Estimation of nitrate concentration in

groundwater of Kadava river basin-Nashik

district, Maharashtra, India by using
artificial neural network model

Vasant Madhav Wagh, Dipak Baburao

Panaskar & Aniket Avinash Muley

Modeling Earth Systems and

Environment

ISSN 2363-6203
Volume 3
Number 1

Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2017) 3:1-10

DOI 10.1007/s40808-017-0290-3

1 23
Your article is protected by copyright and
all rights are held exclusively by Springer
International Publishing Switzerland. This e-
offprint is for personal use only and shall not
be self-archived in electronic repositories. If
you wish to self-archive your article, please
use the accepted manuscript version for
posting on your own website. You may
further deposit the accepted manuscript
version in any repository, provided it is only
made publicly available 12 months after
official publication or later and provided
acknowledgement is given to the original
source of publication and a link is inserted
to the published article on Springer's
website. The link must be accompanied by
the following text: "The final publication is
available at link.springer.com”.

1 23
 Author's personal copy
Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2017) 3:36
DOI 10.1007/s40808-017-0290-3
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Estimation of nitrate concentration in groundwater of Kadava
river basin-Nashik district, Maharashtra, India by using artificial
neural network model
Vasant Madhav Wagh1 · Dipak Baburao Panaskar1 · Aniket Avinash Muley2
Received: 21 December 2016 / Accepted: 8 February 2017
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017
Abstract  Monitoring of groundwater quality is an impor-
tant tool to facilitating adequate information about water
management in respective areas. Nitrate concentration in
aquifer systems is crucial problem in intensive agricultural
regions of Indian subcontinent. Nitrate is one of the quali-
tative parameter of groundwater and its enrichment leads
to human health implications, hence it entails precise peri-
odic extent. In the present study, artificial neural network
(ANN) model with back propagation algorithm was imple-
mented to predict groundwater quality and its suitability
of Kadava River basin in Nashik district. The groundwater
qualitative data were collected from 40 dug/bore wells in
pre and post monsoon season of 2011. In this context, sig-
nificant correlated parameters viz., EC, TDS, TH, Ca, Mg,
Na, Cl, ­CO3, ­HCO3 and S ­ O4 for pre monsoon; EC, TDS,
TH, Mg, Na, Cl, F, C ­ O3, ­HCO3 and S­ O4 were considered in
post monsoon season. In case of the study area, among 40
groundwater samples, 52.50% and 65% showed higher con-
centration than the permissible limit (45 mg/L) of Bureau
of Indian standards of nitrate in pre and post monsoon sea-
son. As a result, the optimal network architectures obtained
through R software as 10-8-1 and 10-6-1 for training and
10-6-1 and 10-6-1 are used in testing pre and post monsoon
* Vasant Madhav Wagh
Wagh.vasant@gmail.com
Dipak Baburao Panaskar
dbpanaskar@rediffmail.com
Aniket Avinash Muley
aniket.muley@gmail.com
1
School of Earth Sciences, Swami Ramanand Teerth
Marathwada University, Nanded, Maharashtra, India
2
School of Mathematical Sciences, Swami Ramanand Teerth
Marathwada University, Nanded, Maharashtra, India
 
season data set respectively. The simulated outputs track
the measured and predicted N ­ O3 values with coefficient of
determination (R2), residual mean square error (RMSE) and
mean absolute relative error (MARE) for training and test-
ing data. Accordingly, it is promising to manage ground-
water resources in an easier manner with proposed ANN
model.
Keywords  Groundwater quality · Nitrate · ANN · Nashik
Introduction
In India, groundwater is an important natural resource used
for drinking in rural and urban parts of the country. Gen-
erally, overexploitation of groundwater devoid of impartial
recharge, excess use of chemicals, fertilizers, pesticides
percolating into groundwater has leads to groundwater
quality declination (Goyal et  al. 2010). The groundwater
quality depends upon rock- water interaction, geological
settings, residence time of water and inputs from soil dur-
ing percolation (Todd et al. 1980; Toth 1999; Laurent et al.
2010; Wagh et al. 2016a). Most of the water related prob-
lems in the country due to presence of fluoride, arsenic and
nitrate (Sharma et  al. 2003; Kumar 2017). The other pos-
sible sources of nitrate will be the sewages leakages into
aquifer due to poor drainage. Groundwater nitrate pollution
and its health impacts were studied by many researchers in
their respective regions of India (Assaf and Saadeh 2009;
Agarwal 2012; Reddy 2013; Panaskar et al. 2016). In gen-
eral, overall groundwater quality has been considerably
deteoriated due to agricultural cropping system. Nitrogen
is an essential nutrient to enhance plant growth although,
when nitrogen fertilizers and compost applications exceed
the denitrification capacity of soil, nitrogen might leach
13
Vol.:(0123456789)
 Author's personal copy
36   Page 2 of 10
to ground water usually in the form of nitrate (Meisinger
and Randall 1991; Hubbard and Sheridan 1994). The high
concentration of ­NO3–N in groundwater is attributed to a
multi-factorial dynamic interaction process in intensive
agricultural and cropping systems (Maithani 2009; Stre-
bel et  al. 1989). Nitrate is a significant indicator of water
pollution to organic load and play crucial role in drinking
water hygiene. Water quality is enormously important, as
unremitting access to good quality water is necessary for
life sustenance and economic development.
Some researchers focused on estimating ­NO3 pollution
in groundwater with different of input parameters, network
algorithm and regional case studies varies among investi-
gators. The distribution of groundwater N ­ O3–N pollution
is also simulated using neural networks, however, in these
studies, the selection of input layers relied on subjective
judgments rather than actual numerical analysis (Stre-
bel et  al. 1989; Maithani 2009). Some authors used ANN
model to obtain predictive results in hydrochemical anal-
ysis, water resources and management of point and non
point sources and it also solve various types of engineer-
ing prediction and optimization problems in their particular
regions (Salmi 2015; Etheshami 2016; Wagh et al. 2016b).
Chen et  al. (2016) reported that, most fertilizers viz.,
Urea, di-ammonium phosphate, NP/NPK complexes, Sin-
gle Super Phosphate, Ammonia are commonly used in agri-
cultural regions and leads to nitrate pollution. High content
of nitrate leads to Methaemoglobinaemia disease found in
human being and it affects the oxygen circulation. It may
also cause blue-baby syndrome in infants and hypertension
increased infant mortality and stomach cancer are the erst-
while probable health impacts (Comly 1987). Therefore, an
attempt has been made here to evaluate the nitrate enrich-
ment in shallow and deep aquifers of the Kadava river basin
and appraise their suitability for drinking. The nitrate char-
acterization of groundwater was analyzed through identifi-
cation of appropriate ANN model based on most associated
parameters affecting groundwater quality by correlation
analysis. The work was carried out with a view that these
findings may assist in effective management of groundwa-
ter resources and discovering new remedial measures to
overcome the declined water quality in the Study area.
Need of the study
In case of the study area, with available literature, there are
only a few studies on the investigation of water quality in
the Nashik district; however, the studies are restricted over
Godavari River basin and urban areas of Nashik city. The
groundwater quality and suitability aspects of the study area
have continued to be unstudied, which led to a major data
gap on this important issue. The study area comes under
intensive agricultural practices and renowned for Grapes,
13
Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2017) 3:36
Sugarcane and Onion productions due to favorable climate.
Central Groundwater Board corroborated that nitrate con-
centration in few villages in Nashik district were found
beyond the permissible limit (CGWB 2014). Maharashtra
Pollution Control Board study reported that, the villages
from the study area viz. Pimpalgaon, Ahergaon, Savergaon,
Ahergaon and Khategaon etc., showed an escalating trend
of nitrate content (MPCB and NEERI 2014). In the study
area, most commonly used fertilizers are Urea, Ammonium
sulphate, NPK complexes, IFFCO, Sufla, etc. The intake of
nitrogen is ≤50% in the crops; the remaining will be perco-
lated and leached into the soil and groundwater.
Study area
The study area under investigation is located in the
Nashik District of Maharashtra, which lies between lati-
tude 19,055′: 20,025′N and longitude 73,055:74,015′E of
the Survey of India (SOI) toposheet numbers 46 L/3, L/4,
H/15 and H/16 on 1,50,000 scale (Fig. 1). The study area
comprises Niphad and Chandwad Tehsil with geographical
area 1053 km2. Kadava is tributary of Godavari River and
which flows from Sahyadri hills (NW to SE) direction. The
confluence point of Kadava and Godavari River is Nandur-
mademeshwar dam at Niphad Tehsil. The average annual
rainfall of study area is around 700  mm, out of that 80%
prevailing from South-West monsoonal winds. The tem-
perature in the study area ranges from 5 to 40 °C in winter
and summer season with semi arid climate (CGWB 2014)
(Fig. 2).
Geologically the study area underlain by basaltic lava
flows of upper Cretaceous to lower Eocene age and com-
prising Pahoehoe and Aa lava flows of basaltic composition
(GSI 2001). The groundwater in Deccan Trap Basalt occurs
in upper weathered and fractured parts down 20–25  m
depth. Groundwater occurs under unconfined condition in
weathered and fractured parts from phreatic aquifer and at
deeper level it occurs under semi confined to confined con-
ditions. In case of the study area Alluvium occurs in small
and discontinues patches along the banks and flood plain
of rivers like Godavari and Kadava. Large part of the area
in Niphad Tehsil comes under Alluvium belt whereas few
parts in Chandwad Tehsil. The present study area soil are
classified into four categories namely lateritic black soil,
reddish brown soil, coarse shallow reddish black soil and
light brownish black soil. Generally the soil is fertile and
suitable for growing crops like grapes, sugarcane, onion
and vegetables. The black soil contains high contents of
alumina and carbonates of calcium and magnesium with
variable contents of potash, nitrogen and phosphorous
(CGWB 2014). The soil porosity and permeability con-
trol the recharge process thereby affecting the groundwa-
ter potential of the basin. The study area is drain by River
 Author's personal copy
Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2017) 3:36 Page 3 of 10  36
Fig. 1  Study area with groundwater sample locations map
Kadava and back water of Godavari River and having den-
drtic drainage pattern.
Data collection and methods
In order to fulfil the research objectives, groundwater sam-
ples were collected from representative 40 dug/bore wells
locations in agricultural area of Niphad and Chandwad
Tehsil during pre and post monsoon season of 2011. Handy
global positioning system (GPS) device used to record the
location coordinates (Table 1). The water samples collected
in prewashed and treated polythene cans; afterward sealed,
labeled and brought to laboratory for further physicochemi-
cal analysis. The parameter pH and electrical conductivity
(EC) measured in the field itself by employing portable
digital meter. Physicochemical parameters analyzed in the
laboratory by gravimetric analysis following the standard
methods of American Public Health Association (APHA
2005). AquaChem 5.1 software used to compute the ionic
balance errors (±5%). The R software and MS-Excel tools
were used for computing descriptive statistics and ANN
analysis.
Artificial neural network
Artificial neural network models (Figs.  3, 4, 5, 6) were
specified by the network topology, training and testing
rules. These aspects have primarily affected the network
performance; with three different layers in the network
topology can be distinguished as: an input layer, hidden
layer and output layer. The ANN architecture for water
quality prediction were decided by the performance of
the respecting networks. The training algorithm for the
whole networks utilizes the Levenberg - Marquardt Back
13
 Author's personal copy
36   Page 4 of 10 Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2017) 3:36

Table 1  Location coordinates of the study area

Sample umbers Village Name Type Latitude Longitude

G1 Pimpalgaon DW 20°11′00″N 73°59′44″E

Baswant
G2 Pimpalgaon DW 20°11′44″N 74°00′50″E
Baswant
G3 DhotrKhede DW 20°13′15″N 74°03′04″E
G4 Khadakjam DW 20°14′46″N 74°04′33″E
G5 Vadalibhoi DW 20°17′10″N 74°06′51″E
G6 Deogaon DW 20°19′55″N 74°11′44″E
G7 Shirur Tangadi DW 20°21′35″N 74°09′06″E
G8 Puri DW 20°21′02″N 74°07′32″E
G9 Kanmandale DW 20°21′13″N 74°04′57″E
G10 Dodambe DW 20°19′51″N 74°03′41″E
G11 Kundane DW 20°21′23″N 74°03′21″E
G12 Jaitapur DW 20°21′26″N 74°01′38″E
G13 Ekrukhe DW 20°19′54″N 74°01′46″E
G14 Shinde BW 20°18′47″N 74°05′58″E
G15 Khadak Ozar DW 20°14′16″N 74°07′52″E
G16 Khandalwadi BW 20°16′01″N 74°03′53″E
G17 Vadnair Bhairav DW 20°15′11″N 74°02′04″E
G18 Pimpalnare DW 20°16′24″N 74°01′12″E
G19 Niphad DW 20°04′48″N 74°06′10″E
G20 Raulas BW 20°06′15″N 74°03′57″E
G21 Davachwadi DW 20°08′45″N 74°03′30″E
G22 Karsul DW 20°08′28″N 74°02′34″E
Fig. 2  Hydro-geological map of the study area (after GSI 2001) G23 Lonwadi BW 20°09′47″N 74°01′44″E
G24 Ahergaon DW 20°10′41″N 74°00′32″E
G25 Palkhed DW 20°10′44″N 74°03′36″E
Propagation algorithm and three layer back-propagation G26 Ranwad DW 20°10′47″N 74°05′25″E
ANN is used in this study. The ANNs were trained for both G27 Sarole khurd DW 20°10′06″N 74°07′52″E
type of inputs and different number of hidden neurons, G28 Khangaon DW 20°09′43″N 74°09′40″E
sequentially selected to find the best performing network in G29 Vanasgaon DW 20°09′04″N 74°08′38″E
the training data. An early stopping approach also applied G30 Nandur Khurd DW 20°12′40″N 74°06′12″E
to the network training. The best performance network on G31 Nandurdi DW 20°08′36″N 74°06′17″E
the training data was selected as trained network, and fea- G32 Ugaon DW 20°07′07″N 74°06′18″E
tured in the water quality predictor network. The number of G33 shivadi, near DW 20°07′06″N 74°07′52″E
canal
input and output neurons is determined by the nature of the
G34 Sonewadi Budruk DW 20°06′49″N 74°10′00″E
problem under study.
G35 Ambewadi DW 20°05′08″N 74°09′54″E
In this study, the networks were trained and tested with
G36 Achola nala DW 20°04′28″N 74°08′10″E
one hidden layer and 1 to 10 hidden neurons. Two differ-
G37 Jalgaon DW 20°03′34″N 74°07′05″E
ent types of ANN models were developed. In the first type,
G38 Kathergaon DW 20°02′35″N 74°07′01″E
prediction was performed based on the pre monsoon sea-
G39 Shivare DW 20°02′53″N 74°08′37″E
son data set and the second type, post monsoon season
G40 Shivare DW 20°02′18″N 74°08′26″E
data set with significantly correlated variables among over-
all parameters were selected as input. After the training is
complete, the performance of the ANN is determined. The prevent such problems and also matching the data values
verification statistics are useful in evaluating the modeling before training the neural network, the input data should
results. The development and expansion of a model of become standard and optimized. Standardizing the input
ANN requires exact definitions and design for its technical data will prevent the excessive reduction in weights. To
components. Basically entering the data as unprepared and design ANN models 2 groups of data are required: (1)
raw data will reduce the accuracy and speed of network. To Training data (2) Test data.

13
 Author's personal copy
Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2017) 3:36 Page 5 of 10  36

The training data are used to find the relations between data (raw data) were normalized before subjecting to train-
inputs and observed outputs. The validation data are used ing and testing by transforming the data to the range of 0 to
to control and monitor the training procedure and the test 1 to increase the speed and accuracy of ANNs performance
data are used to evaluate the performance of the suggested by Eq. (1) (Wagh et al. 2016b)
network. R is the software is used to develop the ANN’s
X − Xmin
model. The above model has an input layer, a hidden layer X̂ = (1)
Xmax − Xmin
and an output layer. This software has the power of optimi-
zation in order to solve the problems like predicting, clas- When the neural networks training completed, the value of
sifying and estimating the functions. The input and output the networks output is normalized and it needs de-normal-
ization transforming into the actual value. The equation is
defined as follows (Eq. 2):
1-1 .65 0 1
EC 0.048 37 2 ( )
-0
.55 X = X̂ × Xmax − Xmin + Xmin (2)
0.3

25 6
--00
-0
00..4

7 858
.4.81686145810004723 .2651676

36

- .4
-0 .
.7.96956 00-0. ..1

1
TDS where X is original value, Xmin and Xmax are minimum and
6973

69

-0
15

-0 .11 4863
3

.9559
022

.24 99 maximum values in the series, X̂ is the normalized data.

0.7
-1 .43 0-1-10.1.7

- 1.523 65
0
66 4

TH
76115

-0

0
-1 .061196
78042143 .2.15574526199645 0 ..1668943813 0.14..7439176 ..03409
9

.35
5
6

8
26

.19 8
59

372
.14

0.0 .61751 Sensitivity analysis

8
0.06

3 1
-1

Ca -0 1.
03
75 4
52 3

- 0 .6 78
9 5979652188 113906145 8000 76711 8237 55

0. 8 8
1

1.499

65 776 3
94

565
0-0. .7 -00.1

0.4 66 Sensitivity Analysis provides the model designer with valu-

-0 .29

Mg 1.05499 -0 .99
01
08 8 31 4 4 58

0.3 378
2

48
NO3 able information about the sensitivity of the model with
2 4 0 11..4.142 0-1.0..460

3
0873
463
-00

15
-0 . 708
Na -0 .46 regard to its input variables. By understanding the impact
35

-0.58 326
46

-0 . 52
0735
-2 .12 8

.5 5416 of input variables on the estimation precision of the model,

10

4
-0-0 .08 8 8 87
--00. .878 5 0

.24
-
7 35

Cl -0
-0 .4532203 -1 low impact variables can be removed from the network and
9
78

.786
-1 .06 78 -1 .18 64

.90 72 3
-0

a simpler model can be developed. In this study, R software

607220..0.418485773-00..2

-0-0 .29 455

6
.00

21

CO3
62

.17

-0
was used for sensitivity analysis. Values of sensitivity coef-
5885338111 306905295
432

0. .30 7986
4

25 37
-0

.431 3
.5
-100.5

HCO3
- 0.934622
1
ficients of input variables were calculated by dividing the
01

1.07
35
.67 7

errors of the network when one variable was omitted by the

69

8 57
52 6
1
.2054715

-2 .
.1
-00..1.2

.29
-0
00-1

-1 44 82
SO4 0.5 error of the network when no variable was omitted. In this
method, if the value of the sensitivity coefficient becomes
Fig. 3  Optimal train set model pre-monsoon season 2011 (10-8-1)
more that 1, the variable assumed to have a large impact in
defining the dependent variable. After training the network
for all arrangements, the ANNs with different typologies
1 -0 .04 1
EC -0 70
-2 .89 747 9
.5
73 1 -1 .66 1
00-01
...8
16.5

7 79 EC
-0 .4695 25
781553554395 0 .020685145676 .38862423042 0.2.43572543 1 .3

TDS -0
70 -20-0

-1 .47 084 1
-1 .
77

-1 .

-0 . .1
97 2
34

79
1--0
15

87
0. ..9

93 31 0 43
0393347659727-20.2.00004878012 01.0..5
828

-2 .2315
.4
58

0.2 TDS
..0.81 001..40

7 6 93 8 289 502 259394 .06319004 .312 295 453 6

-0 .
81 9

-2 .

-0 .
4

TH
8

0.04056 04 54
65
26

26

-0 333
80 8
011
-0 .5

60

.65 -0 .
2

4 6 TH
3414
28

-0 .2

-0

27

-0.49285
1.5
.9
1.

1.
7 42

Ca
33

32
4

07
12

-0 .2
06

8 972
74

- 0 2 9 101..1

0.45
99

9728
0.
.4

79
0.07
844052179 .9901 725 0039 533 27 1

06 9
1.344

06
-0

22 Mg
--01 .

20
1
29

-0 .8
6

0.
-1 .

55

2
99

0.91 34
0.01562 6 6 44
7 9 46

1.286

Mg 2
26

.27

37
-0 .31

55
9

0.0 0. 1015
98

99
-1

27 39 0.68
53 9

NO3 Na -0 .1 0
93

16 13
-0. 4

73 7 1 8 7437 13 5671314 .7547 5884 .60 7393

-0 .23
8
101..8678 1-0. .2

50 1
483

-0 .
25

-0 .
04 4 15 .094

95
NO3
7 95 . 145 6 -2.1551 -0 .67

Na 4 82 7078
--01 .7
88

1.01869 0.26 29
056

-1 .
-1
6

0. 4
Cl 8 96
5

65
00

0.59369
23

62 8 -1 .9
1

-0
6
-0 .97 8

4245 .72
57

-1 .5
0.

Cl 55134
0.218 7

4
10.
78

-0 .1
61

-0 .2
5

63 F
63
07

55989
-10 0 0

0.43
02
1
24
-0

.86
29 0.807765417 -0 ..0.1

6
79811
99
.8

1.

-0
-0

.87
0-01 .6 9 --101..4

.7
78

CO3 -1.51214
.2

-0

-0
525 17 0338
34

99

CO3 0.0628
-0 .58 743

1.6
3

21

-1 .70 923

96 62 -0 .
8

35 25 5
..27348556775960..90.6890
3

02 5
9 5060-32.1..1

19

65
-1 .
38

35 53
1.2
14

HCO3
66

-0 .12 2 HCO3
-1 .

9 53 1.0064 2
0.7
65

7
510313

47 71
8 3
95
20..9.3

.42

.0
--100.1

0. .678 38
-0

-0 .75 767
--0

SO4 2 SO4 -0

Fig. 4  Optimal test set model pre-monsoon season 2011 (10-6-1) Fig. 5  Optimal train set model post-monsoon season 2011 (10-6-1)

13
 Author's personal copy
36   Page 6 of 10 Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2017) 3:36

1 -1 .84 1 [ ]2 [ ]−1
EC -0 42 N
∑ N
∑
-0 .69 208 8 2
.0
11 R2 = ̄
(Pi − P)(O ̄
i − O)
̄ 2 (Oi − O)
(Pi − P) ̄

1--0
01
.0..5
6 65
-0 .8174

.4
1500
TDS

4 1664311 .98265 419832 520333449 .2118250374 .204 448 .65 6

7205 001-0
i=1 i=1

0.0

-0 .
-0 .
17 7
(3)

89
631

36
53 1

81
-0 .

..20.33490 00-.1.2.517 0--10..7

63

9
TH 1.28921

85
-0

36
.45 [ ]0.5
19
N

-0 .6
0 1
5 91 ∑

1.
.2
-1 .2 7

29
(4)
-0

Mg −1 2

6
RMSE = N (Pi − Oi )

39
835
97
-0 .2 1
49

7
9
37261

0.390
75

.31 i=1
1.0

-0 0271 0.23
14 1

Na -1 .2 4

31
-1 .31 26
6

0.6
4
36597270984830.7.902332792841 0 .3366985975-00.4.6171 64 -0..0736 8
6

96
61

61 NO3
--10 .0

87
N
1 ∑ ||Oi − Pi ||
375

0.0
1

Cl 4 25
(5)
11

0.73045 0.55 MARE = × 100

4 9 998

-2
92 9

.05 N i=1 Oi
-0

-0 .11 2

2 1
-1.3

7693
F -1 .2 5
where, N is the number of observations, Pi is the predicted
09 7

1.29
95
6 4

05
29

58

61 2
values, Oi is the observed data, P̄ and O
̄ are the mean values
-0-0. .4 2.

.9

56
69

0.
-0
87

CO3 0.79334
for Pi and Oi, respectively.
2

-0 .99 623

0.2
2

91 5
58

2
-0-00.0.1

18
35 5
37

0.1
19

HCO3
21 5

-1 .5234
2

-0 .

5 65
84
3
...1

.3
1.1

-0 .04 493
Results and discussion
--100

SO4 -0

Descriptive statistical analysis of the physico-chemical

Fig. 6  Optimal test set model post-monsoon season 2011 (10-6-1)
parameters of the groundwater samples of pre and post
monsoon season is given in Table 2. Tables 3 and 4 repre-
sents the training and testing results prediction for pre and
were used to evaluate the efficiency of the model. To reach
post monsoon season of 2011.
the goals of different structures of ANN like perceptron,
Analytical result confirm that, nitrate concentration in
usually tried to choose and use the best network with com-
pre monsoon season of Kadava river basin varied from
puted values of error. Also, to find the effective factor on
19.31 to 68.61  mg/L, with an average of 48.63  mg/L
nitrate the sensitivity analysis had been done. At last to
whereas, post monsoon season shows variation from 31.37
choose the appropriate and optimized model, the R2, RMSE
to 66.15 mg/L, with an average of 49.97 mg/L.
and MARE had been used. These values were calculated
As the origin of nitrate in the groundwater regarded as
respectively from these Eqs. (3–5):
anthropogenic, a concentration of more than 3  mg/L in

Table 2  Descriptive statistics of the physico-chemical parameters in pre and post monsoon season
Parameter Pre monsoon season 2011 (n = 40) Post monsoon season 2011 (n = 40)
Mean SE SD Range Minimum Maximum Mean SE SD Range Minimum Maximum

pH 8.3 0.0 0.2 1.1 7.8 8.9 8.1 0.0 0.2 0.9 7.7 8.6
EC 2508.50 255.82 1617.94 6944.00 816.00 7760.00 2134.55 217.48 1375.47 7282 718 8000
TDS 889.27 65.45 413.96 2089.45 425.05 2514.50 739.78 58.02 366.96 1970.74 329.45 2300.19
TH 553.49 37.07 234.44 1092.06 189.73 1281.79 432.71 32.60 206.18 1021.48 182.16 1203.64
Ca 52.89 4.28 27.05 118.41 12.02 130.43 45.86 3.32 21.02 84.63 15.23 99.86
Mg 102.79 8.17 51.64 257.05 28.32 285.37 77.60 7.90 49.95 245.7 19.78 265.48
Na 102.45 16.63 105.17 567.80 15.60 583.40 96.27 11.98 75.76 378.5 25.2 403.7
K 2.32 0.25 1.58 6.60 0.90 7.50 2.42 0.36 2.26 12.4 0.1 12.5
Cl 233.90 29.52 186.72 1015.30 42.60 1057.90 184.50 23.20 146.76 790.2 49.24 839.44
F 0.43 0.05 0.32 1.90 0.10 2.00 0.39 0.02 0.13 0.6 0.2 0.8
CO3 60.00 11.81 74.70 300.00 0.00 300.00 56.50 6.05 38.27 160 0 160
HCO3 155.75 9.48 59.95 340.00 60.00 400.00 109.00 7.62 48.19 240 30 270
SO4 130.11 8.40 53.11 216.40 22.61 239.01 117.27 7.89 49.91 254.69 46.67 301.36
NO3 48.63 1.92 12.13 49.31 19.31 68.62 49.97 1.78 11.27 34.78 31.37 66.15

SD standard deviation, SE standard error of mean

13
 Author's personal copy
Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2017) 3:36 Page 7 of 10  36

Table 3  Training and testing results prediction for pre-monsoon 2011 season

No. of Neuron Train set dataset (Pre monsoon 2011) Test set dataset (Pre monsoon 2011)
2
No. of steps Error R RMSE MARE (%) No. of steps Error R2 RMSE MARE (%)

1 3 0.64 0.99 0.30 24.36 7 0.50 0.97 0.23 18.28

2 3 0.65 0.99 0.30 24.15 6 0.49 0.97 0.24 19.04
3 15 0.71 0.99 0.29 23.72 2 0.48 0.97 0.22 18.60
4 9 0.60 0.99 0.29 24.08 7 0.38 0.97 0.25 20.72
5 7 0.70 0.99 0.28 21.49 3 0.61 0.97 0.28 23.51
6 4 0.66 0.99 0.32 22.96 8 0.38 0.97 0.24 20.42
7 8 0.62 0.99 0.31 25.59 5 0.45 0.97 0.24 18.98
8 5 0.62 0.99 0.29 22.30 4 0.57 0.97 0.24 20.02
9 6 0.67 0.99 0.29 23.87 8 0.47 0.97 0.23 18.94
10 7 0.69 0.99 0.29 23.43 7 0.44 0.97 0.25 20.19

Table 4  Training and testing results prediction for post-monsoon 2011 season

No. of Neuron Train set dataset (Post monsoon 2011) Testset dataset (Post monsoon 2011)
No. of steps Error R2 RMSE MARE (%) No. of steps Error R2 RMSE MARE (%)

1 6 1.36 0.99 0.33 31.50 1 0.65 0.96 0.33 28.27

2 4 1.40 0.99 0.35 33.84 6 0.65 0.96 0.32 27.48
3 6 1.44 0.99 0.33 30.10 1 0.64 0.96 0.33 28.35
4 10 1.33 0.99 0.34 32.98 2 0.66 0.96 0.32 28.14
5 8 1.35 0.99 0.33 30.94 6 0.69 0.96 0.33 29.52
6 8 1.29 0.99 0.31 28.45 4 0.58 0.96 0.31 27.39
7 4 1.45 0.99 0.38 37.00 6 0.63 0.96 0.31 27.87
8 7 1.38 0.99 0.32 27.16 4 0.65 0.96 0.32 27.58
9 7 1.50 0.99 0.33 29.66 5 0.64 0.96 0.32 27.24
10 6 1.33 0.99 0.31 28.68 6 0.58 0.96 0.35 27.84

Fig. 7  Pre-monsoon season nitrate concentration

Fig. 8  Post-monsoon season nitrate concentration

groundwater can be considered as affected by the human
activities (Burkardt and Kolpin 1993; Chen et al. 2016). As
per the Indian standard of drinking water up to 45 mg/L is
permissible limit of nitrate for drinking. From Figs. 7 and 8
revealed that, 21 samples out of 40 samples (52.50%) and
26 samples out of 40 samples (65%) having high concentra-
tion of nitrate than 45 mg/L (Figs. 7, 8) (BIS 2012).
Initially, while evaluating correlation analysis for pre-
monsoon season data set through the MS-Excel and it is
observed that, EC parameter associated with TDS (0.87),

13
 Author's personal copy
36   Page 8 of 10
TH(0.70), Mg (0.75), Na (0.77), Cl (0.87) and S ­ O4(0.63).
TDS shows association with TH (0.85), Mg (0.89), Na
(0.87), Cl (0.77) and with S­ O4 (0.62). TH shows its posi-
tive relationship with Mg (0.96), Na (0.50), Cl (0.77),
­HCO3 (0.66). Ca shows association with H ­ CO3 (0.54).
Mg shows positive correlation with Cl (0.81), C ­ O3 (0.53),
­SO4 (0.65). Cl shows association with Na (0.88) and S ­ O4
(0.59).
Thereafter, correlation analysis is performed for post-
monsoon season data set and it is observed that, EC param-
eter associated with TDS (0.97), TH(0.92), Mg (0.91), Na
(0.86), Cl (0.97), F (0.57), ­CO3 (0.60), ­HCO3 (0.74) and
­SO4(0.81). TDS shows association with TH (0.93), Mg
(0.94), Na (0.92), Cl (0.98), F (0.56), ­CO3 (0.72), ­HCO3
(0.75) and with S ­ O4 (0.84). TH shows its positive rela-
tionship with Mg (0.97), Na (0.72), Cl (0.92), ­CO3 (0.66),
­HCO3 (0.68) and ­SO4 (0.85). Mg shows association with
Na (0.78), Cl (0.92), F (0.51), ­CO3 (0.75), ­HCO3 (0.68) and
­SO4 (0.80). Na shows positive correlation with Cl (0.90), F
(0.58), ­CO3 (0.72), H­ CO3 (0.70) and ­SO4 (0.69). Cl shows
association with F (0.58), ­CO3 (0.68), ­HCO3 (0.70) and
­SO4 (0.79). F is associated with H ­ CO3 (0.58). ­SO4 is asso-
ciated with ­CO3 (0.54) and ­HCO3 (0.54).
Fig.  9  a Line plot for pre-monsoon season 2011. b Scatter plot for pre-monsoon season 2011
Fig.  10  a Line plot for post-monsoon season 2011. b Scatter plot for post-monsoon season 2011
13
Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2017) 3:36
With these correlation studies, among all the parameters
which are having most significant positive relationship in
pre and post monsoon season were treated as input vari-
ables for further formulation and prediction of N ­ O3 ANN
model. EC, TDS, TH, Ca, Mg, Na, Cl, C ­ O3, ­HCO3 and ­SO4
parameters were considered for pre monsoon study. On the
other hand, for post monsoon season, EC, TDS, TH, Mg,
Na, Cl, F, ­CO3, ­HCO3 and ­SO4 parameters were considered.
The training/testing data split can have a significant
impact on the results of the model. The cross-validation
technique (Chang et al. 2013; Fijani et al. 2013) is used to
divide the data sets. Based on this approach, 40 data points
were divided in two sets; training 70% (28 samples) and
testing 30% (12 samples).
The neuralnet function is used in R programming for the
development of ANN model. A vector is specified by num-
ber of hidden layers and hidden neurons in each layer. The
resilient backpropagation algorithm with weight back track-
ing was used through sensitive analysis for 1–10 hidden
neurons. Through the sensitivity analysis it is found that
the 6 neurons show the optimum R2, RMSE and MARE for
all the indices excluding pre monsoon season training data
set. So, further investigation the vector (10, 6, 1) induces a
 Author's personal copy
Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2017) 3:36 Page 9 of 10  36
neural network with specified number of neurons is used.
The resilient back propagation with weight backtracking
algorithm with cross entropy differentiable error function
is considered and logistic function is used as an activation
function with the assumption that logically output is not
linear. These all parameters are used as input layers with 6
hidden neurons to evaluate the groundwater suitability for
the drinking purpose.
The variation of measured and predicted N ­ O3 data were
also presented in Figs.  9a and 10a and the model data
tracked the experimental data closely. Hence, with the
use of easily measurable parameters as input data ANN
can predict the nitrate concentration in groundwater. Fig-
ures  9b, 10b scatter plot shows the coefficient of determi-
nation with high positive relationship among measured and
predicted results of ­NO3 for pre-monsoon (R2 = 0.98) and
post-monsoon (R2 = 0.97) respectively which shows the
accuracy of the proposed model. The association between
measured and predicted N ­ O3 values in the form of linearity
and coefficient of determination indicates the reliability of
the evaluated model.
Conclusion
In a nut shell, groundwater quality in Kadava river basin
is investigated with special emphasis on nitrate pollution
in aquifer system. Analytical results inferred that, out of 40
samples 52.50% and 65% exceed the permissible limit of
BIS in pre and post monsoon season; hence, unfit for drink-
ing. Such consumption of high content nitrate water can
cause serious health issues in human beings and animals.
In case of the study area, the N ­ O3 values increases due
to excessive use of chemical fertilizers. To overcome this
nitrate enrichment problem in aquifer systems of the study
area, farmers should be initiated with organic farming and
minimize the use of nitrogen complex fertilizers. On the
other hand, high concentration of nitrate in post monsoon
season due to dissolution, percolation and leaching process.
The study demonstrated that, ANN provides vital tool for
predicting ­NO3 values in 40 observations dug/ bore wells
of Kadava river basin, Nashik district. A neural network
model consisting 10 input neurons, 6 hidden neurons and 1
output variable were used for computing ground water suit-
ability for drinking excluding pre monsoon season having
8 hidden neuron gives optimality of the nitrate concentra-
tion. The R2, RMSE and MARE values shows the accuracy
of the proposed model. Interesting fact is revealed that, Ca
content decreases and F concentration increases in post
monsoon season of the study area. The proposed model
gave satisfactory fit to the experimentally obtained data-
set in 40 observation wells. A comparison between meas-
ured and predicted value of nitrate were computed through
ANN model and MS-Excel. This indicates that, it is capa-
ble of improving the accuracy to determine the suitability
of groundwater for drinking. The graphical representa-
tion clearly shows the accuracy of measured and predicted
values are closely associated. Hence, the proposed ANN
model is applicable to measure the ground water suitabil-
ity for drinking purpose in easier manner. This model can
be considered by planning and development authorities for
better management of groundwater resources.
References
Agarwal R (2012) Nitrate contamination in ground water samples
of Gangapur city town (Sawai Madhopur District) Rajasthan. J
Chem Biol Phys Sci 2(1):511–513
APHA (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and
wastewater, 21st edn. American Public Health Association, New
York
Assaf H, Saadeh M (2009) Geostatistical assessment of groundwater
nitrate contamination with reflection on DRASTIC vulnerability
assessment: the case of the Upper Litani Basin, Lebanon. Water
Resour Manage 23:775–796
BIS (2012) Indian standards specification for drinking water, BIS:
10500: 2012. http://www.cgwb.gov.in/Documents/WQ-stand-
ards.pdf
Burkardt MR, Kolpin DW (1993) Hydrogeologic and landuse factors
associated with the herbicide and nitrate occurrence in near sur-
face aquifers. J Envviron Qual 22:646–656
Central Groundwater Board (CGWB) (2014) http://cgwb.gov.in/dis-
trict_profile/maharashtra/nashik.pdf
Chang FJ, Tsai WP, Chen HK, Yam RSW, Herricks EE (2013) A self
organizing radial basis network for estimating riverine fish diver-
sity. J Hydrol 476:280–289
Chen J, Wu H, Qian H, Gao Y (2016) Assessing nitrate and fluoride
contaminants in drinking water and their health risk of rural resi-
dents living in a semiarid region of northwest china. Exposure
Health (London). doi:10.1007/s12403-016-0231-9
Comly HH (1987) Cyanosis in infants caused by nitrates in well
water. J Am Med Assoc 257:2788–2792
Ehteshami M, Farahani ND, Tavassoli S (2016) Simulation of nitrate
contamination in groundwater using artificial neural networks.
Model Earth Syst Environ 2(1):1–10
Fijani E, Nadiri AA, Moghaddam AA, Tsai FTC, Dixon B (2013)
Optimization of DRASTIC method by supervised commit-
tee machine artificial intelligence to assess groundwater vul-
nerability for Maragheh–Bonab plain aquifer, Iran. J Hydrol
503:89–100
Geological Survey of India (GSI) (2001) District resource Map. GSI,
Nashik district
Goyal SK, Chaudhary BS, Singh O, Sethi GK, Thakur PK (2010)
GIS based spatial distribution mapping and suitability evalua-
tion of groundwater quality for domestic and agricultural pur-
pose in Kaithal district, Haryana state, India. Environ Earth Sci
61(8):1587–1597.
Hubbard RK, Sheridan JM, Adriano DC, Iskandar AK, Murarka IP
(1994) Nitrates in groundwater in the southeastern USA. Con-
tamination of groundwaters, pp 303–345
Kumar PS (2017) Geostatistical modeling of fluoride enrichment
and nitrate contamination in the groundwater of Lower Bhavani
Basin in Tamil Nadu, India. Model Earth Syst Environ 3(1):1
Laurent M, François A, Marie MJ (2010) Assessment of groundwater
quality during dry season in Southeastern Brazzaville, Congo
13
 Author's personal copy
36   Page 10 of 10
Maharashtra pollution control board (MPCB) CSIR-National Envi-
ronmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) (2014) Water
quality status of water bodies of Maharashtra with resources to
analytical and statistical tool (2007–2011) http://mpcb.gov.in/
ereports/pdf/waterreport2007-2011.pdf
Maithani S (2009) A neural network based urban growth model of an
Indian city. J Indian Soc Remote Sens 37(3):363–376
Meisinger JJ, Randall GW (1991) Estimating nitrogen budgets for
soil-crop systems. Managing nitrogen for groundwater quality
and farm profitability, (managingnitroge), pp 85–124
Panaskar DB, Wagh VM, Muley AA, Mukate SV, Pawar RS, Aamal-
awar ML (2016) Evaluating groundwater suitability for the
domestic, irrigation, and industrial purposes in Nanded Tehsil,
Maharashtra, India, using GIS and statistics. Arabian J Geosci
9(13):615
Reddy AGS (2013) Geochemical evaluation of nitrate and fluoride
contamination in varied hydrogeological environs of Prakasam
district, southern India. Environ Earth Sci 71:4473–4495
Salami ES, Ehteshami M (2015) Simulation, evaluation and predic-
tion modeling of river water quality properties (case study:
Ireland rivers). Int J Eng Sci Technol 12(10):3235–3242.
doi:10.1007/s13762-015-0800-7
Sharma V, Negi SC, Rudra RP, Yang S (2003) Neural networks for
predicting nitrate-nitrogen in drainage water. Agric Water Manag
63(3):169–183
13
Model. Earth Syst. Environ. (2017) 3:36
Strebel O, Duynisveld W, Bo¨ttcher J (1989) Nitrate pollution
of groundwater in Western Europe. Agric Ecosyst Environ
26(3):189–214
Subramani T, Elango L, Damodarasamy SR (2005) Groundwa-
ter quality and its suitability for drinking and agricultural
use in Chithar River Basin, Tamil Nadu, India. Environ Geol
47:1099–1110
Todd DK (1980) Groundwater hydrology, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York
Toth J (1999) Groundwater as a geologic agent: an overview of the
causes, processes, and manifestations. Hydrogeol J 7(1):1–14
Wagh VM, Panaskar DB, Muley AA, Mukate SV, Lolage YP, Aamal-
awar ML (2016b) Prediction of groundwater suitability for irri-
gation using artificial neural network model: a case study of
Nanded tehsil, Maharashtra, India. Model Earth Syst Environ
2(4):196
Wagh VM, Panaskar DB, Varade AM, Mukate SV, Gaikwad SK,
Pawar RS, Muley AA, Aamalawar ML (2016a) Major ion chem-
istry and quality assessment of the groundwater resources of
Nanded tehsil, a part of southeast Deccan Volcanic Province,
Maharashtra, India. Environ Earth Sci 75(21):1418