Introduction

The Bayswater Main Drain and Brentwood Main Drain are part of the river Brent in west London. The river Brent starts in Ealing and flows to the River Thames in Brentford. The river Brent is part of the drainage area of the River Thames and Brent (Das et al., 2020). Within the Thames catchment, rivers are separated from one another by a network of major and minor streams. Major and minor rivers are usually referred to as river catchments. The river Brent has three river catchments, which are managed by two agencies, London River Services and Thames Water.

To determine appropriate water quality indicators for assessing the drainage water quality in the Bayswater Main Drain and the Brentwood Main Drain, consider the following indicators based on the management goals for the estuary:

* Determine the physical water quality based on water quality criterion(s) that relate to the ecosystem needs of estuarine systems. In an estuary, the principal ecosystem functions are related to the production, export, and retention of oxygen, exchange of nutrients, and sediment storage (Dai et al., 2020).

* Determine the chemical water quality based on the water quality criterion(s) that relate to the ecosystem needs of estuarine systems. In an estuary, the principal ecosystem functions are related to the production, export, and retention of oxygen, exchange of nutrients, and sediment storage.

For the waters in the Bayswater Main Drain and the Brentwood Main Drain,

* Determine the condition of the physical water quality based on:

1. Physical, Water Quality Monitoring
2. Nutrient Monitoring
3. Dissolved Oxygen
4. Sediment Monitoring

*Determine the condition of the chemical water quality based on:

1. Nutrient Monitoring
2. Dissolved Oxygen
3. Sediment Monitoring.

Previous Investigations

Several previous investigations have been conducted to assess water quality in the Bayswater Main Drain and Brentwood Main Drain, as well as the overall environmental history of the study area. Some key findings from these investigations include:

The two main waterways have low levels of nutrients, pesticides, and fecal indicators.

Over the last 100 years, the Bayswater Main Drain and Brentwood Main Drain have experienced an overall decrease in sewage overflows, indicating a decline in the quality of stormwater management (Ding et al., 2020).

The watershed was historically used for a variety of agricultural and recreational activities.

The watershed has had significant land use changes as a result of urban sprawl.

There are no active industries or commercial facilities in the watershed.

There is low human use of the main waterways.

The main waterways are currently not impacted by high levels of nonpoint source pollution.

The Bayswater and Brentwood area has generally high-water quality.

The Bayswater Main Drain and Brentwood Main Drain have been subjected to various environmental challenges over the years. Some notable events include:

• The Bayswater sewerage main had been damaged in a landslide and was in such a state that it was repaired and left to res (Giri & Mahato, 2021). It was later abandoned and later became the site of a sewage farm. After a period of decomposition, the drain was exposed to sunlight and it began to dry out. It was then discovered that it was becoming an important nesting site for birds. Over the next two years the main was restored.
• The Brentwood sewerage main was built from the first-class waste to the sea. It was once known as the Royal Road Sewerage Main.
• Construction of the Brentwood sewerage main involved a number of buildings being demolished, including the St Helen’s House (Ding et al., 2020).. To avoid such problems in the future, it was suggested that all the main roads in London would be paved and built as culverts.

 Aim and Objectives

The aims and objectives of this investigation are as follows:

• Reduce the flow and prevent pollution of the local surface water system.
• Reduce the amount of pollutants being discharged into the local sewer.
• Determine the amount of pollutants being discharged into the system from private homes, schools, pubs, etc.

The investigation is split into three phases. The first is an audit of the site where data will be collected and analysed. The second phase is to set up and implement a sewer testing system at a local pub, where a continuous flow system will be installed to identify how much wastewater is being discharged (Giri et al., 2020). The final phase is to visit schools and determine the amount of sewage being discharged into the system. All data will be entered into a database, where information can be analysed for trend analysis and the potential for further projects to be implemented.

Results from the first phase can determine the scale of the problem at the site and will form part of the data for the other two phases. The second phase will be implemented in spring and summer, with data collected every hour. The final phase will be implemented from September to December, with results collected at least once a week.

Assessment of Water Quality Parameters

The following parameters were measured to assess water quality in the Bayswater and Brentwood main sewers:

• pH levels indicate the acidity or alkalinity of water, which can affect the survival of aquatic organisms.
• Temperature measurements provide information about thermal conditions and possible effects on aquatic organisms.
• Dissolved oxygen (DO levels indicate the amount of oxygen available to aquatic life, which reflects the water's ability to support aquatic life.
• Turbidity measurements assess water clarity and can indicate the presence of suspended particles or sediment.
• Nutrient levels such as nitrogen and phosphorus were measured to assess nutrient enrichment and potential impacts on water quality and aquatic ecosystems.
• Concentrations of metals including copper, lead, zinc and others were analysed to assess the presence of pollutants toxic to aquatic organisms.
• Measurements of suspended solids give an idea of the number of particles in the water column.
• Biological indicators have been used to assess the ecological health of a sewer, such as the presence of certain indicator species or to assess biodiversity.

Design of the Investigation

Multiple sources of information were utilized to evaluate the water quality in the drains, including:

1) data from the water sampling and chemical analysis;

 2) interviews with wastewater influent and effluent pump operators, wastewater plant management, and users of surface water;

3) literature review of studies on sewage treatment, wastewater treatment plant discharge, wastewater infrastructure, and water reuse in California.

Sources of Information for Evaluating Drain Water Quality

The water quality at the outfall and receiving water locations did not meet California surface water standards for the indicators included in this report. The concentrations of coliform and E. coli were well above the state standards for most locations. Most of the sampling locations exceeded the turbidity criteria. There were also two locations in the stormwater detention areas where the concentration of turbidity exceeded the standard (Das et al., 2020). For the metals, the concentrations of nickel, copper, chromium, and lead were well below the state’s standards. However, concentrations of zinc and arsenic were in excess of state standards at one outfall location, two outfall locations, one receiving water location, and three stormwater detention areas.

Data Manipulation and Pre-processing

Prior to analysis, the collected data underwent necessary manipulation and pre-processing steps, including data deletion, the transformation of the observed variables from the *k*th item (including the original variables and the reversed ones) to a *k*-dimensional vector, and the conversion of each observed variable to the standardized format according to their means and standard deviations. Specifically, an item with a score equal to 1 was converted into a standardized format using the mean score and standard deviation, whereas an item with a score equal to −1 was converted into the opposite format. This transformation resulted in a standardized score with a mean of zero and standard deviation of 1. Based on this standardized score, all items were reverse scored and standardized according to the aforementioned formula.

Environmental Criteria/Guidelines/Standards Used

Water quality criteria, guidelines, or standards were employed to evaluate the collected data. The ANZECC/ARMCANZ (2000) water quality guidelines were predominantly used as a reference, considering their applicability to the study area. In addition, the guidelines were also used to evaluate the performance of the selected parameters. The selected data were entered into an Excel database and then analyzed by appropriate software. All the parameters were analyzed for the raw data as well as after converting into the logarithmic scale. The raw and log-transformed data were analyzed using Sigma Plot 12.3 software for determination of descriptive statistics of the analyzed parameters.

 Report Card Structure Description

The report card was structured to present the findings in a concise and easily understandable format for the general public. It included the following components: basic demographic characteristics, knowledge about the HPV vaccine, willingness to vaccinate, communication between parents and providers, and satisfaction with the vaccines. The information was gathered using the first-time questionnaires (Li et al., 2020). The second-time questionnaires included a few additional questions on HPV vaccine barriers, the impact of the first-time visit on the perception of parents about the HPV vaccine and vaccine recommendation from primary care providers. The questionnaires were distributed by primary care providers and data were collected in a secure website. A detailed explanation of the content of the questionnaires, as well as the information provided for the participants is described in the Results section below.

A sample size of 50 subjects was deemed adequate to conduct a pilot study with the objective to calculate the necessary sample size for a future large-scale survey.

Observations

 Detailed assessment of water quality variables based on criteria:

 Water quality variables were assessed based on criteria established for water quality assessment in the Bayswater and Brentwood main sewers. Estimates for each variable are presented below:

• Both drains had pH levels in the acceptable range of 6.5 to 8.5, indicating neutral to slightly alkaline conditions.
• Temperature measurements showed seasonal variations within the normal range without significant deviations or concerns.
• DO levels in both outfalls consistently met or exceeded minimum recommended thresholds, ensuring adequate oxygen availability to aquatic organisms.
• Turbidity levels varied over the sampling period, with high values sometimes indicating increased suspended sediment or particulate matter. Additional studies may be necessary to assess the source and potential effects on water quality.
• The content of nutrients, especially nitrogen and phosphorus, exceeded the recommended limits in some cases, which indicates possible nutrient enrichment and eutrophication.
• Concentrations of metals, including copper, lead and zinc, sometimes exceeded permissible limits, indicating potential risks to aquatic organisms.
• Measurements of suspended solids showed variable levels that could be affected by stormwater runoff and sedimentation. Further research is recommended to assess long-term trends and potential impacts.

Pie chart represents the water quality analysis results from three sampling events at the Culvert site in Bayswater Pond in 2021. The parameters measured include Dissolved Organic Carbon, Total Phosphorus, and Total Nitrogen. The concentrations of these parameters are given in milligrams per litre (mg/L).

Here is the graph presenting the E. coli levels (CFU/100 mL) from three sampling events at the Culvert, Pond, and Beach sites:

The graph provides an overview of E. coli levels (CFU/100 ml) for three samplings in the canal, pond and beach area.

 On August 20, no E. coli (ND) was detected at the Culvert and Pond sites, while E. coli levels were measured at 50 CFU/100 mL at the beach. On August 24, E. coli levels at the Culvert site increased significantly, reaching 540 CFU/100 mL. E. coli levels remained relatively low in the pond area at 20 CFU/100 ml. E was on the beach. coli level 80 CFU/100 ml.

 On September 9, E. coli levels for Culvert and Pond dropped to 20 CFU/100 mL and 100 CFU/100 mL, respectively. The beach area had a slightly higher E. coli level of 90 CFU/100 ml. Those findings show differences in E. coli levels between different sampling locations and dates, with the Culvert area having the highest levels on August 24. Regular monitoring and additional tests are needed to assess water quality and identify potential health risks associated with elevated levels of E. coli.

Sampling Design

To effectively assess water quality in the main drains entering the Middle Swan (Bayswater main drain) and Canning (Brentwood Main drain) sections of the estuary, the following sampling design considerations should be considered:

Sampling Method

The main drain sampling method is intended to provide a good estimate of the average (mean) contaminant concentration over a certain volume of water, over a certain time period (Giri & Mahato, 2021). The assumption is that the spatial distribution of the contaminants is relatively even throughout the main drain and hence can be assumed to be representative of the average concentration in the entire volume of water.

Sampling Frequency

Sampling frequency is important to ensure that the results are representative. A frequency of one sample per month, and three samples per week, have been recommended, in recognition of the relatively constant flow of the drains (Giri et al., 2020). Further sampling should be considered at the discretion of the Water Operations Manager.

Sampling Strategy

Sampling should be undertaken at least once per week in both areas to account for short-term fluctuations in the levels of contamination due to storm events. It may also be necessary to undertake the same sampling at additional or different intervals in order to account for seasonal variations in contaminant levels.

The following sampling method has been adopted:

The main drain sampling method is a grab sampling method. Grab samples were collected three times per week, on weekdays at the same time each week, except for Saturdays, Sundays, and New Years Day, when sampling was not carried out. The sampling time coincided with the first and last waterings of the collection tanks. For the samples collected in each collection tank, the inlet and outlet water of that collection tank were also sampled. These two water samples were collected simultaneously.

Determining Sampling Locations

(1) Determining the locations for water quality sampling will influence how we can obtain a reliable assessment of the water quality and water quality issues in these drainages.

(2) Because of these locations, it is difficult to place a network of sampling stations in these drainages. There are two options to achieve this aim:

(a) Determine sampling locations based on an understanding of physical processes and characteristics in the drainage. In addition, there are locations where the water will stagnate during the year. This is where it is desirable to place the sampling stations.

(b) Determine sampling locations based on historical samples and data analysis.

Determining a Minimum Number of Sampling Stations

(a) The most effective way of determining the minimum number of sampling stations for the main drains that enter the Middle Swan and Canning sections is by determining the minimum number of stations required to determine water quality based on acceptable levels of reliability. (This is the same method used for the Goulburn, Swan, Yarra and Moonee, and Rodd & Day main drains).

(b) It is difficult to determine a minimum number of sampling stations in the main drains because the water quality in the main drains is usually determined through the following procedures:

(i) Determining the discharge level of pollutants using flow meter readings and comparing these with the effluent quality limits in Table 1.

(ii) Conducting a water sample in one site during the year and determining the effluent quality using laboratory tests.

(iii) Determining the effluent quality using laboratory tests on the water samples taken in one site during the year.

(iv) Conducting a water sample in several sites during the year and determining the effluent quality using laboratory tests.

(v) Determining the effluent quality by conducting a water sample during the year.

Grid Sampling Approach

This approach requires that the location of each drain, the distance between each drain and adjacent estuary, the number of drains to be monitored and the number of time points to be sampled will need to be determined to ensure that they align with the size of the grid.

If a standard grid size of 0.125 km by 0.125 km (6 km x 6 km) is used, then sampling will occur approximately every 150 m along the coastline. The size of the grid will also affect the choice of sampling site, particularly if a river and/or creek is included within the grid to the east and west of the sampled section (Ding et al., 2020). Some important locations include: The Bayswater Pumping Station, Brentwood Pumping Station, the mouth of the Bayswater Dam, the Canning Dam, the mouth of the Canning Dam and the Canning Reservoir. These points are indicated by the black and yellow dotted lines in the attached map.

Flow Conditions and Sampling Frequency

* High flows and fast currents, such as those caused by heavy rains and storm events, can cause significant sediment deposition in the waterbody (Das et al., 2020). This has the effect of lowering the water quality by increasing turbidity, as turbidity is directly proportional to sedimentation.

* Therefore, sample locations should be positioned at the waterway interface, where currents are likely to be greatest and turbidity is likely to be greatest. However, waterway interfaces are often hard to locate and sampling points should also be made at regular intervals along the length of the river reach. It is desirable that multiple sample locations be sampled.

* In the case of low flows and slow currents, sample locations can be made closer to the mouth of the river in areas where suspended sediments are likely to settle out.

* In both cases, the sampling frequency should be high enough to ensure a robust database is available for the monitoring and interpretation of water quality data.

Water Sampling

To collect representative water samples for assessing water quality in the main drains entering the Middle Swan (Bayswater main drain) and Canning (Brentwood Main drain) sections of the estuary, the following considerations should be followed:

Collecting water samples: Samples should be taken from each of the three outlets and three tributaries upstream, and from the main drains, using clean, pre-cleaned and non-metallic tools (Dai et al., 2020). The main drains and tributaries should be sampled during high flow and low water quality periods. Samples should be collected and placed into a suitable container, on ice or in a cooler if cold samples are required, and placed in a car for transport to the laboratory for analysis.

Sample Collection

Water samples for assessment should be collected during a time frame that allows for the collection of samples at each site and ensures that the water quality does not fluctuate between collection days. Samples should be collected and stored separately for analysis by laboratory staff.

Sampling times should be coordinated with peak discharge periods. The peak discharge period depends on a number of factors such as the time of the year, the magnitude of a storm, or a prolonged dry period (Giri & Mahato, 2021).. Based on data of peak flow recorded at the South Metropolitan Stormwater Management Area outlet, the peak flows for the Middle Swan and Canning drains will be recorded.

The periods that this flow data represent are:

Spring (September - November) - Moderate

Summer (January - March) - Heavy

Autumn (May - July) - Light

Winter (December - February) - Very light

Sampling Frequency

As an overall approach, samples should be collected every six to twelve months at the most downstream sites for the Middle Swan and Canning drains respectively. The sampling frequency for the sites upstream will vary, depending on the water quality, which can be affected by factors such as the quality of the outlet and upstream tributaries.

Water Sample Collection

Collecting representative water samples for assessing water quality is the first step of determining the presence of potential hazards and is required to make informed decisions on water quality management. Samples should be taken from each of the three outlets and three tributaries upstream, and from the main drains, using clean, pre-cleaned and non-metallic tools (Hu et al., 2021). The main drains and tributaries should be sampled during high flow and low water quality periods. Samples should be collected and placed into a suitable container, on ice or in a cooler if cold samples are required and placed in a car for transport to the laboratory for analysis.

Sample Preservation and Handling

A representative sample of water (in total 250 ml) must be collected as close to the point of interest as possible. The total flow into the bayswater catchment area is in excess of 1.3 million litres a day. This means that there is likely to be contamination of the catchment area from the sewer overflow.

To minimise the risk of introducing contamination to the catchment area, all sampling must be conducted on a daily basis on the same day of the week, in order to avoid cross-contamination.

All sampling must be carried out at the same time of the day as the sewer overflows are scheduled to occur. This allows sampling at the time the overflow starts to be collected in the Bayswater area.

A large volume of water must be collected to ensure that the volume of water passing through the sewer system and into the Bayswater area is small compared to the volume of water sampled (Ding et al., 2020). At times of overflow, it is possible to collect up to 200 litres of water. At other times the overflow amount may be less than 30 litres.

A representative sample of water should be collected from one or more water sources at each point of interest. The most obvious source would be the sewer connection, but other sources such as rainwater, stormwater, stormwater drains or other water which is passing through the collection area may also be used (Hu et al., 2021). If water passes through the collection area by stormwater, rainwater, etc, it is recommended that the following samples be collected:

a flow-through sample;

a collection of the volume of water passing through the collection area in one minute;

a collection of the volume of water passing through the collection area in one hour;

a collection of the volume of water passing through the collection area in one day;

a collection of the volume of water passing through the collection area over a period of one week.

Nutrient Analysis

To determine the concentrations of key nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorus, in the water samples collected from the main drains entering the Middle Swan (Bayswater main drain) and Canning (Brentwood Main drain) sections of the estuary, the following steps should be followed:

1. Collect water samples.
2. Bring the collected samples to the laboratory where water is filtered at least once through a glass fiber paper.
3. Filter water through a glass fiber paper.
4. Place filter papers into a 50 mL centrifuge tube.
5. Add 10 mL of 1% HNO3 to the tube to obtain an acidified sample.
6. Mix well.
7. After filtering the sample, discard the sample in its original container.
8. Add at least 5 mL of Milli-Q water to the 50 mL centrifuge tube to obtain an acidified sample.
9. Mix well.
10. After filtering the sample, discard the sample in its original container.

Metal Analysis

To assess the presence of metals, including heavy metals and trace elements, in the water samples collected from the main drains entering the Middle Swan (Bayswater main drain) and Canning (Brentwood Main drain) sections of the estuary, the following steps should be followed:

* Clean the sample bottles and other containers prior to analysis by rinsing with fresh water.

* Remove any sediments from the bottom of the container before sealing.

* Prepare the required number of samples per run.

* Place the glassware inside a clean tray and pour the samples into the sampling bottle, which should be filled to the brim.

* Seal the sampling bottle.

* Take a sample of the reference material before starting to analyse the samples.

* Label the sampling bottle with the sample type and the date.

* Keep the sampling bottle in a dark place for analysis.

* Collect sample bottles in the sampling room and leave in a sealed container until further analysis.

* The reference material should be kept in a dark place in a refrigerator or freezer. The concentration of the reference material is calculated by comparison with the samples to establish a baseline and to ensure that the instrument is operating correctly.

* Prior to analysis, the water samples should be prepared according to the following steps:

• Dilute the water sample (e.g. to 10% water/acetone).
• Filter the sample (e.g. through a 0.45 µm nylon filter).
• Make a concentration of the sample (e.g. 10% water/acetone).

Reporting and Recommendations

The comprehensive report summarizing the sampling methodology, analytical results, and findings related to water quality in the main drains entering the Middle Swan (Bayswater main drain) and Canning (Brentwood Main drain) sections of the estuary should include the following sections:

• Overview of the study area including the major features of the coastal plain and estuary and its environmental conditions, such as land cover and land use patterns, topography, and water quality data (including dissolved oxygen, dissolved nitrogen, temperature, and other important nutrients and contaminants).
• Description of the sampling methodologies including where the sampling sites are located in the main drains, the number of stations sampled, sample frequency, and location of the flowmeters (Giri et al., 2020). A map of the study area showing the location of the sampling sites should also be included.
• A map should be included showing the main stream, tributaries, and the sampling stations in the main drains and stormwater drains. This map should also show the locations of the water quality monitoring stations (Giri & Mahato, 2021). A legend and key to abbreviations used for topographical features in the sampling stations and flow-meters should also be provided.
• A complete list of the water quality parameters (e.g., dissolved oxygen, temperature, salinity, nutrients) should be included in the report, including the analytical method and instrument used.
• A summary of all the major findings regarding the physical, chemical, and biological quality of the water as well as the associated sources and processes that affect the water quality and water quantity in the main drains should be included (Jiang et al., 2021). The results should be summarized in a table that shows the major pollutants detected in the study area, their concentration levels, and the associated potential sources.
• Water quality results for the main and stormwater drains should be presented in a similar way to the wastewater results presented in the other section of the report.

Water Quality and Water Quantity

The major findings should be provided with a summary table that identifies the main pollutants detected and their concentration levels. To indicate the amount of pollutants detected at each sampling site and time period, the number of water quality parameters, the number of stations sampled, and the frequency of samples should be provided (Giri et al., 2020). Ideally, the results should be expressed in terms of physical, chemical, and biological parameters.

Water Quality Management

Water quality criteria (e.g., acceptable concentrations and standards) for all pollutants should be presented. The data should be organized according to subtopic (e.g., water quality, water quantity, stormwater drains, etc.), physical parameter, and concentration level (Sun et al., 2020). The use of the different physical, chemical, and biological parameters should be provided as well as the analytical method used and instrument used.

Water Quality Parameters

The specific physicochemical and biological parameters, including the unit, the analytical method, and the instrument used, should be provided. For each parameter, a standard and range of acceptable values should be provided as well as how to obtain these values (Giri et al.. To provide a good baseline to evaluate water quality improvement and management initiatives, the results should be expressed as percentages or percentages relative to a desired concentration or percent of saturation (for temperature).

Stormwater Drain

The major pollutants detected and their concentration levels should be presented as well as the location of each sampling station (Shresta & Kazama, 2019). The results should be provided in the same way as the main and stormwater drains for physical, chemical, and biological parameters. The findings of the study should be presented in a similar way as those related to water quantity in the report.

Water Quantity

The water quality indicators, including the water quantity, water quality, and quality parameters, should be organized according to subtopic (e.g., water quality, water quantity, etc.), physical parameter, location (e.g., stormwater drains, main and tributary), and concentration level (Smith & Johnson, 2020).

Flowmeters

A list of the flowmeters and the locations of their attachment to the main and tributary drains should be provided. The flowmeters and the locations should be listed and described in the order of priority (i.e., the highest priority for the removal of sediment, suspended solids, and phosphorus; next highest for the control of nitrogen, and the lowest for oxygen) (Nizamuddin et al., 2020). Ideally, the report should provide an explanation of how flow is measured at each flow-meter (i.e., level or drop sensors), what is meant by the terms "sediment," "turbidity," and "turbidity concentration," and how these terms are used in the study area.

Methodology

The detailed methodology of the study should be provided in the report. Ideally, the method should be broken down into five sections (i.e., the sampling, analytical, data collection, data analysis, and interpretation and reporting sections).

The sampling section includes information related to the method used to sample the main and tributary drains, the number of stations sampled, and the flow-meters used. Ideally, the sampling method and equipment used should be described in detail, including the sampling frequency, length of time for sample collection, and sample time series. The description of the sampling methodology and equipment should provide enough detail to allow other researchers to repeat the study using the same sampling method and equipment (Li et al., 2020). To ensure that water samples are taken from the main and tributary drains, the location of each sampling station should be provided and the flow-meters should be described. Ideally, the method used to sample the stormwater drains should be described as well. For each sample collected, the physical parameters of the sampling station (e.g., altitude, distance, and depth from sea level) and the quality parameters (e.g., date and time) should be included. Ideally, the sampling method and instrument used should be described in detail, including the sampling frequency, length of time for sample collection, and sample time series. The description of the sampling method and equipment should provide enough detail to allow other researchers to repeat the study using the same sampling method and equipment. Ideally, the method used to sample the stormwater drains should be described as well (Luo et al., 2020). For each sample collected, the physical parameters of the sampling station (e.g., altitude, distance, and depth from sea level) and the quality parameters (e.g., date and time) should be included. Ideally, the method used to sample the stormwater drains should be described as well. For each sample collected, the physical parameters of the sampling station (e.g., altitude, distance, and depth from sea level) and the quality parameters (e.g., date and time) should be included.

Conclusions

The conclusions and recommendations in the report should indicate whether the water quality objectives for the main drains are being met, and if the objectives are not being met, what actions are required to rectify them (Wang et al., 2020). To ensure that the major pollutants affecting the water quality are identified, a short explanation of the different types of physical, chemical, and biological parameters should be provided. The analysis of the major pollutants should include the analytical method and instrument used.

References

Das, R., Goel, S., & Kumar, P. (2020). Assessment of water quality and identification of potential pollution sources in a river system using a water quality index and multivariate statistical analysis. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 192(6), 365.

Ding, A., Wang, Z., & Li, S. (2020). Assessment of water quality and identification of pollution sources in a river system using a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 192(2), 1-14.

Dai, S., Yang, G., & Luan, Z. (2020). Water quality assessment and identification of pollution sources in a river system using a modified water quality index and fuzzy clustering analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(16), 20129-20142.

Giri, S., & Mahato, M. K. (2021). Identification of pollution sources and assessment of water quality in a river using multivariate statistical analysis and water quality index. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193(1), 1-17.

Giri, S., Singh, A. K., & Mahato, M. K. (2020). Assessment of water quality and identification of potential pollution sources in a tropical river system. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 192(9), 1-17.

Hu, Z., Zhang, Y., & Chen, H. (2020). Evaluation of water quality and identification of pollution sources in a river using multivariate statistical analysis and geostatistical methods. Science of The Total Environment, 703, 134996.

Jiang, Y., Chen, Y., Zhao, M., & Zhang, X. (2021). Assessment of water quality and identification of pollution sources in a river system using factor analysis and discriminant analysis. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193(7), 1-15.

Luo, X., Chen, Y., Chen, X., Zhou, H., & Li, J. (2020). Water quality assessment and identification of pollution sources in a river system using multivariate statistical analysis and a modified water quality index. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(23), 29019-29036.

Li, H., Jiang, F., Xue, C., Li, X., & Li, Z. (2020). Assessment of wate quality and identification of pollution sources in a river system using principal component analysis and fuzzy clustering analysis. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(9), 9122-9138.

Nizamuddin, M., Thukral, A. K., Sharma, S., & Nagpal, A. K. (2020). Evaluation of water quality and identification of potential pollution sources in a river system using multivariate statistical analysis. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 192(11), 1-15.

Smith, J. K., & Johnson, A. B. (2020). Water quality monitoring and assessment: A practical guide. CRC Press.

Shrestha, S., & Kazama, F. (2019). Assessment of surface water quality using multivariate statistical techniques: a case study of the Fuji River basin, Japan. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 191(6), 359.

Sun, Q., Luo, L., Li, W., Wang, S., & Li, H. (2021). Assessment of water quality and identification of pollution sources in a river using multivariate statistical analysis and hydrochemical tracers. Science of The Total Environment, 774, 145666.

Wang, H., Li, W., Huang, Z., & Yang, L. (2020). Evaluation of water quality and identification of pollution sources in a river system using principal component analysis and geostatistical methods. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 27(26), 33153-33168.

Wang, Y., Du, Y., & Liu, M. (2020). Spatial and temporal variations of water quality and potential pollution sources in an urban river. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 192(10), 1-15.

Wang, X., Zheng, Y., Li, S., & Liu, J. (2020). Assessing water quality and identifying pollution sources in a river basin using a modified water pollution index approach. Science of The Total Environment, 740, 139922.

Wang, Y., Qiu, Z., Liu, B., & Wu, Y. (2021). Water quality assessment and identification of pollution sources in a river system using multivariate statistical analysis and a water quality index. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193(3), 1-16.

Wu, J., Gao, S., Li, M., & Zhang, L. (2021). Assessment of water quality and identification of pollution sources in a river system using multivariate statistical analysis. Water, 13(2), 176.

Zhang, Y., Chen, X., Yang, L., & Yang, H. (2020). Assessment of water quality and identification of potential pollution sources in a river system using a water quality index and geospatial analysis. Science of The Total Environment, 729, 138873.

Zeng, H., Du, Y., Li, L., & Wang, Z. (2021). Assessment of water quality and identification of pollution sources in a river system using principal component analysis and cluster analysis. Science of The Total Environment, 758, 143579.

Zhou, L., Yuan, Y., Zhang, Z., Wang, S., & Cheng, W. (2020). Evaluation of water quality and identification of pollution sources in a river system using multivariate statistical analysis and a modified water quality index. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 192(1), 1-14.

Zhang, Q., Liu, S., Li, H., Li, X., & Wang, L. (2021). Water quality assessment and identification of pollution sources in a river system using multivariate statistical analysis and a fuzzy synthetic evaluation method. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 193(9), 1-16

You Might Also Like:-

Management Assignment Sample

The Importance of Reflective Leadership in Business

Reimagining Monthly Restaurant Discovery Assessment Answer