Basrah Journal of Veterinary Research,Vol.17, No.3,2018
Proceeding of 6th International Scientific Conference,College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Basrah,Iraq
721
GROUNDWATER QUALITY FOR DRINKING BY GOLD-STANDARD AT
HIGH-ALTITUDE AREA, TAIF, KSA "VISION 2030 G"
*Sherifa Mostafa M. Sabra , **Afaf Bushara M. Ismail
*Microbiology Branch, Department of Biology , College of Science , university of Taif , KSA
*Serology Unit and Bacterial Strain Bank, Animal Health Resource. Institute [AHRI], [ARC],Giza,
Egypt
**Analytical Chemistry Specialty, Department of Medical Laboratory, College of Applied Medical
Science, University of Taif , KSA
Department of Chemistry , College of Science , University of Al-Dalanj , Sudan
Keywords: Groundwater (GW), gold-standard (GS), Electric conductivity (TDS).
Corresponding Author:[email protected]
ABSTRACT
This paper was for Groundwater (GW) quality for drinking by gold-standard (GS) at
high-altitude (HA) area, Taif, KSA "VISION 2030 G", GW samples contained turbidity,
resulted high in samples (6 and 10); (0.03 and 0.018). Public health (PH) were had declined
within GS. Electric conductivity (EC) were within the optimum value, total dissolved salts
(TDS) were had lowest value. Total hardness (TH) were of more than (300–500) mg L−1,
Chloride (Cl−) ranged from (18-1759) mg L−1 with 30% and 70% samples. Sulfate (SO4
2−)
ranged from (33-2245) mg L−1 with 90% falling above GS, Nitrates (NO3
−) ranged from (0–
60) mg L−1 with 80% falling below GS. Bacterial types revealed both Gram-positive and
negative were not in samples (1, 2, 6 and 7), both Gram-positive and negative were present
in samples (5, 8 and 9). The arrangement of colony count were in samples (9, 1, 8, 6, 7 and
5), that was ranged the colony from (550-15) / mL. The common bacteria were isolated
included Staphylococcus Species (Staph. Spp.), Micrococcus Spp, Escherichia coli (E. coli)
and Klebsiella Spp. The conclusion were discharged from the results, that did not agree with
GS to the community use. The most examined GW samples for drinking water (DW) did not
agree with GS, bacterial quality did not accepted from GS, will affect PH. The
recommendation were directed to "MOH", to follow up GW for DW through GS at HA
area, so could using for human as DW without any harm and did'not affect PH.
Basrah Journal of Veterinary Research,Vol.17, No.3,2018
Proceeding of 6th International Scientific Conference,College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Basrah,Iraq
722
INTRODUCTION
GW resulted in wide variation TDS, had pH falling within GS [1], taste and odour had (2-3) as
TON (0.11-0.79 NTU), turbidity recorded in E-Makkah, was High pH 8.44, EC (7,735.36 ds/m) in
N-Makkah, low pH 6.62 in NW-Makkah and low EC 115.61ds/m in E-Makkah [2]. Turbidity was
0.6 NTU within 5 NTU, Na value for total alkalinity [3]. The total nitrogen and organic carbon
ranged (15.21-61.33) mg/l and (10.63-70.60) mg/l, which exceeded GS [3]. At Al-khamis, Coliform
count was 100%, faecal Coliforms 87.9% and Strept. Spp 57.6% [4]. In Hail, Coliform bacteria
were 20% [1], in Makkah, E. coli [2], Acinetobacter (1.5- 48%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa
(9.55×10−4) [5].
The aim of this paper was for GW quality for drinking by GS at HA area, Taif, KSA "VISION
2030 G", the DW considered as one of the human priorities and so this paper was made for clearfy
GW using at HA area "Taif" as perfect DW for human by compared its physical, chemical and
bcacterial quality with GS for ideal DW at HA area to protect PH.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
-Location map: GW sources at HA area "Taif" (map 1) [6].
-Collection samples: That were collected in sterile containers and were sent to Lab. [7].
Map 1: The location of GW samples collected from HA area "Taif"
-Analysis methods:
Physical and Chemical: The turbidity, pH and electrical conductivity (EC) of GW samples were
measured using portable pH meter and electrical conductivity meter. TH, Calcium Ca2+ and
Basrah Journal of Veterinary Research,Vol.17, No.3,2018
Proceeding of 6th International Scientific Conference,College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Basrah,Iraq
723
Magnesium (Mg2+), Chlorides Cl− Nitrate (NO-1) and sulfate (SO-2 4) were analyzed [8-9].
Magnesium were estimated by EDTA volumetric titrations. Chloride ion concentration was
determined by volumetric titrations using AgNO3. Sulfate was measured using turbidity meter. EC
was used to obtain the total dissolved solids (TDS) concentration in water by dividing EC values
expressed in μS/cm by 1.56. The total hardness (TH, mg/L CaCO3) of water samples was
determined by using the following equation: TH = 2.5Ca2+ + 4.1Mg2+ [8-10].
Bacterial: GW sample was diluted with 1:10 by distaled water, 100 ml was filtered by (LabTech,
Korea) with fresh cellulose nitrate filter (Sartorius, Germany, with pore size 0.45 μm). The
partitions were poured through filter trap, then two cellulose nitrate filter was taken out carefully by
sterile forceps and placed on the Chromo-agar for isolation and identification, that were incubated
for 48 hrs at 37ºC, then confirmed by Micro-scan [11].
-Data analysis: Simple Excel Methods were analyzed the results [12].
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 1: Prevalence of physical characters
Samples *K *No. Turbidity *pH *EC *TDS
*K1 0.007 6.5 2.7 144
*K2 0.001 6.8 2.8 122
*K5 0.008 5.7 3.6 144
*K6 0.040 5.7 4.0 145
*K7 0.015 6.0 3.5 137
*K8 0.006 5.8 3.8 142
*K9 0.011 5.7 3.7 139
*K *No.: Key Number, *pH: Potential of Hydrogen, *EC: Electric
Conductivity, *TDS: Total Dissolved Salts
Table 1 showed prevalence of physical characters, turbidity, GW samples contained turbidity,
were read high in (6 and 10); (0.03 and 0.018) [1-3]. The pH were had falling within GS [1-3]. EC
all GW samples were within the optimum value [1-3, 8-10]. TDS were had lowest value [1-3].
Table 2: Prevalence of chemical quality
Parameters Range SASO
standards
Percent
%
G.C.C.S.
standards
Percent
%
WHO
Standards
Percent
%
*TH 55-2793 500 30% 500 30% *NS 00%
*Cl- 18-1759 600 30% 400 30% 250 30%
*NO-
3 0-60 <45 20% <45 20% 50 20%
*SO-2
4 400 400 10% 250 10% 250 10%
*TH: Total hardness, *CL-: Chloride, *NO3-: Nitrates, *SO-2
4: Sulfate
Table 2 showed prevalence of chemical quality, TH of more than (300–500) mg L−1
objectionable scale in heating vessels and pipes [8-10]. Cl− ranged (18-1759) mg L−1 with 30% [8-
10] and 70% samples [1-3, 8-10]. SO4
2− ranged (33-2245) mg L−1 with 90% falling above GS [8-
10] NO3
− ranged (0–60) mg L−1 with 80% falling below GS [1-3, 8-10].
Basrah Journal of Veterinary Research,Vol.17, No.3,2018
Proceeding of 6th International Scientific Conference,College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Basrah,Iraq
724
Table 3: Prevalence of bacterial quality
Item Bacterial growth
Samples
*K *No.
Growth
rate
Colony
type
Gram stain
Positive Negative
*K1 + 2 + -
*K2 - 0 - -
*K5 + 2 + +
*K6 + 2 + -
*K7 + 2 + -
*K8 + 2 + +
*K9 + 2 + +
*K *No.: Key Number
Table 3 showed prevalence of bacterial quality by bacterial growth, both Gram-positive and
negative were not in samples (1, 2, 6 and 7), presence of both Gram-positive and negative in
samples (5, 8 and 9) [1-2, 4-5].
Table 4 : Prevalence of bacterial quality by colony count and *CFU/mL
Item Bacterial growth
Samples
* K *No.
Colony count *CFU/mL
Gram stain
Positive Negative Positive Negative
*K1 280 00 28000 00
*K2 00 00 00 00
*K5 13 10 1300 1000
*K6 30 00 3000 00
*K7 29 00 2900 00
*K8 50 1 5000 100
*K9 250 300 25000 30000
*CFU/mL: Colony Forming Unite/mL, *K *No.: Key Number
Table 4 showed prevalence of bacterial quality by bacterial CFU / mL, the arrangement of
colony count were in GW samples (9, 1, 8, 6, 7 and 5), that was ranged colony from (550-15) / mL
[1-2, 4-5]. The common bacteria were isolated (Staph. Spp., Micrococcus Spp, E. coli and
Klebsiella Spp) [1-2, 4-5]. The result of bacteria were not agreed with GS to community [8-10].
CONCLUSIONS
The most examined GW samples for use as DW revealed the chemical quality did not agree with
GS, also bacterial quality did not agreed with GS and did not accepted from GS to help PH.
RECOMMENDATION
"MOH" must follow up GW for use as DW through GS at HA area, so could using for human
drinking without any harm and protect PH.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks were sent to (Civil Eng. Adel Kelaiker Kody, Miss. Jawaher H. Al-Zaidi, Sciences
College, Taif University, KSA and all persons), who had acted in this work.
Basrah Journal of Veterinary Research,Vol.17, No.3,2018
Proceeding of 6th International Scientific Conference,College of Veterinary Medicine
University of Basrah,Iraq
725
REFERENCES
1. Ahmad, T., 2009. Evaluation of well water quality in Hael Region Central of Saudi Arabia.
Thirteenth International Water Technology Conference, (IWTC), 13, 2009, Hurghada, Egypt,
pp.:1121-1132.
2. Anas, S., Saleh, A., Hussain, A., Khaled, M. and Mohammed, A., 2014. Physical and
biological quality of ground water in Makkah area. Int. J. Innovative Res. in Sci. Engineering
and Techno., 3(1):8819-8822.
3. Hala, M., 2014. Assessment of ground water quality during dry season in Jazan city southwest
of Saudi Arabia. Int. J. Chem. Tech. Res., 6(1):628-635.
4. Eed, A., 2008. Bacteriological assessment of urban water sources in Khamis Mushait
Governorate, southwestern Saudi Arabia. Int. J. Health Geographics, 8(16):1-8.
5. Dhafer, A., Nada, A., Kenda, T. and Pei-Ying, H., 2015. Assessing the groundwater quality at
a Saudi Arabian agricultural site and the occurrence of opportunistic pathogens on irrigated food
produce. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 12:12391-12411.
6. http://www.parc.gov.pk/index.php/en/2013-12-12-10-22-55.2018
7. https://us.vwr.com/store/product/3278087/sample-containers.2018
8. APHA,1999. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 20th edn.
American Public Health Association, Washington DC.
9. http://www.who.int/whopes/quality/en/MethodM26.pdf.2018
10. Todd D.K,1980. Groundwater hydrology, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York
11. Saati, A. and Faidah, H., 2013. Environmental prevalence of pathogens in different drinking
water resources in Makkah city (Kingdom of Saudi Arabia), Current World Environment, 8(1),
37-53.
12. http://www.cal.org/twi/EvalToolkit/appendix/toolkit13_sec9.pdf.2018
