MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297517319 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2082355/v1

Evaluation of Groundwater Quality Using Water Quality Index and GIS, The Case of Debre Tabor Town, Ethiopia

2022· preprint· en· W4297517319 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adugnaw Shega Tasew, Zigiybel Firiew Berihune

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater and Watershed Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroundwaterTurbidityTotal dissolved solidsNitrateWater qualityEnvironmental scienceDry seasonHydrology (agriculture)Wet seasonEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental chemistryChemistryGeographyGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Assessing the quality of groundwater for better management of the water sources is essential. This study is aimed at evaluating the groundwater quality of Debre Tabor town. Twelve groundwater samples were collected at hand dung wells during the wet season (Mid July-Mid August 2020) and dry season (1st February –Mid-March 2021). Various Physico-chemical parameters (pH, electrical conductivity (EC), Total dissolved solids (TDS), Temperature, Turbidity, Calcium (Ca 2+ ), Magnesium (Mg 2+ ), Chloride (Cl − ), Nitrate (No 3 − ), and microbiological parameters (Total coliform and Feacal coliform)) were analyzed and compared with the standard guidelines recommended by WHO. GIS was used to show the distribution of groundwater quality throughout the study area. WQI created by Canadian Council of Minster of the Environment (CCME) was applied to evaluate the suitability of the groundwater for drinking purposes. Also, the result shows that total coliform and faecal coliform at all groundwater wells were not suitable for drinking purpose. The result shows that Electrical conductivity, Temperature, Nitrate, Chloride and Magnesium at all groundwater wells were suitable for drinking purpose for both dry and wet season whereas Turbidity, pH, Calcium and Total Dissolved Solids are suitable for drinking purpose at some groundwater wells but not suitable at some wells. The water quality analysis result shows that spatial and seasonal variations of the parameters are significant throughout the study area(p < 0.05). According to CCMEWQI result seven groundwater samples show poor water quality status of 40.53-44 while, five groundwater samples show marginal water quality status of 44.19–55.82. Based on the information provided by the study, it is recommended to identify the source of contamination, provide properly designed sanitation systems and to monitor water quality at least once per year for effective and proper management of the groundwater quality.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.181
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicGroundwater and Watershed AnalysisFrench-language works237,207