| Literature DB >> 35083687 |
Sophia Shuang Chen1,2, Ismael Aaron Kimirei3, Cheng Yu4, Qiushi Shen5, Qun Gao5.
Abstract
Anthropogenic pollution plays an important part in deteriorating the water quality of rivers all over the world, especially in urban areas of Africa where water quality monitoring is still seriously constrained by the limited test facility and capability. In this study, for evaluating the impact of urbanization on the river water quality, we investigated four typical urban rivers of Tanzania through the upper-urban-down gradient assessment approach and analyzed by water quality index (WQI) and statistical methods. The physicochemical indices monitored in these rivers revealed that the contents of those indicators of TN, TP, PO43-, NH4+, CODMn, and NO3- were accumulated significantly in the lower reaches of the cities, which indicated the life-type pollution characteristics in such urban rivers of Africa. The following main conclusions are achieved from this study. The water quality of 30% of the investigated river sections is in the medium to good status based on the subjective WQI with sensory factors included. Moreover, the sections with obvious water quality decline are mainly limited to the river segments within the urban central area, and severe pollution of water bodies is closely related to large cities, indicating an increasing pollution tendency with the quickly growing population. Therefore, to help formulate water pollution control policies in response to the rapid urban expansion in African countries, it is necessary to adopt an economical and feasible method to carry out early monitoring of surface water quality timely.Entities:
Keywords: African cities; Gradient analysis; Urban river; Urbanization; Water pollution
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35083687 PMCID: PMC9135893 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-021-18082-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int ISSN: 0944-1344 Impact factor: 5.190
Fig. 1Location of the cities and monitoring sites of Msimbazi river in Dar es Salaam, Mirongo river in Mwanza, Imeta river in Mbeya, and Ngerengere-Morogoro river in Morogoro
Gradient distribution of sampling sites along the four urban rivers
| Headwater/rural/ peri-urban | Urban | Urban downstream | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Msimbazi R | D1, D2 | D3, D4, D5, D6 | D7 |
| Mirongo R | Mw1*, Mw2, Mw3 | Mw4, Mw5, Mw6, Mw7, Mw8 | Mw9 |
| Sisimba-Imeta R | Mb1, Mb2 | Mb3, Mb4, Mb5 | Mb6, Mb7* |
| Ngerengere-Morogoro R | Mo1 | Mo2, Mo3, Mo4 | / |
*An industrial park locating at the upstream of Mw1; a sewage treatment plant discharging between Mb6 and Mb7.
Statistical summary of the physical and chemical parameters of the investigated river water during wet and dry seasons
| Wet season (March) | Dry season (August) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Parameters | Critical level | Minimum | Maximum | Mean | SD( | Minimum | Maximum | Mean | SD( |
| TN (mg/L) | < 1.0b | 0.55 | 45.1 | 7.52 | 9.65 | 0.80 | 60.10 | 8.96 | 13.92 |
| TP (mg/L) | < 0.1a | 0.02 | 2.66 | 0.44 | 0.76 | 0.02 | 2.62 | 0.51 | 0.80 |
| NO2−(mg/L) | 0.00 | 0.27 | 0.11 | 0.09 | 0.01 | 0.11 | 0.04 | 0.03 | |
| NH4+(mg/L) | < 0.3a | 0.04 | 17.98 | 1.73 | 4.01 | 0.07 | 14.58 | 2.63 | 4.18 |
| NO3−(mg/L) | < 10b | 0.00 | 7.12 | 2.33 | 2.12 | 0.07 | 5.88 | 2.72 | 1.87 |
| PO43−(μg/L) | < 70a | 0.00 | 1368 | 190 | 332 | 2.32 | 845.95 | 133.39 | 209.64 |
| F−(mg/L) | 0.06 | 12.98 | 0.87 | 2.45 | 0.13 | 11.14 | 2.05 | 2.51 | |
| Cl−(mg/L) | 0.69 | 711.51 | 167.24 | 261.15 | 0.56 | 867.10 | 169.87 | 240.99 | |
| SO42−(mg/L) | 0.44 | 376.93 | 51.52 | 91.68 | 0.81 | 150.05 | 37.43 | 43.34 | |
| DO (mg/L) | > 7a | 2.20 | 17.85 | 9.89 | 4.25 | 0.47 | 14.53 | 7.21 | 3.45 |
| ORP | − 10.00 | 355.00 | 204.1 | 98.24 | 86.00 | 497.00 | 282.63 | 115.54 | |
| TDS (mg/L) | 30 | 6270 | 819 | 1340 | 67 | 15,200 | 1062 | 2876 | |
| EC (μS/cm) | < 980d | 47.00 | 10,310 | 1467 | 2575 | 104 | 23,100 | 1643 | 4372 |
| Turbidity (NTU) | < 5/25b | 9.69 | 252.00 | 79.63 | 65.76 | 4.79 | 318.00 | 46.47 | 76.77 |
| Temperature (°C) | 18.93 | 32.31 | 25.75 | 3.70 | 12.25 | 30.04 | 23.97 | 4.33 | |
| pH | - | - | - | - | 6.38 | 12.14 | 7.48 | 1.28 | |
| < 6c | - | - | - | - | 4.91 | 282.46 | 37.72 | 83.01 | |
| Ca(mg/L) | 2.24 | 295.18 | 44.13 | - | - | - | - | - | |
| Mg(mg/L) | 0.15 | 833.41 | 42.96 | - | - | - | - | - | |
aThe limit levels recommended by US-EPA and EU, citied in Awoke et al., 2016
b,National Environmental Standards Compendium of Tanzania, TZS 789:2003-Drinking (potable) water—Specification.
cEnvironmental Quality Standards for Surface Water of China (GB3838-2002) Class III.
dUNEP 2016. A Snapshot of the World’s Water Quality: Towards a global assessment. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya. Appendix C2 Case study 5 – Vaal.
Fig. 2Comparison and statistical analysis of water quality parameter values in box plots with reference value at upper-urban-down gradient segments of the investigated four urban rivers
Fig.3Spatial variation of WQIobj and WQIsub in March wet period and August dry season
Water quality status of various sites in headwater/peri-urban, urban, and urban downstream segments for the investigated four urban rivers
| Water quality category | Level change after urban areas | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Headwater/peri-urban | Urban | Urban downstream | Dry season | Wet season | ||
| 1 | Msimbazi river | M-G | EP-M | P | -2 | -1 |
| 2 | Mirongo river | G | M-G | M-G | -1 | 0 |
| 3 | Sisimba/Imeta river | G | M-G | M-G | -1 | -1 |
| 4 | Ngerengere-Morogoro river | G-VG | M-G | / | / | / |