification of conducive parameters in Damodar River, India. Environ Monit Assess 194:1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-09955-0

Makubura R, Meddage DPP, Azamathulla H, Pandey M, Rathnayake U (2022) A simplified mathematical formulation for water quality index (WQI): a case study in the Kelani River Basin. Sri Lanka Fluids 7:147. https://doi.org/10.3390/fluids7050147

Massoud MA (2012) Assessment of water quality along a recreational section of the Damour River in Lebanon using the water quality index. Environ Monit Assess 184:4151–4160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2251-z

Hamdi KM, Lihan S, Hamdan N, Tay MG (2022) Water quality assessment and the prevalence of antibiotic- resistant bacteria from a recreational river in Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia. J Sustain Sci Manag 17:37–59. https://doi.org/10.46754/jssm.2022.05.004

Moskovchenko DV, Babushkin AG, Yurtaev AA (2020) The impact of the Russian oil industry on surface water quality (a case study of the Agan River catchment, West Siberia). Environ Earth Sci 79:1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-020-09097-x

Mukate S, Wagh V, Panaskar D, Jacobs JA, Sawant A (2019) Development of new integrated water quality index (IWQI) model to evaluate the drinking suitability of water. Ecol Indic 101:348–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2019.01.034

Muniz DHF, Malaquias JV, Lima JE, Oliveira-Filho EC (2020) Proposal of an irrigation water quality index (IWQI) for regional use in the Federal District, Brazil. Environ Monit Assess 192:1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08573-y

Murillo-Delgado JO, Jimenez-Torres HD, Alvarez-Bobadilla JI, Gutierrez-Ortega JA, Camacho JB, Valle PFZ, Barcelo-Quintal ID, Delgado ER, Gomez-Salazar S (2021) Chemical speciation of selected toxic metals and multivariate statistical techniques used to assess water quality of tropical Mexican Lake Chapala. Environ Monit Assess 193:1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-09185-w

Muvundja FA, Walumona JR, Dusabe MC, Alunga GL, Kankonda AB, Albrecht C, Eisenberg J, Wüest A (2022) The land–water–energy nexus of Ruzizi River Dams (Lake Kivu outflow, African Great Lakes Region): status, challenges, and perspectives. Front Environ Sci 10:892591. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2022.892591

Nair HC, Joseph A, Padmakumari Gopinathan V (2020) Hydrochemistry of tropical springs using multivariate statistical analysis in Ithikkara and Kallada river basins, Kerala, India. Sustain Water Resour Manag 6:1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-020-00363-1

Najah A, Teo FY, Chow MF, Huang YF, Latif SD, Abdullah S, Ismail M, El-Shafie A (2021) Surface water quality status and prediction during movement control operation order under COVID-19 pandemic: case studies in Malaysia. Int J Environ Sci Te 18:1009–1018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-021-03139-y

Nong X, Shao D, Zhong H, Liang J (2020) Evaluation of water quality in the South-to-North Water diversion project of China using the water quality index (WQI) method. Water Res 178:115781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2020.115781

Ortega-Samaniego QM, Romero I, Paches M, Dominici A, Fraíz A (2021) Assessment of physicochemical and bacteriological parameters in the surface water of the Juan Diaz River, Panama. WIT Trans Ecol Environ 251:95–104. https://doi.org/10.2495/WS210101

Othman F, Alaaeldin ME, Seyam M, Ahmed AN, Teo FY, Fai CM, Afan HA, Sherif M, Sefelnasr A, El-Shafie A (2020) Efficient River water quality index prediction considering minimal number of inputs variables. Eng Appl Comp Fluid Mech 14:751–763. https://doi.org/10.1080/19942060.2020.1760942

Panneerselvam B, Muniraj K, Duraisamy K, Pande C, Karuppannan S, Thomas M (2022) An integrated approach to explore the suitability of nitrate-contaminated groundwater for drinking purposes in a semiarid region of India. Environ Geochem Hlth 10:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10653-022-01237-5

Parween S, Siddique NA, Mahammad Diganta MT, Olbert AI, Uddin MG (2022) Assessment of urban river water quality using modified NSF water quality index model at Siliguri city, West Bengal, India. Environ Sustain Indic 16:100202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2022.100202

Paun I, Cruceru L, Chiriac FL, Niculescu M, Vasile GG, Marin NM (2016) Water quality indices—methods for evaluating the quality of drinking water. In: Proceedings of the 19th INCD ECOIND International Symposium—SIMI 2016, “The Environment and the Industry”, Bucharest, Romania, 13–14 October 2016: 395–402. https://doi.org/10.21698/simi.2016.0055

Peluso J (2021) Comprehensive assessment of water quality through different approaches: physicochemical and ecotoxicological parameters. Sci Total Environ 800:149510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.149510

Peng H (2022) Hydrochemical characteristics and health risk assessment of groundwater in karst areas of southwest China: a case study of Bama, Guangxi. J Clean Prod 341:130872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130872

Phadatare SS, Gawande S (2016) Review paper on development of water quality index. Int Res J Eng Technol 5:765–767. https://doi.org/10.17577/IJERTV5IS050993

Poonam T, Tanushree B, Sukalyan C (2013) Water quality indices- important tools for water quality assessment: a review. Int J Adv Chem 1:15–28. https://doi.org/10.5121/ijac.2015.1102

Qu X, Chen Y, Liu H, Xia W, Lu Y, Gang DD, Lin LS (2020) A holistic assessment of water quality condition and spatiotemporal patterns in impounded lakes along the eastern route of China’s South-to-North water diversion project. Water Res 185:116275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2020.116275

Radeva K, Seymenov K (2021) Surface water pollution with nutrient components, trace metals and metalloidsin agricultural and mining-affected river catchments: a case study for three tributaries of the Maritsa River, Southern Bulgaria. Geogr Pannonica 25:214–225. https://doi.org/10.5937/gp25-30811

Ramírez-Morales D, Pérez-Villanueva ME, Chin-Pampillo JS, Aguilar-Mora P, Arias-Mora V, Masís-Mora M (2021) Pesticide occurrence and water quality assessment from an agriculturally influenced Latin-American tropical region. Chemosphere 262:127851. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.127851

Ristanto D, Ambariyanto A, Yulianto B (2021) Water quality assessment based on national sanitations foundation water quality index during rainy season in Sibelis and Kemiri estuaries Tegal City. IOP Conf Ser: Earth and Environ Sci 750:012013. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/750/1/012013

Rizani S, Feka F, Fetoshi O, Durmishi B, Shala S, Çadraku H, Bytyçi P (2022) Application of water quality index for the assessment the water quality in River Lepenci. Ecol Eng Environ Tech 23:189–201. https://doi.org/10.12912/27197050/150297

Roozbahani MM, Boldaji MN (2013) Water quality assessment of Karoun river using WQI. Int Res J Appl Basic Sci 5:628–632

Roșca OM (2020) Impact of anthropogenic activities on water quality parameters of glacial lakes from Rodnei mountains, Romania. Environ Res 182:109136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.109136

Rubio-Arias H, Contreras-Caraveo M, Quintana RM, Saucedo-Teran RA, Pinales-Munguia A (2012) An overall water quality index (WQI) for a man-made aquatic reservoir in Mexico. Int J Env Res Pub He 9:1687–1698. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph9051687

Said A, Stevens DK, Sehlke G (2004) An innovative index for evaluating water quality in streams. Environ Manage 34:406–414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-004-0210-y

Samadi MT, Sadeghi S, Rahmani A, Saghi MH (2015) Survey of water quality in Moradbeik river basis on WQI index by GIS. Environ Eng Manag J 2:7–11

Sarwar S, Ahmmed I, Mustari S, Shaibur MR (2020) Use of Weighted Arithmetic Water Quality Index (WAWQI) to determine the suitability of groundwater of Chaugachcha and Manirampur Upazila, Jashore, Bangladesh. Environ Biolog Res 2:22–30

Scopus (2022) Analyze search results Retrieved February 22, 2023, from https://www.scopus.com/term/analyzer.uri?sid=8eeff2944308f3417393fe6b0de5b7e1&origin=resultslist&src=s&s=TITLE-ABS-KEY%28water+quality+index%29&sort=cp-f&sdt=b&sot=b&sl=34&count=38419&analyzeResults=Analyze+results&txGid=68cf75652b70f07c51075648639736f3

Shah KA, Joshi GS (2017) Evaluation of water quality index for River Sabarmati, Gujarat. India Appl Water Sci 7:1349–1358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-015-0318-7

Shan W (2011) Discussion on parameter choice for managing water quality of the drinking water source. Procedia Environ Sci 11:1465–1468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2011.12.220

Singh PK, Tiwari AK, Panigary BP, Mahato K (2013) Water quality indices used for water resources vulnerability assessment using GIS technique: a review. Int J Earth Sci Eng 6:1594–1600

Sofi MS, Hamid A, Bhat SU, Rashid I, Kuniyal JC (2022) Impact evaluation of the run-of-river hydropower projects on the water quality dynamics of the Sindh River in the Northwestern Himalayas. Environ Monit Assess 194:626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10303-5

Steinhart CE, Shcierow LJ, Sonzogni WC (1982) Environmental quality index for the great lakes. Water Resour Bull 18:1025–1031

Stričević L, Pavlović M, Filipović I, Radivojević A, Martić Bursać N, Gocić M (2021) Statistical analysis of water quality parameters in the basin of the Nišava River (Serbia) in the period 2009–2018. Geografie 126:55–73. https://doi.org/10.37040/geografie2021126010055

Sudhakaran S, Mahadevan H, Arun V, Krishnakumar AP, Krishnan KA (2020) A multivariate statistical approach in assessing the quality of potable and irrigation water environs of the Netravati River basin (India). Groundw Sustain Dev 11:100462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2020.100462

Sukmawati NMH, Rusni NW (2019) Assessment of Water Quality Index of Beratan lake using NSF WQI indicator. Warmadewa Med J 4:39–43

Sutadian AD, Muttil N, Yilmaz AG, Perera BJC (2016) Development of river water quality indice- A review. Environ Monit Assess 188:58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-015-5050-0

Taloor AK, Pir RA, Adimalla N, Ali S, Manhas DS, Roy S, Singh AK (2020) Spring water quality and discharge assessment in the Basantar watershed of Jammu Himalaya using geographic information system (GIS) and water quality Index (WQI). G Groundw Sustain Dev 10:100364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2020.100364

Tampo L, Alfa-Sika Mande SL, Adekanmbi AO, Boguido G, Akpataku KV, Ayah M, Tchakala I, Gnazou MDT, Bawa LM, Djaneye-Boundjou G, Alhassan EH (2022) Treated wastewater suitability for reuse in comparison to groundwater and surface water in a peri-urban area: Implications for water quality management. Sci Total Environ 815:152780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152780

Teodorof L, Ene A, Burada A, Despina C, Seceleanu-Odor D, Trifanov C, Ibram O, Bratfanof E, Tudor MI, Tudor M, Cernisencu I, Georgescu LP, Iticescu C (2021) Integrated assessment of surface water quality in Danube River Chilia branch. Appl Sci 11:9172. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11199172

Tirkey P, Bhattacharya T, Chakraborty S (2015) Water quality indices-important tools for water quality assessment: a review. Int J Adv Chem 1:15–28

Tripathi M, Singal SK (2019) Allocation of weights using factor analysis for development of a novel water quality index. Ecotox Environ Safe 183:109510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.109510

Tyagi S, Sharma B, Singh P, Dobhal R (2013) Water quality assessment in terms of water quality index. Am J Water Resour 1:34–38. https://doi.org/10.12691/ajwr-1-3-3

Uddin MG, Nash S, Rahman A, Olbert AI (2022) A comprehensive method for improvement of water quality index (WQI) models for coastal water quality assessment. Water Res 219:118532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2022.118532

Uddin MG, Nash S, Olbert AI (2021) A review of water quality index models and their use for assessing surface water quality. Ecol Indic 122:107218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.107218

Udeshani WAC, Dissanayake HMKP, Gunatilake SK, Chandrajith R (2020) Assessment of groundwater quality using water quality index (WQI): a case study of a hard rock terrain in Sri Lanka. Groundw Sustain Dev 11:100421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2020.100421

Ugochukwu U, Onuora O, Onuarah A (2019) Water quality evaluation of Ekulu river using water quality index (WQI). J Environ Stud 4:4. https://doi.org/10.13188/2471-4879.1000027

Uning R, Suratman S, Bedurus EA, Nasir FAM, Hock Seng T, Latif MT, Mostapa R (2021) The water quality and nutrients status in the Dungun River Basin, Terengganu. Am Soc Microbiol Sci J 16:1–14. https://doi.org/10.32802/asmscj.2021.837

Vaiphei SP, Kurakalva RM (2021) Hydrochemical characteristics and nitrate health risk assessment of groundwater through seasonal variations from an intensive agricultural region of upper Krishna River basin, Telangana. India. Ecotox Environ Safe 213:112073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.112073

Valentini M, dos Santos GB, Muller Vieira B (2021) Multiple linear regression analysis (MLR) applied for modeling a new WQI equation for monitoring the water quality of Mirim Lagoon, in the state of Rio Grande do Sul—Brazil. SN Appl Sci 3:70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-04005-1

Varol S, Davraz A, Şener Ş, Şener E, Aksever F, Kırkan B, Tokgözlü A (2021) Assessment of groundwater quality and usability of Salda Lake Basin (Burdur/Turkey) and health risk related to arsenic pollution. J Environ Health Sci 19:681–706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40201-021-00638-5

Vasistha P (2020) Assessment of spatio-temporal variations in lake water body using indexing method. Environ Sci Pollut R 27:41856–41875

Wang Q, Li Z, Xu Y, Li R, Zhang M (2022) Analysis of spatio-temporal variations of river water quality and construction of a novel cost-effective assessment model: a case study in Hong Kong. Environ Sci Pollut R 29:28241–28255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17885-6

Wong YJ, Shimizu Y, He K, Nik Sulaiman NM (2020) Comparison among different ASEAN water quality indices for the assessment of the spatial variation of surface water quality in the Selangor River basin. Malaysia Environ Monit Assess 192:644. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-020-08543-4

Xiao L, Zhang Q, Niu C, Wang H (2020) Spatiotemporal patterns in river water quality and pollution source apportionment in the Arid Beichuan River Basin of Northwestern China using positive matrix factorization receptor modeling techniques. Int J Env Res Pub He 17:5015. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17145015

Xiong F, Chen Y, Zhang S, Xu Y, Lu Y, Qu X, Gao W, Wu X, Xin W, Gang DD, Lin LS (2022) Land use, hydrology, and climate influence water quality of China’s largest river. J Environ Manage 318:115581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115581

Yan F, Liu L, You Z, Zhang Y, Chen M, Xing X (2015) A dynamic water quality index model based on functional data analysis. Ecol Indic 57:249–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.05.005

Yang Z, Bai J, Zhang W (2021) Mapping and assessment of wetland conditions by using remote sensing images and POI data. Ecol Indic 127:107485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107485

Yılmaz E, Koç C, Gerasimov I (2020) A study on the evaluation of the water quality status for the Büyük Menderes River, Turkey. Sustain Water Resour Manag 6:100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-020-00456-x

Yogendra K, Puttaiah ET (2008) Determination of water quality index and suitability of an urban waterbody in Shimoga Town, Karnataka. Proceedings of Taal 2007: The 12th world lake conference 342: 346

Yotova G, Varbanov M, Tcherkezova E, Tsakovski S (2021) Water quality assessment of a river catchment by the composite water quality index and self-organizing maps. Ecol Indic 120:106872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106872

Yuan H, Yang S, Wang B (2022) Hydrochemistry characteristics of groundwater with the influence of spatial variability and water flow in Hetao Irrigation District, China. Environ Sci Pollut R 20:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20685-1

Zakir HM, Sharmin S, Akter A, Rahman MS (2020) Assessment of health risk of heavy metals and water quality indices for irrigation and drinking suitability of waters: a case study of Jamalpur Sadar area, Bangladesh. Environ Adv 2:100005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envadv.2020.100005

Zhan S, Zhou B, Li Z, Li Z, Zhang P (2021) Evaluation of source water quality and the influencing factors: a case study of Macao. Phys Chem Earth Parts a/b/c 123:103006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2021.103006

Zhang L (2017) Different methods for the evaluation of surface water quality: the case of the Liao River, Liaoning Province, China. Int Rev Spat Plan Sustain Dev 5:4–18. https://doi.org/10.14246/irspsd.5.4_4

Zhang L (2019) Big data, knowledge mapping for sustainable development: a water quality index case study. Emerg Sci J 3:249–254. https://doi.org/10.28991/esj-2019-01187

Zhang ZM, Zhang F, Du JL, Chen DC (2022) Surface water quality assessment and contamination source identification using multivariate statistical techniques: a case study of the Nanxi River in the Taihu Watershed, China. Water 14:778. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14050778

Zhu X, Wang L, Zhang X, He M, Wang D, Ren Y, Yao H, Net Victoria Ngegla J, Pan H (2022) Effects of different types of anthropogenic disturbances and natural wetlands on water quality and microbial communities in a typical black-odor river. Ecol Indic 136:108613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.108613

Zotou I, Tsihrintzis VA, Gikas GD (2018) Comparative assessment of various water quality indices (WQIs) in Polyphytos reservoir-Aliakmon River. Greece Proc 2:611. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2110611

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Agricultural and Food Engineering, School of Engineering, Holy Spirit University of Kaslik, P.O.Box 446, Jounieh, Lebanon

Sandra Chidiac, Paula El Najjar, Naim Ouaini, Youssef El Rayess & Desiree El Azzi

FMPS HOLDING BIOTECKNO s.a.l. Research & Quality Solutions, Naccash, P.O. Box 60 247, Beirut, Lebanon

Paula El Najjar

Syngenta, Environmental Safety, Avenue des Près, 78286, Guyancourt, France

Desiree El Azzi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Sandra Chidiac or Desiree El Azzi .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Chidiac, S., El Najjar, P., Ouaini, N. et al. A comprehensive review of water quality indices (WQIs): history, models, attempts and perspectives. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 22 , 349–395 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-023-09650-7

Download citation

Received : 07 December 2022

Accepted : 23 February 2023

Published : 11 March 2023

Issue Date : June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-023-09650-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Water quality index (WQI)
• Water quality parameters
• Surface water
• Ground water
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Official websites use .gov

A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS

A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Importance of Water Quality and Testing

Water Quality

Water testing, consumer confidence reports.

The United States has one of the safest water supplies in the world. Over 90 percent of Americans get their tap water from community water systems, which are subject to safe drinking water standards.

Drinking water quality varies from place to place, depending on the condition of the source water from which it is drawn and the treatment it receives, but it must meet U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations. Community water systems follow the rules set forth by the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Many states enforce their own drinking water standards that are at least as protective as EPA’s national standards. The SDWA rules include guidelines for drinking water quality, water testing schedules, and water testing methods.

Even though U.S. tap water supplies are considered to be among the safest in the world, water contamination can still occur. There are many possible sources of contamination, including:

• Sewage releases
• Naturally occurring chemicals and minerals (for example, arsenic, radon, uranium)
• Local land use practices (for example, fertilizers, pesticides, livestock, concentrated feeding operations)
• Manufacturing processes (for example, heavy metals, cyanide)
• Malfunctioning on-site wastewater treatment systems (for example, septic systems)

In addition, drinking water that is not properly treated or that travels through an improperly maintained distribution system (pipes) may also create conditions that increase risk of contamination.

Private wells, which are not regulated by the EPA, supply drinking water to over 15 million homes. Well owners are responsible for keeping their water clean and safe. Visit CDC’s Private Wells  page for more information on water quality of private ground water wells.

When water system officials find an issue with the drinking water supply (for example, that it has become contaminated), a water advisory  may be issued to help protect the public’s health.

The presence of certain contaminants in our water can lead to health issues, including gastrointestinal illness, reproductive problems, and neurological disorders. Infants, young children, pregnant women, the elderly, and people with weakened immune systems  may be especially at risk for illness.

The EPA sets standards and regulations  for the presence and levels of over 90 contaminants in public drinking water, including E.coli , Salmonella , Cryptosporidium , metals such as lead, and disinfection byproducts. Learn more about these germs in the Diseases and Contaminants page .

Every community water supplier must provide an annual report, sometimes called a Consumer Confidence Report , or “CCR,” to its customers. The report provides information on local drinking water quality, including the water’s source, contaminants found in the water, and how consumers can get involved in protecting drinking water.

• Rainwater Collection and Water Reuse
• Commercially Bottled Water
• EPA Potential Well Water Contaminants and Their Impacts
• EPA Drinking Water Regulations
• U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Water Quality Information

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

•   Facebook
•   Twitter
•   Linkedin
•   Digg
•   Reddit
•   Pinterest
•   Email

Latest Earthquakes |    Chat Share Social Media  

Water Quality

What is in that water that you just drank? Is it just hydrogen and oxygen atoms? Is it safe for drinking? All water is of a certain "quality" (and you can't tell by just looking), but what does "water quality" really mean? 

All Water Quality Science Topics

View a list of all of our science topics about water quality.

Water Quality Data for the Nation

The USGS National Water Information System (NWIS) contains extensive water-quality data, both real-time and historical, for the nation.

Quick Links

Ph and water.

• Hardness of Water
• Water Quality Photo Gallery
• Water Quality Q&A
• Teacher's Resources
• USGS Water Quality Data for the Nation

Browse Topics

Downloadable Products

Water Quality Questions & Answers

Desalination

Acid Rain and Water

The Water Science School -- What We Offer

Water Science Photo Galleries

Water Q&A: How is sewage and wastewater treated?

Water q&as: how does our swimming pool stay so clean, water q&as: why does my water smell like rotten eggs, water q&a: what causes fish kills, water q&a: is groundwater always clean.

Home — Essay Samples — Environment — Earth & Nature — Water Quality

Essays on Water Quality

Water quality, clean water and sanitation: review of the issue of water pollution, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

Steps of The Wastewater Treatment Process

Water contamination and the methods of water treatment, importance of clean water and advantages of water dispensers, monitoring of wastewater quality: a review, let us write you an essay from scratch.

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Soil and Water: Cornerstones of Ecosystem Health

Ecological assessment of mai pokhari wetland, water quality assessment of five southern maine beaches: comparing ​escherichia coli​ levels, heavy metal detection from drinking water of district pishin (balochistan, pakistan) by using atomic absorption spectrometry, get a personalized essay in under 3 hours.

Expert-written essays crafted with your exact needs in mind

Florida Hard Water Analysis and Filtration Report

The case of erin brockovich and the issue of water quality, the crucial importance of clean drinking water access, water and food security as an international issue, addressing the urgent issue of ocean acidification, should bottled water be banned, exploring the dynamics of water consumption, how soil and water conservation improves water quality, the impact of a poor drainage system on urban areas, relevant topics.

• Biodiversity
• Mount Everest

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction & Top Questions

Domestic sewage

Solid waste, toxic waste, thermal pollution, petroleum (oil) pollution, effects of water pollution on groundwater and oceans, water quality standards.

How does water pollution affect aquatic wildlife?

Is red tide caused by water pollution.

water pollution

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• National Geographic - What Is Water Pollution?
• Frontiers - Effects of Water Pollution on Human Health and Disease Heterogeneity: A Review
• Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health - Water Pollution
• Environmental Pollution Centers - What Is Water Pollution?
• National Resources Defense Council - Water Pollution: Everything You Need to Know
• Chemistry LibreTexts - Water Pollution
• water pollution - Student Encyclopedia (Ages 11 and up)
• Table Of Contents

What is water pollution?

Water pollution is the release of substances into bodies of water that makes water unsafe for human use and disrupts aquatic ecosystems. Water pollution can be caused by a plethora of different contaminants, including toxic waste , petroleum , and disease-causing microorganisms .

What human activities cause water pollution?

Human activities that generate domestic sewage and toxic waste cause water pollution by contaminating water with disease-causing microorganisms and poisonous substances. Oil spills are another source of water pollution that have devastating impacts on surrounding ecosystems.

Sewage can promote algae growth, which can eventually result in eutrophic “dead zones” where aquatic life cannot survive because of a lack of oxygen. Microplastics are often found in marine wildlife and can become concentrated in humans who consume seafood because of biomagnification . Oil spills, such as the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, strand and kill many different marine species.

While some studies point to human activity as a catalyst for red tide, scientists are unsure about its cause. Red tide is a common term for harmful algal blooms that often poison or kill wildlife and humans who consume contaminated seafood. Red tides can severely impact ecosystems and local economies.

Recent News

water pollution , the release of substances into subsurface groundwater or into lakes , streams, rivers , estuaries , and oceans to the point that the substances interfere with beneficial use of the water or with the natural functioning of ecosystems . In addition to the release of substances, such as chemicals , trash, or microorganisms, water pollution may include the release of energy , in the form of radioactivity or heat , into bodies of water.

Types and sources of water pollutants

Water bodies can be polluted by a wide variety of substances, including pathogenic microorganisms, putrescible organic waste, fertilizers and plant nutrients , toxic chemicals, sediments, heat , petroleum (oil), and radioactive substances . Several types of water pollutants are considered below. (For a discussion of the handling of sewage and other forms of waste produced by human activities, see waste disposal and solid-waste management .)

Water pollutants come from either point sources or dispersed sources. A point source is a pipe or channel, such as those used for discharge from an industrial facility or a city sewerage system . A dispersed (or nonpoint) source is a very broad unconfined area from which a variety of pollutants enter the water body, such as the runoff from an agricultural area. Point sources of water pollution are easier to control than dispersed sources, because the contaminated water has been collected and conveyed to one single point where it can be treated. Pollution from dispersed sources is difficult to control, and, despite much progress in the building of modern sewage-treatment plants, dispersed sources continue to cause a large fraction of water pollution problems.

Domestic sewage is the primary source of pathogens ( disease -causing microorganisms) and putrescible organic substances. Because pathogens are excreted in feces , all sewage from cities and towns is likely to contain pathogens of some type, potentially presenting a direct threat to public health . Putrescible organic matter presents a different sort of threat to water quality. As organics are decomposed naturally in the sewage by bacteria and other microorganisms, the dissolved oxygen content of the water is depleted. This endangers the quality of lakes and streams, where high levels of oxygen are required for fish and other aquatic organisms to survive. In addition, domestic sewage commonly contains active pharmaceutical ingredients, which can harm aquatic organisms and may facilitate antibiotic resistance . Sewage-treatment processes reduce the levels of pathogens and organics in wastewater, but they do not eliminate them completely ( see also wastewater treatment ).

Domestic sewage is also a major source of plant nutrients , mainly nitrates and phosphates . Excess nitrates and phosphates in water promote the growth of algae , sometimes causing unusually dense and rapid growths known as algal blooms . When the algae die, oxygen dissolved in the water declines because microorganisms use oxygen to digest algae during the process of decomposition ( see also biochemical oxygen demand ). Anaerobic organisms (organisms that do not require oxygen to live) then metabolize the organic wastes, releasing gases such as methane and hydrogen sulfide , which are harmful to the aerobic (oxygen-requiring) forms of life. The process by which a lake changes from a clean, clear condition—with a relatively low concentration of dissolved nutrients and a balanced aquatic community —to a nutrient-rich, algae-filled state and thence to an oxygen-deficient, waste-filled condition is called eutrophication . Eutrophication is a naturally occurring, slow, and inevitable process. However, when it is accelerated by human activity and water pollution (a phenomenon called cultural eutrophication ), it can lead to the premature aging and death of a body of water.

The improper disposal of solid waste is a major source of water pollution. Solid waste includes garbage, rubbish, electronic waste , trash, and construction and demolition waste, all of which are generated by individual, residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial activities. The problem is especially acute in developing countries that may lack infrastructure to properly dispose of solid waste or that may have inadequate resources or regulation to limit improper disposal. In some places solid waste is intentionally dumped into bodies of water. Land pollution can also become water pollution if the trash or other debris is carried by animals, wind, or rainfall to bodies of water. Significant amounts of solid waste pollution in inland bodies of water can also eventually make their way to the ocean. Solid waste pollution is unsightly and damaging to the health of aquatic ecosystems and can harm wildlife directly. Many solid wastes, such as plastics and electronic waste, break down and leach harmful chemicals into the water, making them a source of toxic or hazardous waste.

Of growing concern for aquatic environments is plastic pollution . Since the ocean is downstream from nearly every terrestrial location, it is the receiving body for much of the plastic waste generated on land. Several million tons of debris end up in the world’s oceans every year, and much of it is improperly discarded plastic litter. Plastic pollution can be broken down by waves and ultraviolet radiation into smaller pieces known as microplastics , which are less than 5 mm (0.2 inch) in length and are not biodegradable. Primary microplastics, such as microbeads in personal care products and plastic fibers in synthetic textiles (e.g., nylon ), also enter the environment directly, through any of various channels—for example, from wastewater treatment systems , from household laundry, or from unintentional spills during manufacturing or transport. Alarmingly, a number of studies of both freshwater and marine locations have found microplastics in every aquatic organism tested. These tiny plastics are suspected of working their way up the marine food chains , from zooplankton and small fish to large marine predators, and have been found in seafood. Microplastics have also been detected in drinking water. Their health effects are unknown.

Waste is considered toxic if it is poisonous , radioactive , explosive , carcinogenic (causing cancer ), mutagenic (causing damage to chromosomes ), teratogenic (causing birth defects), or bioaccumulative (that is, increasing in concentration at the higher ends of food chains). Sources of toxic chemicals include improperly disposed wastewater from industrial plants and chemical process facilities ( lead , mercury , chromium ) as well as surface runoff containing pesticides used on agricultural areas and suburban lawns ( chlordane , dieldrin , heptachlor). (For a more-detailed treatment of toxic chemicals, see poison and toxic waste .)

Sediment (e.g., silt ) resulting from soil erosion or construction activity can be carried into water bodies by surface runoff . Suspended sediment interferes with the penetration of sunlight and upsets the ecological balance of a body of water. Also, it can disrupt the reproductive cycles of fish and other forms of life , and when it settles out of suspension it can smother bottom-dwelling organisms.

Heat is considered to be a water pollutant because it decreases the capacity of water to hold dissolved oxygen in solution, and it increases the rate of metabolism of fish. Valuable species of game fish (e.g., trout ) cannot survive in water with very low levels of dissolved oxygen . A major source of heat is the practice of discharging cooling water from power plants into rivers; the discharged water may be as much as 15 °C (27 °F) warmer than the naturally occurring water. The rise in water temperatures because of global warming can also be considered a form of thermal pollution.

Petroleum ( oil ) pollution occurs when oil from roads and parking lots is carried in surface runoff into water bodies. Accidental oil spills are also a source of oil pollution—as in the devastating spills from the tanker Exxon Valdez (which released more than 260,000 barrels in Alaska’s Prince William Sound in 1989) and from the Deepwater Horizon oil rig (which released more than 4 million barrels of oil into the Gulf of Mexico in 2010). Oil slicks eventually move toward shore, harming aquatic life and damaging recreation areas.

Groundwater —water contained in underground geologic formations called aquifers —is a source of drinking water for many people. For example, about half the people in the United States depend on groundwater for their domestic water supply . Although groundwater may appear crystal clear (due to the natural filtration that occurs as it flows slowly through layers of soil ), it may still be polluted by dissolved chemicals and by bacteria and viruses . Sources of chemical contaminants include poorly designed or poorly maintained subsurface sewage-disposal systems (e.g., septic tanks ), industrial wastes disposed of in improperly lined or unlined landfills or lagoons , leachates from unlined municipal refuse landfills, mining and petroleum production, and leaking underground storage tanks below gasoline service stations. In coastal areas, increasing withdrawal of groundwater (due to urbanization and industrialization) can cause saltwater intrusion: as the water table drops, seawater is drawn into wells.

Although estuaries and oceans contain vast volumes of water, their natural capacity to absorb pollutants is limited. Contamination from sewage outfall pipes, from dumping of sludge or other wastes, and from oil spills can harm marine life, especially microscopic phytoplankton that serve as food for larger aquatic organisms. Sometimes, unsightly and dangerous waste materials can be washed back to shore, littering beaches with hazardous debris. In oceans alone, annual pollution from all types of plastics was estimated to be between 4.8 million and 12.7 million tonnes (between 5.3 million and 14 million tons) in the early 21st century, and floating plastic waste had accumulated in Earth’s five subtropical gyres, which cover 40 percent of the world’s oceans.

Another ocean pollution problem is the seasonal formation of “ dead zones” (i.e., hypoxic areas, where dissolved oxygen levels drop so low that most higher forms of aquatic life vanish) in certain coastal areas. The cause is nutrient enrichment from dispersed agricultural runoff and concomitant algal blooms. Dead zones occur worldwide; one of the largest of these (sometimes as large as 22,730 square km [8,776 square miles]) forms annually in the Gulf of Mexico , beginning at the Mississippi River delta.

Although pure water is rarely found in nature (because of the strong tendency of water to dissolve other substances), the characterization of water quality (i.e., clean or polluted) is a function of the intended use of the water. For example, water that is clean enough for swimming and fishing may not be clean enough for drinking and cooking. Water quality standards (limits on the amount of impurities allowed in water intended for a particular use) provide a legal framework for the prevention of water pollution of all types.

There are several types of water quality standards. Stream standards are those that classify streams, rivers , and lakes on the basis of their maximum beneficial use; they set allowable levels of specific substances or qualities (e.g., dissolved oxygen , turbidity, pH) allowed in those bodies of water, based on their given classification. Effluent (water outflow) standards set specific limits on the levels of contaminants (e.g., biochemical oxygen demand , suspended solids, nitrogen ) allowed in the final discharges from wastewater-treatment plants. Drinking-water standards include limits on the levels of specific contaminants allowed in potable water delivered to homes for domestic use. In the United States , the Clean Water Act and its amendments regulate water quality and set minimum standards for waste discharges for each industry as well as regulations for specific problems such as toxic chemicals and oil spills . In the European Union , water quality is governed by the Water Framework Directive, the Drinking Water Directive, and other laws . ( See also wastewater treatment .)

InBrief | A Cascade of Impacts: The Many Ways Water Affects Child Development

Given the body’s near-constant need for water, its availability and quality are critical for child development and lifelong health. However, freshwater supplies are increasingly endangered due to extended droughts, large-scale farming of water-intensive crops in arid climates, overuse of local water sources, and toxic contamination.

Full Text of the Graphic

Inbrief | a cascade of impacts:the many ways water affects child development.

Water is essential for life. It comprises around 60% of the adult human body and 75% of infants’ bodies. Organs such as the brain, heart, kidney, and lungs are more than three-quarters water and require continued hydration to function optimally. Our bodies need water to dissolve food, absorb nutrients, dissipate heat, distribute blood, protect our brains from physical shocks, and more. Children drink more water per pound of body weight than adults, with infants consuming the most water of any age group, whether through breast milk or formula prepared with water. Given the body’s near-constant need for water, its availability and quality are critical for child development and lifelong health.

However, freshwater supplies are increasingly endangered due to extended droughts, large-scale farming of water-intensive crops in arid climates, overuse of local water sources, and toxic contamination. Climate change exacerbates water supply challenges by worsening droughts and floods. Warmer temperatures accelerate evaporation, leading to intense storms that can overwhelm water infrastructure, causing floods that disrupt water treatment and management systems and introduce pollutants into water supplies.

Historical and current policy decisions have created systemic inequities, leading to significant disparities in access to clean water, particularly in Indigenous, rural, and minoritized communities. New policy, system, and program-level decisions must begin by addressing disparities, ensuring we can increase the availability of safe, clean water for all people, with profound effects on the development, health, and well-being of our children.

How Water Affects Children’s Health,Learning, and Behavior

Young children require more water than adults due to their rapidly developing organs, making them more sensitive to water contaminants like toxic metals, chemicals, viruses, and parasites. Clean water is essential for health during pregnancy—and even before conception. Water is one of the primary ways people are exposed to hormone-disrupting chemicals, and exposure of either biological parent before conception has been linked to a reduced ability to become pregnant and reduced birthweight in their babies, as well as an increased likelihood of long-term health issues for their children. Access to clean water across the lifespan significantly reduces these effects, but water contaminants are just one of many ways water affects development. A range of disruptions in the availability and quality of water can affect child development through multiple pathways, including the ones outlined below.

• Brain Development: The brain needs adequate water and nutrients to function properly—even mild dehydration can impair children’s attention and memory. Contaminants in drinking water can disrupt brain development, particularly in early childhood when the brain’s protective membrane is not fully developed, leading to potential long-term cognitive and behavioral issues. Additionally, children’s brain development and mental health can also be affected when there is too much or too little water in the environment around them, such as during flooding or drought, which can cause lasting impacts such as anxiety, depression, and memory deficits.

• Infections and the Immune System: Floods can expose children to a variety of pathogens and chemicals, leading to increased rates of infections and gastrointestinal issues. Additionally, exposure to certain chemicals in drinking water can suppress immune functioning and increase the risk of chronic diseases.

• Nutrition: Reliable access to clean water is essential for growing, washing, and cooking nutritious foods, with contaminated water leading to lower crop yields and nutritional value. Both droughts and floods can reduce crop production, affecting children’s access to high-quality food. Contaminated water can also expose infants and children to harmful substances, emphasizing the importance of water quality for health and nutrition. To read about specific water contaminants, like lead, plastics, and PFAS, see the section “Protecting Children from Water Contaminants” in the working paper.

Policy Solutions Must Begin by Addressing Disparities

In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly explicitly recognized the human right to affordable and safe drinking water. The US abstained from voting on this resolution and has never recognized the human right to water; instead, water has been treated in the context of property rights. This approach often excludes Indigenous people, leading to significant disparities in water access and quality for Native American households. Historical policies like racial “underbounding”—a practice that drew irregular boundaries purposefully excluded communities of color from municipal incorporation—have also excluded communities of color from essential water and sanitation infrastructure investments, leaving them to rely on poor-quality services. Additionally, communities with higher proportions of Black and Latine residents often face harmful levels of contaminants in their water due to the placement of manufacturing plants and other facilities near their watersheds. Similar zoning decisions have placed low-income populations in disaster-prone areas without sufficient disaster preparedness. Communities across the US and worldwide are also facing unprecedented threats to their clean water supply, and threats such as flooding and droughts are increasing due to climate change.

Policy decisions have contributed to these issues over time, which means new policy decisions can help alleviate them. Addressing threats to the supply of clean water requires mitigating their effects, through targeted public investment in water infrastructure, prioritizing underserved communities, and ensuring transparent fund management, as well as tackling their root causes by reducing fossil fuel consumption. Many community leaders and policymakers are already mobilizing to good effect and should be empowered to continue. Below is a selection of actions through which community leaders and policymakers can have an important impact and act on behalf of children.

• Improve protections & enforcement at the state & federal levels. Equal enforcement of national water protection standards is necessary to reduce exposure to contaminants, with regulations informed by community input, research, and healthcare providers. Federal and state agencies, such as the EPA, must be supported in their efforts to protect child health.

• Make water affordable. Customers pay water system owners for water services, with privately owned systems typically charging higher rates than municipal ones. Despite the Low-Income Household Water Assistance Program (LIHWAP) helping 1.4 million households maintain water access through September 2023, the program ended in March 2024, highlighting the need for a permanent solution.

• Support healthy development generally. While protecting everyone from toxic contaminants is the primary goal, interventions like enriched educational opportunities, supportive relationships, and good nutrition can mitigate the negative effects of exposure to contaminants on child development and health across the lifespan.

• Make testing & filtering widely available. Resources such as farm subsidies and SNAP benefits (food stamps) can be used as models to overcome water testing and filtration barriers, with practitioners connecting patients to relevant programs. After disasters like floods, comprehensive water quality testing and financial resources from the EPA can support, and technologies like point-of-use filtration can supplement public systems.

• Improve the resilience of current water systems with hybrid models of “green” & “gray” infrastructure. Combining green infrastructure, such as green spaces and bioswales, with gray infrastructure, like updated sewer systems and flood barriers, enhances resilience against storms and flooding, which can better protect children by reducing water pollution and flood risks.

• Engage in “citizen science.” In the face of government inaction on water issues, citizen-led action and community-engaged research can be powerful tools. This was demonstrated in Flint, Michigan, where activists and researchers successfully validated concerns about water quality and instigated protective measures.

To read more about these solutions and find resources for taking action, see the full paper, A Cascade of Impacts: The Many Ways Water Affects Child Development: Working Paper No. 2, and the related Solutions Spotlight.

Related Topics: child development , Warming , water , environment

Explore related resources.

• Reports & Working Papers
• Tools & Guides
• Presentations
• Infographics

Briefs : Growing Up in a Warming World: How climate change is affecting the availability and safety of water in the developmental environment

Reports & Working Papers : A Cascade of Impacts: The Many Ways Water Affects Child Development

Tools & Guides : Solutions Spotlight: A Cascade of Impacts: The Many Ways Water Affects Child Development

Impact of Dams and Barrages on Diversity and Distribution of Phytoplankton Functional Groups in the Subtropical Ganga River, India

38 Pages Posted: 13 Sep 2024

Jeetendra Kumar

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Basanta Kumar Kumar Das

Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) - Central Inland Fisheries Research Institute

Asha Taterao Landge

Shashi bhusan, sandeep kumar mishra, simanku borah.

Dams and barrages significantly impact the ecological functions of rivers by regulating water flow, causing fragmentation, and affecting water quality and biodiversity. To find out how dams and barrages influence the ecosystem of the rivers, this study used phytoplankton functional groups (FGs) as bioindicators of aquatic habitats in the subtropical Ganga River, India. We identified a total of 114 phytoplankton species, including 25 FGs. Genera Nitzschia and Ulneria were detected at all sites under FG D, accounting for greater than 22%. The summer season recorded the highest functional diversity (i.e., number of FGs), followed by the winter. The SIMPROF (Type 3) test classified phytoplankton FGs into six SIMPROF groups based on their frequency and location, using the coherent curve and dendrogram cluster analysis of FGs. Hierarchical cluster analysis using FGs suggested that dams and barrages influenced distribution and abundance. Kanpur was very polluted due to the highest levels of specific conductivity, phosphate, and total phosphorus. However, precipitation and surface runoff dilution significantly reduced pollution during the monsoon season. Redundancy analysis (RDA) strongly influenced six functional groups, namely D, A, P, C, MP, and X1, out of the 15 most prevalent functional groups. Consequently, we hypothesised that the series of dams and barrages would modify the hydrological features of successive reservoirs, affecting the regional and seasonal variations in functional diversity. To improve water quality and promote a wider range of FGs in the study region, it is necessary to strive for minimal environmental flow.

Keywords: Cascading reservoir, flow regimes, nutrient dynamics, dams, barrages

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

affiliation not provided to SSRN ( email )

No Address Available

Basanta Kumar Kumar Das (Contact Author)

Indian council of agricultural research (icar) - central inland fisheries research institute ( email ).

Barrackpore Kolkata, 700120 India

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, biology & sustainability ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Ecology eJournal

Ecosystem ecology ejournal, environmental science & climate change ejournal, community ecology ejournal, ecological modeling ejournal, environmental data analysis ejournal, environmental biology ejournal.

• Environment
• Science & Technology
• Business & Industry
• Health & Public Welfare
• Topics (CFR Indexing Terms)
• Public Inspection
• Presidential Documents
• Document Search
• Advanced Document Search
• Public Inspection Search
• Reader Aids Home
• Office of the Federal Register Announcements
• Using FederalRegister.Gov
• Understanding the Federal Register
• Recent Site Updates
• Federal Register & CFR Statistics
• Videos & Tutorials
• Developer Resources
• Government Policy and OFR Procedures
• Congressional Review
• My Clipboard
• My Comments
• My Subscriptions
• Sign In / Sign Up
• Site Feedback
• Search the Federal Register

This site displays a prototype of a “Web 2.0” version of the daily Federal Register. It is not an official legal edition of the Federal Register, and does not replace the official print version or the official electronic version on GPO’s govinfo.gov.

The documents posted on this site are XML renditions of published Federal Register documents. Each document posted on the site includes a link to the corresponding official PDF file on govinfo.gov. This prototype edition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov will remain an unofficial informational resource until the Administrative Committee of the Federal Register (ACFR) issues a regulation granting it official legal status. For complete information about, and access to, our official publications and services, go to About the Federal Register on NARA's archives.gov.

The OFR/GPO partnership is committed to presenting accurate and reliable regulatory information on FederalRegister.gov with the objective of establishing the XML-based Federal Register as an ACFR-sanctioned publication in the future. While every effort has been made to ensure that the material on FederalRegister.gov is accurately displayed, consistent with the official SGML-based PDF version on govinfo.gov, those relying on it for legal research should verify their results against an official edition of the Federal Register. Until the ACFR grants it official status, the XML rendition of the daily Federal Register on FederalRegister.gov does not provide legal notice to the public or judicial notice to the courts.

Design Updates: As part of our ongoing effort to make FederalRegister.gov more accessible and easier to use we've enlarged the space available to the document content and moved all document related data into the utility bar on the left of the document. Read more in our feature announcement .

Consolidated Hydro New York, LLC; Notice of Reasonable Period of Time for Water Quality Certification Application

A Notice by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on 09/11/2024

This document has been published in the Federal Register . Use the PDF linked in the document sidebar for the official electronic format.

• Document Details Published Content - Document Details Agencies Department of Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Agency/Docket Number Project No. 7153-018 Document Citation 89 FR 73643 Document Number 2024-20594 Document Type Notice Page 73643 (1 page) Publication Date 09/11/2024 Published Content - Document Details
• View printed version (PDF)

This table of contents is a navigational tool, processed from the headings within the legal text of Federal Register documents. This repetition of headings to form internal navigation links has no substantive legal effect.

This feature is not available for this document.

Additional information is not currently available for this document.

• Sharing Enhanced Content - Sharing Shorter Document URL https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2024-20594 Email Email this document to a friend Enhanced Content - Sharing
• Print this document

Document page views are updated periodically throughout the day and are cumulative counts for this document. Counts are subject to sampling, reprocessing and revision (up or down) throughout the day.

This document is also available in the following formats:

More information and documentation can be found in our developer tools pages .

This PDF is the current document as it appeared on Public Inspection on 09/10/2024 at 8:45 am.

It was viewed 0 times while on Public Inspection.

If you are using public inspection listings for legal research, you should verify the contents of the documents against a final, official edition of the Federal Register. Only official editions of the Federal Register provide legal notice of publication to the public and judicial notice to the courts under 44 U.S.C. 1503 & 1507 . Learn more here .

Document headings vary by document type but may contain the following:

• the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
• the number of the CFR title and the number of each part the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly related to
• the agency docket number / agency internal file number
• the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

See the Document Drafting Handbook for more details.

Department of Energy

Federal energy regulatory commission.

• [Project No. 7153-018]

On August 27, 2024, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (New York DEC) submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) notice that it received a request for a Clean Water Act section 401(a)(1) water quality certification as defined in 40 CFR 121.5 , from Consolidated Hydro New York, LLC in conjunction with the above captioned project on August 27, 2024. Pursuant to section 4.34(b)(5) of the Commission's regulations, [ 1 ] we hereby notify New York DEC of the following:

Date of Receipt of the Certification Request: August 27, 2024

Reasonable Period of Time to Act on the Certification Request: One year, August 27, 2025.

If the New York DEC fails or refuses to act on the water quality certification request on or before the above date, then the certifying authority is deemed waived pursuant to section 401(a)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341(a)(1) .

Dated: September 5, 2024.

Debbie-Anne A. Reese,

Acting Secretary.

1.   18 CFR 4.34(b)(5) .

[ FR Doc. 2024-20594 Filed 9-10-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P

• Executive Orders

Reader Aids

Information.

• About This Site
• Legal Status
• Accessibility
• No Fear Act
• Continuity Information