Groundwater is a main resource of drinking water in several parts of India. Its degradation poses a significant risk to water availability and human health, highlighting the importance of regularly evaluating groundwater quality in these regions. Thus, the significant aim of this study is to examine and map groundwater quality and its vulnerability for drinking purposes using the EWQI, PIG, and GOD methods. The quality of groundwater in the study area is found to be generally alkaline in nature. More than 20% of samples exceeded the desirable limit of TH. Correlations of major ions revealed that groundwater samples were distributed in the areas of silicate weathering and dolomite dissolution. The EWQI values vary from 33.74 to 62.22, with an average value of 41.54. The spatial distribution diagrams of hydrochemical parameters and EWQI represent poor water quality in southern and southern-western areas. The PIG ranged from 0.49 to 0.84, with an average value of 0.59. Moreover, the GOD method indicates that the southern part of the region has moderate vulnerability and demonstrates that groundwater level is the significant factor for the calculation of groundwater vulnerability.

  • To analyze the groundwater quality for drinking purposes in Kurukshetra district of Haryana (India).

  • Scatter plots with permissible limits and spatial distribution maps were plotted.

  • Groundwater quality is estimated by the EWQI method.

  • The PIG method was compared to determine overall groundwater quality.

  • GOD method is a significant factor for the calculation of groundwater vulnerability.

Rapid population growth, industrialization, and better living standards have resulted in ever-increasing demands for groundwater in India. The groundwater covers approximately one-third of the Earth's area. It is a significant water resource in arid and semiarid areas, and many sources of pollution contaminate its quality, which may be natural and anthropogenic activities (Abtahi et al. 2015; Grimmeisen et al. 2017; Gao et al. 2020; Gani et al. 2023a; Raheja et al. 2024a).

In the recent past, numerous studies have estimated groundwater quality, including factors affecting water quality and anthropogenic sources of contamination, spread over many parts of India (Ram et al. 2021; Khan et al. 2022; Mahammad et al. 2022). Recently, water quality indices (WQIs) have been proposed and used to understand groundwater quality status around the globe. The application of entropy theory to assess water quality has proven to be more accurate than other indexing methods (Li et al. 2016; Kumar et al. 2022; Raheja et al. 2022a; Gani et al. 2023b, 2024a; Sharma et al. 2024). Zhang et al. (2021a) calculated the quality criteria for groundwater using the integrated-weight water quality index (IWQI) in the Jiaokou district, China and observed the effect of anthropogenic activities on groundwater quality. Salem et al. (2023) assess groundwater quality for irrigation in the Zeroud Basin, Kairouan Plain, Tunisia using extensive physicochemical examinations revealing the dominance of Na+, Ca2+, Mg2+, , , and Cl ions. Raheja et al. (2022a) studied groundwater quality by using the entropy water quality index (EWQI) and WQI using data from various sites in Haryana (India) and found that the EWQI-based water quality prediction techniques work well in studying the suitability of groundwater for drinking. Shyam et al. (2022) evaluate the groundwater quality in Mewat district of Haryana for drinking and irrigation uses. They found that the majority of groundwater in the study region presents a high risk of salinization. Another study by Krishan et al. (2022) assessed the groundwater salinity status in the southwest zone of Punjab, India, and recommended salinity in groundwater arises from the combination of evaporation enrichment and salt dissolution. Matta et al. (2022) studied the Ganga River's water quality using the WQI and an overall index of pollution (OIP). Hosseini-Moghari et al. (2015) studied the groundwater quality in Saveh Plain, Iran. Approximately 35% of groundwater sample wells were not suitable for drinking purposes in their study. Adimalla & Venkatayogi (2018) have estimated groundwater quality in Telangana state, India, and concluded from the work that anthropogenic activities and geochemical processes usually control groundwater quality. These earlier studies specified that groundwater quality variation depends on various factors such as anthropogenic activities, geochemical factors, and dissolution processes (Maurya et al. 2023; Gani et al. 2024b; Hussain et al. 2024; Raheja et al. 2024b, 2024c). Another study conducted by Sharma et al. (2021), measured drinking water quality by using heavy metals assessments. Maurya et al. (2021) assessed the WQI of the upper Ganges River near Haridwar, Uttarakhand, correlating it with changing land use to infer its logical implications. Zhang et al. (2021b) calculated the quality criteria for groundwater using the IWQI in the Jiaokou district, China, and observed the effect of anthropogenic activities on groundwater quality. They found that the EWQI-based water quality prediction techniques work well in studying the suitability of groundwater for drinking purposes. Maurya et al. (2021) studied the Ganga River's water quality using WQI whereas Subba Rao (2012) assessed groundwater quality by estimating the pollution index of groundwater (PIG) of the Varaha River Basin in (Andhra Pradesh) India. Hamlat et al. (2017) investigated the use of 10 different WQIs in the Tafna basin and reported that the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME) WQI and British Columbia (BC) WQI were the suitable indices. Narsimha & Sudarshan (2018) have estimated groundwater quality in Telangana state, India, and concluded that anthropogenic activities and geochemical processes usually control groundwater quality. However, while evaluating the comprehensive chemical quality of groundwater, Krishan et al. (2023) employed an integrated approach to studying groundwater quality for drinking through hydrochemistry and WQI in Mewat district, northern India. These earlier studies specified that groundwater quality variation depends on several factors such as anthropogenic activities, geochemical factors, and dissolution processes.

Many researchers have also applied the geographic information system (GIS)-based spatial interpolation technique to monitor groundwater quality by using the inverse distance weighted (IDW) interpolation. Yadav et al. (2018) assess the groundwater quality for drinking purposes in Agra City, India by using a geo-informatic approach. Maurya et al. (2023) evaluate groundwater quality and its suitability for drinking and irrigation, analyzing major ions, and heavy metals, and employing GIS for spatial mapping in Jaunpur district, Uttar Pradesh, India. Results indicate elevated levels of EC, TDS, and TH, suggesting unsuitability for drinking and irrigation. GIS is concluded to be a cost-effective and time-efficient technique for transforming big data sets to create different spatial distribution maps (Harichandan et al. 2021; Masood et al. 2022; Raheja et al. 2022b, 2024d).

The vulnerability of groundwater refers to the ease with which contaminants can reach a specific position in the groundwater system after they are introduced at a different location above the uppermost aquifer (Foster et al. 2002). The vulnerability of groundwater is influenced by a variety of factors, including the characteristics of the aquifer, the soil and rock types that cover the aquifer, the depth and thickness of the soil and rock layers, the topography of the land surface, and the types and amounts of contaminants that are introduced into the system. So, it is important to understand the groundwater vulnerability to protect this valued resource from contamination and ensure its long-term sustainability. There are many techniques for determining a groundwater vulnerability, but the overlay and index methods are among the most efficient and straightforward (Akinlalu et al. 2021; Pathak et al. 2021; Patel et al. 2023). There are numerous overlay and index methods, but the most often used and well-known ones include DRASTIC (Aller & Thornhill 1987), GOD (Foster 1987), AVI (Van Stempvoort et al. 1993), and PI (Goldscheider et al. 2000). The GOD method performs effectively in locations where groundwater quality is somewhat too good and where groundwater pollution is more strongly influenced by the depth of the water table and the aquifer.

Groundwater is a dependable source for safe drinking purposes and is more widely used than other water sources. Recently studied that half the urban area population of India depends on groundwater only. A literature review has shown that very limited work has been carried out in the Kurukshetra district, where mainly groundwater is used for drinking purposes. Further, the study area is already in the dark zone, and the water table has been falling at an alarming rate for the last many years (CGWB 2013). Because of the above reasons, Kurukshetra district, Haryana state in India, has been selected as a study area to assess groundwater quality and its vulnerability. The main objectives of this study are (1) to calculate the hydrochemical properties of the groundwater (2) to study the hydrochemistry of ions and generate a spatial distribution map using ArcGIS (3) to determine the groundwater quality for drinking purposes by using the EWQI and PIG (4) to study the groundwater vulnerability by using GOD (groundwater occurrence and depth) method.

Study area and description

This study was carried out in the Kurukshetra district, situated in the northeast zone of Haryana state (India) (Figure 1). The geographical coordinates of Kurukshetra are laying between 29°53′00″–30°15′02″ N latitude and 76°26′27″–77°07′57″ E longitude and cover an area of 1,530 km2 with an annual rainfall of about 582 mm. The study area has a dry, hot summer, and semiarid monsoon climate and an average temperature of 23.9 °C. The average elevation of the study is between 274 and 241 m above mean sea level (CGWB 2019). The Kurukshetra district lies between two river basins, i.e., Upper Yamuna Basin and Upper Ghaggar Basin. Most area of the Kurukshetra district falls in the Upper Ghaggar Basin. The entire study area is covered by tropical arid brown soil. The groundwater level ranges from 21.80 to 34.41 m bgl during the post-monsoon season and 20.18–32.64 m bgl (below ground level) in the pre-monsoon season (CGWB 2013). Groundwater is assumed as a significant source of the drinking water supply of the district in rural and urban areas. Therefore, an evaluation of the groundwater quality and its vulnerability of the Kurukshetra district is needed.
Figure 1

Map of Kurukshetra district in Haryana state (India) with groundwater locations.

Figure 1

Map of Kurukshetra district in Haryana state (India) with groundwater locations.

Close modal

Sample collection and analysis

Groundwater sampling in Kurukshetra district, Haryana, was collected during February 2021 from where 19 samples were taken from the tube wells. These samples were collected in 1-L High Density Polyethylene (HDPE) bottles, which were rinsed three to five times with groundwater at the sampling site to avoid any outside impurities. Samples of groundwater were collected only after allowing of pumping the water for about 5–10 min from each tube well and these samples were stored in an icebox at 4 °C before doing analysis. The sample analyses in the laboratory were carried out as per the American Public Health Association (APHA 2012). The pH, EC, and TDS were measured at each sampling site. Volumetric titration with Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) was used to measure the Ca2+ and Mg2+ ions. Apparatuses, namely flame photometer, and spectrophotometer were used to determine the concentration of Na+, K+, , , and F ions. Volumetric titration with H2SO4 solution was carried out to determine the concentration.

Entropy water quality index

EWQI is calculated to estimate groundwater quality for safe drinking (Amiri et al. 2014; Raheja et al. 2022a). The steps involved in the calculation of EWQI are as given in Table 1.

Table 1

EWQI steps used

Step usedFormula
Normalization of initial matrix and standard matrix 

 
Ratio of the index value   
Information entropy   
Entropy weight   
Quality rating scale   
Finally,   
Step usedFormula
Normalization of initial matrix and standard matrix 

 
Ratio of the index value   
Information entropy   
Entropy weight   
Quality rating scale   
Finally,   

Kumar & Augustine (2022) described the EWQI into five categories as listed in Table 1. If the value of EWQI is less than 50, then excellent groundwater quality. If EWQI values lie between 50 and 100, then good. If EWQI values lie between 100 and 200, then poor groundwater quality. If EWQI values lie between 200 and 300, then very poor, and if the value of EWQI > 300, groundwater is not useful for drinking.

Pollution Index of Groundwater

The PIG has been used to evaluate groundwater quality for drinking purposes (Subba Rao 2012). These five steps are explained in the following paragraphs:

Step 1, Calculation of relative weight (RW). The RW is varied from 1 to 5 and assigned to each chemical parameter, depending upon the level of importance of groundwater for drinking purposes, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2

Relative weight of hydrochemical parameters (EC in μS/cm, remaining mg/L, except pH)

Sr. No.Name of parametersRelative weight ()Weight parameter WHO (2011) standards
pH 0.095 7.5 
TDS 0.095 500 
TH 0.095 200 
Ca2+ 0.048 75 
Mg2+ 0.048 30 
Na+ 0.095 200 
K+ 0.024 12 
 0.024 300 
Cl 0.119 250 
10  0.119 200 
11  0.119 50 
12 F 0.119 1.5 
   = 42   
Sr. No.Name of parametersRelative weight ()Weight parameter WHO (2011) standards
pH 0.095 7.5 
TDS 0.095 500 
TH 0.095 200 
Ca2+ 0.048 75 
Mg2+ 0.048 30 
Na+ 0.095 200 
K+ 0.024 12 
 0.024 300 
Cl 0.119 250 
10  0.119 200 
11  0.119 50 
12 F 0.119 1.5 
   = 42   

In step 2, the weight parameter has been calculated by the following Equation (1):
(1)
In Step 3, the concentration status is calculated by using the following Equation (2)
(2)
In step 4, overall groundwater quality (OGQ) for purposes of drinking is computed by the following Equation (3)
(3)
In step 5, is computed by taking the sum of all values
(4)

The PIG value can be used to classify into five categories provided in Table 3 (Subba Rao 2012).

Table 3

Groundwater quality classification criteria based on PIG (Subba Rao 2012)

Sr. No.PIG classificationType of pollution
<1.0 Insignificant pollution 
1.0–1.5 Low pollution 
1.5–2.0 Moderate pollution 
2.0–2.5 High pollution 
>2.5 Very high pollution 
Sr. No.PIG classificationType of pollution
<1.0 Insignificant pollution 
1.0–1.5 Low pollution 
1.5–2.0 Moderate pollution 
2.0–2.5 High pollution 
>2.5 Very high pollution 

GOD method

The GOD method is one of several methods used to assess groundwater vulnerability, which refers to the likelihood that groundwater resources may become contaminated by human activities or natural processes. This method is first introduced by Foster (1987). The GOD method is based on three key parameters: groundwater confinement (G), overlaying lithology strata (O), and depth of groundwater level (D) (Table 4). The GOD method is a significant overlay method because it provides a relatively simple way to evaluate groundwater vulnerability at a regional scale. By mapping the confinement, overlaying lithology, and depth of groundwater, it is possible to identify areas where the groundwater is particularly vulnerable to contamination (Alsharifa 2017). The data set used for the GOD method was downloaded from the India Water Resources Information System website (https://indiawris.gov.in/wris/). The resulting vulnerability maps can be used to guide land use planning and management decisions, develop groundwater protection policies, and prioritize areas for groundwater protection and monitoring. The GOD method is evaluated by multiplying the influence of the three elements using Equation (5) as given below:
(5)
where is the aquifer type, is the overlay lithology, and is the groundwater depth (Table 4).
Table 4

Weight assigned for GOD method

LayerTypeWeight
Groundwater confinement (G) Confined aquifer 0.2 
Semi-confined aquifer 0.4 
Unconfined aquifer 0.6 
Overlaying strata (O) Basalt 1.0 
Karst limestone 0.9 
Massive sandstone 0.8 
Sand and gravel 0.7 
Groundwater depth (D) 0–2.0 m 1.0 
2.0–5.0 m 0.9 
5.0–20.0 m 0.8 
20.0–50.0 m 0.7 
> 50 m 0.6 
LayerTypeWeight
Groundwater confinement (G) Confined aquifer 0.2 
Semi-confined aquifer 0.4 
Unconfined aquifer 0.6 
Overlaying strata (O) Basalt 1.0 
Karst limestone 0.9 
Massive sandstone 0.8 
Sand and gravel 0.7 
Groundwater depth (D) 0–2.0 m 1.0 
2.0–5.0 m 0.9 
5.0–20.0 m 0.8 
20.0–50.0 m 0.7 
> 50 m 0.6 

If the value of the GOD index is between 0 and 0.1, then it falls in the negligible vulnerability class. If GOD index values lie between 0.1 and 0.3, then low. If GOD index values lie between 0.3 and 0.5, then moderate groundwater vulnerability. If GOD index values lie between 0.5 and 0.7, then high, and if the value of the GOD index lies between 0.7 and 1.0, groundwater vulnerability is very high, and very high groundwater vulnerability means that the groundwater in a specific region is higher risk of contamination or depletion (Ghazavi & Ebrahimi 2015; Patel et al. 2023).

Statistical analysis

The statistical parameters including mean, range, maximum, and minimum values for various parameters were computed using Microsoft Excel software. Spatial distribution maps of groundwater quality parameters were generated using ArcGIS software, which analyses geographic information to create layered and spatial maps. The spatial modeling utilized an IDW interpolation technique, calculating values for each grid node based on nearby data points within a user-defined search radius. All data points were incorporated in the interpolation process, with node values determined by averaging the weighted sum of all points (Yadav et al. 2018).

Quality assurance and quality control

To check the quality and reliability of the groundwater quality data set, an ion balance error (IBE) test was also carried out by using the following Equation (6):
(6)
All the above concentrations are in mg/L, and groundwater samples fall within the acceptable limit of ± 5% (Deutsch 2020).

General characteristics of major ions

The results of the hydrochemical parameters of the study area are presented in Table 5. The value of pH determines the nature of the groundwater, either alkaline or acidic. Usually, if a pH value <7 indicates acidic nature, whereas a pH value greater than 7 indicates alkaline nature, it is neutral if pH = 7. The pH value ranges from 7.85 to 8.96, with a mean value of 8.48 (Figure 2). The distribution pattern of the pH of the groundwater of the Kurukshetra district is shown in Figure 3(b). Results from Figure 3(a) and 3(b) suggest groundwater of the Kurukshetra district is mostly alkaline in northern, western, and southern boundaries.
Table 5

Statistical summary of hydrochemical parameters compositions with side effects of the study area

Sr. No.Name of parameterMinimum valueMaximum valueMean valueWHO (2011) 
Remarks
Desirable limit (DL)Maximum allowable limit (MAL)
pH 7.85 8.96 8.48 6.5 8.5 Taste effects 
TDS 403 1,400 713.53 500 1,500 Bad taste, leather formation reduced 
TH 177 276 235.80 200 600 Stomach disorder and kidney issue 
Ca2+ 10 45 28.52 75 200 Defective teeth, kidney stones, and colorectal cancer 
Mg2+ 14 45 25.79 50 150 Laxative effect 
Na+ 34 187 83.74 a 200 Unpleasant taste 
K+ 3.4 14.5 7.81 a 12 Laxative effect 
 155 745 294.75 300 a Laxative effect 
 1.5 22.6 6.08 10 45 Methemoglobinemia or blue-baby disease 
10 Cl 12 75 37 250 600 Heart or kidney problems 
11  10 65 37.21 200 400 Laxative effect 
12 F 0.35 0.98 0.61 1.0 1.5 Teeth problems 
Sr. No.Name of parameterMinimum valueMaximum valueMean valueWHO (2011) 
Remarks
Desirable limit (DL)Maximum allowable limit (MAL)
pH 7.85 8.96 8.48 6.5 8.5 Taste effects 
TDS 403 1,400 713.53 500 1,500 Bad taste, leather formation reduced 
TH 177 276 235.80 200 600 Stomach disorder and kidney issue 
Ca2+ 10 45 28.52 75 200 Defective teeth, kidney stones, and colorectal cancer 
Mg2+ 14 45 25.79 50 150 Laxative effect 
Na+ 34 187 83.74 a 200 Unpleasant taste 
K+ 3.4 14.5 7.81 a 12 Laxative effect 
 155 745 294.75 300 a Laxative effect 
 1.5 22.6 6.08 10 45 Methemoglobinemia or blue-baby disease 
10 Cl 12 75 37 250 600 Heart or kidney problems 
11  10 65 37.21 200 400 Laxative effect 
12 F 0.35 0.98 0.61 1.0 1.5 Teeth problems 

aImplies, not available.

Figure 2

Relation between pH and TDS (mg/L) in an analyzed groundwater sample.

Figure 2

Relation between pH and TDS (mg/L) in an analyzed groundwater sample.

Close modal
Figure 3

(a) Scatter plot of pH along with prescribed drinking water limits and (b) spatial distribution map of pH in groundwater.

Figure 3

(a) Scatter plot of pH along with prescribed drinking water limits and (b) spatial distribution map of pH in groundwater.

Close modal
Total dissolved solids (TDS) and total hardness (TH) were also checked in the laboratory to recognize groundwater quality further. TDS signifies the salt content in groundwater and its suitability for drinking purposes. Figure 4(a) shows that all groundwater samples are within the suggested drinking water standards (WHO 2011). The value of TDS varies from 403 to 1,400 mg/L, while the average value of 713.53 mg/L. The high TDS value in groundwater can be attributed to the salts leaching from the soil surface. The spatial distribution of TDS in the groundwater of the Kurukshetra district is shown in Figure 4(b). If the TDS value is <1,000 mg/L, it is suitable for drinking purposes (Davis & De Wiest 1966). From a perusal of Figure 4(b), the groundwater of the study area is suitable for drinking, except for one site (S19) that is found to be unfit for drinking purposes in terms of TDS concentration. In Figure 4(b), groundwater has a high hardness in samples S3, S5, S15, S16, S17, and S19 lying in the northwest area and sample S1 of the east–south boundary.
Figure 4

(a) Scatter plot of TDS along with prescribed drinking water limits and (b) spatial distribution map of TDS.

Figure 4

(a) Scatter plot of TDS along with prescribed drinking water limits and (b) spatial distribution map of TDS.

Close modal
Figure 5(a) and 5(b) show the scatter plot and spatial distribution of TH in the groundwater of the study area. The TH varies from 177 to 276 mg/L with a mean of 235.8 mg/L (Table 5). Additionally, a high value of TH may cause kidney problems in humans, bad taste in water, and may cause corrosion of the pipe (Chaudhary & Satheeshkumar 2018). Out of 19 groundwater samples, 21% of the sample are moderately hard type, and the rest, 79% of groundwater samples, fall under the very hard category as per guidelines issued by WHO (2011). Figure 6 illustrates a bivariate plot between TDS versus TH of groundwater for drinking purposes. From Figure 6, it can be noticed that groundwater samples fall under moderately hard water to very hard category.
Figure 5

(a) Scatter plot of TH along with prescribed drinking water limits and (b) spatial distribution map of TH.

Figure 5

(a) Scatter plot of TH along with prescribed drinking water limits and (b) spatial distribution map of TH.

Close modal
Figure 6

Bivariate plots between TDS and TH for groundwater samples.

Figure 6

Bivariate plots between TDS and TH for groundwater samples.

Close modal
As per the results of the present study, the cationic and anionic orders of the Kurukshetra district (Haryana) can be represented as Sodium > Calcium > Magnesium > Potassium and Bicarbonate > Chloride > Sulfate > Nitrate > Fluoride, respectively. Figure 7(a), 7(c), 7(e) and 7(g) describe the distribution of Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, and K+ cations along with desirable limits and maximum allowable limits for drinking water. The Ca2+ ion concentration varies from 10 to 45 mg/L with an average of 28.52 mg/L (Table 2). As per WHO (2011) guidelines, the acceptable limit of Ca2+ ions in drinking water is 75 mg/L. Figure 7(b) shows the spatial distribution of Ca2+ ions in groundwater, indicating that all samples fit drinking purposes. The concentration of Mg2+ ions ranges from 14 to 45 mg/L with a mean of 25.5 mg/L. The distribution of Mg2+ ions is shown in Figure 7(d), signifying that all the groundwater samples are within the desirable drinking water limits (WHO 2011). The Na+ ion ranges between 34 and 187 mg/L. High Na+ ions may cause high blood pressure and infection problems in the human body (Kumar & Augustine 2022). The allowable limit for drinking purposes of Na+ is 200 mg/L (WHO 2011), and 100% of groundwater samples are within the permissible limit in the study area. Figure 7(f) shows the spatial distribution of Na+ in groundwater, indicating that all groundwater samples of the Kurukshetra district fall under allowable drinking water limits. The concentration of K+ ion lies between 3.4 and 14.5 mg/L having an average value equal to 7.81 mg/L. However, Figure 7(g) depicts a variation of K+ ions in groundwater and prescribed drinking water limits. The spatial distribution of the K+ ions is represented (Figure 7(h)) and demonstrates that three groundwater samples (S3, S14, and S15) out of 19 collected samples have exceeded the maximum allowable limit as suggested by WHO (2011).
Figure 7

Scatter plot (a, c, e, g) and spatial distribution map (b, d, f, h) of Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, and K+.

Figure 7

Scatter plot (a, c, e, g) and spatial distribution map (b, d, f, h) of Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+, and K+.

Close modal
Figure 8(a), 8(c), 8(e), 8(g) and 8(i) illustrate the variation of , Cl, , , and F anions and prescribed drinking water limits in the study area. The concentration of varied from 155 to 745 mg/L, having an average of 294.75 mg/L. However, Figure 8(b) indicates that concentrations of in the western part (S3, S11, S13, S14, and S19) and the northern part (S2 and S5) have more than the desirable limit. The Cl concentration ranges from 12 to 75 mg/L with an average of 37 mg/L (Table 2). A high intake of Cl in drinking water may cause a salty taste. As per WHO standards of Cl ion for drinking water, the desirable limit is 250 mg/L. The spatial distribution of chloride ions in Figure 8(d) signifies that all the groundwater samples of the Kurukshetra district lie within the permissible limit for drinking water (WHO 2011). The values over the Kurukshetra district varied from 1.5 to 22.6 mg/L with an average of 6.08 mg/L. In this study, locations (S2, S9, S11, and S14) exceed the recommended desirable limit of 10 mg/L (WHO 2011). The F ion's desirable and maximum allowable limits are 1.0 and 1.5 mg/L (WHO 2011). In the Kurukshetra district, the F level varied from 0.35 to .98 mg/L with an average of 0.61 mg/L. It can be observed from Figure 8(j) that 19 samples fall within the desirable limit as per guidelines (WHO 2011).
Figure 8

Scatter plot (a, c, e, g, i) and spatial distribution (b, d, f, h, j) of , Cl, , , and Fanions.

Figure 8

Scatter plot (a, c, e, g, i) and spatial distribution (b, d, f, h, j) of , Cl, , , and Fanions.

Close modal

Correlation of major ions

The correlation of major ions is extensively used to investigate the key hydrogeochemical processes that regulate the aquifer system or to identify the mineral types involved in water–rock interactions (Figure 9). Groundwater quality is generally influenced by a variety of factors, including natural processes, human activities, regional geology, mineral content, and various weathering processes (Li et al. 2019). When the mole ratio of Cl to Na+ equals one, it indicates that halite dissolution is the primary process. As illustrated in Figure 9(a), most groundwater samples plotted below the agreement line (y = x) suggest the potential for halite dissolution in the groundwater of Kurukshetra. Additionally, the presence of and Ca2+ indicates gypsum dissolution in the groundwater of the study area. Figure 9(b) shows that most groundwater samples are located above the agreement line (y = x), suggesting that gypsum dissolution is not the main natural process for and Ca2+. In the case of to Ca2+, all groundwater samples above the agreement line (y = 2x) point to the occurrence of dolomite dissolution (Figure 9(c)). Figure 9(d) and 9(e) indicate that all sample points fall within the zone between carbonate rocks and silicate rocks, confirming that the hydrochemistry of Kurukshetra groundwater is primarily influenced by silicates and carbonates rather than evaporite rocks. As shown in Figure 9(f), all groundwater samples are above the agreement line (y = x), confirming that the hydrochemistry of Kurukshetra groundwater is governed by silicate weathering. These observations collectively demonstrate that the groundwater quality in Kurukshetra is controlled by a combination of mineral dissolution processes and rock–water interactions, with a significant emphasis on silicate and carbonate weathering. Understanding these processes is essential for managing and protecting groundwater resources in the region, ensuring a safe and sustainable water supply for the local population.
Figure 9

Correlation plots of the major ions (a) Cl vs. Na+, (b) vs. Ca2+, (c) vs. Ca2+, (d) (Mg2+/Na+) vs. (Ca2+/Na+), (e) (/Na+) vs. (Ca2+/Na+), and (f) ( + ) vs. (Ca2+ + Mg2+) in the groundwater of Kurukshetra.

Figure 9

Correlation plots of the major ions (a) Cl vs. Na+, (b) vs. Ca2+, (c) vs. Ca2+, (d) (Mg2+/Na+) vs. (Ca2+/Na+), (e) (/Na+) vs. (Ca2+/Na+), and (f) ( + ) vs. (Ca2+ + Mg2+) in the groundwater of Kurukshetra.

Close modal

Assessment of groundwater quality based on EWQI and PIG

Two indices, namely the EWQI and PIG, are calculated to assess the OGQ for drinking purposes. The calculated EWQI values range from 33.76 to 62.22, with an average of 41.54. Usually, when EWQI values exceed 100, it is unsuitable for drinking. Figure 10(a) and 10(b) demonstrate the distribution of EWQI classification with groundwater samples of the study area. These results obtained from EWQI specify that one groundwater sample collected from a tube well in the Thana village of Kurukshetra district falls under poor quality (Figure 10(a)). A higher concentration of EWQI was observed in the southern-western part of the study area (Figure 10(b)). The PIG values calculated for groundwater vary from 0.49 to 0.84 (Figure 11(a)), with a mean of 0.59. Figure 11(b) shows the spatial distribution map of PIG in the groundwater of the study area. These PIG results indicate that 100% of groundwater samples collected from the study area have insignificant pollution, which shows that these can be used for drinking purposes. It can be concluded that the Kurukshetra district is identified as having good water quality as per the EWQI classification is the same as those with insignificant pollution according to the PIG classification. Two indices, the EWQI and PIG, are calculated to evaluate the overall quality of groundwater for drinking purposes (Subba Rao 2012; Adimalla 2021; Raheja et al. 2022a). The EWQI values range from 33.76 to 62.22, with an average of 41.54. Generally, EWQI values above 100 indicate water is unsuitable for drinking (Khan et al. 2022). Figure 10(a) and 10(b) illustrate the distribution of EWQI classifications among groundwater samples in the study area. According to EWQI results, one groundwater sample from a tube well in Thana village, Kurukshetra district, falls under the poor-quality category (Figure 10(a)). Higher EWQI concentrations were observed in the southwestern part of the study area (Figure 10(b)). The PIG values for groundwater range from 0.49 to 0.84, with an average of 0.59 (Figure 11(a)). The spatial distribution map of PIG values in the groundwater of the study area is shown in Figure 11(b). The PIG results indicate that 100% of the groundwater samples collected from the study area have insignificant pollution levels, making them suitable for drinking purposes. In conclusion, the groundwater quality in Kurukshetra district is classified as good according to the EWQI and shows insignificant pollution according to the PIG classification. Together, these indices highlight that the Kurukshetra district has predominantly good water quality. The combination of low EWQI and PIG values supports the conclusion that groundwater in this area is largely suitable for consumption, with minimal pollution levels. Regular monitoring and localized interventions can further ensure the safety and sustainability of groundwater resources in the region.
Figure 10

(a) Plots of sample-wise classification of EWQI and (b) spatial distribution map of EWQI in groundwater.

Figure 10

(a) Plots of sample-wise classification of EWQI and (b) spatial distribution map of EWQI in groundwater.

Close modal
Figure 11

(a) Plots of sample-wise classification of PIG and (b) spatial distribution map of PIG in groundwater.

Figure 11

(a) Plots of sample-wise classification of PIG and (b) spatial distribution map of PIG in groundwater.

Close modal

Groundwater vulnerability by GOD method

There are two main types of aquifers: unconfined and confined. Water can easily move into and out of an unconfined aquifer, and its water table is generally near the ground surface. The vulnerability of an aquifer depends on whether it is confined or semi-confined. The unconfined aquifer type is therefore given higher ratings based on the method. The whole area of Kurukshetra district falls under the unconfined aquifer stage (Figure 12). Figure 13 shows the overlay strata of the study area and found that all area falls under the sand gravel layer. These layers can affect the behavior of the aquifer by controlling the discharge, recharge, and flow of water within the aquifer. This layer strata are highly permeable; it can allow contaminants to easily reach and pollute the underlying aquifer. In the GOD method, a third significant factor is water level. The groundwater level or table is an important aspect of managing groundwater resources and protecting them from contamination. So, it directly reduces the groundwater quality. The spatial map for the groundwater level is shown in Figure 14. From Figure 14, it was indicated that most of the Kurukshetra area has a varying between 20 and 50 m, and only two villages i.e., Jandaula and Santokhpur have water tables between 5 and 20 m. Figure 15 shows the groundwater vulnerability spatial map of the study area and indicates that the southern part of the region has a moderate vulnerability. Baronda, Berthala, Bachki, Bodhni, and Malikpur–Singhpura villages are considered as low vulnerability due to high groundwater levels. So, groundwater level is the crucial factor that may affect the groundwater vulnerability of a specific region.
Figure 12

Spatial distribution map of groundwater confinement.

Figure 12

Spatial distribution map of groundwater confinement.

Close modal
Figure 13

Spatial distribution map of overlay strata.

Figure 13

Spatial distribution map of overlay strata.

Close modal
Figure 14

Spatial distribution map of groundwater level.

Figure 14

Spatial distribution map of groundwater level.

Close modal
Figure 15

Spatial distribution map of groundwater vulnerability.

Figure 15

Spatial distribution map of groundwater vulnerability.

Close modal

Implementing the findings of this groundwater quality study at the national level involves integrating its data and methodologies into larger water resource management strategies. National governments can use GIS-based maps to identify areas, such as the southern part of Kurukshetra district, where hydrochemical parameters indicate higher concentrations of pollutants. By targeting these specific areas, authorities can prioritize and allocate resources more effectively for remediation efforts and preventive measures. The study's findings on the relationship between TDS and TH help in establishing national drinking water standards and ensuring that groundwater meets these criteria. Additionally, public health campaigns can be launched to educate communities about the significance of water quality, encouraging practices that prevent contamination and promote sustainable groundwater use. The national implementation of such studies also entails the development of infrastructure for regular monitoring and maintenance of groundwater resources, ensuring that water quality remains within safe limits for human consumption. At the global level, the insights from this study can contribute to international efforts aimed at improving groundwater quality and reducing vulnerability. Organizations such as the WHO and the United Nations can use these findings to update global water quality guidelines and recommend best practices for groundwater management. The study's methodology, including the use of the EWQI and PIG classifications, can be standardized and promoted as a model for other regions facing similar challenges. Additionally, global funding mechanisms can support projects in vulnerable areas identified by such studies, helping to build infrastructure and capacity for better groundwater management. Transboundary water management agreements can benefit from the vulnerability assessments provided by methods like GOD, ensuring that regions with moderate vulnerability, such as the southern portion of the Kurukshetra district, receive adequate protection and that sustainable usage practices are enforced. This global implementation fosters a cooperative approach to safeguarding groundwater resources, essential for addressing the broader impacts of climate change and population growth on water security.

This study focuses on assessing groundwater quality for safe drinking purposes in the Kurukshetra district. Based on that several conclusions may be drawn as follows:

  • 1. The groundwater in the study area is found to be alkaline in nature. Eighty-six percent of groundwater samples have a total dissolved solid (TDS) value of less than 1,000 mg/L, and 21% of groundwater samples collected from different locations exceeded the desirable limit of TH (WHO 2011). The relation between TDS and TH shows that 79% of samples fall under the very hard freshwater category.

  • 2. GIS-based spatial distribution of hydrochemical parameters shows higher concentrations in the southern part of the study area. Moreover, the correlation of major ions indicates that the hydrogeochemical composition is dominated by silicate weathering and dolomite dissolution.

  • 3. The EWQI indicates that 94.73% of groundwater samples have exhibited good water quality. The spatial distribution of EWQI has a higher concentration in the southern-western part of the study area.

  • 4. The value of the PIG indicates that all groundwater samples collected from the study area have insignificant pollution (PIG < 1.0). Both classifications (EWQI and PIG) specify that the groundwater of the Kurukshetra district is good for human consumption.

  • 5. Based on the GOD method for groundwater vulnerability, indicates that mostly southern portion of the study area has moderate vulnerability, and shows that groundwater level is the important parameter for the assessment of groundwater vulnerability.

The study concludes that assessing groundwater quality is beneficial for making informed decisions regarding the sustainable exploitation and management of groundwater resources.

The first author (Hemant Raheja) is thankful to the Ministry of Education, Government of India for providing the scholarship to do this research. The authors convey their thanks to the National Institute of Technology, Kurukshetra, for giving several research facilities.

This work was financially supported by the Ministry of Education, Government of India (Grant No. 2K19/NITK/PHD/61900011-Hemant Raheja).

H. R. developed the methodology, collected the samples, conceptualized the whole article, wrote the original manuscript, and arranged the software. A. G. reviewed the article, edited the manuscript, and rendered support in language embellishment. M. P. reviewed the article, edited the manuscript, arranged the software, and supervised the work.

All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.

The authors declare there is no conflict.

Abtahi
M.
,
Golchinpour
N.
,
Yaghmaeian
K.
,
Rafiee
M.
,
Jahangiri-rad
M.
&
Keyani
A.
2015
A modified drinking water quality index (DWQI) for assessing drinking source water quality in rural communities of Khuzestan Province, Iran
.
Ecol. Indic.
53
,
283
291
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.02.009
.
Akinlalu
A. A.
,
Mogaji
K. A.
&
Adebodun
T. S.
2021
Assessment of aquifer vulnerability using a developed ‘GODL’ method (modified GOD model) in a schist belt environ, Southwestern Nigeria
.
Environ. Monit. Assess.
193
,
1
27
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-08960-z
.
Aller
L.
&
Thornhill
J.
1987
DRASTIC: A Standardized System for Evaluating Ground Water Pollution Potential Using Hydrogeologic Settings
.
Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, US Environmental Protection Agency
,
Washington, D.C
.
Alsharifa
H. M.
2017
Assessing the groundwater vulnerability in the upper aquifers of Zarqa River Basin, Jordan using DRASTIC, SINTACS and GOD methods
.
Int. J. Water Resour. Environ. Eng.
9
,
44
53
.
https://doi.org/10.5897/ijwree2016.0688
.
Amiri
V.
,
Rezaei
M.
&
Sohrabi
N.
2014
Groundwater quality assessment using entropy weighted water quality index (EWQI) in Lenjanat, Iran
.
Environ. Earth Sci.
72
,
3479
3490
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-014-3255-0
.
APHA
2012
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste Water
, 22nd edn.
American Public Health Association (APHA), 14 American Water Works Association and Water Environment Federation 15 (WEF)
,
New York
, p.
1360
.
CGWB
2013
Ground water information booklet of Kurukshetra District, Haryana. Central Ground Water Board Regional Office, Ministry of Water Resource Govt of India, North West Region Chandigarh
.
CGWB
2019
Ground Water Year Book of Haryana State. Central Ground Water Board, Ministry Jal Shakti, Government India, North West Region Chandigarh
.
Chaudhary
V.
&
Satheeshkumar
S.
2018
Assessment of groundwater quality for drinking and irrigation purposes in arid areas of Rajasthan, India
.
Appl. Water Sci.
8
,
1
17
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-018-0865-9
.
Davis
S. N.
&
De Wiest
R. J. M.
1966
Hydrogeology
.
Wiley
,
New York
.
Deutsch
W. J.
2020
Groundwater Geochemistry
.
CRC Press
.
https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003069942
.
Foster
S. S. D.
1987
Fundamental concepts in aquifer vulnerability, pollution risk and protection strategy. Vulnerability Soil Groundwater Pollution, The Netherlands, pp. 69–86
.
Foster
S.
,
Hirata
R.
,
Gomes
D.
,
D'Elia
M.
&
Paris
M.
2002
Groundwater Quality Protection : A Guide for Water Utilities, Municipal Authorities, and Environment Agencies
.
World Bank
,
Washington, DC
.
Gad
M.
,
El-Safa
M. M. A.
,
Farouk
M.
,
Hussein
H.
,
Alnemari
A. M.
&
Elsayed
S.
2021
Integration of water quality indices and multivariate modeling for assessing surface water quality in Qaroun Lake, Egypt
.
Water (Switzerland)
13
,
1
22
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w13162258
.
Gani
A.
,
Singh
M.
,
Pathak
S.
&
Hussain
A.
2023a
Groundwater quality index development using the ANN model of Delhi Metropolitan City, India
.
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-31584-4
.
Gani
A.
,
Pathak
S.
,
Hussain
A.
,
Ahmed
S.
,
Singh
R.
&
Khevariya
A.
2023b
Water quality index assessment of river Ganga at Haridwar stretch using multivariate statistical technique
.
Mol. Biotechnol
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12033-023-00864-2
.
Gani
A.
,
Hussain
A.
,
Pathak
S.
&
Banerjee
A.
2024a
An empirical investigation on the elimination of heavy metals using bioremediation method for selected plant species
.
Phys. Chem. Earth, Parts A/B/C
134
,
103568
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pce.2024.103568
.
Gani
A.
,
Hussain
A.
,
Pathak
S.
&
Omar
P. J.
2024b
Analysing heavy metal contamination in groundwater in the vicinity of Mumbai's landfill sites: An in-depth study
.
Top Catal.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11244-024-01955-3
.
Gao
Y.
,
Qian
H.
,
Ren
W.
,
Wang
H.
,
Liu
F.
&
Yang
F.
2020
Hydrogeochemical characterization and quality assessment of groundwater based on integrated-weight water quality index in a concentrated urban area
.
J. Cleaner Prod.
260
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121006
.
Ghazavi
R.
&
Ebrahimi
Z.
2015
Assessing groundwater vulnerability to contamination in an arid environment using DRASTIC and GOD models
.
Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.
12
,
2909
2918
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-015-0813-2
.
Goldscheider
N.
,
Klute
M.
,
Sturm
S.
&
Hotzl
H.
2000
The PI method – a GIS-based approach to mapping groundwater vulnerability with special consideration of karst aquifers
.
Zeitschrift. Fur. Angew. Geol.
46
,
157
166
.
Grimmeisen
F.
,
Lehmann
M. F.
,
Liesch
T.
,
Goeppert
N.
,
Klinger
J.
&
Zopfi
J.
2017
Isotopic constraints on water source mixing, network leakage and contamination in an urban groundwater system
.
Sci. Total. Environ.
583
,
202
213
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.01.054
.
Hamlat
A.
,
Guidoum
A.
&
Koulala
I.
2017
Status and trends of water quality in the Tafna catchment: A comparative study using water quality indices
.
J. Water Reuse. Desalin.
7
,
228
245
.
https://doi.org/10.2166/wrd.2016.155
.
Harichandan
A.
,
Patra
H. S.
,
Dash
A. K.
,
Sethy
K. M.
,
Sahu
S. K.
&
Ghosh
M.
2021
Suitability of groundwater quality for its drinking and agricultural use near Koira region of Odisha, India
.
Sustainable Water Resour. Manage.
7
,
1
18
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-021-00505-z
.
Hosseini-Moghari
S. M.
,
Ebrahimi
K.
&
Azarnivand
A.
2015
Groundwater quality assessment with respect to fuzzy water quality index (FWQI): An application of expert systems in environmental monitoring
.
Environ. Earth Sci.
74
,
7229
7238
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-015-4703-1
.
Hussain
A.
,
Deshwal
A.
,
Priyadarshi
M.
,
Pathak
S.
,
Sambandam
G.
&
Chand
S.
2024
Landfill leachate analysis from selected landfill sites and its impact on groundwater quality, New Delhi, India
.
Environ. Dev. Sustainable
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04403-6
.
Khan
M. Y. A.
,
El Kashouty
M.
,
Gusti
W.
,
Kumar
A.
,
Subyani
A. M.
&
Alshehri
A.
2022
Geo-temporal signatures of physicochemical and heavy metals pollution in groundwater of Khulais Region – Makkah Province, Saudi Arabia
.
Front Environ. Sci.
9
.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2021.800517
.
Krishan
G.
,
Rao
M. S.
,
Vashisht
R.
,
Chaudhary
A.
,
Singh
J.
&
Kumar
A.
2022
Isotopic assessment of groundwater salinity: A case study of the Southwest (SW) Region of Punjab, India
.
Water (Switzerland)
14
,
1
20
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w14010133
.
Krishan
G.
,
Kumar
M.
,
Rao
M. S.
,
Garg
R.
,
Yadav
B. K.
&
Kansal
M. L.
2023
Integrated approach for the investigation of groundwater quality through hydrochemistry and water quality index (WQI)
.
Urban Clim.
47
,
101383
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.uclim.2022.101383
.
Kumar
P. J. S.
&
Augustine
C. M.
2022
Entropy-weighted water quality index (EWQI) modeling of groundwater quality and spatial mapping in Uppar Odai Sub-Basin, South India
.
Modell Earth Syst. Environ.
8
,
911
924
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40808-021-01132-5
.
Kumar
A.
,
Palmate
S. S.
&
Shukla
R.
2022
Water quality modelling, monitoring, and mitigation
.
Appl. Sci.
12
,
1
7
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/app122211403
.
Li
Z.
,
Yang
Q.
,
Yang
Y.
,
Ma
H.
,
Wang
H.
&
Luo
J.
2019
Isotopic and geochemical interpretation of groundwater under the influences of anthropogenic activities
.
J. Hydrol.
576
,
685
697
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2019.06.037
.
Mahammad
S.
,
Islam
A.
&
Kumar
P.
2022
Geospatial assessment of groundwater quality using entropy-based irrigation water quality index and heavy metal pollution indices
.
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20665-5
.
Masood
A.
,
Aslam
M.
,
Pham
Q. B.
,
Khan
W.
&
Masood
S.
2022
Integrating water quality index, GIS and multivariate statistical techniques towards a better understanding of drinking water quality
.
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.
29
,
26860
26876
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17594-0
.
Maurya
P. K.
,
Ali
S. A.
,
Alharbi
R. S.
,
Yadav
K. K.
,
Alfaisal
F. M.
&
Ahmad
A.
2021
Impacts of land use change on water quality index in the upper Ganges river near Haridwar, Uttarakhand: A GIS-based analysis
.
Water (Switzerland)
13
,
1
20
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w13243572
.
Maurya
P. K.
,
Ali
S. A.
,
Zaidi
S. K.
,
Wasi
S.
,
Tabrez
S.
&
Malav
L. C.
2023
Assessment of groundwater geochemistry for drinking and irrigation suitability in Jaunpur district of Uttar Pradesh using GIS-based statistical inference
.
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.
30
,
29407
29431
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-23959-w
.
Patel
P.
,
Mehta
D.
&
Sharma
N.
2023
Assessment of groundwater vulnerability using the GIS approach-based GOD method in Surat district of Gujarat state, India
.
Water Pract. Technol.
18
,
285
294
.
https://doi.org/10.2166/wpt.2023.004
.
Pathak
S.
,
Gupta
S.
&
Ojha
C. S. P.
2021
Assessment of groundwater vulnerability to contamination with ASSIGN index: A case study in Haridwar, Uttarakhand, India
.
J. Hazardous, Toxic, Radioact Waste
25
.
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HZ.2153-5515.0000594
.
Raheja
H.
,
Goel
A.
&
Pal
M.
2022a
Prediction of groundwater quality indices using machine learning algorithms
.
Water Pract. Technol.
17
,
336
351
.
https://doi.org/10.2166/wpt.2021.120
.
Raheja
H.
,
Goel
A.
&
Pal
M.
2022b
An evaluation of groundwater quality and its suitability for drinking and irrigation uses under the GIS framework
.
Water Pract. Technol.
17
,
2259
2277
.
https://doi.org/10.2166/wpt.2022.134
.
Raheja
H.
,
Goel
A.
&
Pal
M.
2024a
Evaluation of groundwater quality for drinking purposes based on machine learning algorithms and GIS
.
Sustain. Water Resour. Manage.
10
,
11
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-023-00990-4
.
Raheja
H.
,
Goel
A.
&
Pal
M.
2024b
Assessment of Groundwater Quality for Drinking and Potential Health Risks of Nitrate Pollution. World Environ. Water Resour. Congr. 2024, vol. 1, Reston, VA: American Society of Civil Engineers; p. 473–85. https://doi.org/10.1061/9780784485477.043
.
Raheja
H.
,
Goel
A.
&
Pal
M.
2024c
A holistic assessment of groundwater quality for drinking and irrigation purposes
.
Water Pract. Technol.
19
,
134
153
.
https://doi.org/10.2166/wpt.2023.228
.
Raheja
H.
,
Goel
A.
&
Pal
M.
2024d
A novel approach for prediction of groundwater quality using gradient boosting-based algorithms
.
ISH J. Hydraul. Eng.
30
,
281
292
.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09715010.2024.2316615
.
Ram
A.
,
Tiwari
S. K.
,
Pandey
H. K.
,
Chaurasia
A. K.
,
Singh
S.
&
Singh
Y. V.
2021
Groundwater quality assessment using water quality index (WQI) under GIS framework
.
Appl. Water Sci.
11
,
1
20
.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-021-01376-7
.
Salem
S.
,
Gaagai
A.
,
Ben Slimene
I.
,
Moussa
A.
,
Zouari
K.
&
Yadav
K.
2023
Applying multivariate analysis and machine learning approaches to evaluating groundwater quality on the Kairouan Plain, Tunisia
.
Water
15
,
3495
.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w15193495
.
Sharma
G. K.
,
Jena
R. K.
,
Ray
P.
,
Yadav
K. K.
,
Moharana
P. C.
&
Cabral-Pinto
M. M. S.
2021
Evaluating the geochemistry of groundwater contamination with iron and manganese and probabilistic human health risk assessment in endemic areas of the world's largest River Island, India
.
Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol.
87
,
103690
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.etap.2021.103690
.
Sharma
S.
,
Pathak
S.
&
Kumar
S.
2024
A planning-support tool for spatial suitability assessment of harvesting sites for stormwater infrastructure
.
J. Hazardous, Toxic, Radioact. Waste
28
,
1
9
.
https://doi.org/10.1061/jhtrbp.hzeng-1249
.
Shyam
R.
,
Krishan
G.
,
Kheraj
A.
&
Kumar
A.
2022
Evaluation of groundwater quality for life-supporting activities: A case study of Haryana, India
.
Int. J. River Basin Manage.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2022.2135518
.
Subba Rao
N.
2012
PIG: A numerical index for dissemination of groundwater contamination zones
.
Hydrol. Process.
26
,
3344
3350
.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8456
.
Van Stempvoort
D.
,
Ewert
L.
&
Wassenaar
L.
1993
Aquifer vulnerability index: A GIS-compatible method for groundwater vulnerability mapping
.
Can. Water Resour. J.
18
,
25
37
.
https://doi.org/10.4296/cwrj1801025
.
WHO
2011
Guidelines for Drinking-Water Quality
, Vol.
38
.
WHO Chron
, pp.
104
108
.
https://doi.org/10.1248/jhs1956.35.307
.
Zhang
Q.
,
Qian
H.
,
Xu
P.
,
Hou
K.
&
Yang
F.
2021a
Groundwater quality assessment using a new integrated-weight water quality index (IWQI) and driver analysis in the Jiaokou Irrigation District, China
.
Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf.
212
,
111992
.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2021.111992
.
Zhang
Y.
,
Li
X.
,
Luo
M.
,
Wei
C.
,
Huang
X.
&
Xiao
Y.
2021b
Hydrochemistry and Entropy-Based Groundwater Quality Assessment in the Suining Area, Southwestern China 2021
.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY 4.0), which permits copying, adaptation and redistribution, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).