vv

Life Sciences Group

Global Journal of Ecology

DOI CC By

Padmanabha B*
Research Article
Post graduate, Department of Applied Zoology,
Maharani’s science college for women, University of
Mysore. Mysuru-570005, India Comparative study on the
Dates: Received: 07 August, 2017; Accepted: 21
October, 2017; Published: 23 October, 2017
hydrographical status in the lentic and
*Corresponding author: Padmanabha B,
Post graduate, Department of Applied Zool-
lotic ecosystems
ogy, Maharani’s science college for women,
University of Mysore. Mysuru-570005, India, E-mail:

Abstract
Keywords: lentic, lotic; WQI; hydrography; lakes; Ka-
very; Mysuru The objective of this study is to assess the hydrography in the lentic and lotic ecosystems. According
https://www.peertechz.com to this study, the Water Quality Index of lentic ecosystem is highest in the Kukkarahalli lake (106.32),
followed by Karanji lake (97.42), Varuna lake (95.73) and lowest in the Kamana lake (94.62). The Water
Quality Index of lotic ecosystem (Kavery river) is highest in the Sangama (99.33), followed by Snanghat
(96.40), Chandravana (93.05) and lowest in the Paschimavahini (90.48). So, the Water Quality Index of
lentic ecosystem is higher than the lotic ecosystem in general. This indicates that, the water quality of
standing water is deteriorated more than the running water.

Introduction wide to a major river that is kilometers in width. Despite these

differences, the following unifying characteristics make the
Water is essential for the survival of any forms of life. For ecology of running waters unique from that of other aquatic
confirming the good quality of water resources large number habitats. Flow is unidirectional. There is a state of continuous
of physico-chemical or biological parameters studied in detail physical change. There is a high degree of spatial and temporal
and must be found in normal range. In any rational formulation heterogeneity at all scales (microhabitats). Variability between
and deciding quality of water, an adequate knowledge of lotic systems is quite high.
existing nature of physico-chemical parameters, magnitude
and source of pollutants must be known, for which monitoring Physico-Chemical analysis of water sample gives a picture
of hydrographical parameters and pollutants is essential. of the physical and chemical constituents which would give us
In recent years, rivers are the amongst the most vulnerable only certain numerical value but for estimating exact quality of
water bodies to pollution as a consequence of unprecedented water an indexing system has been developed known as “Water
development. Thus the water quality of these water resources is Quality Index (WQI)”. WQI gives us an idea regarding the quality
a subject of ongoing concern and has resulted in an increasing of entire aquatic system. Water quality index is defined as “a
demand for monitoring river water quality. The quality of rating of water quality, which reflects the composite influence
water is described by its physical, chemical and microbiological of different water quality parameters on the overall quality of
characteristics. Therefore a regular monitoring of fresh water water”. Large amount of water quality data is reduced in to
bodies not only prevents outbreak of disease and checks water single numerical value to formulate water quality index. The

from further deterioration, but also provides a scope to assess water quality index of lotic ecosystems studies were carried

the current investments for pollution prevention and control. out by few researchers [1,2]. Few limnologists formulated
the Water quality Index in the lotic ecosystems to know the
A lotic ecosystem is the ecosystem of a river, stream or water quality status [3-6]. Some other hydrologists assessed
spring. Included in the environment are the biotic interactions the physico-chemical parameters and computed water quality
(amongst plants, animals and micro-organisms) as well as the index in the ground water [7-9]. The comparative study was
abiotic interactions (physical and chemical). Lotic ecosystems carried out on water quality index in the lakes of Mysore [10].
can be contrasted with lentic ecosystems, which involve The water quality parameters of Kavery river was quantified
relatively still terrestrial waters such as lakes and ponds. and water quality index was computed [11,12]. The surface
Together, these two fields form the more general study area water quality was assessed and compared by employing water
of freshwater or aquatic ecology. Lotic waters can be diverse in quality indices [13]. Water Quality Assessment was carried out
their form, ranging from a spring that is only a few centimeters in terms of Water Quality Index [14].

0015

Citation: Padmanabha B (2017) Comparative study on the hydrographical status in the lentic and lotic ecosystems. Glob J Ecol 2(1): 015-018.
 The Kaveri is a large Indian river. The origin of the river is at Where Va-Actual amount of nth water quality parameter,
Talakaveri, Kodagu in Karnataka, flows through Karnataka and Vi = The ideal value of water quality parameter, Vi = 0 except
Tamil Nadu and across the southern Deccan plateau. The water for pH and D.O, (Vi= 7.0 mg/ lit for pH and Vs = 14.6 mg/ lit
from this river is used as potable water in the river basins of for D.O.)
Karnataka and Tamilnadu. The river water is supplied to cities
like Mysuru, Mandya, Bangalore etc., for drinking purpose. The Vs- Standard Value
four lakes namely Kamana, Varuna, Karanji and kukkarahally
2. Unit Weight (wi) for various parameters is inversely
lakes are water feeding source to human utility and agriculture.
proportional to the recommend standard (Sn) for the
The present study is carried out to evaluate the suitability
corresponding parameter
of Kavery river water to human consumption and the water 1
quality of lotic ecosystem is compared with lentic ecosystems. Wi= K/ Sn, Where K (constant) = 1 / Vs1  1 / Vs2  1 / Vs3  1 / Vs4      1 / Vsn

Materials and Methods VSn = ‘n’ number of standard values (9 parameters).

The surface water samples collected in each month from Results and Discussion
January 2011 to December 2013 & subjected to hydrographical
analysis. The methodology followed as per standard According to the results, the quality rating of Biochemical
specifications [15-19], for the investigation of water quality Oxygen Demand is more than 100 in the Chandravana (108)
parameters. In this study few hydrographical parameter are and Sangama (126) of Kavery river. All other hydrographical
estimated in four sites (Sangama, Snanghat, Chandravana and parameters are within 100, which indicates that all these water
Paschimavahini) of the Kavery river and four lakes (Kamana, quality parameters are within the prescribed standards. In
Varuna, karanji and Kukkarahally lakes) in the Mysuru. Few comparison, in the lotic ecosystem the highest Water Quality
physicochemical parameters like pH, Dissolved oxygen, total Index is recorded in the Sangama (99.40) of Kaveri river
alkalinity, chloride, hardness, carbondioxde, were estimated followed by Snanghat (96.40), Chandravana (93.05) and lowest
at spot immediately after collection of the sample and other in the Paschimavahini (90.48) (Table 1).

chemical analysis for total solids, calcium, magnesium, B.O.D.

According to the results, In Kamara lake only magnesium
carried out in laboratory.
(123.33) quality rating was more than 100, whereas other
parameters were within 100 indicates that these were within
Water Quality Index (WQI) computation
the prescribed ICMR and WHO standards. In Karanji lake the
For the computation of the Water Quality Index, 9 Water quality rating of dissolved oxygen (100) and magnesium (150)
Quality parameters are considered [20,21]. The recorded Water was more than 100. In Kukkarahally lake the quality rating of
Quality Parameter values are compared with the ICMR and WHO pH (153), total dissolved solids (132), dissolved oxygen (112.5),
recommended standards [22-24], for water quality parameters total hardness (120) and magnesium (250) was more than 100.
to compute Water Quality Index. Water quality parameters are All other parameters are within the prescribed standards. In
studied from the point of view to know the status of water the lentic ecosystem the highest value of WQI is documented
quality. in the Kukkarahalli Lake (106.32), followed by Karanji Lake
(97.42), Varuna Lake (95.73) and lowest in the Kamana Lake
Water Quality Index (WQI) = ∑qiwi,. Where qi = quality (94.62).
rating, wi = unit weight
As per the results in the table 1 & 2, the highest Water
1. Quality rating qi =100(Va-Vi) / (Vs-Vi) or Quality Index is recorded in the Lentic ecosystem (Kukkarahalli

Table1: Water quality rating and Sub index (qiwi) of four sites in the Kavery river.
Parameter Water Quality rating (qi) Sub index (qiwi)
unit weight
Paschima (wi) Paschima
Chandravana Snanaghat Sangama Chandravana Snanaghat Sangama
vahini vahini
pH 71 53 80 73 0.20 14.2 10.6 16 14.6
TDS 55 50 14 43 0.004 0.165 0.2 0.05 0.17
Dissolved Oxygen 81 79 84 69 0.35 28.35 27.65 29.4 24.15
Biochemical
88 108 97 126 0.35 30.8 37.6 34.2 44.1
Oxygen Demand
Chloride 15.04 10.4 18 17.8 0.007 0.10 0.0728 0.12 0.12
Total Alkalinity 41 49 38 50 0.01 0.41 0.49 0.38 0.5
Total Hardness 50 49 49 32.4 0.005 0.25 0.245 0.24 1.62
Calcium 62 65 64 53 0.2 12.4 13 12.8 10.6
Magnesium 76 80 80 86.6 0.04 3.8 3.2 3.2 3.46
Water Quality Index (∑qi wi) 90.48 93.05 96.40 99.33
Average WQI of lotic ecosystem 94.8
0016

Citation: Padmanabha B (2017) Comparative study on the hydrographical status in the lentic and lotic ecosystems. Glob J Ecol 2(1): 015-018.
Table 2: Water quality rating and Sub index (qiwi) of four lakes.
Parameter Water Quality rating (qi) unit weight Sub index (qiwi)
Kamana lake Varuna lake Karanji lake Kukkarahally lake (wi) Kamana lake Varuna lake Karanji lake Kukkarahally lake
pH 46.6 93.33 73 153 0.20 9.32 18.66 14.6 30.6
TDS 76.6 50.6 80.6 132 0.004 0.3064 0.20 0.32 0.528
Dissolved Oxygen 97 97.91 100 112.5 0.35 33.95 34.26 35 39.375
Biochemical
88 90 76 32 0.35 30.8 31.5 26.6 11.2
Oxygen Demand
Chloride 32.4 16 16.8 38.4 0.007 0.22 0.11 0.1176 0.2688
Total Alkalinity 73.33 28.33 33 15.8 0.01 0.73 0.28 0.33 0.158
Total Hardness 45.2 25.2 90 120 0.005 0.22 0.126 0.45 0.6
Calcium 70 39 70 68 0.2 14 7.8 14 13.6
Magnesium 123.33 70 150 250 0.04 4.9 2.8 6 10
Water Quality Index (∑qi wi) 94.62 95.73 97.42 106.32
Average WQI of lentic ecosystem 98.5

Lake- 106.32) & lowest in the Lotic ecosystem (Paschimavahini < 50 (0–50) – fit for human consumption, WQI<80 (51–80) –
90.48). The average WQI was more in lentic ecosystem (98.5) moderately polluted, WQI<100 (80-100) – Excessively polluted
than lotic ecosystem (94.8). and WQI > 100 – severely polluted [1,5,10]. In lotic ecosystem
the WQI of all the 4 sites are within 100. So, in future the water
Kukkarahalli lake is highly polluted due to sewage and quality may be deteriorate further and it may even hamper the
excessive land encroachments and blockage of water flow agricultural yield. So some necessary preventive measures to
source almost lead to the eutrophication of the lake so the
control the pollution level increase. In the Lentic ecosystem the
pollution is high in Kukkarahalli lake. In Karanji lake disposals
Water Quality Index of Kukkarahalli lake is above 100. So, it
of sewage from the nearby residential areas are let into lake.
is highly polluted and the Water Quality of other 3 lakes are
This pollution leads to the destruction of aquatic life in the
below 100 and their pollution level increases significantly. In
lake. In order to prevent the destruction of aquatic life in the
conclusion, the higher water quality index indicated that lentic
lake and to renovate it, restoration activities are undertaken by
ecosystems water quality deteriorated significantly when
zoo authority of Karnataka. The restoration activities includes
compared with lotic ecosystem.
removal of polluted silt, de-weeding of the entire lake surface,
removing 30 cm of silt from the lake, restoration of feeder References
channels. Kamana lake and Varuna lake are comparably less
polluted than other two lakes. Due to anthropogenic activities 1. Mohanta BK, Patra AK (2000) Studies in the water quality index of river
Sanamachhakananda at Keonjargarh, Orissa, India. Poll Res 19: 377-385.
such as washing, bathing, disposal of wastes, agricultural
runoff and domestic sewage water is excessively polluted. 2. Sinha DK, Shilpi Saxena, Ritesh saxena (2004) Water quality index for Ram
Ganga river water at Moradabad. Poll Res 23: 527-531.
In lotic ecosystem, among four sites the high WQI recorded
in the Sangama (99.33), followed by Snanghat (96.40), 3. Bahera H, Pal L, Rout SP (2004) Seasonal variations in the water quality index
Chandravana (93.05) and lowest in the Paschimavahini (90.48). for Vani Vihar Lake in Bhuvaneshwar. In: Water pollution (Edr. Aravind Ku-
mar). APH Publ Corp, New Delhi. 199-209.
Increase in the WQI reflects higher pollution load so, Sangama
is highly polluted site than other 3 sites along Kaveri river due 4. Mohanty SK (2004) Water quality index of four religious ponds and
to anthropogenic activities. In the Kavery river, Sangama has its seasonal variation in the Temple city, Bhuvaneshwar. In: Water
higher pollution than snanghat. Here human activities are pollution (Edr. Arvind Kumar). APH Publ Corp, New Delhi. 211-218. Link:
more such as bathing, washing and disposal of wastes and also https://goo.gl/xNh5Rz
it is one of the most attractive tourist spot where Large number
5. Kesharwani S, Mandoli AK, Dube KK (2004) Determination of water quality
of peoples visited to this site this leads to very high floating index (WQI) of Amkhera pond of Jabalpur city (MP). Ntl J Life Sci 1: 61-66.
population. Because of this reason there is more pollution. In
Chandravana WQI recorded is (93.04). The main polluters in this 6. Swain SK, S Mohapatra, RK Patel (2005) A measure of pollution load in ponds
sites are agricultural runoff, industrial and domestic sewage. of Puri, Orissa on the basis of NSF-WQI suggestions. Poll. Res 24: 599-603.

Huge quantities of fertilizers and pesticides are discharged 7. Marriappan V, Jeyprakash R, Mallika RDD, Ramasubbu R, Ramasubramanian
into the river as agricultural runoff this leads to the pollution. V (2004) An analysis of Physico-Chemical characteristics of ground water
Similar observation was made by aquatic researchers in the quality and quality index in and around Sivakasi town. In: Water pollution (Ed.
Kavery river at tamilnadu [25]. In other other lotic ecosystems Arvind Kumar) APH Publ corp, New Delhi. 65-71.
also the water quality deteriorated in the increasing order from
8. Mariappan V, Rajan MR, Ravindran DA, Prabakaran PP (2005) A systematic
the upstream to the downstream [26-29].
study of water quality index among the physico-chemical characteristics of
ground water in and around Thanjavur town. IJEP 25: 551-555.
When 0>WQI< 100 indicates that the water is considered
as good for human consumption. If WQI>100 reflects its 9. Venkatasubramani R, Murali K, Meenambal T (2005) Ground water quality
unsuitability for human use. It has been accepted that if WQI index for Coimbatore east zone. Nat Env & Poll Tech 4: 199-202.

0017

Citation: Padmanabha B (2017) Comparative study on the hydrographical status in the lentic and lotic ecosystems. Glob J Ecol 2(1): 015-018.
10. Padmanabha B, Belagali SL (2005) Comparative study on the water 20. Harkins RD (1974) An objective of water quality index. J Watr Poll Contr Fedr
quality index of four lakes in the Mysore city. IJEP 25: 873 - 876. Link: 46: 589. Link: https://goo.gl/E4h2bB
https://goo.gl/obcas5
21. Kesharwani S, Mandoli AK, Dube KK (2004) Determination of water quality
11. Basu S, lokesh KS (2012) Evaluation of Cauvery River Water Quality index (WQI) of Amkhera pond of Jabalpur city (MP). Ntl J Life Sci 1: 61-66.
at Srirangapatna in Karnataka using Principal Component Analysis.
International Journal of Engineering and Science. 1: 6 – 12. Link: 22. Indian standard Institute (ISI) (1983) Indian standard specification for
https://goo.gl/wWfbqv
drinking water.

12. Kalavathy S, Sharma RT, Sureshkumar P (2011) Water quality index of river
23. ICMR (1977) Manual of standards of quality for drinking water supplies. 2nd
Cauvery in Triruchirappalli district, Tamilnadu. Arch Environ sci 5: 55-61. Link:
edition Indian Council of Medical Research, Govt of India, New Delhi.
https://goo.gl/a6D3nC

13. Katyal D (2011) Water Quality Indices Used for Surface Water Vulnerability 24. WHO (1984) A Guideline for drinking water quality, (Recommendations),
Assessment. IJES 2: 22-41. Link: https://goo.gl/TkR9Du World health organization Geneva. 1-130. Link: https://goo.gl/etDRZK

14. Tyagi S, Sharma B, Singh P, Dobhal R (2013) Water Quality Assessment in 25. Annalakshmi G, Amsath A (2012) An Assessment of Water Quality of River
Terms of Water Quality Index. AJWR 1: 34-38. Link: https://goo.gl/ScmLDR Cauvery and its Tributaries Arasalar with reference to Physico- chemical
Parameters at Tanjore DT, Tamilnadu, India. International Journal of
15. Trivedy RK, Goel PK (1986) Chemical and Biological methods for water Appiled Biology and Pharmaceutical Technology. 3: 269-279. Link:
pollution studies. Environmedia, Karad, Maharastra, India.
https://goo.gl/c5cQqr

16. Gopalan R, Anand A (1988) Environmental chemistry laboratory manual.

26. Narain S, Chauhan R (2000) Water Quality Status of River Complex Yamuna
Emerald publ., Madras. Link: https://goo.gl/eujVek
at Panchnada (DISTT: Etawah, UP, India. Poll Res 19: 357-364.
17. APHA-AWWA-WPCF (1989) Standard Methods for the examination of
water and waste water. 18th edition, American Public Health Association, 27. Sinha AK, Saxena S, Saxena R (2004) Water quality index for Ram Ganga river
Washington, D.C. 2005. water at Moradabad. Poll Res 23: 527-531.

18. Manivasakam (1996) Physico-chemical examination of water, sewage and 28. Bhanja K Mohanta, Ajoyku Patra (2004) Studies on the water quality index of
Industrial effluents (3rd edn). Pragathi prakashan publishers, Coimbatore. river Sanamachhakandana Garh, Orissa, India. Poll Res 19: 377-385.
Link: https://goo.gl/qUki2P
29. Mahesh Kumar, Akkaraboyina, Raju BSN (2012) A Comparative Study of
19. Kodarkar MS, Diwan AD, Murugan N, Kulkarni KM, Anuradha Ramesh Water Quality Indices of River Godavari . International Journal of Engineering
(1998) Methodology for water analysis (physico-chemical, biological and Research and Development 2: 29-34. Link: https://goo.gl/3wpdTp
microbiological). IAAB Publ. Hyderabad.

Copyright: © 2017 Padmanabha B. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted
use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

0018

Citation: Padmanabha B (2017) Comparative study on the hydrographical status in the lentic and lotic ecosystems. Glob J Ecol 2(1): 015-018.