Helgoländer Meeresuntersuchungen

, Volume 49, Issue 1–4, pp 633–645

Pollution effects in Visakhapatnam harbour, India: An overview of 23 years of investigations and monitoring

  • A. V. Raman
Marine Ecology: Political, Economic and Environmental Implications
  • 262 Downloads

Abstract

Visakhapatnam Harbour, a semi-enclosed water body on the east coast of India, is subject to a high degree of pollution caused by industrial and urban wastes. Studies carried out during the last twenty years or so at 6 selected stations in the harbour revealed appreciable hydrographic and biotic changes. Over the years, the concentration of nitrites (max. 5 mg/l) and phosphates (9.6 mg/l) has increased. Dissolved oxygen registered all-time-high values (max. 21.6 mg/l) caused by periodic outbursts of phytoplankton, notably,Skeletonema costatum and other species. Benthic conditions have also changed and only certain pollution-tolerant species (e.g.Capitella capitata) inhabited the bottom sediments that contained a heavy load (2.5%) of organic matter. In the harbour, increased pollution led to the disappearence of stenoecious species and their replacement with other forms known for their tolerance to pollution. The paper describes the major changes which have occurred in water quality and organisms in the harbour as a result of pollution increase during the last two decades.

Literature Cited

  1. APHA (Ed.), 1971. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewaster. American Public Health Association, Washington, 874 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Bismillah Shaik, 1986. Ecology of macrobenthos in relation to pollution in the north arm in Visakhapatnam harbour. Thesis, Andhra Univ., Waltair, 59 pp.Google Scholar
  3. Eppley, R. W. & Weiler, C. S., 1979. The dominance of nanoplankton as an indicator of marine pollution: a critique.—Oceanologica Acta2, 241–245.Google Scholar
  4. Fanuko, N., 1984. The influence of experimental sewage pollution on lagoon phytoplankton.—Mar. Pollut. Bull.15, 195–198.Google Scholar
  5. Food and Agricultural Organisation (Ed.), 1975. Manual of methods in aquatic environment research. Part I. Methods for detection, measurement and monitoring of water pollution.—FAO Fish. tech. Pap.137, 1–233.Google Scholar
  6. Ganapati, P. N., 1969. Biology of pollution in Visakhapatnam harbour.—Mar. Pollut. Bull.166, 1–3.Google Scholar
  7. Ganapati, P. N. & Raman, A. V., 1973. Pollution in Visakhapatnam harbour.—Curr. Sci.42, 490–492.Google Scholar
  8. Ganapati, P. N. & Raman, A. V., 1979. Organic pollution andSkeletonema blooms in Visakhapatnam harbour.—Indian J. mar. Sci.8, 184–187.Google Scholar
  9. Ganapati, P. N., Lakshmana Rao, M. V. & Nagabushanam, R., 1958. Biology of fouling in the Visakhapatnam harbour.—Andhra Univ. Mem. Oceanogr.62, 193–209.Google Scholar
  10. Gaudette, H. E., Wilson, R. G., Toner, L. & Folger, D. W., 1974. An in-expensive titration method for the determination of organic carbon in recent sediments.—J. sedim. Petrol.44, 249–253.Google Scholar
  11. Gray, J. S., 1976. The fauna of the polluted river Tees estuary.—Estuar. coast. mar. Sci.4, 653–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Holme, N. A. & McIntyre, A. D., 1971. Methods for the study of marine benthos. Blackwell, Oxford, 387 pp.Google Scholar
  13. Ketchum, B. H., 1973. Ecological effects of marine pollution. Marine Biological Association of India, Cochin37, 7–28.Google Scholar
  14. Mahoney, J. B. & McLaughlin, J. J. A., 1979. Salinity influence on ecology of phytoflagellate blooms in lower New York Bay and adjacent waters.—J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol.37, 213–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pearson, T. H., 1975. The benthic ecology of Loch Linhe and Loch Eil, a sea-Loch system on the west coast of Scotland. IV. Changes in the biotic fauna attributable to organic enrichments.—J. exp. mar. Biol. Ecol.20, 1–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pearson, T. H. & Rosenberg, R., 1978. Macrobenthic succession in relation to organic enrichment and pollution of the marine environment.—Oceanogr. mar. Biol.16, 229–311.Google Scholar
  17. Phaniprakash, K., 1989. Phytoplankton ecology in relation to pollution in Visakhapatnam harbour, Bay of Bengal. Thesis, Andhra Univ. Waltair, 180 pp.Google Scholar
  18. Prasada Reddy, B. R., 1986. Studies on some physico-chemical parameters of harbour and coastal waters of Visakhapatnam (Bay of Bengal). Thesis, Andhra Univ., Waltair, 195 pp.Google Scholar
  19. Raman, A. V., 1980. Ecobiology of pollution in Visakhapatnam harbour (Bay of Bengal). Thesis, Andhra Univ., Waltair, 171 pp.Google Scholar
  20. Raman, A. V. & Ganapati, P. N., 1983. Pollution effects on ecobiology of benthic polychaetes in Visakhapatnam harbour (Bay of Bengal).—Mar. Pollut. Bull.14, 46–52.Google Scholar
  21. Raman, A. V. & Ganapati, P. N., 1986. Benthic polychaete macrofauna and pollution in Visakhapatnam harbour, India. In: Indian Ocean—biology of benthic marine organisms. Ed. by M.-F. Thompson, R. Sarojini & R. Nagabhushanam. Oxford & IBH Publishing, New Delhi, 463–484.Google Scholar
  22. Raman, A. V. & Phaniprakash, K., 1989a. Phytoplankton ecology in relation to pollution in Visakhapatnam harbour, east coast of India.—Asian mar. Biol.6, 161–166.Google Scholar
  23. Raman, A. V. & Phaniprakash, K., 1989b. Phytoplankton in relation to pollution in Visakhapatnam harbour, east coast of India.—Indian J. mar. Sci.18, 33–36.Google Scholar
  24. Rama Raju, V. S., Sarma, V. V., Narasimha Rao, T. V. & Vijaya Kumar, R., 1987. Variation of physicochemical characteristics with tide in Visakhapatnam harbour, east coast of India.—Indian J. mar. Sci.16, 218–222.Google Scholar
  25. Reish, D. J., Soule, D. F. & Soule, J. D., 1980. The benthic biological conditions of Los Angeles. Long Beach harbours: Results of 28 years of investigations and monitoring.—Helgoländer Meeresunters.34, 193–205.Google Scholar
  26. Richards, F. A. & Thompson, T. G., 1952. The estimation and characterisation of plankton populations by pigment analyses.—J. mar. Res.11, 156–171.Google Scholar
  27. Sarma, A. L. N. & Ganapati, P. N., 1975. Meiofauna of the Visakhapatnam harbour in relation to pollution.—Bull. Rep. mar. Sci. Univ. Cochin7, 243–255.Google Scholar
  28. Sarma, V. V., Raju, G. R. K. & Bose Babu, T., 1982. Pollution characteristics and water quality in the Visakhapatnam harbour.—Mahasagar15, 15–22.Google Scholar
  29. Satyanarayana Rao, K., Srinivasan, V. & Balaji, M., 1989. Success and spread of the exotic fouling bivalveMytilopsis sallei (Recluz) in Indian waters.—Spec. Publ. Asian Fish. Soc.1, 125–127.Google Scholar
  30. Sournia, A. (Ed.) 1978. Monographs on oceanographic methodology—phytoplankton manual. UNESCO, Paris, 337 pp.Google Scholar
  31. Stockner, J. G. & Cliff, D. B., 1979. Phytoplankton ecology of Vancouver harbour.—J. Fish. Res. Bd Can.36, 1–10.Google Scholar
  32. Strickland, J. D. H. & Parsons, T. R. 1968. A practical handbook of sea water analysis.—Bull. Fish. Res. Bd Can.167, 1–311.Google Scholar
  33. Tsuruta, A. & Yamada, M., 1980. Hydrological and biological observations in Dokai Bay, Northern Kyushu. III. Phytoplankton as a biological indicator of eutrophication.—J. Shimonoseki Univ. Fish.29, 103–111.Google Scholar
  34. Umamaheswara Rao, M. & Mohanchand, V., 1988. Water quality characteristics and phytoplankton of polluted Visakhapatnam harbour.—Mar. environ. Res.25, 423–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Biologische Anstalt Helgiland 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. V. Raman
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Marine Biology, Department of ZoologyAndhra University WaltairVisakhapatnamIndia

Personalised recommendations