International Journal of Agricultural Science and Research (IJASR) ISSN (P): 2250-0057; ISSN (E): 2321-0087 Vol. 10, Issue 4, Aug 2020, 89-96 © TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

ASSESSMENT OF GROUNDWATER QUALITY IN KARAMADAI AND ANNUR BLOCK OF DISTRICT, ,

THANGAMANI. S1*, A. SELVAPERUMAL2 & E. SUJITHA3 1Teaching Assistant (SWCE) Agricultural Engineering College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India 2Teaching Assistant (SWCE) Agricultural Engineering College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India 3Teaching Assistant (SWCE), Institute of agriculture, Kumulur, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India ABSTRACT

The quality of groundwater has been depleting nowadays due to over exploitation by the increased industrialization, urbanization, agricultural activities, and various human activities and the quality of groundwater gets contaminated severely. According to Central Groundwater Board (CGWB), the groundwater from has highest salinity level (EC > 3000µS/cm). Hence, current study has been carried out in characterizing the physiochemical nature of groundwater standard in Karamadai and Annur Block of Coimbatore district, Tamil Nadu, India to find out the

irrigation water quality. In this study, seven (7) groundwater samples from Karamadai block and six (6) groundwater Article Original samples from Annur block have gathered randomly from bore wells. The samples have been analyzed for pH, EC, TDS, Na+, Ca2+, Mg2+, Cl-, K+, carbonates, bicarbonates and total hardness. Sodium adsorption ratio, Residual sodium carbonate and water quality Index were calculated to locate out the groundwater suitability for irrigation. The results revealed that the value of pH differs from 7.6 to 8.6 and EC was 0.73 to 2.27 ds/m. Both highest and lowest EC values were observed in Annur Block. In addition, the EC value from all the samples were far beyond the permissible limit (<1 ds/m). However, Kurubanoor in Karamadi block (0.84 ds/m) and athipalayam in Annur block recorded the lowest EC

range (0.73 ds/m) while comparing with others. The high value of EC in irrigation water shows that there are salinity hazards. This leads to the reduction of crop growth and yield. Over all, the groundwater from Mangalakarai of Karamadai block (C3S1) and Athipalayam of Annur (C2S2) block are suitable for irrigation because it matches the optimum parameters required for irrigation. Water Quality Index in Karamadai (35 to 70) confirms that, the groundwater appears to be poor in quality for drinking and it can be used for irrigation and in Annur (162 to 451), it appears to be undesirable in quality and could be utilized for irrigation with correct management practices.

KEYWORDS: Groundwater Quality, Irrigation & Physico-chemical Analysis

Received: May 14, 2020; Accepted: Jun 04, 2020; Published: Jul 10, 2020; Paper Id.: IJASRAUG202011

1. INTRODUCTION

Groundwater is utilized gloablly for domestic, industrial, as well as for irrigation. Groundwater accounts for only 29.9 per cent of global fresh water. In the last few decades, there was a drastic growth in the requirement of fresh water because of fast development of population along with the boosted rate of industrialization. Expeditious urbanization, particularly in developing nations like India, These have influenced the accessibility as well as standard of groundwater because of its overexploitation. Over exploitation or excessive pumping leads to lowering the groundwater level in Coimbatore district (Elangovan, 2006). As per Central Groundwater board (2008), the stage groundwater development in Annur and Karamadai block are 160 and 96 % respectively. Standard of

www.tjprc.org [email protected] 90 Thangamani. S, A. Selvaperumal & E. Sujitha groundwater is identically essential as its standard due to its appropriate for diverse causes (Kumar et al. 2009, Subramani et al.2005). Therefore, the current research has taken to characterize the groundwater standard in Karamadai as well as Annur Block of Coimbatore district, Tamil Nadu, India to find out the irrigation water standard. Hydro chemical examination was broadly utilized to evaluate the groundwater standard as it gives knowledge of groundwater suitability for various purposes. In general, water for irrigation of agricultural crops can be assessed in terms of salinity and alkalinity (DPI&F notes, 2004). Hence, in the present research, pH, EC, TDS, cations and anions are measured and Sodium Adsorption ratio, Residual Sodium carbonate calculated to ensure the suitability of groundwater for irrigating crops.

2. METHODOLOGY 2.1 Description of the Study Area

Karamadai and Annur block are situated in Coimbatore district of the Indian state of Tamil Nadu (Fig.1). Karamadai block lies between 11º01’05”N and 11º24’06” N latitude and 76º49’ 22” E and 77º06’34”E longitude and Annur block lies between 11º02’10”N and 11º19’49” N latitude and 77º06 43”E and 78º13’ 06” E longitude. The total geographical area of the Annur block is 29059.96 ha and Karamadai block is 35926.39 ha (G-return, 2012-13). The major crops cultivated in Karamadai block are paddy, cereals, pulses, fruit crops and vegetables. In Annur block, maize, cholam (fodder crop), sugar cane, curry leaves and flower crops are mainly cultivated.

Figure 1: Location of the Study Area

Impact Factor (JCC): 8.3083 NAAS Rating: 4.13 Assessment of Groundwater Quality in Karamadai and Annur Block of Coimbatore District, Tamil Nadu, India 91

Figure 2: Location of Sampling in the Study Area

The average annual rainfall of Karamadai block varies from 450 to 500 mm and Annur block is around 410 mm. Both blocks receive major rainfall during Northeast Monsoon seasons. The land use classification of both the blocks is shown in Figure.3. Around 45 per cent geographic area in Karamadai block is under reserve forest followed by cultivable area (21%) and fallow land (14%). Uncultivable wasteland covers around 4 per cent of the total area. Meanwhile in Annur block, the net cultivable area is 37 per cent followed by fallow land (18%). The uncultivable waste land 18 per cent (G- return-2016).

Land use classification of Karamadai block Land use classification of Annur block 4% Uncultivable Waste Uncultivable Waste 2% Non Agri Uses 15% 11% 0% 0% Non Agri Uses Cultivable Waste Land 3% 37% 45% Permanent Pasture & Permanent Pasture & Grass Grass Land, Misc. Tree 14% Land, Misc. Tree Crops & Crops & Groves Groves Current Fallow Current Fallow 30%

Other Fallow Other Fallow 21% 18% Net Cultivated Area Net Cultivated Area

Figure 3: Land use Classification of Karamadai and Annur Block

2.2 Sample Collection

The samples of bore well water from thirteen different places, seven from Karamadai block and 6 from Annur block were randomly collected in one liter water bottle. The collected samples were analyzed for pH, EC, TDS, cations and anions based on the standard procedure and results were compared as per USSL classification (USSL,1954 and Wilcox 1955)

www.tjprc.org [email protected] 92 Thangamani. S, A. Selvaperumal & E. Sujitha

Figure 4: Sample Collection and Analysis

2.3 Parameters Selected and their Calculation

Parameters selected for the present study are EC, SAR and RSC. Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR) and Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC) are computed through the succeeding equations.

(1)

(All values of cations and anions are in me L-1)

Table 1: Salinity Hazard Classes Based on USSL Classification Salinity hazard class EC in (dS m-1) Remark on quality C1 0.1-0.25 Excellent C2 0.25-0.75 Good C3 0.75-2.25 Doubtful C4 and C5 >2.25 Unsuitable

Table 2: Sodium Hazard Classes Based on USSL Classification Sodium Hazard class SAR Remark on quality S1 10 Excellent S2 10-18 Good S3 18-26 Doubtful S4 and S5 >26 Unsuitable

Table 3: Groundwater Quality based on RSC (Residual sodium carbonate) (Richards 1954) RSC (me L-1) Remark on Quality <1.25 Good 1.25-2.5 Doubtful >2.5 Unsuitable

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 3.1 pH

The pH of the groundwater samples collected from 13 places of Karamadai and Annur blocks range from 7.6 to 8.8 that were within the acceptable limits 6.5- 8.5 given by Indian Standards (Fig.5). The high pH level greater than or equal to 8 in

Impact Factor (JCC): 8.3083 NAAS Rating: 4.13 Assessment of Groundwater Quality in Karamadai and Annur Block of Coimbatore District, Tamil Nadu, India 93

Karamadai, Mangalakarai, Kurumbanoor, Saravanapatti, Kovilpalayam, Kurumbapalayam, Vellamadai indicates that they have concentrations of biocarbonates. One of the major purposes in managing pH was to generate water that reduces corrosion or incrustation. This procedure could lead to substantial harm to the water supply systems, outcome from complicated associations among pH also other parameters, like dissolved solids, dissolved gases, hardness, alkalinity, as well as temperature.

9 pH at Karamadai block 8.8 8.8 pH at Annur block 8.8 8.6 8.5 8.6 8.4 8.4 8.2 8.2 8

8 pH pH 7.8 7.6 7.8 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.4 7.4 7.2 7.2 7 7

Figure 5: Range of pH from Collected Water Samples

3.2 EC (Electrical Conductivity)

Normally, the electrical conductivity is an estimate of the capability of water to pass on electrical current and was also influenced through the existence of dissolved solids. As the amount of whole dissolved solids (TDS) increases, the conductivity also raises. High salinity of irrigation water was accountable for salt accumulation in the root zone and also causes harm to plant cells (Greenway and Munns 1980). It is the major essential parameter that decides the appropriate utilization of water irrigation. The EC of collected samples varies from 0.73 to 2.46 (dS/m). Karamadai (2.46 dS/m ) and Vellanaipatti recorded highest EC (2.27 dS/m) in Karamdai and Annur block (Fig 6).

3 2.5 2.27 EC at Karamadai block 2.46 EC at Annur block 2.5 2 2

1.5 dS/m) dS/m) 1.5

0.84 1 0.73 EC( 1 EC( 0.5 0.5 0 0

Figure 6: Range of EC from Collected Water Samples

3.3TDS (Total Dissolved Salts)

Concentration of entire dissolved solids in groundwater decides its suitability for drinking, irrigation as well as other purpose. EC of water was a quickest operation of TDS and it was conveyed in terms of mg/L. The collected samples have TDS ranges from 115 to 1472 mg/L. The places Kovilpalayam, Karamadai, Kuttaiyur, Veerasnagar, Kurumbanoor, Vellamadai have TDS value slightly greater than the optimum TDS level. However, in Saravanapatti, Vellanaipatti, Athipalayam, Kurumampalyam, the TDS level is very high while comparing with permissible limit (Fig 7).

www.tjprc.org [email protected] 94 Thangamani. S, A. Selvaperumal & E. Sujitha

1472 1600 TDS at Karamadai block 1600 TDS at Annur block 1386 1400 1400 1200 1200 1000 1000 800 800

600 600 447 TDS(mg/L) 400 TDS(mg/L) 400 200 115 200 0 0

Figure 7: Range of TDS from Collected Water Samples

3.4 Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR)

Irrigation water was categorized on the basis of Sodium Adsorption Ration (SAR) and electrical conductivity (EC). The SAR shows that the relative proportion of sodium to calcium and magnesium. The highest SAR recorded at Veerasanagar, Karamadai and kuttaiyur in Karamadai block and all places of annur block (Fig.8). High concentrations of sodium, both in absolute and in relative terms, make water not appropriate for irrigation. The samples from the research area exceeded the permissible limit of SAR that comes under S3, S4 and S5 category as per USSL classification.

80.0 72.6 SAR at Karamadai block 70.0 64.3 60.0 50.0 45.5 40.0 SAR 30.0 16.8 17.4 20.0 10.0 4.5 2.5 0.0

Figure 8: Range of SAR from Collected Water Samples

3.5 Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC)

Residual Sodium Carbonate (RSC) is an index of irrigation water to shows alkalinity hazard of soil. Residual sodium carbonate were present in Karamadai,Veerasnagar and Kurumbanoor (Karamadai block) and kurumpalayam, and Vellamadai (Annur Block) (Fig. 9). Samples from Veerasanagar and Karamadi shows that groundwater in the these area exceeds the permissible limit of RSC (>2.5 me L-1) and not suitable for irrigation

4.0 0.40 0.37 3.4 RSC at Karamadai block 3.6 RSC at Annur block 3.5 0.35 3.0 0.30 0.27 2.5 0.25

2.0 1.6 0.20

RSC RSC 1.5 0.9 0.15 1.0 0.10 0.5 0.05 0.0 0.00

Figure 9: Range of RSC from Collected Water Samples

Impact Factor (JCC): 8.3083 NAAS Rating: 4.13 Assessment of Groundwater Quality in Karamadai and Annur Block of Coimbatore District, Tamil Nadu, India 95

Table 4: Irrigation Suitability at Study Area Place Latitude Longitude pH EC TDS SAR RSC Classification Abirami Theatre 11.2891 76.94097 7.6 2.30 115 4.5 - C4S1 Belladhi 11.2613 76.97811 7.8 1.51 928 16.8 - C3S2 Veerasnagar 11.2896 76.95746 7.9 2.19 1354 72.6 3.4 C3S4 Kurumbanoor 11.2796 76.92829 8.2 0.84 487 17.4 1.6 C3S2 Kuttaiyur 11.2771 76.95271 7.6 1.41 939 45.5 0.9 C3S4 Mangalakarai 11.2566 76.93298 8.2 1.43 773 2.5 - C3S1 Karamadai 11.2407 76.96004 8.8 2.46 1472 64.3 3.6 C4S4 Kovilpalayam 11.1453 77.04029 8.5 1.02 616 23.0 - C3S3 Kurumapalayam 11.1132 77.02775 8.5 0.89 528 29.0 0.27 C3S3 Saravanampatti 11.0764 77.00298 8.0 1.01 647 26.0 - C3S4 Vellanaipatti 11.0953 77.07156 8.6 2.27 1386 34.0 - C4S4 Athipalayam 11.0859 76.98178 7.6 0.73 447 18.0 - C2S2 Vellamadai 10.9606 77.670551 8.1 0.85 519 22.0 0.37 C3S3

4. CONCLUSIONS

The examinations of water samples gathered from thirteen stations of Karamadai and Annur block of Coimbatore district shows that, the groundwater from Mangalakarai of Karamadai block (C3S1) and athipalayam of annur (C2S2) block are suitable for irrigation because it matches the optimum parameters required for irrigation. Comparatively Karamadai block water samples materialize to be good for irrigation except Kuttaiyur. In addition, the bore well water from Annur block has more Total Dissolved Salts and Sodium Adsorption ratio (SAR). Therefore, it is not appropriate to use bore well water for irrigation in Karamadai. Also, the EC value form all the sample values are beyond the permissible limit (<1 ds/m) except three stations. The high value of EC in irrigation water reveals the salinity hazards in the area. This results in the reduction of crop growth and yield.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTION

This research has been done as a joint effort of all authors. Author ST collected the sample and analyzed whereas Authors ST, AS and ES wrote the final draft of manuscript.

REFERENCES

1. Ambast, R.S (1971). Ecosystem Study of Tropical pond with primary Production of Different Vegetation Zones. Hydrobiology 12:57-61.

2. Anithamary, I., Ramkumar, T. and Venkatramanan, S. (2012) Application of Statistical Analysis for the Hydrogeochemistry of Saline Groundwater in Kodiakarai. Tamilnadu, India, Journal of Coastal Research 281: 89-98.

3. Central Groundwater Board (CGWB) (2014). Annual report, Tamil Nadu

4. Rasul M. Khalaf & Waqed H. Hassan, “Evaluation of Irrigation Water Quality Index (IWQI) For Al-Dammam Confined Aquifer in the West and Southwest of Karbala City, Iraq”, International Journal of CivilEngineering (IJCE), Vol. 2, Issue 3, pp.21-34

5. Datta, P.S. Tyagi, S.K. 1996. Major ion chemistry of groundwater in Delhi area: chemical weathering processes and groundwater flow regime. J Geol Soc India 47:179-188.

6. Department of primary industries and fisheries. (2004);1-6 ISSN 0155 – 3054

7. Elangovan,K (2006). GIS fundamentals, applications and implementations, new India publishing Agency, 140 www.tjprc.org [email protected] 96 Thangamani. S, A. Selvaperumal & E. Sujitha

8. Fact sheet No. 701. 2007. Interpreting irrigation water analysis II -Plant nutrition and water quality. A & l Canada Laboratories, Inc. 2136 Jetstream rd. London, ON N5V 3P5.

9. G-return, District statistical data, Coimbatore.(2012-13)

10. Ir. Darwis , “Extension about the Groundwater Conservation and its Influence on Farmers Knowledge and Attitude in Takalar Regency, Indonesa”, BEST: International Journal of Management Information Technology and Engineering (BEST: IJMITE), Vol. 6, Issue 5, pp. 1-10

11. Greenway H, Munna R(1980). Mechanism of salt tolerance in non halophytes. Ann Rev Plant Physiol. 3(l):149–190

12. Horton, R.K. 1965. An index number system for rating water quality. Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation, 37: 300.

13. Jalali, M. 2006. Chemical characteristics of groundwater in parts of mountainous region, Alvand, Hamadan, Iran. Environ. Geology 51:433–446.

14. N. Ravisankar & S. Balakumar, “Assessment of Groundwater Quality in Chidambaram Town, Cuddalore District, Tamilnadu State”, Impact Factor(JCC): 3.7985-This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.usIMPACT: International Journal of Research in Humanities, Arts and Literature (IMPACT: IJRHAL), Vol. 7, Issue 5, pp.445-456

15. Kannan, K. 1991. Fundamentals of Environmental Pollution. S. Chand and Company Ltd. New Delhi.

16. Kelly, J., Thornton, I. and Simpson, P.R. 1996. Urban geochemistry: a study of the influence of anthropogenic activity on the heavy metal content of soils in traditionally industrial and nonindustrial areas of Britain. Appl Geochem 11:363–370.

17. Kumar SK, Rammohan V, Sahayam JD, Jeevananadam M (2009). Assessment of groundwater quality and hydrogeochemistry of Manimuktha river basin, Tamil Nadu, India. Environ Monit Assess. 159:341–351

18. Subramani T, Elango L, Damodarasamy SR (2009). Groundwater quality and its suitability for drinking and agricultural use Chithar River Basin, Tamil Nadu, India. Environ Geol.47:1099–1110

19. Katpatal Y. B, Chavan C. S , “Study of Groundwater Level Profile in an Unconfined Aquifer: Case Study of Nagpur Urban Area, Central India “International Journal of Civil Engineering (IJCE), Vol.1, Issue 2 pp.25-34

20. US Salinity Laboratory Staff. Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils. US Department of Agriculture.(1954);60: 160

21. Wilcox, L.V.(1955) Classification and use of irrigation waters. USDA Circular No. 969, U.S. Department of Agriculture, USA

22. Richards LA (1954).Diagnostics and improvement of saline and alkaline soils. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture hand book no. 60. U.S. Salinity Laboratory, Washington, DC.

Impact Factor (JCC): 8.3083 NAAS Rating: 4.13