IntechOpen

Home > Books > Inland Waters - Ecology, Limnology and Environmental Protection [Working Title]

Open access peer-reviewed chapter - ONLINE FIRST

Analysis of Heavy Metal Toxicity in the Surface and Bottom Waters of Lower Lake Bhopal, M.P. (India)

Written By

Aarefa Jan, Suchitra Banerjee, Rajendra Chouhan, Subrata Pani and Saima Syed

Submitted: 01 January 2024 Reviewed: 03 February 2024 Published: 27 March 2024

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.1004579

Inland Waters - Ecology, Limnology and Environmental Protection IntechOpen
Inland Waters - Ecology, Limnology and Environmental Protection Edited by Mohamed Nageeb Rashed

From the Edited Volume

Inland Waters - Ecology, Limnology and Environmental Protection [Working Title]

Prof. Mohamed Nageeb Rashed

Chapter metrics overview

4 Chapter Downloads

View Full Metrics
Advertisement

Abstract

The present study was focused on the assessment of heavy metals in Lower Lake of Bhopal. With reference to toxic metal contamination, water samples were collected quaterly from four stations mentioned for a period of two years (January 2020 to December 2021). Heavy metals, i.e., iron, zinc, chromium, copper, and nickel were determined in surface and bottom waters taken from the Lower Lake, Bhopal, using atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) according to the Standard Methods of American Public Health Association (APHA). The range values of these metals were compared with the tolerance limits as laid down by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), India. Results of this analysis revealed that the concentration of these metals was below the permissible limits both in surface and bottom waters except Fe, which was alarming. It was concluded that the metals (Fe, Zn, Cr, Cu, and Ni) were present in water, and the contamination was supposed to be due to a high degree of anthropogenic stress including idol immersion activity. The water quality of the Lake reveals that although the situation is not too bad, it is alarming. Proper conservation and management plans and strategies have to be formulated and implemented for the restoration, conservation, and management of these water bodies at the government and public level.

Keywords

  • Lower Lake
  • toxic metals
  • AAS
  • contamination
  • anthropogenic activities

1. Introduction

One of the main issues facing modern human society is environmental degradation [1]. Environmental pollution has been rising steadily over the last few decades because of rapidly expanding industry, rising energy consumption, and thoughtless loss of natural resources [2]. The soil and aquatic ecosystems are continually exposed to a variety of harmful organic and inorganic chemicals from various natural and anthropogenic sources. Heavy metals are one of them, and they contribute significantly to environmental pollution both because they are hazardous and because they have the capacity to bioaccumulate in the food chain [3]. Water quality assessment of water bodies like Lakes has become an important issue due to increased water pollution caused by human interference [4]. Lakes have been continuously contaminated by the encroachment of lake areas due to human settlements, release of industrial waste, sewage, dumping of garbage, etc. By assessing the water quality of lakes, pollution load caused by human activities can be monitored regularly, and water pollution can be controlled. The water quality index tells the water quality status of a water source and has been applied for both surface and groundwater quality assessment [5]. WQI reduces a large amount of water quality data into easily understandable information to the public and to the concerned authorities and policymakers [6]. WQI detects and evaluates the level of contamination of any water body and helps in water quality management [7]. Water purity is considered as a major concern for humanity since it is the main resource for sustaining life [8]. Due to the concomitant rise of human activity adjacent to the rivers over the past few decades, harmful chemical compounds are contaminating water supplies at an accelerated pace [2, 3]. Among the most significant pollutants are toxic metals, which pose a global problem due to their protracted retention in waterways and soils, rising geo-ecological dangers, and disruption of normal biochemical processes [9, 10]. Numerous toxic metals are created and discharged into our aquatic system because of human endeavors like agriculture, mining, industry, or urbanization. These metals then accumulate in soils and are biomagnified through the food chain cycle [11, 12].

In order to assess the quality of the water, physiochemical factors are crucial. The relationship between toxic metals and physicochemical characteristics may be seen in the way that a higher concentration of toxic metals is linked to a decrease in oxygen demand in water. Among the most harmful types of water contamination is toxic metals [13]. Cu and Zn are among those that are necessary for living things, whereas other elements like Pb, Cd, and Al are harmful to them [14]. Toxic metals are essential elements for drinking water guidelines in determining the purity of water for consumption [15]. The ecotoxicological impacts of toxic substances on living things include both necessary and non-essential elements [16]. In order to reduce sewage disposal, various preventive strategies and nature-based approaches are being used to limit toxic metal inflow into our water systems; however, toxic metal accumulation persists within aquatic habitats [17, 18, 19, 20, 21].

As a result, water contamination, evaluation, and monitoring were essential due to their immediate impacts on aquatic life as well as human health [22]. Because they were also non-degradable and hazardous even at small doses, lead and mercury can accumulate via food chain. On the contrary, important micronutrients, such as copper, zinc, and iron, have adverse impacts on the biology of living things when in large quantities [23, 24]. Heavy metals concentration in the groundwater could be due to various anthropogenic activities that release various types of contaminants [25]. The potential health risks of heavy metal contamination in groundwater sources of southwestern Punjab showed that the Hg, Pb, As, and Se concentrations are above the guideline values of the World Health Organization [26]. Contamination of freshwater sources can be caused by both anthropogenic and natural processes. According to the Central Pollution Control Board, Maharashtra along with two other states, contributes 80% of hazardous waste generated in India, including heavy metal pollution [27].

The present study has been carried out to evaluate the heavy metal toxicity in Lower Lake of Bhopal.

Advertisement

2. Methodology, results, and discussion

2.1 Description of sampling site

The Lower Lake, also known as Chhota Talaab, is a lake situated in Bhopal, the capital of the Indian province of Madhya Pradesh (Figure 1) (coordinates: 23016′0″N 77025′0″E). The Lake has a 1.29 km2 (0.50 sq. mi) contact area, a maximal depth of 10.7 m, and normal depths of about 6.2 m (20 ft) (35 ft). In addition, the Lake’s coverage area is 9.6 km2 (3.7 sq. mi). It makes up the wetlands of Bhoj along with Bhojtal, or Lake Superior. The Chhota Talaab is plagued by contamination brought on by emptying nalllahs laden with sewage, a shortage of freshwater sources, and industrial laundry. The whole Lake was nutrient-rich, so the water was unfit for human consumption. Among all of these, tourists can find a great place to sit and enjoy the beauty of the city’s surroundings at the Lake.

Figure 1.

Lower Lake Bhopal (source: Google earth).

2.1.1 Study area

Lower Lake, which is a part of Bhoj Wetland (together known as Upper and Lower Lakes), was created by constructing an earthen dam (Pul Pukhta) in the seventeenth century. The Lake water was never used as potable water, even though it was not required because the other lake, i.e., upper lake water, was sufficient to meet the demand for potable water. The Lower Lake water was generally used for other purposes like irrigation, gardening, horticulture, washing clothes, bathing, and recreational activities.

2.2 Sampling technique

The current study was conducted from January 2020 to December 2021 to assess the water quality of Lower Lake from four stations. The sampling sites have been selected at various locations along Lower Lake Bhopal. For toxicological studies, water samples were collected during different seasons (quarterly), viz. January to March, April to June, July to September, and October to December. The descriptions of the sampling stations are described in Table 1.

Sampling stationLatitudeLongitudeMASL
Ginnori (St-1)23°01′09.81″N77°23′37″E437 m
Bhoipura (St-2)23°07′09.99″N77°35′40.23″E411 m
Khatlapura (St-3)23°11′55.82″N77°39′01.63″E405 m
Center (St-4)23°17′01.74″N77°41′31.56″E399 m

Table 1.

Sampling stations along with global positioning system.

During the period of investigation quarterly samples were collected from four identified sampling stations. Water samples were collected in sterile glass bottles, jerry cans from each station following the standard methods [28].

2.3 Detailed description of the stations

Detailed description of the stations of both (Table 1) and (Figure 2) are given below:

Figure 2.

Sampling stations of Lower Lake (Google source).

2.3.1 Ginnori (St-1)

This station is close to Kamla Park at the Lake’s northernmost end (Killole Park). The area of the Lake is among the most contaminated regions and has consistently shown exceptionally high levels of PO4, NO3, Ca, Mg, and other minerals. The water has an extremely high concentration of inorganic components since this area is a hub for washermen’s work. As a result, Microcystis aeruginosa outbreaks at high densities and were consistently seen over the seasons in all water columns. The epilimnion region is also confined to a few millimeters, which restricts the development of subsurface macrophytes and speeds up breakdown processes. Elevated biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD) levels were also detected in the vicinity, which is consistent with washermen’s activity.

2.3.2 Bhoipura (St-2)

This station lies close to Bhoipura. The wastewater that enters this site through the nearby inlets, which carries household pollutants from the numerous residential areas, has an effect on the water. This location is a highly impacted site for idol immersion practices as well as being vulnerable to human activities (swimming, bathing, etc.).

2.3.3 Khatlapura (St-3)

This station is among the main locations for idol immersion events and is close to Khatlapura Mandir. In addition to all this, local devotees who visit the temples for devotion also toss the puja items—flowers, incense sticks, coconuts, etc.—into the Lake. These are extremely degradable materials that are to blame for the water’s rising biological oxygen requirement.

2.3.4 Center (St-4)

The sample station is located between MLB Hostel and MLB Campus (Figure 2). Sampling site 4, which is located in the Lower Lake’s bottom zones, is among the Lake’s highest contaminated regions. The purity of the water in this location, though, began to improve.

2.4 Determination of heavy metals

To evaluate the presence of heavy metals in water samples, saturated HCl was used to extract them, and the specimens were stored in a refrigerator until analysis. The metals assessed included Fe, Zn, Cr, Cu, and Ni. The analysis of heavy metals was carried out using an Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer (Parkin Elmer Analyst AA100) and a UV Visible Spectrophotometer (HACH DREL 4000), following the procedure outlined in the Hach Manual (2010) (Table 2).

ParameterConcentration (μg/l) in present investigationPermissible limit (inland surface water in mg/l)Remarks
Fe2.0363.0Within permissible limits but alarming
Zn1.2365.0Within permissible limit
Cr0.5012.0Within permissible limit
Cu0.0093.0Below permissible limit
Ni0.0643.0Within permissible limit

Table 2.

General standards** for discharge of environmental pollutants [29].

These standards shall be applicable for industries, operations, or processes other than those industries, operations or process for which standards have been specified in Schedule of the Environment Protection Rules, 1986.


Advertisement

3. Results

3.1 Iron

3.1.1 Surface water

Variation in iron in surface water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Heavy metals in surface water of lower Lake: iron (μg/liter).

During the period of investigation, iron at the surface was observed within the range of 0.144–2.036 μg/liter. The minimum value of iron was recorded at station 1, and the maximum value of iron was recorded at station 2. During this period, the maximum value of iron was observed in June 2020. Higher values of iron were recorded at station 2 and station 3 compared to other stations.

3.1.2 Bottom water

Variation in iron in bottom water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Heavy metals in bottom water of lower Lake: iron (μg/liter) during 2020–2021.

During the period of investigation, iron at bottom water was observed within the range of 0.586 to 1.988 μg/liter. The minimum value of iron was recorded at station 2, and the maximum value of iron was recorded at station 3. During this period, the maximum value of iron was observed in November 2020. Higher values of iron were recorded at station 3 and station 1 compared to other stations.

3.2 Zinc

3.2.1 Surface water

Variation in zinc in surface water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Heavy metals in surface water of lower Lake: zinc (μg/liter) during 2020–2021.

During the period of investigation, zinc in surface water was observed within the range of nil to 1.236 μg/liter. The minimum value of zinc was recorded at many stations, and the maximum value of zinc was recorded at station 1. During this period, the maximum value of zinc was observed in June 2021. Higher values of zinc were recorded at station 1 and station 3 compared to other stations.

3.2.2 Bottom water

Variation in zinc in bottom water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Figure 6.

Figure 6.

Heavy metals in bottom water of lower Lake: zinc (μg/liter) during 2020–2021.

During the period of investigation, zinc at bottom water was observed within the range of 0.021–0.604 μg/liter. The minimum value of zinc was recorded at station 2, and the maximum value of zinc was also recorded at station 2. During this period, the maximum value of zinc was observed in September 2021, followed by January 2021. Higher values of zinc were recorded at station 2 and station 3 compared to other stations.

3.3 Chromium

3.3.1 Surface water

Variation in chromium in surface water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Figure 7.

Figure 7.

Heavy metals in surface water of lower Lake: chromium (μg/liter) during 2020–2021.

During the period of investigation, chromium at surface water was observed within the range of nil to 0.5 μg/liter. The minimum value of chromium was recorded at station 1 and the maximum value of chromium was recorded at the station 3. During this period, the maximum value of chromium was observed in November 2021. Higher values of chromium were recorded at station 3 and station 2 compared to other stations.

3.3.2 Bottom water

Variation in chromium in bottom water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Figure 8.

Figure 8.

Heavy metals in bottom water of lower Lake: chromium (μg/liter) during 2020–2021.

During the period of investigation, chromium at bottom was observed within the range of 0.013–0.423 μg/liter. The minimum value of chromium was recorded at station 1 and the maximum value was recorded at station 3. During this period, the maximum value of chromium was observed in February 2021, followed by March 2020. Higher values of chromium were recorded at station 3 compared to other stations.

3.4 Copper

3.4.1 Surface water

Variation in copper in surface water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Figure 9.

Figure 9.

Heavy metals in surface water of lower Lake: copper (μg/liter) during 2020–2021.

During the period of investigation, copper at the surface was observed within the range of 0.001–0.009 μg/liter. The minimum value of copper was recorded at many stations, and the maximum value of copper was recorded at many stations as well.

3.4.2 Bottom water

Variation in copper in bottom water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Figure 10.

Figure 10.

Heavy metals in bottom water of lower Lake: copper (μg/liter) during 2020–2021.

During the period of investigation, copper at bottom water was observed within the range of 0.002–0.009 μg/liter. The minimum value of copper was recorded in many places, and the maximum value of copper was recorded at many stations. During this period, the maximum value of copper was observed in June 2020.

3.5 Nickel

3.5.1 Surface water

Variation in nickel in surface water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Figure 11.

Figure 11.

Heavy metals in surface water of lower Lake: nickel (μg/liter) during 2020–2021.

During the period of investigation, nickel in surface water was observed within the range of 0.011–0.039 μg/liter. The minimum value of nickel was recorded in many places, and the maximum value of nickel was recorded at station 2. During this period, the maximum value of nickel was observed in October 2020, followed by October 2021. Higher values of nickel were recorded at station 2 and station 3 compared to other stations.

3.5.2 Bottom water

Variation in nickel in bottom water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Figure 12.

Figure 12.

Heavy metals in bottom water of lower Lake: nickel (μg/liter) during 2020–2021.

During the period of investigation, nickel at bottom water was observed within the range of 0.009–0.064 μg/liter. The minimum value of nickel was recorded at station 1, and the maximum value of nickel was recorded at station 3. During this period, the maximum value of nickel was observed in November 2020. Higher values of nickel were recorded at stations 3 and 2 compared to other stations.

3.6 Iron

3.6.1 Surface water

Variation in iron in surface water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Table 3.

20202021
JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC
Ginnori (St-1)0.4930.1281.0141.0110.9840.2460.8560.6440.7811.0130.90.9610.3440.4730.2360.1440.8520.6570.5190.7460.3580.4190.3870.562
Bhoipura (St-2)0.4731.2361.2651.2441.2372.0360.9470.6341.1081.0370.9850.4861.0320.9871.2610.9820.4570.630.1471.0891.0521.0441.0261.027
Khatlapura (St-3)0.6590.4781.21.110.9480.9650.8740.8650.7430.7590.9680.8750.9810.6940.6981.2641.0421.2631.1181.0960.9270.6940.4660.781
Center (St-4)0.4790.6850.9860.3680.4850.4630.2740.1630.3180.2690.8460.8730.6390.7110.2790.4680.4680.5610.6930.2780.2370.2690.7460.478
Min0.4730.1280.9860.3680.4850.2460.2740.1630.3180.2690.8460.4860.3440.4730.2360.1440.4570.5610.1470.2780.2370.2690.3870.478
Max0.6591.2361.2651.2441.2372.0360.9470.8651.1081.0370.9850.9611.0320.9871.2611.2641.0421.2631.1181.0961.0521.0441.0261.027
Mean0.53930.64851.11930.89080.8960.99870.69530.55570.72930.73070.921670.77370.72870.72080.66180.7110.71970.82250.62370.76380.64380.62320.6730.7255

Table 3.

Heavy metals in surface water of lower Lake: iron (μg/liter).

3.6.2 Bottom water

Variation in iron in bottom water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Table 4.

20202021
JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC
Ginnori (St-1)1.4971.1291.0171.0141.5841.2361.3561.4441.4811.0131.1941.9911.4411.4791.4361.2441.7521.6771.5491.7461.3581.4151.3871.542
Bhoipura (St-2)1.4741.2391.2751.2641.2811.0391.9771.6371.1281.4370.9890.5861.6320.9881.2671.9831.4581.6341.1451.1891.2521.1431.1271.125
Khatlapura (St-3)1.6691.6781.2211.241.4481.6610.9761.8671.7731.7791.9881.8791.9841.8941.6911.2641.2421.2731.4181.0921.9471.6941.4761.581
Center (St-4)1.4711.6811.9821.3641.4831.4611.2711.1641.3171.2611.8451.8711.6331.7121.2771.4671.4611.5631.6941.2711.2331.2661.7411.472
Min1.4711.1291.0171.0141.2811.0390.9761.1641.1281.0130.9890.5861.4410.9881.2671.2441.2421.2731.1451.0921.231.1431.1271.125
Max1.6691.6811.9821.3641.5841.6611.9771.8671.7731.7791.9881.9911.9841.8941.6911.9831.7521.6771.6941.7461.951.6941.7411.581
Mean1.54181.42281.41571.211.44351.34951.42221.52381.43331.38031.498831.4841.68581.49251.43821.53081.48451.51621.44081.3561.51.39251.43321.4043

Table 4.

Heavy metals in bottom water of lower Lake: iron (μg/liter).

3.7 Zinc

3.7.1 Surface water

Variation in zinc in surface water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Table 5.

20202021
JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC
Ginnori (St-1)0.5010.1200.220.0330.020010.017000.2500.0031.020.0080.3020.24201.2360.0450.0060.2540.3240.5460.002
Bhoipura (St-2)0.540.5400.2040.00600.020.00100.310.100.5250.5040.2450.010.2300.0350.0020.040.3540.120
Khatlapura (St-3)0.060.060.1260.23000.0030.120.0310.0020.2020.3010.086BDL0.0941.20.650BDL0.1450.1320.0080.3030.225
Center (St-4)0.0560.0090.4250.36400.020.00100.00200.0250.010.5250.5040.2450.010.23BDL00.0350.0020.040.3540.120
Min0.0560.00900.204000.001000000.0860.0080.0940.01000.0350.0020.040.0080.120
Max0.540.540.4250.3640.0330.020.020.120.0310.310.2020.3011.020.5040.3021.20.651.2360.0450.1450.2540.3540.5460.225
Mean0.24260.14760.11020.24440.00780.0080.00840.02420.00660.11240.06540.06280.44840.2560.1960.29440.2220.3090.03750.03140.10120.20960.24180.0454

Table 5.

Heavy metals in surface water of lower Lake: zinc (μg/liter).

3.7.2 Bottom water

Variation in zinc in bottom water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Table 6.

20202021
JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC
Ginnori (St-1)0.5210.1120.1470.3250.2310.2210.1780.2140.2090.2520.2180.3030.4020.3080.3070.3420.2470.2460.4450.4060.4140.5210.5710.202
Bhoipura (St-2)0.5450.5470.3220.2190.2860.3170.0240.0210.2170.3290.4170.2160.4250.5140.2430.4010.3230.3190.1350.2020.6040.4540.4120.317
Khatlapura (St-3)0.5060.4060.3260.4230.4470.3610.2030.2120.2310.3020.2520.3090.5860.4610.1940.2490.2650.4710.3670.2450.4320.5080.3070.225
Center (St-4)0.1560.3090.2210.2340.3270.3020.1010.1190.3020.2790.3250.1010.3250.2040.1450.2010.1230.3420.2350.2020.0410.3240.3120.178
Min0.1560.1120.1470.2190.2310.2210.0240.0210.2090.2520.2180.1010.3250.2040.1450.2010.1230.2460.1350.2020.040.3240.3070.178
Max0.5450.5470.3260.4230.4470.3610.2030.2140.3020.3290.4170.3090.5860.5140.3070.4010.3230.4710.4450.4060.6040.5210.5710.317
Mean0.404830.338830.2481670.307170.328170.297170.122170.13350.2450.29050.3078330.223170.44150.36750.22350.299170.2340.349170.293670.277170.3560.4420.413330.23617

Table 6.

Heavy metals in bottom water of lower Lake: zinc (μg/liter).

3.8 Chromium

3.8.1 Surface water

Variation in chromium in surface water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Table 7.

20202021
JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC
Ginnori (St-1)0.0220.0250.080.0520.0350.0020.0010.0150.0120.020.0050.10.0240.020.0520.0210.0650.0240.210.0130.0020.00800.32
Bhoipura (St-2)0.110.1120.0250.210.3050.010.020.0240.0240.0020.0040.020.140.1540.040.2430.3350.040.0620.0580.0450.010.0090.05
Khatlapura (St-3)0.3210.3220.40.0540.120.1070.0010.0020.0010.001BDLBDL0.210.4210.3260.0350.23BDL0.012BDL0.023BDL0.50.31
Center (St-4)0.080.0350.230.0020.0210.0030.10.1120.04BDL0.0020.0020.140.1540.040.2430.3350.040.0620.0580.0450.010.0090.05
Min0.0220.0250.0250.0020.0210.0020.0010.0020.0010.0010.0020.0020.0240.020.040.0210.0650.0240.0120.0130.0020.00800.05
Max0.3210.3220.40.210.3050.1070.10.1120.040.020.0050.10.210.4210.3260.2430.3350.040.210.0580.0450.010.50.32
Mean0.1110.10380.1520.0640.10040.02480.02460.0310.01560.0060.003250.0310.10760.15380.09960.11260.2060.0320.07160.03550.02340.0090.10360.156

Table 7.

Heavy metals in surface water of lower Lake: chromium (μg/liter).

3.8.2 Bottom water

Variation in chromium in bottom water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Table 8.

20202021
JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC
Ginnori (St-1)0.3290.2180.1270.2110.1450.2150.0410.0910.2070.0130.0170.0420.2470.1540.1130.1270.1440.1240.3270.1250.1090.1150.1320.141
Bhoipura (St-2)0.1170.1190.1250.2140.3250.2010.2020.2240.2240.2020.2040.2020.1140.1570.1040.2490.3450.1040.1620.10580.1450.1010.1090.105
Khatlapura (St-3)0.3270.3290.4120.1540.1290.1370.2110.1420.2010.2110.2310.1710.2170.4230.3290.1350.2340.3190.1120.2780.1230.2310.2170.316
Center (St-4)0.0830.0390.2370.1420.1210.1030.1160.1180.1040.1780.1020.1020.1450.1590.3040.2460.3750.4040.2620.1580.1450.1160.1090.154
Min0.0830.0390.1250.1420.1210.1030.0410.0910.1040.0130.0170.0420.1140.1540.1040.1270.1440.1040.1120.10580.110.1010.1090.105
Max0.3290.3290.4120.2140.3250.2150.2110.2240.2240.2110.2310.2020.2470.4230.3290.2490.3750.4040.3270.2780.150.2310.2170.316
Mean0.18780.14880.20520.17260.16820.15180.12220.13320.1680.12340.11420.11180.16740.20940.19080.17680.24840.2110.1950.15450.130.13280.13520.1642

Table 8.

Heavy metals in bottom water of lower Lake: chromium (μg/liter).

3.9 Copper

3.9.1 Surface water

Variation in copper in surface water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Table 9.

20202021
JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC
Ginnori (St-1)0.0020.0040.0010.0030.0010.0060.0010.0030.0010.0030.0060.0010.0030.0040.0040.0030.0030.0020.0010.0020.0010.0020.0030.003
Bhoipura (St-2)0.0030.0060.0060.0060.0030.0090.0030.0020.0030.0070.0090.0010.0010.0060.0030.0020.0050.0060.0030.0030.0060.0090.0060.004
Khatlapura (St-3)0.0040.0070.0080.0050.0040.0050.0010.0060.0080.0060.0010.0020.0010.0090.0040.0070.0090.0040.0010.0060.0050.0070.0040.009
Center (St-4)0.0010.0030.0020.0020.0010.0030.0010.0010.0020.0020.0030.0010.0020.0030.0030.0010.0020.0030.0010.0040.0030.0010.0020.006
Min0.0010.0030.0010.0020.0010.0030.0010.0010.0010.0020.0010.0010.0010.0030.0030.0010.0020.0020.0010.0020.0010.0010.0020.003
Max0.0040.0070.0080.0060.0040.0090.0030.0060.0080.0070.0090.0020.0030.0090.0040.0070.0090.0060.0030.0060.0060.0090.0060.009
Mean0.00250.0050.00430.0040.00230.00580.00170.00320.00380.00450.004830.00130.00180.00570.00350.00350.0050.00380.00170.00380.00370.00480.00380.0057

Table 9.

Heavy metals in surface water of lower Lake: copper (μg/liter).

3.9.2 Bottom water

Variation in copper in bottom water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Table 10.

20202021
JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULYAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC
Ginnori (St-1)0.0030.0050.0030.0040.0040.0080.0060.0080.0020.0070.0050.0020.0070.0050.0060.0070.0040.0040.0040.0040.0050.0040.0040.005
Bhoipura (St-2)0.0050.0080.0070.0090.0070.0090.0090.0090.0040.0090.0090.0030.0080.0080.0080.0080.0080.0070.0050.0080.0080.0080.0070.008
Khatlapura (St-3)0.0070.0080.0090.0090.0050.0070.0080.0080.0090.0090.0080.0040.0070.0090.0090.0090.0090.0080.0070.0070.0090.0090.0080.007
Center (St-4)0.0030.0040.0040.0060.0060.0040.0040.0040.0030.0040.0040.0040.0040.0040.0040.0040.0070.0040.0030.0060.0040.0040.0040.002
Min0.0030.0040.0030.0040.0040.0040.0040.0040.0020.0040.0040.0020.0040.0040.0040.0040.0040.0040.0030.0040.0040.0040.0040.002
Max0.0070.0080.0090.0090.0070.0090.0090.0090.0090.0090.0090.0040.0080.0090.0090.0090.0090.0080.0070.0080.0090.0090.0080.008
Mean0.00470.00620.00580.00680.00550.00680.00670.0070.00480.0070.00650.00320.00630.00650.00670.00680.00680.00580.00480.00620.00650.00630.00580.005

Table 10.

Heavy metals in bottom water of lower Lake: copper (μg/liter).

3.10 Nickel

3.10.1 Surface water

Variation in nickel in surface water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Table 11.

20202021
JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC
Ginnori (St-1)0.0120.0110.0190.0170.0230.0130.0260.0220.0220.0310.0120.0230.0170.0140.0240.0110.0170.0120.0190.0110.0170.0140.0130.018
Bhoipura (St-2)0.0190.0190.0210.0210.0290.0180.0290.0310.0290.0390.0180.0190.0230.0190.0320.0130.0260.0180.0230.0130.0230.0320.0170.026
Khatlapura (St-3)0.0170.0170.0230.0260.0260.0190.0210.0260.0260.0350.0210.0240.0280.0210.0270.0190.0310.0210.0280.0190.0290.0380.0280.027
Center (St-4)0.0110.0130.0160.020.0190.0130.0160.0210.0210.0110.0110.0190.0120.0110.0130.0120.0240.0110.0170.0110.0180.0310.0110.013
Min0.0110.0110.0160.0170.0190.0130.0160.0210.0210.0110.0110.0190.0120.0110.0130.0110.0170.0110.0170.0110.0170.0140.0110.013
Max0.0190.0190.0230.0260.0290.0190.0290.0310.0290.0390.0210.0240.0280.0210.0320.0190.0310.0210.0280.0190.0290.0380.0280.027
Mean0.01480.0150.01970.02120.02420.01580.02280.02530.02470.02770.015670.02130.020.01620.02350.01420.02430.01570.0220.0140.02220.02780.0180.02

Table 11.

Heavy metals in surface water of lower Lake: nickel (μg/liter).

3.10.2 Bottom water

Variation in nickel in bottom water during various months of 2020–2021 at different stations of Lower Lake is depicted in Table 12.

20202021
JANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDEC
Ginnori (St-1)0.0170.0190.0230.0220.0270.0090.0310.0370.0390.0380.0270.0380.0210.0160.0340.0180.0210.0160.0220.0170.0230.0170.0230.011
Bhoipura (St-2)0.0360.0230.0380.0410.0220.0390.0280.0170.0360.0440.0390.0240.0180.0390.0330.0240.0410.0360.0390.0110.0230.0120.0350.032
Khatlapura (St-3)0.0190.0210.0360.0380.0330.0370.0410.0390.0280.0230.0640.0220.0180.0290.0370.0460.0410.0230.0480.0440.0290.0360.0370.039
Center (St-4)0.0220.0360.0170.0260.0390.0280.0390.0410.0340.0330.0210.0260.0340.0280.0390.0140.0230.0170.0240.0180.0130.0220.0170.016
Min0.0170.0190.0170.0220.0220.0090.0280.0170.0280.0230.0210.0220.0180.0160.0330.0140.0210.0160.0220.0110.0130.0120.0170.011
Max0.0360.0360.0380.0410.0390.0390.0410.0410.0390.0440.0640.0380.0340.0390.0390.0460.0410.0360.0480.0440.0290.0360.0370.039
Mean0.02450.02570.02820.03170.03030.02680.03470.0320.0340.03420.039330.02830.02380.02780.03580.0270.03130.0240.03380.02420.02170.02250.02770.0247

Table 12.

Heavy metals in bottom water of lower Lake: nickel (μg/liter).

Advertisement

4. Results and discussion

In India, the most anthropogenic sources of metals are industrial, petroleum contamination, and sewage disposal Vishwakarma et al. [30]. During the present investigation, comparatively in monsoon and post-monsoon months, metal ions can be incorporated into food chains and concentrated in aquatic organisms to a level that affects their physiological state. Of the effective pollutants are the heavy metals, which have a drastic environmental impact on all organisms. Trace metals such as Pb, Fe, Zn, Hg, Cr, Cd, Co, and Ni can play a biochemical role in the life processes of all aquatic plants and animals; therefore, they are essential in the aquatic environment in trace amounts of Mason [31].

During the present investigation, it was observed that the metals in the Lake water attained their maximum values during monsoon and post-monsoon seasons. Station 2, followed by stations 3 and 1, ranked first in the accumulation of metals, while station 4 ranked last. This may be attributed to the discharge of sewage effluents from the adjacent habitation clusters where a well-developed and operational Sewage and Effluent Treatment Plant has yet to be fully established.

The maximum mean values of the measured metals were recorded at stations 2 and 3. This may be attributed to the huge amounts of raw sewage and industrial wastewater (automobile repairing and service center) discharged into the Lake from the adjacent catchment area. Higher values of heavy metals due to the discharge of raw sewage and industrial effluents were also reported by Abdel-Moat and El-Samar [32]. The high levels of Zn and Fe in the lake water can be attributed to industrial and agricultural discharge, which was also reported by Mason [31].

The health hazards associated with exposure to heavy metals depend on their oxidation state, ranging from the low toxicity of the metal form to the high toxicity. While comparing the values of the above physicochemical and heavy metal parameters, it can be concluded that the deterioration in the water quality of Lake is mainly due to the inflow of sewage and urban wastes from it is densely habitation.

Advertisement

5. Conclusions

In general, most of the parameters during the period of investigation, the range values of different heavy metals in surface and bottom waters, were compared with the EPA standards [29] referred by the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), India (Table 2). At the same time, comparing the values, it was found that most of the heavy metals were below the permissible limits, except Fe, which was alarming. During the monsoon season, there was a noticeable increase in heavy metal concentrations in both surface and bottom waters. This can be attributed to the runoff from adjacent areas, which carry pollutants and sediments into the Lake. The post-monsoon period showed a relatively lower level of heavy metal contamination, indicating a decrease in external inputs during this time. However, the pre-monsoon season witnessed a resurgence in heavy metal levels, potentially due to increased anthropogenic activities and sediment disturbances. Although presently there is no alarming level of heavy metal pollution in this water body, and fish that are being consumed is safe as per the present analysis however, in the future, if the inflow of untreated domestic sewage and dumping of solid wastes continues, the quality of Lake water may further deteriorate to alarming level. The state of water bodies that are utilized for the main reasons must be preserved, while those utilized for secondary uses must be enhanced. For the rehabilitation, protection, and maintenance of this water body at the governmental and private levels, appropriate preservation and administration plans and tactics must be developed and implemented because this Lake is the backbone of the city of Bhopal.

Advertisement

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to the Department of Zoology, Government Motilal Vigyan Mahavidyalaya, Bhopal, and EPCO, Bhopal, India, for providing the necessary facilities to carry out the sample analysis.

Advertisement

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no competing or conflict of interest.

Advertisement

A. Appendices

See Figure A1.

Figure A1.

Photographs of the sites selected for sampling.

Advertisement

Nomenclature

Cu

copper

Cr

chromium

Fe

iron

Ni

nickel

Cd

cadmium

Hg

mercury

Zn

zinc

Pb

lead

Ppm

parts per million

St-1

Station 1

St-2

Station 2

St-3

Station 3

St-4

Station 4

S

surface

B

bottom

AAS

Atomic absorption spectroscopy

BOD

Biochemical oxygen demand

COD

Chemical oxygen demand

mg/l

milligrams per liter

μg

microgram

μg/liter

microgram per liter

CPCB

Central Pollution Control Board

References

  1. 1. Adoni AD, Joshi G, Ghosh K, Chourasia SK, Vaishya AK, Yadav M, et al. Work Book on Limnology. Sagar, India: Pratibha Publishers; 1985. 127 pp
  2. 2. Alam MZ, Ahmad S, Malik A. Genotoxic and mutagenic potential of agricultural soil irrigated with tannery effluents at Jajmau (Kanpur), India. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 2009;57(3):463-476
  3. 3. Alam MZ, Ahmad S, Malik A, Ahmad M. Mutagenicity and genotoxicity of tannery effluents used for irrigation at Kanpur, India. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 2011;73(7):1620-1628
  4. 4. Lingaswamy, Saxena. Assessment of the water quality of Hussain Sagar, Fox Sagar and Kattamysamma Lakes of Hyderabad, Telangana State, India: Using Water Quality Index (WQI). Current World Environment. 2016;11(2):537-543
  5. 5. Yadav KK, Gupta N, Kumar V, Sharma S, Arya S. Water quality assessment of Pahuj River using water quality index at Unnao Balaji, M.P., India. International Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences. 2015;19(1):241-250
  6. 6. Padma Priya KT, Seeta Y, Manikya Reddy P. Assessment of water quality in Saroornagar Lake, Hyderabad. International Journal of Recent Scientific Research. 2015;6(11):7536-7540
  7. 7. Srinivas L, Seeta Y, Manikya Reddy P. Assessment of Water Quality Index in Lower Manair Dam, Karimnagar district, Telangana. International Journal of Recent Research Aspects. 2017;4(4):6-10
  8. 8. Brack W, Dulio V, Ågerstrand M, et al. Towards the review of the European Union Water Framework Directive: Recommendations for more efficient assessment and management of chemical contamination in European surface water resources. Science of the Total Environment. 2017;576:720-737
  9. 9. Chabukdhara M, Nema AK. Assessment of heavy metal contamination in Hindon River sediments: A chemometric and geochemical approach. Chemosphere. 2012;87(8):945-953
  10. 10. Liu WX, Li XD, Shen ZG, et al. Multivariate statistical study of heavy metal enrichment in sediments of the Pearl River Estuary. Environmental Pollution. 2003;121(3):377-388
  11. 11. Uluturhan E, Kucuksezgin F. Heavy metal contaminants in Red Pandora (Pagellus erythrinus) tissues from the Eastern Aegean Sea, Turkey. Water Research. 2007;41(6):1185-1192
  12. 12. Yi Y, Yang Z, Zhang S. Ecological risk assessment of heavy metals in sediment and human health risk assessment of heavy metals in fishes in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River basin. Environmental Pollution. 2011;159(10):2575-2585
  13. 13. Laws EA. Aquatic Pollution-An Introductory Text. New York: Wiley; 2000
  14. 14. Fatoki OS, Lujiza N, Ogunfowokan AO. Levels of Cd, Hg and Zn in some surface waters from the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Water SA. 2003;29(4). ISSN 0378-4738
  15. 15. Waqar AS, Hasan J. Effect of rain water harvesting on the amounts of some heavy metals in the ground water of East Dwarka subcity of Delhi. Current World Environment: An International Research Journal of Environmental Sciences. 2006;2:145-150
  16. 16. Storelli MM, Storelli A, D’addabbo R, et al. Trace elements in loggerhead turtles (Carettacaretta) from the eastern Mediterranean Sea: Overview and evaluation. Environmental Pollution. 2005;135(1):163-170
  17. 17. Dural M, Bickici E. Distribution of trace elements in the tissues of Upeneuspori and Upeneusmolucensis from the eastern cost of Mediterranean, Iskenderun Bay, Turkey. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances. 2010;9:1380-1383
  18. 18. Hasan MR, Khan MZ, Khan M, et al. Heavy metals distribution and contamination in surface water of the Bay of Bengal coast. Cogent Environmental Science. 2016;2(1):1140001. DOI: 10.1080/23311843.2016.1140001
  19. 19. Khound NJ, Bhattacharyya KG. Multivariate statistical evaluation of heavy metals in the surface water sources of Jia Bharali river basin, North Brahmaputra plain, India. Applied Water Science. 2017;7(5):2577-2586
  20. 20. Keesstra S, Nunes J, Novara A, et al. The superior effect of nature based solutions in land management for enhancing ecosystem services. Science of the Total Environment. 2018;610:997-1009
  21. 21. Paller MH, Littrell JW. Long-term changes in mercury concentrations in fish from the middle Savannah River. Science of the Total Environment. 2007;382(2–3):375-382
  22. 22. Saha N, Rahman MS, Ahmed MB, et al. Industrial metal pollution in water and probabilistic assessment of human health risk. Journal of Environmental Management. 2017;185:70-78
  23. 23. Bhattacharya PT, Misra SR, Hussain M. Nutritional aspects of essential trace elements in oral health and disease: An extensive review. Scientifica. 2016;2016:1-12. DOI: 10.1155/2016/5464373
  24. 24. Nair IV, Kailash S, Arumugam M, Gangadhar K, Clarson D. Trace metal quality of Meenachil river at Kottayam, Kerala (India) by principal component analysis. World Applied Sciences Journal. 2010;9(10):1100-1107
  25. 25. Dinakaran J, Abbas NS, Shvetambriarora SB, Kaula BC. Assessment of heavy metals in ground water of different locations of National Capital Region, Delhi, India. Current World Environment. 2021;16(1):143-150. DOI: 10.12944/CWE.16.1.14
  26. 26. Bangotra P, Jakhu R, Mukesh Prasad RS, Aswal AA, Mushtaq Z, Mehra R. Investigation of heavy metal contamination and associated health risks in groundwater sources of southwestern Punjab, India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2023;195:Article number: 367
  27. 27. Mawari G, Kumar N, Sarkar S, Frank AL, Daga MK, Singh MM, et al. Human Health Risk Assessment due to Heavy Metals in Ground and Surface Water and Association of Diseases With Drinking Water Sources: A Study From, Maharashtra, India. Environmental Health Insights. 2022;2022(16):11786302221146020. DOI: 10.1177/11786302221146020
  28. 28. APHA. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water. 20th ed. American Water Works Association Water Environmental Federation: American Public Health Association; 2010
  29. 29. Environment (Protection) Rules, 1989 Ministry Of Environment And Forests, S.O. 8(E) dated the 3rd January, 1989. Clauses (aa), (ee) and (ff) inserted by Notification NO. G.S.R. 931(E) dated 27.10.89 published in the Gazette No. 564 dated 27.10.89
  30. 30. Vishwakarma S, Varma A, Saxena G. Assessment of water quality of lower lake river, Madhya Pradesh, India. International Journal of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering. 2013;5(4):217-222. DOI: 10.5897/IJWREE2012.0376
  31. 31. Mason CF. Biology of Freshwater Pollution. 4th ed. England: Essex Univ; 2002. 387 p
  32. 32. Abdel-Moati MA, El-Sammak AA. Man-made impact on the geochemistry of the Nile Delta Lakes. A study of metals concentrations in sediments. Water, Air and Soil Pollution. 1997;97:413-429

Written By

Aarefa Jan, Suchitra Banerjee, Rajendra Chouhan, Subrata Pani and Saima Syed

Submitted: 01 January 2024 Reviewed: 03 February 2024 Published: 27 March 2024

© The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.