Groundwater quality status and Hydrochemical processes in Arda Panchayat, Jharsuguda, Odisha

Introduction

Groundwater is one of the most vital sources of freshwater worldwide, providing water for drinking, agriculture, and domestic use, particularly in arid, semi-arid, and developing regions where surface water resources are either scarce or polluted [1,2,3,4,5] . It is estimated that, in India 70% of water is used for irrigation. Over time, the use of groundwater has increased because surface water sources are not always sufficient. At the same time, rapid urbanization and the expansion of agricultural activities have gradually worsened groundwater quality [6,7] . Groundwater is an important water resource that fulfills about 80-95% of rural drinking water needs, nearly 50% of agricultural requirements, and around 50% use for drinking purpose. Comparatively, groundwater serves as a major source of drinking water in countries such as France and China, contributing approximately 50% and 70% of their potable water needs, respectively [8,9,10] . In the locality of Jhrasuguda, groundwater is the main source of water for domestic and agriculture use. The availability of clean and adequate groundwater plays an important role in supporting these people and their future [11] . However, natural geological factors, rapid urbanization, intensive agriculture, and industrial development have gradually polluted and stressed groundwater resources, creating serious concerns about their long-term safety and reliability [12,13,14,15,16,5] . The current study therefore aimed at assessing the groundwater quality of Arda Panchayat for sustainable growth of agriculture and domestic uses.

Study Area

The study area lies between latitudes 21 0 .52´30´´N to 210.56´30´´N and longitude 84 0 .4´15´´to 84 0 .7´45´E in the Survey of India topographical map 73C/6. The study area map is shown in Fig. 1 The area contains 6 numbers of revenue villages with a population of 7201. The climate condition varies from time to time. The temperature fluctuates between 35 o C-45 o C during summer time. The study area experiences monsoon from June to September, during which the temperature remains pleasant, whereas winter temperatures fluctuate between 11°C and 35 °C. In the study area the minimum temperature in summer is 34 °C and in winter months temperature ranges from 11 °C to 35 °C. This area has no high hills and the average height ranges between 500 ft to 750 ft above the mean sea level. Crystalline and sedimentary rocks are underline in the study area and these rocks are belonging mainly to Precambrian and Permo-carboniferous age. The area comprise of various litho units of diverse composition, such as granite gneiss, sandstone, shale of lower Gondwana and metasedimentary of Precambrian age.

Materials and Methods

A total of 30 groundwater samples were collected from the study area during the post-monsoon season of 2025. Sample location map shown in Fig. 2. Table no.1 illustrate the sampling point of study area. hydrogen ion concentration (pH), total dissolved solids (TDS), and electrical conductivity (EC) were analyzed in the field following by the standard procedures of the American Public Health Association (APHA, 1992) [17] using digital pH, TDS, and EC meters. The remaining physicochemical parameters were subsequently analyzed in the laboratories of the Department of Earth Sciences, Sambalpur University. Total hardness (TH) as CaCO 3 and calcium (Ca 2+ ) were analyzed titrimetrically, using standard EDTA [18,19] . Magnesium (Mg 2+ ) was calculated by the differential of total hardness and calcium hardness. Sodium (Na + ) and potassium (K + ) were deermind using a flame photometer. Total alkalinity (TA) as CaCO₃, carbonate (CO₃²⁻), and bicarbonate (HCO₃⁻) were estimated through titration with standard HCl solution. Chloride (Cl⁻) was analyzed by argentometric titration using standard AgNO₃ solution. Sulphate (SO₄²⁻) was determined by titrimetric method, while fluoride (F⁻) concentration was measured using a spectrophotometer [18] . The ion balance error (IBE) was evaluated following APHA standard procedures, and the obtained results were found to be within the range of 5% to 10% (Fig. 3).

IBE%=(∑CATION∑ANION)/(∑CATION+∑ANION) ×100

There are different procedure for evaluating the groundwater quality for irrigation are%Na, SAR, KR, MAR, RSC etc. According to the concept proposed by Gibbs (1970) [21] , groundwater chemistry is mainly governed by factors such as precipitation, rock-water interaction, and evaporationcrystallization processes. The Piper Diagram was used to identify the hydrochemical characteristics of groundwater samples. In the Gibbs Diagram, TDS values were plotted against Na⁺/(Na⁺ + Ca²⁺) and Cl⁻/(Cl⁻ + HCO₃⁻) ratios in two separate diagrams, shown in Fig. 5a and Fig. 5b, respectively. The plot of TDS versus Na⁺/(Na⁺ + Ca²⁺) indicated that the majority of the groundwater samples fall within the "rock dominance" field. Similarly, the plot of TDS against Cl⁻/(Cl⁻ + HCO₃⁻) also revealed that most of the samples are controlled by rock dominance processes.

Results and Discussion

The groundwater in the research area has a mean pH of 7.64 and ranges from 6.58 to 8.42. Most of the natural water have pH value varying from 6.5 to 8.0, but rarely have 5.5. Water having pH value 7.0 to 7.3 are normally regarding as neutral [20] . It implies that the ground water of the study area is neutral to slightly alkaline. In normal water, alkalinity is generally less than 10 mg/l but it may increase up to 250 mg/l in high sodium water. The total alkalinity (TA) of ground water of the study area in between 35 to 270 mg/l. The hardness (TH)

of ground water of the study area ranges from 25 to 215 mg/l and the average value is 119 mg/l. The specific conductance of ground water of the study area varies from 96.9 to 734 micro mho/cm with an average of 403.2 micromho/cm (Table - 2). A good relationship between chloride and specific conductance is a common feature in ground water such relationship is observed in the present study, beside this specific conductance has positive relationship with total hardness, alkalinity, sodium and magnesium (Fig. 4) indicate that the conductivity is due to salts of sodium, potassium and magnesium. TDS of ground water sample can be measured from specific conductance of water sample or from actual measurement of reside left after evaporation of filtered water sample or from addition of all the ions or from the alkalinity by multiplying a factor 0.64 when carbonates and bicarbonates are absent or directly by electro potential method. The TDS in the study area varies from 65 to 470 with an average of 267.5. Among the cations Ca 2+ , Mg 2+ , Na + and K + ions range from 4 to 52 mg/l, 0.01 to 42.52 mg/l, 8.4 and 68 mg/l and 0.6 to 56 mg/l with a mean of 27.5, 11.7, 29.8, and 9 mg/l respectively. Dissolved anions, CO 3 2-, HCO 3 -, Cl - , SO 4 2-, and F -lie between 0 to 18, 42.7 to 260, 7.1 to 198, 0.05 to 82 mg/l and 0 to 0.7 mg/l with a mean of 1.2, 126.8, 45.6, 17.3 mg/l and 0.3 mg/l respectively.

Mechanisms Controlling Groundwater Chemistry

Gibbs diagrams, which plot the ratios of Na⁺/(Na⁺ + Ca²⁺) and Cl⁻/(Cl⁻ + HCO₃⁻) against TDS, are commonly used to identify the major mechanisms controlling groundwater chemistry, including precipitation dominance, rock dominance, and evaporation dominance [21.18] . The sample points are plotted in Gibbs's diagrams (Fig. 5a) and (Fig. 5b).

It is found that maximum of the samples falls within the region of "Rock dominance" and only two samples are plotted in the "precipitation dominance". The hydrogeochemical facies of the groundwater has been determined using Piper's trilinear classification. This diagram is considered one of the most important graphical methods for studying groundwater quality [22] . It interprets the groundwater's chemical nature in the study area. In this diagram, all the major ions are expressed in epm value. Piper trilinear diagram consists of two triangular sections and one central diamond-shaped section. The diamond-shaped portion is further divided into six distinct fields [23,24] . In the study area, most of the groundwater samples fall within the calcium-bicarbonate (Ca²⁺-HCO₃⁻) facies, with a few samples showing mixed water type characteristics, while only one sample belongs to the Na⁺-Cl⁻ type. The diagram further indicates that alkaline earth elements (Ca²⁺ and Mg²⁺) dominate over alkali metals (Na⁺ and K⁺), and weak acidic anions (HCO₃⁻) are more abundant than strong acidic anions (Cl⁻ and SO₄²⁻). (Fig. 6).

Groundwater Quality for Drinking

Groundwater of the study area does not passes any smell or colour, but various in tastes is making from place to place. Chemical quality standards have been established for suitability of water for domestic purposes by various organizations like BIS, WHO, USPHS, ICMR, ISI etc. In the present study BIS, 2012 standards have been adopted.

Comparison of result of chemical analysis with that of BIS, 2012 standard for drinking water reveals that more groundwater sample from the study area are fit for drinking with only few exceptions. Most groundwater samples in the study area exhibited pH values that fall within the acceptable limits, while all the groundwater samples come under allowable limit. The TDS of the groundwater in most of the cases are within the acceptable limit. Hardness of the groundwater has no adverse effect on health; however, some evidences have been given to indicate its role in the heart daises. It is found that groundwater sample from this area can be classified as moderately soft. The total alkalinity of the sample Id. T18, T20, T21 are beyond acceptable (Table -3). limit. The calcium content is within the acceptable limit except few but all are within the maximum allowable limit. The bicarbonate content is well except the samples Id. 18 and 21 (Table -3). All groundwater samples from the study area exhibited chloride, fluoride and sulphate levels within the acceptable limit. The graphical representation of all parameters are shown in Fig. 7a to 7j

Quality of Groundwater for Irrigation 3.3.1. Sodium adsorption ratio (SAR)

Electrical conductivity and sodium concentration play a significant role in determining the suitability of groundwater for agriculture purpose. High salt concentration in irrigation water increases the osmotic pressure of the soil solution [25] , which reduces the ability of plant roots to absorb water through osmosis. As a result, water uptake by plants decreases, adversely affecting plant growth. The osmotic pressure is directly related to the salinity hazard or total dissolved salt content in irrigation water. Apart from directly influencing plant growth, dissolved salts also alter soil properties such as structure, permeability, and aeration, thereby indirectly affecting crop productivity. Based on the total dissolved soluble salts, irrigation water is divided into four salinity classes: low salinity (C1), medium salinity (C2), high salinity (C3), and very high salinity (C4). These classes are determined according to electrical conductivity (EC) values, where EC less than 250 µS/cm indicates C1, 250-750 µS/cm represents C2, 750-2250 µS/cm corresponds to C3, and values exceeding 2250 µS/cm fall under C4. [26,18] (Fig. 8). Water with high EC values contributes to the development of saline soils. Another important parameter used to evaluate irrigation water quality is sodium hazard, commonly expressed as the Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR). SAR is calculated using ionic concentrations expressed in milliequivalents per litre (meq/l), as represented by the following equation.

Irrigation water containing high concentrations of sodium, potassium, calcium, and magnesium salts is detrimental to plants [27] . The sodium content in irrigation water is commonly expressed as percentage sodium (%Na) [28] , which can be calculated using the following formula. Where all ionic concentrations are expressed in milliequivalents per liter (meq/l). The percentage sodium (%Na) values in the study area range from 20.89 to 61.53 meq/l. Wilcox introduced a method for classifying irrigation water on the basis of%Na with respect to electrical conductivity. The plotting of parameter for well water of the study area is shown in the Fig. 9. Table 3 presents the classification of groundwater according to the Wilcox classification system. It is found that majority of the sample of the study area fall under good to permissible class. Only one sample is fall under the doubtful (Fig. 9).

Magnesium adsorption ratio (MAR)

The magnesium adsorption ratio (MAR) is expressed by the given formula. It represents the ratio of magnesium ions to the combined concentration of calcium and magnesium ions [29, 18] .

MAR = 𝑀𝑔 2+

Where all ionic concentrations are expressed in milliequivalents per liter (meq/l). Elevated magnesium concentration in irrigation water has harmful effects on soil quality because it causes the soil to become more alkaline, which reduces crop yield [29,30] . If the MAR value is below 50%, the water is considered suitable for irrigation purposes [31] . In this study, 24 water samples are found to fit for irrigation due to the determined value of MAR being less than 50 and 6 samples are unsuitable (Table-4).

Permeabilty index (PI)

Irrigation water also depends on the permeability of the soil. Doneen (1964) developed a criterion to assess the suitability of water for irrigation based on the permeability index which is given by the equation -

All the equations are expressed in meq/l. Irrigation water is classified into three classes by Doneen [32] . Class I is good for irrigation where PI is more than 75, class II is moderate where the PI value is between 75 to 25, class III is poor and here PI value is less than 25. In the study area the PI values range from 44.91 to 142.27. During this period, 16 samples are in good and only 4 samples are in moderate category (Fig. 10).

Conclusion

The quality of groundwater that is physical, chemical and biological characters of the groundwater decides its suitability or unsuitability for a particular use that is domestic and irrigation. Quality aspect of groundwater for utilization purposes such as agriculture and domestic purposes are thoroughly discussed by processing the chemical data.

According to drinking water standards, the magnesium of groundwater is beyond desirable limit in the village of Gambharidihi (T-10), bicarbonate value is exceed there desirable limit in Dhutra and Arda (T-18, 21) and beyond the desirable limit of total total alkalinity in the village of Dhutra and Arda (T-18, 20, 21) in the study area. Except for a few cases, the percentage sodium (%Na) of samples remained within the permissible range. According to the SAR classification, all groundwater samples are found to be suitable for irrigation and belong to the excellent to good class. According to MAR, twenty four sample are suitable and six are unsuitable and PI have sixteen samples are good and fourteen are moderate for irrigation. Geochemical facies reveal that Ca 2+ -HCO₃ -and mixed dominant type, controlled by lithological interaction mixed carbonate-silicate weathering and reverse ion exchange.

References

1. Manjusree TM, Joseph S, Thomas J. Hydrogeochemistry and groundwater quality in the coastal sandy clay aquifers of Alappuzha district, Kerala. Journal of the Geological Society of India. 2009;74(4):459-468.
2. Alao JO, Bello AY, Lawal HA, Abdullahi D. Assessment of groundwater challenge and the sustainable management strategies. Results in Earth Sciences. 2024;2:100049. doi:10.1016/j.rines.2024.100049.
3. Masmoudi T, Benakcha M, Abdennour MA, Bouzekri A, Amrane A, Alcala FJ. Groundwater quality evaluation for drinking and agricultural purposes: A case study in semi-arid region (Zab El-Gharbi, SE-Algeria). Desalination and Water Treatment. 2024;319:100476.
4. Darwish MH, Mohamed HA, Elsheikh AE, Tantawy AAA, Hassan S. Groundwater evaluation for different uses in arid and desert regions, El-Kharga Oasis, Egypt. Environmental Research Communications. 2026.
5. Gbadebo AM, Egbedara TA, Gbadebo OO, Dimowo BO. Geochemical evaluation of groundwater quality in Yewa for drinking and irrigation purposes. 2026.
6. Jamshidzadeh Z, Barzi MT. Groundwater quality assessment using the Potability Water Quality Index (PWQI): A case in the Kashan Plain, Central Iran. Environmental Earth Sciences. 2018;77(3):59. doi:10.1007/s12665-018-7237-5.
7. Venugopal T, Giridharan L, Jayaprakash M, Periakali P. Environmental impact assessment and seasonal variation study of the groundwater in the vicinity of River Adyar, Chennai, India. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 2008;149:81-97. doi:10.1007/s10661-0080185-x.
8. Adimalla N, Qian H. Groundwater quality evaluation using Water Quality Index (WQI) for drinking purposes and human health risk (HHR) assessment in an agricultural region of Nanganur, South India. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 2019;176:153-161. doi:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.03.066.
9. Wang Y, Jiao JJ. Origin of groundwater salinity and hydrogeochemical processes in the confined Quaternary aquifer of the Pearl River Delta, China. Journal of Hydrology. 2012;438:112-124. doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2012.03.008.
10. Radhakrishnan E, Ramasamy P, Vellaisamy V, Natesan D, Senapathi V, Karthikeyan S. Seasonal changes and hydrogeochemical factors influencing groundwater quality in Nannilam, Thiruvarur District of Tamil Nadu, India. Geofluids. 2026;2026(1):9936907.
11. Irene J, Irene BN, Daniels C. Not a drop to drink: Addressing Nigeria's deepening freshwater crisis. Water. 2025;17(12):1731. doi:10.3390/w17121731.
12. Ocheri M, Odoma L, Umar N. Groundwater quality in Nigerian urban areas: A review. Global Journal of Science and Frontier Research. 2014;14(3):1-9.
13. Nwinyi OC, Uyi O, Awosanya EJ, Oyeyemi IT, Ugbenyen AM, Muhammad A, Alabi OA, Ekwunife OI, Adetunji CO, Omoruyi IM. Review of drinking water quality in Nigeria: Towards attaining Sustainable Development Goal Six. Annals of Science and Technology. 2020;5(2):58-77.
14. Li P, Karunanidhi D, Subramani T, Srinivasamoorthy K. Sources and consequences of groundwater contamination. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. 2021;80(1):1-10. doi:10.1007/s00244-020-00805-z.
15. Etuk M, Re V, Viaroli S, Raco B, Igwe O. Assessing groundwater quality and solute sources in highly anthropized areas: The case of Abuja Federal Capital Territory, Nigeria. Groundwater for Sustainable Development. 2025;29:101425.
16. American Public Health Association (APHA). Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. Washington (DC): American Public Health Association; 1992.
17. Subba Rao N. Seasonal variation of groundwater quality in a part of Guntur District, Andhra Pradesh, India. Environmental Geology. 2006;49(3):413-429.
18. Senapati S, Mohanta N, Bakhara B, Parida S. Hydrochemical analysis and evaluation of the suitability of groundwater for irrigation purposes in Khariar blocks of Nuapada district, Odisha, India. International Journal of Geography, Geology and Environment. 2025;7(10):46-54.
19. Das AK, Mahanta N. Evaluation of pre-monsoon groundwater quality of Pallahara Block, Angul District, Odisha, India. 2019;1(69.3):15-04.
20. Gibbs RJ. Mechanisms controlling world water chemistry. Science. 1970;170:1088-1090.
21. Al-Ahmadi ME. Hydrochemical characterization of groundwater in Wadi Sayyah, Western Saudi Arabia. Applied Water Science. 2013;3:721-732.
22. Sajil Kumar PJ. Interpretation of groundwater chemistry using Piper and Chadha's diagrams: A comparative study from Perambalur Taluk. Elixir Geoscience. 2013;54:12208-12211.
23. Bakhara B, Mahanta N, Sahoo HK. Interpretation of groundwater chemistry using Piper and Chadha's diagrams: A comparative study from Balangir and Puintala blocks of Balangir district, Odisha, India. JETIR. 2019;6:35-38.
24. Thorne DW, Peterson HB. Irrigated soils. London: Constable and Company Limited; 1954.
25. Devi RL, Tali JA, Rafiqi FA, Rashid S, Malla FA, Kavitha G, Khurshid SZ. Hydrochemical analysis of surface water quality in South Chennai lakes: Enhancing water use efficiency and sustainability for irrigation and pollution management. In: Water Use Efficiency, Sustainability and the Circular Economy. 2025. p. 345362.
26. Alam M, Rais S, Aslam M. Hydrochemical investigation and quality assessment of groundwater in rural areas of Delhi, India. Environmental Earth Sciences. 2012;66(1):97-110.
27. Wilcox LV. The quality of water for irrigation use. Washington (DC): US Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin; 1948.
28. Szabolcs I, Darab C. The influence of irrigation water of high sodium carbonate content on soils. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Congress of ISSS. 1964. p. 803812.
29. Kaur P, Zeh A, Chaudhari N, Eliyas N. Unravelling the record of Archaean crustal evolution of the Bundelkhand Craton, northern India using U-Pb zircon and monazite ages, Lu-Hf isotope systematics, and whole-rock geochemistry of granitoids. Precambrian Research. 2016;281:384-413.
30. Kumar D, Ahmed S, Krishnamurthy NS, Dewandel B. Reducing ambiguities in vertical electrical sounding interpretations: A geostatistical application. Journal of Applied Geophysics. 2007;62(1):16-32.
31. Brindha K, Elango L. Geochemistry of fluoride-rich groundwater in a weathered granitic rock region, Southern India. Water Quality, Exposure and Health. 2013;5(3):127-138.
32. Doneen LD. Notes on water quality in agriculture. Water Science and Engineering Paper 4001. California: Department of Water Science and Engineering, University of California; 1964.