Abstract
The impact of land use on water quality is becoming a global concern due to the increasing demand for freshwater. This study aimed to assess the effects of land use and land cover (LULC) on the surface water quality of the Buriganga, Dhaleshwari, Meghna, and Padma river system in Bangladesh. To determine the state of water, water samples were collected from twelve locations in the Buriganga, Dhaleshwari, Meghna, and Padma rivers during the winter season of 2015 and collected samples were analysed for seven water quality indicators: pH, temperature (Temp.), conductivity (Cond.), dissolved oxygen (DO), biological oxygen demand (BOD), nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N), and soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) for assessing water quality (WQ). Additionally, same-period satellite imagery (Landsat-8) was utilised to classify the LULC using the object-based image analysis (OBIA) technique. The overall accuracy assessment and kappa co-efficient value of post-classified images were 92% and 0.89, respectively. In this research, the root mean squared water quality index (RMS-WQI) model was used to determine the WQ status, and satellite imagery was utilised to classify LULC types. Most of the WQs were found within the ECR guideline level for surface water. The RMS-WQI result showed that the “fair” status of water quality found in all sampling sites ranges from 66.50 to 79.08, and the water quality is satisfactory. Four types of LULC were categorised in the study area mainly comprised of agricultural land (37.33%), followed by built-up area (24.76%), vegetation (9.5%), and water bodies (28.41%). Finally, the Principal component analysis (PCA) techniques were used to find out significant WQ indicators and the correlation matrix revealed that WQ had a substantial positive correlation with agricultural land (r = 0.68, P < 0.01) and a significant negative association with the built-up area (r = − 0.94, P < 0.01). To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first attempt in Bangladesh to assess the impact of LULC on the water quality along the longitudinal gradient of a vast river system. Hence, we believe that the findings of this study can support planners and environmentalists to plan and design landscapes and protect the river environment.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Surface water quality is an essential resource for humans, and aquatic life depends on it (Akter et al., 2018; Parween et al., 2022). Therefore, sustainable management of surface water quality has become a global priority (Asha et al., 2020; Uddin et al., 2018; Sultana et al., 2022). Rivers in the world are one of the primary sources of surface water, and they play pivotal roles in ensuring water for drinking, fisheries management, transportation, recreation, power generation, irrigation, and protecting ecosystems worldwide (Edokpayi et al., 2017; Ullah et al., 2018). However, anthropogenic activities, such as the discharge of massive volumes of ineffectively treated or untreated effluent into surface water, contaminate freshwater supplies and limit access to the world’s finite water resources (Uddin et al., 2018; UNESCO, 2021). Researchers projected that climate change would decrease water quality (Cisneros et al., 2014; Delpla et al., 2009). Many developed countries, including Australia, Ireland, Canada, and the UK, have adopted various policies and guidelines to monitor surface water quality for effective water resource management. Still, they need help putting these frameworks in place due to limited resources (Uddin et al., 2020a; Uddin et al., 2020b). On the other hand, approximately three million people (90% of whom are children under the age of five) die every year from waterborne diseases in developing nations, according to the World Health Organization (WHO, 2018) (Dede et al., 2013). Recently, several researchers explained that there is a good relationship between land use and land cover (LULC) and surface water quality (Attua et al., 2014; Bonansea et al., 2021; Chen et al., 2016; Wilson, 2015; Wilson & Weng, 2010; Zhang et al., 2022). LULC results from human and natural activities directly impacting riparian ecosystem services (Tahiru et al., 2020). However, its association with the water quality may vary depending on its spatial scales and patterns (Wu and Lu, 2021). LULC may affect the different physical, chemical, and biological processes of the watershed. As a result, the degradation of surface water quality is among the most severe effects of LULC change. Forest land cover, for example, plays a vital role in maintaining water purity, whereas urban and croplands (with high fertiliser use) degrade water quality (Liu et al., 2016; Mello et al., 2018; Wang & Zhang, 2018; Xiao et al., 2016). The availability of accessible freshwater in volume and quality has declined dramatically due to improper land management practices over the years (Li et al., 2008). Deteriorated water causes ecological imbalances in the surface water body and puts livelihoods and economic viability at risk (Liu et al., 2012). Researchers identified that agriculture, deforestation, and rapid urbanisation are the three main factors affecting surface water quality (Muhammaed et al., 2022). Therefore, monitoring and reporting surface water quality and identifying its relation to LULC have become crucial issues.
Generally, water quality analysis is mandatory for monitoring spatio-temporal variations in physical, biological, and chemical indicators of water (Fashae et al., 2019). Again, the management and monitoring of water quality require the collection and laboratory measurement of large water quality datasets, which are difficult to interpret and time-consuming (Uddin et al., 2022b; Uddin et al., 2022c; Singh et al., 2004). However, this kind of monitoring has some limitations regarding representing the overall scenario (Uddin et al., 2022a). Recently, the water quality index (WQI) models have been widely used for assessing water quality (surface and ground) because this technique is more straightforward to compare than the typical model (Aljanabi et al., 2021). The WQI models convert a series of water quality information into a unitless numerical form that illustrates the complete water quality scenario (Sutadian et al., 2016). Numerous WQI models have been developed by a variety of nations and organisations to achieve specific aims. But those techniques are criticised due to the model uncertainty, reliability, transparency, and sensitivity (Uddin et al., 2022d; Uddin et al., 2022e; Uddin et al., 2023a). Generally, the WQI models are a sum of four steps: (i) water quality indicators selection, (ii) sub-index process, (iii) weighting of water quality indicators; and (iv) aggregation function (Gupta & Gupta, 2021; Uddin et al., 2022a). A comprehensive review of different WQI models, including their pros and cons, can be found in Uddin et al., 2021. Since the last few decades, tools and approaches based on Geographical Information Science (GIS) have been widely utilised to visualise the spatio-temporal distribution of water quality status (Uddin et al., 2022e; Uddin et al., 2023b; Uddin et al., 2023c; Kumar et al., 2019; Ram et al., 2021; Sultana & Dewan, 2021 Chai et al., 2021). In addition, multivariate statistical techniques such as principal component analysis (PCA) are employed to identify the crucial WQ indicators. PCA is widely used in water quality research for selecting significant WQ indicators (Akhtar et al., 2021; Fu et al., 2022; Yang et al., 2020).
LULC change monitoring is essential for socioeconomic development and ecosystem change (Kimwatu et al., 2021; Talukdar et al., 2022). The traditional way of doing a LULC survey is difficult and takes a long time. However, remote sensing incorporating GIS technology makes the process simpler for the researcher (Tewabe & Fentahun, 2020). Numerous free satellite images, such as Landsat, Sentinel, etc., are routinely utilised for LULC monitoring. Although, varying resolutions of satellite images, classification methods, diverse computer software, and human error during the selection of training samples made the LULC classification system complex (Mohan et al., 2021). In addition, classification systems, e.g., sub-pixel, knowledge-based, contextual-based, supervised, unsupervised, object-based image analysis (OBIA), and hybrid-based methods still need to be fully computerised and have certain limitations (Quader, 2019). Again, one of the significant tasks for LULC classification is accuracy assessment (Das et al., 2021; Makinde & Oyelade, 2020). The error matrix, confusion matrix, and kappa-coefficient are frequently utilised for image classification accuracy assessment (Petropoulos et al., 2015).
Many studies have been conducted globally to investigate the impact of various LULC types on the quality of surface water, including urban, cropland, forest, and other forms of land use/cover (Tahiru et al., 2020; Pana et al., 2022; Bonansea et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2022; Chen et al., 2016; Wilson, 2015; Kumar et al., 2019; Sultana & Dewan, 2021; Chotpantarat and Boonkaewwan, 2018; Petropoulos et al., 2015; Attua et al., 2014; Wilson & Weng 2010). Pana et al. (2022) identified land use impact on surface water quality in the Suqia river basin in Argentina. Again, Kang et al. (2010) found a positive association between surface water pollution (nitrogen, phosphorus, and ammonia) and the urban area in the Yeongsan river basin, South Korea. They found a negative association between water pollution, forest land, and grassland cover. Tong and Chen (2002) discovered a significantly positive connection between different indicators (phosphorus, nitrogen, and faecal coliform) of surface water and land use. According to Liu et al. (2016), urban development increases the amount of built-up land and impermeable coatings, which disrupts the drainage process and contributes to higher water contamination. Similarly, Bullard (1966) determined that urban surface water contamination results from urban stream loads containing a lot of sand, dust, soot particles, and oil-washed off buildings, roads, footpaths, and other pavements.
In the context of Bangladesh, particularly in Dhaka city and peripheral areas, rapid unplanned urbanisation and industrial development and their associated activities, i.e., untreated sewage, domestic waste, and industrial waste, have been deteriorating the surface water quality (Hasan et al., 2019; Nahar et al., 2021; Tania et al., 2021). Again, climate change and natural and artificial disasters are increasing the pressure on surface water (Malak et al., 2020; Quader et al., 2021). Several studies were carried out to assess the water quality of the urban rivers in the country and their spatio-temporal distribution, such as the Buriganga River (Islam et al., 2019; Kamal et al., 1999; Pramanik & Sarker, 2013; Zerin et al., 2017), Dhaleshwari River (Hasan et al., 2020; Real et al., 2017), Shitalakhya River (Kabir et al., 2020), Turag River (Rahman et al., 2021a), and Meghna River (Bhuyan et al., 2017; Rima et al., 2020). But, none of them focuses on the impact of LULC on water quality. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the impact of LULC on the quality of surface water in the Buriganga, Dhaleshwari, Meghna, and Padma river system in Bangladesh. The specific objectives were (i) to identify the water quality status in a longitudinal gradient of the Buriganga, Dhaleshwari, Meghna, and Padma rivers system; and (ii) to explore the relationship between LULC and water quality of the studied river system. Thus, the association between LULC and surface water quality seems to have significant conceptual and managerial implications. It provides several thoughts regarding the safeguarding of surface water bodies. Subsequently, it helps supply water in many sectors, including potable water, agricultural, industrial, municipal, and recreational uses. It will help policymakers and watershed managers to take proactive steps in future land use development.
Materials and methods
Overview of the research area
Over the last forty years, extreme pollution incidents have happened in the rivers surrounding Dhaka (Uddin & Jeong, 2021). Dhaka is known globally as a metropolis with chaotic land use and urban development, as well as one of the most vulnerable cities due to the increasing impact of natural disasters (Rahman et al., 2018; Malak et al., 2022). In Dhaka’s outlying waterways, water quality deteriorates rapidly due to widespread pollution-related growth, i.e., urbanisation and industrialisation (Nargis et al., 2021). The study area comprises four main urban rivers in Dhaka city and its peripheries: the Buriganaga, Dhaleshwari, Meghna, and Padma rivers (Fig. 2). Among them, the Buriganga identifies primary pollution sources in Dhaka (Bashar & Fung, 2020) and main receptors of industrial effluent (Hossain et al., 2021), ranked top among the world’s most contaminated waterways (Uddin et al., 2016; Hossain et al., 2021; Kamal et al., 1999). In 2009, the Bangladesh government declared the river an ecologically critical area (ECA) (DoE, 2015). Other peripheral rivers in the city, such as the Dhaleshwari and Padma rivers, also receive pollutants from industrial discharges and domestic sewage (UNDP, 2010), although these rivers contribute to the socioeconomic growth of the region (Hasan et al., 2020). In a more downstream part, the Meghna river merged with the Padma River in the Chandpur district (one of the largest rivers in the north-western part of Bangladesh). The Meghna river, Bangladesh’s most significant and broadest river, is vital to (e.g., navigation, irrigation, fish spawning and shelter, industrial usage, and drinking water sources) millions of people living nearby (Rahman et al., 2021b). The river basin area is dominated by agricultural and industrial activities, which may impact the river water quality.
Research design
The methodology used to conduct this research includes field data collection, laboratory analysis, and satellite imagery analysis. Finally, a correlation matrix was developed to show the influence of the LULC on WQI (Fig. 2).
Water sample collection and laboratory analysis
A total of 12 water samples were collected from twelve sampling locations during the winter season (Fig. 1). The sampling sites are located from upstream to downstream, representing the longitudinal gradient of the rivers and the diversity of LULC types and pollution pressures. The sampling sites were marked as S1 to S12 along the longitudinal gradient of the rivers (Fig. 1) . Sampling sites, their local correspondence names, and coordinates are presented in Table 1.
Water samples were directly collected from the middle of the river using a rented launch (water vehicle). A Schindler sampler (5-L capacity, 50 cm long) was used to collect integrated surface water samples. After collection, samples were kept cool in an ice box and later transported to the research laboratory in the department of Botany and the department of Geography and Environment, Jagannath University. In situ, measurements of water temperature (mercury thermometer), pH (HI-96107, Hanna), dissolved oxygen (DO, DO200A-YSI, USA), and conductivity (EC 300-YSI, USA) were done using portable meters. Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) was measured using BOD bottles and kept in the dark for five days. After reaching, the laboratory, all the samples were filtered through Whatman GF/F filter paper for total suspended solids (TSS) and chemical analysis. The concentrations of NO3-N and soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) in the filtered water sample were determined following the methods of Müller and Wiederman (1995), and Murphy and Riley (1962), respectively. Analytical methods for seven investigated water quality indicators are summarised in Table 2, and a flow chart of the research methodology is presented in Fig. 2.
Assessing water quality using the RMS-WQI model
The water quality index is a popular method for assessing surface water quality and employs aggregation techniques to convert extensive water quality data into a single index or value (Uddin et al., 2023c; Yan et al., 2022). The root mean squared water quality index (RMS-WQI) model was utilised to assess the water quality of the Buriganga, Dhaleshwari, Meghna, and Padma rivers in this research. One of the advantages of this method is that it produces lower uncertainties (Uddin et al., 2023a). Details of the RMS-WQI model can be found in Uddin et al., 2022c. The RMS-WQI model was calculated in four steps, which are detailed below.
Selecting water quality indicators
The first step of WQI model development is water quality indicator selection. Indicator selection considers expert opinions, data availability, and environmental significance (Uddin et al., 2017; Abed et al., 2022). During the present study, water temperature, pH, DO, conductivity, BOD, TSS, NO3-N, and SRP were included in a mathematical equation to determine the water quality. The physicochemical indicators were selected based on the inland surface water regulation of the Environmental Conservative Rules (ECR), (1997). Additionally, NO3-N and SRP were selected, which are essential indicators for assessing the water quality of the rivers in Bangladesh (Zerin et al., 2017).
Sub-index (SI) generation
Sub-indexing transforms all WQ indicators into a common number to calculate the WQI calculation, which ranges from 0 (poor water quality) to 100 (excellent water quality) (Uddin et al., 2023a; 2023d). The sub-index (SI) value will score 100 if the WQ indicator falls between guideline values; otherwise, it will score 0. In this regard, ECR surface water quality regulation values (ECR, 1997) were used to calculate the SI. The utilised sub-index equations are summarised in Table 3.
Obtaining indicators weight values
Typically, an indicator weight value is calculated based on the significance of an indicator or reference regulation of water quality (Uddin et al., 2023b). Nonetheless, the RMS-WQI model is an unweighted WQI model. Therefore, this index does not require a weight value for assessing the final value (Uddin et al., 2023c).
Aggregation formula
The present study applied the following equation to calculate the index scores of the Buriganga, Dhaleshwari, Meghna, and Padma rivers. The RMS-WQI calculation process details are attached in Supplementary Tables 1a and 1b. The aggregation formula is as follows:
where n denotes the number of water quality indicators and \(SI\) is the sub-index value of the ith indicator. The final score was evaluated based on the classification scheme provided in Table 4. More information on the classification scheme can be found in Uddin et al., 2023b).
Geospatial data analysis
In the geospatial data analysis part, we established LULC and spatial distribution maps of RMS-WQI of the study area. The grid box method was used for each sample location to develop AOI (Area of Interest). Using the Grid index feature tool in ArcGIS Pro 2.8, we created a 10*10 km grid box because it was enough to cover the investigated river channel/s. The grid index method is a pre-set division index in which a region is divided into rectangular grids to reflect a predefined spatial area (ESRI, 2023a). The grid object’s position encompasses a portion of the area within the grid’s limits, and this item is part of the grid. The size of the grids is determined by the object being examined (Nigmatov et al., 2022). Total eight grid box is created which named as A1, B1, B2, C1, D1, E1, F1, and F2 (Fig. 6).
Land use and land cover (LULC) classification
Remotely sensed, multi-temporal satellite data from Landsat series 8 (Thermal Infra-Scanner (TIRS)/Operational Land Imager (OLI)) were used as primary inputs to quantify the 2015 land cover area. The satellite image was obtained on 28 January 2015 from the United States Geological Survey, Earth Observation and Science Center (USGS-EROS) website (https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/). The raster image was processed through ArcGIS Pro 2.8 software (image pre-processing including geometric and radiometric correction, grid-box clipping, mapping, and analysis). For the LULC classification, we used the object-based image analysis (OBIA) method in Trimble eCongnition software (Developer version 9.0). The OBIA method is applied due to the advantages over the classification (Ahmed et al., 2020) and the recognition of good classification results (Quader, 2019). Details of OBIA techniques can be found in Zaki et al. (2022). The image was spatially referenced in the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) projection system (zone 46 north) with the World Geodetic System (WGS) 1984 as the datum. The details of the satellite image are summarised in Table 5.
LULC classification accuracy assessment
Accuracy assessment methods are utilised to validate the classification accuracy of classified maps. A wide variety of accuracy assessment techniques are described in remote sensing literature; among them, the error matrix is widely used to calculate the accuracy of LULC classification (Nasir et al., 2022). Error matrixes define errors in LULC map classification caused by image pixels in one class being allocated to another (Foody, 2008). The error matrix computes the user, producer, overall accuracy, and the kappa statistics, which helps to rate the classification. Details of user, producer, overall accuracy, and kappa coefficient can be found in Chughtai et al., 2021. Over 100 reference pixels were chosen for the error matrix development using stratified random sampling in ArcGIS Pro 2.8. Stratified random sampling is a widely used tool for accuracy assessment sampling (Sajib & Moniruzzaman, 2021). Details of stratified random sampling can be found in Stehman and Foody (2019) and kappa value interpretation classification (rating criteria) can be found in Islami et al. (2022). The following equations are utilised for the calculated user (Eq. 3), producer (Eq. 4), overall accuracy (Eq. 5), and kappa coefficient (Eq. 6).
where \(r\) is the number of rows in the matrix, \(N\) is the total number of observations, \({X}_{ii}\) is the correctly classified pixel numbers, and \({X}_{icol}\) and \({X}_{irow}\) are the column and row total, respectively.
Spatial distribution mapping
The spatial variation of water quality indicators and the RMS-WQI index was visualised using proportional symbology through ArcGIS Pro computer software (version 2.8). It illustrates the relative differences among the features based on quantities (ESRI, 2023b). Details about proportional symbol mapping can be found in Tanimura et al. (2006) and Gao et al. (2019).
Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis was applied to determine the impact of LULC types on water quality. First, for screening significant physicochemical factors in the study area, PCA was performed using Primer v6 (Clarke & Gorley, 2006). After that, R version 4.2.1 (R core Team, 2021) was used to correlate the selected physicochemical factors, WQI value, and land use types (%). Prior to PCA, all the indicators were transformed log (x + 1) except water temperature and pH, which were standardised.
Results
Descriptive statistics of water indicators
General statistical calculations such as mean, maximum, minimum, and standard deviation for studied water quality indicators, along with reference values, are provided in Table 6, while Fig. 3 illustrates the variation of water quality indicators in different sampling sites. In the sampling site, the highest (8.40) pH value was recorded at sampling site S6 and the lowest (6.10) value at sampling site S1. Additionally, 80% of sampling sites (10 out of 12) are found alkaline (8.00–8.40), which surpasses the guideline value and indicates the presence of CO32−, Ca2+, and Mg2+ in the river system (Billah et al., 2016). Again, 90% of the sampling sites’ surface water temperature was found within guideline values, whereas conductivity was found in the range of the guideline limit.
In the study area, dissolved oxygen (DO) levels range between 2.77 and 6.69 mg/L with a mean value of 4.86 ± 1.11 mg/L, and the majority are within the reference value, except sampling site S9. DO play an active role in the river water quality system and its influence by the photosynthesis process (Dordoni et al., 2022). According to ECR (1997), the threshold value for BOD5 is 2.00 mg/L for river ecosystems, and in this study, BOD5 is within the threshold limit. Both NO3-N and SRP concentrations were found in the reference value limit range.
Assessment of water quality using RMS-WQI
The water quality status of Buriganga, Dhaleshwari, Meghna, and Padma rivers were classified using the RMS-WQI model, and the calculated score of this model for each sampling site was visualised in Fig. 4. In the present study, the “fair” status of water quality found in all sampling sites which ranges from 66.50 to 79.08. This result indicated that a few indicators exceed the reference value. The highest WQI score (79.08) was found for sampling station S12, where the river system flows downward, and the lowest WQI score (66.50) was calculated for sampling station S11. Additionally, Fig. 5 presents the spatial–temporal distribution of the calculated RMS-WQI score at each monitoring site of the study area. This distribution revealed that the WQ score is high in the downstream and low in the upstream. RMS-WQI followed the sequence in order of S11 > S5 > S2 > S1 > S6 > S4 > S3 > S9 > S10 > S7 > S8 > S12 based on their calculated value. The order also indicates that the RMS-WQI index score is higher upstream and lower downstream (except sampling site S11).
States of LULC and classification accuracy
Based on the field observations, a total of four major land cover types were present in the Map (Fig. 6), which include (1) agricultural land (AL), (2) built-up areas (BA), (3) vegetation (Veg), and (4) water bodies (WB). The area of the 2015 land cover was calculated in square kilometres (Table 7). In the 2015 classified image, agricultural land was the dominant LULC type, making up 37.33% of the study landscape, followed by built-up area (24.76%), vegetation (9.5%), and water bodies (28.41%).
In terms of agricultural land, grid box D1 (sample site-S9), E1 (sample site-S10), F1 (sample site-S11) have more than 16% agricultural land, and A1 (sample site-S1), B1 (Sample site (S2, S3, S4), C1 (sample site-S5), C2 (sample site-S6, S7, and S8), F2 (sample site-S12) have less than 16% agricultural land, respectively. Al block occupied the highest (29.90%) built-up area land cover, and the E1 block had the lowest (0.72%) built-up area. Only two grids (F2 and C1) had more than 20% vegetation cover, whereas grids A1, B1, C2, D1, E1, and F1 only occupied more than 5% of vegetation cover. The area percentage of water bodies from grids C2-F2 is more than 14%, and A1-C1 ranges from 3 to 7%. The LULC classified map (Fig. 6) indicates that upstream grids (A1, B1, C1) were densely urbanised areas, whereas downstream grids (D1, E1, F1, F2) were agriculture-dominant areas. Lastly, the C2 grid box is a mixture of urban and agricultural land areas.
The overall accuracy assessment and kappa co-efficient value of post-classified images were 92% and 0.89, respectively. The accuracy of agricultural land, built-up area, vegetation, and waterbodies area was 90.70%, 100%, 95.24%, and 85%, respectively. On the other hand, the user accuracy of all LULC classes ranges from 84 to 100%. The statistical summary of the accuracy assessment can be found in Supplementary Table 2.
Multivariate statistical analysis
Selection of WQ indicators using PCA analysis
PCA of different physicochemical factors among 12 sampling sites resulted in three axes. The first two axes explained 86% variance of physiochemical factors in sampling sites. The eigenvalue of PC1 and PC2 were 1.59 and 0.68, respectively. Out of 7 variables, only three were selected based on the eigenvectors. pH (r = 0.677) and SRP (r = − 0.389) correlated with PC1 while water temperature (r = 0.778) correlated positively with PC2 (Fig. 7).
Relationship between WQ indicators, RMS-WQI and LULC
The statistically valid association between the PCA-based selected WQ indicators, calculated RMS-WQI value, and LULC classes revealed multiple significant positive and negative correlations through Pearson’s correlation test at a 99% confidence level (Fig. 8). Results of the Pearson correlation showed that RMS-WQI displayed a significant positive correlation with agricultural land (r = 0.68) while the negative association with the built-up area (r = − 0.94) and vegetation (r = − 0.65). This indicates that water quality value decreased with increased urbanisation, and in our study (except sampling station S11), we observed lower RMS-WQI values in the grids (A1, B1, B2, C1) which occupied the highest percentage (more than 90%) of the built-up area. Among physiochemical parameters, SRP showed significant correlation with RMS-WQI (r = − 0.7) and all LULC types (AL: r = − 0.77, BA: r = 0.82, Veg: r = 0.69, WB: r = − 0.57).
Discussion
During the present study, PCA showed that except for S3 and S4, all the sampling sites coincide between pH and water temperature. Significant positive and negative associations of these factors with PC’s axes were observed (Fig. 7). So, an increase or decrease in these factors can impact the WQI value resulting in an alteration in water quality.
In the present study, the downstream area is larger than the upstream, so it was expected that the water quality tends to improve as the river system flows downward. The WQI value did not gradually decrease from S1 to S12, which urges other factors responsible for the water quality. Sometimes, this can be explained by the water quality indicators or WQI. Surprisingly, the lowest WQI value was calculated in sampling site S11. The sampling site S11 is located downstream of the rivers, and agricultural activities surround the area. The degradation of water quality may be caused by agricultural runoff, which required future investigation. Again, the second and third lowest RMS-WQI in S2 and S1 sampling sites are located in the country’s most polluted urban river (Buriganga river) and receive a tremendous amount of untreated human waste beyond its limit (Kibria et al., 2015). Moreover, urban runoff could significantly impact the physicochemical properties of surface water (Diganta et al., 2020). The correlation between RMS-WQI and the built-up area (BL) supported the result (Fig. 8).
On the other hand, the highest RMS-WQI value was found in the sampling site S12, located in the Padma River; fair water quality was found due to less built-up area and an expansion of the surface area of the main channel (Figs. 4 and 6). Ding et al. (2015) and Liu et al. (2016) found similar results in China. Ding et al. (2015) found that urban areas significantly influenced water quality in the Dongjiang River basin, Southeastern China. They performed the variance analysis and found that basins with the less built-up area have better water quality. Likewise, Liu et al. (2016) stated that the negative impact of the urban areas was amplified by the rise in urban impervious surfaces, which worsened the degradation of natural water quality. Therefore, the association between stream water quality and urban areas negatively correlates. Conversely, they found negative consequences of agricultural land on natural stream water quality because urban infrastructure masked arable land. Similarly, Mello et al. (2018), Rather and Dar (2020), Kim et al. (2020), and Cheah and Hamid (2016) found comparable results in Brazil, India, South Korea, and Malaysia, respectively. Mello et al. (2018) observed a positive correlation between water quality and total suspended solids, total nitrogen, and total phosphorus at a 0.01 significant level, as well as organic suspended solids and faecal coliforms at a 0.05 significant level in low-order natural streams in Southeastern Brazil. Instead, Rather and Dar (2020) found that a rise in the built-up area has been strongly associated with an increase in the average COD, nitrate-nitrogen, and total phosphorus of Dal Lake, India, since 1980. Kim et al. (2020) concluded that urban area is the dominant land cover class that deteriorates the stream water quality indicators, i.e., microbiological and nitrogen. Cheah and Hamid (2016) found that the rivers with built-up areas recorded the highest level of pollution in the river water of Kedah, Penang, and Perak states of Malaysia. In the present study, we found a significant correlation between SRP and LULC (Fig. 8). But among the LULC types the correlation coefficient was maximum in built-up areas which indicated that the major source of SRP was from the urban area affecting the water quality and thus correlation of SRP with RMS-WQI supported the result.
Conclusion
This research aimed to assess the impacts of LULC on the water quality of the Buriganga, Dhaleshwari, Meghna, and Padma rivers in Bangladesh. The major conclusions from the study are as follows:
-
1.
Most WQ indicators were found within the reference value except pH.
-
2.
The RMS-WQI result showed that the water quality of Buriganga, Dhaleshwari, Meghna, and Padma rivers belongs to the “fair” category group, indicating that few WQ indicators deviate from their reference value.
-
3.
Four major LULC types were identified in the study where agricultural land was the dominant LULC type, making up 37.33% of the study landscape, followed by built-up area (24.76%), vegetation (9.5%), and water bodies (28.41%).
-
4.
The PCA identified pH, Temperature, and SRP as significant WQ indicators that support the evaluation of the relation between WQ indicators, RMS-WQI and LULC.
-
5.
The correlation study showed that WQ had a significant positive correlation with agricultural land and a negative association with the built-up area. It indicates that increasing urbanisation has a significant impact on water quality.
Degradation of river water quality is among the most severe effects of LULC change, influencing the watershed’s different physical, chemical, and biological processes. Therefore, proper monitoring and land use planning are required to protect surface water quality. To combat future water pollution, the authors believe that the findings of this study can support land use planners and environmentalists in the planning and design of landscapes as well as protect the river environments, which may gradually improve the WQ. The primary drawback of the present study is that water quality was analysed utilising just seven WQ indicators and WQ indicator data from one year. Time series data of WQ and LULC may aid in a more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between WQ and LULC. Despite its limitation, the present study assesses the relationship between LULC and WQ in Buriganga, Dhaleshwari, Meghna, and Padma rivers. The current research established that LULC could be used as a proxy of anthropogenic pollution measures to assess river water quality. Thus, identifying LULC can provide an indirect estimate for the river management authorities to implement restoration programmes.
Data availability
The datasets generated during and analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
Abed, B. S., Farhan, A. R., Ismail, A. H., & Al Aani, S. (2022). Water quality index toward a reliable assessment for water supply uses: A novel approach. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 19(4), 2885–2898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-021-03338-7
Ahmed, B., Rahman, M. S., Sammonds, P., Islam, R., & Uddin, K. (2020). Application of geospatial technologies in developing a dynamic landslide early warning system in a humanitarian context: The Rohingya refugee crisis in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 11(1), 446–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2020.1730988
Akhtar, N., Ishak, M. I. S., Ahmad, M. I., Umar, K., Md Yusuff, M. S., Anees, M. T., & Ali Almanasir, Y. K. (2021). Modification of the water quality index (WQI) process for simple calculation using the multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method: A review. Water, 13(7), 905. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13070905
Akter, S. H. I. L. P. I., Saifullah, A. S. M., Meghla, N. T., Uddin, M. J., & Diganta, M. T. M. (2018). Seasonal variation of phytoplankton abundance and water quality parameters in Jamuna river. Journal of Science and Technology, 8, 107–123.
Aljanabi, Z. Z., Al-Obaidy, A. H. M. J., & Hassan, F. M. (2021, June). A brief review of water quality indices and their applications. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 779(1), 012088. IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/779/1/012088
Asha, Ayesha Siddiqua, Saifullah, A. . S. . M. ., Uddin, Md. Galal., Sheikh, Md. Shemul., Uddin, Muhammad Jasim, & Diganta, Mir Talas Mahammad. (2020). Assessment of trace metal in macroalgae and sediment of the Sundarban mangrove estuary. Applied Water Science, 10(1)
Attua, E. M., Ayamga, J., & Pabi, O. (2014). Relating land use and land cover to surface water quality in the Densu River basin, Ghana. International Journal of River Basin Management, 12(1), 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/15715124.2014.880711
Bashar, T., & Fung, I. W. H. (2020). Water pollution in a densely populated megapolis. Dhaka. Water, 12(8), 2124. https://doi.org/10.3390/W12082124
Billah, M. M., Kamal, A. H. M., Hoque, M. M., & Bhuiyan, M. K. A. (2016). Temporal distribution of water characteristics in the Miri estuary, east Malaysia. Zoology and Ecology, 26(2), 134–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/21658005.2016.1148960
Bhuyan, M. S., Bakar, M. A., Akhtar, A., Hossain, M. B., & Islam, M. S. (2017). Analysis of water quality of the Meghna River using multivariate analyses and Rpi. Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bangladesh, Science, 43(1), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.3329/JASBS.V43I1.46241
Bonansea, M., Bazán, R., Germán, A., Ferral, A., Beltramone, G., Cossavella, A., & Pinotti, L. (2021). Assessing land use and land cover change in Los Molinos reservoir watershed and the effect on the reservoir water quality. Journal of South American Earth Sciences, 108, 103243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsames.2021.103243
Cisneros, B. E. J., Oki, T., Arnell, N.W., Benito, G., Cogley, J. G., Döll, P., Jiang, T., & Mwakalila, S. S. (2014) Freshwater resources. In: Climate change 2014: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: Global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 229–269.
Chai, N., Yi, X., Xiao, J., Liu, T., Liu, Y., Deng, L., & Jin, Z. (2021). Spatiotemporal variations, sources, water quality and health risk assessment of trace elements in the Fen River. Science of the Total Environment, 757, 143882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.143882
Cheah, E. H., & Hamid, S. A. (2016). Determination of water quality of rivers under various land use activities using physico-chemical indicators and bacterial populations in Northern Peninsular Malaysia. Wetland Science, 14(6), 788–798. https://doi.org/10.13248/j.cnki.wetlandsci.2016.06.005
Chen, X., Zhou, W., Pickett, S. T., Li, W., & Han, L. (2016). Spatial-temporal variations of water quality and its relationship to land use and land cover in Beijing, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(5), 449. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13050449
Chotpantarat, S., & Boonkaewwan, S. (2018). Impacts of land-use changes on watershed discharge and water quality in a large intensive agricultural area in Thailand. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 63(9), 1386–1407. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2018.1506128
Chughtai, A. H., Abbasi, H., & Karas, I. R. (2021). A review on change detection method and accuracy assessment for land use land cover. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 22, 100482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2021.100482
Clarke, K. R., & Gorley, R. N. (2006). Primer v6: User manual/tutorial (Plymouth routines in multivariate ecological research).
Das, N., Mondal, P., Sutradhar, S., & Ghosh, R. (2021). Assessment of variation of land use/land cover and its impact on land surface temperature of Asansol subdivision. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, 24(1), 131–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrs.2020.05.001
de Mello, K., Valente, R. A., Randhir, T. O., dos Santos, A. C. A., & Vettorazzi, C. A. (2018). Effects of land use and land cover on water quality of low-order streams in Southeastern Brazil: Watershed versus riparian zone. CATENA, 167, 130–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CATENA.2018.04.027
Delpla, I., Jung, A. V., Baures, E., Clement, M., & Thomas, O. (2009). Impacts of climate change on surface water quality in relation to drinking water production. Environment International, 35(8), 1225–1233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2009.07.001
Dede, O. T., Telci, I. T., & Aral, M. M. (2013). The use of water quality index models for the evaluation of surface water quality: A case study for Kirmir Basin, Ankara, Turkey. Water Quality, Exposure and Health, 5(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12403-013-0085-3
Diganta, M. T. M., Sharmi, T. T., Saifullah, A. S. M., Uddin, M. J., & Sajib, A. M. (2020). Appraisal of heavy metal contamination in road dust and human health risk in a municipality of Bangladesh. Environmental Engineering & Management Journal (EEMJ), 19(12).
Ding, J., Jiang, Y., Fu, L., Liu, Q., Peng, Q., & Kang, M. (2015). Impacts of land use on surface water quality in a subtropical river basin: A case study of the Dongjiang River basin. Southeastern China. Water, 7(12), 4427–4445. https://doi.org/10.3390/w7084427
DoE. (2015). River water quality report 2015. Ministry of Environment and Forest. Government of Bangladesh. Retrieved on 1 January 2022 from http://www.doe.gov.bd/site/publications/6fa41411-904e-43f2-be31-f2744c68f42d/River-Water-Quality-Report-2015
Dordoni, M., Seewald, M., Rinke, K., Schmidmeier, J., & Barth, J. A. (2022). Novel evaluations of sources and sinks of dissolved oxygen via stable isotopes in lentic water bodies. Science of The Total Environment, 838, 156541. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156541
ECR-97. (1997). The environment conservation rule. Department of Environment, Bangladesh, Rule 12, Standards for Water, Schedule 3.
Edokpayi, J. N., Odiyo, J. O., & Durowoju, O. S. (2017). Impact of wastewater on surface water quality in developing countries: A case study of South Africa. In H. Tutu (Ed.), Water Quality (pp. 401–416). IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/66561
Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI). (2023b), Proportional symbols, ArcGIS Pro 3.0., Redlands, CA. Retrieved January 01, 2023, from https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/help/mapping/layer-properties/proportional-symbology.htm#:~:text=Proportional%20symbology%20is%20used%20to,magnitude%20of%20a%20feature%20attribute
Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) (2023a), Grid index features (cartography), ArcGIS Pro 3.0., Redlands, CA. Retrieved January 01 2023, from https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/tool-reference/cartography/grid-index-features.htm
Fashae, O. A., Ayorinde, H. A., Olusola, A. O, & Obateru, R. O. (2019). Landuse and surface water quality in an emerging urban city. Applied Water Science, 9(2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-019-0903-2
Foody, G. M. (2008). Harshness in image classification accuracy assessment. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 29(11), 3137–3158. https://doi.org/10.1080/01431160701442120
Fu, D., Chen, S., Chen, Y., & Yi, Z. (2022). Development of modified integrated water quality index to assess the surface water quality: A case study of Tuo River. China. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 194(5), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-09998-3
Gao, P., Li, Z., & Qin, Z. (2019). Usability of value-by-alpha maps compared to area cartograms and proportional symbol maps. Journal of Spatial Science, 64(2), 239–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/14498596.2018.1440649
Gupta, S., & Gupta, S. K. (2021). A critical review on water quality index tool: Genesis, evolution and future directions. Ecological Informatics, 63, 101299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoinf.2021.101299
Hasan, M. M., Ahmed, M. S., Adnan, R., & Shafiquzzaman, M. (2020). Water quality indices to assess the spatiotemporal variations of Dhaleshwari river in central Bangladesh. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 8, 100068. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.INDIC.2020.100068
Hasan, M. K., Shahriar, A., & Jim, K. U. (2019). Water pollution in Bangladesh and its impact on public health. Heliyon, 5(8), e02145. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HELIYON.2019.E02145
Hossain, M. N., Rahaman, A., Hasan, M. J., Uddin, M. M., Khatun, N., & Shamsuddin, S. M. (2021). Comparative seasonal assessment of pollution and health risks associated with heavy metals in water, sediment and fish of Buriganga and Turag River in Dhaka City. Bangladesh. SN Applied Sciences, 3(4), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/S42452-021-04464-0
Islam, M. S., Afroz, R., & Mia, M. B. (2019). Investigation of surface water quality of the Buriganga river in Bangladesh: Laboratory and spatial analysis approaches. Dhaka University Journal of Biological Sciences, 28(2), 147–158. https://doi.org/10.3329/DUJBS.V28I2.46501
Islami, F. A., Tarigan, S. D., Wahjunie, E. D., & Dasanto, B. D. (2022). Accuracy assessment of land use change analysis using Google Earth in Sadar Watershed Mojokerto Regency. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 950, No. 1, p. 012091). IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/950/1/012091
Kabir, M. H., Tusher, T. R., Hossain, M. S., Islam, M. S., Shammi, R. S., Kormoker, T., Proshad, R., & Islam, M. (2020). Evaluation of spatio-temporal variations in water quality and suitability of an ecologically critical urban river employing water quality index and multivariate statistical approaches: A study on Shitalakhya river, Bangladesh. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 27(5), 1388–1415. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2020.1848415
Kamal, M. M., Malmgren-Hansen, A., & Badruzzaman, A. B. M. (1999). Assessment of pollution of the River Buriganga, Bangladesh, using a water quality model. Water Science and Technology, 40(2), 129–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0273-1223(99)00474-6
Kang, J. H., Lee, S. W., Cho, K. H., Ki, S. J., Cha, S. M., & Kim, J. H. (2010). Linking land-use type and stream water quality using spatial data of fecal indicator bacteria and heavy metals in the Yeongsan river basin. Water Research, 44(14), 4143–4157. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WATRES.2010.05.009
Kibria, M. G., Kadir, M. N., & Alam, S. (2015). Buriganga river pollution: Its causes and impacts. International Conference on Recent Innovation in Civil Engineering for Sustainable Development (IICSD-2015), 323–328.
Kim, T., Kim, Y., Shin, J., Go, B., & Cha, Y. (2020). Assessing land-cover effects on stream water quality in metropolitan areas using the water quality index. Water, 12(11), 3294. https://doi.org/10.3390/W12113294
Kimwatu, D. M., Mundia, C. N., & Makokha, G. O. (2021). Developing a new socio-economic drought index for monitoring drought proliferation: A case study of Upper Ewaso Ngiro River Basin in Kenya. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193(4), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-021-08989-0
Kumar, P., Dasgupta, R., Johnson, B. A., Saraswat, C., Basu, M., Kefi, M., & Mishra, B. K. (2019). Effect of land use changes on water quality in an ephemeral coastal plain: Khambhat City, Gujarat. India. Water, 11(4), 724. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11040724
Li, S., Gu, S., Liu, W., Han, H., & Zhang, Q. (2008). Water quality in relation to land use and land cover in the upper Han River Basin. China. Catena, 75(2), 216–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CATENA.2008.06.005
Liu, W., Zhang, Q., & Liu, G. (2012). Influences of watershed landscape composition and configuration on lake-water quality in the Yangtze River basin of China. Hydrological Processes, 26(4), 570–578. https://doi.org/10.1002/HYP.8157
Liu, X., Zhong, K., Sun, C., & Li, X. (2016). The correlation between land use and water quality in the typical urbanized region of China: A case study in the river net area of Pearl River delta. In Weng Q., Gamba P., Xian G., Chen J. M., & Liang S. (Eds.), 4th International Workshop on Earth Observation and Remote Sensing Applications, EORSA 2016 (pp. 410–414). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. https://doi.org/10.1109/EORSA.2016.7552840
Malak, Md. Abdul., Sajib, Abdul Majed, Quader, Mohammad Abdul, & Anjum, Humayra. (2020). “We are feeling older than our age”: Vulnerability and adaptive strategies of aging people to cyclones in coastal Bangladesh. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 48, 101595.
Makinde, E. O., & Oyelade, E. O. (2020). Land cover mapping using Sentinel-1 SAR and Landsat 8 imageries of Lagos State for 2017. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27, 66–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05589-x
Malak, M. A., Prema, S. F., Sajib, A. M., & Hossain, N. J. (2022). Livelihood of independent waste pickers (Tokai) at Dhaka City in Bangladesh: Does it incidental choice of them?. Indonesian Journal of Geography, 54(1), 92–104. https://doi.org/10.22146/IJG.65461
Mohan, A., Singh, A. K., Kumar, B., & Dwivedi, R. (2021). Review on remote sensing methods for landslide detection using machine and deep learning. Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies, 32(7), e3998. https://doi.org/10.1002/ett.3998
Muhammed, H. H., Nasidi, N. M., & Wayayok, A. (2022). Impact of climate changes and landuse/land cover changes on water resources in Malaysia. In Environmental Degradation in Asia (pp. 465–483). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-12112-8_21
Müller, R., & Wiedemann, F. (1995). Die Bestimmung des Nitrats in Wasser. Jahrbuch für Wasserchemie und Wasserreinigungstechnik. Verlag Chemie, Reinbek, 12, 247–271.
Murphy, J., & Riley, J. P. (1962). A modified single solution method for the determination of phosphate in natural waters. Analytica Chimica Acta, 27(C), 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-2670(00)88444-5
Nahar, N., Mahiuddin, S., & Hossain, Z. (2021). The severity of environmental pollution in the developing countries and its remedial measures. Earth, 2(1), 124–139. https://doi.org/10.3390/EARTH2010008
Nargis, A., Habib, A., Harun-Or-Rashid, H., & H. B., Islam Sarker, M. S., Jin, R., Liu, G., Liu, W., Al-Razee, A. N. M., Chen, K., & Cai, M. (2021). Status of multielement in water of the river Buriganga, Bangladesh: Aquatic chemistry of metal ions in polluted river water. Emerging Contaminants, 7, 99–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EMCON.2021.03.001
Nasir, S. M., Kamran, K. V., Blaschke, T., & Karimzadeh, S. (2022). Change of land use/land cover in kurdistan region of Iraq: A semi-automated object-based approach. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment, 26, 100713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2022.100713
Nigmatov, A., Rasulov, A., & Tobirov, O. (2022). Methodology for assessing the tourist potential of the nature of the Fergana Valley using GIS technologies and experimental methods. Journal of Pharmaceutical Negative Results, 2268–2286. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202209.0181.v1
Pana et al., 2022 - Paná, S., Ferral, A., Marinelli, M. V., Petrosillo, I., del Valle Asís, I., Roqué, M., & Bonansea, M. (2022). Study of the impacts of Land Use-Land Cover on surface water quality based on field data and satellite information. In 2022 IEEE Biennial Congress of Argentina (ARGENCON) (pp. 1–7). IEEE.
Parween, S., Siddique, N. A., Diganta, M. T. M., Olbert, A. I., & Uddin, M. G. (2022). Assessment of urban river water quality using modified NSF water quality index model at Siliguri city, West Bengal, India. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 16, 100202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2022.100202
Petropoulos, G. P., Kalivas, D. P., Georgopoulou, I. A., & Srivastava, P. K. (2015). Urban vegetation cover extraction from hyperspectral imagery and geographic information system spatial analysis techniques: Case of Athens, Greece. Journal of Applied Remote Sensing, 9(1), 096088. https://doi.org/10.1117/1.jrs.9.096088
Pramanik, B. K., & Sarker, D. C. (2013). Evaluation of surface water quality of the Buriganga River. Journal of Water Reuse and Desalination, 3(2), 160–168. https://doi.org/10.2166/WRD.2013.059
Quader, M. A. (2019). Impact of Rohingya settlement on the landcovers at Ukhiya Upazila in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh. Jagannath University Journal of Life and Earth Sciences, 5(1), 13–18.
Quader, M. A., Dey, H., Malak, M., & Sajib, A. M. (2021). Rohingya refugee flooding and changes of the physical and social landscape in Ukhiya, Bangladesh. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(3), 4634–4658. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00792-0
R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/
Rahman, M. S., Ahmed, A. S. S., Rahman, M. M., Babu, S. M. O. F., Sultana, S., Sarker, S. I., Awual, R., Rahman, M. M., & Rahman, M. (2021b). Temporal assessment of heavy metal concentration and surface water quality representing the public health evaluation from the Meghna River estuary. Bangladesh. Applied Water Science, 11(7), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/S13201-021-01455-9
Rahman, A., Jahanara, I., & Jolly, Y. N. (2021a). Assessment of physicochemical properties of water and their seasonal variation in an urban river in Bangladesh. Water Science and Engineering, 14(2), 139–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.WSE.2021.06.006
Rahman, M. A., Moniruzzaman, M., & Akter, S. (2018). Dynamic Progression of Disaster Induced Vulnerability: A Study on Dhaka City. Journal of Patuakhali Science and Technology University, 9(1&2), 97–110.
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. Applied Water Science, 11(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13201-021-01376-7
Rather, I. A., & Dar, A. Q. (2020). Assessing the impact of land use and land cover dynamics on water quality of Dal Lake, NW Himalaya. India. Applied Water Science, 10(10), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/S13201-020-01300-5
Real, M. K. H., Khanam, N., Mia, M. Y., Nasreen, M., Real, M. K. H., Khanam, N., Mia, M. Y., & Nasreen, M. (2017). Assessment of water quality and microbial load of Dhaleshwari River Tangail. Bangladesh. Advances in Microbiology, 7(6), 523–533. https://doi.org/10.4236/AIM.2017.76041
Rima, R., Ryhan, A. A., Ahmed, S., Islam, R., Munshi, S. H., & Azam, S. (2020). Assessment of water quality indicators of Meghna River Kishoreganj, Bangladesh. Asian Journal of Environment & Ecology, 12(2), 29–37. https://doi.org/10.9734/AJEE/2020/V12I230156
Sajib, A. M., & Moniruzzaman, M. (2021). Driving forces of landuse and landcover changes in the north-eastern part of Dhaka Conurbation. The Dhaka University Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences, 10(2), 53–66. https://doi.org/10.3329/dujees.v10i2.57515
Singh, K. P., Malik, A., Mohan, D., & Sinha, S. (2004). Multivariate statistical techniques for the evaluation of spatial and temporal variations in water quality of Gomti River (India)—a case study. Water Research, 38(18), 3980–3992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2004.06.011
Stehman, S. V., & Foody, G. M. (2019). Key issues in rigorous accuracy assessment of land cover products. Remote Sensing of Environment, 231, 111199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2019.05.018
Sultana, M. S., & Dewan, A. (2021). A reflectance-based water quality index and its application to examine degradation of river water quality in a rapidly urbanising megacity. Environmental Advances, 5, 100097. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVADV.2021.100097
Sultana, S., Karmaker, B., Saifullah, A. S. M., Galal Uddin, M., & Moniruzzaman, M. (2022). Environment-friendly clay coagulant aid for wastewater treatment. Applied Water Science, 12, 1–10.
Sutadian, A. D., Muttil, N., Yilmaz, A. G., & Perera, B. J. C. (2016). Development of river water quality indices—a review. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 188(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-015-5050-0
Tahiru, A. A., Doke, D. A., & Baatuuwie, B. N. (2020). Effect of land use and land cover changes on water quality in the Nawuni Catchment of the White Volta Basin, Northern Region. Ghana. Applied Water Science, 10(8), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/S13201-020-01272-6
Talukdar, G., Sarma, A. K., & Bhattacharjya, R. K. (2022). Assessment of land use change in riverine ecosystem and utilizing it for socioeconomic benefit. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 194(11), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10495-w
Tania, A. H., Gazi, M. Y., & Mia, M. B. (2021). Evaluation of water quantity–quality, floodplain landuse, and land surface temperature (LST) of Turag River in Bangladesh: An integrated approach of geospatial, field, and laboratory analyses. SN Applied Sciences, 3(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/S42452-020-04011-3
Tanimura, S., Kuroiwa, C., & Mizota, T. (2006). Proportional symbol mapping in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 15, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v015.i05
Tewabe, D., & Fentahun, T. (2020). Assessing land use and land cover change detection using remote sensing in the Lake Tana Basin. Northwest Ethiopia. Cogent Environmental Science, 6(1), 1778998. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311843.2020.1778998
Tong, S. T. Y., & Chen, W. (2002). Modeling the relationship between land use and surface water quality. Journal of Environmental Management, 66, 377–393. https://doi.org/10.1006/jema.2002.0593
Uddin, Md. Galal., Moniruzzaman, Md. ., Quader, Mohammad Abdul, & Hasan, Md. Abu. (2018). Spatial variability in the distribution of trace metals in groundwater around the Rooppur nuclear power plant in Ishwardi, Bangladesh. Groundwater for Sustainable Development, 7, 220–231.
Uddin, M. J., & Jeong, Y. -K. (2021). Urban river pollution in Bangladesh during last 40 years: potential public health and ecological risk, present policy, and future prospects toward smart water management. Heliyon, 7(2), e06107. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.HELIYON.2021.E06107
Uddin, M. G., Moniruzzaman, M., Hoque, M. A. A., Hasan, M. A., & Khan, M. (2016). Seasonal variation of physicochemical properties of water in the Buriganga River, Bangladesh. World Applied Sciences Journal, 34(1), 24–34.
Uddin, M. G., Moniruzzaman, M., & Khan, M. (2017). Evaluation of groundwater quality using CCME water quality index in the Rooppur nuclear power plant area, Ishwardi, Pabna, Bangladesh. American Journal of Environmental Protection, 5(2), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.12691/ENV-5-2-2
Uddin, M. G., Nash, S., Diganta, M. T. M., Rahman, A., & Olbert, A. I. (2022b). Robust machine learning algorithms for predicting coast al water quality index. Journal of Environmental Management, 321, 115923. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.115923
Uddin, M. G., Nash, S., Diganta, M. T. M., Rahman, A., & Olbert, A. I. (2022c). A comparison of geocomputational models for validating geospatial distribution of water quality index, in: Priyanka, H., Rahman, A., Basant agarwal, Binita Tiwari (Eds.), Computational Statistic al Methodologies and Modeling for Artificial Intelligence. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Publisher, USA
Uddin, M. G., Nash, S., & Olbert, A. I. (2021). A review of water quality index models and their use for assessing surface water quality. Ecological Indicators, 122, 107218. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOLIND.2020.107218
Uddin, G., Nash, S., & Olbert, A. I. (2022e). Optimization of parameters in a water quality index model using principal component analys is, in: Proceedings of the 39th IAHR World Congress. International Association for Hydro-Environment Engineering and Research (IAH R), Spain, pp. 5739–5744. https://doi.org/10.3850/IAHR-39WC2521711920221326
Uddin, M. G., Nash, S., Rahman, A., & Olbert, A. I. (2022a). A comprehensive method for improvement of water quality index (WQI) models for coastal water quality assessment. Water Research, 219, 118532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.118532
Uddin, M. G., Nash, S., Rahman, A., & Olbert, A. I. (2023a). A novel approach for estimating and predicting uncertainty in water quality index model using machine learning approaches. Water Research, 119422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.119422
Uddin, M. G., Nash, S., Rahman, A., & Olbert, A. I. (2023b). Performance analysis of the water quality index model for predicting water state using machine learning techniques. Process Safety and Environmental Protection. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2022.11.073
Uddin, M. G., Nash, S., Rahman, A., & Olbert, A. I. (2022d). Development of a water quality index model-a comparative analysis of vari ous weighting methods. In Mediterranean Geosciences Union Annual Meeting (MedGU-21). Istanbul (pp. 1–6)
Uddin, M. G., Nash, S., Rahman, A., & Olbert, A. I. (2023c). Assessing optimization techniques for improving water quality model. Journ al of Cleaner Production, 385, 135671. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135671
Uddin, M. G., Nash, S., Rahman, A., & Olbert, A. I. (2023d). A sophisticated model for rating water quality. Science of the Total Environment, 161614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.161614
Uddin, M. G., Olbert, A. I., & Nash, S. (2020a). Assessment of water quality using Water Quality Index (WQI) models and advanced geos tatistical technique. In Civil Engineering Research Association of Ireland (CERAI). Civil Engineering Research Association of Ireland (CERAI) (pp. 594–599). Cork Institute of Technology Cork.
Uddin, M. G., Olbert, A. I., & Nash, S. (2020b). Application of Water Quality Index Models to an Irish Estuary. In Civil Engineering Res earch Association of Ireland (CERAI). Civil Engineering Research Association of Ireland (CERAI) (pp. 576–581).
Ullah, K. A., Jiang, J., & Wang, P. (2018). Land use impacts on surface water quality by statistical approaches. Global Journal of Environmental Science and Management, 4(2), 231–250. https://doi.org/10.22034/GJESM.2018.04.02.010
UNDP. (2010). Pollution abatement strategies for rivers and wetlands in and around Dhaka City. Retrieved on 1 January 2022 from http://ext.bd.undp.org/CCED/bgdp/BGDPMaterials/ReviewDocuments/Pollutionabatementstrategiesforriverandwetland.pdf
UNESCO. (2021). The global water quality challenge & SDGs. International Initiative on Water Quality (IIWQ). Retrieved on 1 January 2022 from https://en.unesco.org/waterquality-iiwq/wq-challenge
Wang, X., & Zhang, F. (2018). Effects of land use/cover on surface water pollution based on remote sensing and 3D-EEM fluorescence data in the Jinghe Oasis. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-31265-0
WHO. (2018). A global overview of national regulations and standards for drinking water quality. Retrieved on 1 January 2022 from https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/272345
Wilson, C. O. (2015). Land use/land cover water quality nexus: Quantifying anthropogenic influences on surface water quality. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187(7), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-015-4666-4
Wilson, C., & Weng, Q. (2010). Assessing surface water quality and its relation with urban land cover changes in the Lake Calumet Area. Greater Chicago. Environmental Management, 45(5), 1096–1111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-010-9482-6
Wu, J., & Lu, J. (2021). Spatial scale effects of landscape metrics on stream water quality and their seasonal changes. Water Research, 191, 116811.
Xiao, R., Wang, G., Zhang, Q., & Zhang, Z. (2016). Multi-scale analysis of relationship between landscape pattern and urban river water quality in different seasons. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep25250
Yan, T., Shen, S. L., & Zhou, A. (2022). Indices and models of surface water quality assessment: Review and perspectives. Environmental Pollution, 119611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2022.119611
Yang, W., Zhao, Y., Wang, D., Wu, H., Lin, A., & He, L. (2020). Using principal components analysis and IDW interpolation to determine spatial and temporal changes of surface water quality of Xin’anjiang River in Huangshan, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(8), 2942. https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH17082942
Zaki, Abdurrahman, Buchori, Imam, Sejati, Anang Wahyu, & Liu, Yan. (2022). An object-based image analysis in QGIS for image classification and assessment of coastal spatial planning. The Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, 25(2), 349–359.
Zerin, L., Gani, M. A., & Khondker, M. (2017). Comparative water quality assessment of the river Buriganga near Dhaka metropolis. Bangladesh. Bangladesh Journal of Botany, 46(2), 589–598.
Zhang, F., Chen, Y., Wang, W., Jim, C. Y., Zhang, Z., Tan, M. L., & Rahman, H. A. (2022). Impact of land-use/land-cover and landscape pattern on seasonal in-stream water quality in small watersheds. Journal of Cleaner Production, 357, 131907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131907
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express their gratitude to Md. Mujahidul Islam, a former research student of the Department of Geography and Environment at Jagannath University in Dhaka, Bangladesh, for his assistance during field data gathering.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval
Not applicable.
Consent to participate
Not applicable.
Consent for publication
All authors consent to the publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Gani, M., Sajib, A.M., Siddik, M. et al. Assessing the impact of land use and land cover on river water quality using water quality index and remote sensing techniques. Environ Monit Assess 195, 449 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-10989-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-023-10989-1