Quantitative Study on Microbial Pollution of River ... - GANGAPEDIA

<strong>Quantitative</strong> <strong>Study</strong> on Microbial Pollution of River Yamuna at
Delhi
V Goel, Grad IE
Dr A Kumar, Member
N K Verma, Non-member
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
Traditionally, the river pollution has been extensively studied with regard to physical and chemical
characteristics. However, lately microbiological quality of the river has come under greater focus owing
to deleterious effects of pollution on human health, especially in the context of Designated Best Use
(DBU) of the river waters. With this intent, the paper presents pollutional aspects of river Yamuna at
Delhi, the capital of India, during lean the period. Out of large number of microbial parameters linked
with human health, some significant contaminating indicators, namely, heterotrophic plate count (total
plate count, CFU/ml), total coliform (MPN/100 ml), Fecal Coliform (MPN/100 ml), pathogenic parasites,
namely, Helminths (eggs/l), coliphages/100 ml have been identified and measured along with the related
usual parameters, namely, dissolved oxygen (ppm), biochemical oxygen demand (ppm), chemical oxygen
demand (ppm), pH, temperature (0C), total dissolved solids (ppm) and turbidity (NTU). Six sampling
locations (bridge sites) were selected and total 24 sample sets were collected over a period of four
months from March 2004 to June 2004. The high values of microbial indicators and pathogens detected
revealed that the microbiological quality of Yamuna waters was poor, unsafe and not acceptable even
for the lowest DBU. The results of the study have revealed the need for pollution abatement measures
to ensure river water quality as per the requirement of DBU. Further, an attempt has been made for
generating the rapid method for estimation of organic pollution and corresponding microbial pollution,
during Delhi stretch of Yamuna river, through derived relationships, namely, Chemical oxygen demand
(COD, mg/l) and Fecal Coliform (FC, MPN/100ml). The results of Fecal Coliform obtained by laboratory
analysis can be verified by comparing the results obtained from various inter-relationships investigated
in this study. The duplicate analysis or use of control tubes can be avoided in routine microbial analysis.
Keywords Keywords Keywords Keywords Keywords : : Microbial; Water quality indicators; Pathogens; Yamuna river
Today water resources have become the most exploited
natural systems since man strode the earth. According
to United Nations (UN) report, fresh water is gradually
becoming a matter of concern. With nearly 900 million
people affected by diarrhea each year and an equal
number suffering from disease caused by various worms,
unclean water ranks at top of the world’s population
problem 1 . River Yamuna, which is the main source of
water supply to National Capital — Delhi, plays a crucial
role in its growth. The river water is used for both
abstractive and in stream purposes. The water is used
as raw water source for drinking water supply, irrigation
purposes, cooling water etc. Low economic group people
use the river water for bathing purpose, cloth washing,
irrigation in cultivation of all types of fruits, vegetables
and wheat etc. Perennial increase of population and
urban activities in Delhi are placing exigent pressures
and demands on this natural riverine resource. There is
V V Goel, Goel, Dr Dr A Kumar Kumar are are with with the the Department Department of of Civil Civil Engineering,
Engineering,
Indian Indian Indian Institute Institute of of TT
Technology
T Technology
echnology echnology, echnology , Roorkee Roorkee 247667 247667 and and N N K K K V VVerma
V erma is
is
with with the the Central Central Pollution Pollution Control Control Control Board, Board, Delhi.
Delhi.
This paper was received on August 28, 2004. Written discussion on
this paper will be entertained till May 30, 2008.
a heavy pressure of water supply and sanitation on river
Yamuna at Delhi, leading to severe impact on water
quality of the river 2- 4 . Report of the scientists at All
India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi,
finds an alarming prevalence of various diseases causing
microbes in drinking water and recreational water. The
use of this water may lead to several life threatening
diseases 5 . The causative microbial agents, also called
pathogens, multiply in the intestinal tract of the persons
suffering from the disease and are discharged in their
faeces in large numbers. The disease is then transmitted
to healthy individuals through water or food
contaminated with the faeces. Since, the spread of these
diseases is mainly through the water route they are also
called as water borne diseases 6 . The pathogenic
organism may belong to any of the group of
microorganisms, such as, virus, bacteria, protozoa and
helminths (worms). Since, it is impractical to test water
for all pathogens related to water borne diseases due to
the complexity of the testing, time and cost, indicator
organisms are used. However, no simple indicator that
complies with all the criteria is available, hence more
than one indicator organism is employed 7, 8 .
In spite of the problem of poor water quality in Delhi
segment flow, few data exist on the microbial contents
56 IE(I) Journal–EN

of the river water. Most of the previous studies, already
done on Yamuna, limits to the detection of coliforms as
microbial indicator that may not indicate the exact
concentration of pathogens in water. Therefore the
present study highlights the concentration of pathogenic
parasites (Helminths, coliphages) along with the
heterotrophic plate count (HPC), total coliform (TC) and
Fecal Coliform (FC) to determine the microbial quality
of the river water.
RIVER RIVER YAMUNA
YAMUNA
The river Yamuna, the largest tributary of river Ganga
has been one of the most prominent and sacred rivers of
India through the ages. Yamuna, according to the
legends, was the daughter of Surya, the Sun God and
sister to Yama, the God of Death. Consequently, popular
belief is that those who take a dip in its holy water are
not tormented by fears of death. Yamunotri, which is
the north of Haridwar in the Himalayan Mountains, is
the source of the Yamuna. The river Yamuna, a major
tributary of river Ganges, originates from the Yamunotri
glacier near Banderpoonch peaks (38°59' N, 78°27' E) in
the Mussourie range of the lower Himalayas at an
elevation of about 6387 m above mean sea level in district
Uttarkashi (Uttranchal). The catchment of Yamuna river
system covers parts of Uttar Pradesh, Uttranchal,
Himachal Pradesh, Haryana, Rajasthan, Madhya
Pradesh and National Capital Territory (NCT) Delhi.
The entire Yamuna river right from its origin to
confluence with the Ganga and its tributaries are subject
to human activities, which directly or indirectly affect
the water quality 5 .
NCT — Delhi, located at a latitude of 28°34'N and
longitude of 77°07'E, is facing the challenges of
sanitation and environmental degradation due to
increasing population and urbanization. Delhi alone
contributes around 3 296 MLD/day of sewage by virtue
of drains outfalling in Yamuna Delhi segment flow (22
km length). This is more than that of all the class II
cities of India put together. Despite the smallest
percentage of catchment area in Yamuna, only 0.4% of
total catchment area, Delhi is the largest contributor of
pollution to the river 2,9 .
STUDY STUDY SITE SITE SITE AND AND AND SOURCES SOURCES OF OF POLLUTION
POLLUTION
From Wazirabad barrage to Okhala barrage, the whole
Yamuna river Delhi Segment was considered for this
study. The different sampling stations selected are as
follows:
(i) Wazirabad Barrage (WB): entry point of Yamuna
river in Delhi segment.
(ii) ISBT Yamuna Bridge (ISBT): approximately
5.5 km D/s from WB.
(iii) ITO Bridge (ITO): approximately 12 km D/s from WB.
(iv) Nizamuddin Bridge (NB): approximately 14.5 km
D/s from WB.
(v) Toll Bridge (TB): approximately 19 km D/s from
WB.
(vi) Okhala Barrage (OB): approximately 22 km D/s
from WB.
The details of sampling stations selected and various
drains outfalls in river Yamuna Delhi Segment are
shown in Figure 1.
RA RATIONALE RA TIONALE FOR FOR SAMPLING SAMPLING LOCA LOCATIONS
LOCA LOCA TIONS
The sampling stations were selected on the basis of the
following major criteria 10,11
♦ It should be accessible in all seasons of the year.
♦ It should have proper mixing of pollutants thus
representing water quality of river at that particular
stretch.
♦ Facilities to take water samples should be available
there. Bridges are normally the first choice for locating
a stream sampling station, since they are not only
provide ready access but also permit sampling at any
point across the width of stream. Further the bridges
are clearly identifiable and the site can be precisely
described.
1. Burari* drain and (1993)
Najafgarh* drain (MLD)
2. Magazine road (5)
3. Sweeper colony (7)
4. Khyber pass (8)
5. Metacalfe house (6)
6. Kudsia bagh (54)
7. Moat (negligible) flow
9. Mori gate (125)
10. Civil mill* (22)
11. Power house* (17)
12. Sen nursing home* (113)
13. Drain number 14 (113)
14. Barapullah (156)
15. Maharani bagh (17)
16. Kalkaji (negligible) flow
17. Okhala (NA)
18. Tughlakabad (2)
From Haryana
20,21,22,(52)
To mathura
8. Trans Yamuna
MCD (NA)
6.5 km
Hindon cut canal (NA)
19,23 (606)
Figure Figure 1 1 Conceptual Conceptual linearised linearised diagram diagram of of river river river Yamuna amuna at at Delhi
Delhi
Vol 88, March 2008 57
WB°
ISBT°
ITO°
NB°
TB°
OB°
N
5.5 km
2.5 km
4.5 km
3 km
* Mixed sewage source
o Sampling station

♦ It should affect the quality of water — (i) before
drains from city discharge; (ii) inside city; and (iii) after
the river leaves the city.
SAMPLE SAMPLE COLLECTION
COLLECTION
Sample collection is a very important part of river study
because conclusions drawn are based only on the testing
of collected samples. The purpose of taking samples is
to obtain information, which in some way typifies the
aquatic system from which samples are drawn 12 . Grab
Sampling procedure was adopted as recommended by
Standard Method for microbiological analysis. Samples
were collected during lean season, on monthly basis, for
a period of four months from March 2004 to June 2004.
Three sets of water samples, from each sampling location
and for every sampling date, were collected for this study.
(i) Water samples for microbiological examination,
other than Helminth eggs, for BOD and COD
determination were collected in non-reactive
borosilicate glass bottles of 500 ml capacity each that
had been cleansed and rinsed carefully, given a final
rinse with distilled water and sterilized. Samples were
taken from the river by holding the bottle near its base
in the hand and plunging it, neck downward, below
the surface. Then turning the bottle until neck points
slightly upward and mouth is directed toward the
current. The sampling bottle was not filled up to the
brim and 20 mm to 30 mm space was left for effective
shaking of the bottle 13 .
(ii) Water samples for Helminth eggs were collected in
Table able 1 1 1 Summary Summary of of analytic analytic methods methods and and observed observed values
values
non-reactive plastic bottles of 5 l capacity, which had
been cleansed and finally rinsed with distilled water 14 .
(iii) Water samples for DO determination were
collected in BOD bottles (non-reactive borosilicate
glass bottles of 300 ml capacity). The DO was fixed by
standard procedure Onsite, just after collection 13 .
SAMPLE SAMPLE PRESER PRESERVATION
PRESER TION TION AND AND STORAGE
STORAGE
Microbiological analysis of water samples was started
as soon as possible after collection to avoid unpredictable
changes in the microbial population 15 . As the samples
cannot be processed within 1 h after collection, therefore
for most accurate results, samples were brought in iced
insulated container, during transport from Delhi to IIT
Roorkee laboratory.
ANAL ANALYSIS ANAL YSIS OF OF SAMPLES
SAMPLES
The Samples were analyzed in accordance with the
standard methods. The techniques, instruments and
principles involved in arriving at different parameters
are tabulated in Table 1.
RESUL RESULTS RESUL RESULTS
TS
The variation in water quality parameters determined
through the analysis on site and in laboratory at Indian
Institute of Technology, Roorkee (India) were reported
in Table 1. The longitudinal profile of various microbial
parameters is shown in Figure 2. The Longitudinal
profiles of BOD, COD and DO values were shown in
Figure 3.
Parameters Parameters Principle Principle Principle
Instruments/ Instruments/ technique technique used used
Observed Observed values values
values
Minimum Minimum Maximum Maximum Maximum Average verage
Temperature, °C Metric Thermometer 19 36 28
pH Metric Digital pH meter 7 9.2 7.5
TDS, mg/l Metric Digital TDS meter 190 700 460
Turbidity, NTU Nephelometric Digital Turbidity Meter 3.6 52.0 32.1
DO, mg/l Volumetric Modified Winkler’s method
BOD, mg/l Volumetric Winkler’s method, incubation for 3 days
COD, mg/l Closed Reflux, colorimetric Hach COD system (DR/ 4000 U
TC, MPN/100 ml MPN index Lauryl tryptose broth, incubation
FC, MPN/100 ml MPN index EC Medium, incubation temperature
HPC, CFU/ml Total plate count Pour plate method, plate count agar,
Coliphages, per ml Equations (APHA 9211 D 3) Inte-relationship
Titrant — N/40 Na 2 S 2 O 3 Ind — starch 0.0 8.2 1.5
at 27°C (IS : 3025 part 4, 1993) 3.0 52.0 34.2
spectrophotometer) set at λ = 600 nm 6.0 120.0 75.5
temperature 35 ± 0.5°C for 24 h to 48 h 2.1E04 4.3E07 9.3E06
44.5 ± 0.2°C for 24 ± 2 h 3.9E03 3.9 E 07 4.6 E 06
incubation temperature 35°C for 48 h,
digital colony counter 2.4E03 1.5E06 2.6E05
between TC and coliphages, FC
Helminth eggs, Microscopic count Modified Bailenger method,
and coliphages 5.2E03 9.0E08 1.2E08
per ml centrifuge (1000 g), compound microscope 5 38 23
58 IE(I) Journal–EN

The total coliform, MPN/100ml values in river were
always found exceeding the permissible limit of 500 or
less for DBU class B, ie, for outdoor bathing and 5000 or
less for DBU class C, ie, for drinking water source after
conventional treatment and disinfection 16,17 . The BOD
values in river was found most of the times exceeding
the permissible limit of 3 mg/l or less for both DBU class
B and class C. From D/S of WB to OB, near zero DO
level was the clear indication of relatively higher
pollution loads. The depletion of oxygen was the major
impact in the polluted stretch of the river due to
excessive presence of organic matter, which disturbed
the river ecosystem to a large extent. The biodegradation
of organic pollution resulted in release of nutrients,
which causes eutrophication of river. The pathogenic
parasite Helminth (eggs/l) values found in Yamuna river
are much higher and water was not suitable even for
the irrigation purpose. The minimum value was found
is 5 eggs/l which exceeds the permissible limit of 1 egg/l 18 .
INTER INTER RELA RELATIONSHIP
RELA TIONSHIP BETWEEN BETWEEN BOD BOD BOD AND AND COD
COD
COD test gave a relatively quick estimation of the
carbonaceous contents of the sample (within a matter of
3 h) compared to the BOD test, which normally takes 3
days. Also the COD test has a higher precision than the
BOD test. As polluted water bodies may have a varying
proportion of degradable and non- degradable substances
in them, the only practical way in which the COD test
can be used for estimation of BOD is to develop a specific
Log scale
1.0E + 09
1.0E + 08
1.0E + 07
1.0E + 06
1.0E + 05
1.0E + 04
1.0E + 03
1.0E + 02
1.0E + 01
1.0E + 00
Total plate count CFU/100 ml
Total coliform MPN/100 ml
Fecal coliform MPN/100 ml
Coliphases/100 ml
Helminths, eggs/l
WB ISBT ITO NB TB OB
Sampling locations
Figure Figure 2 2 Average verage microbial microbial profile profile of of river river Yamuna amuna at at Delhi
Delhi
mg/l
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Average observed
DO values
8.4
3.7
78.8
39
Average observed
BOD values
105
46.5
87.3
37.5
WB ISBT ITO NB TB OB
Sampling locations
Average observed
COD values
40.3 38.3
7.7 0 0 0 0.25 1.3
Figure Figure 3 3 Longitudinal Longitudinal profile profile of of DO, DO, BOD BOD and and COD COD in in river river Yamuna amuna
at at Delhi
Delhi
90
83.8
correlation between COD and BOD values for specific
case 19-21 . The COD values, observed in Yamuna river
Delhi segment flow, at various sampling locations and
date have been plotted against the BOD in Figure 4(a).
The relationship investigated as BOD = 0.454 COD have
high degree of correlation. Thus the precise and carefull
determination of COD be better suited for routine
analysis due to much shorter time requirement and not
for needing an electric incubator.
INTER INTER RELA RELA RELATIONSHIP
RELA RELA TIONSHIP BETWEEN BETWEEN VARIOUS
VARIOUS
MICROBIAL MICROBIAL INDICA INDICATORS
INDICA TORS
Microbiological tests are generally complex and need a
lot of training and practice to yield reasonably reliable
results. Fecal Coliform MPN is by far the most important
microbial indicator from water quality point of view
because of its direct health significance 11,22,23 . The FC
values, observed in Yamuna river Delhi segment flow,
at various sampling locations and dates have been
plotted against the HPC in Figure 4(b) and against TC
in Figure 4(c). The relationships evaluated, with the
1.0E + 08
1.0E + 07
1.0E + 06
1.0E + 05
1.0E + 04
1.0E + 03
1.0E+03 1.0E+04 1.0E+05 1.0E+06 1.0E+07 1.0E+08
Figure Figure 4 4 Inter Inter-relationship Inter -relationship graphs
graphs
TC, MPN/100 ml (log scale)
Vol 88, March 2008 59
BOD, mg/l
FC, MPN/100 ml
(log scale)
FC, MPN/100 ml
(log scale)
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
1.00E + 08
1.00E + 07
1.00E + 06
1.00E + 05
1.00E + 04
BOD = 0.454 COD
R 2 = 0.9312
COD, mg/l
(a)
1.00E + 03
1.00E+03 1.00E+04 1.00E+05 1.00E+06 1.00E+07
HPC, CFU/ml (log scale)
(b)
FC = 0.0791 TC 1.1047
R 2 = 0.9559
(c)
FC = 0.0182 HPC 1.5343
R 2 = 0.9598

degree of correlation greater than 95 %, are
♦ FC, MPN /100 ml = 0.0232 × TC 1.1697 , MPN/100ml
♦ FC, MPN /100 ml = 0.0326 × HPC 1.4742 /ml
The results of Fecal Coliform obtained by laboratory
analysis can be verified by comparing the results
obtained from various inter-relationships investigated
in this study. The duplicate analysis or use of control
tubes can be avoided in routine microbial analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
♦ During the last 20 years, the annual average value
of BOD, TC and FC value, in river Yamuna, has
increases from 17.0 mg/l to 34.2 mg/l, 2.06 E05 MPN/
100 ml to 9.3 E06 MPN/100 ml and 1.4 E05 MPN/100
ml to 4.6 E06 MPN/100 ml, respectively. The BOD
value increases by 100 percent, TC and FC Values
increased to 4000 % and 3000 % fold, respectively. The
relatively higher increase in Microbiological pollution
load shows that little emphasis was given to control of
the microbial quality of effluents being discharged in
river.
♦ The high values of microbial indicators and
pathogens detected revealed that the microbiological
quality of water was poor, unsafe and not acceptable
even for the lowest DBU. The deterioration in water
quality is found due to the regular outfalls of 23 drains
carrying wastewater to river Yamuna during Delhi
Segment. Approximately 3296 MLD/day of sewage by
virtue of above drains outfalls in Yamuna. Despite the
above scenario, the people of Delhi extensively use the
water of river Yamuna for various purposes. The
results of the study have revealed the need for planning
and implementation of various pollution abatement
measures for improvement in the river water quality
as per requirement of DBU.
♦ The rapid method developed for estimation of organic
pollution and microbial pollution, through inter
relationships, namely, chemical oxygen demand and
Fecal Coliform, can be helpful in routine analysis of
river water quality. This method can also be applied
for evaluation of water treatment efficiency at the
water treatment plant as well as sewage treatment
plant installed in Delhi, more frequently and in lesser
time.
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
1. B K Sharma. ‘Water Pollution’. Goel Publishing House, UP, India,
2001.
2. CPCB . ‘Water Quality in India, Status and Trend (1990 - 2001)’.
Monitoring of India National Aquatic Resources Series: MINARS,
vol 17, 2002 - 2003,Delhi.
3. CPCB. ‘Annual Report 2002 - 2003’.
4. www.cpcb.nic.in , CPCB Web Site.
5. www.yap.nic.in , Yamuna Action Plan Web Site.
6. C J Hurtz, R L Crawford, M J Mclnerney and L D Stetzenbach.
‘Manual of Environmental Microbiology’. Second Edition, ASM Press,
Washington, 2002.
7. NHMRC. ‘Microbial Indicators of Water Quality’. An NHMRC
Discussion Paper, 2001.
8. J A Tree and M R Adams. ‘Chlorination of Indicator Bacteria and
Viruses in Primary Sewage Effluent’. Journal of Applied and
Environmental Microbiology, vol 69, no 4, 2003, pp 2038 - 2043.
9. CPCB. ‘Water Quality Status of Yamuna River’. Assessment and
Development <strong>Study</strong> of River Basin Series: ADSORBS, vol 32, 1999 -
2000.
10. S Aggarwal and R C Trevedi. ‘Ecological Analysis of The River
Yamuna — a Functional Approach in a Diversified Ecosystem in India’.
Arch Hydrobiol Suppl, vol 0945-3748/95/0101, 1995, pp 405 - 426.
11. CPCB. ‘Basin Sub-basin Inventory of Water Pollution: The Ganga
Basin’. Part I. ‘The Yamuna Sub-basin (1977 - 1978)’. Assessment
and Development <strong>Study</strong> of River Basin Series: ADSORBS, vol 2, 1980-
1981.
12. IS:1622-1981. ‘Method of Sampling and Microbiological
Examination of Water’. Edition 2.4, BIS, New Delhi, Reaffirmed 1996,
2003 to 2005.
13. ‘Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater’.
19th Edition and 20th Edition, APHA, AWWA, WPCF, New York,
1995 and 1998.
14. ‘Analysis of Wastewater for use in Agriculture: A Laboratory
Manual of Parasitological and Bacteriological Techniques’. World
Health Organization, 1996.
15 F A Gaudy. ‘Microbiology for Environmental Scientists and
Engineers’. McGraw Hill International Book Company, 1998.
16. Metcalf and Eddy. ‘Wastewater Engineering Treatment Disposal
and Reuse’. Tata McGraw-Hill Publication Co Ltd, New Delhi, 2003.
17. N Kumar. ‘Pollution Studies on River Ramganga at Moradabad’.
ME Thesis, Env Engg Section, Civil Engg Deptt, UOR, Roorkee,
1997.
18. World Health Organization. ‘Water Quality: Guidelines, Standards
and Health’. IWA Publishing, 2002, London.
19. S J Arceivala. ‘Wastewater Treatment and Disposal’. Marcel
Dekker, Inc Newyork and Basal, 1981.
20. A H EL-Shaarawi and R E Kwiatkowski. ‘Statistical Aspects of
Water Quality Monitoring’. Elsevier Science Publishers, New York,
1985.
21. C N Sawyer, P L McCarty and G F Parkin. ‘Chemistry for
Environmental Engineering’. Fifth Edition, Tata McGraw-Hill
Publication Co Ltd, New Delhi, 2003.
22. C Gantzer, P Gaspard,L Galvez, A Huyard, N Dumouthier and J
Schwartzbrod. ‘Monitoring of Bacterial and Parasitological
Contamination During Various Treatment of Sludge’. Journal of
Water Research, vol 35, no 16, 2001, pp 3763 - 3770.
23. P R Trevedi. ‘Environmental Pollution and Control’. APH
Publishing Corporation, New Delhi, 2004.
60 IE(I) Journal–EN