Physico-Chemical Characteristics of the River Kulik of the Uttar Dinajpur District of West Bengal, India

Abstract

The river Kulik is an internationally important river between India and Bangladesh. Till date, no work has been done to understand the physico-chemical characteristics as well as the pollution status of the river Kulik at the Raiganj and Hemtabad blocks in the Uttar Dinajpur district, West Bengal, India. The goal of this investigation was to analyse different physico-chemical parameters to understand the present level of pollution in the river Kulik for two years, from November 2019 until October 2021. The investigation was carried out on a monthly basis at five selected sampling sites along the river Kulik. Different physico-chemical parameters were analysed following the methods of APHA, 2017. The pH varied from 5.90 to 7.86, which indicates the slightly acidic to slightly alkaline nature of the water. The lowest dissolved oxygen (DO) value recorded at site 5 (1.60 mgL-1) during the winter season of the first year may have been caused by excessive fertilizer application in agricultural fields close to the river Kulik. The abrupt rise in DO levels from March 2020 to June 2020 at every site might be due to the lesser anthropogenic activities during the lockdown in India because of the COVID-19 Pandemic situation. The highest BOD was found in April 2020 at Site 5, which crossed the limits of the CPCB standard set for drinking and bathing. Public awareness is crucial for river pollution control and revival; further study is needed to understand water quality and productivity.

Full text

Physico-Chemical Characteristics of the River Kulik of the
Uttar Dinajpur District of West Bengal, India
JAYANTA MAJUMDER and DEBASHRI MONDAL*
Department of Zoology, Raiganj University, Raiganj, Uttar Dinajpur, India.
Abstract
The river Kulik is an internationally important river between India and
Bangladesh. Till date, no work has been done to understand the physico-
chemical characteristics as well as the pollution status of the river Kulik
at the Raiganj and Hemtabad blocks in the Uttar Dinajpur district,
West Bengal, India. The goal of this investigation was to analyse di󰀨erent
physico-chemical parameters to understand the present level of pollution
in the river Kulik for two years, from November 2019 until October 2021.
The investigation was carried out on a monthly basis at ve selected
sampling sites along the river Kulik. Di󰀨erent physico-chemical parameters
were analysed following the methods of APHA, 2017. The pH varied from
5.90 to 7.86, which indicates the slightly acidic to slightly alkaline nature
of the water. The lowest dissolved oxygen (DO) value recorded at site 5 (1.60
mgL-1) during the winter season of the rst year may have been caused by
excessive fertilizer application in agricultural elds close to the river Kulik.
The abrupt rise in DO levels from March 2020 to June 2020 at every site
might be due to the lesser anthropogenic activities during the lockdown
in India because of the COVID-19 Pandemic situation. The highest BOD
was found in April 2020 at Site 5, which crossed the limits of the CPCB
standard set for drinking and bathing. Public awareness is crucial for river
pollution control and revival; further study is needed to understand water
quality and productivity.
CONTACT Debashri Mondal drdebashrimondal@gmail.com Department of Zoology, Raiganj University, Raiganj,
Uttar Dinajpur, India.
© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Enviro Research Publishers.
This is an Open Access article licensed under a Creative Commons license: Attribution 4.0 International (CC-BY).
Doi: https://dx.doi.org/10.12944/CWE.18.3.29
Article History
Received: 21 February
2023
Accepted: 09 November
2023
Keywords
Anthropogenic Activities;
BOD; CPCB; DO;
Physico-chemical;
River Kulik;
Water.
Current World Environment
www.cwejournal.org
ISSN: 0973-4929, Vol. 18, No. (3) 2023, Pg. 1277-1297
Introduction
Water is considered one of the most important
of all the natural resources present on earth. It is
essential for most ecological systems, all living
organisms, food production, human health, and
economic development.1 Water is one of the principal
natural resources for the survival of mankind and
is abundant in the ecosystem.2 Nature contains
water in a variety of forms, including lakes, rivers,
oceans, clouds, rain, and fog. Nevertheless,

1278MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
in nature, chemically pure water does not remain
for very long. Presently, our planet is highly polluted
due to industrialization, increased human population,
indiscriminate use of fertilizers in agricultural
fields, and different anthropogenic activities.3
Farmers focus on cost-e󰀨ective water, nutrients,
and organic matter sources, neglecting harmful
e󰀨ects like chemical contamination and health issues
in agriculture.
The river Kulik is a Bangladesh-India inter-border
river that ows through Uttar Dinajpur, West Bengal,
India. Kulik which is a short and narrow stream,
comes from a marsh in Raipur, Baliadangi upazila,
Thakurgaon district, Bangladesh. The Kulik acts as
the India-Bangladesh border for a short distance
from Haripur upazila before crossing into India.
It enters the Uttar Dinajpur district of West Bengal
from the south and weaves its way southwest
through the lively city of Raiganj to join the Nagar,
where shing is done on a regular basis.4 On the
banks of the river Kulik, di󰀨erent crops like paddy,
mustard, jute, and wheat are cultivated throughout
the year, depending totally on the irrigation water
of the river Kulik. Even the water of the river Kulik
is consumed by the tribal inhabitants of Sherpur.
Although the river is the heart of Uttar Dinajpur
District, West Bengal; it’s water becomes gradually
polluted day by day due to di󰀨erent anthropogenic
activities like bathing of both humans and cattle,
washing linens and utensils, and disposing
of di󰀨erent solid wastes in the water of the river.
The physicochemical properties of the water of the
Mouri river in Khulna, Bangladesh, were studied
by Kamal et al.5 Pal et al. and Pal and Talukdar
examined the hydro-ecological changes related to
damming across the rivers Tangon, Ganga-Padma,
and Atreyee in India and Bangladesh.6,7 Di󰀨erent
water quality parameters of the river Tangon were
also investigated in Bangladesh by Roy et al.
In India, many workers studied the physico-chemical
properties of di󰀨erent water bodies.9,10,11,12 In West
Bengal, Acharjee and Barat conducted research
on the spatiotemporal dynamics of physical and
chemical elements in the river Relli in the Darjeeling
Himalaya.13 The identity crisis in habitat caused by
the squeezing of the riparian wetland in the Tangon
river basin in the Barind region of India was studied
by Chakraborty.14 In the Radhikapur village of the
Uttar Dinajpur district, the water quality parameters
of the Tangon River were studied by Mondal and
Sarkar.15
Although the river Kulik is very important for the
local inhabitants of the Uttar Dinajpur district of West
Bengal, till date no information has been available on
the physico-chemical characteristics of the river Kulik
as well as the present pollution status of the river.
Consequently, to understand the present status
of pollution in the river, the primary objective
of current research was aimed to investigate various
physico-chemical characteristics of the river Kulik at
the chosen locations in the district of Uttar Dinajpur,
West Bengal, India.
Study Area
For the present investigation, ve sampling sites
were chosen based on the length of the river and
the point and non-point sources of pollution to study
the ichthyofauna diversity of the Kulik river in Uttar
Dinajpur district, West Bengal (Table 1).
Methodology
Over the course of two years, from November
2019 to October 2021, various physico-chemical
parameters of the river Kulik in the Uttar Dinajpur
district were investigated. Every month, between the
hours of 6 and 10 a.m., water samples were taken
from the ve designated sampling locations along
the river. The air and water temperatures, pH, and
transparency were recorded in the eld with the
help of an ACETEQ digital Celsius thermometer
(Model KT-908) with an external sensing probe.
The hydrogen Ion concentrations (pH) of water were
determined with the help of a portable pH meter
(Model-HI96107, HANNA Instrument, Italy). A Secchi
disc was used to gauge the transparency and depth
of the water following Boyd.16 The BOD samples
were placed in the BOD incubator and incubated
for ve days at 20°C [O-CIS-6(D)] in the laboratory
of Department of Zoology, Raiganj University. For
the other physico-chemical factors like DO, Free
CO2, Total Alkalinity (TA), Total Hardness (TH), Total
Chloride (TC), water samples were collected and
brought to the laboratory in plastic bottles (1500 mL)
and analysed as early as possible following APHA.17
The values were compared with the standard values
of WHO and CPCB.18,19

1279MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Table 1: Brief descriptions of the ve sampling sites of the river Kulik
Sites Location Brief Description
Site 1 Lat 25.810152 This site is located in Makarhat, which is on the border
(MAKARHAT) Long 88.240520 of Bangladesh and India. At this site, the Kulik River of Bangla
-desh enters India (Fig. 1). The water level is quite low at this
site. One military camp is present near the site to control the
mobility of people from both countries. The human population
is lower at this site. Only some agricultural elds and di󰀨erent
plants are present near the site. Fishing is done at this site.
Site 2 Lat 25.690178 This site is situated below the Kasimpur bridge of Bindole
(KASIMPUR) Long 88.202701 Thakurbari Road, which is the connector between Raiganj
and Hemtabad blocks. This road extends up to the Bangla-
desh border (Fig. 1). Some tribal people reside near the site.
Local people used to capture sh at this site. They use the
water of the Kulik for di󰀨erent purposes, like cleaning utensils,
clothes, washing pets and animals, and bathing.
Site 3 Lat 25.620319 This site is located under the Kulik Bridge, which is a part
(KULIK BRIDGE Long 88.115684 of the National Highway (NH34). It is very near the Kulik
NH34) Wildlife Sanctuary. The river Kulik is connected to the
sanctuary by a system of man-made canals. The water of
the river ows into the sanctuary during monsoons, providing
a variety of food for the birds, especially the Asian Openbill
Stork, which eats mostly apple snails from the river Kulik.
(Fig. 1). Under the bridge, many festivals and village fairs
are celebrated by the villagers. Agricultural elds are also
present, where seasonal crops are cultivated. Boating is
one of the main attractions of this site. During the winter,
this site is used for picnic purposes. Fishing and bathing
are also done at this site.
Site 4 Lat 25.595078 This site is situated about 250 meters away from the bypass
(PATHARMONI Long 88.114579 of NH 34. Through this road, Bihar is connected with Raiganj.
GHAT) Most of the sh of the Kulik River are collected from this site.
There are plenty of sh available at this site, and shing is
done here regularly due to the presence of the river buck.
The water at this site is used mainly for domestic purposes,
especially for bathing pet animals.
Site 5 Lat 25.558380 This site is located in Nichitpur, which is also a link between
(NICHITPUR) Long 88.041977 Bengal and Bihar. This is the outlet of the Kulik River where
it meets the river Nagar (Fig. 1). This site is very important
for the villagers of the border area of Raiganj and Bihar.
Fishing is the main profession of the villagers.

1280MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Fig. 1: Satellite view of the Kulik river with ve selected water sampling Sites at Raiganj
and Hemtabad Block
Site.1=Makarhat, Site . 2= Kasimpur, Site. 3= Kulik Bridge NH34, Site. 4= Patharmoni Ghat,
Site. 5= Nichitpur

1281MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Fig. 2.1: Monthly variations of air temperature at ve chosen sampling locations
Statistical Analysis
Correlation and ANOVA was also done with the help of
Microsoft Excel [Microsoft 365(16.0.15601.20148)].
Results
In Figs. 2.1 to 2.14, the monthly uctuations of several
physico-chemical parameters of water at Sites 1, 2, 3, 4,
and 5 throughout the course of the entire study
period are shown.
Site 5 reported the lowest temperature of air
(12.80°C) in the month of January 2021, while Site 4
recorded the highest (33.25°C) in the month
of May 2021. (Fig. 2.1). The relationship between air
and water temperatures was consistently strong and
favourable across all sites r = 0.9481 (Site 1), r = 0.9425
(Site. 2), r=0.9578 (Site. 3), r=0.9632 (Site. 4)
and r=0.9774 (Site. 5) (Table 2.1 to Table 2.5).
ANOVA analysis showed that the variation in Air
temperature was signicant in the case of seasons
at the 1% level (P<0.01).
Fig. 2.2: Monthly variations of water temperature at ve selected sampling Sites.
The months of May 2021 and January 2021,
respectively, showed the highest (32.10°C) and
lowest (12.0°C) recorded water temperatures (Fig.
2.2) from Site 4. At three sites, water temperature
significantly correlated negatively with pH and
positively with depth, r = -0.4154 (Site 1), r = -0.6069
(Site 2), r = -0.5311 (Site 4) (Tables 2.1, 2.2 and 2.4).
ANOVA analysis showed that the variation in Water
temperature was signicant in the case of sites at
the 5% signicance level (P<0.05) and seasons at
the level of 1% (P<0.01).

1282MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
The lowest humidity (47%) was found at Site 1
in the month of February 2020, while the highest
(99%) was found there in the months of July 2020,
November 2019 at Site 2, and May 2021 at Site 3.
(Fig. 2.3). At sites 1 and 2, humidity and TDS had
a positive and substantial connection, where r =
0.3239 (Site 1) and r = 0.3868 (Site 2) (Tables 2.1
and 2.2). ANOVA analysis showed that the variation
in Humidity was signicant in the case of seasons
at the 5% level (P<0.05).
Fig. 2.3: Monthly changes in Humidity at ve selected sampling Sites
Fig. 2.4: Monthly changes in pH at ve selected sampling Sites
One of the key parameters in determining the
hydrogen ion concentration in an aqueous solution
is pH. The pH range in the current investigation was
between 5.90 and 7.86, indicating that the water
was either slightly acidic or slightly alkaline. Site 4
recorded the highest pH (7.86) values in the month
of December 2019 and the lowest pH (5.90) values
in the months of April and May 2021 (Fig. 2.4).
It may be due to the excess rainfall at that time.
It was signicantly positively correlated with the sites'
overall hardness, r = 0.5652 (Site. 1), r = 0.4805
(Site. 2), r =0.6554 (Site. 3), r =0.4511 (Site. 4), and
r =0.4853 (Site 5). (Table 2.1. to 2.5) ANOVA analysis
showed that the variation in pH was signicant in the
case of seasons at a 1% level (P<0.01).

1283MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
The lowest Total Dissolved Solid concentration (0.11
ppm) was identied at Site 3 in the month of April
2021, and the highest concentration (0.29 ppm) was
discovered at Site 2 in the month of August 2020
(Fig. 2.5). A strong and favorable association was
found between total alkalinity and TDS at the Site.
1 (r=0.5825), Site. 2 (r=0.6306), Site. 5 (r=0.4345)
(Tables 2.1, 2.2 and 2.5).
Fig. 2.5: Monthly changes in Total Dissolved Solid at ve selected sampling Sites
Fig. 2.6: Monthly changes in Electric Conductivity at ve selected sampling Sites
The highest conductivity (0.32 mhos cm-1) was
recorded at Site 5 throughout the study period,
primarily in the month of April 2021. At Site 5,
Electrical Conductivity (EC) was found to be at
its highest during the summer (Fig. 2.6). EC
was found to be lowest in the month of August,
2021 at Site 2. ANOVA analysis showed that
the variation in Electric Conductivity was
significant in the case of seasons at the 1%
level (P<0.01).
The transparency of water depends on the amount
of inorganic or organic particles present in the water.
Throughout the duration of the investigation, the
transparency of the river's water ranged from 12 cm
to 57 cm. The transparency of water was highest in
the month of August 2021 (57.00 cm) at Site 2 and
lowest in the month of April 2021 (12.00cm) at the
same Site (Fig. 2.7). ANOVA analysis showed that
the variation in Transparency was signicant in the
case of seasons at the 5% level (P<0.05).

1284MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Fig. 2.7: Monthly variation in Transparency at ve selected sampling Sites
Fig. 2.8: Monthly variation in Depth at ve selected sampling Sites
Fig. 2.9. Monthly changes in Dissolved Oxygen at ve selected sampling Sites

1285MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
The highest monthly free CO2 readings of the study
were found at Site 2 (10.00 mgL-1) in the months
of January and February 2020; at Site 3 in the
month of February 2021; at Site 4 in the month of
March 2020. The lowest (4.00mgL-1) was found at
Site 2 between November and December of 2019,
at Site 3 in the month of November, 2019, and at
Site 4 and Site 5 in the month of December, 2019
Depth is the dimension of the river channel. It is
a basic physical characteristic of the river and an
indicator of the stream's dynamics, related to the
substrate and riverbed morphology. The highest
depth (805.00 cm) of the river was recorded in the
month of July, 2020, from Site 5, and the lowest
depth (21.00cm) of the river was recorded in the
month of May, 2021, from Site 2 (Fig. 2.8). At all the
study sites, depth signicantly correlated positively
with total alkalinity. ANOVA analysis showed that the
variation in Depth of the river Kulik was signicant in
the case of seasons at 1% level (P<0.01).
Throughout the entire study period, Site 1 reported the
highest DO (13.20mgL-1) in the month of December
2019. The lowest value of dissolved oxygen was
observed (1.60mgL-1) at Site 5 (Fig. 2.9). At Sites
3 and 5, DO signicantly correlated positively with
both chloride and BOD (Table 2.3 and 2.5.). ANOVA
analysis showed that the variation in DO of the river
Kulik was signicant in the case of seasons at the
1% level (P<0.01).
Fig. 2.10: Monthly variation in Free Carbon-di-Oxide at ve selected sampling Sites
Fig. 2.11: Monthly variation in Total Alkalinity at ve selected sampling Sites.

1286MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
(Fig. 2.10). Free CO2 showed a positive correlation
with chloride and BOD (Table 2.1. to 2.5). ANOVA
analysis showed that the variation in Free CO2 of the
river Kulik was signicant in the case of seasons at
5% level (P<0.05).
The maximum level of total alkalinity (52.00mgL-1)
was observed in the month of June, 2020 at Site 4,
while the lowest level (12.00mgL-1) was recorded in
the month of November, 2019 at Site 3 (Fig. 2.11).
During the study, Total Alkalinity had a signicant
positive correlation with BOD at sites 1 and Site 5
(Table 2.1 and 2.5). ANOVA analysis showed that
the variation in Total Alkalinity of the river Kulik
was signicant in the case of seasons at 1% level
(P<0.01).
Fig.2.12: Monthly variation in Total Hardness at ve selected sampling Sites
Throughout the entire study period, Site 2 recorded
the highest total hardness (107.00mgL-1) in the
month of December 2019, while Site 4 recorded the
lowest total hardness (34.00mgL-1) in the months
of April and May 2020 (Fig. 2.12). The total hardness
had a signicant negative correlation with BOD
(r = -0.3141) at Site 3 (Table 2.3). ANOVA analysis
showed that the variation in Total Hardness of the
river Kulik was signicant in the case of seasons at
the 1% level (P<0.01).
Fig. 2.13. Monthly variation in Total Chloride at ve selected sampling Sites

1287MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Throughout the entire study period, Site 2 recorded
the highest total hardness (107.00mgL-1) in the
month of December 2019, while Site 4 recorded the
lowest total hardness (34.00mgL-1) in the months of
April and May 2020 (Fig. 2.12). The total hardness
had a signicant negative correlation with BOD
(r = -0.3141) at Site 3 (Table 2.3). ANOVA analysis
showed that the variation in Total Hardness of the
river Kulik was signicant in the case of seasons at
the 1% level (P<0.01).
Fig. 2.14: Monthly variation in biological oxygen demand at ve selected sampling Sites
In January 2020, the BOD value of Site-5 showed
the lowest level ever (1.44 mgL-1). The highest BOD
(7.68 mgL-1) was found in the month of April 2020 at
Site 5 (Fig. 2.14). ANOVA analysis showed that the
variation in BOD of the river Kulik was signicant in
the case of seasons at the 1% level (P<0.01).
Discussion
Water quality is generally dened as the chemical,
physical, and biological properties of water based
on the criteria of its utilization. Temperature
fluctuations play an important role in climate
variability, necessitating the need to continue
tracking temperature patterns even in places
where a temperature pattern has been identied by
Oyewole.20 Water temperature is signicant for its
inuence on chemical and biological processes in
organisms.21 Water temperature is one of the most
crucial environmental elements impacting aquatic
ecosystems and physico-chemical parameters,
according to Bellos and Sawidis.22 Ahipathy and
Puttaiah noted that the season, location, sample
duration, and temperature of e󰀪uents entering the
stream all play a signicant role in the variation in
the temperature of the river.23 Both the minimum
air and water temperatures were found during the
winter, and the maximum was recorded
during the summer months (Figs. 2.1 and 2.2)
At each location, there was a sizable positive
association between air and water temperatures:
r= 0.9481 (Site. 1), r= 0.9425 (Site. 2), r=0.9578
(Site. 3), r=0.9632 (Site. 4), and r=0.9774
(Site. 5). The air temperature and water temperature
were positively and signicantly correlated at each
location (Tables 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5). Similar
ndings were recorded by Mondal et al. in the Mirik
Lake of the Darjeeling Hills.24 At all locations, water
temperature had a negative correlation with pH
(Tables 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5), like Mondal.25
The pH values of the present study varied from 5.90
to 7.86, indicating a slightly acidic to slightly alkaline
nature of the water (Fig. 2.4). The pH showed
a signicant negative correlation with BOD at Sites
2, 3, 4, and 5. Tajmunnaher et al. also observed
a negative correlation between pH and BOD in
the Kushiyara river, Sylhet, Bangladesh.26 During
the summer, the pH value was found to be higher,
which corroborates the ndings of Krishnaram et al.27
The pH showed a positive correlation with electrical
conductivity (Tables 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5), like
Gupta et al.28

1288MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Table 2.1: Pearson's coe󰀩cient of correlation for the period of November 2019 to October 2021 for the temperature of air and physico-chemical
characteristics in water at the Site 1. N = 24, degrees of freedom = 22
Parameters Temper Humi pH TDS EC (µm Transp Depth DO Free TA TH TC Biological
ature dity (ppm) hos -arency (cm) (mgL-1) CO2 (mgL-1) (mgL-1) (mgL-1) Oxygen
of water (%) cm-1) (cm) (mgL-1) Demand
(°C) (BOD)
(mgL-1)
Air temperature 0.9481 0.0201 -0.417 0.2077 -0.2982♦ -0.2718 0.5902♦♦♦ -0.1478 -0.0004 0.6383♦♦♦ -0.1604 -0.1075 0.1626
(°C) ♦♦♦♦ 4♦♦
Temperature of 0.0662 -0.4154 0.1206 -0.3098♦ -0.1435 0.5775♦♦♦ -0.0361 -0.0663 0.6286♦♦♦ -0.1987 -0.0749 0.166
Water (°C) ♦♦
Humidity (%) -0.0947 0.3239♦ 0.1654 0.2836 0.1694 -0.2043 -0.3285♦ 0.3899♦♦ -0.0696 -0.0122 -0.2098
pH 0.215 0.3320♦ 0.4623♦♦ -0.0941 0.2581 0.0772 -0.3052♦ 0.5652♦♦♦ 0.3173♦ -0.1718
TDS (ppm) 0.0222 0.1864 0.4682♦♦ 0.0495 0.4145♦♦ 0.6306♦♦♦ 0.1826 0.0503 0.2526
EC (µmhos cm-1) 0.0449 -0.2557 0.0215 0.0228 0.0724 0.5228♦♦♦ 0.2669 -0.0022
Transparency (cm) 0.0825 0.4014♦♦ -0.0867 -0.0456 0.1226 -0.0656 -0.1044
Depth (cm) 0.2056 0.056 0.5461♦♦♦ -0.1509 -0.055 0.023
DO(mgL-1) 0.0796 0.0362 -0.0731 -0.4263♦♦ 0.0885
Free CO2 (mgL-1) 0.1213 0.3127♦ 0.2029 0.5199♦♦♦
TA (mgL-1) -0.123 -0.1402 0.3452♦
TH (mgL-1) 0.2719 -0.2829
TC (mgL-1) 0.0498
i)♦♦♦♦ Signicant at 0.2% level (P = 0.002), ♦♦♦ Signicant at 1% level (P = 0.01), ♦♦ Signicant at 5% level (P = 0.05), and ♦ Signicant at 10% level (P = 0.10)
ii) Non-signicant correlation is shown by values not marked.

1289MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Table 2.2. Pearson's coe󰀩cient of correlation for the period of November 2019 to October 2021 for the temperature of air and physico-chemical
characteristics in water at the Site 2. N = 24, degrees of freedom = 22
Parameters Temper Humi pH TDS EC (µm Transp Depth DO Free TA TH TC Biological
ature dity (ppm) hos -arency (cm) (mgL-1) CO2 (mgL-1) (mgL-1) (mgL-1) Oxygen
of water (%) cm-1) (cm) (mgL-1) Demand
(°C) (BOD)
(mgL-1)
Air temperature 0.9425 0.0359 -0.541 0.2035 -0.561 0.0767 0.5346♦♦♦ -0.0109 0.2122 0.6496♦♦♦ -0.2412 0.3994♦♦ 0.3334♦
(°C) ♦♦♦♦ 9♦♦♦ 8♦♦♦
Temperature 0.122 -0.606 0.1259 -0.558 0.1692 0.5368♦♦♦ 0.1385 0.021 0.6110♦♦♦ -0.2456 0.3359♦ 0.3472♦
of Water (°C) 9♦♦♦ 4♦♦♦
Humidity (%) 0.1172 0.386 0.2035 0.3796♦♦ 0.1615 0.2452 -0.4833 0.2932♦ -0.0287 -0.0237 0.0969
8♦♦
pH 0.1402 0.4302♦♦ -0.0179 -0.3791♦♦ -0.1767 0.0402 -0.3600♦♦ 0.4805♦♦ -0.2375 -0.2939♦
TDS (ppm) -0.0609 0.1261 0.3950♦♦ 0.128 -0.013 0.5825♦♦♦ -0.2335 0.1306 0.1098
EC (µmhos cm-1) -0.3846 -0.5170♦♦♦ 0.0457 -0.266 -0.3159♦ 0.3062♦ -0.2455 -0.1657
Transparency (cm) 0.5395♦♦♦ 0.4326♦♦ -0.3200♦ 0.1101 -0.0515 -0.012 -0.0158
Depth (cm) 0.3863♦♦ 0.0655 0.623 -0.1973 0.5007 -0.0032
DO(mgL-1) -0.4460♦♦ 0.3799♦♦ -0.0233 -0.0545 0.0862
Free CO2 (mgL-1) 0.1169 0.3432♦ 0.4432♦♦ 0.0871
TA (mgL-1) -0.251 0.2174 0.1617
TH (mgL-1) 0.0761 -0.2617
TC (mgL-1) 0.251
i)♦♦♦♦ Signicant at 0.2% level (P = 0.002), ♦♦♦ Signicant at 1% level (P = 0.01), ♦♦ Signicant at 5% level (P = 0.05), and ♦ Signicant at 10% level (P = 0.10)
ii) Non-signicant correlation is shown by values not marked.

1290MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Table 2.3. Pearson's coe󰀩cient of correlation for the period of November 2019 to October 2021 for the temperature of air and physico-chemical
characteristics in water at the Site 3. N = 24, degrees of freedom = 22
Parameters Temper Humi pH TDS EC (µm Transp Depth DO Free TA TH TC Biological
ature dity (ppm) hos -arency (cm) (mgL-1) CO2 (mgL-1) (mgL-1) (mgL-1) Oxygen
of water (%) cm-1) (cm) (mgL-1) Demand
(°C) (BOD)
(mgL-1)
Air temperature 0.957 -0.0421 -0.1960 0.2135 -0.1675 0.4302♦♦ 0.4226♦♦ 0.0829 0.2194 0.6694♦♦♦ -0.2657 0.1795 0.1625
(°C) 8♦♦♦♦
Temperature of -0.0017 -0.2005 0.1311 -0.2295 0.4591♦♦ 0.4356♦♦ 0.1783 0.0832 0.5883♦♦♦ -0.2191 0.1912 0.1633
Water (°C)
Humidity (%) 0.1087 0.1359 -0.2468 0.0722 -0.1795 0.0448 -0.2631 -0.2714 -0.0149 -0.3858♦♦ -0.2384
pH 0.4641♦♦ 0.0308 -0.0387 0.0343 -0.2604 -0.2488 -0.3482♦ 0.6555 0.2917♦ -0.4886♦♦
TDS (ppm) -0.0650 0.3358♦ 0.2683 -0.0831 -0.0093 0.1729 0.2449 -0.0641 -0.1773
EC (µmhos cm-1) -0.5949 -0.5055 -0.1724 0.1179 -0.1013 -0.0111 0.0694 0.2787
Transparency (cm) 0.8034♦♦♦♦ 0.3821♦♦ -0.2387 0.3065♦ -0.1159 -0.0652 -0.0499
Depth (cm) 0.1280 -0.1383 0.1887 -0.1818 0.3128♦ -0.0963
DO(mgL-1) -0.1097 0.1040 -0.0817 -0.1493 0.3144♦
Free CO2 (mgL-1) 0.3064♦ -0.1303 -0.2066 -0.0499
TA (mgL-1) -0.1486 -0.0991 0.1807
TH (mgL-1) 0.1651 -0.3141♦
TC (mgL-1) 0.2045
i)♦♦♦♦ Signicant at 0.2% level (P = 0.002), ♦♦♦ Signicant at 1% level (P = 0.01), ♦♦ Signicant at 5% level (P = 0.05), and ♦ Signicant at 10% level (P = 0.10)
ii) Non-signicant correlation is shown by values not marked.

1291MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Table 2.4. Pearson's coe󰀩cient of correlation for the period of November 2019 to October 2021 for the temperature of air and physico-chemical
characteristics in water at the Site 4. N = 24, degrees of freedom = 22
Parameters Temper Humi pH TDS EC (µm Transp Depth DO Free TA TH TC Biological
ature dity (ppm) hos -arency (cm) (mgL-1) CO2 (mgL-1) (mgL-1) (mgL-1) Oxygen
of water (%) cm-1) (cm) (mgL-1) Demand
(°C) (BOD)
(mgL-1)
Air temperature 0.963 0.0020 -0.500 -0.359 -0.0505 0.1201 0.4188♦♦ -0.0134 -0.1318 0.6197♦♦♦ -0.2579 0.2955♦ 0.0860
(°C) 2♦♦♦♦ 0♦♦♦ 0♦♦
Temperature of 0.0460 -0.531 -0.368 0.0309 0.1455 0.3930♦♦ 0.0779 -0.1328 0.5467♦♦♦ -0.2195 0.3392♦ 0.1324
Water (°C) 1♦♦♦ 4♦♦
Humidity (%) 0.2896♦ 0.2750 -0.0456 0.3850♦♦ 0.1850 0.0703 -0.0274 0.0395 0.3618♦♦ -0.2371 -0.3813♦♦
pH 0.689 -0.3006♦ 0.0870 0.0004 -0.1028 0.1645 -0.1924 0.4511♦♦ -0.0498 -0.3241♦
9♦♦♦♦
TDS (ppm) -0.481 0.4113♦♦ 0.1845 0.1164 -0.1168 -0.0269 0.3852♦♦ -0.2881 -0.3747♦♦
9♦♦♦
EC (µmhos cm-1) -0.4383♦♦ 0.0418 -0.1477 0.0826 -0.1864 0.0165 0.3175♦ 0.0786
Transparency (cm) 0.2683 0.526 -0.2517 0.2286 -0.0157 -0.3188♦ 0.0460
9♦♦♦
Depth (cm) 0.2967♦ -0.0625 0.3387♦ -0.2315 0.0362 -0.1177
DO(mgL-1) -0.3323♦ 0.2382 -0.2290 -0.3697♦♦ 0.2357
Free CO2 (mgL-1) 0.0096 0.1698 0.3795♦♦ 0.3792♦♦
TA (mgL-1) -0.2513 0.1398 0.0668
TH (mgL-1) 0.1368 -0.2710
TC (mgL-1) 0.3012♦
i)♦♦♦♦ Signicant at 0.2% level (P = 0.002), ♦♦♦ Signicant at 1% level (P = 0.01), ♦♦ Signicant at 5% level (P = 0.05), and ♦ Signicant at 10% level (P = 0.10)
ii) Non-signicant correlation is shown by values not marked.

1292MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Table 2.5. Pearson's coe󰀩cient of correlation for the period of November 2019 to October 2021 for the temperature of air and physico-chemical
characteristics in water at the Site 5. N = 24, degrees of freedom = 22
Parameters Temper Humi pH TDS EC (µm Transp Depth DO Free TA TH TC Biological
ature dity (ppm) hos -arency (cm) (mgL-1) CO2 (mgL-1) (mgL-1) (mgL-1) Oxygen
of water (%) cm-1) (cm) (mgL-1) Demand
(°C) (BOD)
(mgL-1)
Air temperature 0.977 0.1452 -0.2810 0.0010 -0.2359 0.2628 0.3692♦♦ 0.0217 0.1291 0.4761♦♦ -0.2044 0.1134 0.0938
(°C) 4♦♦♦♦
Temperature of 0.2098 -0.2671 -0.0282 -0.1635 0.3491♦ 0.4216♦♦ 0.1168 0.1203 0.4664♦♦ -0.1793 0.2013 0.1291
Water (°C)
Humidity (%) -0.0972 -0.0121 -0.1835 0.4583♦♦ 0.2360 0.0611 0.1419 0.2271 0.4194♦♦ 0.0221 -0.1907
pH 0.1584 0.3864♦♦ -0.2800 -0.1794 -0.2043 -0.2029 -0.3922♦♦ 0.4853♦♦ 0.0610 -0.3321♦
TDS (ppm) -0.4194♦♦ 0.2544 0.3648♦♦ 0.2826 -0.2032 0.4345♦♦ 0.0540 -0.2541 0.0289
EC (µmhos cm-1) -0.4235 -0.4380♦♦ -0.1219 0.1825 -0.2010 -0.0060 0.2182 0.1076
Transparency (cm) 0.7072♦♦ 0.530 -0.2180 0.3435♦ -0.1365 -0.0078 0.0721
♦♦ 6♦♦♦
Depth (cm) 0.3023 -0.2201 0.3475♦ -0.2883 0.0709 -0.1524
DO(mgL-1) -0.1887 0.2282 -0.0981 -0.0804 0.4302♦♦
Free CO2 (mgL-1) 0.0936 0.1956 0.4225♦♦ 0.4771♦♦
TA (mgL-1) -0.2264 -0.2577 0.3343♦
TH (mgL-1) 0.1585 -0.0901
TC (mgL-1) 0.3005
i)♦♦♦♦ Signicant at 0.2% level (P = 0.002), ♦♦♦ Signicant at 1% level (P = 0.01), ♦♦ Signicant at 5% level (P = 0.05), and ♦ Signicant at 10% level (P = 0.10)
ii) Non-signicant correlation is shown by values not marked.

1293MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Total Dissolved solids are a nutrient that regulates
the biological and physical quality of water.29 A rise in
TDS indicates contamination by extraneous sources,
which has a negative impact on the quality of natural
water.30 TDS and total alkalinity displayed a strong
and positive association at Site. 1 (r = 0.6306), Site.
2 (r=0.5825), and Site. 5 (r=0.4345) (Table 2.5).
Similar observations were recorded by Kothari et al.
at di󰀨erent water bodies in Uttarakhand.31
The highest conductivity reading recorded at Site 5
in the summer months (Fig. 2.6) might be attributed
to human inuence. Tripathi et al. also found higher
values of conductivity in the summer months.32
In the current research, the EC of water exhibited
a strong positive correlation with total hardness
(Tables 2.1 and 2.2) and chloride (Table 2.4) An
analogous observation was also recorded by Kumar
et al. in the middle of the Gangetic Plain.33 At every
site, transparency and DO showed a substantial
positive association throughout the whole study
period (Tables 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5). A similar
observation was also recorded by Zhenghu et al. at
Shahu Lake in China.34 At every study site, depth
signicantly positively correlated with total alkalinity.
Similar ndings were recorded in the river Kushiyara
of Bangladesh by Tajmunnaher and Chowdhury.26
As a result, oxygen availability is considered
a key component in hydrobiology, impacting
organism function, community organization, and
local diversity.35 According to Ansari and Raja,
fluctuations in DO levels were caused by the
solubility of oxygen in water, the intensity of light,
and photosynthesis.36 According to Banerjee,
an annual DO concentration of around 5.00 mgL-1
was determined to be appropriate for sh culture.37
The highest DO (13.20 mgL-1) was recorded from
Site 1 in the month of December, 2019. Alam et al.
also observed the highest DO values in December
in the case of Hilnabeel, Bangladesh.38 The quantity
of oxygen in the river Kulik is determined by the
area of water-air contact, water circulation, and the
amounts generated and consumed within each site.
The lowest values of DO at Site 5 (1.60 mgL-1) were
much lower than the drinking (Fig. 2.9) and bathing
water standards set by the CPCB and the drinking
water standards set by the WHO.19,18 At Sites 3 and
5, DO signicantly correlated positively with both
chloride and BOD (Fig. 2.9). Similar ndings were
made by Bose and Gorai at Dhanbad and Pillai
et al. in the coastal waters of the South-West coast
of India.39,40
Carbon dioxide is present in water as dissolved gas.
For aquaculture, the limits of free carbon dioxide are
1–10 mgL-1, according to Boyd and Tucker.19 Free
CO2 showed a positive correlation with the chloride
and BOD of water in the present investigation.
Similar observations were recorded by Huq at
Kumari Beel, Bangladesh.41
Total alkalinity limitations for aquaculture are 50–300
mgL-1.16 The total alkalinity values of the present
study (12.00 mgL-1 to 52.00 mgL-1) were within the
limit (Fig. 2.11). The lowest alkalinity (12.00 mgL-1)
was recorded during the winter months (Fig. 2.11),
which may be due to the ‘dilution e󰀨ect'.42 Alkalinity
and BOD had a strong positive association in the
current study. Sharma and Jindal also found similar
observations in the river Sultej of Ludhiana.43
According to Boyd and Tucker, TH levels of 50–200
mgL-1 are appropriate for aquaculture.16 Over
the course of the investigation, the highest total
hardness value (107.00 mgL-1) recorded at Site 2
in the month of December 2019 might be linked
to a combination of elements such as the minimal
water level of the river, the higher temperature, and
the salts of calcium and magnesium added by soap
and detergents utilized for laundry and bathing.
The lowest value (34.00 mgL-1) of the total hardness
was recorded in the months of April and May 2020
(Fig. 2.9), which could be attributed to lesser human
activities during the Lockdown period due to the
COVID-19 pandemic situation. The total hardness
had a signicant negative correlation with BOD
(r = -0.3141) at Site 3. Similar ndings were recorded
by Risner at the Albama and Dog River Watersheds.44
Chloride concentration indicates the level of pollution.45
Higher chloride concentrations are linked to higher
levels of pollution.46,47 Chloride is expelled as
nitrogenous chemicals in water bodies.48 The most
signicant source of chloride in naturally occurring
freshwater is the outow of household sewage,
and a high chloride concentration indicates sewage
contamination.49 Chloride had a signicant positive
correlation with BOD (r = 0.3012) in Site 4 (Table 2.4)
and (r = 0.3005) at Site 5 (Table 2.5). A similar type
of positive correlation was recorded by Tripathi
et al. from the river Ganga at Holy Place Shringverpur,

1294MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
Allahabad, and by Bhandari and Nayal at the Kosi
river, Uttarakhand.32,50
The highest BOD (7.68 mgL-1) was found in the
month of April, 2020 at Site 5 (Fig. 2.12), which was
much greater than the drinking and bathing water
standards set by CPCB.19 The higher BOD values
may be associated with organic pollution caused
by sewage contamination through incoming drains.
According to Wahid et al., a BOD value greater
than 7.00 mgL-1 is indicative of pollution.51 BOD
levels between 2.00 mgL-1 and 4.00 mgL-1 are
acceptable, while levels above 5.00 mgL-1 indicate
serious pollution.52
Conclusion
The present investigation revealed the current
physico-chemical status of the water in the river Kulik
of the Uttar Dinajpur District. Although the values of
di󰀨erent parameters of water quality such as pH,
chloride, TA, and TH of all ve sampling sites in the
Uttar Dinajpur district are within the recommended
limits (drinking water standard) set by WHO, most of
the time the dissolved oxygen values of Site 5 were
lower than the drinking and bathing water standards
set by CPCB and the drinking water Standard set
by WHO. The highest BOD was recorded from
Site 5, which was much greater than the drinking
and bathing water standards set by CPCB. From
the overall study, it can be concluded that Sites 3,
4, and 5 were more polluted than the other sites.
The higher pollution levels at these sites may be
due to higher levels of anthropogenic activities and
poor maintenance of the water. Nonetheless, it is
imperative to explore more chemical compounds to
nd out the overall water quality of the river Kulik.
To control the discharge of garbage from homes and
agricultural elds next to the river, public awareness
is crucial. In order to protect the water quality of the
river, sand lifting from the river should be reduced.
This research can be helpful in developing strategies
for ecological management, conservation, and
restoration.
Acknowledgements
The authors express their sincere thanks to the
Vice Chancellor, Raiganj University, Uttar Dinajpur
– 733134 for providing the opportunities to perform
the research work in the Department of Zoology.
Funding
The author(s) received no nancial support for the
research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Conict of Interest
The author(s) declares no conict of interest.
References
1. Postel, S. L. Daily, G.C. and Ehrlich P.R.
Human appropriation of renewable fresh
water. Science. 1996; 271: 785-788.
2. Gautam, H.R. and Kumar, R. Better
Groundwater Management Can Usher in
India into Second Green Revolution. Journal
of Rural Development. 2010; 58(7): 3-5.
3. BasavarajaSimpi, S. M., Hiremath, K. N.
S. Murthy, K. N. Chandrashekarappa,
Anil N. Patel, E. T. Puttiah. Analysis of
Water Quality Using Physico-Chemical
Parameters Hosahalli Tank in Shimoga
District, Karnataka, India. Global Journal of
Science Frontier Research. 2011; 1(3):31-34.
4. Nishat, B., Chakraborty, S. K., Hasan, M.E. and
Rahman, A.J.M.Z. Rivers Beyond Borders:
India Bangladesh Trans-boundary River
Atlas. Ecosystems for Life: A Bangladesh-
India Initiative. Int. Uni. Conser. Nat., Dhaka,
Bangladesh. 2014; 51 - 52.
5. Kamal, D., Khan, A.N., Rahman, M.A. and
Ahamed, F. Study on the Physico Chemical
Properties of Water of Mouri River, Khulna,
Bangladesh. Pakistan Journal of Biological
Sciences. 2007; 10: 710-717.
6. Pal, J., Pal, M., Roy, K. P. and M. A. Water
Quality Index for assessment of Rudrasagar
Lake Ecosystem, India. International Journal
of Engineering Research Applications. 2016;
6(1): 98-101.
7. Pal, S. and Talukdar, S. Impact of missing ow
on active inundation areas and transformation
of parafluvial wetlands in Punarbhaba–
Tangon river basin of Indo-Bangladesh.
Geocarto International. 2019; 34(10): 1055-
1074.

1295MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
8. Roy, F., K. C. and Ferdoushi, Z. Some
aspects of water quality of the Tangon River
in Bangladesh. 2020; 15(4): 59-66.
9. Moundiotiya, C., Sisodia, R., Kulshreshtha, M.
and Bhatia, A.L. A case study of the Jamwa
Ramgarh wetland with special reference
to physico-chemical properties of water
and its environs. Journal of Environmental
Hydrology. 2004; 12(24): 1-7.
10. Kumar, S.S., Puttaiah, E.T., Manjappa,
S., Naik, S.P. and Vijay, K. Water quality
assessment of river Tunga, Karnataka.
Environment and Ecology. 2006; 24(1): 23-
26.
11. Bhuiyan, J.R. and Gupta, S. (2007). A
comparative hydrobiological study of a few
ponds of Barak Valley, Assam and their role
as sustainable water resources. Journal of
Environmental Biology. 2007; 28(4): 799-802.
12. Patel, J.N. and Patel, N.K. Study of physico-
chemical properties of water in Amirgadh
Taluka of Banaskantha District of North
Gujarat, India. Life sciences Leaets. 2012;
9: 82-90.
13. Acharjee, M.L. and Barat, S. Spatio-temporal
Dynamics of Physico-Chemical Factors of
River Relli in Darjeeling Himalaya, West
Bengal, India. North Bengal University
Journal of Animal Sciences. 2011; 5:24-33.
14. Chakraborty, R., Talukdar, S. and Pal, S.
Habitat identify crisis caused by the riparian
wetland squeeze in Tangon River Basin,
Barind Region, India. 2018; 26: 507-516.
15. Mondal, D. and Sarkar, M. Investigations on
water quality parameters and ichthyofaunal
diversity of the river Tangon at Radhikapur,
Uttar Dinajpur, West Bengal, India. Uttar
Pradesh Journal of Zoology. 2021; 42(10):
75-89.
16. Boyd, C.E. and Tucker, C.S. Pond aquaculture
water quality management Kluwen Academic
Publishers, Boston, MA USA. 1998.
17. APHA. Standard methods for the examination
of water and wastewater. 23rd ed, American
public Health Correlation, American Water
Works Correlation and Water Environmental
Federation, Washington, USA. 2017.
18. WHO. WHO handbook on indoor radon: A
Public health perspective, Geneva, World
Health Organization. 2013.
19. Water Quality Standards in India CPCB.
(Source IS 2296:1992). 2012.
20. Oyewole, Cl. Climate change: Mitigating e󰀨ect
change by Evolving Sustainable Agriculture.
International Journal of Science. 2015; 4: 6.
21. Jayalakshmi, V., Lakshmi, N. and
Singaracharya, M. A. Assessment of physico-
chemical parameters of water and waste
waters in and around Vijayawada. International
Journal of Research in Pharmaceutical and
Biomedical Sciences. 2011; 2(3): 1040-1046.
22. Bellos, D, and Sawidis, T. Chemical pollution
Monitoring of River (Thesealia, Greece).
Journal Environment Management. 2005;
76(4): 282-292.
23. Ahipathy, M.V. and Puttaiah, E.T. Ecological
characteristics of Vrishabhavathy River in
Bangalore (India). Environmental Geology.
2006; 49:1217–1222. DOI: https://doi.
org/10.1007/s00254-005-0166-0
24. Mondal, D., Pal J., Ghosh, K. T and Biswas, K.
A. Abiotic characteristics of Mirik Lake water
in the Hills of Darjeeling, West Bengal, India.
Advances in Applied Science Research.
2012; 3(3): 1335-1345.
25. Mondal, D. Hydrobiological Study of the
Mirik Lake of the Darjeeling Hills. Lambert
Academic Publishing, Germany. 2020. ISBN.
978-620-2-52488-9.
26. Tajmunnaher, and Chowdhury, M.A.I.
Correlation Study for Assessment of Water
Quality and its Parameters of Kushiyara
River, Sylhet, Bangladesh. International
Journal of New Technology and Research.
2017; 3(12): 01-06.
27. Krishnaram, H., Mohan, M., Ramchandra,
Vishalkashi, Y. Limnological studies on
Kolaramma lake Kolar, Karnataka.
Environmental Ecology. 2007; 52(2): 364-
367.
28. Gupta, D. P., Sunita and J. P. Saharan.
Physiochemical Analysis of Ground Water of
Selected Area of Kaithal City (Haryana) India.
Researcher. 2009; 1(2): 1-5.
29. Medudhula, T., Samatha, C. and Sammaiah,
C. Analysis of water quality using physico-
chemical parameters in lower manair reservoir
of Karimnagar district, Andhra Pradesh.
International Journal of Environmental
Science. 2012; 3(1): 22-25.

1296MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
30. Kataria, H.C., Qureshi, H.A., Iqbal, S.A. and
Shandilya, A.K. Assessment of water quality
of Kolar Reservoir in Bhopal (M.P). Pollution
Research. 1996; 15: 191-193.
31. Kothari, V., Vij, S., Sharma, S.K. and Gupta,
N. Correlation of various water quality
parameters and water quality index of
districts of Uttarakhand. Environmental and
Sustainability Indicators. 2021; 9: 1-8.
32. Tripathi, I. P., Dwivedi, A., Kumar, P., Suresh,
M, and Gautam, S. S. Physico-chemical
parameters and Correlation Coefficients
of Ground Waters of Shahdol District.
Asian Academic Research Journal of Multi
disciplinary. 2014; 1: 178-200.
33. Kumar, P., Kumar, M., Ramanathan, A.L, and
Tsujimura, M. Tracing the factors responsible
for arsenic enrichment in groundwater of
the middle Gangetic Plain, India: a source
identification perspective. Environmental
Geochemistry and Health. 2010; 32(2):
129–146.
34. Zhenghu, M., Lei, W., Xiaoyu, L., Xiangning,
Q., Juan, Y., Xini, Z. and Yaqing L. The
oasis regional small and medium lake water
transparency monitoring research and impact
factor analysis based on eld data combined
with high resolution GF-1 satellite data.
Journal of Freshwater Ecology. 2021; 36(1):
77-96. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0270506
0.2021.1883753
35. Wetzel, R.G. Limnology: lake and river
ecosystem. Academic Press, New York.
2001.
36. Ansari, S. and Raja, W. Zooplankton diversity
in freshwater bodies of Aligarh region, U.P.
Limnology Souvenir World Lake Conf. Jaipur.
NSL. 2007; 170-175.
37. Banerjee., S.M. Water quality and soil
conditions of shponds in some states at India
in relation to sh production. Indian Journal
of Fisheries. 1967; 14:115-155.
38. Alam, Dr. MD, T., Hussain, MD., Hasan, MD.,
Haque, MD., Das, S, and Mazumder, S.
Water quality parameters and their correlation
matrix: A case study in two important wetland
Beels of Bangladesh. 2015; 30(3):223-254.
39. Bose, S. K. and Gorai, A. C. Seasonal
uctuations of plankton in relation to physico-
chemical parameters of a freshwater Tank
of Dhanbad, India. Journal of Freshwater
Biology. 1993; 5: 133–140.
40. Pillai, V. N. Variations in dissolved oxygen
content of coastal waters along the south
west coast of India in space and time. Indian
Journal of Marine Science. 1993; 22: 279-
282.
41. Huq., M.E. A complication of environmental
causes of Bangladesh Administered by the
Department of environment, BEMP. 2002;
60-63.
42. Bishop, J.E. Limnology of small Malayan
River, Sungai Gomback. Dr. W. Junk
Publishers, The Hague. 1973.
43. Sharma, C. and Jindal, R. Studies on water
quality of Sutlej River around Ludhiana with
reference to physicochemical parameters.
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment.
2011; 174: 417-425.
44. Risner, T. R. Relationship between Hardness
levels in Eslava Creek and Rainfall amounts
in mobile. 2007.
45. Sinha, M. P. Effect of waste disposal on
water quality of river Damodar in Bihar.
Physicochemical characteristics. In Ecology
and Pollution in Indian rivers (Ed. R.K.
Trivedi). 1988; 216-246.
46. Umavathi, S., Longakumar, K. and Subhashini,
S. Studies on the nutrient content of Sulur
pond in Coimbator, Tamil Nadu. Journal of
Ecology and Environmental Conservation.
2007; 13(5): 501-504.
47. Vijayvergia, R.P. and Y.D. Tiagi. Bioindicators
of environmental: a case study of certain plant
species in eutrophicated Lake Udaisagar and
nearby polluted sites, Udaipur (Rajasthan).
Indian Journal of Environmental Science.
2007; 11: 111-114.
48. Basu, M., Roy, N. and A. Barik. Seasonal
abundance of net zooplankton correlation
with physico-chemical parameters in a
freshwater ecosystem. International Journal
of Lakes and rivers. 2010; 3:67-77.
49. Ekubo, A. A. and J. F. N. Abowei. Review of
some water quality management principles in
culture sheries. Research Journal of Applied
Sciences, Engineering and Technology. 2011;
3: 1342-1357.

1297MAJUMDER & MONDAL, Curr. World Environ., Vol. 18(3) 1277-1297 (2023)
50. Bhandari, S. N, and Nayal, K. Correlation
study on Physico-Chemical parameters
and quality assessment of Kosi River water,
Uttarakhand. CODEN ECJHAO. Journal
of Chemistry. 2008; 5(2): 342-346.
51. Wahid, S. M., Babel, M. S, and Bhuiyan, A.
R. Hydrologic monitoring and analysis in the
Sundarbans mangrove ecosystem. Journal
of Hydrology. 2005; 332: 381-395.
52. Clerk, R.B. Marine Pollution. Fifth Edition,
Oxford. 1986; 256.