ASSESSMENT OF FISH SPECIES BIODIVERSITY IN YAMUNA RIVER (HARYANA) : A POST COVID 19 ANALYSIS

Abstract

A post-COVID-19 has potential benefits to biodiversity and the environment, yet others have suggested both benefits and detriments. The present study was intended to record the fish biodiversity at the selected sites of Yamuna river (Yamunanagar, Panipat, Faridabad) in Haryana from September 2021 to April 2022. A total of sixty-four (64) fish species have been recorded from 3 sites (Yamunanagar, Panipat and Faridabad) which belong to 9 orders, 15 families and 64 species. The maximum number of species was recorded from 3 sites during November 2021, which was 56 species from Yamunanagar, 52 from Panipat and 27 from Faridabad. The minimum number of species reported was 44 from Yamunanagar (in February), 42 from Panipat (in October) and four from Faridabad (in April). The most dominating order was Cypriniformes, Siluriformes, Anabentiformes and Synbranchiformes. Cyprinus carpio, Labeo rohita, Ompak bimaculatus and Parambassis ranga were recorded from Yamunanagar and L. rohita was the only species recorded during all months. Puntius sophore, P. chola and Pethia ticto were recorded from the most dominating family Cyprinidae from Faridabad. The temperature of river water range from 8.38±0.08-21.33±0.13 °C, pH range from 6.00±0.11-8.03±0.11, DO from 1.68±0.06-8.10±0.007mg/l, total alkalinity from 83.25±0.48-351.75±11.89mg/l and total hardness 121.75±1.93-279.25±6.29mg/l.

Full text

ASSESSMENT OF FISH SPECIES BIODIVERSITY IN YAMUNA RIVER
(HARYANA) : A POST COVID 19 ANALYSIS
Shri Ram Yadav1, Ravikant2*, Siddharth Kumar Jatav1, Mahendra Kumar Yadav3, Gajender Singh2
and Tejpal Dahiya2
1Department of Fisheries Resource Management, COFS, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar - 125004, India.
2Department of Zoology, COBS&H, CCS Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar-125004, India.
3Department of Aquaculture, COFS, Govind Ballabh Pant University, Pantnagar-263 153, India.
*e-mail : rkantazad@gmail.com
(Received 3 October 2022, Revised 19 November 2022, Accepted 1 December 2022)
ABSTRACT : A post-COVID-19 has potential benefits to biodiversity and the environment, yet others have suggested both
benefits and detriments. The present study was intended to record the fish biodiversity at the selected sites of Yamuna river
(Yamunanagar, Panipat, Faridabad) in Haryana from September 2021 to April 2022. A total of sixty-four (64) fish species have
been recorded from 3 sites (Yamunanagar, Panipat and Faridabad) which belong to 9 orders, 15 families and 64 species. The
maximum number of species was recorded from 3 sites during November 2021, which was 56 species from Yamunanagar, 52
from Panipat and 27 from Faridabad. The minimum number of species reported was 44 from Yamunanagar (in February), 42
from Panipat (in October) and four from Faridabad (in April). The most dominating order was Cypriniformes, Siluriformes,
Anabentiformes and Synbranchiformes. Cyprinus carpio, Labeo rohita, Ompak bimaculatus and Parambassis ranga were
recorded from Yamunanagar and L. rohita was the only species recorded during all months. Puntius sophore, P. chola and
Pethia ticto were recorded from the most dominating family Cyprinidae from Faridabad. The temperature of river water range
from 8.38±0.08 –21.33±0.13 °C, pH range from 6.00±0.11 - 8.03±0.11, DO from 1.68±0.06 – 8.10±0.007mg/l, total alkalinity
from 83.25±0.48 – 351.75±11.89mg/l and total hardness 121.75±1.93 – 279.25±6.29mg/l.
Key words : Fish diversity, physico chemical, water parameters, Yamuna river.
How to cite : Shri Ram Yadav, Ravikant, Siddharth Kumar Jatav, Mahendra Kumar Yadav, Gajender Singh and Tejpal Dahiya
(2023) Assessment of fish species biodiversity in Yamuna river (Haryana) : A post COVID 19 analysis. J. Exp. Zool. India 26,
817-824. DOI: https://doi.org/10.51470/jez.2023.26.1.817, DocID: https://connectjournals.com/03895.2023.26.817
J. Exp. Zool. India Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 817-824, 2023 ISSN 0972-0030
DocID: https://connectjournals.com/03895.2023.26.817 eISSN 0976-1780
INTRODUCTION
The effects of COVID-19 have potential benefits
for biodiversity and the environment, yet others have
suggested both benefits and detriments (Cooke et al,
2021). For example, the rivers of India are cleaner because
of remarkable reductions in industrial pollution. Still,
imperilled freshwater fish species are increasingly
exploited by food-insecure peoples in response to the
disruption of their normal livelihoods (Pinder et al, 2020).
The COVID-19 virulent disease has altered how
pollutants (i.e., nutrients, pesticides, toxins and
contaminants, micro plastics, light and noise and salinity)
influence freshwater ecosystems (Reid et al, 2019 and
Chen et al, 2020). During the COVID-19, global
lockdowns and temporary closures of many industries
have potentially reduced the discharge of nutrients, heavy
metals, and other chemicals to water bodies and reduced
emissions to the atmosphere (Cooke et al, 2021).
The Yamuna river, one of the most important and
sacred rivers of the northern plains of India, is highly
polluted. The river originates at the Yamunotri glacier,
traverses 120 km to emerge onto the Indo-Gangetic plains
at Dakpathar in Uttarakhand, and finally joins the Ganges
River at Allahabad after crossing 1376 km (Sharma et
al, 2017).
Fish make up about half of all vertebrates on the
planet and there are 32,900 species of fish among the
64,000 vertebrates (Froese and Pauly, 2014). In India,
there are 2500 different fish species, 930 of which dwell
in freshwater and 1570 live in the sea (Kar et al, 2004).
In the Indian Subcontinent, 742 freshwater species are
classified into 233 genera, 64 families and 16 orders
(Jayram, 1999). In the Indian seas, there are over 2,500
species of fish (almost 11% of the world’s species).
Central India’s diverse water resources, such as streams,
rivers, reservoirs, subterranean aquatic ecosystems,
DOI: https://doi.org/10.51470/jez.2023.26.1.817

818 Shri Ram Yadav et al
traditional lakes and domestic ponds, are home to a
diverse range of freshwater fish. India is the world’s
second-largest fish producer, behind China and the
world’s second-largest aquaculture producer (FAO,
2014).
The variety and variability of flora, fauna, and
microbes in an environment can be defined as biodiversity.
Fish account for half of all vertebrate species on the
planet, and they can be found in practically every type of
aquatic environment. Over-exploitation of biological
resources to feed a growing human population is so
evident, especially in densely populated third-world
nations, that most resources, whether terrestrial or aquatic,
have two exhibited symptoms of diversity loss, which is
a severe problem for all living things (Rathore et al, 2017).
The variety and variability of flora, fauna and
microbes in an environment can be defined as biodiversity.
Biodiversity is the most valuable but least appreciated
resource and can be a key to maintaining the world
(Wilson, 1992). In India, biodiversity outside protected
areas is rich because of close relationships between
religious and sociocultural beliefs and conservation. There
are many practical reasons for conserving biodiversity,
not to mention benefits related to food, medicine and other
materials, as well as the environmental services supplied
by natural ecosystems (Vipin et al, 2012).
Over-exploitation of biological resources to feed a
growing human population is so evident, especially in
densely populated third-world nations, that most resources,
whether terrestrial or aquatic, have exhibited symptoms
of diversity loss, which is a severe problem for all living
things. Water quality parameters describe the
physicochemical properties of river water, and these
elements change across time and space. Human
intervention with nature significantly impacts the natural
concentration of environmental factors. Water resources
are greatly influenced by the magnitude of socioeconomic
activity, urbanization, industry, and hydropower generation,
and these operations impact water quality and aquatic
biodiversity (Jain et al, 2018).
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The present studies were conducted in three districts
(Yamunanagar, Panipat and Faridabad) along the Yamuna
River between 28° 55' 42.8664'' N North latitude and
77° 5'29.3712'' E’East longitudes. The Average depth of
the river in Haryana is 3m, and the total length of the
river in Haryana is 305km.
The samples were collected monthly from September
2021 to April 2022 with the help of fishermen and landing
centres. The fish were collected by using cast nets (1.5
m diameter and 2.0 × 2.0 mm mesh), gill nets (10-40
mm) and drag nets (different mesh sizes and lengths) by
local anglers and market surveys at fish landing sites along
the river banks. The samples were collected twice a
month. The collected fish samples were preserved in 8%
formalin and brought to the laboratory for further study
and identification.
The meristic and morphometric characters of
collected fishes were measured and identified up to the
species level. Species identification was carried out by
using the standard keys of Qureshi and Qureshi (1983),
Talwar and Jhingran (1991), Shrivastava (1998), Jayaram
(1999). The diversity indices viz. Shannon index, Simpson
index, Margalef index and evenness index were used to
calculate with the help of software PAST (Hammer et
al, 2001) and Biodiversity Pro (McAleece et al, 1999).
The physicochemical parameters were analyzed at
all three water sampling sites. Later, these samples were
relocated to the research lab for further evaluation. All
water samples collected from the river have gone through
the laboratory procedure to evaluate physical and
chemical parameters by using the methodology available
in APHA (2012). The water temperature was measured
at the sampling sites using a digital thermometer. pH was
recorded by a handy pH meter of Electronics India.
However, total dissolved oxygen, total alkalinity and total
hardness were analyzed at the Department by using the
standard protocol mentioned in APHA (2012)
RESULTS
Fish diversity
During the entire study period, a total of sixty-four
(64) fish species have been recorded from 3 sites
(Yamunanagar, Panipat and Faridabad) which belong to
9 orders, 15 families and 64 species. The maximum
number of species was recorded from 3 sites during
November 2021, which was 56 species from
Yamunanagar, 52 from Panipat and 27 from Faridabad.
The minimum number of species reported was 44 from
Yamunanagar (in February), 42 from Panipat (in October)
and four from Faridabad (in April). The most dominating
order was Cypriniformes, Siluriformes, Anabentiformes
and Synbranchiformes. C. carpio, L. rohita, Ompak
bimaculatus and Parambassis ranga were recorded
from Yamunanagar and L. rohita was the only species
recorded during all months. Puntius sophore, P. chola,
and Pethia ticto were recorded from the most dominating
family Cyprinidae from Faridabad. The water quality
parameters were recorded in the present investigation
from different sites (Yamunanagar, Panipat and
Faridabad). The temperature of river water range from

Assessment of fish species biodiversity in Yamuna river, Haryana, India 819
Table 1 : Order and family-wise distribution of recorded fish species at selected sites.
S. Order Family Species Common Fin formula
no. name
1.Cyprinidae Barilius barna Boroli D. 9 (2/7); P. 14-15; V. 9; A. 12-14 (2-3/10-11); C. 19
2. Labeo catla Katla D-18(3/15),P-19,V-9,A-8(3/5),C-19,LL-40-43
3. Chagunius Chagunio D. 11(3/8); P1. 15; P2. 9; A. 8 (3/5)
chagunio
4. Cirrhinus mrigala Mrigal D. 16; P1. 17; P2. 9; A. 8
5. Cirrhinus reba Rewah/Bata D. 32-39/74-90; A. 3/75-88; P. 23
6. Cyprinus carpio Common carp D. 3-4/18-20, P1: 1/15, P2: 1/8, A. 3-5
7. Esomus danricus Meese D. 8 (2/6); P1. 11-13 (1/10-12); P2. 7 (1/6);
A. 7-8 (2-3/5)
8. Hypopthalmicthys Silver carp D 3/7; P1 1/17; P2 1/7; A 2-3/12-14
molitrix
9. Labeo bata Bata D. 17-18 (3/14-15); P1. 16-18; P2. 9 (1/8); A. 7(2/5)
10. Labeo rohita Rohita D. 15-16 (3/12-13); P1. 16-17; P2. 9; A. 7(2/5)
11. Labeo gonius Kuri D. 16-17 (3/13-14); P1. 15-16; P2. 9(1/8); A. 7(2/5)
12. Labeo calbasu Kalisasu D. 17-18 (3/14-15); P1. 16-18; P2. 9 (1/8); A. 7(2/5).
13. Puntius sarana Olive barb / D. 3/8; A. 3/5; P. 15; V. 19
Sar puti
14. Oxygaster bacaila Large razorbelly D. 10(2/8); P1. 12-13; P2. 9; A. 14-15(2/12-13)
minnow
15. Osteobrama Hafo D. 10 (2/8); P1. 15; P2; 9-10; A. 33-36 (3/30-33)
cotiocotio
16. Crossocheilus latius Kala bata D. 10-11 (2-3/8); P. 14-16; P. 9; A. 7 (2/5)
17. Garra annandalei Annandale garra D. 9 (2/7); P1. 15; P2. 9; A. 7 (2/5)
/Stone roller (Rahman, 1989 and 2005)
18. Cypriniformes Garra gotylagotyla Ngamussengum D. 10 (2/8); P1. 15; P2. 9; A. 7 (2/5)
19. Puntius sophore Phabounga D. 11 (3/8); P1. 15; P2. 9 (1/8); A. 8 (3/8).
20. Pethiacon chonius Puthi D. 11 (3/8); P1. 13-15; P2. 9 (1/8); A. 7-8 (2-3/5)
21. Pethia ticto Chenaputhi - D iii-iv 8; P 13-15; V i 8; A ii-iii 5.
22. Puntius chola Chola puti D. 10-11 (2-3/8); P1. 15; P2. 9; A. 7-8 (2-3/5)
23. Systomus sarana olive barb D. 3/8; A. 3/5; P. 15; V. 19
24. Puntius chelynoides Kendai D. 3/8, P1.15, P2. 1/8. A. 3/5
25. Schizothorax Ngaka/common D iii 8; A iii 5; P i 15-16; V i 9
richardsonii snowtrout
26. Salmo phasiabacaila Chelakani D. 10(2/8); P1. 12-13; P2. 9; A. 14-15(2/12-13)
27. Salmo phasiaphulo Finescalera -D1. 8; P1. 11-13; P2.7-8; A. 15; C. 16
zorbellyminow
28. Amblypharyngodon Molacarplet D. 9 (2/7); P1. 15; P2. 9; A. 7 (2/5)
mola
29. Cabdio morar Cabdiomorar D. 2/8-9; P1. 14-15; P2. 8; A. 2-3/8-9
30. Aspidoparia jaya Jaya D. 2/7; P1. 14-15; P2. 8; A. 2 / 7
31. Rasbora daniconius Dohnikona/ D. 9 (2/7); P1. 14-15; P2. 9; A. 7 (2/5)
Slender rasbora
32. Barilius bendelisis Bilcha D. 9(2/7); P. 13-15; V. 9; A. 9-10(2-3/8); C. 18
Table 1 continued...

33. Barilius vagra Gheur/ Glar D. 9 (2/7); P. 16; V. 9; A. 13-15 (2-3/11-12); C. 19
34. Botiidae Botia lohachata Reticulate loach D. 9-10; P1. 14; P2. 8; A. 5-6
35. Botia dario Bengal loach D. 11-13 (2-3/9-10); P1. 14; P2. 8; A. 7-8 (2/5-6)
36. Engraulidae Setipinna phasa Phasa D i 14-15; A iii 66-78; P i 14; V i 6
37. Channidae Channa gachua Boga D. 32-37; A. 21-23; P. 15; V. 6; C. 12
38. Channa marulius Hall/Gajal D. 49-55; P1. 17-19; P2. 6; A. 28-35
Anabantiformes
39. Channa punctatus Gorissa D. 29-32; P1. 15-18; P2. 6; A. 20-22
40. Anabantidae Anabas testudineus Climbing perch 26-28 (XVI-XVIII 1-2/7-10) P1. 13-15 (1-2/11-14) P2
41. Clariidae Clarias batrachus Magur D. 64-70; P1. 1/9-10; P2. 6. A. 45-52
42. Heteropneus Heteropneustes Singee D. 6-7; P1. 1/6-7; P2. 6; A. 62-70
tidae fossilis
43. Siluridae Wallago attu Barali/Poil D. 5; P1.1/13-14; P2. 10; A. 85-89.
44. Bagridae Rita rita Rita D. 11/6; P1. 1/10; P2. 8; A. 11-13
45. Siluridae Ompok bimaculatus Butter Catfish D. 4; P1.12-15(1/11-14); P2. 8; A. 66-73.
46. Notopteridae Mystus tengara Tengaramystus D. I/7; P1. I/8; P2.6; A. 10-139
47. Ailiidae Ailia coila Kajuli D. 0; P1. 1/14; P2. 6; A. 67-75.
48. Siluriformes Ailiichthys punctata Jamuna ailia D. 0; P I/12; A 70-90; C. 17
49. Clupisoma garua GaruaBachcha D.l/6; A 3/28; P. 1/11; V. 1/5; C. 17-20.
50. Schilbeidae Eutropiichthys Basa D. 1/7; P1. 1/13-14; P2. 6; A. 3-4/46-48
vacha
51. Eutropiichthys Muribacha D. I/7; P1. 1/13; P2. 6; A. 3/35-37
murius
52. Neotropius Indian potasi D. 1/5-6; P1. 1/7; P2. 6; A. 33-40
atherinoides
53. Silonia silondia Silond catfish D1 I/7; D2 0; P I/11-13; V 6; A 40-46 (4-36/42)
54. Mastacem Mastacembelus Bami D. XXXVII-XXXVIII/78-84, P1. 25-26, A. III/77-85
belidae armatus
55. Notopteridae Notopterus chitala Featherback D. 9; P1. 15-16; P2. 6; A. 115-120
Synbranchiformes
56. Notopterus Bronze D. 7-8; P1. 15-17; P2. 5-6; A. 99-104.
notopterus featherback
57. Mystus seenghala Seenghala D. I/7; P1.I/9; P2.I/5; A.11-12
58. Anguilliformes Anguillidae Anguilla bengalensis Mottled eel D. 250-305; P. 18; A. 210-250; C. 10-12
59. Pristigaster Ilisha megaloptera Indian ilisha D. 2-3/12-14; P1. 13-15; P2. 7; A. 2-3/36-39.
idae
60. Clupeidae Gudusia Karati D. 14-15 (3/11-12); P1. 13 (1/12); P2. 7;
Clupeiformes chapra A. 23-25 (2/21-23)
61. Gonialosa manmina Ganges river D. 3/12-13; P1. 14-15; P2. 8; A. 24-25
gizzard shad
62. Ovalentaria Ambassidae Chanda nama Chanda D1. VIII, D2. I/16-17, P1. 12-13, P2. I/5, A. III/16-17
63. Parambassis ranga Indian X-ray D1. VI, D2. I/13-15, P1. 10-11, P2. I/5, A. III/15-16
fish
Perciformes
64. Parambassis lala Highfin glassy D VII/I P1 I/13 P2 I/5 A. III/13
perchlet
Table 1 continued...
820 Shri Ram Yadav et al

Fig. 1 : Order-wise distribution of observed fish species.
Fig. 2 : Family-wise distribution of observed fish species.
8.38±0.08 –21.33±0.13 °C, pH range from 6.00±0.11 -
8.03±0.11, DO from 1.68±0.06 – 8.10±0.007mg/l, total
alkalinity from 83.25±0.48 – 351.75±11.89mg/l and total
hardness 121.75±1.93 – 279.25±6.29mg/l.
The recorded 64 fish species belonged to 8 orders
and 19 families. The checklist of fish species and their
orders and families is given in Table 1.
The order Cypriniformes was dominant, containing
56 per cent of fish species, followed by Siluriformes, 20
per cent. Orders Synbranchiformes and Ananbantiformes
comprise six per cent of fish species, while Clupeiformes
and Perciformes had only five per cent of the total reported
fish species. The rest of the orders had less species
diversity, only two or three per cent.
The family Cyprinidae was found to be dominant,
containing 52 per cent of fish species, followed by the
family Sciaenidae (six per cent), family Notoptendae (six
per cent) and Channidae comprise (six per cent) of fish
species. At the same time, Channidae, Heteropneustidae
and Culpeidae had only five per cent (each) of the total
reported fish species. The rest of the families had a low
amount of species diversity having only two per cent.
Water parameter
Temperature
In the present investigation, the maximum water
temperature was recorded in different sites Yamunanagar
(20.68±0.05), Panipat (20.43±0.14) and Faridabad
(21.33±0.13) in April 2022. The minimum temperature
was recorded during January 2022 (winter). That
condition was observed due to low water levels during
summer and natural climatic changes like minimum
atmospheric temperature during winter and high summers.
pH
In the present investigation, the pH value recorded
from Yamunanagar was a maximum of 8.03±0.11 (in
January), in Panipat 7.38±0.11 (in February) and in
Faridabad 6.98±0.11 (in February).
Dissolve oxygen
The dissolved oxygen in water is one of the most
crucial parameters or factors of any aquatic ecosystem
that decides its life. In Yamunanagar, DO value ranges
Assessment of fish species biodiversity in Yamuna river, Haryana, India 821

from 5.53±1.74 - 8.10±0.07. In Panipat, it was 3.63±0.08
– 4.80±0.4, while, in Faridabad, it was found to be the
least among the recorded values, 1.33± 0.06 – 2.33± 0.09.
Total alkalinity
Water’s total alkalinity is the capacity to neutralize a
strong acid. Alkalinity in natural water bodies is mainly
due to carbonates and bicarbonates ions in water. In the
present investigation, it was observed at maximum in
Yamunanagar at 172.00±1.63 mg/l, Panipat at
194.00±2.16 mg/l and Faridabad, it was maximum
(351.75±11.89 mg/l) among the recorded values of total
Table 2 : Shannon-Weaver Diversity Index (Fish diversity) of study
areas (segmentwise).
Month Yamunanagar Panipat Faridabad
September 2021 2.0356 1.8183 1.6590
October 2021 2.0921 2.0174 1.1413
November 2021 1.8829 1.9064 1.5806
December 2021 1.9020 1.9153 1.6731
January 2022 2.0845 2.0343 0.5004
February 2022 1.6461 1.7795 0.4101
March 2022 1.9173 1.6604 1.0397
April 2022 2.0446 2.1817 1.0397
Table 3 : Water temperature of Yamuna River water at different study sites.
Water temperature (oC)
Studied Sites Sept. Oct. Nov.Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar.Apr.
(2021) (2021) (2021) (2021) (2022) (2022) (2022) (2022)
Yamunanagar 19.80±0.11 16.95±0.07 15.40±0.07 11.73±0.25 8.38±0.08 10.43±0.06 14.30±0.09 20.68±0.05
Panipat 19.80±0.31 18.05±0.09 15.90±0.17 11.95±0.33 8.50±0.18 10.43±0.06 14.13±0.11 20.43±0.14
Faridabad 21.25±0.10 20.63±0.55 17.25±0.10 13.95±0.07 9.88±0.09 11.23±0.09 15.68±0.09 21.33±0.13
CD (p=0.05) 0.64 1.04 0.39 0.79 0.40 0.23 0.31 0.36
Table 4 : pH of Yamuna River water at different study sites.
pH
Studied Sites Sept. Oct. Nov.Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar.Apr.
(2021) (2021) (2021) (2021) (2022) (2022) (2022) (2022)
Yamunanagar 7.03±0.05 7.50±0.08 7.40±0.06 7.88±0.05 8.03±0.117.58±0.15 7.68±0.06 7.08±0.15
Panipat 6.95±0.03 7.13±0.15 7.15±0.10 7.08±0.13 7.13±0.06 7.38±0.116.85±0.07 6.80±0.07
Faridabad 6.85±0.07 6.50±0.08 6.53±0.08 6.33±0.17 6.00±0.11 6.98±0.116.83±0.09 6.33±0.13
CD (p=0.05) NS 0.35 0.25 0.40 0.31 0.41 0.23 0.39
Table 5 : Dissolved oxygen (DO) of Yamuna River water at different study sites.
Dissolved oxygen (DO) mgL-1
Studied Sites Sept. Oct. Nov.Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar.Apr.
(2021) (2021) (2021) (2021) (2022) (2022) (2022) (2022)
Yamunanagar 8.10±0.07 7.90±0.07 5.53±1.74 6.58±0.15 6.68±0.10 6.40±0.11 6.53±0.09 7.20±0.13
Panipat 4.58±0.05 3.90±0.07 4.80±0.114.68±0.14 3.63±0.08 4.40±0.16 4.63±0.10 3.88±0.17
Faridabad 2.30±0.08 2.33±0.09 2.23±0.11 1.68±0.09 1.68±0.06 1.85±0.24 1.70±0.18 1.33±0.06
CD (p=0.05) 0.22 0.25 NS 0.41 0.27 0.57 0.42 0.42
Table 6 : Total alkalinity of Yamuna river at different study sites.
Total Alkalinity (TA) mgL-1
Studied Sites Sept. Oct. Nov.Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar.Apr.
(2021) (2021) (2021) (2021) (2022) (2022) (2022) (2022)
Yamunanagar 83.25±0.48 103.25±0.63 95.50±0.96 139.75±0.63 163.25±1.38 124.75±1.11 170.25±0.63 172.00±1.63
Panipat 167.50±2.33 169.50±0.96 193.75±2.53 147.00±3.11 174.00±2.94 158.00±2.86 177.00±2.04 194.00±2.16
Faridabad 216.50±2.33 219.75±5.48 351.75±11.89 289.75±6.49 311.50±10.48 175.50±25.39 330.50±14.41 274.50±7.89
CD (p=0.05) 6.23 10.49 22.8 13.52* 20.55 NS 27.29 15.63
822 Shri Ram Yadav et al

alkalinity.
Total hardness
During the present investigation, the value of total
hardness was recorded at maximum values in March,
209.50±4.21 mg/l (in Yamunanagar), 291.00±1.92 mg/l
(in Panipat) and 279.25±6.29 mg/l (in Faridabad). The
sudden fluctuation in the value of total hardness in March
in maximum value.
DISCUSSION
In the present study, a total of 64 fish species have
been recorded from 3 sites (Yamunanagar, Panipat and
Faridabad districts of Haryana) which belong to the order
Cypriniformes (36 species), followed by the order
Siluriformes (14 species), Anabantiformes (4 species),
Synbranchiformes (3 species), Clupeiformes (3 species),
Anguilliformes (1 species), Perciformes (2 species),
Ovalentaria (1 species). The present study reveals the
same dominance pattern as reported by Joshi et al (2016)
from the river Yamuna. They reported 112 species
belonging to 10 orders, 29 families and 73 genera.
Lakra et al (2010) studied the fish diversity, habitat
ecology, and management issues of a tropical river in
India’s Ganga basin. They reported that 63 fish species,
representing 20 families and 45 genera, were collected
from five sampling stations distributed along the upstream,
midstream, and lower streams. Joshi et al (2022) reported
similar patterns of species composition in several river
systems and found 58 fish species representing seven
orders, 20 families and 40 genera.
Anthropogenic activities and the associated water
pollution, deposition of heavy metals, eutrophication,
damming, disruption of hydrology, and introduction of
exotic species have been reported as threats to the Ganga
river’s fauna and vegetation (Tripathi et al, 2017).
The same anthropogenic activity has an impact on
the current inquiry as well. At Allahabad, 89 different
fish species from the Ganga river were reported by
(Tripathi et al, 2017). The annual data analysis on fish
landings revealed that C. carpio, O. niloticus and the
various group made up most of the estimated yearly catch.
Table 7 : Total hardness of Yamuna river water at different study sites.
Total Hardness (TH) mgL-1
Studied Sites Sept. Oct. Nov.Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar.Apr.
(2021) (2021) (2021) (2021) (2022) (2022) (2022) (2022)
Yamunanagar 121.75±1.93 146.25±3.75 140.50±2.26 146.75±2.18 125.50±2.87 169.75±3.09 209.50±4.21 182.75±1.44
Panipat 133.50±0.96 268.75±2.69 268.75±2.69 242.50±2.10 127.00±2.52 259.50±3.78 291.00±1.92 275.50±2.66
Faridabad 186.00±3.19 203.00±2.35 203.00±2.35 169.50±9.74 186.25±8.69 218.50±12.09 279.25±6.29 247.00±11.90
CD (p=0.05) 7.21 9.70 7.91 19.11 17.78 24.43 14.63 22.9
When it comes to Indian Major carps, C. mrigala
contributed the most. Current work was assumed to study
the 64 species from the Yamuna river. Annual data on
fish landing showed that the estimated yearly catch was
dominated by L. rohita and A. testudineus.
The water quality parameters were recorded in the
present investigation from different sites. The
temperature of river water range from 8.38±0.08 –
21.33±0.13°C, pH range from 6.00±0.11 - 8.03±0.11, DO
from 1.68±0.06 – 8.10±0.007mg/l, total alkalinity from
83.25±0.48 – 351.75±11.89mg/l and total hardness
121.75±1.93 – 279.25±6.29mg/l.
CONCLUSION
The present study gives enlightening information on
fish biodiversity and assists in understanding the water
nature of the Yamuna river. Fish biodiversity is an indicator
of ecosystem health, conservation status and human food
resources. The fish biodiversity of the Yamuna river was
poor, indicating its water quality. There is a need of the
hour to conserve the vulnerable and endangered fauna
of the Yamuna river through suitable conservation
strategies such as regulation of mesh size and
implementation of ban periods. The Yamuna river
exhibited that the water quality of Yamuna river is polluted
due to industrial discharge and wastes from agriculture,
surface runoff and human activity. So, Yamuna river water
is unsuitable for drinking and needs to be improved for
various human uses. From the above point of view, it
could be concluded that the water of the Yamuna river
needs to be treated before its use for drinking and should
be improved for aquatic fauna by checking pollution and
discharging treated domestic and industrial discharge.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors (s) gratefully acknowledge the financial
assistance received by the University. Thanks to HOD,
Zoology & Aquaculture and University authorities for
providing the necessary research infrastructure.
REFERENCES
APHA A (2012) W (2012) Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater. American Public Health Association,
Assessment of fish species biodiversity in Yamuna river, Haryana, India 823

American Water Works Association & Water Environment
Federation. (eds. EW Rice, RB Baird, AD Eaton, and LS Clesceri),
22nd ed., Washington.2
Chen Y, Qu X, Xiong F, Lu Y, Wang L and Hughes R M (2020)
Challenges to saving China’s freshwater biodiversity: Fishery
exploitation and landscape pressures. Ambio 49(4), 926-938.
Cooke S J, Twardek W M, Lynch A J, Cowx I G, Olden J D, Funge-
Smith S and Britton J R (2021) A global perspective on the
influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on freshwater fish
biodiversity. Biological Conservation 253, 108932.
FAO (2014) Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives.
Meeting, & World Health Organization (2014) Safety evaluation
of certain food additives and contaminants (Vol. 68). Published
by World Health Organization
Froese R and Pauly D (2014) Fisheries Management. In: eLS 2014,
John Wiley & Sons Ltd: Chichester http://www.els.net/
[DOI:0.1002/9780470015902.a0003252.pub3]2017; 20 (1-2),
30–42. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2017.1265879
Jain C K, Malik D S and Tomar G (2018) Seasonal variation in physico-
chemical and phytoplankton diversity of Alaknanda river at
Garhwal region (Uttarakhand). Int. J. Fish Aquat Stud. 6, 353-
357.
Jayram (1999) The freshwater fishes of the Indian regions. Narendra
Publishing House, Delhi, 55
Joshi K D, Alam A, Jha D N, Srivastava S K and Kumar V (2016) Fish
diversity, composition and invasion of exotic fishes in river
Yamuna under altered water quality conditions. Indian J. Anim.
Sci. 86(8), 957-963.
Joshi K D, Pathak A K, Kumar S, Dayal R, Singh A K, Kumar R and
Lal K K (2022) Fish community diversity assessment of
protected Saraiyaman wetland in the Ganga River basin, India.
Community Ecology 23(1), 63-73.
Kar D, Roy A and Dey S C (2004) An overview of fish genetic
diversity of northeastern India. In: Proceedings of National
Workshop on Rational use of Water Resources for Aquaculture.
(eds. Garg S K and Jain K L), 18-19 March 2004, CCS Haryana
Agricultural University, Hisar p164-171.
Lakra W S, Sarkar U K, Kumar R S, Pandey A, Dubey V K and Gusain
O P (2010) Fish diversity, habitat ecology and their conservation
and management issues of a tropical River in Ganga basin, India.
The Environmentalist 30(4), 306-319.
Pinder A C, Raghavan R, Britton J R and Cooke S (2020) COVID-19
and biodiversity: The paradox of cleaner rivers and elevated
extinction risk to iconic fish species. Aquatic Conservation:
Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 30(6), 1061-1062.
Rathore L K, Sharma B K and Dangi P L (2017) Fish biodiversity and
fisheries potential of reservoir Udaisagar (Udaipur, Rajasthan).
Int. J. Fish. Aquatic Stud. 5(3), 587-592.
Reid A J, Carlson A K, Creed I F, Eliason, E J, Gell P A, Johnson P T
and Cooke S J (2019) Emerging threats and persistent
conservation challenges for freshwater biodiversity. Biol. Rev.
94(3), 849-873.
Sharma A P, Das M K, Vass K K and Tyagi R K (2017) Patterns of
fish diversity, community structure and ecological integrity of
River Yamuna, India. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management
20(1-2), 30-42.
Tripathi S, Gopesh A and Dwivedi A C (2017) Fish and fisheries in
the Ganga River: current assessment of the fish community,
threats and restoration. J. Exp. Zool. India 20, 907-912.
Vipin V, Dinesh D and Vivek P (2012) Fish biodiversity of Betwa
River in Madhya Pradesh, India with special reference to a sacred
ghat. Int. J. Biodiv. Conser. 4(2), 71-77. \
Wilson E O (1992) Diversity of life. Norton: W.W. & Company, Inc.
p. 424.
824 Shri Ram Yadav et al