ESSENCE - International Journal for Environmental Rehabilitation and Conservation
Midha et al./Vol. VII [1] 2016/26 – 35
Volume VII: No. 1 2016 [26 – 35]
Physico-chemical Characterization of Indira Gandhi Canal, Sri Ganganagar (Rajasthan)
Midha, Rachna1; Dhingra, Abha1 and Malhotra, G.S. 2
Received: January 25, 2016  Accepted: March 16, 2016  Online: June 30, 2016
Abstract
The present study was carried out on the Indira
Gandhi Canal to evaluate the water quality with
special reference to physico-chemical parameters
like pH, conductance, DO, BOD, COD, TA,
TDS, TSS, TS, Total Hardness, Chloride
Content, Sulphate Content, Nitrate Content and
Calcium Content for ten different sites of
selected canal stretch. Average estimated values
are compared with BIS. The Comparison is
showing that all water quality parameters that are
examined are above the BIS’s permissible limit.
It figures out that it is not suitable for drinking
purpose and there is strong need forpreservation
and monitoring of Indira Gandhi Canal water.
Keywords: IGCW | Physico-chemical Characters
For correspondence:
1
Department of Botany, Tantia University, Sri Ganganagar
2
Department of Environmental Science, MaharshiDayanand
College, Sri Ganganagar
E-mail: gurmeet.malhotra@gmail.com
[ISSN 0975 - 6272]
[www.essence-journal.com]
Introduction
The Indira Gandhi Canal Project (IGNP) was
introduced for arid north-western part of
Rajasthan to meet the demand for food
production against the increasing population
growth. Sri Ganganagar and Hanumangarh
districts fall within the project, and form large
command area. These are the very productive
areas of Rajasthan, which has been famous for
high yields of wheat, rice and cotton after the
inception of lndira Gandhi Nahar Project (IGNP).
Along the irrigation the entire population of the
both districts is depended upon the IGNP for
drinking water supply.
In the recent years it was observed that pollution
level in Indira Gandhi Canal has been raised due
to the freely discharge of industrial effluents and
municipal sewage to IGNP. So, IGNP water has
direct concern with the society and human health.
Method and Material
The grab samples were collected in thoroughly
cleaned polythene bottles once a month from
26
 Midha et al./Vol. VII [1] 2016/26 – 35

each sampling site in between the Jan 2014 – Sampling Site-1 (GPS Cordinate-29.450815,
Dec. 2015. After taking the samples, they were 74.521113)

analysed for specified parameters in the 2) Sampling Site-2 (GPS Cordinate-29.385735,

laboratory and appropriate statistical test were 74.452418)

performed. 3) Sampling Site-3 (GPS Cordinate-29.327498,

74.383554)
All the samples were analysed according to the
4) Sampling Site-4 (GPS Cordinate-29.262598,
Standard Methods given by the APHA. The pH
74.311702)
and EC were measured on the spot at each
sampling site with the digital pH and 5) Sampling Site-5 (GPS Cordinate-29.224826,
74.194451)
Conductometer.
6) Sampling Site-6 (GPS Cordinate-29.205480,
The area selected for the present study falls under 73.899846)
theSri Ganganagar and Hanumangarh districts of
7) Sampling Site-7 (GPS Cordinate-29.141824,
Rajasthan. This study area is climatically the 73.761634)
mixture of arid and semi-arid climates regimes
8) Sampling Site-8 (GPS Cordinate-29.107877,
and local human population have high
73.637042)
dependency on the IGNP.
9) Sampling Site-9 (GPS Cordinate-29.064322,
A total 10 sampling stations were chosen and 10 73.567485)
replicate samples were taken from each sampling 10) Sampling Site-10 (GPS Cordinate-29.008041,
sites, overall a total 100 samples were analysed. 73.482458)
The mean values of phyisco-chemical parameters
All the statistical analysis and graphical work
of each sampling sites were shown in the Table
were done with the help of Microsoft Office
1.The sampling sites are marked in topological
2011 and PaSt 3.14 (Paleontological Statistics).
map with their GPS coordinates. The GPS
coordinates of all 10 sampling sites are given
here and also marked in the map (Map 1).
1)

Map 1: Showing all sampling sites and

their GPS coordinates

27
 Midha et al./Vol. VII [1] 2016/26 – 35

Result and Discussion accurate and precise measurement of pH

The scales of stipulated physico-chemical
parameters werefound as per the observation
Table-1, after the analysis of samples.
The pH measurement is the determination of
the activity of hydrogen ions in aqueous
solution. In applications, ranging from
industrial operations to geological and
chemical processes, it is important to have an
(APHA 2005). The pH of canal water is
varying between 7.6-8.3 in observed sampling
sites. There was a sequential increase in pH
with distance travelled by canal water was
observed due to the dilution and sedimentation
effect. pH of canal water was found within the
acceptable range in almost all the sampling
sites.

Parameter/Site BIS Site-1 Site-2 Site-3 Site-4 Site-5 Site-6 Site-7 Site-8 Site-9 Site-10
pH 6.5-8.5 7.6 7.6 7.8 8.1 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.3
EC 50 420 410 380 380 370 340 340 315 310 310
DO (mg/l) 4-8 4.4 4.8 4.8 5.1 5.6 6.0 6.0 6.1 6.0 6.0
BOD (mg/l) 200 2100 2100 2000 1850 1700 1650 1520 1500 1500 1400
COD (mg/l) 300 2650 2650 2500 2350 2250 2150 2020 2000 2000 1900
Total Alkalinity 200 295 290 282 273 260 255 242 238 229 221
(mg/l)
TDS (mg/l) 500 2120 2090 2060 1990 1910 1800 1760 1720 1690 1650
TSS (mg/l) 200 1550 1440 1300 1210 1070 910 850 750 700 640
Chloride (mg/l) 250 530 615 690 720 750 805 845 850 850 860
Total Hardness 300 980 985 870 810 760 730 695 680 670 590
(mg/l)
Calcium (mg/l) 12 16 16 15 15 15 14 13 13 13 13
Magnesium 18 22 22 22 21 21 21 21 21 21 21
(mg/l)
Sulphate (mg/l) 200 253 245 244 236 231 225 226 218 217 217
Nitrate (mg/l) 45 62 62 62 61 61 60 59 59 59 59
Table-1: Showing the average magnitude of various
physico-chemical parameters in all sampling sites

Electronic Conductivity is the ability of a
material in the water where these are present in
the acidic forms, capable of conducting current
and therefore, conductivity is a good and rapid
measure of the total dissolved solids. The
conductivity fluctuated between 420-310 that
much higher from the BIS desirable limit. The
high value of EC is indicating the high
availability of dissolved solids, which is due to
the low quantum of water and the ions coming
through the drainage of sewage and industrial
effluents.

28
 Midha et al./Vol. VII [1] 2016/26 – 35

The dissolved oxygen (DO) content plays an

important role in supporting aquatic life in
running water and is susceptible to
environmental changes. The DO is a sort of
oxygen that present in the water as molecular
form, it remain trapped in water molecules.
This is an essential component of the water,
which is being used by the aquatic organisms
for respiration (Wetzel 2002; Gagan Matta et
al. (2015a); Gagan Matta et al. (2015b) and Figure 2 Showing spatial variability in EC
Gagan Matta (2015). The value of DO is among all sampling sites
varying between 4.4-6.0, this is indicating the
hypoxic condition of the canal water and
showing less suitability for drinking purpose.

The COD or Chemical Oxygen Demand is the

total measurement of all chemicals (organics &
in-organics) in the water and BOD is a
measure of the amount of oxygen that require
for the bacteria to degrade the organic
components present in water. It is a highly
acceptable measure for the pollution
measurement. The high values of both
Figure 3 Showing spatial variability in DO
parameters indicate the high pollution load
among all sampling sites
(Vanloon 2000).

Figure-1 Showing spatial variability in pH

among all sampling sites
Figure-4 Showing spatial variability in BOD
among all sampling sites

29
 Midha et al./Vol. VII [1] 2016/26 – 35

Figure-5 Showing spatial variability in COD Figure-8 Showing spatial variability in TSS
among all sampling sites among all sampling sites

Figure-6 Showing spatial variability in Total

Figure-9 Showing spatial variability in
Alkalinity among all sampling sites
Chloride among all sampling sites

Figure-7 Showing spatial variability in TDS

Figure-10 Showing spatial variability in Total
among all sampling sites
Hardness among all sampling sites

30
 Midha et al./Vol. VII [1] 2016/26 – 35
Figure-11 Showing spatial variability in
Calcium among all sampling sites
Figure-12 Showing spatial variability in
Sulphate among all sampling sites
The value of BOD is varying from the 2100-
1400 and the value for COD is varying from
2650-1900, shown in the figure 4 and 5. Both
parameters are suggesting the high pollution
load in the canal water. These high values are
supporting the formation of hypoxic water
condition that is further lethal to the aquatic
organisms. It is noticeable that the values of
BOD and COD are much higher than the BIS
desirable limit.
Total Alkalinity is a measure of the acid-
neutralizing capacity of water. Alkalinity is
fundamentally a measure of how much an
alkali is dissolved in the water. The natural
water contains alkalinity due to the water
carbonate system and it is essential for the
survival of the living organisms. In general,
this alkalinity reach upto the level of 8.5 pH
but mixing of the industrial effluents neutralize
the natural water and force to leach out the
essential minerals from the natural water. The
Total Alkalinity of the all-sampling sites
ranging from the 295-221 mg/l (Carbonate
Scale) as shown in figure 6. Which is higher
than the BIS desirable limit. There was a
sequential decrease in Total Alkalinity with
distance travelled by canal water was observed
due to the dilution and sedimentation effect.
The Solids refer to matter suspended or
dissolved in water. Solids may affect water or
effluent quality adversely in a number of ways.
Waters with high dissolved solids generally are
of inferior palatability and may induce an
unfavorable physiological reaction in the
transient consumer. A limit of 500 mg
dissolved solids/L is desirable for drinking
waters but highly mineralized waters are
unsuitable for drinking. Waters high in
suspended solids may be esthetically
unsatisfactory for such purposes as bathing
(APHA 2005). The magnitude of the TDS is
ranging from the 2120-1650 mg/l (Carbonate
Scale) and TSS is ranging from 1550-640 mg/l
(Carbonate Scale) in the canal water as shown
in figure 7 and 8. These values are much
higher than the BIS desirable limits. These
higher values are suggesting the mixing of
sewage and effluents in canal water.
31
 Midha et al./Vol. VII [1] 2016/26 – 35
The chloride comes into the water by the
natural process like weathering of rocks and it
found to be combined with other cations viz.
Sodium, Potassium, Magnesium and Calcium.
The chloride of sodium, potassium, calcium
and magnesium are highly soluble in water.
But the high amount of the chloride comes
from the degradation of the organic matter and
industrial effluents (APHA 2005). The
concentration of chloride in canal water is
ranging from the 530-860 mg/l within the
sampling stretch of the canal, shown in the
figure-10. It is indicating the degradation of the
organic matters and mixing of the industrial
effluents. The magnitude of Chloride was
found higher than BIS desirable limits. The
high chloride content can reduce the water
Alkalinity and become less suitable for living
system.
Hardness is a measure of the capacity of water
to precipitate the soap. Soap is precipitated
chiefly by the calcium and magnesium ions
present in the water. In spite of that other
polyvalent cations also may precipitate soap,
but they often are in complex forms, frequently
with organic constituents, and their role in
water hardness may be minimal and difficult to
define. The value of the hardness may affect
the aesthetic value of the water and make it
problematic to human use (APHA 2005). The
Total Hardness in the canal water is ranging
from 980-590 mg/l which much higher than the
BIS desirable limit, shown in the figure 11.
There was a sequential decrease in Total
Hardness with distance travelled by canal
water was observed due to the dilution and
sedimentation effect.
Conclusion
The results of the present work indicate that
there are significant variations in the
physicochemical parameters in canal water
along the sampled stretch. The investigation
reveals that the quality of canal water at these
sampling sites is found to be not safe and
cannot be used for the domestic purposes
without any treatment. Surely this water is
hazardous to the human and can become the
cause of many diseases.
References
Ali, M. and Tiwari, T. N. (1998): Trace metals
in ground water of Rourkela (India),
concentrations and correlations. National
Academy Science Literature,11(8): 244-
246.
APHA (2005): Standard methods for the
examination of water and wastewater
(21st Edn), Washington, D.C., American
Public Health Association.
Bailey, R. (2002): Chemistry of the
environment. San Diego, Calif.:
Academic Press.
Barik, R. N., Pradhan, B., Patel, R. K. (2005):
Trace elements in ground water of
Paradeep area. J. Inal. Polln. Contl.,
21(2): 355-362.
Baysal, A., Ozbek, N. and Akm, S. (2013):
Determination of Trace Metals in Waste
Water and Their Removal
Processes.Waste Water - Treatment
Technologies and Recent Analytical
Developments.
32
 Midha et al./Vol. VII [1] 2016/26 – 35
Bhatt, D. M., Hegde Ganesh, R. (1997):
Ground waters quality in Uttara Kannada
Distt.of Karnataka. Indian J. Environ.
Hlth., 39(1); 61-64.
Borgaonkat, S. S., Gokhble, K. S. (1992):
Distribution of Copper, Zinc, Cadmium
and Lead in Thane creek and its relation
with textural types and organic carbon. J.
Environ. Bio. , 13(1): 39-45.
Dayal, G. and Singh, R. P. (1991): Heavy
metal contamination of ground water in
Agra city (U.P.). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
(India), 61(A): 569-572.
Debendra, N., Guha, M., Haqueb, R., Ghosha,
N., Dea, M., Santraa, A., Chakraborti, D.
and Smithb, A.(1997): Arsenic in
drinking water and the prevalence of
respiratory effects in West Bengal,
India.Int. J. Epidemol, 26(6):1047-1052.
Gagan Matta (2015): Effect of water quality on
phytoplankton ecology of Upper Ganga
Canal, International Journal of Scientific
& Engineering Research, Volume 6,
Issue 2, 762-768.
Gagan Matta, R. R. Pandey and K. K. Saini
(2015a): Assessment of pollution on
water quality and phytoplankton
diversity in canal system of River Ganga.
World Journal of Pharmaceutical
Research. Vol. 4(11): 889-908
Gagan Matta, Sachin Srivastava, R. R. Pandey
and K. K. Saini (2015b): Assessment of
physicochemical characteristics of Ganga
Canal water quality in Uttarakhand.
Environ Dev Sustain. DOI
10.1007/s10668-015-9735-x
Gangal, R. K. and Zutshik (1988): a
comparative study of base metals in
ground water and effluent of Khetri
copper area and pollution from waste
industrial effluent in khetri copper
complex and nearby villages. Indian
Journal of Environmental Agriculture,
3(1 & 2): 61-72.
Grd, D., Dobsa, J., Simunic-Meznaric, V. and
Tompic, T. (2012): Analysis of Heavy
Metals Concentration in Wastewater
along Highways in Croatia.Journal of
Computing and Information Technology,
20(3).
Gupta, S. C. (1991): Chemical character of
ground water in Nagaur district,
Rajasthan. Indian J. Environ. Hlth.,
33(3): 341-349.
Hammer, Ø., Harper, D.A.T., and P. D. Ryan,
(2001): PAST: Paleontological Statistics
Software Package for Education and
Data Analysis. Palaeontologia
Electronica 4(1): 9pp.
Islam, M., Ahmed, M., Raknuzzaman, M.,
Habibullah -Al- Mamun, M. and Islam,
M. (2015): Heavy metal pollution in
surface water and sediment: A
preliminary assessment of an urban river
in a developing country. Ecological
Indicators, 48, pp.282-291.
Jain, C. K., Sharma, M. K.(2000): Regression
analysis of ground water quality data of
Sagar district, Madhya Pradesh. Indian J.
Environ. Hlth. 42(4): 159-168.
Kachhawa, C. (2013): Pollution status of
surface water resources in arid region of
33
 Midha et al./Vol. VII [1] 2016/26 – 35
rajasthan (india).International Journal of
Modern Physics: Conference Series, 22,
pp.733-735.
Kataria, H. C., Dubey, K. S. (1997): Trace
assessment of Copper and Zinc in ground
water of Bhopal, (M.P.). Oriental J.
Chem., 13(1): 76.
Klavinš, M., Briede, A., Rodinov, V.,
Kokorite, I., Parele, E. and Klavina, I.
(2000): Heavy metals in rivers of
Latvia☆.Science of The Total
Environment, 262(1-2), pp.175-183.
Kumaraval, B., Gopalswamy, V. and
Kankasabai, V. (2003): Ground water
contamination due to munciple garbage
dumping.Pollution Research, 22(1): 67-
71.
Mall, R. K., Gupta, A., Singh, R. and Rathore
L. S. (2003): Water Resources and
climate Change- An Indian Prespective,
Current Science, 90(12).
Melluso, G., Esposito, A., Guida, M.,
Maurano, F., Trieff, N. and Pagano, G.
(1994): Distribution of inorganic and
organic pollutants in river sediments in
Campania, Italy.Bulletin of
Environmental Contamination and
Toxicology, 52(1).
Montigomery (1989): Environmental Geology,
McGraw Hill International, New York.
Murlikrishna, C. B., Shankar, B. M. (2000):
Ground waters quality evaluation of
Karkala Town.Polln Res, 19(4): 675-676.
Nag, T. K. and Das, A. K. (1992): Metal
contamination of drinking water studied
of Burdhwan district. India Journal for
Environmental Protection ,12(9): 641-
645.
Pandey N., Singh B.C. (1996): Trace metals in
drinking water from different sources in
port City of Paradeep. Indian J. Environ.
Prot., 16(11): 824-827.
Ramchandran, S., Narayanan, A., Pundari,
Kanthan, N. V. (1991): Nitrate and
pesticide concentration in ground water
of cultivated area in North Madras.
Indian Journal for Environmental
Health, 33(4): 421-424.
Shailaja, K., Johnson Marry Esther (2006):
Heavy metals in ground water of same
areas of Hyderabad. Nature Env. Polln.
Techno., 5(3), 447-449.
Shaji, E., Viju, J. and Thambi, D. S. (2007):
Ground water contamination due to
municipal garbage dumping. Pollution
Research, 22(1): 67-71.
Sharma, M., Ranga M. M, Goswami, N. K.
(2005): Study of ground water quality of
the marble industrial area of Kishangarh
(Ajmer), Rajasthan. Nature EnvPolln
Techno, 4(3): 419-420.
Sharma, Y., Prasad, G. and Rupainwar, D.
(1992): Heavy metal pollution of river
Ganga in Mirzapur, India.International
Journal of Environmental Studies, 40(1),
pp.41-53.
Singh, R. and Yadav, Y. (2013): Deterioration
in Drinking Water Resources and
Relative Health Hazards in Bikaner city,
Rajasthan, India: A physicochemical
analysis. Oriental Journal of Chemistry,
29(4), pp.1661-1664.
34
 Midha et al./Vol. VII [1] 2016/26 – 35

Singh, R., Maheshwari, R. C., Hoelzel G. Vanloon, G. W. and Duffy, S. J. (2000):

(1999): Decontamination of arsenic from Environmental Chemistry, Oxford
drinking water –a review. Indian J. University Press, New York.
Environ. Prot., 19: 674-680.
Vishwanath, G. and Anantha, K. S. (2004):
Singh, V., Chandel, C. P. S. (2004), The Status of ground water quality.Pollution
potability of ground water in terms of Research, 23 (2): 391-394.
water quality index (WQI) of Jaipur City.
Wehrmann, A. H., Sean, V. S. and Timothy, P.
Cheml. Environ. Res., 13(3&4): 307-
B. (2000): An analysis of ground water
314.
use to aquifer potential yield in Illinosis,
Srinivas, C. H., Piska, R., Venkatoshwar, C., Illinosis state water survey.
Rao M.S., Reddy, R. (2000): Studies on
Wetzel (2002): Limnological analysis,
ground water quality of
Springer India.
Hyderabad.Polln. Res., 19(2): 285-289.
Srivastava, S., Kumar, M., Singh, J.,
Srivastava, K. K., Singh, G. (1999):
Status of water pollution in and around
Hazaribag Township in South
Bihar.Indian J. Environ. Prot. 19(9):
641-645.
Swamy, Y. V., Roy, G. Ch., Das, S. N.,
Sengupta, S. and Muduli, R. (2005):
Assessment of water quality in Tsunami
affected,( A.P.).Current Science, 91(10).
Tahir, M. A. (2000): Arsenic in groundwater of
Attock and Rawalpindi District. Joint
venture PCRWR and UNICEF,
Islamabad.
Tiwari, B., Mishra (2005): Evaluation of
ground water quality in Rewa region,
M.P.,India.Ecol. Env. and Cons. 8(1):
133-136.
Trivedi, P. (1988): Relationship between
fluoride, total alkalinity, total hardness,
in ground water of Pali district in arid
and semi arid region of western
Rajasthan.58 (A): 7-11.
35