92 A dvances in Environmental Biology, 3(1): 92-100, 2009 ISSN 1995-0756

92
A dvances in Environmental Biology, 3(1): 92-100, 2009
ISSN 1995-0756
© 2009, A merican-Euras ian Network for Scientific Information
T his is a refereed journal and all articles are professionally screened and reviewed
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Water Pollution Status Assessment of King Talal Dam, Jordan
1
Khalid G. Fandi,
2,3
Isam Y. Qudsieh, 3Suleyman A. Muyibi, 4Muhannad Massadeh
1
Department of Biology Faculty of Science , A l -H u s sein Bin Talal University,
Jordan,
2
Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ja z a n U n i v e r sity,
Jazan, Saudi Arabia.
3
Bioenvironmental Engineering Research Unit (BERU) Department of Biotechnology
of Engineering International Islamic University Malaysia P.O. Box 10
50728 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
4
Department of Biological Sciences and Biotechn o logy Faculty of Science The
13115, Al-Zarqa, Jordan
P.O Box 20, Ma'an,
P.O. Box 706, 45142
Engineering F a c u l ty
Hashemite University
Khalid G. Fandi, Is am Y. Quds ieh, Suleyman A . M uyibi, M uhannad M as s adeh: W ater Pollution
Status A s s es s ment of King Talal Dam, Jordan: Am.-Eurasian J. S u s t a i n . Agric., 3(1): 92-100,
2009
ABS TRACT
King Talal Dam (KTD) res ervoir, Jordan's larges t surface res erv o ir, is t h reatened by the activities
of the catchment’s area, both domes tic and indus trial, whic h e mit untreated was te into the res ervoir’s
tributaries , cons equently, raising the pollution and co n t a min ating the water chemically and biologically.
T h e re fo re , the objective of this s tudy was to as s es s the water quality and the pollution load to th e
res ervoir in t e rms o f s ome cardinal water quality parameters . W ater s amples obtained from ins ide and
releas e outlet s ite of the dam were chemically tes ted by a n alyzing the pres ence of heavy metals ,
phenolic compounds , trace elements us ing as a s creening tool ICP-M S, GCM S, and other e q uipment
for phys ico-chemical and other parameters . For the biolo g ic a l s c reening, eos ine methylene blue (EM B)
media was us ed to inves tigate the pres ence of the fecal coliform and E. coli. Re s u lt s o b t a ined from
this s tudy s howed that th e c oncentration of analyzed metals (Cu, Zn, Cd, Cr, Fe, Hg, Pb, M o and
M n) and other parameters (p H , EC, TDS, BOD, turbidity) are within the recommended s tandard limits
fo r t h es e contents in irrigation water. A ls o, res ults obtained from this s tudy indicates the pollutio n
tendencies of the s u rfa c e w a ters of KTD res ervoir, attributable to high levels of organic compounds ..
Res ults revealed s ignifica n t toxicity of phenolic compounds was found in water s amples , indicating the
water quality of thes e s ample s is not potable. It is mainly due to the pres ent of biological
contamination. The maximum concentrations of phenol was (2.09 mg l-1 ) and (1.82 mg l-1 ) fo r o u t let
and ins ide w a ter s amples res pectively. A mong the s elected phenolic compounds , the mos t frequently
detected w e re cyclohexane and benzene, which was found to be pres ent in all s ampling s ites . A ll the
analyzed s ample s o f fecal coliform s howed contaminated s tatus ranging between 1.1 ´ 103 to 2.1 ´ 106
CFU 100 ml-1 from water and s ewage s amples res pectively. E. coli c ounts were more than 1.1 ´ 102
CFU in 100 ml-1 in all s amples which indicates that our irrig a t io n w a ter have biological pollution
which is very alarming. This s t u d y p ro vides a very us eful amount of information for detecting potential
toxicity ris ks .
Key words: King Talal Dam, Biological Pollu t a n t s , P henolic Compounds , GC/M S, Surface W ater Quality,
Heavy M etals
Corres ponding Author
Khalid G. Fandi, 1Department of Biology Faculty of Science, Al-Hussein Bin Talal University,
P.O Box 20, M a'an, Jordan,
H/P: +962777718013
Email: [email protected]
Adv. Environ. Biol., 3(1): 92-100, 2009
Introduction
The Kin g T alal Dam (KTD) is a larges t
s urface res ervoir in the hills of northern Jordan,
which was originally cons tructed in 1977 to
provide a s torage capacity of 55 million m3
(M CM ). To meet t h e country's increas ed water
demands , in 1984 work to rais e the dam further
w a s begun, , a project that was completed in
1988 w it h a gros s s torage capacity of 86 M CM .
The ma in purpos e of this res ervoir is to s upply
agricultural irrigation water to the J o rdan Valley.
M eanwhile, the water from KTD re s e rv o ir is us ed
to irrigate lands within the middle an d s outhern
zones of the Jordan Valley [1]. T h e Has hemite
Kingdom of Jordan: W ater Sector Revie w U p date.
M a in Re p o rt . F e b ru a ry 1 5 , 2 001. Ru ra l
Development, W ater and Environment Group &
In fras tructure Development Group, M iddle Eas t
an d N o rth A frica Region. Report No. 21946-JO.]
Zarqa River is the main artery flow ove r the
KTD. The flow charac t eris tics have been further
modified by t h e dis charge to the river of treated
do mes tic and indus trial was tewater that compos e
nearly all of th e s u mmer flow and s ubs tantially
degrad e t h e water quality. W ater quality from the
KTD is d ra ma t ic a lly d e t e rioration after the
es tablis hment of the larges t was tewater treatment
plants (W W T P ) in 1985 at A s -Samra which is
about 42 km ups tream the res ervoir. The treated
was tewater, dis charged through the Zarqa River to
KTD and s pilled out do w n s tream until it reaches
to the Jordan Valle y area, is mainly us ed for
irrigation purpos es . Therefore, a ny pollution in the
river will lead to pollution in the d a m, w h ich in
turn may affect the qua lity of agricultural produce
in t h e Jordan Valley, which is partially irrigated
from its waters [2].
For the time being, K T D water is mixed
wit h treated was tewater which comes from the
A s -Samra W W TP at a rate of 70 M CM Y-1 [3].
The tre a t e d effluent from the W W TP is mixed
with fres h water res ource from the Zarqa River
Bas in in a ratio of approximately 1:1 [4] before
it dis charged to W adi Zarka Ba s in s ys tem and
flows into the res ervoir [2]. Subs e q u ently, the
amount of s ew age flowing into the A s -Samra
was tewater treatment plant has been increas ing
rapidly and has overloaded almos t three time s the
plant's des igned capacity [5], mainly due to the
high population growth in th e me t ro p o lit a n
A mma n-Zarqa area. A ls o, the KTD res ervoir is
threatened by factories indus trial areas , w hich
emit untrea t e d w a s t e in t o t h e re s e rv o ir’s
tributaries , rais ing s alinity and levels of chemical
and metal [6]. M oreover, groundwater s alinis a t ion
and agricultural res idues als o influence s urface
waters , s o that, the re s e rvoir was reported to be
highly euth ro p hic [6, 7]. It is neces s ary to
det e rmine the water quality for agriculture s ince
it plays an important role in s oil for growing
crops [8]. W hile there is little evidence [9] of
93
real deterioration of s oil quality from irrigatio n
u s in g K T D w a t e r, there t e n d s t o b e a
ps ychological avers ion to cons uming th is produce.
Concern over microbiological contamination has
lead to res trictions on the us e of the treated
was tewate r. Typically, green vegetables are not
irrigated with this water, while fruit trees a re .
A ls o , g roundwater in the area of the plant has
witnes s ed s erious deterioration [10].
W ater quality concerns dominated the earlies t
dev e lo p me n t a l p h a s e s . P o p ulation increas es ,
ho w e v er, exert more pres s ure on limited high
quality s urface s ources and contaminated water
s ources with human and indus t ria l was tes , which
led to deteriorating water quality. The activitie s
in catchment's area of the KTD have the main
contribution and effect in the water quality by
polluting and contaminat in g the water chemically
and biologically. Recently, new plant was in itiated
by the government to u p g ra de A s -s amra W W TP
to improve the quality of its effluent dis charges
and to reduce its impact on the Zarqa River.
This s tudy focus e s o n the pres ent water quality
of the KTD and defin e s the exis ting problem
encountered with the water quality in res pect of
the agricultural irrigation purpos e. A full d eep
s tu d y and further inves tigations will be beneficial
to determine the problem s tatement by identifying
the t y p e of contaminants which can lead the
government to the s o urce of the contamination
and the type of tre a t me nt required. Some data on
KTD water quality are available [11], but little
or any information have been provided o n the
bioavailable heavy me n t al and organic fractions of
the res ervoir. Phenol and p h e n olic compounds are
a group of organic pollutants that often appear in
w a s t e w a t e rs fro m ma n y h e a v y c h e mic a l,
petroch e mical, and oil refining indus tries . Becaus e
of their toxicity and poor biodegradability [12],
phe nolic compounds are important water pollutant
which are s ubject to legis lation, even at low
concentration. A European Community directive
s pecifies a legal tolerance le v e l o f 0.1 ìg l!1 for
each phenolic c o mp o u nds and 0.5 ìg l!1 for the
s u m of all compounds in water intended for
human cons umption [13, 14][2] EEC Drinking
W ater Gu id e lin e 80/ 779/ EECN O L 229/ 11–29,
1980.. Hence, the pres ent res earch was carried
out o n KTD to determine the phys ico-chemical
characte ris t ic s , h e a v y metals , biological, and
phenolic compounds in s urface water, this planned
res earch will be helpful to as s e s s the impact of
the pollution of th e catchment’s area effluent in
KTD on the s urrounding water bodies .
Materials and Methods
Sample collection and preparation
Surface water s amples (raw water) of KTD
were collected about 10 cm below the water
s urface us ing glas s bo t t les . W ater s amples in this
Adv. Environ. Biol., 3(1): 92-100, 2009
s tudy were collected in July 2007 from d ifferent
places (Ins ide a n d o u t let) of the KTD (Fig. 1).
Standard procedures w e re fo llo w e d fo r the
collection of water s amples for phys ico-chemical
ana ly s is . Polyethylene bottles were us ed to s tore
s urface water s amp les bas ed on the methods
d e s cribed in A PHA [15]. For biological analys is
and placed in an ice b ox and trans ported to the
laboratory for immediate analys is . T h e s amples
were s tored at 1 – 4 ° C t e mperature prior to
analys is in the laboratory. W a t e r s amples collected
were filtered through 0.45 ìm membrane filt e r
paper (M illipore®) us ing glas s filtration unit and
acidified w it h concentrated HNO3 acids in order
to pres e rv e t h e me t a ls and als o to avoid
precipitation [16].
Water quality analysis
The w a t e r p H , t e mp e ra t u re , electrical
conductivity (EC) and total dis s olved s olid (TDS)
we re d etermined at the time of s ampling in the
fie ld us ing a portable W TW Cond. 315i HA N N A ,
HI991301 M odel Oaklab. Total Solid (TS), Total
Sus pended Solid (TSS), were determined according
to A PHA methods [16]. Chemical oxygen dema nd
(COD), Dis s olved Oxygen (DO ) and Biological
oxyg e n d e mand (BOD) were als o determined
following the procedure of Hamer [17].
ICP-MS analysis
For determining heavy metal conc e n trations ,
50 ml of each water s amples we re a c idified with
approximately 0.5 ml o f c o ncentrated HNO3
(M erck, s uprapur) and pas s e d t h ro u g h a cid
was hed folded filters (M N 280 1/4, M achereyNagel). The filt rate was s tored in acid was hed
polypropylene tubes (62.548.004 PP, Sars tedt) u n til
it was mea s u red. Inductively Coupled Plas ma-M as s
S p e c t ro s c o p y (ICP -M S ) O p tima 2000 D V,
s pectrometer A utos ampler model (PerkinElme r) was
us ed to d e termine and accurately the trace metal
concentrations in water s amples . The validation of
t h e p ro c e d u re fo r metal determination wa s
conducted by s piking s amples with multielement
s tandard s olution containing 0.5 mg l-1 of all
me tals analys ed. Spiked s amples were analys ed
under the s ame experimental conditions us ed for
procedural blanks and s amples . A cceptable (>90%)
recov e ries from the s piking experiment validate
the experimental procedure.
Gas Chromatograph - Mass Spectrophotometer
Capillary GC/M S analys is
an A gile n t (P alo A lto, CA ,
gas chromatograph, equipped
injection port, interfaced to
was carried o ut on
USA ) M odel 6890N
with a s plit/s plitles s
an A gilent 5975C
94
inert ma s s -s elective detector (M SD). For each
s ample, 10 ml of water was placed in a 20-ml
tes t tube (with s crew cap) or a reactio n vial and
dis s olved in 10 ml of h e xa n e . A 100 µl of 2N
potas s ium h y d ro xide in methanol (11.2 g in 100
ml) was a d d ed. Samples were vortex for 30
s econds . A fter then centrifu g ed at 4000 g for 3
min and the clear s upernatant w a s trans ferred to
a 2-ml autos ampler vial [18].
A DB-5M S fus ed s ilica capillary column
(J&W Scient ific, Fols om, CA , USA ) was us ed;
t h e dimens ions of the column were 30 m × 0.25
mm i.d ., 0.25 µm film thicknes s . Ultra hig h
purity heliu m (He) with an in-line A lltech oxygen
trap was u s ed as carrier gas . The carrier gas -line
pres s ure was s et at a flow of 1.0 ml min - 1 and
c o lu mn h e a d p re s s u re at 26.04 p s i. T h e
temperature of the in jector was maintained at 320
NC and the injected s ample v olume was 1.0 µl
in the s plitles s mo d e with 1:50 s plit ratio. The
in terface temperature was held at 280 NC. T h e
c o l u m n t e m p e ra t u re p ro g ra m w a s : o v e n
equilibration time 1 min; initial temperature 120
N C for 3 min, then rais ed to 292 NC at a ra t e
of 5 NC/min and then to 320N at a ra t e of 30
NC/ min with a final is otherm of 2 min. The
ma s s s p e c t ro me t e r w a s c a l i b r a t e d w it h
p e rflu o ro tributylamine at an ele c t ro n imp a c t
ionization energy of 70 eV. The identific a tion of
individual peaks in t he total ion chromatogram
was done by the A gilent data s ys te m having a
NBS mas s s pectra lib ra ry of about 40 000
compounds .
Microbiological parameters
Bacteriological analys is of w ater s amples
colle c t e d from five different s ites of KTD was
conducted after s a mp lin g . T h e p res ence of
Coliforms and E. coli s pecifically was tes ted
us ing Co lit a g T M kit . A t ra n s p a re n t b o ttle
containing 100 ml of wat e r s ample mixed with
Colitag re a gents was incubated at 37°C overnight.
A fter incubation, the b o t t les were examined for
yellow color formation which indicated coliforms
pres ence. Pos itive bottles we re then checked for
the pres ence of E.coli by looking for fluore s cence
under UV light. Standard Plate count me t h o d was
us ed for further water ana lys is . Liquefied tubes
containing Tryptone glucos e agar were ino culated
with 1 ml of water s ample, mixed and poured
into a Petri d is h. The Petri dis hes were then
in c u bated at 37°C for 24 hours . The amount of
bacteria in water is expres s ed as t he number of
Colony Forming Units per 100 milliliters (CFU
100 ml - 1 ). Total coliforms and E. coli were
analyzed u s ing Eos ine M ethylene Blue (EM B)
agar plates and Lactos e broth w it h Durham tube
[19].
Adv. Environ. Biol., 3(1): 92-100, 2009
95
Fig. 1: Locations of the s ampling s ites on KTD by Google earth
Res ults and Dis cus s ion
Physico-chemical analysis
A s umma ry
o f t h e p h y s ic o -c h e mical
parameters obtained in KTD for two differe nt
s ites are pres ente d o n T able 1. pH was found to
b e a ll alkaline in nature in the range between
7.76 to 8.24 in s ummer. W HO has recommended
maximum permis s ible limit of p H from 6.5 to
9.2 [20]. On the whole the KTD has pH values
within the des irable and s uitable range. The high
pH valu e s d u ring s ummer may be due to high
photos ynthes is of micro and macro vegetation
res ulting in high production of free CO2, s hifting
the equilibrium towards alkaline s ide [21].
The value of total dis s olved s olid (TDS)
ranges from 1.98-2.36 mg l-1 all the values of
total dis s olved s olid is in the pres cribed limit o f
W HO [22] it is d u e t o high dis s olved s alts of
Ca, M g a n d F e . D e termination of TDS is
as s ociated w ith the general acceptance of water
by population as its pres ence in e xc e s s ive
quantities reduces t he palatability and imparts bad
tas te to water [23].
Turbidity was fo u n d in the range of 8.11 to
32.8 NTU of outlet to ins ide s ample res pectively.
T u rbidity level exceeding 10 NTU in the dam
water, affects the aes thetic quality of wa t e r,
s ig n ific antly. W ater may not be s a fe fro m
hygie n ic point of view as under s uch conditions
it b e c omes very difficu lt t o ma in t a in t h e
minimum des irable limit of chlorine in the water.
Electrical conductivity (EC) of water is als o
an important parameter for water quality. The
values of EC we re 1240 ìS cm-1 for both
s amples s ites (Table 1). H igher conductivity of
water could indicates high amount of ion s t h a t
exceed the recommended limit by W HO [22].
A range of 4.1-6.2 ppm of Biochemical
Oxygen Demand (BOD) was obtained at ins ide
and out le t s amples res pectively (Table 1). BOD
indicates the pres ence of microbial activities and
dead organic matte r on which microbes can feed.
BO D is directly linked with decompos ition of
dead organic matt e r pres ent in the dam and
hence the higher values of BOD can b e d irectly
rela t ed with pollution s tatus of the dam. A n
invers e relations hip w a s fo u n d b etween the
dis s olved oxy g e n concentration and biological
oxygen demand values [24].
Chemic a l Oxygen Demand (COD) indicates
the pollution level of a water body a s it is
relate d t o t he organic matter pres ent in the dam
[22]. COD concentra tions in the range of 19-39
ppm were obtained in the outlet and ins ide
s amples res pectively (Table 1). F rom the obs erved
value of Bio-Chemical Oxygen Demand, it may
s afely be c oncluded that the bacteriological load
in KTD is high due to Eutrophicat io n a nd
dumping of was te materials . From the obs ervation
it is als o s een that th e Ch e mic a l O xy gen
De mand (COD) was s lightly higher. This is als o
a bad indication.
Microbial analysis
The pres ence o f fecal coliform is an index
of biological pollution in water s amples . The
analytical data values of feca l c o liform bacteria
and E. c o l i a re pres ented in Table-2. The
bacteriological contamination of t o tal coliform at
the four water s a mples obtained from different
s ites of KTD exces s ively exceeded the permis s ible
limit. Fecal coliform s howed a wide amplitude of
variation at all the s tudy point s and it ranged
fro m 1.1 ´ 103 CUF 100 ml-1 to 2.3 ´ 104 CUF
100 ml-1 . In ra w s e w age concentration of total
Adv. Environ. Biol., 3(1): 92-100, 2009
96
Table 1: Physico Chemical Parameters of KT D during
Sampling point at the dam pH*
EC(ìs cm -1)
Inside
7.76
1420
Outlet
8.24
1420
summer at two selected sites of
T DS (mg l -1) VDS (mg l -1)
2.36
1.1
1.98
0.42
inside and outlet of the dam
T urbidity (NT U)
BOD5
32.8
4.1%
8.11
6.2%
Table 2: Analytical data of cations and heavy metals. T he determination of trace elements i n K T D w at ers
Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectroscopy (ICP-MS).
Sampling point at the dam
Heavy metals (mg l -1)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Cu
Zn
Cr
Mn
Fe
Co
Ref. Values:
Inside
Outlet
0.01
0.00031
0.00014
0.01
Nil
Nil
Ref. Values:
Inside
Outlet
0.01
0.0058
0.0038
0.01
0.0122
0.119
Ref. Values:
Inside
Outlet
COD
39
19
(mg l -1)
b y Inductively
0.01
0.05
0.05
0.01
Nil
0.0006
0.0006
0.009
Nil
0.2995
0.0236
0.004
Heavy metals (mg l -1)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Mo
Sn
Pb
Ni
Hg
Phenol
0.01
0.05
0.0003
0.0032
Nil
0.0034
Cations (mg l -1)
-----------------------------------------------Mg+
Na+
Ca+
30
49.19
58.61
60
263.3
241.9
0.01
0.0034
0.0018
1.829
2.092
30
116.1
152.7
coliform and fecal coliform was 1.7 ´ 107 and
2.1 ´ 106 CUF 100 ml- 1 res pectively. A ll the
analyzed s amples s how contaminate d s tatus and E.
coli coun t s w e re more than 1.1 ´ 102 CUF 100
ml - 1 s ample. The pres ence of fecal colifo rm
bacteria indicates t h at the water is contaminated
with fecal human or animal w a s te, while the
total coliform c o u nts indicate that the water is
c o n taminated with both fecal was te and other
bacteria from the s oil. The larg e number of
b a c t e ria pres ent in was tewater not only pos e a
healt h h a zards to the pers on who us es it for
irrigation but als o there is ris k of contaminating
fo od products [ ]. W HO s tandards for the us e of
was tewater in agricultural prod uction for export
g e n e rally require a level of treatment that ens ure s
t h at the fecal coliform content of the was tewat e r
is le s s than 103 CFU 100 ml-1 [25]. The res ults
obtained from this s tudy in w a s exceeded the
irrig ation reus e s tandard limited of 1000 mos t
probable number M PN of fecal coliform p e r 100
ml and the treated was tewater s tandard limit fo r
total coliform [26], it indicates that our irrigation
channels have biological pollu tion which is very
alarming.
plants and microorganis ms , wh ile many other
metals like Cd, Cr and Pb have no known
phys iological activ it y , b u t t h e y a re proved
detrime ntal beyond a certain limit [28, 29] which
is very mu ch narrow for s ome elements like Cd
(0.01 mg l-1 ), Pb (0.10 mg l - 1 ) and Cu (0.050
mg l-1 ). The dea dlier dis eas es like edema of
e y e lids , tumor, conges tion of nas a l mu c o u s
membranes and pharynx, s tu ffines s of the head
a n d g a s t ro in t e s t in a l, mus cular, reproductiv e ,
neurological a n d genetic malfunctions caus ed by
s o me o f t h e s e heavy me t a ls h a v e b e e n
documented [30, 31]. Th e refore, monitoring thes e
metals is important for s afety as s es s me nt of the
environment and human health in particular. The
trace elements analys is was carried out through
UPM laboratories us ing ICP-M S. The average
analytical res ults of trace ele ments of the KTD
water s amples are pres ented in Table 3. The
res ults indicate that all of the heavy me t als ,
compared with the optimum concentrations of
idea l c o n c e n t ra t io n s [32], w e re within the
accepted limits for irrigation.
Heavy metals analysis
Organic c ompounds analyzed by GCM S in
the KTD water s a mples s tudies are s hown in
Table 4. A typical computerized recons tructed ion
chromatogram of phenolic comp ounds for which
the water s amples were analyzed is s hown in
Figure 2.
The high chemical variability s hown by the
row water s amples in s tudy were obs erved. M ore
than 100 compounds w e re detected in the organic
A mong t h e inorganic contaminants of the
KTD water, heavy metals a re getting importance
fo r t h e ir non-degradable nat u re a n d o ft e n
ac c u mu la t e t h ro u g h t ro pic level caus ing a
deleterious biological effect [27]. Though s ome of
the metals like Cu, Fe, M n, Ni and Zn are
es s ential as micronutrients for life p ro ces s es in
Chemical analysis
Adv. Environ. Biol., 3(1): 92-100, 2009
Table 3: Analytical data of faecal Coliform (E. coli)
Sample
T otal Plate count
Faecal Coliform
(CFU100 ml -1 )
bacteria (CFU100 ml -1 )
Raw Sewage
1.7 × 107
2.1 × 10 6
Sample 1
1.6 × 103
2.3 × 10 4
Sample 2
1.4 × 103
1.8 × 10 4
Sample 3
1.1 × 103
1.3 × 10 4
Sample 4
1.6 × 102
1.1 × 10 3
97
Escherichia coli
levels (CFU 100 ml -1)
1.4 × 10 3
1.6 × 10 2
1.4 × 10 2
1.3 × 10 2
1.1 × 10 2
pH
7.4
7.1
7.4
7.6
7.3
Table 4: Organic compounds identified by GCMS in the KT D water samples and their percentage of apparition
Library/ID
CAS #
R.T min
% of total
4-Decene, 3-methyl-, (E)062338-47-0
3.318
0.78%
3-Heptene, 2-methyl-,(E)000692-96-6
3.318
0.78%
3-Ethyl-4-methyl-2- pentene
019780-68-8
3.349
1.82%
2-Methyl-2-heptene
000627-97-4
3.349
1.82%
1-Hexene,3,3,5-trimethyl013427-43-5
3.349
1.82%
Dodecane,4,6-dimethyl061141-72-8
4.104
0.77%
Undecane,4,6-dimethyl017312-82-2
4.104
0.77%
Dodecane, 2,7,10-trimethyl074645-98-0
4.168
1.29%
Undecane
001120-21-4
4.217
1.03%
Benzene, 1,2,3-trimethyl000526-73-8
4.724
1.18%
Cyclopentane, (2-methylbutyl)053366-38-4
4.921
3.25%
Cyclohexane, 1,1,2-trimethyl007094-26-0
4.921
3.25%
1-Hexene, 3,3-dimethyl003404-77-1
4.986
4.62%
2,3-Dimethyl-3-heptene,Z)059643-73-1
5.048
3.47%
Nitric acid, nonyl ester
020633-13-0
5.048
3.47%
Hexacosane
000630-01-3
5.554
0.70%
Dodecane, 1-iodo004292-19-7
5.622
1.51%
Sulfurous acid, 2-ethylhexyl hexyl
1000309-20-2
5.622
1.51%
Undecane, 3,6-dimethyl
017301-28-9
5.683
1.99%
Nonane, 4,5-dimethyl
017302-23-7
5.683
1.99%
Benzene, 1,3-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl
001014-60-4
5.748
6.14%
Benzene, 1,4-bis(1,1-dimethylethyl
001012-72-2
5.748
6.14%
Heptadecane
000629-78-7
5.814
1.17%
T ridecane, 1-iodo035599-77-0
5.814
1.17%
2-Bromo dodecane
013187-99-0
5.814
1.17%
1-Hexene, 3,5,5-trimethyl004316-65-8
5.999
0.75%
2-Nonanol, 5-ethyl000103-08-2
5.999
0.75%
Cyclooctane, butyl016538-93-5
5.999
0.75%
Cyclohexane,1-ethyl-2,3-d-imethyl007058-05-1
6.278
1.24%
Cyclohexane,1,1,3,5-tetramethyl-,
050876-31-8
6.278
1.24%
1-Hexadecanol, 2-methyl002490-48-4
6.393
2.31%
Cyclohexane, 1,1,3,5-tetramethyl-,cis050876-32-9
6.393
2.31%
1-Butene, 3,3-dimethyl000558-37-2
6.536
1.22%
2-Pentene, 2-methyl000625-27-4
6.536
1.22%
Pentadecane, 8-heptyl071005-15-7
6.81
0.46%
Eicosane
000112-9S-8
6.81
0.46%
T etratriacontane
014167-S9-0
6.864
0.45%
Decane, 2-methyl006975-98-0
6.966
0.56%
10-Methylnonadecane
056862-62-5
6.99
0.90%
Octacosane
000630-02-4
7.129
1.05%
Pentacosane
000629-99-2
7.129
1.05%
Methoxyacetic acid,2-tetradecy)ester
1000282-04-8
7.419
0.61%
Cyclohexane, 1-ethyl-2-propyl062238-33-9
7.459
1.37%
Hexene, 2,2,5,5-tetramethyl
000692-47-7
7.459
1.37%
Undecane, 5-methyl001632-70-8
7.611
1.33%
Cyclooctane, ethyl013152-02-8
7.644
3.22%
Nitric acid, nonyl ester
020633-13-0
7.683
1.95%
3-Hexene, 2,2,5,5-tetramethyl-, (Z
000692-47-7
7.683
1.95%
Cyclohexane, 1-ethyl-2,3-dimethyl007058-05-1
7.706
1.14%
Cyclohexane, 1,2,4-trimethyl2002234-75-5
7.774
1.67%
Undecene, 4,5-dimethyl-, [R*,S*- (Z)1_
055170-93-9
7.774
1.67%
Disulfide, di-tert-dodecyl
027458-90-8
8.35
1.74%
Cyclohexane, 1,3,5trimethyl001795-26-2
8.564
0.79%
L -Hexadecanethiol
025360-09-2
8.611
1.10%
Oxalic acid, allyl hexadecyl ester
1000309-24-4
8.674
2.09%
Cyclooctane, ethyl013152-02-8
8.674
2.09%
2-Heptene, 4-methyl-, (E)066225-17-0
8.674
2.09%
T etrapentacontane, 1,54-dibromo
1000156-09-4
8.728
1.98%
T etratetracontane
007098-22-8
8.812
1.08%
Cyclohexane, 2-ethyl-1,3-dimethyl007045-67-2
8.847
0.85%
Pyrene
000129-00-0
8.938
1.15%
Sulfurous acid, butyl undecyl este
1000309-17-8
9.002
0.73%
Adv. Environ. Biol., 3(1): 92-100, 2009
Table 4: Continue
Heneicosane
Pentacosane
T etrapentacontane, 1,54-dibromo
Heptacosane
98
000629-94-7
000629-99-2
1000156-09-4
000593-49-7
9.002
9.319
9.319
9.319
0.73%
0.90%
0.90%
0.90%
Fig. 2: Chromatogram of total phenolic comp o u n d s fro m K T D water of outlet A , and ins ide the
res ervoir B, us ing GCM S. Phenolic compounds are pres ented in Table 4
fraction. The mos t frequently detected compounds
at two s ampling s ites from KTD were bis phenol
A
( B P A ) , o c t y lp h e n o l ( O P ) , 1 , 2 benzenedicarboxylic acid, bis (2-ethylhexyl) e s ter
(D EH P ) a n d 1,2-b e n ze n e d ic a r b o xy lic a c id ,
bis (methylpropyl) es ter (DBP).
A methylated phenolic compound 2,6-bis (1,1dimethylethyl)4-methyl phenol was detected very
Adv. Environ. Biol., 3(1): 92-100, 2009
frequently at all s ampling s ites . The frequency of
p h t h a la t e e s t e r (Benzene dicarboxyclic a c id
diethyl) was highes t among the detected es ters
Samples from the KTD were run, alternately,
fo r the total extractable organics in s can mod e in
order to monitor organic pollution other t han
phenols . M any extractable organics were found in
the KTD durin g t h is s urvey. From the res ults it
is a s s u me d that the res ervoir is organically
polluted with cyclohexanes . S ince the Zarqa river
pas s es through agricultura l areas of northern
Jordan where cyclic pes ticides , ins ecticides and
herbicides are regularly us ed in order to protect
crop from pes ts , it is mos t likely that thes e
compounds have entered the river as water runoff
and pres ent as a photo-geothe rmal degradation by
products of thes e pes ticides .
Recently, A l-Zu’bi [9] reported v arious levels
o f h e a vy metals concentration in the s oil o f
irrigated are a fro m K T D a n d t h e t re a t e d
was tewa t e r dis charged through the Zarqa River to
KTD until it reaches to the Jorda n Valley area,
is a c ceptable for irrigation purpos es . However, the
fate of o t h er pollutants like phenols , chlorophenols
and organochlorine compounds had not been
evaluated. The major s o u rc e s o f wides pread
phenols , chlorophenols and bromophenols in the
water have probably been the indus trial effluents ,
petrochemical, agricultural runoff, chlorination of
w a s t e w a t e r p rior to the dis cha rg e in t h e
waterways and t ra n s fo rma t ion products from
n a t ural and s ynthetic chemicals [33]. Health ris ks
res ulting from phenols and chlorophenols in the
water have not been es tablis hed, however, t hey
are known to caus e tas te and odor problems in
drinking water even at trace level [34].
For the GC, it is clear tha t there are a big
number o f c h emicals involved in the pollution;
expect e d chemicals are more than 100 pollutants
s uch as hexane, toluen e , b e n zene and their
derivat ives . Supported by the res ult of Phenol
which is very high according to W HO s tan d ards
to meet th e d is charge requirements for s ewage
and indus trial effluents (0.001 mg l-1 -W HO) and
for recommended raw w a t er quality criteria and
frequency of monitoring is 0.002 mg l-1 -W HO).
Howe v e r t he res ults of ICP s how that the
pres ence of heavy metals is not contrib uting a lot
in the pollution. Supporting by the COD res ults
w h ic h a re lo w e r than expected. Fro m t h e
s creening, we can s ay that the pollution is n o t
caus ed by hydrocarbon s ources , but it is becaus e
of t h e pres ence of certain chemicals s uch as
phenolic compound s t hat may be dis charged from
the pharmaceutical indus try or another indus tries
involved and located in t h e catchment's area of
the Dam.
The KTD does not comply with the W HO
effluent regulations for thes e parameters and is a
s ignificant point s ource of pollution into the
99
Zarqa river and t h e D a m. The KTD needs
further upgrading t o imp ro v e it s t re a tment
perfo rmance to ens ure s us tainable us e of the
water for the downs t re am us ers . It is not an
e as y job to s elect the type of treatment be fo re
identifying the real p roblem by tes ting the water.
A ds orption treatment by activated ca rb o n is highly
recomme nded or carbon nano tube can be us ed
t o s o lv e t h e p ro b le m o f h e a v y me t a ls .
Biore me diation which is the us e of biological
agent s t o reclaim s oils and waters polluted by
s ubs t a n c es hazardous to human health and/or the
enviro nment; it is an extens ion of biological
t re a t me n t p ro c e s s e s t h a t have been us e d
traditionally to treat was tes in w h ic h microorganis ms ty p ic a lly a re u s ed to biodegrade
environmental pollutants . The t arget of treatment
can be achieved by as s e s s ment of biological
proces s with micro-filtration (M F) us ing hollow
fiber membrane as pretreatme n t fo r Re v e rs e
os mos is RO/ Nano filt ra t io n N F P ro c e s s es ,
as s es s ment of membra n e technologies (NF &RO)
as advanced treatmen t p roces s es , demons trating the
reu s e o f reclaimed water for lands cape irrigation
and eva lu a ting treatment cos ts and economics of
water reus e. It is s till early t o ma ke a decis ion
on what t y p e of treatment can be us ed to s olve
the problem. In fac t a s ampling protocol and
s t rategy mus t be cons idered in add it io n t o
frequently s it e monitoring. This is not a s ingle
hand project, expertis e; profes s ional hands mus t
be involved as well as a s ite vis it will be highly
recommended.
Ack nowledgements
The authors thank to M s . Se Young Kim for
her as s is tance with ICP-M S analy s e s and to M r.
Sukiman for his as s is tanc e w ith GCM S. Special
thanks to the International Is lamic Un ivers ity,
M alays ia for the technical as s is tance for this
s tudy. This s tudy wa s s u p ported by the National
Center for Biotechnology (NCB), Jordan.
References
1.
2.
3.
W orld Bank, 2001. The Has hemite Kingdom
of Jord a n : W ater Sector Review Update.
M ain Report. Febru a ry 15, 2001. Ru ra l
Developmen t, W ater and Environment Group
& Infras tructure Development Group, M iddle
Eas t and North A frica Region, Report No .
21946-JO.
Shatanawi, M . and M . Fayyad, 1996. Effect
of Khirbet A s -Samra treated efflu e nt on the
quality of irrigation water in th e Central
J o rdan Valley. W ater Res earch,
30: 29152920.
W A J, 2003. W ater A uthority of Jordan, Open
files at the W ater A uthority of J o rd a n .
A mman, Jordan.
Adv. Environ. Biol., 3(1): 92-100, 2009
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
A mmary, B.Y., 2007. W as tewater reus e in
J o rdan: Pres ent s tatus and future p la n s .
Des alination, 211: 164-176.
Ba s h ir B., 1999. A s -Samra W a s t e w a t e r
T re a t me n t Plant Jordan Valley A uthority ,
M in is t ry o f F o re ig n A f f a i r s , J a p a n .
http://www.mofa.go.jp/regio n/middle_e/peacepro
ces s /ewg/mis s ion9903/jordan2.html.
Gideon, R., 1991. The pot e ntial impact of
in d u s t ria l w a s tes on water res ources in
A mman-Zarqa b a s in. Proc. Sec. Environ. Poll.
Symp. 1990. Frie d e rich Ebert Stiftung GoetheIns titut, A mman W ater Res earch and S t udy
Center. Univers ity of Jordan, A mman.
Hadadin, N.A . and Z.S. T arawneh, 2007.
Environmental Is s ues in Jordan , Solutions and
Re c o mme n d a t io n s . A merican J o u rn a l o f
Environmental Sciences , 3(1): 30-36.
A yers , R. and S. W es cott, 1976. W ater
Q u a lit y fo r A g ric u lt u re, Irriga t io n a n d
Drainag e , FA O Irrigation and Drainage, No.
29, Rome, Italy.
A l-Zu’bi, Y., 2007. Effect of irrigation water
on agricultural s oil in Jordan valley: A n
example from arid area cond it ions . J. of A rid
Env., 70: 63-79.
A l-Kharabs heh, A ., 1999. Ground-w ater quality
deterioration in arid areas : a cas e s tudy of
the Zerqa river bas in as in flu e n ced by
Khirbet Es -Samra was te wa ter (Jordan), J. of
A rid Env., 34: 227-239.
M W I/ A RD ., 2001. Controllin g
H a rmfu l
Dis charges in t h e A mman–Zarqa Bas in, W ater
Reus e Component, W ate r P o licy Support,
M inis try of W ater and Irrigation, A mma n ,
Jordan.
Zahangir, M .A ., A . Suleyman, F. M ariatul et
al., 2006. Removal of p h e nol by activated
carbons prepared from palm o il mill effluent
s ludge. J. of Env Scinces , 18: 446–452.
Drinking W ater Directive, 1980. 80/778/EEC,
Commis s ion of the European Communities .
EEC Drinkin g
W a t e r Gu id e lin e , 1980.
80/779/EECNOL 229/11–29.
A PHA , 1995. Stan d ard methods for the
examination of w a t e r and was te water, 19th.
Ed , A me ric an Public Health A s s ociatio n ,
A merican W ater W orks A s s ocia tion & W ater
Environment Federation, W as hington, DC.
A PHA , 1985. Standa rd M ethods for the
e xa min a t io n of water and was te w a t e r.
A me ric a n P u b lic H e a lt h A s s o c i a t i o n .
W as hington DC, pp: 1244.
Hamer, M .J., 1986. Labora t o ry
c h emical
analys is in water and was tewater techno logy.
2nd Ed. W iley and Sons . New York, pp: 30
- 46.
IUPA C W orks hop 2/87.
100
19. Brown, A .E., 2005. Bens on's M icrobiological
A pplications . 9th ED . M c Gra w Hill. New
York).
20. De A .K., 2002. Environmental Chemis t ry, 4th
Ed ition, New A ge International Publis hers ,
New Delhi, 245-252.
21. Trived i, R.K., 1989. limnology of three fres h
wat e r ponds in M anglore, National Symp. on
A d v a nces in limnology c o n s e rv a t io n o f
endangered fis h s pecies . Oct 23-25. Srinagar.
22. W HO, 1999. Guideline for drinkin g water
quality. 2nd edn. Recommendatio n . W orld
Health Organization Geneva, 1: 30-113.
23. Ra jan M .R. and I. Paneers elvam, 2005.
Ev a lu a t io n o f drinking water quality in
Dindigul city, Tamil Nadu. Indian J. Environ.
and Ecoplan, 10(3): 771-776.
24. Cos cun, I., S. Yu rt e ri, T. M irat and D.
Gurol, 1987. Remo val of dis s olved organic
contaminan t s b y o zo nation. Environmental
Progres s , 6(4): 240-244.
25. W orld Health Organization, 1989. Heal th
guidelines for the use of wastewater i n
agricultu r e and aquaculture (Technical Report
Series 778: 1-74). Geneva: A uthor.
26. Yas s er, K.N., M . M ans our, M . A l N a jjar and
P. G. M cCornick, 2001. W as tewater reus e
law and s tandards in t he kingdom of Jordan.
T h e M inis try of W ate r a n d Irrig a t io n ,
A mman, Jordan.
27. J a in, V.K., 1978. Studies on effect o f
cadmium on the gro w t h pattern of phas eolus
aurius varieties , A bs i, I. Bo t. Conf. JIBS.,
57-84.
28. Bruins , M .R., S. Kapil, F.W . Oehme, 2000.
M ic robial re s is t a n c e t o me t a ls in t h e
e n vironment. Ecotox. Environ. Safe, 45: 198207.
29. M a rs chner, H., 1995. M ineral nutrition o f
higher plants , A cademic Pres s , London.
30. A bbas i, S.A ., N. A bbas i, R. Soni, 1998.
Heavy metal in the environment, 1s t. Ed.,
M ital Publication, New Delhi, India.
31. Ts u ji, L.J.S., J.D. Karagatzides , 2001. Chronic
lead expos ure, body condition and tes tis mas s
in wild M alla rd Ducks , B. Environ. Contam.
Tox., 67: 489-495.
32. A driano, D.C., 1986. Trace Elements in the
Terres trial Env iro n me n t . S p rin g e r, Berlin,
Heideleberg, New York, Tokyo, pp: 536.
33. W egman, R.C.C. and A .W .M . Hofs tee, 1979.
Ch lorophenols in s urface wa t e rs o f t h e
Netherlands
(1976-1977), W ater
Res ., 13:
651-657.
34. Bu rt ts che ll, R.H ., A .A . Ro s e n , F .M .
M iddleton, an d M .B. Ettinger, 1959. Chlorine
derivatives of phenol caus ing tas te and odor,
J. A W W A , 51: 205-214.