Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 5, pp 4715–4727 | Cite as

Influence of technological and municipal wastewaters on vulnerable karst riverine system, Krka River in Croatia

  • Vlatka Filipović MarijićEmail author
  • Damir Kapetanović
  • Zrinka Dragun
  • Damir Valić
  • Nesrete Krasnići
  • Zuzana Redžović
  • Ivana Grgić
  • Jakov Žunić
  • Dáša Kružlicová
  • Peter Nemeček
  • Dušica Ivanković
  • Irena Vardić Smrzlić
  • Marijana Erk
Research Article

Abstract

Exceptional natural value of karst rivers, as well as their potential as a source of drinking water supply, contributes to the importance of developing strict environmental protection. Although most of its watercourse is proclaimed national park, Krka River is impacted by technological and municipal wastewaters, which are released without proper purification only 2 km upstream of the park border. In order to assess water ecological status of the Krka River, vulnerability of karst ecosystem and potential threat to the Krka National Park, spatial and temporal variability of physico-chemical and microbiological water parameters, as well as concentrations of 25 total dissolved metals/metalloids were evaluated. All parameters indicated deteriorated water quality near the wastewater influences, which was for certain metals and bacterial counts even comparable to other world rivers of technological/rural catchment. Downstream location pointed to purification processes in karst river, although nutrients and conductivity were still in a range below good water quality and Al, Co, Fe, Li, Mn, Ni, Sr, Ti, and Zn levels remained comparable to their levels in the pollution impacted area, especially in autumn, indicating season-dependent processes. Presented data provided background status and identified pollution influences in the karst riverine system which indicated potential risk for protected area and a need for comprehensive water quality assessment.

Keywords

Trace elements Macro elements Nutrients Bacterial counts Water ecological status National park 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The financial support of the “Adris Foundation” for the project: Evaluation of the Krka River water quality and potential risk to the Krka National Park by application of new bioindicators and biomarkers is gratefully acknowledged. The National Scholarship Programme of the Slovak Republic is acknowledged for the scholarship stay and statistical analyses improvement at Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of SS. Cyril and Methodius in Trnava. The authors also appreciate the assistance of the Meteorological and Hydrological Service Office for providing the data on river water flow of the Krka River source. Special thanks to Zvjezdana Šoštar Vulić for valuable help in measurement of the physico-chemical water parameters and Dr. Nevenka Mikac for the opportunity to perform metal measurements on HR ICP-MS.

References

  1. Brown MT, Depledge MH (1998) Determinants of trace metal concentrations in marine organism. In: Langston WJ, Bebiano MJ (eds) Metal metabolism in aquatic environments. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 185–217.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4757-2761-6_7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Crosa G, Froebrich J, Nikolayenko V, Stefani F, Gallid P, Calamari D (2006) Spatial and seasonal variations in the water quality of the Amu Darya River (Central Asia). Water Res 40(11):2237–2245.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2006.04.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cukrov N, Cmuk P, Mlakar M, Omanović D (2008) Spatial distribution of trace metals in the Krka River, Croatia. An example of the self-purification. Chemosphere 72(10):1559–1566.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2008.04.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cukrov N, Tepić N, Omanović D, Lojen S, Bura-Nakić E, Vojvodić V, Pižeta I (2012) Qualitative interpretation of physico-chemical and isotopic parameters in the Krka River (Croatia) assessed by multivariate statistical analysis. Int J Environ An Ch 92(10):1187–1199.  https://doi.org/10.1080/03067319.2010.550003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dautović J (2006) Determination of metals in natural waters using high resolution inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. University of Zagreb, Bachelor of Science Thesis (in Croatian) Google Scholar
  6. Dautović J, Fiket Ž, Barešić J, Ahel M, Mikac N (2014) Sources, distribution and behavior of major and trace elements in a complex karst lake system. Aquat Geochem 20(1):19–38.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10498-013-9204-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dragun Z, Kapetanović D, Raspor B, Teskeredži E (2011) Water quality of medium size watercourse under baseflow conditions: the case study of river Sutla in Croatia. Ambio 40(4):391–407.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-010-0119-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. HRN EN ISO 8467:2001 Water quality - Determination of permanganate indexGoogle Scholar
  9. EN ISO 6222:1999 Water quality - Enumeration of culturable micro-organisms - Colony count by inoculation in a nutrient agar culture mediumGoogle Scholar
  10. European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (EPCEU). Directive 2008/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on environmental quality standards in the field of water policy, amending and subsequently repealing Council Directives 82/176/EEC, 83/513/EEC, 84/156/EEC, 84/491/EEC, 86/280/EEC, and amending Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. Official J (2008) L 348/84Google Scholar
  11. Filipović Marijić V, Sertić Perić M, Matoničkin Kepčija R, Dragun Z, Kovarik I, Gulin V, Erk M (2016) Assessment of metal exposure, ecological status and required water quality monitoring strategies in small- to medium-size temperate rivers. J Environ Sci Heal A 51(4):309–317.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10934529.2015.1109393 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Government of the Republic of Croatia (GRC). Directive on Water Classification. Official Gazette (2013) No. 73Google Scholar
  13. Hach Company/Hach Lange GmbH (2013) Water analysis guide, 1st edn. Loveland, USAGoogle Scholar
  14. Hartmann A, Goldscheider N, Wagener T, Lange J, Weiler M (2014) Karst water resources in a changing world: review of hydrological modeling approaches. Rev Geophys 52(3):218–242.  https://doi.org/10.1002/2013RG000443 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jones CA, Nimick DA, McCleskey RB (2004) Relative effect of temperature and pH on diel cycling of dissolved trace elements in prickly Pear Creek, Montana. Water Air Soil Poll 153(1):95–113.  https://doi.org/10.1023/B:WATE.0000019934.64939.f0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kapetanović D, Dragun Z, Valić D, Teskeredžić Z, Teskeredžić E (2009) Enumeration of heterotrophs in river water with spread plate method: comparison of yeast extract agar and R2A agar. Fresenius Environ Bull 18(7b):1276–1280Google Scholar
  17. Neal C, Neal M, Hill L, Wickham H (2006) The water quality of the River Thame in the Thames Basin of south/south-eastern England. Sci Total Environ 360(1–3):254–271Google Scholar
  18. Ouyang Y, Nkedi-Kizza P, QT W, Shinde D, Huang CH (2006) Assessment of seasonal variations in surface water quality. Water Res 40(20):3800–3810.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2006.08.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pawar SB, Shembekar VS (2012) Studies on the physico-chemical parameters of reservoir at Dhanegoan district, Osmanabad (M.S.), India. Journal of Experimental Sciences 3(5):51–54Google Scholar
  20. Perica D, Orešić D, Trajbar S (2007) Geomorphological characteristics of the Krka River valley with special emphasis on the gorge from the Town of Knin to Bilušića Buk waterfall. In: Marguš D (ed) Proceedings of the Symphosium- Krka River and Krka National Park. Public institution “Krka National Park”, Šibenik, pp 109–125 (in Croatian) Google Scholar
  21. Sarkar SK, Saha M, Takada H, Bhattacharya A, Mishra P, Bhattacharya B (2007) Water quality management in the lower stretch of the river Ganges, east coast of India: an approach through environmental education. J Clean Prod 15(16):1559–1567.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.07.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Senesi GS, Baldassarre G, Senesi N, Radina B (1999) Trace element inputs into soils by anthropogenic activities and implications for human health. Chemosphere 39(2):343–377.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-6535(99)00115-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rice EW, Baird RB, Eaton AD, Clesceri LS (2012) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 22nd edn. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  24. Vesper DJ, White WB (2003) Metal transport to karst sources during storm flow: an example from Fort Campbell, Kentucky/Tennessee, USA. J Hydrol 276(1):20–36.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(03)00023-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Water Framework Directive (WFD) - River Basin Management Plans (2016) Reporting Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy as amended by Decision 2455/2001/EC and Directives 2008/32/EC, 2008/105/EC and 2009/31/ECGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vlatka Filipović Marijić
    • 1
    Email author
  • Damir Kapetanović
    • 1
  • Zrinka Dragun
    • 1
  • Damir Valić
    • 1
  • Nesrete Krasnići
    • 1
  • Zuzana Redžović
    • 2
  • Ivana Grgić
    • 2
  • Jakov Žunić
    • 1
  • Dáša Kružlicová
    • 3
  • Peter Nemeček
    • 3
  • Dušica Ivanković
    • 1
  • Irena Vardić Smrzlić
    • 1
  • Marijana Erk
    • 1
  1. 1.Division for Marine and Environmental Research“Ruđer Bošković” InstituteZagrebCroatia
  2. 2.Department of Biology, Faculty of ScienceUniversity of ZagrebZagrebCroatia
  3. 3.Department of ChemistryUniversity of SS Cyril and Methodius, Faculty of Natural SciencesTrnavaSlovakia

Personalised recommendations