Results and Discussion
The physico-chemical complexes of different sampling
stations are appended in Table 1. The water quality analysis of
Bhadra river showed that Station I was unpolluted and station II
was comparatively less polluted as compared to Stations III and IV.
Stations III and IV were found to be highly polluted because of influx
of industrial effluents, sewage and domestic wastes. Station V, also
receiving sewage, had lesser pollution load compared to Stations
III and IV. The likely pollutants in the river are lignin compounds,
cellulose, chloralkali, dyes, fillers, heavy metals and other organic
compounds from pulp and paper, iron and steel industries and
domestic wastewater.
In Bhadra river, 45 species of phytoplankton have been
identified and station wise distribution has been given in Table 2.
Based on the percentage composition, the algae belonging to
Chlorophyceae (40%) were dominant fol lowed by
Bacil lariophyceae (29.49%), Cyanophyceae (15.50%),
Euglenophyceae (10.0%) and Chrysophyceae (5.01%) at Station
I. At Station II also the Chlorophyceae (36%) were dominant followed
Results and Discussion
The physico-chemical complexes of different sampling
stations are appended in Table 1. The water quality analysis of
Bhadra river showed that Station I was unpolluted and station II
was comparatively less polluted as compared to Stations III and IV.
Stations III and IV were found to be highly polluted because of influx
of industrial effluents, sewage and domestic wastes. Station V, also
receiving sewage, had lesser pollution load compared to Stations
III and IV. The likely pollutants in the river are lignin compounds,
cellulose, chloralkali, dyes, fillers, heavy metals and other organic
compounds from pulp and paper, iron and steel industries and
domestic wastewater.
In Bhadra river, 45 species of phytoplankton have been
identified and station wise distribution has been given in Table 2.
Based on the percentage composition, the algae belonging to
Chlorophyceae (40%) were dominant fol lowed by
Bacil lariophyceae (29.49%), Cyanophyceae (15.50%),
Euglenophyceae (10.0%) and Chrysophyceae (5.01%) at Station
I. At Station II also the Chlorophyceae (36%) were dominant followed
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..