Printer Friendly

Phytoplanktonic diversity and seasonal fluctuations in Surinsar Wetland, Jammu (J&K)--A Ramsar site.

Introduction

Phytoplankton serves as an important and indispensable link in the food web of an aquatic ecosystem as they harvest the radiant energy of the sun for subsequent trophic levels. Phytoplankton constitutes a decisive force in determining the primary productivity of a water body 1. Apart from this, they act as bio indicators of pollution and with their enzymatic secretions they purify the polluted aquatic ecosystems [2,3,4]. The flora and fauna of an aquatic ecosystem have an intimate relation with the physico-chemical conditions of water. Phytoplankton, nevertheless, are also affected by their physical, chemical and biological factors. Some important factors regulating the growth and succession of phytoplankton are (a) light and temperature, (b) buoyancy regulation (which is remaining within the photic zones by alteration of sinking rates), (c) inorganic nutrient factors, (d) organic micronutrient factors and interactions of organic compounds with inorganic nutrient availability and (e) biological factors of competition for available resources and predation by other organisms [5].

Analysis and evaluation of the seasonal and spatial growth characteristics of phytoplankton are sometimes difficult because of array of environmental factors involved [5]. A sizable amount of work regarding the studies on phytoplankton has been carried out by a number of workers [6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. However, literature regarding various aspects of phytoplankton ecology in the subtropical waters of Jammu (J&K) is scanty and has been taken up by only a few workers [17,18,16,19] thus suggesting, a need of detailed investigations on this aspect.

The present study provides momentous information about the phytoplanktonic population inhabiting Lake Surinsar. Surinsar Lake is an important subtropical freshwater Lake of Jammu and has been recently recognised as an important Ramsar site (Ministry of Environment and forest, Government of India). In order to understand the biological functioning of freshwater ecosystems and detect changes over time, it is essential to investigate the development of their phytoplankton populations, as they are particularly sensitive to changes in nutrients, responding rapidly when levels rise [20]. Thus, phytoplankton assessment studies could considerably provide critical information regarding the trophic status of the wetland and may momentously help in its conservation.

Materials and Methods

Study Area

Surinsar Lake is a sub-tropical, picturesque, freshwater lake at a distance of about 40 km to the north east of Jammu city and at an elevation of 605m above mean sea level (Fig-1). Circumference of the lake is 2.496km. The spread of the lake varies from 27.92 to 29.14 hectares. The maximum length, breadth and depth of the Lake are 888m, 444m and 24.05m respectively [21]. The main sources of water to the lake are monsoon rains and underground natural springs. The lake is almost oval in contour with a deep notch towards its north-west harbouring a small island eccentrically that serves as a hub for a number of diverse flora and fauna. The Lake serves as a wintering ground and a transit point for many exotic migratory birds, which visit the Lake every year during their Palaearctic-oriental migration [22].

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

The study was conducted for a period of two years (April, 2005 to March, 2007) wherein some physico-chemical parameters were analyzed on a monthly basis following APHA [23]. For monthly planktonic collection, 50 litres of lake water was filtered through plankton net having a mesh size 60-70 [micro]m. The sample so collected was fixed by adding few drops of 5% formalin. Preserved samples were then identified following standard literature [24,25,26,27,28].

Results and Discussion

The study revealed the presence of a total of 38 genera of phytoplankton, out of which 16 belonged to class Chlorophyceae, 13 to Bacillariophyceae and 9 to Cyanophyceae (Table-1). Qualitatively, Chlorophyceae was observed to be the most dominant class but Bacillariophyceae was found to be abundant, quantitatively. Cyanophyceae was observed to be least prevailing in terms of count and diversity. Seasonal variations in total phytoplankton count were characterized by a bimodal peak, first in September (post monsoon) and other in March (spring) with a decline during summer and reaching a minimum in winter during both the years of study. Seasonal variations in different classes of algae were found to be closely associated with the changes in the physico-chemical conditions of the water (Table-2, 3 and Fig.2) thus, making the environment conducive for some species while non-conducive for others [14,16]. Spring peak was observed to be due to fairly high pH [9,29] whereas the post monsoon peak was due to high pH coupled with increased photoperiod and increased availability of nutrients brought from the catchment area along with surface run off [30,31]. Summer decline was due to the grazing effect of zooplankton and increased fish feeding at higher temperature due to greater metabolism at increased temperature [32]. The winter minima was attributed to extreme fall in the temperature [33,34,16].

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Chlorophyceae was found to be the most dominant class qualitatively and ranked second quantitatively. It was observed to be represented by four orders showing well-marked seasonal variations. Order Chlorococcales was found to be the most prevailing throughout the study period and exhibited their extreme adaptability to varied ecological conditions. Their highest count was in September and lowest in July during two year study period. They were found to be positively related with DO, pH and Calcium (Table-3). Order Zygnematales (particularly Desmids) formed a major contributor of Chlorophyceae. Family Desmidiaceae being represented by good number of representatives recorded a peak in April and minima in July. Desmids were negatively related to bicarbonates but favoured by moderate temperature (Table-3). Family Zygnemataceae was represented by a single genus Spirogyra sp. which marked its presence almost throughout the year showing a peak in February and minima in June and remaining totally absent during the months of July and August. Order Volvoccales represented by three genera showed a maxima in January and minima in December. It was found to remain absent during the months of June, July and August. The most poorly represented order during the study was reported to be Oedogonales showing peak in March and remaining absent in June, July and January.

Class Bacillariophyceae being dominant quantitatively showed highest count in July due to combined effects of both of calcium and temperature since calcium together with temperature is found to facilitate the diatomic growth [29]. However, their lowest count during December when though calcium level was high but temperature was low was attributed to the fact that high calcium but low temperature during the winter season does not favour the growth of the diatoms [35].Therefore, Bacillariophyceae showed a negative correlation with calcium (Table-3). Order Pennules with 12 genera remained low during December whereas order Centrales represented by single genera Cyclotella sp. showed maximum count in July and minimum in October. Both the orders showed peak in the month of July. Water temperature was found to be an important factor influencing Diatomic growth but temperature at which diatoms were most abundant did not nearly corresponded to its optimum value 36. Also, absence of Dinoflagellates throughout the year resulted in the presence of diatoms thus indicating their negative relation 37,16. Monsoon peak in diatoms was attributed to the increased oxidizable organic matter present in the Lake alongwith increased inorganic salts by leaching of surrounding rocks and agricultural fields as a result of monsoon rains. Moreover, abundant angiospermic macrophytes present during monsoons accelerated the diatomic growth.

Class Cyanophyceae ranked third both qualitatively and quantitatively with highest count during August when there was optimum temperature, low oxygen and increased organic content [38]. It was found to be minimum during January at low temperature and reduced photoperiod [37,16]. Order Chroococcales with 5 representatives showed their highest count during July while order Nostocales with four representatives showed a peak in August. Both the orders showed least count during the month of January.

Conclusion

The present study concludes that the presence of some pollution indicator species such as Anabaena sp., Chroococcus sp., Microcystis sp., Oscillatoria sp., Spirulina sp., (among Cyanophaceae), Ankistrodesmus sp., Pandorina sp., Pediastrum sp., Scendesmus sp. (among Chlorophyceae) and Achnanthes sp., Navicula sp., Nitszshia sp., and Synedra sp. (among Bacillariophyceae) [39,40,41,42,43] speaks voluminously about the trophic status of the Lake. The vary presence of these pollution indicator species implies that the nature of the anthropogenic stress and pollution threat arising in the lake Surinsar is escalating the trophic status of the Lake. These vital cues from the phytoplanktonic inhabitants of Lake Surinsar can invariably help in the restoration strategies of this imperative wetland.

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to the Head, Department of Zoology, University of Jammu, Jammu for providing various facilities to carry out the present study.

References

[1] Steeman, N.M., 1964., Recent advances in measuring and understanding marine primary production.J.Ecol., 52:109-130.

[2] Thunmark, S., 1945., Zur sozio logie des susswasser plankters, fine methodologisch- Okologische studies. Folia limn. Scand., 3:1-66.

[3] Aldo, M., Conzonno,V., Echenique, R., and Labollits,H.,1991., Physical and chemical characters,phytoplankton and primary production of Ezequial Ramos Mxia, reservoir(Argentina).Hydrobiologia.209:107-116.

[4] Shastree, N.K., 1992., Dynamics of phytoplanktonic fluctuations in a lentic water body. Aquatic environment, 6:59-85.

[5] Wetzel, R.G., 2001., Limnology. Lake and river ecosystems. Academic press. A Harcourt Science and Technology Company. 525 B Street, Suite 1900, San Diego, California 92101-4495.

[6] Ganapati, S.V.,1940., The ecology of a temple tank containing a permanent bloom of Microcystis aeruginosa Kuetz. (Henfr.). J.Bom.Nat. His .Soc.,42:65 77.

[7] Hohn, M.H.,1959., The uses of diatom populations as ameasure of water quality in selected areas of Galveston and Chocolate Bay, Texas. Publ. Inst.Mar.Sci.Univ.Tex., 6:206-212.

[8] Margalef, R.,1961., Hidrografa fitoplancton de un area marine de lcosta meridional de Puerto Rico. Inv. Pesq. 18: 33-96.

[9] George M.G.,1962., Occurrence of a permanent algal bloom in a fish tank at Delhi with special reference to factors responsible for its production. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. 56B: 354-362.

[10] Hulburt, E.M.,1965., The diversity of phytoplankton populations in oceanic, coastal and estuarine regions.J.Mar.Res., 21: 81-93.

[11] Patten, B.C.,1962., Species diversity in net phytoplankton in Raritan Bay. J.Mar.Res., 20:57-75.

[12] Eloranta, P.,1974., Studies on the phytoplankton in Lake Kcurusselka, Finish Lake District.Ann.Bot.Fenniei.II..13-24.

[13] Tanslankian, M.J., and Hardy, J.T., 1976., Sewage nutrient enrichment and phytoplankton ecology along the central coast of Lebanon. Mar.Biol., 38:315325.

[14] Dunstan, W.M., and Menzel, D.W., 1971., Continuous cultures of natural population of phytoplankton in dilute, treated sewage effluents. Limnol.Oceanogr., 16:623-632.

[15] Fogg GE., Steward W.D.P., Fay P and Walsby AE., 1973., The Blue-Green Algae. Academic Press, New York, pp 459.

[16] Mohan, C.,1993., Limnology of Lake Mansar with Particular reference to primary producers. Ph.D thesis, Department of Botany, University of Jammu, Jammu.

[17] Anand, V.K., 1977, Limnology of Gadigarh stream (Miran Sahib, Jammu) with special reference to producers inhabiting the stream. Ph.D thesis, University of Jammu, Jammu.

[18] Kant, S.,1985., Limnology of the Himalayan lakes. Problem of resource use and management. In: Studies on Eco- Development of Himalayan mountains.(Singh, T.V. and Jagdish, K.eds.). Print house (India), Luckhnow.165-195.

[19] Zuber, S.M., 2007.,.Ecology and Economic Valuation of Lake Mansar, Jammu. Ph.D Thesis, University of Jammu, Jammu (J&K).

[20] Hotzel ,G., and Croome, R.,1999., A phytoplankton Methods Manual for Australian Freshwaters. LWRRDC Occasional Paper 22/99, Land and Water Resources Research and Development Corporation, Canberra, www.lwa.gov.au/ products_list.asp

[21] NIH (1995). Water quality studies of Surinsar Lake in Jammu region. Technical Report No. CS (AR)--157.-150.

[22] Singh, P. (2004). Faunal diversity and ecology of wetlands of Jammu. Ph.D.Thesis, University of Jammu.

[23] APHA., 1985., Standard methods of examination of wastes and wastewater. 16th edu. American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C.

[24] Edmondson,W.T.,1963., Fresh Water Biology. Eds. W.T. Edmondson John Wiley & Sons,Inc.

[25] Hutchinson,G.E.,1967., A treatise on limnology II. Introduction to lake biology and the limnoplankton. John Wiley and Sons Inc., New York 1115.

[26] Adoni,A.D., 1985., Work book on limnology, Pratibha Publishers, C-10, Gour Nagar, Sagar, India.

[27] Pennak,R.W.,1989.,Invertebrates of the United States, 3rd Ed. Protozoan to Mollusca.

[28] Battish, S.K., 1992., Freshwater Zooplanktons of India. Oxford and IBM Publishing Co..Pvt. Ltd.., New Delhi: 233.

[29] Kant,S., and Kachroo, P.,1973., Phytoplankton population in Dal and Wular lake in Srinagar. III. Proc. Ind. Nat. Sci. Asa., 39(B):632-645.

[30] Govind, B.V., 1963., Preliminary studies on the phytoplankton of Tungabhadra reservoir.Ind.J.Fish., 10:148-158.

[31] Singh, R., and Mahajan, I.,1987., Phytoplankton and water chemistry of Rewalsar and Renuka Lakes, Himachal Pradesh. Ind. J. Ecol., 14(2): 273-277.

[32] Anderson, G.C., Comita, G.W., and Heg, V.E., 1955., A note on the Phytoplankton and Zooplankton relationship in two lakes of Washington. Ecology.36:757-59.

[33] Philipose, M.T.,1960., Freshwater phytoplankton of inland fisheries. Proc.Symp. Algology.ICAR.New Delhi. 272-291.

[34] Singh, V.P.,1959., Phytoplankton ecology of inland waters of Utter Pradesh.Proc. Symp. Algology.I.C.A.R, New Delhi:243-271.

[35] Singh, S.R., and Swarup, K.,1980., Studies on the primary production of phytoplankton in Suraha Lake (Ballia, India.). Internationale Revue dergesamten Hydrobiologie und Hydrographic. 65 (5):709-717.

[36] Pearsal, W.H.,1980., Phytoplankton in the English Lakes I. The water of dissolved substances of biological importance. J.Ecol. 18: 306-320.

[37] Sharma, G.,1989., Impact of littoral flora on Renuka and Rewalsar Lake of Himachal Pradesh. Ph.D thesis, Himaxhal Pradesh University , Shimla.

[38] Venkateshwarlu, V., 1969., An ecological study of the algae of river Mossi, Hyderabad (India) with special reference to water pollution. II. Factors influencing the distribution of Algae. Hydrobiol., 33:352-363.

[39] Rai, L.C., 1978., Ecological studies of algal communities of the Ganges river at Varanasi. Indian J. Ecol., 5(1): 1-6.

[40] Palmer, C.M., 1980., Algae and Water Pollution. Castle House Publication Ltd., England. 123.

[41] Prasad ,D.V., 1990., Primary productivity and energy flow in upper lake Bhopal. Indian. J. Environ. Hlth., 32(2): 132-39.

[42] Tripathi, A.K., and Pandey, S.N.,1990., Water Pollution. Ashish Publishing House. Punjabi Bagh, New Delhi- 110026.

[43] Sawhney, N.,2008., Biomonitoring of river Tawi in the vicinity of Jammu City. Ph. D. Thesis University of Jammu, Jammu.

[44] Sehgal, H.S.,1980., Limnology of lake Surinsar, Jammu with reference to Zooplankton and fishery prospects. Ph.D. thesis, University of Jammu.

(1) K.K. Sharma, (2) Preeti Verma and (3) Shvetambri

(1) Professor and (2), (3) Ph.d Scholar (1),(2),(3) Department of Zoology, University of Jammu-180001, Jammu &Kashmir, INDIA

(1) Email: kklimnol@rediffmail.com

(2) Email: preetiverma_zoology@indiatimes.com

(3) Corresponding Author Email: j.shvetambri@yahoo.com
Table-1: Qualitative and Quantitative Distribution of Total number
of Phytoplankton in Surinsar Wetland from April 2005 to March 2007.

Sp. \ Months A M Ju Jl A S O N D
 05
C-Chlorophyceae
O-Volvocales

Gonium sp. 8 4 0 0 0 4 6 9 2
Pandorina sp. 10 5 0 0 0 4 7 11 3
Volvox sp. 10 5 0 0 0 6 9 13 3

O-Chlorococcales

Dictyosphaerium sp. 17 10 17 16 15 23 15 6 3
Ankistrodesmns sp. 27 15 25 21 19 39 20 12 10
Selenastrum sp. 27 13 24 22 20 32 20 11 8
Kirchneriella sp. 21 10 20 19 18 28 17 7 5
Pediastrum sp. 30 16 28 25 23 46 21 10 8
Scenedesmus sp. 44 24 41 37 34 52 36 20 15
Crucigenia sp. 20 15 23 21 18 28 19 9 7

O-Oedogonales

Oedogonium sp. 10 2 7 0 3 17 16 12 8
Bulbochaete sp. 9 1 5 0 4 15 11 9 8

O- Zygnematales

Spirogyra sp. 16 12 10 0 0 20 14 9 0
Cosmarium sp. 24 20 13 3 10 22 19 9 5
Euastrum sp. 20 16 9 3 7 19 15 6 4
Staurastrum sp. 15 13 7 2 5 14 12 5 3

C- Cyanophyceae
O- Chroococales

Gloeocapsa sp. 10 11 12 20 18 15 8 4 4
Synechococus sp. 9 10 11 19 16 14 7 5 3
Microcystis sp. 20 21 25 35 32 29 19 15 13
Merismopedia sp. 18 19 22 31 38 25 17 11 9
Aphanocapsa sp. 23 24 28 37 36 32 21 16 12

O-Nostocales
Spirulina sp. 13 16 17 26 29 21 12 6 4
Oscillatoria sp. 17 22 22 30 35 27 16 10 9
Nostoc sp. 13 15 14 18 19 16 12 9 6
Anabaena sp. 15 18 20 31 33 26 14 8 5

C-Bacillariophyceae
O-Pennales

Diatoma sp. 25 9 8 37 31 34 21 18 4
Synedra sp. 28 12 10 40 33 35 25 21 7
Navicula sp. 36 17 13 54 42 46 34 31 11
Pinnularia sp. 13 7 5 28 17 20 12 10 2
Gyrosigma sp. 15 8 5 25 18 19 15 12 3
Cymbella sp. 40 19 15 52 45 48 37 31 12
Amphora sp. 38 15 12 50 40 45 35 30 10
Rhopalodia sp. 37 13 11 48 41 42 33 28 7
Nitzchia sp. 30 14 12 39 33 36 29 24 8
Achnanthes sp. 31 9 6 45 37 41 29 23 4
Cocconeis sp. 33 11 10 49 39 43 30 25 7
Gomphonema sp. 37 16 14 51 40 47 32 27 11

O-Centrales

Cyclotella sp. 15 0 22 40 38 19 4 13 10

Sp. \ Months J F M A M Ju Jl A
 06 06 06
C-Chlorophyceae
O-Volvocales

Gonium sp. 11 2 10 15 10 0 0 0
Pandorina sp. 14 3 12 21 16 0 0 0
Volvox sp. 17 5 15 18 11 0 0 0

O-Chlorococcales

Dictyosphaerium sp. 12 18 20 29 19 28 25 22
Ankistrodesmns sp. 18 30 38 39 20 37 34 31
Selenastrum sp. 16 27 32 35 19 33 30 27
Kirchneriella sp. 15 24 27 24 13 23 21 18
Pediastrum sp. 18 32 40 45 22 40 36 33
Scenedesmus sp. 30 47 50 54 31 51 47 44
Crucigenia sp. 16 21 24 29 14 27 23 21

O-Oedogonales

Oedogonium sp. 0 5 19 15 4 0 0 7
Bulbochaete sp. 0 3 16 13 2 0 0 5

O- Zygnematales

Spirogyra sp. 25 30 27 22 18 12 0 0
Cosmarium sp. 15 12 17 32 28 19 6 13
Euastrum sp. 10 8 13 29 25 16 5 11
Staurastrum sp. 9 7 10 20 18 13 3 10

C- Cyanophyceae
O- Chroococales

Gloeocapsa sp. 2 5 7 14 17 21 31 27
Synechococus sp. 4 6 6 11 16 18 28 25
Microcystis sp. 10 17 18 22 25 29 40 38
Merismopedia sp. 7 13 15 19 21 22 34 31
Aphanocapsa sp. 11 18 20 24 30 33 43 39

O-Nostocales
Spirulina sp. 3 9 11 17 20 22 32 30
Oscillatoria sp. 7 12 15 20 24 27 39 35
Nostoc sp. 5 10 12 14 17 18 26 23
Anabaena sp. 4 10 13 15 20 24 37 34

C-Bacillariophyceae
O-Pennales

Diatoma sp. 12 17 35 30 16 13 40 37
Synedra sp. 16 20 37 33 18 17 46 38
Navicula sp. 22 30 51 49 21 19 60 52
Pinnularia sp. 7 8 22 27 10 9 33 30
Gyrosigma sp. 9 10 21 22 9 5 34 27
Cymbella sp. 23 30 50 42 19 17 57 48
Amphora sp. 21 29 47 45 20 16 61 50
Rhopalodia sp. 20 26 43 40 15 11 59 49
Nitzchia sp. 18 23 38 35 14 10 47 37
Achnanthes sp. 15 21 43 39 11 8 55 45
Cocconeis sp. 17 24 45 46 22 15 62 51
Gomphonema sp. 20 25 50 44 25 20 58 49

O-Centrales

Cyclotella sp. 20 6 31 21 0 30 46 43

Sp. \ Months S O N D J F M
 07
C-Chlorophyceae
O-Volvocales

Gonium sp. 9 14 17 7 21 6 19
Pandorina sp. 12 15 20 9 28 8 25
Volvox sp. 13 15 21 7 34 10 29

O-Chlorococcales

Dictyosphaerium sp. 37 20 12 9 20 30 33
Ankistrodesmns sp. 50 27 15 11 22 41 46
Selenastrum sp. 45 24 16 10 20 36 41
Kirchneriella sp. 35 17 10 8 13 25 30
Pediastrum sp. 59 30 17 12 26 47 52
Scenedesmus sp. 65 41 25 21 37 56 62
Crucigenia sp. 39 19 10 6 16 29 35

O-Oedogonales

Oedogonium sp. 25 22 17 12 0 10 28
Bulbochaete sp. 18 17 14 11 0 10 21

O- Zygnematales

Spirogyra sp. 37 29 34 0 42 51 30
Cosmarium sp. 31 24 12 9 20 16 21
Euastrum sp. 27 22 10 7 17 14 20
Staurastrum sp. 19 17 8 5 13 12 15

C- Cyanophyceae
O- Chroococales

Gloeocapsa sp. 24 12 8 6 4 9 11
Synechococus sp. 21 10 7 5 2 9 10
Microcystis sp. 33 20 16 14 12 18 19
Merismopedia sp. 26 10 14 12 10 16 17
Aphanocapsa sp. 37 23 18 15 13 20 22

O-Nostocales
Spirulina sp. 23 16 11 8 4 5 15
Oscillatoria sp. 30 19 12 9 6 7 17
Nostoc sp. 19 13 9 7 2 3 10
Anabaena sp. 28 14 11 10 6 8 12

C-Bacillariophyceae
O-Pennales

Diatoma sp. 38 29 25 12 19 23 39
Synedra sp. 41 30 26 15 20 25 42
Navicula sp. 56 44 41 16 33 39 58
Pinnularia sp. 31 25 22 6 15 20 32
Gyrosigma sp. 28 20 18 4 11 17 30
Cymbella sp. 50 37 33 15 26 32 55
Amphora sp. 52 42 38 13 27 36 58
Rhopalodia sp. 51 39 33 10 24 32 55
Nitzchia sp. 40 32 27 8 18 25 43
Achnanthes sp. 48 36 30 7 22 28 50
Cocconeis sp. 55 43 37 11 27 36 59
Gomphonema sp. 52 41 34 17 23 32 57

O-Centrales

Cyclotella sp. 26 8 19 15 28 10 37

Table 2: Seasonal variations in various physico-chemical parameters
(mg/lt) of Surinsar Lake from April'05 to March'07.

Months/ Parameters A M Ju Jl A S
 05

AT 31.0 32.0 36.5 38.0 31.0 28.0
WT 26.0 31.0 33.0 38.5 37.5 28.5
pH 8.6 8.4 8.2 8.0 8.3 8.7
T 192 190 141 187 177 200
DO 6.6 6.6 5.6 6.8 7.2 8.8
FC[O.sub.2] 0.0 0.0 5.9 8.0 0.0 0.0
C[O.sub.3.sup.-] 13.0 18.1 0.0 0.0 24.8 18.7
HC[O.sub.3.sup.-] 198.4 241.6 320.0 262.4 281.6 147.2
[Ca.sup.++] 26.4 28.0 26.8 26.4 24.0 26.0
[Mg.sup.++] 22.8 20.6 15.3 9.9 9.9 12.6
Cl- 36.2 34.0 34.0 47.3 46.0 27.7

Months/ Parameters O N D J F M
 06

AT 22.0 18.0 14.5 12.5 20.0 21.0
WT 25.0 19.5 16.5 16.0 22.0 25.0
pH 9.3 9.1 7.6 7.4 7.1 8.9
T 189 195 212 194 149 217
DO 10.4 10.0 4.8 4.0 7.6 9.6
FC[O.sub.2] 0.0 0.0 7.0 1.0 9.0 0.0
C[O.sub.3.sup.-] 10.6 12.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.3
HC[O.sub.3.sup.-] 169.6 187.2 155.2 240.0 236. 8 163.2
[Ca.sup.++] 33.6 30.0 29.2 36.8 29.2 34.4
[Mg.sup.++] 24.3 14.0 24.3 26.7 20.1 21.8
Cl- 40.0 23.1 40.9 38.6 38.0 20.4

Months/ Parameters A M Ju Jl A S

AT 32 33.5 38.0 34.0 40.0 29.5
WT 31.0 30.5 32.0 35.0 38.5 30.0
pH 8.5 8.3 7.5 7.5 8.4 9.2
T 215 222 144 169 192 234
DO 10.0 8.8 6.8 6.0 8.4 10.0
FC[O.sub.2] 0.0 0.0 4.0 6.0 0.0 0.0
C[O.sub.3.sup.-] 18.1 21.6 0.0 0.0 25.4 19.3
HC[O.sub.3.sup.-] 208.0 209.6 244.8 238.4 265.6 137.6
[Ca.sup.++] 29.2 20.4 28.8 29.2 26.0 29.6
[Mg.sup.++] 16.2 22.6 19.6 18.9 15.3 21.6
Cl- 37.3 35.2 36.8 49.3 48.1 30.2

Months/ Parameters O N D J F M
 07 07

AT 27.0 20.0 18.0 14.5 15.0 19.5
WT 26.0 21.0 20.0 17.0 17.0 21.0
pH 9.5 9.2 7.7 7.3 7.1 9.1
T 203 228 236 233 178 242
DO 11.2 10.4 5.6 4.0 8.0 10.4
FC[O.sub.2] 0.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 0.0
C[O.sub.3.sup.-] 13.6 15.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.8
HC[O.sub.3.sup.-] 126.4 193.6 172.8 201.6 208.0 235.2
[Ca.sup.++] 36.0 26.8 30.0 30.4 32.4 30.0
[Mg.sup.++] 9.9 20.4 19.6 23.0 24.3 19.9
Cl- 40.6 25.6 41.4 39.3 38.6 23.7

AT = Air Temperature([degrees]c), WT = Water Temperature
([degrees]c), T= Transparency(cms).

Table 3: Correlation co-efficient 'r' (p<0.0500) between
physicochemical parameters and algae of Surinsar wetland
from April 2005 to March 2007.

Physicochemical Chlorophyceae Cyanophyceae Bacillariophyceae
parameters

Air Temperature -0.40 0.16 -0.04
[H.sub.2]O Temp. 0.02 0.85 0.28
Transparency 0.27 -0.35 0.18
pH 0.39 0.10 0.33
DO 0.50 0.15 0.45
FC[O.sub.2] -0.33 -0.16 -0.26
C[O.sub.3.sup.-] 0.41 0.34 0.44
HC[O.sub.3.sup.-] -0.02 0.48 0.23
[Ca.sup.++] 0.03 -0.65 -0.25
[Mg.sup.++] -0.19 -0.65 -0.27
[Cl.sup.-] -0.48 0.33 -0.01
Chlorophyceae 1.00 0.07 0.51
Cyanophyceae 0.07 1.00 0.56
 0.51 0.56 1.00
COPYRIGHT 2010 Research India Publications
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2010 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Sharma, K.K.; Verma, Preeti; Shvetambri
Publication:International Journal of Applied Environmental Sciences
Date:Feb 1, 2010
Words:4554
Previous Article:Environmental impact assessment of a proposed bauxite mining using rapid impact assessment matrix method.
Next Article:Delineation of groundwater potential areas--a case study from Tirunelveli district, tamilnadu, India.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters