Surface water quality evaluation, apportionment of pollution sources and aptness testing for drinking using water quality indices and multivariate modelling in Baitarani River basin, Odisha
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Baitarani River, Odisha, faces serious deterioration due to massive human intervention. It is particularly susceptible to degradation because it receives industrial and waste water emissions from surrounding organizations and municipal bodies. The current condition of the river is deplorable, leaving behind only minimal economic and ecological values. In this Baitarani Watershed, Odisha, this study emphasizes on analysing the seasonal variation (post-monsoon) of the water quality rating of the river in terms of the Water Quality Index (WQI). Study assessed the hydro-chemical variables, collected from thirteen sampling sites, during 2021–2024; and the whole river was investigated for 15 physicochemical parameters. Again, environ-metrics techniques, such as principal component analysis (PCA), and hierarchical (H) cluster analysis (CA), were used to assess the hydro-chemical variables. In all sites, the indicator Turbidity did not meet the drinking water quality limits (< 5NTU). During the post-monsoon season, the obtained WA-WQI value scored as 21.7 to 191, signifying excellent to unsuitable water quality. In this context, the WAWQI (Weighed Arithmetic Water Quality Index) values show that almost 61.54 % sampling sites have poor to unsuitable quality of water. On the contrary, the computed CCMEWQI (Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment Water Quality Index) value of the present research, varied between 23 and 97. These values indicate that water quality ranges from excellent to very poor water quality. Spanning a spectrum, the values of Integrated Weight (I)-WQI oscillated between 14 and 97. About 23.08 % remained within the excellent-good category, suggesting low pollution. These values also indicate 76.92 % of samples renders poor water and thus, significant contamination of the research zone by elements like turbidity, EC, and TDS indicates that the water quality in these areas is below drinkable limits and requires purification before use. The method, CA grouped four zones into three clusters, i.e., relatively low-polluted, medium-polluted, and high polluted. During post-monsoon season, most of the water quality characteristics were lower owing to dilution by monsoon rainfall, while pollutants were relatively higher in at some places, which might be due to reduced river flow and concentrated pollutants. The PCA resulted into 4 components namely PC-1 (51.31 %), PC-2 (16.044 %), PC-3 (11.799 %) and PC-4 (9.04 %) and indicated that particularly PC-1 contributes parameters such as turbidity, EC, TDS, Na+, K+, Ca2+, and Mg2+, were mostly influenced by mineralization, ions dissolution, and rock weathering. Ultimately, this innovative study from both indexing techniques, concludes that out of the 13 sampling sites, around 61.54 % (WA), 76.92 % (IWQI) and 53.85 % (CCME) is observed to be the most polluted site. CA and PCA identified that natural phenomena, along with agricultural, municipal, and industrial discharges, are the major polluting sources in the river basin. Reducing sewage outflow, blocking direct stormwater discharge, and avoiding continuous solid garbage disposal by neighbouring populations are ways to improve river water quality. This study provides baseline information that would serve as an effective plan for the management of the river basin.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".