Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.

in ©IJONS

Vol.15 / Issue 83 / Apr / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Groundwater Quality Assessment for Domestic and Irrigation purposes

for Mandya district of Karnataka, India using Geospatial tools

Sagar D.N1, H.T. Basavarajappa2 and Manjunatha M.C3*

1Research Scholar, Dos in Earth Science, University of Mysuru, Mysore, Karnataka, India.
2Rtd. Senior Professor, Dos in Earth Science, University of Mysuru, Mysore, Karnataka, India.
3Assistant Professor, DBT-BUILDER, JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research, Karnataka, India.

Received: 24 Dec 2023 Revised: 09 Jan 2024 Accepted: 10 Mar 2024

*Address for Correspondence

Manjunatha M.C
Assistant Professor,
DBT-BUILDER,
JSS Academy of Higher Education and Research,
Karnataka, India.
Email: mcmanju1@gmail.com

This is an Open Access Journal /article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited. All rights reserved.

ABSTRACT

Groundwater is extensively needed by most organisms on earth, especially humans. Groundwater

depletion and its quality degradation are noticed in various parts of the country due to rise in
demography, climate change, global warming, and industrial demands. Similar affects are observed from
Mandya district of Karnataka state where 70 water samples are randomly acquired during the pre-
monsoon (April 2023) and assessed for 15 parameters quality. SAR, RSC, permeability index, magnesium
hazards, sodium percentage, and Kelly’s ratio are evaluated for both drinking and agricultural aspects.
Anthropogenic activities of modern agricultural practices, mining, and municipal waste dumps releasing
toxic effluents into the groundwater that contributing to rise in salinity and alkalinity noticed at some
locations of the study district. The outcome results enumerate the above permissible limits of
groundwater parameter through spatial representation maps and assess in future management plans for
Mandya district.

Keywords: Groundwater Quality, Parameters, WHO, BIS, Mandya.

INTRODUCTION

In India, nearly 2 lakh sq.km area is affected by saline water with EC of more than 4000 μS/cm and being a prime
issue in agricultural practices. Modern type of agricultural practices involves intensive applications of sewage/drain
water, agrochemicals, fertilizers, and mining/ quarrying & automobile services even on minor lineaments cause
serious threat to groundwater quality [2]. Many parts of Rajasthan and southern Haryana showed higher value of EC
71555
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.15 / Issue 83 / Apr / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Sagar et al.,

values of 10,000 μS /cm making water sources as non-portable. Most parts of northern districts in Karnataka state
showed higher concentration of chlorine, EC, fluoride; where nitrate distribution are higher in almost all districts
except few. Among the freshwater sources, groundwater is well utilized by man for his daily needs of domestic,
irrigation, mining, automobile industries and other demands. Evaluating both chemical and physical characteristics
are much needed to allocate water suitability for various fields. Anthropogenic activity are quicker than rock-water
interactions noticed in many parts of the country in affecting groundwater water quality. The chemistry of both
surface and subsurface water sources changes over time due to the interactions of geology, soil, meteorology,
hydromorphology, and vegetation type. Carbon-di-oxide and other chemical constituents react highly with
rainwater over lands and infiltrates through tiny pores to subsurface regions and progressively causing groundwater
contamination. Groundwater chemistry changes based on water movement within the pores present between rock
present beneath the earth, and residence time also affect it. Irrigation water contains soluble dissolved salts
originating from the hydro-geochemical process that increase osmotic pressure which makes plant roots to observe
more amounts of water [32]. These salts also affect soil structure, and permeability that ultimately affecting the plant
growth. The irrigation water quality is greatly experimented by many earlier pioneers through Residual Sodium
Carbonate (RSC), Sodium Absorption Ratio (SAR), Permeability index, Sodium Percentage, Magnesium hazards and
Kelly’s ratio. Mandya district covering an area of 4,850.8 sq.km and lies in between 76019’ to 77 0 20’ E longitude and
12 013’ to 13 014’ N latitude (Fig.1a). The general elevation ranging from 287 to 1045 mts above MSL and sloping
towards SE direction. Average annual rainfall records 691 mm and temperature ranges from 160 to 370C. Cauvery,
Shimsha, Hemavathi and Lokapavani are the major flowing rivers in the district that providing main sources of
water for irrigation. The district falls under rain shadow zone of Western Ghats and receives most of the rainfall
during monsoon seasons.

METHODOLOGY

70 groundwater samples are randomly collected using Garmin GPS etrex-10 handheld instrument from various
locations of Mandya district during the Pre-monsoon period (April) of the year 2023 (Fig.1a). The samples are
collected using polythene bottle that was cleaned by distilled water rinsed with same water sample at the time of
sample collection and carried to laboratory on the same day. Samples are treated with nitric acid for cation analysis
and stored under 40C for anion analysis. The present analysed parameters include fluoride (F-), electrical
conductivity (EC), potential of hydrogen (pH), total hardness (TH), iron (Fe), total dissolved solids (TDS) and cation
groups like calcium (Ca 2+), magnesium (Mg2+), sodium (Na+), potassium (K+), and anions groups like bicarbonate
(HCO3-), carbonate (CO32-), sulphate (SO42-), chloride (Cl-) and nitrate (NO3-). EC, pH and TDS are estimated in the
field by using Hanna field meter; Ca2+, Mg2+, Cl- are estimated by volumetric titration method; Na + and K+ estimated
by using Flame Photometer; F- is estimated by visual interpretation technique; whereas SO42- is estimated by
turbidity method as per BIS Standard (Islam and Patel, 2011; Ramesh and Elango, 2012). The obtained results are
correlated and analysed with the help of both World Health Organization (WHO) and Bureau of Indian Standards
(BIS) values for better interpretation [5; 34]. The agricultural aspects like SAR, RSC, Permeability index, Magnesium
Hazards, Sodium Percentage and Kelly’s ratio are also evaluated in the present study. Thematic maps of sample
location, agriculture overlaid on lineament, lithology, and spatial distribution maps are generated by ArcGIS v10
software, Wilcox diagram [35], USSL diagram and Piper Diagram are Plotted using Diagrams Software.

RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Geogenic activity
The study area falls under Western Dharwar Craton and Peninsular Gneiss [24] comprises 3.4-3.0 Ga ‘Ancient
Supracrustals’ (Sargur Group) and tonalite-trondhjemite-granodiorite (TTG) basement overlain unconformably by
2.9-2.6 Ga greenstone belts [23,27]. Gneiss, granite, pegmatite, and ultramafic rock & dykes are the major rock types
observed during limited field visits (Fig.1b). Gneiss, granite, amphibolite schist and excess of mica mineral are

71556
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.15 / Issue 83 / Apr / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Sagar et al.,

identified near Melukote area. The rainwater infiltrates to ground through small pores and dissolves with various
minerals present in the weathered rocks by dissolution, carbonate weathering, ion exchange process and others. This
chemical process varies both spatio-temporally by the chemical behaviour geological formation and water. The rock-
water interactions are estimated by Gibbs [12] plot for both cations and anions (Fig.2b).

Anthropogenic activity
Paddy, sugarcane, maize, ragi, pulses, vegetables are majorly grown in the district that require huge supply of
chemical fertilizers, pesticides and weedicides that causing great anthropogenic activities in Mandya district. Nitrate
concentrations are highest among all parameters in most part of the district due to over usage of chemical fertilizer
extensively used by farmers. The excess agricultural runoff, municipality waste water are being leached into
subsurface zones causing groundwater contamination through major/minor lineaments (Fig.2a). The farmers in the
dry zones of Nagamangala, K.R Pete and Malavalli taluks are highly dependent on groundwater for their
agricultural activities. Over utilization of weedicides, pesticides and chemical fertilizers not only affecting the
groundwater, but also adversely modifying the soil texture due to modern irrigational techniques.

Groundwater Quality Assessment for Domestic Use

Groundwater used for drinking does not exceed the high amount of minerals and other chemical compounds present
in it. The water quality results of standard deviation, mean, maximum, and minimum are given in Table.2. WHO
and BIS established a standard permissible limit for chemical parameter for drinking water is prescribed in Table.1.
Calcium values vary from 14.4 to 144mg/l and the average is 67.53mg/l and revealing that all water samples are
within standards permissible value for both BIS and WHO. Magnesium ranging from 6.4 to 116mg/l and the average
is 34.9mg/l depicting that one sample is exceeding the standard permissible values of BIS; while all other samples are
in the standard permissible values of both BIS and WHO. Sodium ranges from 21.95 to 276.65mg/l and the average is
68.85mg/l. Potassium ranging from 0.28 to 73.91mg/l and the average is 5.28mg/l. Chlorides vary from 13 to 254 mg/l
and the average is 63.48 mg/l and all water samples are within the standard permissible value of BIS and WHO.
Bicarbonates vary from 94.9 to 900.3 mg/l and the average is 346.47mg/l. Fluoride varies from 0.2 to 0.6 mg/l, which
doesn’t exceed standard permissible value of both WHO and BIS. pH varies from 6.7 to 8 in Mandya which does not
exceed the WHO and BIS standards and it can be reduced by applying organic acids from decay vegetation matter or
by the dissolution of sulfide minerals [3,7]. Nitrates vary from 0.8 to 78 mg/l and the average is 19.27mg/l and seven
samples are exceeding the standard permissible value according to WHO and BIS due to the overuse of nitrogen
fertilizers for agriculture activities [4]. Sulfate varies from 2.98 to 251 mg/l and the average is 47.82mg/l and all
sample values are within the permissible range according to BIS and WHO standards [4]. TH varies from 72 to 725
with an average of 316.02; while TDS varies from 176mg/l to 1562mg/l and the average is 552.92mg/l depicting longer
residing time along its flow path [7] with the composition of inorganic salts and small amount of dissolved organic
matter. This process increases total dissolved concentrations and major ions that normally occur in nature [20]. The
exceeding concentration of higher TDS is unfit for drinking purposes and also causes gastrointestinal irritation. In
the study area, 2 samples are above the 1000mg/l is unfit for drinking water, and all other samples are below the
1000mg/l.

Groundwater Quality for Agriculture

Krishna Raja Sagara (KRS) dam release water through number of channels that supply sufficient amount of water for
the seasons of rainfall and post-monsoon; whereas for extreme summers the farmers of entire Mandya need to
depend on groundwater exploration for irrigational and agricultural practices. This process severely modifying the
groundwater chemistry and will certainly affect irrigation water in near future.

EC
It’s an important parameter of water chemical quality that will be measured through ionized inorganic salts in
solution conducting electric current. EC concentration varies from 291 to 2472 (μS/cm). EC depends on the rock-
water interaction and residing time in water [4,11]. The classification of EC results based on the U.S Salinity

71557
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.15 / Issue 83 / Apr / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Sagar et al.,

Laboratory guidelines [33] showing excellent to permissible in majority of the Mandya district, except one particular
location (Fig.3a; Table.3).

SAR
Sodium hazards are measured by taking into the account of magnesium and calcium content in the collected water
sample by using below formula
SAR= (all values in meq/l)
/
The soil structure, its permeability and characteristics property modifies due to increase in sodium content in the soil
[17]. The formation of saline soil are noticed due to high salt concentration in water; whereas the development of
alkaline soils are observed by high sodium content. All the samples of SAR (<10) in Mandya fall under the Excellent
category (Table.4). SAR plotted against the EC in analysing the interaction of various ions that may affect the
irrigation water by using USSL [33] diagram (Fig.3b). In figure.3b, the salinity hazards are classified as very high (C-
4), high (C-3), medium (C-2) and low (C-1) based on the EC classes of very high (S-4), high (S-3), medium (S-2) and
low (S-1). In the study area, 31 samples noticed under suitable category for water usage of group-1 (C1-S1; C2-S1); 38
samples observe under conditional usage of water of group-2 (C1-S2; C2-S2; C3-S1; C3-S2) and only one sample fall
under unsuitable water for irrigation category of group-3 (C4-S1) as shown in Table.5.

RSC
It is the difference between the sum of Ca and Mg and the values are expressed in milli equivalents and one among
the crucial indicator for assessing groundwater quality for agricultural purposes [1,29]. The formula for calculating
the RSC of water is given below:
RSC = (CO3 + HCO3) – (Ca + Mg) (all values in meq/l.)
Nearly 66 number of water samples fall under safe category; 3 are under moderate and only 1 noticed under
unsuitable category as given in Table.6.

Sodium percentage
The soil content with high sodium-carbonate association rises the alkali soils with chlorides leading to the soil
salinity. The soil permeabiligy reduces due to the reaction of sodium with soil [16]. Sodium percent is important in
the classification of irrigation water [21] and is calculated by
( )
Na %= ( )
(all values in meq/l)
The sodium percent of all collected samples are observed in permissible (24%), good (48%)and excellent (12%)
category (Table.7). Wilcox diagram [35] plotted for sodium percent against EC to study the suitability for the
irrigation of water (Fig.4a).

Permiabality Index
These are altered due to longer usage of irrigation water as affected by sodium, magnesium, bicarbonate, and
calcium content of soil [8]. The permeability can be calculated by using the formula [9,14]
(Na + HCO3) 100
PI  (All values in meq/l)
(Ca2 + Mg2 + + Na )
The permeability index is less than 25% is unfit for irrigation [9]. The classification of irrigation water based on
Permiabality index Class-1(>75%), Class-2 (25%-75%), Class-3 (<25%) shown in the figure.4b [10, 31]. All the samples
of Mandya falls under the Class-1 category that shows good for irrigation.

Magnessium hazard: Magnesium Hazard (MH) value for irrigation water was proposed by [30] using the formula
Mg
MH  (All values in meq/l)
(Ca + Mg) x 100

71558
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.15 / Issue 83 / Apr / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Sagar et al.,

The magnesium hazard content more than 50 is unsuitable for irrigation and effects on crop yield and soil salinity.
Magnesium hazard ranges from 10.4 to 81.7 meq/l and 13 samples exceed 50 for Mandya district which is unsuitable
for irrigation (Fig.5a).

Kelly’s ratio: The suitability of irrigation water is analysed by on Kelly’s ratio [16] and the ratio of sodium to calcium
and magnesium is determined by
KR = (all values in meq/l)
Kelly's ratio is less than one suitable for irrigation [15]. The value varies from 0.13 to 1.31 meq/l, and showed less
than 1 in Kelly’s ratio and suitable for irrigation except well numbers of 31, 32, 40 which is not suitable for irrigation
(Fig.5b) [18, 28].

Hydrogeochemical facies
Pipers diagram was plotted in accordance with the concentration of major anion and cation present in the collected
water sample (Fig.6) [22]. The hydrogeo chemical facies type of groundwater for Mandya district is identified as Ca-
Mg-Cl, Ca-Na-HCO3, and Ca-HCO3 types. Ca-HCO3 (Carbonate) is the superior type of water among the collected
samples indicating that the above water type is from the groundwater recharge and return flow of agriculture water
[26].

DISCUSSION

Agricultural activities are majorly dependent on groundwater in dry areas of Malavalli, KR. Pete and Nagamangala
taluks. Groundwater is the prime source for all sectors in rural areas of Mandya district and it’s over utilization has
recorded in recent past for irrigation lands that severely modified the soil textures. Higher concentration of nitrates is
recorded in major parts of the district by over usage of nitrogen fertilizers [6]. Heavy applications of pesticides,
weedicides, and chemical fertilizers had affected the groundwater quality. Few regions of Nagamangala, K.R. Pete
and Mallavalli falls under dry zones and studying water chemistry is the prime task for proper water utilization.

CONCLUSION

Mandya district is a part of hard rock terrains of Precambrian rocks that showed longer rock-water interaction time
and affecting the groundwater quality. Nitrate concentration showed higher amount among other parameters
studied and need proper guidance to the farmers during the usage of nitrogenous fertilizers which may leach to
groundwater. Geogenic and anthropogenic activities are the main sources of water chemistry in Mandya and also
showed salinity and alkaline issues at certain major locations.

REFERENCES

1. Ali SA, Ali U. “Hydrochemical characteristics and spatial analysis of groundwater quality in parts of
Bundelkhand Massif, India”, Appl Water Sci, 8:1-39, 2018.
2. Azadeh Taghinia Hejabi, Basavarajappa HT. “Heavy metal contamination of soils and vegetation in the
Nagarthalli, Mysore District, Karnataka, India”, Journal of Environmental Geochemistry, 12:1-4, 2009.
3. Basavarajappa HT, Manjunatha MC. “Groundwater Quality Analysis in Precambrian Rocks of Chitradurga
District, Karnataka, India using Geo-informatics Technique”, Elsevier, Science Direct, Aquatic Procedia, 4:1354-
1365, 2015a.
4. Basavarajappa HT, Manjunatha MC, Pushpavathi KN. “Rock-water interaction and chemical quality analysis
of groundwater in hard rock terrain of Chamrajanagara district, Karnataka, India using Geoinformatics”,
Journal of Organic and Inorganic Chemistry , 1(1): 1-11, 2015b.

71559
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.15 / Issue 83 / Apr / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Sagar et al.,

5. BIS. “Indian standard specification for drinking water”, Bureau of Indian Standard , Publication no. IS: 10501,
New Delhi, India, 1991.
6. CGWB. “Ground water information booklet, Mandya district, Karnataka, South western region, Bangalore”,
Central Ground Water Board , Govt. of Karnataka, 2008.
7. Davis, De Viest. “Hydrogeology”, New York, John Wiley & Sons, 453, 1966.
8. Dhirendra Mohan Joshi, Alok Kumar, Namita Agrawal. “Assessment of the Irrigation Water Quality of River
Ganga in Haridwar District”, Rasayan J. Chem, 2(2): 285-292, 2009.
9. Doneen LD. “Notes on Water Quality in agriculture”, Department of Water, Science and Engineering, University
of California, 1964.
10. El-Saka MS. “Evaluation of Drainage Water Quality of El Hoks Drain at North Nile Delta, Kafr El-Sheihk
Governorate, Egypt”, Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering , 11(7): 291-297, 2020.
11. Eaton FM. “Significance of carbonates in irrigation Waters”, Soil Science, 69:123-134, 1950.
12. Gibbs RJ. “Mechanism controlling world water chemistry”, Science, 170:795-841, 1976.
13. Islam Mahamudur, Patel Rajkishore. “Thermal activation of basic oxygen furnace slag and evaluation of its
fluoride removal efficiency”, Chemical Engineering Journal, 169(1-3): 68-77, 2011.
14. Janardhana Raju N. “Hydrogeochemical parameters for assessment of groundwater quality in the upper
Gunjanaeru River basin, Cuddapah district, Andhra Pradesh, South India”, Environ Geol, 52: 1067-1074, 2007.
15. Kelly WP. “Permissible composition and concentration of irrigated waters”, Proceedings of the American Society
of Civil Engineers, 66: 607-613, 1940.
16. Kelly WP. “Alkaline soils-Their formation, Properties and Reclamation”, Reunion publication Corporation, New
York, 1951.
17. Kelly WP. “Adsorbed Sodium, cation exchange capacity and percentage sodium adsorption in alkali soils”,
Science, 84: 473-477, 1957.
18. Kumari M, Rai SC. “Hydrogeochemical evaluation of groundwater quality for drinking and irrigation
purposes using water quality index in semi-arid region of India”, J Geol Soc India, 95: 159-168, 2020.
19. Manjunatha MC, Basavarajappa HT. “Spatio-temporal variation in groundwater quality analysis on
Chitradurga district, Karnataka, India using Geoinformatics technique”, Journal of International Academic
Research for Multidisciplinary, 3(11): 164-179, 2015.
20. Norris RD. “In-situ Bioremediation of Groundwater and Geological Material”, A Review of Technologies,
EPA/600/R-93/124 (NTIS PB93-215564), 1992.
21. Obed Fiifi Fynn, Elikplim Abla Dzikunoo, Larry Pax Chegbeleh, Sandow Mark Yidana. “Enhancing
adaptation to climate change through groundwater-based irrigation”, Sustainable Water Resources Management,
9: 1-36, 2023.
22. Piper AM. “A graphic procedure in the geochemical interpretation of water-analyses”, Eos, Transactions
American Geophysical Union , 25(6): 914-928, 1994.
23. Radhakrishna BP, Vaidyanathan R. “Geology of Karnataka”, Geol Soc of India, Bangalore, 1-353, 1997.
24. Ramakrishnan M, Vaidyanadhan R. “Geology of India”, Bangalore, 2:1-428, 2010.
25. Ramesh K, Elango L. “Groundwater quality and its suitability for domestic and agricultural use in Tondiar
river basin, Tamil Nadu, India”, Environ Monit Assess, 184: 3887-3899, 2012.
26. Ramesh K. “Hydrochemical studies and effect of Irrigation on groundwater quality in tondiar basin, Tamil
nadu”, PhD Thesis, Anna University , 1-184, 2007.
27. Sarbajna C, Pandey UK, Krishnamurthy. “Geochemistry and petrogenesis of 2.8 Ga old rare metal bearing
fertile granite at Allapatna, Mandya district, Karnataka”, J Geol Soc India, 91: 67-75, 2018.
28. Singaraja C. “GIS-Based suitability measurement of groundwater resources for irrigation in Thoothukudi
district, Tamil Nadu, India”, Water Qual Expo Health , 7: 389-405, 2015.
29. Sivakarun N, Udayaganesan P, Chidambaram S, Venkatramanan S, Prasanna M.V, Praddep K, Banajarani
Panda. “Factors determining the hydrogeochemical processes occurring in shallow groundwater of coastal
alluvial aquifer, India”, Geochemistry, 80(4): 125623, 2020.
30. Szabolcs L, Darab C. “The influence of irrigation water of high sodium carbonate content of soils”, Proceedings
of 8th International Congress of ISSS , 2:803-812, 1964.
71560
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.15 / Issue 83 / Apr / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997

Sagar et al.,

31. Terlumun Adagba, Aliyu Ibrahim Kankara, Musa Ado Idris. “Evaluation of Groundwater suitability for
irrigation purpose using GIS and irrigation water quality indices”, FUDMA J. of Sci, 6(2): 63-80, 2022.
32. Throne DW, Peterson HB. “Irrigated soils, constable and company”, London, 1954.
33. USSL. “Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkaline soils”, US Salinity Laboratory , Agriculture
Handbook No.60, USDA, 1-160, 1954.
34. WHO. “World Health Organization”, Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality, Recommendations, 4th Edition,
Geneva 27, 2010.
35. Wilcox LV. “Classification and use of irrigation waters”, US Department of Agriculture Circular, Washington
D C, 969:1-19, 1955.

Table.1. Standard Permissible Limit Analysis for Groundwater Parameters with WHO and BIS
WHO standards B.I.S Standards
Well numbers exceed Well numbers exceed
Parameters Desirable Permissible Desirable Permissible
Permissible limit Permissible limit
Limits Limits Limits Limits
pH 7 - 8.5 6.5 - 9.5 6.5 8.5
TH (mg/l) 200 600 21 300 600 19, 21, 36, 64, 66
Cl- (mg/l) 200 600 250 1000
SO42-
200 400 200 400
(mg/l)
NO3-
45 45 11,18,39,68 45 - 11,18,39,68
(mg/l)
Ca 2+ (mg/l) 75 200 75 200
Mg2+
50 150 21 30 100 21
(mg/l)
TDS 500 2000 500 1500 21
F- 1.0 1.5 1.0 -

Table.2. Water quality results of Mandya district

Parameters Minimum Maximum Mean Standard deviation
F- 0.20 0.60 0.34 0.12
NO3- 0.80 78.95 19.27 19.08
Ca2+ 14.40 144.00 67.53 25.45
Mg 2+ 6.40 111.60 34.90 22.26
Na + 21.95 276.65 68.85 41.08
K+ 0.28 73.91 5.28 9.16
SO42- 2.98 251.00 47.82 44.18
Cl- 13.00 254.00 63.48 51.54
CO3- 0.10 5.49 1.23 0.92
HCO3- 94.30 900.30 346.47 132.35
pH 6.79 8.00 7.50 0.26
EC 291.00 2472.00 883.94 379.72
TH 72.00 725.00 316.02 126.12
TDS 176.00 1562.00 552.92 242.42

Table.3. USDA salinity laboratory Class

EC in
TDS Salinity Potential injury and necessary management for Wells, No fall under the
Μs/cm
(mg/l) Class use in irrigation water Class
at 25° C

71561
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.15 / Issue 83 / Apr / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Sagar et al.,

Excellent or Low Salinity hazards are generally not a problem

>150 >250 Nil
Low C1 additional management is not needed
1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 14, 24, 25,
Medium Salinity hazard damage to salt-sensitive
150- Good or 26, 28, 30, 31, 32, 34, 45,
250-750 plants may occur. Occasionally flushing with low-
500 Medium C2 48, 51, 52, 53, 55, 56, 58,
salinity water may be necessary
62, 63, 65, 67, 68, 69, 70
5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16,
High Salinity hazard damage to plants with low
17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25,
tolerance to salinity will likely to occur. Plants
500- Permissible 27, 29, 33, 35, 36, 37, 38,
750-2250 growth and quality will be improved with excess
1500 or High C3 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 46,
irrigation for leaching or periodic use of low
47, 49, 50, 57, 59, 60, 61,
salinity water and good drainage provided
64, 66
Very high salinity hazard, damage to plants with
high tolerance to salinity may occur. Successful
1500- 2250- Unsuitable or use as an irrigation source requires salt tolerance
21
3000 5000 Very High C4 plants, good soil drainage, and excess irrigation
for leaching and periodic utilization of low salinity
water.

Table.4. Irrigation water quality based on Sodium Absorption Ratio

SAR values Class of water No. of Samples
<10 Excellent 70
10-18 Good -
18-26 Fair -
>26 Poor -

Table.5. Classification based on USSL Diagram

Irrigation Water No of Wells in the
Groups USDA Class
Class Class
Group-
C1-S1, C2-S1 Suitable to use 31
1
Group- Conditionally
C1-S2, C2-S2, C3-S1, C3-S2 38
2 suitable
Group- C1-S3, C1-S4, C2-S3, C2-S4, C3-S3, C3-S4, C4-S1, C4-S2,
Unsuitable 1
3 C4-S3, C4-S4

Table.6. Irrigation water quality based on Residual Sodium Carbonate

Range of RSC Class No. of Sample
<1.25 Safe 66
1.25-2.5 Moderate 3
>2.5 Unsuitable 1

Table.7. Classification of irrigation water based on Sodium percent [21]

Sodium Suitability for
Well No, fall under class
Percent irrigation
>20 Excellent 24, 25, 44, 49, 59, 64, 65, 66, 67
1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 22, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 33, 34, 36, 37, 38, 39,
20-40 Good
42, 43, 45, 46, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 68, 69

71562
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.15 / Issue 83 / Apr / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Sagar et al.,

40-60 Permissible 2, 8, 12, 13, 15, 18, 21, 23, 31, 32, 35, 40, 41, 47, 48, 55, 70
60-80 Doubtfull -Nil-
>80 Unsuitable -Nil-

Fig. 1. (a) Sample location map; (b) Lithology map of Fig.2 (a) Lineaments overlaid on agricultural lands; (b)
Mandya district Gibbs Plot showing Rock-Water Interaction as main
process governing groundwater chemistry

Fig.3. (a) Spatial distribution of EC (μS/cm); (b) USSL Fig.4. (a) Wilcox Scatter diagram EC v/s Sodium percent;
Diagram classifying the Water for irrigation (b) Doneen Classification of irrigation water based on
Permeability Index

Fig.5. (a) Spatial variation of Magnesium Hazard; (b) Fig.6. Piper’s Diagram showing hydrogeochemical facies
Kelly’s Ratio

71563