| Literature DB >> 26334283 |
Nayara Luiz Pires1,2, Daphne Heloisa de Freitas Muniz3,4, Tiago Borges Kisaka5, Nathan de Castro Soares Simplicio6,7, Lilian Bortoluzzi2, Jorge Enoch Furquim Werneck Lima4, Eduardo Cyrino Oliveira-Filho8,9,10.
Abstract
The release of domestic sewage in water resources is a practical feature of the urbanization process, and this action causes changes that may impair the environmental balance and the water quality for several uses. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of urbanization on the surface water quality of the Preto River throughout the town of Formosa, Goiás, Brazil. Samples were collected at five points along the river, spatially distributed from one side to the other of the town of Formosa, from May to October of 2012. Data were subjected to descriptive statistics, as well as variance and cluster analysis. Point P2, the first point after the city, showed the worst water quality indicators, mainly with respect to the total and fecal coliform parameters, as well as nitrate concentrations. These results may be related to the fact that this point is located on the outskirts of the town, an area under urbanization and with problems of sanitation, including absence of sewage collection and treatment. The data observed in this monitoring present a public health concern because the water body is used for bathing, mainly in parts of Feia Lagoon. The excess of nutrients is a strong indicator of water eutrophication and should alert decision-makers to the need for preservation policies.Entities:
Keywords: macrophytes; urban sewerage; water contamination; water sources
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26334283 PMCID: PMC4586636 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph120910671
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Population growth in the county of Formosa from 1920–2011 [6,7].
Figure 2Map showing the location of the headwaters of the Preto River in Formosa, Goiás, with respective collection points. Source: satellite image (Landsat-8) modified by SPRING 5.0 software.
Result of the physical and chemical parameters analyzed in the surface water in the headwaters of the Preto River, Formosa, GO, Brazil.
| Collection Points | Temp. (*) (°C) | EC (µS·cm−1) | TDS (mg·L−1) | Turbidity (NTU) | pH | DO (mg·L−1) | Hardness (mg·L−1 CaCO3) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23.5 | 44 | 22 | 0.11 | 5.9 | 2.3 | 9 | |
| 24.7 | 137 | 68 | 0.78 | 7.2 | 5.6 | 34 | |
| 21.9 | 128 | 64 | 1.18 | 7.4 | 6.3 | 45 | |
| ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | |
| 24.1 | 154 | 77 | 0.02 | 6.9 | 3.3 | 61 | |
| 23.2 | 35 | 18 | 2.29 | 5.8 | 3.2 | 9 | |
| 24.1 | 138 | 69 | 5.29 | 7.4 | 5.6 | 36 | |
| 20.2 | 124 | 62 | 1.86 | 7.7 | 5.3 | 41 | |
| 19.5 | 128 | 64 | 4.94 | 7.7 | 5.1 | 44 | |
| 18.7 | 161 | 81 | 1.43 | 6.7 | 3.4 | 69 | |
| 19.7 | 128 | 64 | 2.52 | 6.3 | 3.5 | 12 | |
| 23.5 | 163 | 82 | 3.98 | 7.2 | 5.1 | 37 | |
| 18.8 | 131 | 65 | 2.12 | 7.2 | 5.3 | 41 | |
| 18.1 | 135 | 68 | 3.08 | 7.6 | 4.7 | 46 | |
| 22.1 | 161 | 81 | 3.72 | 6.4 | 4.4 | 73 | |
| ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | |
| 27.4 | 165 | 83 | 1.95 | 7.5 | 6.7 | 45 | |
| 23.6 | 163 | 81 | 5.12 | 7.8 | 7.4 | 56 | |
| 22.8 | 168 | 84 | 1.88 | 7.7 | 4.9 | 59 | |
| 25.9 | 159 | 79 | 3.24 | 7.6 | 3.1 | 81 | |
Notes: (*) Temp. = temperature; (**) the analyses were not carried out due to errors in the localization of the point (P4) in the field; (***) the analyses were not carried out due to the small volume of water at this point.
Result of the concentrations of ions analyzed in the surface water at the headwaters of the Preto River, Formosa, GO.
| Points | F− (mg·L−1) | Cl− (mg·L−1) | NO2− (mg·L−1) | NO3− (mg·L−1) | SO42− (mg·L−1) | Na+ (mg·L−1) | K+ (mg·L−1) | Ca+ (mg·L−1) | Mg+ (mg·L−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.04 | 2.43 | n.d. | 2.28 | 0.30 | 7.32 | 0.34 | 4.01 | 0.40 | |
| 0.05 | 7.03 | 0.06 | 13.85 | 0.90 | 15.03 | 1.95 | 8.50 | 1.22 | |
| 0.05 | 4.06 | n.d. | 0.17 | 0.48 | 11.76 | 0.57 | 8.46 | 1.38 | |
| ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | |
| 0.03 | 1.58 | n.d. | n.d. | 0.45 | 4.01 | 2.14 | 12.28 | 4.63 | |
| 0.05 | 2.75 | n.d. | 2.53 | 0.57 | 7.26 | 0.41 | 4.59 | 0.45 | |
| 0.09 | 7.59 | 0.10 | 13.81 | 1.13 | 14.38 | 2.19 | 8.51 | 1.40 | |
| 0.07 | 4.95 | n.d. | 0.16 | 0.67 | 11.53 | 0.51 | 9.05 | 1.42 | |
| 0.02 | 4.99 | n.d. | 0.15 | 0.74 | 11.84 | 0.72 | 9.79 | 1.55 | |
| 0.01 | 1.27 | n.d. | n.d. | 0.35 | 3.11 | 1.99 | 10.37 | 5.65 | |
| 0.06 | 5.05 | n.d. | 0.77 | 0.66 | 10.36 | 0.28 | 3.50 | 0.33 | |
| 0.11 | 8.72 | 0.09 | 13.69 | 3.80 | 16.21 | 2.33 | 10.43 | 1.40 | |
| 0.03 | 5.09 | n.d. | 0.19 | 0.56 | 11.99 | 0.55 | 13.26 | 1.35 | |
| 0.08 | 5.49 | n.d. | n.d. | 0.63 | 12.17 | 0.64 | 14.53 | 1.61 | |
| 0.09 | 1.19 | n.d. | n.d. | 0.40 | 2.34 | 2.22 | 15.98 | 6.28 | |
| ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | ( | |
| 0.11 | 8.62 | 0.24 | 12.17 | 2.10 | 16.06 | 2.20 | 14.05 | 1.77 | |
| 0.04 | 5.88 | n.d. | 0.15 | 0.34 | 13.01 | 1.10 | 15.52 | 1.86 | |
| 0.05 | 5.98 | n.d. | 0.08 | 0.46 | 12.92 | 1.43 | 15.71 | 1.98 | |
| 0.02 | 0.65 | n.d. | n.d | 0.07 | 1.89 | 2.11 | 12.79 | 7.10 | |
Notes: (*) the analyses were not carried out due to errors in the localization of the point (P4) in the field; (**) the analyses were not carried out due to the small volume of water at this point; (n.d. = not detected).
Figure 3(A) Temperature; (B) Electrical conductivity; (C) hydrogen ion potential and (D) dissolved oxygen.
Figure 4(A) Total hardness; (B) nitrate (C) sodium and (D) potassium.
Results of the biological parameters in the surface water at the headwaters of the Preto River, Formosa, GO.
| Date | P1 | P2 | P3 | P4 | P5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/05/2012 | 1732.9 | >2419.6 | >2419.6 | ( | >2419.6 |
| 25/06/2012 | 1299.7 | >2419.6 | >2419.6 | >2419.6 | >2419.6 |
| 13/08/2012 | 920.8 | >2419.6 | >2419.6 | >2419.6 | >2419.6 |
| 01/10/2012 | ( | >2419.6 | >2419.6 | >2419.6 | 1732.9 |
| 07/05/2012 | 307.6 | >2419.6 | 248.1 | ( | 33.1 |
| 25/06/2012 | 98.4 | >2419.6 | 648.8 | 727.0 | 18.7 |
| 13/08/2012 | 261.3 | 1986.3 | 365.4 | 770.1 | 290.9 |
| 01/10/2012 | ( | >2419.6 | 613.1 | 166.4 | 107.1 |
Notes: (*) The analyses were not carried out due to errors in the localization of the point (P4) in the field; (**) the analyses were not carried out due to the small volume of water at this point.
Figure 5Rainfall in the studied period monitored by the meteorological stations from Embrapa Cerrados. Source: Laboratory of Environmental Biophysics at Embrapa Cerrados.
Descriptive statistics attributed to physical, chemical and biological parameters.
| Variables | Mean | Standard Deviation | Minimum | Maximum |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 22.35 | 2.66 | 18.08 | 27.40 | |
| 7.15 | 0.64 | 5.81 | 7.85 | |
| 134.6 | 37.90 | 35.00 | 168.00 | |
| 67.32 | 18.92 | 18.00 | 84.00 | |
| 4.73 | 1.38 | 2.29 | 7.42 | |
| 44.32 | 20.58 | 9.00 | 81.00 | |
| 2.52 | 1.61 | 0.02 | 5.29 | |
| 2197.81 | 457.51 | 920.80 | 2419.60 | |
| 772.28 | 880.66 | 18.70 | 2419.60 | |
| 10.17 | 4.71 | 1.89 | 16.21 | |
| 1.31 | 0.28 | 0.34 | 2.33 | |
| 10.63 | 3.50 | 4.01 | 15.98 | |
| 2.32 | 0.33 | 0.40 | 7.10 | |
| 0.06 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.11 | |
| 4.63 | 2.53 | 0.66 | 8.72 | |
| 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.00 | 0.24 | |
| 3.33 | 5.58 | 0.00 | 13.85 | |
| 0.82 | 0.85 | 0.30 | 3.80 |
Analysis of variance of means for variables between sampling periods (May, June, August and October).
| Summary Anova | ||
|---|---|---|
| Variables | F Value | |
| 4.116 | 0.0275 | |
| 1.238 | 0.333 | |
| 1.779 | 0.197 | |
| 1.766 | 0.2 | |
| 0.52 | 0.675 | |
| 1.075 | 0.391 | |
| 4.129 | 0.0272 | |
| 0.007 | 0.999 | |
| 0.084 | 0.968 | |
| 0.374 | 0.773 | |
| 3.234 | 0.0547 | |
| 1.071 | 0.393 | |
| 0.287 | 0.834 | |
Notes: (*) Value of p lower than 0.05, indicating significant differences based on the degree of freedom adopted (α = 5%).
Analysis of variance of means for variables between the sampling points (Points 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5).
| Summary Anova | ||
|---|---|---|
| Variables | F Value | |
| 2.353 | 0.108 | |
| 16.39 | 5.37E-05 | |
| 6.831 | 0.00345 | |
| 6.841 | 0.00342 | |
| 13.41 | 0.000152 | |
| 38 | 4.69E-07 | |
| 0.489 | 0.744 | |
| 74.46 | 7.91E-09 | |
| 90.64 | 2.33E-09 | |
| 46.31 | 1.44E-07 | |
| 6.263 | 0.00491 | |
| 2.214 | 0.124 | |
| 37.32 | 5.22E-07 | |
Notes: (*) Value of p lower than 0.05, indicating significant differences based on the degree of freedom adopted (α = 5%).
Figure 6Dendrogram after Cluster analysis from the collected data.