↓ Skip to main content

Physico-chemical and bacteriological quality of drinking water of different sources, Jimma zone, Southwest Ethiopia

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
73 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
296 Mendeley
Title
Physico-chemical and bacteriological quality of drinking water of different sources, Jimma zone, Southwest Ethiopia
Published in
BMC Research Notes, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13104-015-1376-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohammed Yasin, Tsige Ketema, Ketema Bacha

Abstract

The quality of drinking water has always been a major health concern, especially in developing countries, where 80 % of the disease cases are attributed to inadequate sanitation and use of polluted water. The inaccessibility of potable water to large segment of a population in the rural communities is the major health concern in most part of developing countries. This study was designed to evaluate the physico-chemical and bacteriological qualities of drinking water of different sources in the study area. The study was conducted at Serbo town and selected kebeles around the same town in Kersa district of Jimma Zone, southwest Ethiopia. Socio-demographic characteristics of the study populations were gathered using structured and pre-tested questionnaires. Standard microbiological methods were employed for determination of bacterial load and detection of coliforms. Physico-chemical analyses [including total dissolved substances (TDS), total suspended substances (TSS), biological oxygen demand (BOD), nitrate and phosphate concentrations, turbidity and electrical conductivities] were conducted following guidelines of American Public Health Association and WHO. Correlations among measured parameters of water samples collected from different water sources were computed using SPSS software (version 20). Only 18.1 % (43/237) of the study population had access to tap water in the study area. More than 50 % of the community relies on open field waste disposal. Members of the family Enterobacteriaceae, Bacillus and Pseudomonas were among dominant bacterial isolates in the water samples. All water samples collected from unprotected water sources were positive for total coliforms and fecal coliforms (FC). Accordingly, FC were detected in 80 % of the total samples with counts ranging between 0.67 and 266.67 CFU/100 ml although 66.67 % of tap water samples were negative for FC. The recorded temperature and pH ranged between 20.1-29.90 °C and 5.64-8.14, respectively. The lowest and highest mean TDS were 116 and 623 mg/l, respectively. Furthermore, the mean concentration of TSS ranged between 2.07 and 403.33 mg/l. Turbidity, electric conductivity, and nitrate concentration of the water samples ranged, respectively, between 0.01-65.4 NTU, 30.6-729 μS/cm, and below detection limit to 95.80 mg/l. In addition, the mean dissolved oxygen values were found to be between 1.62 and 10.71 mg/l; whereas BOD was within the range of 8-77 mg/l. In all water samples, the concentrations of zinc were within the WHO maximum permissible limits (3 mg/l) although the lead concentration in about 66.7 % of the samples exceeded the maximum permissible limit (0.01 mg/l). The present study has revealed that some of the bacteriological data and physico-chemical parameters of the different water sources had values beyond the maximum tolerable limits recommended by WHO. Thus, it calls for appropriate intervention, including awareness development work and improving the existing infrastructure in order to minimize the potential health problems of those communities currently realizing of the available water sources.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 296 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 296 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 43 15%
Student > Bachelor 25 8%
Lecturer 21 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 6%
Researcher 16 5%
Other 38 13%
Unknown 134 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 43 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 16 5%
Engineering 12 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 3%
Other 48 16%
Unknown 149 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 March 2019.
All research outputs
#7,223,325
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,167
of 4,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#89,370
of 277,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#43
of 187 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,263 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,499 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 187 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.