Quality of Groundwater Sources in Keffi and Karu Local Government Areas, Nigeria

Research Article IJAAER(2020); 6(2):156-166

QUALITY OF GROUNDWATER SOURCES IN KEFFI AND KARU LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREAS, NIGERIA

OBAJE DANIEL OPALUWA1*, YAHAYA MOHAMMED1 AND SHAMMAH EMMANUEL CHAKU2

1Department of Chemistry, Nasarawa State University, P. M. B. 1022, Keffi, Nigeria 2Department of Statistics, Nasarawa State University, P. M. B. 1022, Keffi, Nigeria Corresponding author’s Email: [email protected],

Abstract The quality of water from boreholes and hand dug wells in Keffi and Karu Local Government Areas, Nasarawa State, Nigeria were studied to ascertain the suitability of water from these sources for domestic purpose. The study was done by analysing for some physicochemical parameters using standard methods. The parameters determined were temperature, turbidity, total dissolved solids, total suspended solids, pH, electrical conductivity (EC), alkalinity, dissolved oxygen (DO), chemical oxygen demand (COD), nitrate, chloride, phosphate and sulphate. Water Quality Index for the different samples each was calculated to ascertain suitability of the water for usage. Results obtained for physicochemical parameters showed that COD had values higher than the recommended tolerable limit prescribed by Standards Organization of Nigeria (SON) while all the other parameters determined had values lower or within the recommended limits. WQI calculated showed that water from boreholes in Keffi was good for usage but water from hand dug wells in Keffi and boreholes and hand dug wells in Karu was not suitable for usage as potable water. Statistical analyses done at 95% confidence limit (p<0.05) showed there was no significant differences between physicochemical parameters of water samples from boreholes and wells from Keffi and Karu except for turbidity. However, the water from the study areas have very poor water quality, and it is better for water from these sources to be treated before being used for human consumption.

Keywords: Borehole, well, physicochemical, parameters, standards, index

Introduction All natural water contain many dissolved substances, Water is one of the most abundant natural contamination of water bodies has increasingly become resources, and very important for the sustenance of life an issue of serious environmental concern (Akpoveta et of both plants and animals (Atolaiye et al., 2006). al., 2011). Generally, sanitation such as laundry, Water, indeed, is an integral part of life (Osunkiyesi, flushing of closets and other household chores are 2012); the protoplasm of most living cells contain basic purposes for which water is required domestically about 80% of water, and any incidence and fundamentally for drinking, bathing, and cooking of plasmolysis could be disastrous. Almost all the (Aremu et al., 2008). Two major sources of water biochemical reactions that take place during the whose quality are assessed by chemists are the surface metabolism, and growth of living cells involves water, (streams, rivers, ponds, lakes) and ground waters (wells and they also take place in water (Ayoade and Akitola, and boreholes) (Oko et al., 2014). Surface waters are 1999; Borne, 1978). prone to contamination because they are reported to be Water is a key determinant of sustainable development generally poor in quality as reported by some that should be carefully managed to make for suitable researchers (Oko et al., 2014; Okeola et al., 2010). and sustainable human health (Ogunawo, 2004). The Ground waters on the other hand are more reliable for presence of dissolved or suspended impurities in most domestic and agricultural irrigation needs (Oko et al., natural water bodies has made it almost impossible to 2014) but are, however, prone to contamination where meet up with the potable water needed for human they are sunk close to waste dumpsites or close to consumption in the contemporary world (Goldface, agricultural farmland through leaching as well as 1999). Clean water is a priceless and limited resource runoff. Water is certified alright for usage either that man has begun to treasure, only recently after domestically, industrially or for irrigation purposes decades of pollution and waste (Silderberg, 2008). when the knowledge about its quality is known. Water Potable water is an essential ingredient for good health quality is the physical, chemical, and biological and socio-economic development of man (Bouwer, characteristics of water with regard to set standards 2002), but it is lacking in many societies. particularly by regulatory bodies (SON, 2007; WHO, 2004).

156 The provision of potable water in Nasarawa State is Materials and Methods solely the responsibility of the government and so in Study Area most cases it is characterized by low productivity, few Keffi and Karu Local Government Areas are areas are covered and there is always inefficiency and in Nasarawa State, North central geo-political zone, ineffectiveness in the delivery. Most citizenry that do Nigeria. not benefit from the provisions by the government State is located on longitude 8̊ 30̍ to 9̊ 00̍ E and therefore depend on the available sources which are latitude 8̊ 00̍ to 8̊ 30̍ N. It is generally very warm and surface waters (streams, rivers, ponds, and lakes) and humid with dry season spanning from October to ground waters (wells, boreholes) whose quality cannot March and the rainy season from April to September. be certified satisfactorily. As such, cases of water Residents in communities in this area live on ground associated health problems abound due to drinking and water (boreholes and hand dug wells) as sources of other domestic usage of water from these sources. potable water supply, while the residents in the This therefore implies that in ascertaining the quality of administrative headquarters of the Local Government water, apart from the heavy metal load of the water, Areas live on individual and the government owned the physicochemical parameters are also very boreholes, and deep hand dug wells as potable water important. All these are necessary to avoid water-borne supply sources. Pipe borne water supply are available diseases. This study is geared towards investigating in some places with epileptic operations. The the physicochemical parameters, and water quality communities used for this study are Agwan index of water from these sources in accordance with Lambu/High Court, Dadin Kowa/Angwan Kwara, the requirements of regulatory organizations (SON, Yelwa and City centre all in Keffi and Uke, Auta- 2007; WHO, 2004) to provide baseline information on Balefi, Masaka, the quality of boreholes and hand dug wells Ado/New Nyanya/Karu and Mararaba all in Karu in Karu and Keffi. Local Government Area. Sample Collection, Treatment and Preservation dissolved oxygen and chemical oxygen demand were Samples were taken from boreholes and hand dug determined by methods prescribed by Association of wells in both Karu and Keffi Local Government Areas. Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC, 1990). All the Water samples were collected twice every day at chemicals used for this research were of analytical interval of two weeks and the day and time varied in grade obtained from BDH (British Drug House, order to account for the cyclic intermittent variations London). that may occur at the collection source. Borehole water samples were collected directly from the taps; well Determination of Water Quality Index water samples were collected using a fetcher. The The method used for this study was the one samples were all collected in clean 1.5 dm3 white described by Dhakad et al., (2008) on samples of polyethylene stopper containers which had been soaked ground water that involved the calculation QP as overnight in dilute 0.1 M HNO3 solution, before indicated in the equation (1) below: washing finally with soap solution and firstly rinsed with distilled water and filled with distilled water to the sampling points. The containers were emptied at the QP sampling points and rinsed severally with the samples 푛 A − I to be collected and eventually, the collection of = ∑ ( P P) samples and the containers covered (air tight) 푆 − I푃 푃=0 immediately. Preservations of the samples were carried × 100 (1) out as prescribed by American Public Health AP is the average values of the parameters determined Association (APHA, 2002). The samples were then under laboratory conditions, S is the standard placed in a plastic container with ice and transported permissible values obtained from recognised regulatory 0 and stored thereafter at 4 C in the refrigerator, Haier organisations or bodies (for this study SON, 2007 was Thermocool, T 300, to slow down bacteria and used) and IP is the ideal value for the parameters. The chemical reaction rates, prior to analysis (Akpoveta et ideal values for all the parameters are always al., 2011). considered to be zero except for pH = 7.0, fluorides = 1 ANALYSIS and Dissolved Oxygen, DO = 14.6 (Dhakad et al., Physicochemical Parameters 2008). When the reciprocal of the standard permissible The temperature of water samples were taken at value, S is considered the value obtained represents the the site of collection using the mercury bulb unit weight, W. Water Quality Index, WQI is evaluated thermometer calibrated in degree Celsius, pH was by taking aggregates of the products of parameter measured at the site of sample collection using pH qualities and the unit weights divided by aggregates of meter JENWAY–4510, turbidity by Hanna instrument the unit weight as shown in the equation (2) below: (LP 2000 Turbidity) and the electrical conductivity 푊푄퐼 푛 measured using conductivity meter JENWAY–4510. ∑푝=1 푄푃푊푃 = 푛 (2) Other parameters determined in the preserved water ∑푝=1 푊푃 samples were: Total dissolved solids and total suspended solids by gravimetric method, alkalinity, chloride, sulphate, nitrate and phosphate ions, 157

Statistical Analysis statistical parameters evaluated are mean, The data obtained from this research work standard deviation and correlation using was subjected to statistical evaluations. The SPSS.

Results And Discussion

Results Table 1: Sampling Locations in Keffi and Karu, Nasarawa State, Nigeria indicating Sample Numbers Location Borehole Water Sample Hand dug Well water Sample Angwan Lambu/High Court S1 S6 Dadin Kowa/Angwan Kwara S2 S7 Keffi Tudun Amama S3 S8 Yelwa S4 S9 City Centre S5 S10 Uke S11 S16 Auta Balefi S12 S17 Karu Masaka S13 S18 Ado/New Nyanya/Karu S14 S19 Mararaba S15 S20 1 – 10 are for Keffi and 11 – 20 are for Karu

Table 2: Mean Results of Physicochemical Parameters of Analysed Borehole Water Samples in Keffi LGA Location

14 Parameters S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 Mean SD Standard

Temp ˚C 28.00 27.50 27.50 27.50 27.00 27.50 0.35 Ambient Turbidity(NTU) 1.55 1.95 3.00 2.50 2.75 5.00 2.35 0.59 3 TDS (mg/dm ) 110.00 190.00 100.00 490.00 400.00 258.00 177.12 500.00 3 TSS (mg/dm ) 0.20 0.01 0.10 0.01 0.10 0.08 0.08 - pH 7.02 7.10 7.20 7.20 7.15 7.13 0.08 6.50 – 8.50

EC (μS/cm) 170.00 290.00 150.00 730.00 620.00 392.00 266.26 1000.00 Alkalinity 30.00 38.40 58.80 27.20 53.50 - (mg/dm3) 41.58 14.05 DO (mg/dm3) 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.60 1.80 - 1.88 0.18 3 COD (mg/dm ) 90.00 85.00 75.00 80.00 89.00 83.80 6.30 - NO3 – N 1.75 1.80 1.85 2.60 2.56 50.00 (mg/dm3) 2.11 0.43 Chloride 0.00 0.29 0.09 0.59 0.69 250.00 (mg/dm3) 0.33 0.30 Phosphate 0.75 1.20 1.30 1.44 2.45 - (mg/dm3) 1.43 0.63 Sulphate 0.027 0.029 0.027 0.044 0.026 100.00 (mg/dm3) 0.031 0.01 SD = Standard Deviation

Table 3: Mean Results of Physicochemical Parameters of Analysed Hand dug well Water Samples in Keffi LGA Location 14 Parameters S6 S7 S8 S9 S10 Mean SD Standard Temp ˚C 27.00 27.00 27.00 27.00 27.50 27.10 0.22 Ambient Turbidity(NTU) 3.56 5.10 4.00 4.50 5.70 4.57 0.85 5.00 TDS (mg/dm3) 160.00 290.00 200.00 420.00 350.00 284.00 106.44 500.00 TSS (mg/dm3) 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.08 0.10 0.09 0.01 - pH 6.90 7.55 7.40 7.75 7.65 7.45 0.33 6.50 – 8.50 EC (μS/cm) 240.00 440.00 270.00 630 530.00 422.00 166.94 1000.00 Alkalinity(mg/dm3) 78.00 33.20 42.40 31.60 43.00 45.64 18.81 -

158

Continuation of Table:3 DO (mg/dm3) 1.50 2.00 2.00 2.50 1.95 1.99 0.35 - COD (mg/dm3) 94.00 93.00 88.00 90.50 85.70 90.24 3.44 - 3 NO3 – N (mg/dm ) 2.16 1.67 2.45 2.14 1.14 1.91 0.51 50.00 Chloride (mg/dm3) 0.39 0.29 0.59 0.39 0.59 0.45 0.13 250.00 Phosphate 1.23 1.45 1.45 2.50 2.40 1.81 0.60 - (mg/dm3) Sulphate (mg/dm3) 0.044 0.018 0.042 0.028 0.036 0.034 0.01 100.00 SD = Standard Deviation

Table 4: Mean Results of Physicochemical Parameters of Analysed Borehole Water Samples in Karu LGA Location

14 Parameters S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 Mean SD Standard

Temp ˚C 27.00 27.50 28.00 27.00 27.00 27.30 0.45 Ambient Turbidity(NTU) 2.20 3.50 2.50 2.85 3.00 2.81 0.50 5.00 TDS (mg/dm3) 500.00 40.00 120.00 150.00 125.00 187.00 179.78 500.00 TSS (mg/dm3) 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.90 2.00 0.98 0.71 - pH 6.50 6.71 6.80 6.66 7.05 6.67 0.20 6.50 – 8.50 EC (μS/cm) 75.00 74.00 820.00 701.00 76.00 349.20 377.81 1000.00 Alkalinity 28.00 35.40 48.80 21.20 43.50 - (mg/dm3) 35.38 11.19 DO (mg/dm3) 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.50 1.60 1.82 00.25 - COD (mg/dm3) 91.00 80.00 75.00 78.00 79.00 80.60 6.11 - NO3 – N 3.00 9.10 3.50 5.90 3.68 50.00 (mg/dm3) 5.04 2.53 Chloride 0.10 0.90 0.70 0.95 1.28 250.00 (mg/dm3) 0.79 0.44 Phosphate 1.00 0.90 3.30 3.10 3.20 - (mg/dm3) 2.30 1.23 Sulphate 0.037 0.029 0.021 0.034 0.016 100.00 (mg/dm3) 0.027 0.01 SD = Standard Deviation

Table 5: Mean Results of Physicochemical Parameters of Analysed Hand Dug Well Water Samples in Karu LGA Location

14 Parameters S11 S12 S13 S14 S15 Mean SD Standard

Temp ˚C 27.00 27.50 28.00 27.50 27.70 27.54 0.37 Ambient Turbidity(NTU) 1.50 2.50 2.10 1.85 1.80 1.95 0.37 5.00 TDS (mg/dm3) 500.00 90.00 120.00 150.00 125.00 197.00 170.72 500.00 TSS (mg/dm3) 1.00 1.00 1.90 1.50 2.00 1.48 0.48 - pH 6.86 6.71 7.10 6.66 7.15 6.90 0.22 6.50 – 8.50 EC (μS/cm) 75.00 95.00 820.00 701.00 276.00 393.40 346.70 1000.00 Alkalinity 58.00 35.40 48.80 41.20 43.50 45.38 8.54 - (mg/dm3) DO (mg/dm3) 2.00 2.50 2.00 1.80 1.90 2.04 0.27 - COD (mg/dm3) 91.00 80.00 85.00 98.00 79.00 86.60 7.96 - NO3 – N 3.00 9.10 6.50 8.90 3.68 6.24 2.85 50.00 (mg/dm3) Chloride (mg/dm3) 1.10 0.90 1.70 0.95 1.28 1.19 0.32 250.00 Phosphate 3.00 2.90 3.30 3.10 3.20 3.10 0.16 - (mg/dm3) Sulphate (mg/dm3) 0.037 0.029 0.051 0.034 0.046 0.039 0.01 100.00 SD=StandardDeviation Discussion well water samples respectively in Keffi LGA and Tables 2 and 3 show the mean values for Tables 4 and 5 show the mean values for physicochemical parameters of borehole and hand dug 159 physicochemical parameters of borehole and hand dug respectively (slightly alkaline) while the ones for Karu well water samples respectively in Karu LGA. The LGA were 6.67±0.20 and 6.90±0.22, respectively (slightly acidic). These mean values of pH for both results revealed that the mean temperature values for Keffi and Karu LGAs water samples are all higher than water samples for borehole and hand dug wells in Keffi the range of mean values 4.75±0.36 – 6.05±0.92 for LGA were 27.50±0.35 and 27.10±0.22 ˚C, borehole and hand dug well water in the wet season as respectively, and the ones for Karu LGA were well as 5.30±0.42 – 6.60±0.85 for borehole and hand 27.30±0.45 and 27.54±0.37 ˚C, respectively. These dug well water in the dry season, all within and around ambient temperatures were all lower than the water Lafia (Anzene et al., 2014). All the pH values from this temperature of 30.00 C̊ for Rawal Dam, Islamabad research work are within the acceptable permissible (Zubia et al., 2015). The ambient temperatures limits of 6.50 – 8.50 recommended by regulatory recorded could be attributed to high water level as well bodies. as moderate atmospheric temperatures. It is a well- The capability of water to transmit electric current is known fact that the temperature of water controls all known as electrical conductivity and this parameter chemical and biochemical reactions in the aquatic serves as a tool for evaluating the purity or quality of ecosystem (Medullah et al., 2012; Patil et al., 2012). water. This characteristic of water is dependent on the All the values were within the same range and also fall presence of ions, the total concentrations of the ions, within the acceptable standard limits. the mobility, valence, relative concentration and the The mean values for turbidity of water samples for measurement temperature (Shinde et al., 2011; borehole and hand dug well in Keffi and Karu were Murugsan, 2006). The mean electrical conductivity 2.35±0.60, 4.57±0.85 NTU and 2.81±0.50, 1.95±0.37 values in water samples for boreholes and hand dug NTU respectively. The mean turbidity values are wells in Keffi LGA were 392.00±266.68 and relatively lower because there were no known cases of 422.00±166.94 μS/cm, respectively and for Karu they inflow of wastewater of any form into the water bodies were 349.20±377.81 and 393.40±346.70 μS/cm, that were studied. These values are higher than the respectively. These values are relatively high because mean value of 1.25 NTU obtained for groundwater in there is no possibility of dilution of the water bodies Wukari town (Oko et al., 2014) and lower than studied. All these mean values are lower than the mean 33.34±2.01 – 42.22±3.10 NTU reported for wastewater value of 436 μS/cm recorded for borehole and hand in Deheradun (Singh et al., 2012). The mean values dug well water in Wukari town (Oko et al., 2014) and from this research work are lower than the standard lower than conductivity value of 0.44 μS/cm recorded permissible limit of 5.00 NTU recommended by the for water from borehole in Kubwa, Federal Capital regulatory body 9 (SON, 2007). Territory, Abuja (Aremu, et al., 2011). These mean The mean values for TDS and TSS of water samples values for conductivities obtained from the study areas for boreholes and hand dug wells were 258.00±177.12 are all below the acceptable permissible limit, 1000.00 and 284.00±106.44 mg/dm3; 0.08±0.08 and 0.09±0.01 μS/cm recommended by regulatory bodies. mg/dm3, respectively in Keffi LGA and 187.00±179.78 The value of alkalinity of a sample of water expresses a and 197.00±170.72 mg/dm3; 0.98±0.71 and 1.48±0.48 component of the sample. Alkalinity is primarily due to mg/dm3, respectively in Karu LGA. These mean values carbonate, bicarbonate and hydroxide contents for both TDS and TSS are low probably due to runoffs, (Igwemmar et al., 2013). The mean values of alkalinity sewages, municipal effluents or domestic effluents in water samples for boreholes and hand dug wells in flowing into the water bodies studied which would Keffi LGA were 41.58±14.05 and 45.64±18.81 mg/dm3 have increased the level of their solids (Vinod et al., respectively while for Karu LGA, the mean alkalinity 2013a). Both the TDS mean values from Keffi and values were 35.38±11.19 and 45.38±8.54 mg/dm3 Karu LGAs were lower than the mean value of 1316.17 respectively. The difference observed between the mg/dm3 reported for water from Challawa River (Yisa mean values from Keffi LGA and those of Karu LGA et al., 2008) but higher than the mean value of 246.00 could be attributed to the under laying rocks as well as mg/dm3 reported for borehole and well water in Wukari the closeness of these water sources to pollution town, Taraba State (Oko et al., 2014). All TSS mean sources such as dumping sites and even runoff waters values for Keffi and Karu LGAs in both boreholes and from farmlands. All the mean values for alkalinity in open wells were lower than mean value of 630.29 water from the study area are higher the minimum and mg/dm3 reported water from Challawa River (Yisa et maximum values of 3.60 mg/dm3 and 9.30 mg/dm3 al., 2008) as well as 2.00 mg/dm3 reported for borehole respectively recorded for water from selected boreholes and well water in Wukari town, Taraba State (Oko et in Gwagwalada, Abuja (Igwemmar et al., 2013). The al., 2014). For both TDS and TSS from the study areas mean values of alkalinity in water from the study areas the mean values obtained were all below the are lower than the value of 120.00 mg/dm3 as standard permissible standards of 500.00 mg/dm3 and 100.00 permissible limits recommended by Indian Council of mg/dm3 for TDS and TSS, respectively. Medical Research (ICMR, 1975) and Bureau of Indian The level of acidity or alkalinity of a sample is pH. The Standards (BIS, 1993). Excessive level of alkalinity in pH of water changes based on different dissolved gases water can cause stomach upset as well as encrustation and solids (Qureshimatva et al., 2015). The mean of utensils, pipes and water heaters and other domestic values of pH in water samples for boreholes and hand plumbing materials. It could also give ‘flat’ taste to and dug wells in Keffi LGA were 7.13±0.08 and 7.45±0.33,

160 causing itching during bathing (Igwemmar et al., precipitation (Igwemmar et al., 2013). Drinking water 2013). contaminated with nitrate, if taken, could cause The volume of oxygen that is contained in water is methaemogloinaemia in infants which is also called normally referred to as dissolved oxygen (DO). infantile cyanosis or blue baby syndrome (Akinbile, Temperature, salinity, and pressure are the factors 2006). The mean values of nitrate in water samples determines the amount of oxygen that can be held by from boreholes and hand dug wells in Keffi were the water. Drinking water with better drinking water 2.11±0.43 and 1.91±0.51 mg/dm3 respectively while taste better is always attributed to high DO level and is for Karu the mean nitrate values were 5.04±2.53 and good in a community water supply. However, 6.24±2.85 mg/dm3 respectively. The mean nitrate corrosion in water pipes are caused by high DO levels. values from water samples in Keffi are within the range As a result of this, water with the least possible amount values of 0.30 – 4.60 mg/dm3 of nitrate in water of dissolved oxygen is recommended for industrial use (Igwemmar et al., 2013) but the mean nitrate values for (APEC, 2017). The mean values of dissolved oxygen water from Karu are higher, meanwhile all the mean in water samples from boreholes and hand dug wells in nitrate values from the study area are lower than the Keffi were 1.88±0.18 and 1.99±0.35 mg/dm3 value of 50.00 mg/dm3 recommended as the acceptable respectively, while for Karu the mean dissolved permissible limits by SON (2007). The mean values of oxygen values were 1.82±0.25 and 2.04±0.27 mg/dm3, nitrate in water from Karu are higher than those from respectively. These values are lower than the mean Keffi and this could be attributable likely to the value of 3.90 mg/dm3 and 4.45 mg/dm3 for borehole closeness of sources of water from Karu to some sorts and hand dug well water samples in Wukari town (Oko of pollution sources. et al., 2014). The mean values from the study area are All forms of natural water contain chloride in varying also lower than the acceptable permissible limits of concentrations which is dependent on the geographical 5.00 mg/dm3 recommended some regulatory bodies conditions. The sources of chloride in water are rocks (BIS, 1993; ICMR, 1975). containing chlorides, runoff from agricultural One of the very important water quality parameter is farmlands, and wastewater from industries, oil well chemical oxygen demand (COD) because, similar to wastes and effluent waste from waste water treatment BOD, it could be used evaluate an index that will plants (Igwemmar et al., 2013). Normal cell eventually help to ascertain the effect discharged functioning of both plants and animals require small wastewater will have on the environment. Higher amounts of chloride. High level of organic waste of levels of COD in water is an indication of a greater animal origin could cause or lead to higher amount of oxidizable organic material in the water, concentration of chloride ions in water (Trevedi et al., which will drastically reduce dissolved oxygen (DO) 2009). The mean values of chloride in water samples levels. This can be deleterious to higher aquatic life from boreholes and hand dug wells in Keffi were forms as reduction in DO can lead to anaerobic 0.33±0.30 and 0.45±0.13 mg/dm3 respectively while conditions. The COD test is often used as an alternate for Karu the mean chloride values were 0.79±0.44 and to BOD due to shorter length of testing time (APEC, 1.19±0.32 mg/dm3 respectively. All these mean values 2017). COD indirectly indicates the level of the organic are lower than the values of 52.00, 75.00 and 120.00 compounds in water. The process requires the amount mg/dm3 reported for chloride in water for rainy season, of oxygen that would be required for the conversion of winter season and summer season respectively (Vinod chemicals in water into forms such as carbon (IV) et al., 2013b). These values from the study area are all oxide and ammonia (Oko et al., 2014). lower than the recommended permissible limits of The mean values of COD in water samples from 250.00 mg/dm3 by SON (2007). The mean values of boreholes and hand dug wells in Keffi were 83.80±6.30 chloride in water from Karu are higher than those from and 90.24±3.44 mg/dm3 respectively while for Karu Keffi and this could be likely attributable to the the mean COD values were 80.60±6.11 and 86.60±7.96 closeness of sources of water from Karu to some sorts mg/dm3 respectively. These mean values are all higher of pollution sources. than the mean value of 15.70 mg/dm3 for groundwater The mean values of phosphate in water samples from from South of Najaf City, Iraq (Ahmed, 2016). The boreholes and hand dug wells in Keffi LGA were mean values from the study areas are all higher than the 1.43±0.63 and 1.81±0.60 mg/dm3 respectively while value of 40.00 mg/dm3 recommended as the acceptable for Karu LGA the mean phosphate values were permissible limit by WHO (1998). This could be due 2.30±1.23 and 3.10±0.16 mg/dm3 respectively. All to the fact that there were more chemical compounds in these values are within the range of 0.70 – 7.60 mg/dm3 the water samples from the study areas that needed reported for phosphate in water (Igwemmar et al., oxygen for conversion as a result of leaching and 2013). But the values are lower than the value of < 0.03 runoff from different locations into these underground mg/dm3 recommended as the acceptable permissible water bodies. limits for phosphate in water that can be used Nitrification activities determine the level or domestically and industrially. The mean values of concentrations of nitrates in water samples. The phosphate in water from Karu are higher than those sources of nitrate in water are excessive use of from Keffi LGA and this could be likely attributable to agricultural fertilizer, decayed vegetables in water, the closeness of sources of water from Karu LGA to domestic effluents, sewage disposal, industrial some sorts of pollution sources. discharge, leachable from dump sites and atmospheric

161

If sulphate in water exceeds 250 mg/dm3, a bitter permissible limits for phosphate in water that can be medicinal taste may render the water unpleasant to used domestically and industrially.The differences in drink. The mean values of sulphate in water samples the levels of all the parameters determined particularly from boreholes and hand dug wells in Keffi were between Keffi and Karu LGAs could be attributed to 0.031±0.01 and 0.034±0.01 mg/dm3 while for Karu the the nature of underlying rocks as well as the level and mean sulphate values were 0.027±0.01 and 0.039±0.01 rates of wastes and effluents generated domestically mg/dm3 respectively. These values are lower than the and dumped close to the various water sources. value of 100 mg/dm3 recommended as the acceptable

Table 6: Water Quality Index and Water Quality Status Water Quality Index Water Quality Status 0 – 25 Excellent 26 – 50 Good 51 – 75 Bad 76 – 100 Very Bad >100 Unfit for drinking Source: Chaterjee and Razuddin, 2002

Table 7: Quality Index of Borehole Water in Keffi LGA

S/N Parameters Mean aStandard Ideal Unit Q rating Q×W Permissible Value Weight Level (W) 1 Turbidity(NTU) 2.35 5.00 0 0.2 47.00 9.4 2 TDS (mg/L) 258.00 500.00 0 0.002 51.60 0.1032 3 pH 6.76 8.50 7 0.1176 22.00 2.5872 4 EC (μS/cm) 392.00 1000.00 0 0.001 39.20 0.0392 5 NO3 – N (mg/L) 2.11 50.00 0 0.02 4.22 0.0844 6 Chloride (mg/L) 0.33 250.00 0 0.004 0.13 0.00052 7 Sulphate (mg/L) 0.031 100.00 0 0.01 0.031 0.00031 ∑W = ∑QW = 0.3546 12.2148

∑ 푸푾 12.21483 푾푸푰 = = = 35; aSON (2007) ∑ 푾 0.3546

Table 8: Water Quality Index of Hand Dug Well Water in Keffi LGA S/N Parameters Mean aStandard Ideal Unit Q rating Q×W Permissible Value Weight Level (W) 1 Turbidity(NTU) 4.57 5.00 0 0.2 91.4 18.28 2 TDS (mg/L) 284.00 500.00 0 0.002 56.8 0.1136 3 pH 6.70 8.50 7 0.1176 20.00 2.352 4 EC (μS/cm) 422.00 1000.00 0 0.001 42.20 0.0422 5 NO3 – N (mg/L) 1.91 50.00 0 0.02 3.82 0.0764 6 Chloride (mg/L) 0.45 250.00 0 0.004 0.18 0.00072 7 Sulphate (mg/L) 0.034 100.00 0 0.01 0.034 0.00034 ∑W = ∑QW = 0.3546 20.86526

∑ 푸푾 20.86526 푾푸푰 = = = 59; aSON (2007) ∑ 푾 0.3546

162

Table 9: Water Quality Index of Borehole Water in Karu LGA S/N Parameters Mean aStandard Ideal Unit Q rating Q×W Permissible Value Weight Level (W) 1 Turbidity(NTU) 2.81 5.00 0 0.2 56.2 11.24 2 TDS (mg/L) 187.00 500.00 0 0.002 37.4 0.0748 3 pH 6.90 8.50 7 0.1176 6.67 0.784392 4 EC (μS/cm) 349.20 1000.00 0 0.001 34.9 0.0349 5 Alkalinity (mg/L) 35.38 120.00 0 0.0083 29.48 0.244684 6 DO (mg/L) 1.82 5.00 14.6 0.2 133.13 26.626 7 NO3 – N (mg/L) 5.04 50.00 0 0.02 10.08 0.2016 8 Chloride (mg/L) 0.79 250.00 0 0.004 0.32 0.00128 9 Phosphate (mg/L 2.30 150.00 0 0.0067 1.53 0.010251 ∑W = ∑QW = 0.5596 39.21791

∑ 푸푾 39.21791 푾푸푰 = = = 66; aSON (2007) ∑ 푾 0.5596

Table 10: Water Quality Index of Hand Dug Well Water in Karu LGA S/N Parameters Mean aStandard Ideal Unit Q rating Q×W Permissible Value Weight Level (W) 1 Turbidity(NTU) 1.95 5.00 0 0.2 39.00 7.80 2 TDS (mg/L) 197.00 500.00 0 0.002 39.4 0.0788 3 pH 6.90 8.50 7 0.1176 6.67 0.7843 4 EC (μS/cm) 393.40 1000.00 0 0.001 39.34 0.0393 5 Alkalinity (mg/L) 45.38 120.00 0 0.0083 37.82 0.3139 6 DO (mg/L) 2.04 5.00 14.6 0.2 130.83 26.166 7 NO3 – N (mg/L) 6.24 50.00 0 0.02 12.48 0.2496 8 Chloride (mg/L) 1.19 250.00 0 0.004 0.476 0.0019 9 Phosphate (mg/L 3.10 150.00 0 0.0067 2.067 0.0138 ∑W = ∑QW = 0.5596 35.44779

∑ 푸푾 35.44779 푾푸푰 = = = 63, aSON (2007) ∑ 푾 0.5596 Tables 7 and 8 display the water quality index used. Tables 9 and 10 shows the water quality index values for water samples from boreholes and hand dug values for water samples from boreholes and hand dug wells respectively from Keffi LGA. For the water wells respectively from Karu LGA. The WQI for samples from boreholes in Keffi LGA the WQI was 35 borehole and hand dug well water were 66 and 63 therefore, water from boreholes in Keffi LGA is good which means the water presents water quality status for drinking (Table 6). For water from hand dug wells that are very bad and may have to be treated before in Keffi LGA, the WQI was 59 which implies that the use. water from this presents water quality status that is bad, invariably, the water needs treatment before it can be

Table 11: Physicochemical Parameters of Borehole and Hand Dug Well Water Samples in Keffi LGA (p < 0.05) Borehole Water Well Water Parameters t – value p – value (Mean of mean ± SD) (Mean of mean ± SD) Temp ˚C 27.50 ± 0.35 27.10 ± 0.22 2.138 0.065

Turbidity(NTU) 2.35 ± 0.59 4.57 ± 0.85 -4.785 0.001

TDS (mg/L) 258.00 ± 177.12 284.00 ± 106.44 -0.281 0.786

TSS (mg/L) 0.08 ± 0.08 0.09 ± 0.01 -0.281 0.785

pH 7.13 ± 0.08 7.45 ± 0.33 -2.065 0.073

EC (μS/cm) 392.00 ± 266.68 422.00 ± 166.94 -0.213 0.836

163

Continuation of Table:11

Alkalinity (mg/L) 41.58 ± 14.05 45.64 ± 18.81 -0.387 0.709

DO (mg/L) 1.88 ± 0.18 1.99 ± 0.35 -0.620 0.553

COD (mg/L) 83.80 ± 6.30 90.24 ± 3.44 -2.005 0.080

NO3 – N (mg/L) 2.11 ± 0.43 1.91 ± 0.51 0.668 0.523

Chloride (mg/L) 0.33 ± 0.30 0.45 ± 0.13 -0.798 0.448

Phosphate (mg/L 1.43 ± 0.63 1.81 ± 0.60 -0.977 0.357

Sulphate (mg/L) 0.031 ± 0. 0.034 ± 0.01 -0.511 0.623

Table 12: Physicochemical Parameters of Borehole and Hand Dug Well Water Samples in Karu LGA (p < 0.05)

Borehole Water Well Water Parameters t – value p – value (Mean of mean ± SD) (Mean of mean ± SD) Temp ˚C 27.30 ± 0.45 27.54 ± 0.37 -0.930 0.380 Turbidity(NTU) 2.81 ± 0.50 1.95 ± 0.37 3.097 0.015 TDS (mg/L) 187.00 ± 179.78. 197.00 ± 170.72 -0.090 0.930 TSS (mg/L) 0.98 ± 0.71 1.48 ± 0.48 -1.309 0.227 pH 6.67 ± 0.20 6.90 ± 0.22 -1.129 0.291 EC (μS/cm) 349.20 ± 377.81 393.40 ± 346.70 -0.193 0.852 Alkalinity (mg/L) 35.38 ± 11.19 45.38 ± 8.54 -1.588 0.151 DO (mg/L) 1.82 ± 0.25 2.04 ± 0.27 -1.339 0.217 COD (mg/L) 80.60 ± 6.11 86.60 ± 7.96 -1.338 0.218

NO3 – N (mg/L) 5.04 ± 2.53 6.24 ± 2.85 -0.705 0.501 Chloride (mg/L) 0.79 ± 0.44 1.19 ± 0.32 -1.647 0.138 Phosphate (mg/L 2.30 ± 1.23 3.10 ± 0.16 -1.437 0.189 Sulphate (mg/L) 0.027 ± 0.01 0.039 ± 0.01 -2.137 0.065

Table 11 shows the results of statistical analysis for test samples and the hand dug well water samples from of significance between physicochemical parameters of Karu Local Government Area which is also reflected in borehole water samples and hand dug well water the mean values. samples from Keffi LGA. From the results shown there Conclusion were no significant differences between all the All the physicochemical parameters except physicochemical parameters except for turbidity. The p chemical oxygen demand (COD) determined for water – value for turbidity was 0.001 which conforms to samples from boreholes and hand dug wells in the p<0.05, with the implication that for turbidity there was study areas had mean values lower or within the a significant difference between the borehole water recommended permissible limits as prescribed by samples and the hand dug well water samples from regulatory bodies, mainly SON and WHO. This implies Keffi LGA. This could be attributed to fact that that the COD values determined for the samples are boreholes are normally covered and in most cases wells higher than value recommended by SON. This are not properly covered and there could be settling of invariably leads to greater amount of oxidizable dust in hand dug well as well as the inflow of runoff organic materials that would lead to reduction in the during rainy season and all these could increase dissolved oxygen (DO) which eventually give rise to turbidity. anaerobic conditions, which is deleterious to aquatic Table 12 shows the results of statistical analysis for test lives. The water quality index (WQI) calculated for the of significance between physicochemical parameters of water samples from Keffi LGA analysed showed that borehole water samples and hand dug well water the borehole and hand dug well water from had WQI samples from Karu LGA. From the results shown there values to be 35 and 59 respectively which from the were no significant differences between all the WQI scale indicates that the water samples were of physicochemical parameters except for turbidity. The p good and bad qualities, respectively. The WQI for – value for turbidity was 0.015 which conforms to water samples from Karu LGA had values of 66 and 63 p<0.05, with the implication that for turbidity there was for borehole and hand dug, respectively. This indicates a significant difference between the borehole water

164 that the water from boreholes and hand dug wells in Karu may actually may not be fit for domestic use now. Acknowledgements Conflict of interest The authors express their profound gratitude to Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest TETFund, Nigeria through the Management of related to this work. Nasarawa State, Keffi for making the research grant available for the research work.

References Concentration of Some Mineral Elements Ahmed, J. M., 2016. Evaluation of heavy metals with in Soil Sediment, ambient Water and the Body some physiochemical and biological Parts of Clarias gariepinus and Tilapia parameters for ground water in South of Najaf guineensis fishes in River Tammah, City, Iraq. J. of Ma’aen, 6:11 – 22. Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Curr World Environ, Akinbile, C. O., 2006. Hawked Water Quality and its 1 (20): 95 – 100. Health Implications in Akure, Nigeria. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12944/CWE/1.2.01 Botswana J. of Tech., 15(2): 70 – 75. Ayoade, Y. O. and F. O. Akintola. 1999. Water and http://www.researchgate.ne/publication/25715 Man, a Handbook on Geography Teaching for 9124 Schools and Colleges, Heinemann Akpoveta, O. V., B. E. Okoh and S. A. Osakwe. 2011. Educational Books, Ibadan; 27-35. Quality Assessment of Borehole Water Used BIS 1993. Analysis of water and waste water. Bureau in the Vicinities of Benin, Edo State of Indian Standards. New Delhi. and Agbor, Delta State of Nigeria. Curr. Borne, R. A., 1978. The Chemistry of our Research in Chem., 3:62 – 69. Environment, John Wiley and Sons, Inc. New DOI: 10.3923/crc.2011.62.69 York; 140 Anzene, S. J., S. P. Malu and U. J. Ahile. 2014. Bouwer, H., 2002. Artificial Recharge of Ground Comparative analyses of levels of some trace Water. Hydrology and Engineering metals in boreholes and hand dug wells Hydrogeology Jour., 10 (1): 121 – 142. DOI water sources within and around Lafia https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-001-0182-4 Metropolis. IOSR J. of Appl. Chem., 7(7): 62 Chaterjee, C. and M. Razuddin. 2002. Determination of – 75. Water Quality Index (WQI) of a Degraded DOI: 10.9790/5736-07726275 River in Asanil Industrial Area, Ranigunj, AOAC 1990. Official Methods of Analysis 15th ed., Burdwan, West Bengal. Environ. Poll. Tech., Association of Official Analytical, Chemists 1(2): 181- 189. Washington, DC. Dhakad, N. K., S. Deepak and P. Choudhary. 2008. APEC 2017. Water Systems: Advanced Purification Water quality Index of Ground Water (GWQI) Engineering Corp, USA, finest drinking water of Jhabua Town, M. P. (India). J. of systems in America, 2017. Environ. Res. and Dev., 2(3): 443 – 446. APHA 2002. American Public Health Association. Downloads/JeradDLId0443vol002issue003. Standard Methods for the Determination of Goldface, D., 1999. Water Law and Water Law Metals in Water and Waste Water. 17th Administration, National Water Resources ed. Washington DC. 1268 Institutes, Kaduna, Nigeria, 56 – 57. Aremu, M. O., B. L. Gav, O. D. Opaluwa, B. O. ICMR 1975. Manual of standards of quality for Atolaiye, P .C. Madu and D. U. Sangari. 2011. drinking water supplies. ICMR, New Delhi. Assessment of Physicochemical Igwemmar, N. C., S. A. Kolawole and L. K. Okunoye. Contaminants in Waters and Fishes from 2013. Physical and Chemical Assessment of Selected Rivers in Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Some Selected Borehole Water in Research Journal of Chem. Sci., Gwagwalada, Abuja. Int. J. of Sci. and Tech. 1(4):6 – 17. Res., 2(11): 324 – 328. http://www.researchgate.ne/publication/31660 http://www.ijstr.org/final- 5626 print/nov2013 Medudhula, T., S. Ch and S. Chintha. 2012. Analysis Aremu, M. O., D. U. Sangari, B. Z Musa and M. S. of water quality using physicochemical Chaanda. 2008. Assessment of Ground Water parameters in lower manair reservoir of and Stream Water Quality for Trace Karimnagar district, Andhra Pradesh. Int. J. of Metals and Physicochemical Contaminations Environ. Sci., 3(1):369 – 378. in Toto Local Government Area of Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Int. J. Chem. Sci. 1(1): http://www.ipublishing.co.in/ijesartic 8 – 19. les/twelve/articles/volthree/EIJES31017 http://www.isca.in/rjcs/Archives/v1/i4/ISCA- Murugsan, A., A. Ramu and N. Kannan. 2006. Water RJCS-2011-June quality assessment from Uthmapalayam Atolaiye, B. O., M. O. Aremu, D. Shagye and G. R. I. municipality in Theni District, Tamil Pennap. 2006. Determination and Nadu, India. Poll. Res., 25(1): 163 – 166. 165

Ogunawo, C. O., 2004. Coping with Domestic Water Singh, S. N., G. Srivastava and A. Bhatt. 2012. Supply Problems in Nigeria Urban Centres: Physicochemical determination of pollutants The Ijebu – Ode City Experience. Inter. in wastewater in Dheradun. Curr. World J. of Environ. Issues, 7 (182): 21 – 25. Environ. 2012; 7(1): 133 -138. Okeola, F. O., O. D. Kolawole and O. M. Ameen. SON 2007. Standards Organisation of Nigeria 2010. Comparative Study of Physicochemical (Nigerian Industrial Standards for Drinking Parameters of Water from a River and Water Quality- NIS: 554. its Surrounding Wells for Possible Interactive Trevedi, P., A. Bajpai and S. Thareja. 2009. Evaluation Effect. Adv. in Environ. Biol., 4 (3): 336 – of Water Quality: Physico-chemical 344. Characteristics of Ganga River at Kampur Oko, O. J., M. O. Aremu, R. Odoh, G. Yebpella and G. by using Correlation Study. Nature and Sci., A. Shenge. 2014. Assessment of Water 1(6): 91 – 94. Quality Index of Borehole and Well Vinod, J., D. Satish and G. Sapana. 2013a. Assessment Water in Wukari Town, Taraba State, Nigeria. of water quality index of industrial area Journal of Environ and Earth Sci., 2014; surface water Samples, Int. J. of Chem. 4(3): 336 – 344. Tech., 5:278-284. https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEE https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2880 S/article/view/11621 51847 Osunkiyesi, A. A., Physicochemical Analysis of Ogun Vinod, J., D. Satish, S. Ravi and G. Sapana. 2013b. River (Water Samples) within two locations Study of Pond Water quality by the (Akin Olugbade and Lafenwa) in assessment of physicochemical Abeokuta, Ogun State. IOSR J. of Appl. parameters and water quality index. Chem., 2012; 1(4): 24 – 27. Int. J. of Appl. Biol. and Pharm. Tech., 4(1): DOI: 10.9790/5736-0142427 47 – 52. Patil, P. N., D. V. Sawant and R. N. Deshmukh. 2012. WHO 1988. Assessment of Freshwater Quality, Global Physicochemical parameters for testing of Environmental Monitoring System (GEMS) water- A review. Int. J. of Environ. Sci., report on the related Environmental 3(3): 6 – 13. Monitoring, World Health Organization, http://www.ipublishing.co.in/ijesarticles/twelv Geneva. e/articles/volthree/EIJES31120 WHO 2004. World Health Organization/ Food and Qureshimatva, U. M., R. R. Maury., S. B. Gamit, R. D. Agriculture Organization. Technical Report: Patel and H. A. Solanki. 2015. Determination Heavy Elements in Human Nutrit., of physicochemical parameters and 480: 20 – 48. water quality index of Chandlodia Lake, Yisa, J., E. B. Agbaji and E. M. Okonkwo. 2008. Some Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India. J. of Environ. Physicochemical Contaminations Assessment and Anal. Toxicol., 5(4), 1 – 6. DOI: of Water samples from Challawa 10.4172/2161-0525.1000288 River, Nigeria. Int. J. of Chem. Sci., 1(2): 310 Shinde, S. E., S. A. Pathan, K. S. Raul and D. L. – 317. Sonawane. 2011. Studies on the Zubia, M., U. R. Hameed, A. B. Baloch, U. A. Noor, Z. physicochemical parameters and Muhammad, G. Irum, G. Naila, J. Nelofer, , correlation coefficient and Harsool- D. Nighat A. Bibi, S. Irfana, A. savangi Dam, District Aurangabad, India. Tauqir, , S. Tilawat, M. Muhammad and H. Middle East J. of Sci. Res., 8(1):544 – Abdul. 2015. Analysis of physicochemical 554. parameters of water and sediment Silderberg, M. S., 2008. Higher Education Chemistry, collected from Rawal Dam Islamabad. the Molecular Nature of Matter and Change, American-Eurasian Journ. of Toxicological 3rd ed. McGraw Hill; 25 – 40. Sci., 7(3):123 – 128.

166