Post on 13-Jan-2017
iii
ASSESSMENT ON WATER QUALITY AND BIODIVERSITY WITHIN
SUNGAI BATU PAHAT
NURHIDAYAH BINTI HAMZAH
A project report submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Engineering (Civil – Environmental Management)
Faculty of Civil Engineering
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
JUNE, 2007
v
Hanya yang tHanya yang tHanya yang tHanya yang teristimewa buateristimewa buateristimewa buateristimewa buat
Ayahanda Hamzah bin Rostam
Bonda Kamaliah binti Shukor
Abang-abang;
Mohd Azril Fariz
Mohd Khuzairi
Mohd Hafeez Azad
Adik-adik;
Mohd Zul Iqbal
Mohd Irfan
Mohd Sufi Akhbar
&
Untuk iUntuk iUntuk iUntuk innnnsan tersayangsan tersayangsan tersayangsan tersayang
Mahzan bin Manan
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
“In the name of God, the most gracious, the most compassionate”
First and foremost, a very special thanks and appreciation to my supervisor, Dr Johan
Sohaili for being the most understanding, helpful and patient lecturer I have come to
know. I would also like to express my deep gratitude to my co-supervisor, PM. Dr.
Mohd Ismid bin Mohd Said for his valuable time, guidance and encouragement
throughout the course of this research.
Not forgetting may lovely family that always by my side to support me all the way.
Finally, I wish to extend my heartfelt thanks to all environmental laboratories
technicians for their timely support during my survey.
Last but not least, I also owes special thanks to my friends, who have always been
there for me and extended every possible support during this research.
vii
ABSTRAK
Sungai Batu Pahat sedang mengalami kemerosotan kualiti air dan banyak tumbuhan disekitarnya telah musnah. Kajian ini tertumpu kepada penentuan status Sungai Batu Pahat berdasarkan analisis kualiti air dan kepelbagaian biologi secara kualitatif dan kuantitatif. Terdapat enam parameter utama yang diambilkira dalam kajian ini iaitu oksigen terlarut (DO), permintaan oksigen biokimia (BOD), permintaan oksigen kimia (COD), nitrogen ammonia (NH3-N), pepejal terampai (SS) dan pH. Manakala parameter biologi pula terdiri daripada ikan, zooplankton, phytoplankton, macrobenthos dan tumbuhan tebing sungai. Kualiti air yang didapati menunjukkan tahap yang seragam dengan kualiti air yang kurang memuaskan di mana berdasarkan DOE-WQI, di hilir dan hulu sungai, data menunjukkan kualiti air di kelas III tetapi menurun ke kelas IV di tengah sungai. Ini mungkin disebabkan oleh aktiviti guna tanah di kawasan tebing sungai seperti aktiviti kuari dan penempatan penduduk. Jika dilihat pada data kepelbagaian biologi, terdapat banyak anak ikan yang mempunyai nilai komersial yang tinggi yang masih hidup kerana kepekatan DO yang didapati melebihi 2 mg/L dan juga kualiti makanan yang tinggi yang diperolehi dari tumbuhan di tebing sungai. Secara umumnya, taburan hidupan plankton dan macroinvertebrata di kawasan kajian sangat dipengaruhi oleh pasang- surut air dan juga pokok bakau. Kepelbagaian biologi didapati tertumpu di kawasan hulu sungai dan bilangannya berkurang di hilir dan tengah sungai kemungkinan disebabkan oleh aktiviti guna tanah yang aktif. Kebanyakan kepelbagaian biologi yang dijumpai adalah dari spesis yang tidak sensitif pada kepekatan oksigen terlarut dan pH yang rendah. Kesan ketara akibat kemerosotan kualiti air boleh dilihat pada habitat macrobenthos yang dijumpai sewaktu kajian dilakukan di mana, macrobenthos hampir pupus dan hanya yang tinggal adalah dari spesis yang tidak sensitif kepada pencemaran. Walaubagaimanapun, terdapat juga banyak kepelbagaian biologi (zooplankton dan phytoplankton) yang sensitif kepada pencemaran di kawasan kajian dan ini memberi erti bahawa Sungai Batu Pahat masih lagi mampu untuk menampung hidupan aquatik kerana ia menyediakan tempat tinggal, tempat membiak dan makanan yang berkualiti tinggi walaupun kualiti air menunjukkan sebaliknya.
viii
ABSTRACT
Sungai Batu Pahat is undergoing poor condition in term of water quality and
riverbank vegetation. This study was focus on determining the status of Sungai Batu Pahat due to quantitative and qualitative of water quality and biodiversity analysis. There are six major water quality parameter that considered in this study which are dissolved oxygen (DO), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), ammoniacal nitrogen (NH3-N), suspended solid (SS) and pH. Biodiversity parameter consists of fish, zooplankton, phytoplankton, macrobenthos and riverbank vegetation. Water quality shows a consistent level with low quality of water which is class III at upstream and downstream but dropped to class IV at middle stream according to DOE-WQI. This could be a consequence of riverbank landuse activities such as quarry and settlement. If based on biodiversity data, the juvenile commercial fish still exist correspond to >2 mg/L of DO concentration and quality food supply from riverbank vegetation. Generally, the distribution of planktonic life and macroinvertebrates within study area was tidal and mangrove dependent. Biodiversity was found abundance at downstream and present with low number and species at upstream and downstream probably because lands use activities. Biodiversity that mostly found within study area is tolerant species to low dissolved oxygen concentration and pH. The impact of water quality can clearly be seen with respect to macrobenthos habitat. Macrobenthos almost disappeared during study event and only tolerant species was present. However, the abundance of high demanding biodiversity (zooplankton and phytoplankton) giving the good result that Sungai Batu Pahat still can support aquatic life due in term of shelter, feeding and breeding area even, the quality of water shows otherwise.
ix
CONTENT
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE
DECLARATION ii
DEDICATION iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv
ABSTRAK v
ABSTRACT vi
CONTENTS vii
LIST OF TABLES xi
LIST OF FIGURES xiii
LIST OF SYMBOLS xvii
I INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Site Description 2
1.3 Objective of Study 3
1.4 Scope of Study 3
1.5 Needs of Study 4
x
II LITERATURE REVIEW 5
2.1 Overview 5
2.2 Study Background 6
2.3 Sources of River Water Pollution 8
2.4.1 Natural Factor 8
2.4.2 Human Factor 9
2.4 Effect of Land use Activity 10
2.4.1 Agricultural Activity 10
2.4.2 Settlements Activity 11
2.5 Physico-chemical Parameter 12
2.5.1 Dissolve Oxygen (DO) 12
2.5.2 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD) 13
2.5.3 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) 14
2.5.4 Suspended Solids (SS) 15
2.5.5 Ammoniacal Nitrogen (NH3-N) 16
2.5.6 Acidity and Alkalinity (pH) 17
2.6 Biological Parameter 18
2.6.1 Fish 18
2.6.2 Zooplankton 20
2.6.3 Phytoplankton 21
2.6.4 Benthos 22
2.6.5 Mangrove 24
2.7 River Classification 27
2.8 River Classification Based on Biological Indicator 30
III METHODOLOGY 32
3.1 Introduction 32
3.2 Literature Review 32
3.3 Determine the Parameter Involved 33
3.4 Sampling Method 33
xi
3.4.1 Water Quality Sampling 37
3.4.2 Fisheries Sampling 38
3.4.3 Phytoplankton 39
3.4.4 Zooplankton 40
3.4.5 Macrobenthos 41
3.4.6 Riverbank Vegetation Analysis 42
3.5 Chemical Analysis 42
3.5.1 Concentration Measurement of Biochemical
Oxygen Demand (BOD5) 43
3.5.2 Concentration Measurement Of Chemical Oxygen
Demand (COD) 43
3.5.3 Concentration Measurement Of Nitrogen-Ammonia
(NH3-N) 43
3.5.4 Measurement of Suspended Solids (SS) 43
3.6 Data Analysis 43
IV RESULT AND ANALYSIS 45
4.1 Introduction 45
4.2 Land Use Analysis 46
4.2.1 Residential 48
4.2.2 Agricultural and Farming 49
4.2.3 Commercial 50
4.2.4 Industrial 51
4.3 Water Quality Analysis 52
4.4 Water Quality Index Analysis 55
4.5 Water Quality Parameter Analysis 58
4.5.1 Dissolved Oxygen 58
4.5.2 Biochemical Oxygen Demand 60
4.5.3 Chemical Oxygen Demand 61
4.5.4 Ammoniacal Nitrogen 62
4.5.5 Suspended Solids 64
4.5.6 pH 65
xii
4.6 Biological Analysis 67
4.6.1 Riverbank Vegetation Result 67
4.6.2 Fish Result 69
4.7 Phytoplankton Analysis 74
4.7.1 Distribution Pattern of Phytoplankton
Due to Riverbank Vegetation 76
4.7.2 Distribution Pattern of Phytoplankton
Due to Dissolved Oxygen 78
4.7.3 Distribution Pattern of Phytoplankton
Due to pH 79
4.8 Zooplankton Analysis 79
4.8.1 Distribution Pattern of Zooplankton
Due to Riverbank Vegetation 82
4.8.2 Distribution Pattern of Zooplankton
Due to Dissolved Oxygen 84
4.8.3 Distribution Pattern of Zooplankton
Due to pH 85
4.9 Macrobenthos Analysis 85
4.9.1 Distribution Pattern of Macobenthos
Due to Riverbank Vegetation 86
4.9.2 Distribution Pattern of Macrobenthos
Due to Dissolved Oxygen 88
4.9.3 Distribution Pattern of Macrobenthos Due to pH 89
V CONCLUSION 90
5.1 Conclusion 90
5.2 Recommendation 91
REFERENCES 93
APPENDIX 113
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE TITLE PAGE
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
4.15
4.16
4.17
Water Quality Index (WQI)
Department of Enviroments’ Water Quality Index Standard
Parameter Subindex DOE-WQI
Interim National Water Quality Standard for Malaysia
(INWQS) with related of water quality parameter
Water Quality Determination based on Shannon-Weiner
Diversity Index
Distribution of exiting land use in Batu Pahat
List of subdistricts in Batu Pahat
Water quality parameter result during high tide
Water quality parameter result during low tide
Water quality subindex parameters result during high tide
Water quality subindex parameters result during low tide
Riverbank vegetation that mostly found at Sungai Batu
Pahat
Number of fishermen according to district
Fish species found in Sungai Batu Pahat
Range of fish species length
Phytoplankton taxa during high tide
Phytoplankton taxa during low tide
Phytoplankton taxa as compared to DO concentration
Phytoplankton taxa as compared to pH
Zooplankton during high tide in unit ind/m3
Zooplankton during low tide in unit ind/m3
Zooplankton numbers as compared to DO concentration
27
27
28
29
31
46
47
53
53
54
54
68
70
72
72
74
75
78
79
80
81
84
xiv
4.18
4.19
4.20
4.21
4.22
Zooplankton numbers as compared to pH
Benthic macroinvetebrates within study area during high
tide
Benthic macroinvetebrates within study area during low
tide
Numbers of macrobenthos as compared to DO
concentration
Numbers of macrobenthos as compared to pH
85
86
86
88
89
xv
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE TITLE PAGE
1.1
2.1
2.2
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
Major land use that had been identified around Sungai Batu
Pahat
Common crab in mangrove swamps-Porcelain Fiddler(Uca
annulipes)
Mangrove roots that act as home and hiding place for
juvenile fish against predator
Geographical Positioning System was used to determine
coordinate and distance
Portions of Water Quality Sampling Station at Sungai Batu
Pahat
Upstream of Sungai Batu Pahat. Patches of Nypa habitat
are abundance at the upstream because of low salinity water
compared to seaward. Water seems to be cleaner from
turbidity
A lot of shipping activity occurred at the middle stream of
the estuary, resulting disturbance of biodiversity and
riverbank vegetation as well as water quality depletion
Downstream of Sungai Batu Pahat is adjacent to coastal
water that have wide opening. At downstream, the land are
fully covered by riverbank vegetation especially mangrove
in order to protect against tsunami
Sungai Batu Pahat during high tide. Fresh water from the
river is mixing with coastal water and abundance of fish
will take this opportunity to breed at vegetations’ roots
During low tide, the roots of vegetation were clearly seen
2
24
25
33
34
35
35
36
36
xvi
3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
and this is the time for adult fish go to open sea because,
water from estuary was flowing seaward during this period
Multi-Parameter Analyzer-Consort C535 that had been
used to determine pH level on surface water of Sungai Batu
Pahat
55-YSI Dissolved Oxygen Meter was used in order to get
dissolved oxygen concentration in unit mg/L on surface
water
Cast net had been used thirty (30) times for fish sampling.
Trammel net was used for five (5) times at certain part of
the river where drift net using is allowed
Water sampling using Van Dorn Sampler in order to
identify phytoplankton assemblages
Zooplankton had been caught using plankton net at 0.5m
depth from the water surface
Ekman grab sampler that used to identify benthic animals
with 500µm Endecott sieve on board
Squatter area located by the river with improper sewage
treatment and solid waste collection system
Dumping area that made by local resident and resulting
poor view and bad odour
Trade activities along Sungai Batu Pahat that trades goods
and groceries such as logs and timbers
Busy quarry activities during day time along Jalan Minyak
Beku closed to Sungai Batu Pahat
Trend of water quality from upstream towards downstream
during high tide and low tide where water quality was
dropped to class IV at middle stream associated with nine
potential tributaries that contribute pollutant to estuaries
Rubbish that floating on surface water of Sungai Batu Pahat
which carried by flow during ebbing time from upstream of
the estuaries to coastal area
The fluctuation of dissolved oxygen concentration during
37
37
38
38
39
39
40
41
48
49
50
52
55
57
xvii
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
4.15
4.16
4.17
high tide and low tide with respect to distance which is
increased towards downstream
For both tides, BOD concentration was increased from
upstream and constant as reach at distance 3.21 km to
seawards due to human activities at middle stream and
undisturbed mangrove area at downstream which is known
as abundance organic matter contributor to water bodies
COD concentration that consistent seaward for high tide
because of dilution from coastal water. However, during
low tide, COD was increased at middle stream due to
leaching of organic matter and inorganic matter from
mangrove area, urban area, as well as decaying of aquatic
plants
Ammoniacal nitrogen decreasing seawards for high tide
and low tide due to increasing of dissolved oxygen
concentration
Profile of suspended solids from upstream to downstream
during high tide and low tide which is increased from
upstream to adjacent of coastal water probably because of
bottom sediment disturbance consequence from boats and
ships traffics as well as imported of suspended solids from
mangrove area and Straits of Melaka
pH value within Sungai Batu Pahat that can be concluded
as acidic water because of natural geology and activities at
mangroves’ roots that was identified to lower the pH
Family Ariidae (Catfish) that caught during study event
Percentage of species number found within study area
Distribution pattern of phytoplankton taxa which is slightly
increase towards downstream for high tide and low tide
Zooplankton community distribution along the river
Macrobenthos that found during study event which shows
low diversity during high tide and low tide
58
61
62
63
65
66
70
71
76
82
87
xviii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
APHA
BOD
COD
DO
DOE
FSS
GPS
INWQS
IUCN
MEDS
MPBP
SS
UM
USEPA
VSS
WQI
American Public Health Association
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chemical Oxygen Demand
Dissolved Oxygen
Department of Environment
Fixed Suspended Solid
Geographical Positioning System
Interim National Water Quality Standard
International Union for Conservation of
Nature and Natural Resources
Microbial Easily Degradable Substrate
Majlis Perbandaran Batu Pahat
Suspended Solid
Universiti Malaya
United State Environmental Protect Agency
Volatile Suspended Solid
Water Quality Index
xix
LIST OF SYMBOLS
km
mg/L
kg/m3
µm
cm
ind/m3
L
N
E
C
P
H’
J’
D’
sp.
%
°C
CO2
H2O
NO3
O2
NO2-
NH3
H2S
FeS2
PO4
H-NH3
Kilometer
Milligram per liter
Kilogram per cubic meter
Micrometer
Centimeter
Individu per cubic meter
Liter
North
East
Carbon
Phophorus
Shannon-Weiner’s Index
Pielous’s Index
Margalef’s Index
Species
Percentage
Degree Celsius
Carbon Dioxide
Water
Nitrate
Oxygen
Nitrite
Ammonia
Hydrogen Sulfide
Iron Sulfide
Phosphate
Nitric Acid
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction
River is one of valuable country asset and need to put more attention to
rehabilitate it from time to time. It is should be well cared and concerned of its
importance without any enforcement. By maintaining and well managing the river,
the aesthetic value may increase as well as rate of country economic generation may
improve tremendously. Mangroves are intertidal marine plants, mostly trees, and
thrive in saline conditions and daily inundation between mean sea level and highest
astronomical tides. Mangroves are not a monophyletic taxonomic unit. Fewer than 22
plant families have developed specialized morphological and physiological
characteristics that characterize mangrove plants, such as buttress trunks and roots
providing support in soft sediments and physiological adaptations for excluding and
expelling salt (Schaffelke et al., 2005).
For swampy area like Sungai Batu Pahat, the mangrove plants require certain
heavy metals as essential nutrients; however an excess in these nutrients may
potentially have adverse, ecotoxicological consequences for mangrove communities.
Each mangrove plant species has specific adaptation systems, which may control
their behavior towards pollutants. A study by previous experiment reveals that in
urban area, there are no obvious differences between samples collected in swamps
located upstream and downstream. (Marchand et al., 2005).
2
1.2 Site Description
The main river in the study area is Sungai Batu Pahat which forms from the
joining of two rivers namely Sungai Simpang Kiri and Sungai Simpang Kanan about
3.5 km northwest of the town of Batu Pahat. From the point where Sungai Simpang
Kiri and Sungai Simpang Kanan joins to form Sungai Batu Pahat, the river flows for
approximately 12 km on a south and southwesterly course before draining into the
straits of Melaka near Tanjung Api and Minyak Beku. A few tributaries which are
connected to the river were identified such as Sungai Peserai, Sungai Benang, Sungai
Gudang, Sungai Kajang, Sungai Tambak and Parit Gantong. Within study area,
there are a lot of land use activities such as urban area, quarry, barter-trade jetties and
pig farm as shown in Figure 1.1.
Market
Quarry
Pig FarmMangroves
Primary forest
Residential, Commercial and Industrial
Agriculture
Legend
Figure 1.1: Major land use that had been identified around Sungai Batu Pahat
(Low, 2007)
3
1.3 Objective of Study
The objectives of this study are;
(i) To determine the trends of water quality of Sungai Batu Pahat as
consequence of land use activities;
(ii) To identify the distribution pattern of planktonic life and
macrobenthos due to dissolved oxygen, pH and riverbank vegetation;
(iii) To identify the status of Sungai Batu Pahat based on water quality and
biodiversity analysis.
1.4 Scope of Study
The boundary of this study is from the upstream of Sungai Batu Pahat (1° 51’
35.2” N, 102° 55’ 23.8” E) to the adjacent coastal water of Sungai Batu Pahat, i.e.
Straits of Melaka (1° 47’ 52.1” N, 102° 53’ 30.1” E ). The considering parameter for
this study are water quality parameters which consist of Dissolve Oxygen (DO),
Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), pH (Acidity
and Alkalinity), Suspended Solid (SS) and Ammoniacal Nitrogen (NH3-N), and
biological parameters such as fish, zooplankton, phytoplankton, macrobenthos and
river bank vegetation. The sampling of water quality is taken at seven stations with
six times of frequency for both tides (study period is within August 2006 and
September 2006).
The data of biodiversity quantity in term of zooplankton, phytoplankton and
macrobenthos was taken twice at five stations within August and September, 2006.
Fisheries sampling also was taken twice which two times during high tide and two
times during low tide within study period while riverbank vegetations was measured
once within study period because the condition of river bank vegetation is not change
4
from actual observation. Only the patches of vegetation from both side of the river is
considering in this study.
1.5 Needs of Study
Generally, Water Quality Index (WQI) is used to determine the classification
and pollutant status of particular water bodies. However, rely solely on WQI is not
strong enough to define and justify either the aquatic habitat may survive in the water
bodies or vice versa. Instead of using physicochemical parameters, another strong
influenced factor is via biological survey. Aquatic habitat may have bad impact
causes by deteriorating of water quality. Another reason of fish survival is because
of the existing of feeding and breeding area (riverbank vegetation). Beside, there
would be a Second port development within study area (Mukim Peserai). Therefore,
this study is conducted to determine the existing quality of this river and represent as
a baseline data in order to achieve sustainable development.
CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Overview
River is one of valuable country asset and need to put more attention to
rehabilitate it from time to time. It is should be well cared and concerned of its
importance without any enforcement. By maintain and well manage the river, the
aesthetic value may increase as well as rate of country economic generation may
improve tremendously.
Mangrove forest was surrounded with looses sediment which receive organic
matter from various sources such as bacteria (Bano et al., 1997), algae, mangrove
litter and human activities (Meziane and Tsuchiya, 2001; Tam et al., 1998). Beside
organic matter, human activities such as urbanization and industrialization also
contribute to abundance of pollutant in mangrove sediment
Organic and inorganic pollution is an environmental problem of worldwide
concern because these substance are indestructible and most of them have toxic
effects on living organisms, including humans when they exceed a certain
concentration (Bahadir et al., 2005; Ghrefat and Yusuf, 2006; Ardebili et al., 2006).
Even at low concentration, the tendency to accumulate in the food chain is high
(Corami et al., 2006).
6
Pollutants released into the environment have been increasing continuously
as a result of industrial activities and technological development, posing a significant
threat to the environment and public health because of their toxicity, accumulation in
the food chain and persistence in nature. The heavy metals lead, mercury, copper,
cadmium, zinc, nickel and chromium are among the most common pollutants found
in industrial effluents (Bahadir et al., 2005).
For swampy area like Sungai Batu Pahat, the mangrove plants require certain
substance as essential nutrients; however an excess in these nutrients may potentially
have adverse, ecotoxicological consequences for mangrove communities. Each
mangrove plant species has specific adaptation systems, which may control their
behavior towards pollutants. A study by previous experiment reveals that in urban
area, there are no obvious differences between samples collected in swamps located
upstream and downstream (Marchand et al., 2005).
2.2 Study Background
Sungai Batu Pahat which situated in the southwest of Peninsular Malaysia in
the region of 1° 48’ 00” to 1° 48’ 54” N latitude and 102° 56’ 00” to 102° 56’ 30” E
longitude can be describe as an estuary which is a semi-enclosed water body that has
a free connection with the open sea and an inflow of freshwater that mixes with the
seawater; including fjords, bays, inlets, lagoons, and tidal rivers (USEPA, 2006).
About 3.5 km northwest of the town, Sungai Batu Pahat is forms from the joining of
two rivers namely Sungai Simpang Kiri and Sungai Simpang Kanan. The river flows
for about 12 km beginning from the joining which form Sungai Batu Pahat on a
south and southwesterly course before draining into the straits of Malacca near
Tanjung Api and Minyak Beku.
Sungai Batu Pahat has a sandy/muddy area and the dominant flow there are
driven by the astronomical tides with interval freshwater inflows resulting additional
flows. There are likely to be some very high freshwater flows in the estuary from
time to time. During spring tide, the typical ranges are in order of 3 meter and neap
7
tide is in the range of 1 meter. But sometime, spring tide ranges of nearly 3.7 meter
may occur (Uni-technologies Sdn. Bhd.).
Sungai Batu Pahat is classified as a small river which covered by riverbank
vegetation such as mangrove, nypa and mixed vegetations. However, approximately
4 km southwest of the town of Batu Pahat, will proposed a secondary port
development that covers a total land area of 191.76 acres. Unfortunately, most of the
mangroves in the area have been cleared except for some patches of Nypa tree along
the river bank as well as some secondary shrubs near Parit Tambak.
According to Vincent (2007) observation, low in species count of vertebrates
and invertebrate are found at proposed area due to habitat disturbance and
degradation. Only 38 species out of 638 Malaysian species were recorded for
avifauna, while Odonates which are vital bio-indicator only showed a low 4 species
presence out of 230 species from Malaysia. He also found only 2 herpetofauna, 2
molluscs, 3 Signal crabs (Uca spp.), 2 mudskippers, 2 monkey spp., 1 otter and 1
wild pig spp. within the property.
However, at non-disturbed area, a higher presence of birds and mammals
were found which offer better security, food and shelter. Little egret (Egretta
garzetta) were the most found species feeding along the mudflats especially during
low tide. One species of stork, the Lesser Adjutant (Leptoptilos javanicus) was
observed soaring on thermals in numbers which were later determined to be 16
which is significant. IUCN (2006) was listed the stork as near threatened and based
on The Asian Waterbird Census, this species are the highest count in Peninsular
Malaysia. Beside, riverbank vegetation at Sungai Batu Pahat would be an important
resting and foraging site for migratory birds from the Northern Hemisphere that stop-
over annually from October to January as it is located along the known bird
migration pathway named the East-Asian Australasian Flyway.
8
2.3 Sources of River Water Pollution
River water pollution may occur from non integrated and non systematic of
existing management system. From observation, the enforcement to control point
sources still weak with respect to standard A and Standard B as align in
Environmental Quality Act, 1974. Generally, there are two main sources in
contributing of river water pollution, which are point sources and non point sources.
The point sources consist of detectable sources pollution component such as
domestic waste water discharge and industrial waste water discharge. While non
point sources is undetectable pollution sources such as surface run off, agriculture
and so on. River pollution depending on natural factor and human factor as discuss
as follows;
2.3.1 Natural Factor
Natural factor is hard to identify and it depending on geological factor (Shtiza
et al., 2004; Yilmaz et al., 2005), climate changes (Fatimah Mohd Noor et al., 1992),
local soil erosion (Rieumont et al., 2004), storm and flood conditions (Homens et al.,
2005)
There is two major factor that had been identified as natural pollution
contribution to degradation of water quality which are agriculture runoff (Dalman et
al., 2004; Segura et al., 2005) and urban runoff (Dalman et al., 2004; Thévenot et al.,
2003; Segura et al., 2005; Dwight, 2001). These factors may cause flooding because
of river incapable to support large quantity and immediate surface runoff during
heavy rain or continous rain or both. The characteristic of catchment area may effect
to the rate and quality of flow rate.
Sloppy earth surface may increase the speed of surface runoff as it decrease
water retention time. Hence, soil absortion ability will lowered because normally
vegetation in this area is less thicken and the soil easy to erosive. For that reason, the
9
effect of surface runoff becomes more serious (Fatimah Mohamad Noor et al.,1992)
by affecting public health and economy for particular country (Dwight, 2001).
2.3.2 Human Factor
Human factor or known as anthropogenic sources is the major contributor to
river water and sediment pollution. During the course of the 20th century
anthropogenic influence in river systems has become an increasing limiting factor of
river discharge (Gonzales et al., 2006; Heininger et al., 2006; Ghrefat and Yusuf,
2006; Yin et al., 2006; Rieumont et al., 2004). The trace element that identifies as
most impacted elements by human activities is Cd, Cu, Hg and Zn (Davide et al.,
2002). However, according to Marchand et al (2005), the variations in heavy metal
content with depth or between mangrove areas result largely from diagenetic
processes rather than changes in metal input resulting from local human activities.
In some country, the main function of river is as transportation and shipping
activities. Heavy ship traffic may cause a lot of pollution to river water quality
(Pekey, 2006; Dalman et al., 2004). Beside, dredging activities (Homens et al.,
2005), thermal power plant (Demirak et al., 2005), intensive aquaculture (Dalman et
al., 2004), inadequate water use management, intensive deforestation (Rieumont et
al., 2004) and also mining activities (Dalman et al., 2004; Kehrig et al., 2003) such
as gold mining (Gammons et al., 2005), uranium and tin mining (Seidel et al., 2005),
mining of chromites and decorative stones (Ardebili et al., 2006) and copper mining
(Segura et al., 2005), are the major factor in releasing pollutant to river.
Many study shows that non-biodegradable substance measured in surficial
bottom sediment near industrial area, all show higher levels of inorganic matter
compared to non industrial area. Meaning that, industrial activities discharge a lot of
inorganic matter (Ashkan, 2000; Shtiza et al., 2004; Franca et al., 2005; Thévenot et
al., 2003; Pekey, 2006; Chen et al., 2006; Zhang et al., 2006). Inorganic matter
especially chemical and toxic wastes are discharged from various industries, such as
smelters, electroplating, metal refineries, textile, mining, ceramic and glass. (Bahadir
et al., 2006). For non industrial area, the main sources of inorganic substances in
10
surface water are likely to have been traffic emissions, city wastewater and biosolids
that used as fertilizer. (Zhang et al., 2006)
Municipal waste water, also known as point sources becomes worldwide
concern because the effluent discharge is hard to comply with country standard
(Dalman et al., 2004; Chen et al., 2006; Yilmaz et al., 2005; Davide et al., 2002). In
suburban areas, the use of industrial or municipal wastewater is common practice in
many parts of the world. (Sharma et al., 2006; Rieumont et al., 2004). Ammonia
concentration is normally high at downstream of waste water treatment plant and
nearby the pond with large water habitat population such as duck and swan which
discharge abundant of unwanted waste.
2.4 Effect of Land use Activity
Land use activities are well recognized as main contributor to deteriorating of
river water quality such as agriculture activity and settlement activities as discussed
below;
2.4.1 Agricultural Activity
Pollutant substances of soil resulting from wastewater irrigation is a cause of
serious concern due to the potential health impacts of consuming contaminated
produce. (Sharma et al., 2006; Thévenot et al., 2003). The used of fertilizer and
pesticide such as organochlorine pesticides (OCP) (Turgut, 2002) that used in
agriculture may emerge danger in the future (Ghrefat and Yusuf, 2006; Yilmaz et al.,
2005; Alonso et al., 2003) and pollutant concentration may clearly increase in the
downstream watersheds (e.g., vineyards) because of intense agriculture (Masson et
al., 2006). For peri-urban area, they are not only generators but also receivers of
various pollutants. The water in peri-urban areas is the source of irrigation water for
farmers. (Zhang et al., 2006)
11
Sharma et al (2006) suggested that the use of treated and untreated
wastewater for irrigation has increased the contamination of Cadmium, Lead, and
Nickel in edible portion of vegetables causing potential health risk in the long term.
The study also points to the fact that adherence to standards for pollutant substances
of soil and irrigation water does not ensure safe food.
In general, the concentrations of pollutants in surface waters are significantly
higher during the dry season than the wet season because of the dilution by large
quantities of rainfall in the wet season. During the dry season, surface water is an
important source for irrigation. Irrigation can be a significant pathway for entry of
water pollutants to the soil–plant system. (Zhang et al., 2006)
2.4.2 Settlements Activity
Overpopulation (Franca et al., 2005; Smith, 2004; Butcher et al., 2003) in
certain country becomes more serious impact to environment concern. As large
quantity of community in particular area, the more land is using to support their
routine life activities such as for settlements, plantation, livestock such as duck,
chicken, cow and pig. Uncontrolled land use activities and breaking the legislation
such as overreach river corridor are more likely to be as water pollution sources.
The untreated effluent of domestic waste water in settlement area and river
dumping (Rieumont et al., 2004) which directly release into river basin consist of
high organic and unorganic pollutant element. It is not just affect the water quality,
but also resulting in bad odour and affect the health of community nearby. The
importance of river should take into account in any new development. Therefore,
each vicinity of development should not and suggested to be build outside the river
reserve boundary (Marina Majid, 2000).
12
2.5 Physico-chemical Parameter
There are six major parameter that recommended by Department of
Environment, Malaysia in order to determine river classification which consist of
dissolved oxygen (DO), Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD), Chemical Oxygen
Demand (COD), Ammoniacal Nitrogen (NH3-N), Suspended Solid (SS) and pH.
2.5.1 Dissolve Oxygen (DO)
Dissolved oxygen (DO) is a measure of the amount of oxygen dissolved in
solution in a stream. DO diffuse from the atmosphere into the stream until it reaches
a saturation point. According to Metcalf and Eddy (2004), the actual quantity of
oxygen that can be present in solution is governed by four ways; solubility of the gas,
gas partial pressure in the atmosphere, temperature and finally, the concentration of
the impurities in the water such as salinity and suspended solid
Warmer water has a lower saturation point for DO than cooler water. Water
that is flowing at higher velocities can hold more DO than slower water (Smith,
2004). In the summer months, a DO level is tending to be more critical because the
rate of biochemical reaction that uses oxygen increases with increasing temperature
and the total quantity of oxygen available is lower as stream flows are lower during
summer. In waste water system, DO is desirable because it can eliminate the
formation of noxious odours (Metcalf and Eddy, 2004).
DO is utilized in the processes of respiration and decomposition and only
slightly soluble in water and become the most required parameter for respiration of
aerobic microorganisms as well as all other aerobic life forms. Levels of DO must be
high enough to support the health and well being of aquatic organisms or species
may become stressed or disappear from a stream (Smith, 2004). Oxygen is essential
for maintenance of the microbial sulfur oxidation process (Seidel et al., 2005). Fall
oxidation of the surficial sediment layer relative to summer reduction make the metal
sink into sediment (Ashkan, 2000).
13
Dissolve oxygen is not using only for determining water quality solely, the
value of DO in water bodies will act as indicator for what kind of fish will survive
and to what extent the aquatic life may live in the water bodies. Effluent discharging
directly into water bodies will decline DO concentration. For example, certain fish
need at least 0.008 kg/m3 of DO to survive and below 0.004 kg /m3, this type of fish
will face mortality.
During night, DO concentration and pH value are decline because of the rapid
oxygen consumption and fast bacterioplankton growth rate (Alongi et al., 2003).
Zettler et al (2007) claimed that for macrofauna communities, they are not only
depending on the salinity regime but on the occurrence and duration of oxygen
depression periods.
2.5.2 Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD)
BOD is the total dissolve oxygen required by bacteria for decaying process
under aerobic condition. It also the best indicator in determine oxygen pressure in
consequence of organic pollution of aquatic organisms living. The value of BOD
will continuously increase because of natural plant decaying process and the major
contributors that increase total nutrient in water bodies are construction effluent,
fertilizer, animal farm and septic system
Theoretically, BOD takes an infinite time to complete because the rate of
oxidation is assumed to be proportional to the amount of organic matter remaining.
In 5-days period, the oxidation of the carbonaceous organic matter is from 60 to 70
percent complete, and within 20-days period, the oxidation is about 95 to 99 percent
complete.
5-days BOD (BOD5) is the most widely used parameter of organic pollution
applied to waste water and surface water. It involves DO measurement that used by
microorganisms in the biochemical oxidation of organic matter. However, the BOD
test has a number of limitation which are consist of five; a high concentration of
14
active, acclimated seed bacteria is required; need a pretreatment when handling toxic
waste and must reduce the effects of nitrifying organisms; only can measure
biodegradable organic; after the soluble organic matter present in solution has been
used, there are no stoichiometric validity; and required long period to obtain test
result (Metcalf and Eddy, 2004).
The approximate quantity of oxygen that will be required to biologically
stabilize the organic matter present can be determined by carried out BOD test.
Beside, we can determine the size of waste treatment facilities as well as the
efficiency of some treatment processes. Another purpose of BOD test is to
determine compliance with wastewater discharge permits. Furthermore, BOD test
detail and its limitation supposed to be well understood because the test will continue
to be used some time.
2.5.3 Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
COD refer to the quantity of oxygen required to oxidize a complete organic
substance chemically to form Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and water (H2O). The
deteriorating of water quality can be measured with high value of COD and lower
value of COD represent otherwise. COD mostly show higher value than BOD value.
However, there are no consistent correlations between two different samples but
must take into account that BOD only dealing with organic matter and COD can deal
with both organic and inorganic matter.
That is the reason why COD value is much higher than BOD value. However,
there is no point to get BOD value by measuring COD solely because for most
wastewater treatment plant the operation is the biologically and the priority is given
to BOD test compared to COD test (Nathanson, 1986).
COD test is used for oxidize many organic substance which difficult to
oxidize biologically such as lignin that only can oxidize chemically. In COD test,
dichromate will be used in order to oxidize inorganic substance and increase the
15
apparent organic content of the sample. Sometime, the organic substance in water
sample may be toxic to the microorganisms used in BOD test. The main advantage
of COD test is it only takes 2.5 hour to complete the test compared to 5 or more days
for BOD test.
Wastewater with high COD concentration can cause a substantial damage to
submersed plant, however, by using of chitosan that suggested by Xu et al (2006)
probably could relieve the membrane lipid peroxidization and ultrastructure
phytotoxicities, and protect plant cells from stress of high COD concentration
polluted water. Shen et al (2005) state that COD usually use in wastewater to
determine the microbial easily degradable substrate (MEDS). In tropical coastal-
wetland in Southern Mexico, the COD value is high associated with mangrove
enriched organic matter (Sarkar et al., 2005; Hernandez-Romero et al., 2004).
2.5.4 Total Suspended Solid (TSS)
Total solids content is the most vital physical characteristic of both water and
wastewater, which is composed of colloidal matter, floating matter, settleable matter,
floating matter and matter in solution.
Solids can be classified as suspended and deposit (Spellman, 1999).
Suspended solids is found in the water column where is being transported by water
movements. It is also referred to as Total Suspended Solid (TSS), Volatile
Suspended Solid (VSS) and Fixed Suspended Solid (FSS) beside in related to
turbidity and conductivity. While deposit solids are that found on the bed of a river
or lake through sedimentation process.
SS has a potential to harm fish and aquatic life productivity because it is well
recognize as a major carrier of inorganic and organic pollutant as well as other
nutrients (McCaull and Crossland, 1974). It also may create abundances of estuarine
algal blooms (as diatoms and other typically benign microalgae or as macroalgae),
followed by oxygen deficits and finfish and/or shellfish kills (Donald et al., 2002)
16
especially for early-stages fish that more sensitive to SS (Hadil Rajali and Gambang,
2000) due to lack of light penetration to water bodies (Hoai et al., 2006).
Mangrove litter contributes a lot of nutrient or detritus for microscopic
growth to water column (Sheridan, 1996; Lee, 1999; Alongi et al., 2003). According
to Capo et al. (2005), since water level increased during high tide, mangrove swamps
and forest will inundate and trap the suspended matter that supplied from estuarine
channels. When the river discharge decreases, the SS are re-injected into the estuary,
and caused high turbidity during low tide. Flooding waters from the river mainly
bring organic matter into the estuary that includes plant debris and dissolved humic
compounds. It is suggested to sampling during mid tide because this period has
highest level of suspended matter rather than during the slack of both high and low
waters (Hoai et al., 2006).
2.5.5 Ammoniacal Nitrogen (NH3-N)
Ammonia (NH3) is refer to inorganic substance that abundance found on
surface water, soil and easily catered through plant tissue decaying and composed of
animal waste. Ammonia that rich with nitrogen will be oxidized to nitrite (NO2-) by
soil bacteria; Nitrosomonas with the absence of high dissolve oxygen in water.
Then, nitrification is occurred when Nitrobacter bacteria oxidize the nitrite to form a
nitrate (NO3) (Cech, 2003). Surface water may be polluted when ammonia level is
reach until 0.1 mg/L and since the level increase to 0.2 mg/L, water bodies are no
longer safety place for aquatic life because of high toxicity.
There are a lot of contributors to increase the ammonia level in river.
Improper management of sewerage services, animal waste especially pig farm and
waste from palm oil mill are the main contributors. Ammoniacal nitrogen can
present in two forms which are monochloramines and discholomines with chlorine
(Maketab Mohamad, 1993). The decay of dead algae and other organic material also
produce ammonia that can be toxic to many forms of aquatic life.
17
According to Jack (2006), when dissolved oxygen decrease, ammonia levels
tend to increase. He added that ammonia is recognizing as the number one killer of
tropical fish. As the level of ammonia rises, the death rate climbs even higher.
Ammonia affects fish by causing the blood to lose its ability to carry oxygen. This
creates stress and lowers the resistance of fish to such recurrent bacterial infections
as fin and tail rot, body slime, eye cloud, mouth fungus, and body sores.
2.5.6 Alkalinity and Acidity (pH)
One of the most essential parameter for both natural waters and wastewaters
is the hydrogen-ion concentration or well known as pH which is defined as the
negative logarithm of hydrogen-ion concentration;
pH = -log10 [H+] (2.1)
pH plays a main role for biological life in order to ensure they may survive in
water bodies. The concentration range suitable for existence of most biological life
is quite narrow and crucial (typically 6 to 9). At near surface runoff sources, the
water is having a low-pH where the sources is include shallow groundwater draining
acid and poorly-buffered coarse glacial drift deposits, and soil water from organic-
rich peat soil at lower altitudes (Jarvie et al., 2006).
An extremely high concentration of hydrogen-ion in wastewater is hard to
treat by biological methods and finally resulting alteration of natural waters if the
concentration is not altered before discharge the wastewater effluent. The allowable
pH range for treated effluents discharged to environment usually varies from 6.5 to
8.5 (Metcalf and Eddy, 2004).
Carbon dioxide solubility is the key factor in influencing pH concentration of
estuarine which is function of salinity and temperature. pH is usually be controlled
by the mixing of seawater solutes with those in the freshwater inflow in estuaries.
pH range between 8.1 and 8.3 usually occurred at surface seawater while river waters
18
usually contain a lower concentration of excess bases than seawater because fresh
water inflow to estuaries is much less buffered than seawater normally. This is a
reason why pH is varies in the less saline portion than near their mouth.
Acidic mangrove deposits may be the result of several processes, including
oxidation of reduced compounds (NH3, H2S, and FeS2) caused by translocation of O2
by roots, bioturbating crabs, or the dominance of aerobic decomposition of organic
matter which results in the net production of carbonic acid (Alongi et al., 1998)
Seawater is a very stable buffering system containing excess bases, notably
boric acid and borate salts, carbonic acid and carbonate. An indication of possible
pollutant input such as releases of acids or caustic material, or higher phytoplankton
concentration can be obtained by measuring pH in estuaries and coastal marine
waters (USEPA, 2006)
2.6 Biological Parameter
Biological parameters consist of fish, phytoplankton, zooplankton,
macrobenthos and riverbank vegetation as follows;
2.6.1 Fish
The abundance and health of fish will show the healthy of water bodies
because fish are good indicators of ecological health. In estuarine and marine
communities, fish is an essential component in term of their recreational, economic,
ecological and aesthetic roles. The characteristic of fish make them the most chosen
biological parameter such as follow; they are very sensitive to most habitat
disturbance; sensitive fish may avoid stressful environments since they are mobile;
they also the important linkage between benthic and pelagic food webs; fish is good
19
indicator for long term effects because they are long-lived; and they may display
physiological, morphological, or behavioral responses to stress.
However, the use of fish still has their limitation include as follow; required
large sampling effort to characterize the fish assemblage because it mobile; some fish
are very habitat selective and their habitats may not be easily sampled; they may
avoid stressful environments since they are mobile, hence it will reduce their
exposure to toxic or other harmful condition; and fish shows a relatively high tropic
level, and lower level organisms may provide an earlier indication of water quality
problems (USEPA, 2006).
In mangrove area, since food items associated with mangrove roots will be
much more concentrated among pneumatophores, feeding become easier. Moreover,
fish might also find better manoeuvrability in the two dimensional complexity of
pneumatophores compared to the three-dimensional complexity of prop roots. In
intertidal forest, small fish would gain predatory protection and this represented by
their distribution pattern and low number of large carnivorous fish (Colombini et al.,
1994).
Since there are temporal variations in tide amplitude, local currents and
weather condition factor, microhabitat need to be sampled simultaneously because
the inland microhabitats have higher fish density and biomass compared to the
seaward habitats. From fisheries perspective, during spring tide, fish and shrimp
utilize large parts of the mangrove forest which implies the need for extensive forests
(Ronnback et al., 1998).
Catch rates may be affected due to consecutive sampling because previous
study represent declining catches of large-sized fish on consecutive samplings, most
likely due to the removal of resident fish (Vance et al., 1996) and night sampling
should be avoided because Halliday and Young (1996) found that number and
weight of the total fish catch was significantly lower in subsequent samplings. This
is regards to Colombini et al. (1994) that assert some species is mainly active during
the day and that during the night activity is almost completely interrupted. The total
20
abundance of fish may correlated to water quality which some of the species
decreased whereas others increased (Fabricius et al., 2005)
2.6.2 Zooplankton
Zooplankton consists of two basic categories; holoplankton and
meroplankton. Holoplankton will spend their whole life cycle as plankton and were
characterized by broad physiological tolerance ranges, rapid growth rates, and
behavioral patterns which promote their survival in estuarine and marine waters. The
numerically dominant groups of the holoplankton are calanoid copepods, and the
genus Acartia (A. tonsa and A. clausi) is the most abundant and widespread in
estuaries. Acartia is able to withstand fresh to hypersaline waters and temperatures
ranging from 0o to 40oC. While the meroplankton are much more diverse than the
holoplankton and consist of the larvae of polychaetes, barnacles, mollusks,
bryozoans, echinoderms, and tunicates as well as the eggs, larvae, and young of
crustaceans and fish (USEPA, 2006).
Hoai et al. (2006) observed that the zooplankton consumes phytoplankton
and other zooplankton. The carnivorous fish consume zooplankton as well as the
fishes of the same group. Since the phytoplankton, zooplankton and carnivorous fish
having mortality, this will contribute to the detritus compartment. Some zooplankton
mortality is due to self predation and also represents zooplankton gain; the result of
such an interaction is a net loss of zooplankton, which goes to detritus.
According to USEPA (2006), zooplankton will have rapid turnover which
provides a quick response indicator to water quality interruption and the sorting and
identification is fairly easy as compared to phytoplankton. However, since
zooplankton has high mobility and turnover rate in water column, this will increase
the difficulty of evaluating the correlation between cause and effect for this
assemblage.
21
Many factors effects zooplankton population such as hydrologic processes,
recruitment, food sources, temperature, predation (USEPA, 2006), and salinity
fluctuations (Rougier et al., 2004). However, tidal exchange appears to be the most
essential factor in controlling the size of zooplankton population while freshwater
discharge strength will determine the distribution pattern of zooplankton. Within the
estuaries, tides have a major influence to present of zooplankton communities in term
of structure and density.
Zooplankton abundance occurs after the flooding following the rains due to
an increased quantity of detritus. This represented that zooplankton in mangrove
estuaries is not directly linked to phytoplankton (Hoai et al., 2006).
2.6.3 Phytoplankton
Phytoplankton is a microscopic plant that have higher rate of productivity
within the slower water rather in fast-moving water. Lakes and ponds are good
examples of slow-moving lotic environment where more detritus and other nutrients
to be picking up by microscopic organisms and the water bottom rather than be
swept downstream. Although phytoplankton communities are large in lotic
environments, they do not become as dense as they do in lentic environments. Fast-
moving rivers and streams prevent much primary production due to fast currents and
turbulence and therefore, low level consumers are also very meager (USEPA, 2006).
Many estuaries and marine waters can be considered as plankton-dominated
system. Plankton can implies eutrophication in estuarine environments because it is
one of the earliest communities to respond due to nutrient concentration changes.
Moreover, macroinvertebrates and fish will strongly effected upon plankton primary
production changes and plankton is a valuable indicator of short term impact since
they have generally short life cycles and rapid reproduction rate (USEPA, 2006).
The activity and production of phytoplankton is generally influenced by
present of iron, distance (Sarkar et al., 2005), nitrogen (Jones et al., 2000) and
22
seasonal fluctuations (Kitheka et al., 1996). Towards distance downstream,
phytoplankton biomass and nutrient concentration decreased due to flushing and
biotic uptake resulting in increased bioassay sensitivity to added nutrients (Costanzo
et al., 2004).
In most mangrove waterways, the rate of respiration and bacterioplankton
growth is high (Alongi et al., 2003). In rainy season, nutrient is supplied to estuaries
and resulting in increasing of phytoplankton production while in the dry season, it
goes otherwise since of low nutrient supply and part of it is used to sustain the
zooplankton biomass (Kitheka et al., 1996).
Phytoplankton and suspended solids always represent higher concentration
with respect to shrimp pond effluent (Jones et al., 2000). However, the abundance of
plankton community and metabolisms is differing between surface and near-bottom
waters and between high and low tides which heavy boat traffic and daily harvesting
of mudflats cockles disturb and mix river bed with overlying waters and river banks
erosion (Alongi et al., 2003)
2.6.4 Benthos
The benthic infauna have long been used for water quality assessments
because of their tendency to be more sedentary and thus more reliable site indicators
over time compared to fish and plankton.
The dominant benthic species are subjected to emersion degree (Alongi,
1986), salinity, redox potential (Zettler et al., 2007; Dutrieux et al., 1988),
granulometry, nutrient, microalgae (Chapman and Tolhurst, 2006; Bouillon et al.,
2002), topography, hydrodynamic conditions, water turbidity presence or absence of
sharp temperature stratification, water exchange patterns (Carlos and Marin, 2006)
and carbohydrate (Lee, 1999).
23
Beside, whether changes could change the benthos species composition and
distribution after study conducted a gap of nearly 35 years (Raut et al, 2004).
However, variation in densities of mostly benthic taxa were related to habitat not
time (Sheridan, 1996) and patterns in benthos among different habitats in a mangrove
forest were not strongly correlated with patterns in the sediments (Chapman and
Tolhurst, 2006). Alfaro (2004) found that the abundances of dominant taxa were
generally consistent among sampling events.
The alteration of benthic communities is affected by pollution tolerant of
estuaries. For example, in Mahakam delta (East Kalimantan, Indonesia), the average
biomass per station of benthic in estuaries mangrove is very much weaker in a
polluted than in a non-polluted area. Hence, this organism appears to be suitable
pollution indicator and need extreme pollution to eliminate this species (Dutrieux et
al., 1988). Ahsen et al (2006) supported that distributions of species clearly reflected
the level of organic pollution at the estuary. However, the negative finding was
obtained by Schiff and Bay (2003) where, even though changes in sediment texture,
organic content, and an increase in sediment contamination were observed at the
Ballona Creek, California which is highly urbanized with 83 percent of the watershed
is developed and comprised of predominantly residential land use, there was little or
no alteration to the benthic communities.
Many different habitats are contained in mangrove forest with diverse
macrobenthic fauna living on or in the sediment in different habitats. The
degradation of organic matter in mangrove area is rely on the presence of mangrove
tress and crab fauna by increased the benthic metabolism (Nielsen et al., 2002). But
Lee (1999) suggests that high concentrations of tannins may obstruct colonization by
the macrobenthos rather than mangrove organic matter which not necessarily result
in enhancement effects on marine benthos.
Epibenthic communities in mangrove are strongly dependent on tidal which
greater tidal amplitudes and increased tidal current velocities will transport mangrove
detritus many faunal taxa into embayment (Alongi, 1986). It is known that the leaf
detritus from mangroves contributes a major energy input into higher trophic levels
(Ray et al., 2005). But according to finding by Bouillon et al. (2002) there is no
24
evidence for a trophic role of mangrove litter in sustaining subtidal benthic and
pelagic invertebrate communities in adjacent aquatic systems. Mangrove habitats
have the lowest density and biodiversity compared to seagrass beds that had the
highest number of individuals and taxa. This is regard to significant difference in
their community associations and interactions (Alfaro, 2004). Comparisons of
benthic organisms between mangrove, seagrass, and non-vegetated habitats in other
estuarine systems throughout the world report mixed results (Schiff and Bay, 2003;
Nielsen et al., 2002; Sheridan, 1997).
2.6.5 Mangrove
Mangrove estuarine ecosystems are found at the interface between land and
sea in the tropical and subtropical regions (Ray et al., 2005; Hoai et al., 2006) with
conditions of high salinity, extreme tides, strong winds, high temperatures and
muddy, and anaerobic soils (Kathiresan and Bingham, 2001).
Mangrove always described as multiuse vegetation where from roots, trunk,
branches and leave, every single thing associated with mangrove are island of
habitat. They may attract rich epifaunal communities including bacteria, fungi,
macroalgae and invertebrates. Other groups of organisms as well as for some species
of crab are host in their aerial roots, trunks, leaves and branches as shown in Figure
2.1. Nevertheless, insects, reptiles, amphibians, birds and mammals flourish in the
habitat and contribute to its unique character.
Figure 2.1 : Common crab in mangrove swamps-Porcelain Fiddler (Uca
annulipes) (Vincent, 2007)
25
Malaysian mangrove have redox level within the same range which rarely
more negative than 2100 mV and often greater than 0 mV. While pH value often
less than 6.5 and implies that the soil of most forest are acidic (Alongi et al., 1998).
In mangrove habitat, nutrients such as NO3 and PO4 were consistently higher rather
than in seawater (Hashim et al., 2005) and they utilize nutrients from interstitial
pore-water within the sediment, not directly from the water column (Costanzo et al.,
2004).
Productivity and physical structure are important variables of mangrove
quality. The better the mangrove cover, the better the performance of ecological
processes and so of environmental functions. Mangrove quality in term of
productivity is mangrove ecosystems offer a habitat with abundant food for
temporary residents such as juvenile aquatic species.
While in term of physical structure, the quiet environment contributes to
habitat, particularly for juvenile aquatic species which provides a hiding place
against predators, facilitates sediment control and mitigates against flooding and
extreme conditions associated with their above-ground root systems and its structural
complexity (Gilbert and Janssen 1996; Cheevaporn and Menasveta 2003;
Nagelkerken et al., 1999; Alfaro, 2004; Kathiresan and Bingham, 2001). Figure 2.2
shows a mangrove props roots that acts as hiding place for juvenile fish.
Figure 2.2: Mangrove roots that act as home and hiding place for
juvenile fish against predator
26
Hoai et al. (2006) were proved by measurement of wave forces and
modeling of fluid dynamics and found out that the tree vegetation may reduce wave
amplitude and energy. Analytical model shows that 30 trees from 100 m2 in a 100m
wide belt may reduce the maximum tsunami flow pressure by more than 90 percent.
Forest age will affect the organic carbon oxidation rate in mangrove
sediments. Age of mangrove can be divided into two which are mature (60 years and
more) and young (2 to 12 years) trees. Sediment becomes less inundate because it
more compacted in mature mangrove area. The abundance and diversity of infauna
also undergo declination as well as reduction of sulfate. While in younger mangrove
area, the total macrofaunal abundance is remain similar and the ability of nitrogen
and phosphorus uptake is increasing due to aerobic and suboxic role and the presence
of large numbers of surface-living (Morrisey et al., 2001; Alongi et al., 1998).
Human activities have been the primary cause of mangrove loss.
Aquaculture such as conversion to shrimp ponds and fish pond (Cheevaporn and
Menasveta 2003; Alongi et al., 1999), industrial effluent that contributes to heavy
metal contaminant in the sediment, anthropogenic influences (John and Lawson,
1990) and lubricating oils (Garrity et al., 1994; Zhang et al., 2006) would be the
main supporter to destruction of mangrove habitat.
Different geographical locations had different heavy metal concentrations,
depending on the degree of anthropogenic pollution (Tam and Wong, 2000).
Although mangrove have the ability in controlling the mobility of heavy metals
(Silva et al., 2006) with respect to the abundance type of microorganisms which
clean up the waste materials (Hashim et al., 2005), they still have tolerant limitation
and continuously decline time by time with reduction of 1 percent per year in many
developing countries (Alongi et al., 1999).
In Thailand, the existing mangrove forest has decreased more than 50% in the
past 32 years (Cheevaporn and Menasveta 2003) and based on study made by Bayen
et al. (2004), less than 0.5 percent of Singapore’s total land area are still covered by
mangroves compared to approximate 13 percent in 1820.
27
2.7 River Classification and Pollutant Status
Water Quality Index (WQI) as shown in Table 2.1 is the most important
criteria in order to determine water quality in particular water bodies and limit to
freshwater or river only. DO, BOD, COD, AN, SS and pH are common parameters
that use in determining WQI. River classification for each parameter can be
measured by using Table 2.2. The percentage of entire parameters will be evaluated
and being determine which classes are they in to.
Table 2.1: Water Quality Index (WQI) (DOE, 1986)
WQI Range Pollution Degree
< 31.0 Severely Polluted
31.0 – 51.9 Slightly Polluted
51.9 – 76.5 Moderate
76.5 – 92.7 Clean
> 92.7 Very Clean
Table 2.2: Department of Enviroments’ Water Quality Index Standard
(DOE, 1986)
Parameter Unit Class
I II III IV V
Ammoniacal
Nitrogen
mg/l < 0.1 0.1-0.3 0.3-0.9 0.9-2.7 > 2.7
BOD mg/l < 1 1-3 3-6 6-12 > 12
COD mg/l < 10 10-25 25-30 50-100 > 100
DO mg/l > 7 5-7 3-5 1-3 < 1
pH - > 7 6-7 5-6 < 5 > 5
Suspended Solids mg/l < 25 25-50 50-150 150-300 > 300
Water Quality Index > 92.75 76.5-92.7 51.9-76.5 31.0-51.9 < 31.0
Degree of river classifications that had been recommended is very clean,
clean, moderate, slightly polluted and severely polluted. Before WQI is determined,
Table 2.3 needs to be revised in order to evaluate parameters’ subindex. According
to Department of Environment (1986), WQI was summarizing from Interim National
Water Quality Standard (INWQS) for Malaysia as shown in Table 2.4.
28
Table 2.3: Parameter Subindex DOE-WQI (DOE, 1986)
Parameter Value Subindex equation (SI)
COD If X = < 20 SICOD = 99.1 – 1.33X
If X > 20 SICOD = 103 x [E]-0.0157X - 0.04X
BOD If X = <5 SIBOD = 100.4 – 4.32X
If X >5 SIBOD = 108 x [E]-0.055X – 0.1X
AN If X = < 0.3 SIAN = 100.4 – 4.32X
If 0.3 < X < 4 SIAN = 94 x [E]-0.573X – 5(X-2)
If X = > 4 SIAN = 0
SS If X = < 100 SISS = 97.5 x [E]-0.00676X + 0.7X
If 100 < X < 1000 SISS = 71 x [E]-0.0016X – 0.015X
If X= > 1000 SISS = 0
pH If X < 5.5 SIpH = 17.2 – 17.2X + 5.02X2
If 5.5 = < X < 7 SIpH = -242 + 95.5X – 6.67X2
If 7 = < X <8.75 SIpH = -181 + 82.4X – 6.05X2
If X = > 8.75 SIpH = 536 – 77X + 2.76X2
DO X = DO (mg/L) * 12.6577
If X = < 8 SIDO = 0
If 8 > X SIDO = -0.395 + 0.030X2 – 0.00019X3
WQI = (0.22 * SIDO) + (0.19 * SIBOD) + (0.16 * SICOD) +
(0.15 * SIAN) +(0.16 * SISS) + (0.12 *SIpH) 2.2
Note: (1) X is concentration of parameter in unit mg/L, except for pH and DO
(2) x is symbol of multiply
(3) SIDO, SIBOD, SICOD, SIAN, SISS and SIpH are the Sub Index (SI) of
the respective water quality parameters which isused to calculate the Water
Quality Index (WQI).
29
Table 2.4: Interim National Water Quality Standard for Malaysia (INWQS)
with related of water quality parameter (DOE, 1986)
Parameter Units Class
I IIA IIB III IV V
Ammoniacal
Nitrogen
mg/l 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.9 2.7 > 2.7
BOD mg/l 1 3 3 6 12 > 12
COD mg/l 10 25 25 50 100 > 100
DO mg/l 7 5-7 5-7 3-5 < 3 < 1
pH 6.5-8.5 6-9 6-9 5-9 5-9 -
Color TCU 15 150 150 - - -
Conductivity µmhos/cm 1000 1000 - - 6000 -
Floating N N N - - -
Odour N N N - - -
Salinity ppt 0.5 1 - - 2 -
Taste N N 50 - - -
Total
Dissolved
Solids
mg/l 500 1000 - - 4000 -
Total
Suspended
Solids
mg/l 25 50 50 150 300 > 300
Temperature ˚C - Normal±2 - Normal±2 - -
Turbidity NTU 5 50 50 - - -
E. Coli. Coloni/100ml 10 100 400 5000
(2000)ε
5000
(2000)ε
-
Total Coliform Coloni/100ml 100 5000 5000 50000 50000 > 50000
Class I represents water body of excellent quality. Standards are set for the
conservation of natural environment in its undisturbed state. Water bodies such as
those in the national park areas, fountainheads, and in high land and undisturbed
areas come under this category where strictly no discharge of any kind is permitted.
Water bodies in this category meet the most stringent requirements for human health
and aquatic life protection.
Class II A represents water bodies of good quality. Most existing raw water
supply sources come under this category. In practice, no body contact activity is
30
allowed in this water for prevention of probable human pathogens. There is a need to
introduce another class for water bodies not used for water supply but of similar
quality which may be referred to as Class IIB. The determination of Class IIB
standard is based on criteria for recreational use and protection of sensitive aquatic
species.
Class III is defined with the primary objective of protecting common and
moderately tolerant aquatic species of economic value. Water under this
classification may be used for water supply with extensive/advance treatment. This
class of water is also defined to suit livestock drinking needs.
Class IV defines water quality required for major agricultural irrigation
activities which may not cover minor applications to sensitive crops and finally
Class V represents other waters which do not meet any of the above uses.
2.8 River Classification Based on Biological Indicator
River classification based on biological assessment can be carried out
towards the rivers’ ecology criterion. The assessment of biological variety in term of
river management is mostly use Shannon-Weiner Diversity Index (H’) that measures
both richness and evenness of biodiversity (USEPA, 1980). According to Nor
Azman Kasan (2006), there is significant correlation between water quality and algae
population by compared via WQI and Shannon-Weiner Diversity Index (H’). The
equation for the index is;
ng Shannon-Weiner Diversity Index (H’) = - ∑ Pi ln Pi (2.3)
i = 1
With ng represent number of genera, Pi is ratio to each genara and ln is log 10.
According to Malaysian Water Quality Classification, river’s class can be determined
into five categories; Class I, Class II, Class III, Class IV and Class V based on H’
31
value that had been evaluated (UM-DOE, 1986, Malaysia, 1990-Phase II) as shown
in Table 2.5.
Table 2.5: Water Quality Determination based on Shannon-Weiner Diversity
Index (UM-DOE, 1986)
Shannon-Weiner Diversity
Index, H’
Classification Water Quality
> 3.73 I Very Clean
2.80-3.73 II Clean
1.86-2.80 III Moderate Pollution
0.93-1.86 IV Slightly Pollution
0.00-0.93 V Severely Pollution
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter explains on the few phases used from the beginning to the final
stage in order to achieve the objectives of this study. Before fieldwork is carried out,
there are a few scopes and methodology inflows that need to follow to ensure the
information is well gain in order to make study easier in term of data assemblages
and editing.
3.2 Literature Review
Information related to Sungai Batu Pahat is gathered from variety sources
including maps, internet, books, journal, news articles, magazine, and thesis book
from previous student. This source is catered at Perpustakaan Sultanah Zanariah
(PSZ), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) and Pusat Sumber Fakulti
Kejuruteraan Awam (FKA), UTM. Beside, interviewing with expert, local
communities, fisherman and related authorities such as Department of Forestry, and
Deparment of Environment (DOE) also involved.
33
3.3 Determine the Parameter Involved
Parameters that involved in this study are divided into two which are Water
Quality Index (WQI) and biodiversity parameters. WQI consist of commonly six
parameter which are Dissolved Oxygen (DO), Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD),
Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD), Suspended Solids (SS), acidic and alkalinity
(pH) and Nitrogen-Ammonia (NH3-N). While biodiversity comprise of fishes,
zooplankton, phytoplankton, benthos and riverbank vegetation.
3.4 Sampling Method
The sampling station for both parameters was determined by using
topography map with serial number DNMM 6102 Edition 1-PPNM Sheet 168a & c
and was categorized into three portions of stream which is upstream, middle stream
and downstream as shown in Figure 3.2. At the middle stream, 3 sampling point was
choosen, while at the upstream and downstream, 2 sampling point for each. GPS
(Geographical Positioning System) Etrex Summit model as shown in Figure 3.1 was
used to determine each coordinate of water quality stations.
Figure 3.1: Geographical Positioning System was used to determine
coordinate and distance
34
Water quality parameter was taken three times within August and September
2006 which is three times during high tide and three times during low tide. While for
biodiversity parameter was taken twice on August and September 2006 at five station
as shown in Figure 3.2 which is two times during high tide and two times during low
tide but for riverbank vegetation, only one shot coordinate sampling because no
alteration was observe within sampling events. Figure 3.3, Figure 3.4 and Figure 3.5
shows upstream, middlestream and downstream of sampling station respectively.
Figure 3.6 shows riverbank vegetation during high tide while Figure 3.7 shows low
tide’s scene of riverbank vegetation.
Figure 3.2: Portions of Water Quality Sampling Station at Sungai Batu Pahat
UPSTREAM
MIDDLE STREAM
DOWNSTREAM
35
Figure 3.3: Upstream of Sungai Batu Pahat. Patches of Nypa habitat are
abundance at the upstream because of low salinity water compared to seaward.
Water seems to be cleaner from turbidity
Figure 3.4: A lot of shipping activity occurred at the middle stream of the
estuary, resulting disturbance of biodiversity and riverbank vegetation as well
as water quality depletion
36
Figure 3.5: Downstream of Sungai Batu Pahat is adjacent to coastal water that
have wide opening. At downstream, the land are fully covered by riverbank
vegetation especially mangrove in order to protect against tsunami
Figure 3.6: Sungai Batu Pahat during high tide. Fresh water from the river is
mixing with coastal water and abundance of fish will take this opportunity to
breed at vegetations’ roots
37
Figure 3.7: During low tide, the roots of vegetation were clearly seen and this is
the time for adult fish go to open sea because, water from estuary was flowing
seaward during this period
3.4.1 Water Quality Sampling
‘In-situ’ parameter such as pH and DO was determined by using Multi-
Parameter Analyzer-Consort C535 (Figure 3.8) and 55-YSI Dissolved Oxygen Meter
(Figure 3.9) respectively. While the rest of parameter will be analysis at laboratory
by taken water sample into 2 liter polyethylene bottle which was clean according to
Standard Method APHA 4500-P. The water sample then being preserved by put a
few drops of nitrite acid (H-NH3) and stored at 4°C cold room as soon as BOD
analysis carried out in order to minimize biological activities in the water.
Figure 3.8: Multi-Parameter Analyzer-Consort C535 that had been used
to determine pH level on surface water of Sungai Batu Pahat
38
Figure 3.9: 55-YSI Dissolved Oxygen Meter was used in order to get dissolved
oxygen concentration in unit mg/L on surface water
3.4.2 Fisheries Sampling
Fishes was caught using cast net (Figure 3.10) and trammel net (Figure 3.11)
within August and September, 2006 which is 2 times during neap high tide and 2
times during low tide to high tide. Cast net was used with opening diameter
approximately 2.43 m (8 feet) and mesh size is 2.54 cm (1 inch). Besides, 2 trammel
net was used with 3 layers and each layer has of length 100m. Each trammel net has
2 outside layer with mesh size 10.16 cm (4 inch) and 1 inside layer with mesh size
3.81 cm (1.5 inch). Sampling was carried out 5 times using trammel net and 30
times using cast net and let it on water column for about 30 minutes before identified
the fish species, measure fish length and weight, and evaluate total fish that had been
caught.
Figure 3.10: Cast net had been used thirty (30) times for fish sampling
39
Figure 3.11: Trammel net was used for five (5) times at certain part of the river
where drift net using is allowed
3.4.3 Phytoplankton
Phytoplankton had been sampled at five stations as shown in Figure 3.1.
Water samples were sampled at 0.5m depth from the water surface by using a Van
Dorn Sampler (4.2L) as shown in Figure 3.12. For each replicate, water was
sampled three times and sieved through the 10µm mesh size to concentrate the
phytoplankton samples. The remains of plankton net cod-end were then preserved
with 10% of buffered formaldehyde for laboratory analysis.
Figure 3.12: Water sampling using Van Dorn Sampler in order to identify
phytoplankton assemblages
40
At the laboratory, phytoplankton samples were pipette onto the Sedgewick
Rafter cell and examined under a compound microscope. The phytoplankton was
identified to genus level where possible and photo of dominated phytoplankton
species within Sungai Batu Pahat can be seen at Appendix E.
3.4.4 Zooplankton
Plankton net with 30cm mouth diameter and 147µm mesh and a calibrated
flowmeter was used to sample zooplankton at 0.5m depth (Holguin et al., 2005;
Prepas and Charette, 2003; Lampman and Makarewicz ,1999; Johannsson et al.,
1986) from the water surface as shown in Figure 3.13. The samples were collected
into the plankton bottle and preserved with 10% of buffered formaldehyde for
laboratory analysis.
Figure 3.13: Zooplankton had been caught using plankton net at 0.5m depth
from the water surface
At the laboratory, zooplankton samples were sieved through 53µm Endecott
sieve using running tap water. Particles with sizes smaller than 53µm had been
removed. The zooplankton fraction was transferred onto pre-weighed steel gauze and
excess moisture was absorbed by blotting towel.
41
According to Rougier et al. (2004), 150 mm mesh size is using for
mesozooplankton capture and the other with a 40 mm mesh size is for
microzooplankton capture including rotifers. Wet weight was measured to 2 decimal
points. All samples were then kept separately in storage bottle with 85% alcohol for
subsequent examination.
For enumeration and identification purposes zooplankton samples was
subsampled by using a Stempel pipette and transfer onto a Sedgewick-Rafter cell.
Zooplankton density was determined by counting the zooplankton individuals in the
cell. Sample was split into two or more times if sample was large by using a Folsom
plankton splitter.
3.4.5 Macrobenthos
Macrobenthos samples were collected from upstream of the study area to
adjacent coastal water as shown in Figure 3.2. Figure 3.14 shows an Ekman grab
sampler that used to collect sediment. The sediment was sieved through 500µm
Endecott sieve on board. The entire materials on sieve were collected into a plastic
bag and preserved with 10% of buffered formaldehyde for laboratory analysis.
Figure 3.14: Ekman grab sampler that used to identify benthic animals with
500µµµµm Endecott sieve on board
42
At the laboratory, the materials in the plastic bag were poured onto an enamel
tray. The benthic animals were sorted and identified using a binocular microscope.
Plant debris and shell materials were also recorded.
3.4.6 Riverbank Vegetation Analysis
Coordinate along the river via boat and road was taken approximate every 10
meter in order to measure the riverbank area that still covered by vegetation
including mangrove, nypa and secondary shrubs using GPS. With coordinate data
collection, area of vegetation then is calculated using Google Earth Pro. However,
the results only show an approximate value, not the actual one which is align to this
study objective which to what extent the biodiversity may survive with the presence
of riverbank vegetation beside rely on water quality alone.
Type of existing vegetation along the river was given by Department of
Forestry Johor Tengah. Interview session with forestry personel, was carried out to
gain related information.
3.5 Chemical Analysis
There are important equipments that being used during chemical analysis
including beaker 2000 mL, measurement cylinder 10 mL, 25 mL, 100 mL, and 1000
mL as well as 10 mL pipette which was cleaned comply to Standard Methods APHA
4500-P. The whole equipments and tools was provided by Environmental
Engineering Laboratory, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia (UTM).
43
3.5.1 Concentration Measurement Of Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD5)
To determine BOD5, Standard Method APHA 5210-B is using to evaluate
dissolved oxygen that contain in water sample.
3.5.2 Concentration Measurement Of Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
COD value was evaluated by HACH Model DR/4000 Spectrometer which
comply to Standard Methods APHA 5220-C where water sample being reflux using
COD Reactor Model HACH.
3.5.3 Concentration Measurement Of Nitrogen-Ammonia ((NH3-N)
Standard Method APHA 4500-NH3-BC was used to evaluate Nitrogen-
Ammonia’s (NH3-N) value through HACH model DR/4000 Spectrometer which
created by HACH Company, Loveland, Colorado, USA.
3.5.4 Measurement of Suspended Solids (SS)
For Suspended Solids measurement, all procedures was complied to Standard
Methods APHA 2540-D
3.6 Data Analysis
For physicochemical analysis, Water Quality Index (WQI) and Interim Water
Quality Standard (INWQS) provided by Department of Environment (DOE) were
44
referred to identify the status and classification of Sungai Batu Pahat. The result will
be represented as graph form, utilize Microsoft Excel and CurveExpert software and
the profile of each parameter was determined. Biodiversity data were compared to
previous related studies in order to identify the characteristic and diet of species in
general. The relationship between physicochemical parameter and biodiversity
parameter was examined such as between WQI and biodiversity population, WQI
and vegetation habitat, as well as between biodiversity population and vegetation
habitat.
CHAPTER IV
RESULT AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Introduction
It is well known those mangroves are the salt tolerant forest ecosystems
found in tropical and sub-tropical intertidal regions of the world. They consist of
swamps, forest-land and water-spread areas. These forest ecosystems support marine
fisheries and protect the coastal zone, thus helping the coastal environment and
economy. These ecosystems are biologically productive, but ecologically sensitive.
A lot of factors that contribute to water quality degradation of Sungai Batu Pahat
such as population growth and accompanying land use changes.
Sungai Batu Pahat is situated at Bandar Penggaram and most of the riverbank
had altered into resident area, urban area and shipping activities. It is important to
rehabilitate the water quality within Sungai Batu Pahat because it supports fisheries
as protein diet and livelihood for community nearby as well as for biological
community such as otter and water birds. As mention before in literature review,
Sungai Batu Pahat received a visit from threatened bird’s species-one species of
stork, the Lesser Adjutant (Leptoptilos javanicus). Thus, it is important to identify
the water quality status of the river to ensure fish survival as well as the quality of
food for them (planktonic life and benthic macroinvertebrates). Riverbank
vegetation especially mangrove plays a main role in order to maintain the quality
food for fish survival. Therefore, the existing riverbank vegetation should be
protected from further degradation.
46
4.2 Land Use Analysis
Batu Pahat can be characterized as agricultural land which is covers 83% of
the total area of Batu Pahat as shown in Table 4.1 followed by forestry with 5.62% of
Batu Pahat. Residential area only covers 3.43% with 6,444 ha and other related land
uses are commercial area, institutional and facilities, open space and recreational
area, and industrial area. However, water bodies at Batu Pahat merely 1.54% or
2,887 ha from total area of Batu Pahat and it is not impossible if quality of water
bodies at Batu Pahat were interrupted by land use activities especially from
agriculture run off.
Table 4.1: Distribution of exiting land use in Batu Pahat (MPBP, 2002)
The land use activities around Batu Pahat seem to be a major contributor in
determining the water quality of Sungai Batu Pahat. According to Majlis
Perbandaran Batu Pahat (MPBP, 2002), there is 525 gazetted villages and village-
cluster at Batu Pahat district where smaller villages were annexed to their bigger
immediate neighbors for the purpose of administration. The land use in Batu Pahat
consists of 2 main areas; town centre and the rural areas. In town centre, most of the
land uses are industrial, commercial and residential area while agricultural activities
and small village are located at the rural area.
Land Use Hectare Percent (%)
Agricultural Area 156,070 83.15
Forestry 10,550 5.62
Water body 2,887 1.54
Residential Area 6,444 3.43
Business Area 330 0.18
Industrial Area 918 0.49
Institutional and Facilities 1,387 0.74
Open Space and Recreational
1,266 0.67
Reserve land 4,126 2.20
Total 187,702 100
47
From actual observation, the river banks of Sungai Batu Pahat consist mostly
of mangroves at downstream but dominated by nypa at upstream due to low salinity
and soft bottom sediment. Besides that, Batu Pahat also has primary and secondary
forest as well as other vacant land which consist mostly of bushes, shrubs and grass.
Batu Pahat tends to be very susceptible to flood because of its low lying land and
rapid rising tides.
Table 4.2 shows the subdistrict of Batu Pahat which consist of 14 mukim
(subdistricts) and involved total area of 187,702 hectares in Batu Pahat. From the
table, we can see that the biggest sub district is Tanjung Semberong which covers a
total area of 18.35 % of Batu Pahat while the smallest sub district is Peserai which
covers an area of only 1812 hectares which is 0.97 % of Batu Pahat.
Table 4.2: List of subdistricts in Batu Pahat (MPBP, 2002)
Measure Subdistricts
km2 Acre Hectare Percentage (%)
Lubok 41 10,240 4,143 2.21
Bagan 39 9,600 3,885 2.07
Peserai 18 4,480 1,812 0.97
Simpang Kiri 98 24,320 9,842 5.24
Simpang Kanan 124 30,720 12,432 6.62
Linau 101 24,960 10,101 5.38
Tanjung Semberong
345 85,120 34,447 18.35
Sri Gading 192 47,360 19,166 10.21
Minyak Beku 124 30,720 12,432 6.62
Kampung Bahru 67 16,640 6,734 3.59
Sungai Punggor 88 21,760 8,806 4.69
Sungai Kluang 98 24,320 9,842 5.24
Chaah Bahru 306 75,520 30,562 16.28
Sri Medan 231 56,960 23,051 12.28
Total 1873 462,720 187,702 100
48
4.2.1 Residential
It is well known that over population is the major contributor to degradation
of water quality (Franca et al., 2005; Smith, 2004; Butcher et al., 2003; Lin et al.,
2006). Based on survey made by Majlis Perbandaran Batu Pahat (MPBP, 2002),
nowadays, it is estimated that approximately 400, 000 residents are living in Batu
Pahat with Simpang Kanan being the most dense subdistrict in Batu Pahat with 139,
640 people while the least populated is Bagan with only 4, 692 people. The town
itself has 140, 000 local resident and most houses in this town are single or double
storey terrace houses as well as wooden houses.
Majority of people living along Sungai Batu Pahat dump solid waste as well
as sewage directly into water bodies with respect to lack or no proper sewage
treatment system and solid waste collection system. Due to uncontrolled discharge
of organic matter in estuaries regions, the water bodies will lead to anoxic condition
(Desa et al., 2005).
Figure 4.1 shows some squatters which are located by the river. They also
create their own dumping ground nearby the river that may causes leachate leaching
to estuaries during rainy days resulting depletion of water quality. Figure 4.2 shows
dumping ground made by local communities
Figure 4.1: Squatter area located by the river with improper sewage treatment
and solid waste collection system
49
Figure 4.2: Dumping area that made by local resident and resulting poor view
and bad odour
Beside as ‘dumping area’, Sungai Batu Pahat also acts as route for them to
get to town that located just the other side of the river. It is easier to cross over the
river by boat rather than use road which take a long period because of traffic jam.
Most of the people here have lived here for a long time and likes it here because it is
a complete town with all the basic facilities and it is also very convenient to get
around town.
4.2.2 Agricultural and Farming
Batu Pahat is mostly covered by agriculture activities and also has a wide
area of primary forest which is known as Hutan Simpan Gunung Banang. Riverbank
vegetation that exists along Sungai Batu Pahat will be discussing detail in other sub
topic. Palm oil plantation, rubber plantation and coconut plantation are identified as
the main agricultural activities in Batu Pahat. Discussing about agriculture, we could
never escape from the chemical substance used for plantation growth such as
insecticide, pesticides and fertilizers which might contribute to high amounts of
phosphate in the estuaries.
50
Non point sources of nutrients (from agricultural activities, fossil-fuel
combustion, and animal feeding operations) are often of greater concern than point
sources because they are larger and more difficult to control (Thomas, 2004). The
chemical substance will released abundance into estuaries especially during rainy
days which carried by the storm water runoff as well as animal manure from farming
activities that also flow with the runoff. All these activities will contribute to high
content of ammonia nitrogen in the river.
4.2.3 Commercial
Commercial area is located at the centre city of Batu Pahat and would be the
contributor to river pollution. Human activities such as restaurants, car and motor
services, wet market, hospital and clinics may release a lot of pollutant whether like
it or not. Market and restaurant contribute much organic substance into the water
bodies.
Figure 4.3: Trade activities along Sungai Batu Pahat that trades goods and
groceries such as logs and timbers
Figure 4.3 shows a barter-trade jetty handling import and export of goods
locally and Indonesia that located along Sungai Batu Pahat. As we can seen from
this figure, the port is unsystematically management and messy as well as busier
since the decreasing of such trades in Singapore ports (Low, 2007). Beside oil
51
spillage from ships during loading and unloading goods, workers also tend to dump
waste into the estuaries and increased the chances for water quality to be
deteriorated.
4.2.4 Industrial
Industrial activities are considered as point sources that released less essential
nutrient than non point sources (Sarkar et al., 2005; Thomas, 2004; Alongi et al.,
1998; Simpson and Pedini, 1985). In Batu Pahat, the main industrial activity is
manufacturing of textile with 40% of total textile industry in Malaysia especially the
wet processing plants. This could due to its strategic location for industrial growth
with easy access. Malaysian Knitting Manufacturers Association (MKMA, 1996)
estimated that about 15 out of 40 plants are located in Batu Pahat and most of them
are found at the upstream of Sungai Batu Pahat.
Textile manufacturing is the major income for resident living here, but
improper management of wastewater plant there will lead to heavy metal
contaminant discharged to Sungai Batu Pahat especially the dye used which may
leave a permanent stain to the river and also resulting high turbidity, thus light cannot
penetrate deep beneath the surface.
Based on study made by Rojali Othman (1995), Batu Pahat has rubber
processing factory which process natural latex and is owned by Berjaya Group.
Unfortunately, most of the factories have improper effluent treatment system and this
will make water quality become worst and only tolerant species of fish may survive
in Sungai Batu Pahat.
Wood, brick, steel and other building materials manufacturing are identified
at Batu Pahat region together with sago, rubber, palm oil processing, furniture, and
food production. These activities will create abundance of organic substance which
are not biodegradable as well as chemical and toxic waste that finally discharged into
water column.
52
Another industrial activity that observed at Batu Pahat is quarries with about
7 quarries there such as Batu Pahat Quarry, Lian Huat Granite Quarry, Asia Quarry,
Medan Quarry and Hanson Quarry. Quarries also pose serious threat to water quality
due to its high release of suspended solids and interrupt sediment communities by
fallen of gravel onto estuaries from barges carrying gravel. Figure 4.4 shows one of
the quarries by the river that potentially become the major contributor to degradation
of water quality at Sungai Batu Pahat.
Figure 4.4: Busy quarry activities during day time along Jalan Minyak Beku
closed to Sungai Batu Pahat
4.3 Water Quality Analysis
In Malaysia, there are six main water quality parameter that strongly
recommended by Department of Environment (DOE) in order to classifying the
status of particular water bodies. The parameters are dissolved oxygen (DO),
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), ammoniacal
nitrogen (NH3-N), suspended solids (SS) and finally, alkalinity and acidity (pH). In
this study, the water quality was analyzed between low tide and high tide along 10.43
km length of the river.
53
Water quality were sampling three times for high tide and three times during
low tide within August 2006 and September 2006. The result of each parameter is an
average value of sampling frequency. Table 4.3 shows each parameter result during
high tide while Table 4.4 shows low tide’s water quality parameter result. From both
of the table below, COD during low tide was higher than high tide due to abundance
of inorganic effluent that discharged from land use activities while other parameters
shows almost equal value.
Table 4.3: Water quality parameter result during high tide
Table 4.4: Water quality parameter result during low tide
Sampling Distance from Water Quality Index Parameter (mg/L), except for pH
Station Station 1 DO BOD COD SS AN pH
1 0 3 3.82 60 6.7 1.03 3.13
2 2.5 3.04 8.61 61 10.1 1.18 3.66
3 3.21 3.86 19.88 77 1.5 1.07 4.67
4 4.42 4.2 20.58 71 7.5 1.17 5.14
5 6.26 3.3 19.88 74 18.3 1.09 3.54
6 7.78 3.89 20.3 74 24.9 0.875 4.48
7 10.43 6.61 18.06 230 165.5 0.328 6.21
Sampling Distance from Water Quality Index Parameter (mg/L), except for pH
Station Station 1 DO BOD COD SS AN pH
1 0 3.73 4.31 79 42.4 1.01 3.42
2 2.5 1.07 9.31 90 8.7 1.30 3.66
3 3.21 1.37 13.02 34 2.4 1.08 3.64
4 4.42 2.13 21.14 277 8.5 1.08 3.86
5 6.26 2.68 15.96 207 27.9 0.75 4.12
6 7.78 1.98 14.56 120 41.2 0.798 5.17
7 10.43 5.89 19.88 720 103.1 0.555 6.38
54
After the concentration of each parameter was catered, Table 2.3 as shown in
chapter II previously was used in determining the subindex of each parameter and
finally the water quality index and its class were determined by using Table 2.1 and
Table 2.2. Table 4.5 shows the result of subindex during high tide while during low
tide as shown in Table 4.6. From the both of the table, it is obviously seen that,
water quality during high tide much better rather than during low tide as consequence
of mixing water that create high turbulence and gradient.
Table 4.5: Water quality subindex parameters result during high tide
Sampling Water Quality Subindex WQI Class
Station SIDO SIBOD SICOD SISS SIAN SIpH
1 32 84 38 98 57 13 55 III
2 33 66 37 98 52 21 52 III
3 49 34 28 98 56 46 51 IV
4 56 33 31 98 52 73 56 III
5 38 34 29 99 55 19 46 IV
6 50 33 29 100 63 41 52 III
7 98 38 -6 52 86 94 60 III
Table 4.6: Water quality subindex parameters result during low tide
Sampling Water Quality Subindex WQI Class
Station SIDO SIBOD SICOD SISS SIAN SIpH
1 46 82 27 103 58 17 57 III
2 5 64 21 98 48 21 42 IV
3 8 51 59 98 55 21 47 IV
4 18 32 -10 98 55 26 35 IV
5 27 43 -4 100 67 32 43 IV
6 15 47 11 103 66 73 49 IV
7 84 34 -29 59 76 96 53 III
55
4.4 Water Quality Index Analysis
Water quality Index (WQI) shows a consistent classification with class III at
upstream, class IV at middle stream and back to class III towards downstream for
both high tide and low tide as shown in Figure 4.5. Class III represent that the river
is still can support and protecting common and tolerant aquatic species while class
IV defines that the water is suitable for only major agricultural irrigation activities.
The fluctuation of class within study area was consequence of human activities along
the river. There was significant different of WQI with respect to distance (p < 0.05)
for both tide implying that water quality was influence by distance. According to
DOE (2001) that the rivers in Malaysia were generally clean at the upstream and
were either slightly polluted or polluted due to urban wastes and agricultural
activities at the downstream.
Figure 4.5: Trend of water quality from upstream towards downstream during
high tide and low tide where water quality was dropped to class IV at middle
stream associated with nine potential tributaries that contribute pollutant to
estuaries
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Distance from first sampling point (km)
WQI
high tide low tide
UPSTREAM MIDDLE STREAM DOWNSTREAM
CLASS IV
CLASS III
Resident Area Urban AreaBarter-trade
jetties
Cleared
Area
56
However, the situation was differing for Sungai Batu Pahat. This was caused
by human refuse which common at almost all mangrove estuaries of similar size and
type in Malaysia. High suspended loads and high nutrient concentration was found
at Southeast Asia in consequence of high rates of river runoff, shoreline erosion,
resuspension, heavy boat traffic, agricultural and forest runoff, and dumping waste
(Alongi et al., 2003). The source of water quality deteriorating towards middle
stream is because of discharging from heavy boat traffic, quarry activities, and
settlement activities at adjacent river.
The major reason of depleting water quality at middle stream is it located at
urban area (non-industrial area) that discharges effluent via drainage and tributaries.
Anthropogenic effects are stronger at the estuaries since water circulation is much
more limited than the coastal ecosystem (Ahsen et al., 2006). From observation,
there were nine potential tributaries that contribute to decreasing of water quality at
middle stream (average value of WQI is 51.0 and 41.7 for high tide and low tide,
respectively). Clearance area for proposed development also the main contributors
which release nutrient and heavy metals that supposed to uptake by mangrove into
estuaries. Mangrove is recognize as controller of heavy metal mobility because of its
varies clean up microorganisms (Silva et al., 2006; Hashim et al., 2005). It is well
known that, for non-industrial area, the sources that likely to have is traffic emission
and road runoff, city wastewater and biosolids used as fertilizer (Zhang et al., 2006).
However, the upstream of study area shows slightly polluted with average
value of water quality index (WQI) is 53.2 and 49.5 for high tide and low tide,
respectively. It was due to agriculture runoff and road runoff. The upstream of the
study area is not located exactly at the upstream of the estuaries but located at the
upstream of new proposed development area that situated downstream of Sungai
Batu Pahat. Thus, the water quality still hampered by local communities’ activities
such as agricultural which mostly found at the upstream of Sungai batu Pahat.
As well as the downstream of study area, the WQI shows class III which is
slightly polluted. Downstream of Sungai Batu Pahat is at adjacent coastal water that
has wide open to Straits of Melaka. According to Azrina et al. (2006), downstream
being usually characterized by greater width, lower flow rate, and softer bottom.
57
This would be the strong reason, WQI at downstream has similar classification such
upstream. As refer back to Figure 4.5, WQI during high tide was much better than
low tide due to dilution of estuarine water. This is regards to water level that
increased during high river flows that trap suspension from coastal water at
inundation of mangrove swamps and forest. Rainy season and tidal pumping effects
became the major factors influencing the water quality within the estuaries.
During rainy season, suspended sediment from estuaries will supply to both
mangrove forest and shelf and stocked it there temporarily. When the river discharge
decrease and low tide occur, the suspended sediment is re-injected into the estuaries
(Ahsen et al., 2006; Capo et al., 2005).
From physical observation, during both high tide and low tide, there were still
having rubbish, death plantation and animal, and lubricant oil floating at surface
water as shown in Figure 4.6. The direction of those floating matter are dependent
on tide which high tide, its goes upstream and during low tide it goes seaward. The
other reason for this because of effluent discharging from human activities at
riverbank is not depending on tide. Floating oil will remain stranded on aerial roots,
stems and leaves after the tide ebbs, leading to oxygen deficiency and suffocation
(Zhang et al., 2006).
Figure 4.6: Rubbish that floating on surface water of Sungai Batu Pahat which
carried by flow during ebbing time from upstream of the estuaries to coastal
area
58
4.5 Water Quality Parameter Analysis
Depending on water quality index (WQI) alone does not explain the real and
actual contributor to deteriorating of water quality at Sungai Batu Pahat. Because of
that, analysis of each parameter was insisted to carry out in order to identify either
organic matter or inorganic matters that contribute the most of the WQI dropping to
class IV at middle stream.
4.5.1 Dissolved Oxygen
Generally, dissolved oxygen (DO) was increasing towards downstream for
both tides as shown in Figure 4.7. At upstream, DO concentration during low tide
was higher 19.57% as compared during high tide. It is due to freshwater discharge
from Sungai Simpang Kiri and Sungai Simpang Kanan into estuaries that contain
much Dissolved Oxygen.
Figure 4.7: The fluctuation of dissolved oxygen concentration during high tide
and low tide with respect to distance which is increased towards downstream
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Distance from first sampling point (km)
DO (mg/L)
high tide
low tide
59
At distance of 2.5 km from station 1, DO concentration was dropped about
71.32% during low tide but increased during high tide with 1.33%. The DO
concentration was continuously increased at length of 3.21 km and 4.42 km with
3.86 mg/L and 4.2 mg/L respectively during high tide but dropped to 3.3 mg/L at
distance of 6.62 km because of effluent releasing from barter-trade jetties, quarry and
cleared mangrove area such as solid waste, lubricant oils, granite and sediments.
As well as during low tide, DO concentration was increased until reach to
6.26 km from station 1 with 1.37 mg/L (3.21 km), 2.13 mg/L (4.42 km) and 2.68
mg/L at 6.26 km of distance. After pass by 6.26 km from station 1, the concentration
of dissolved oxygen was rapidly increased with 3.89 mg/L (7.78 km) to 6.61 mg/L
(10.43 km) during high tide which is 41.14 % increasing while 1.98 mg/L (7.78 km)
to 5.89 mg/L (10.43 km) during low tide with 66.38 % increasing.
The rapid increasing of DO level towards downstream probably because of
abundance of DO at coastal water which have wide-range of area with cooler water
and high velocity (Thampanya et al., 2005). According to Smith (2004), Corbitt
(1999) and Nor Azman Kassan (2006), cooler water has a higher saturation point for
DO than warmer water and water that is flowing at higher velocities can hold more
DO than slower water.
Dissolve oxygen at Sungai Batu Pahat can be described as low DO as
consequence of nutrient over-enrichment and become one of the most prominent
stressor of estuarine and coastal aquatic biota. Low or no DO is well recognized as
hypoxia or anoxia circumstance was closely associated with low shell fish production
and massive fish kills in many systems (Weisse and Stadler, 2006; Donald et al.,
2002).
4.5.2 Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) is one of essential parameter in order to
determine organic pollutant level as consequence of domestic wastes, agricultural
60
waste and anthropogenic inputs (Hoai et al., 2006; Hernandez-Romero et al., 2004).
Figure 4.8 shows the profile of BOD concentration towards the adjacent coastal
water. BOD concentration during high tide was increasing from 3.82 mg/L at station
1 to 8.61 mg/L at distance of 2.5 km. At distance of 3.21 km and onwards till 10.43
km, BOD concentration was consistent with 19.88 mg/L, 20.58 mg/L, 19.88 mg/L,
20.3 mg/L and 18.06 mg/L respectively.
Figure 4.8: For both tides, BOD concentration was increased from upstream
and constant as reach at distance 3.21 km to seawards due to human activities at
middle stream and undisturbed mangrove area at downstream which is known
as abundance organic matter contributor to water bodies
While during low tide, BOD concentration also increase at upstream which is
from 4.31 mg/L to 9.31 mg/L. The concentration of BOD also seem to be constant at
distance 3.21 km till 10.43 km with 13.02 mg/L, 21.14 mg/L, 15.96 mg/L, 14.56
mg/L and 19.88 mg/L respectively. From the value obtained here, it can clearly see
that, during low tide and high tide, organic loading is almost equal. The reason of
consistency of BOD concentration probably due to fluctuation of DO concentrations.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Distance from first sampling point (km)
BOD (mg/L)
high tide
low tide
61
From ANOVA analysis, there is significant different (p < 0.05) between DO and
BOD with 95% confident levels. Meaning that, lower BOD concentration is directly
related to increasing of DO level and vise versa. This phenomenon is common as
identified in many previous studies (Metcalf and Eddy, 2004; Nor Azman Kasan,
2006; Peavy et al., 1986; Terbut, 1983).
At middle stream which has busy human activities, BOD was increasing (at
distance of 3.21 km to 6.26 km) because according to Lung (2001), squatters
activities that release untreated sewage and food wastes directly into water bodies
will finally increase the BOD concentration. However, towards downstream which
is at shipping activities, clear area, and onwards, BOD was consistent due to wide-
range area and organic matters were well distributed because of mixing water and
strong current by coastal water (Sholkovitz, 1985; Wang, 1978).
The other reason was probably because of less organic matter discharged at
middle stream but high non-biodegradable matter released as stated by previous
study that industrial activities discharge a lot of non-biodegradable effluent into
estuaries (Pekey, 2006; Chen et al., 2006; Zhang et al., 2006; Franca et al., 2005;
Shtiza et al., 2004; Thévenot et al., 2003; Ashkan, 2000). Even though there were
less land use activities at downstream with no potential pollutant contributor
tributaries, but the BOD concentration still higher. The organic matter may be
provided by mangrove area along the river as well as decaying of aquatic plantation
such as phytoplankton (Hoai et al., 2006; Ahsen et al., 2006; Delizo et al., 2005;
Alongi et al., 2001; Kitheka et al., 1996; Rao et al., 1982)
4.5.3 Chemical Oxygen Demand
COD refer to the quantity of oxygen required to oxidize a complete organic
substance chemically to form Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and water (H2O). The
deteriorating of water quality can be measured with high value of COD and lower
value of COD represents the other way around. Results in Figure 4.9 shows that the
average value during high tide for upstream was 60.5 mg/L, at downstream the
62
concentration increased with 74.0 mg/L and 152 mg/L towards downstream whereby
during low tide, COD value was much higher than high tide with 84.5 mg/L
(upstream), 172.7 mg/L (middle stream) and 420 mg/L (downstream). It was
obviously seen that, at middle stream, which has a lot of human activities such as
commercial area, industrial area and settlement area, the COD concentration was
increased rapidly during low tide due to non-biodegradable discharged. While the
value of COD is generally constant from upstream towards the adjacent coastal water
during high tide due of waters’ mixing between marine water and freshwater
resulting dilution.
However, at downstream, COD is increasing due to high organic and
inorganic substance that imported from Straits of Melaka water as well as from
mangrove swamps that well recognized with abundance of organic matter. In
tropical coastal-wetland in Southern Mexico, the COD value was high associated
with mangrove enriched organic matter (Sarkar et al., 2005; Hernandez-Romero et
al., 2004).
Figure 4.9: COD concentration that consistent seaward for high tide because of
dilution from coastal water. However, during low tide, COD was increased at
middle stream due to leaching of organic matter and inorganic matter from
mangrove area, urban area, as well as decaying of aquatic plants
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Distance from first sampling point (km)
COD (mg/L)
high tide
low tide
63
4.5.4 Ammoniacal Nitrogen
The major sources of ammoniacal nitrogen are herbicide, pesticide and
fertilizer from agricultural and farming activities, detergent from diurnal resident
activities and animal manure from pig farm. At upstream, the average value of NH3-
N was 1.11 mg/L as well as at middle stream, but at downstream the value decrease
to 0.60 mg/L during high tide. During low tide, NH3-N value was 1.16 mg/L at
upstream, drop to 0.97 mg/L at middle stream and continuous decreasing at
downstream as shown in Figure 4.10.
Figure 4.10: Ammoniacal nitrogen decreasing seawards for high tide and low
tide due to increasing of dissolved oxygen concentration
The decreasing concentration of NH3-N seawards probably because of
increasing DO concentration. During day, aquatic plant add DO to the water when
photosynthesis is occurring and oxygen is consumed during night time respiration
(Jack, 2006). NH3-N level was decrease as DO concentration increase (Jack, 2006;
Sarkar et al., 2005; Simpson and Pedini, 1985).
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Distance from first sampling point (km)
NH
3-N
(mg/L)
high tide
low tide
64
The higher level of NH3-N at distance of 2.5 km during both tides was caused
by domestic waste and untreated sewage discharged from squatters’ area and urban
area directly to water column. The other reason associated to decreasing of NH3-N
towards downstream was nutrient uptake by phytoplankton growth. According to
Jack (2006), there is a direct relationship between fertilizer applications and riverine
nutrient fluxes which is when these nutrient supplies reach lower rivers, estuaries,
and coastal waters, they are available for phytoplankton uptake and growth.
4.5.5 Suspended Solids
During high tide, suspended solids was slightly increase at upstream and
middle stream as shown in Figure 4.11 with average value of 8.4 mg/L and 9.1 mg/L
respectively. But at downstream, the SS value rapidly increases to 190.4 mg/L
probably associated to adjacent coastal water that has abundance of suspended solids
imported from Straits of Melaka during high tide as well as abundance of fine
particles and nutrients from undisturbed mangrove swamps at downstream (Ray et
al., 2005; Hoai et al., 2006).
Besides, diurnal boats and ships traffics may increased suspended solids to
water column especially at middle stream and downstream by create a wave and
caused riverbank erosion. During low tide, the SS concentration is much higher than
during high tide at upstream and middle stream because according to Khiteka et al.
(1996) the outgoing low tides leach nutrients from the mangrove swamp soils and
acts as a net exporter of dissolved inorganic nutrients from the mangroves and
adjacent coastal ecosystems because low tide current was identified more stronger
than high tide current (Chapman and Tolhurst, 2006).
65
Figure 4.11: Profile of suspended solids from upstream to downstream during
high tide and low tide which is increased from upstream to adjacent of coastal
water probably because of bottom sediment disturbance consequence from
boats and ships traffics as well as imported of suspended solids from mangrove
area and Straits of Melaka
4.5.6 pH
pH is a major environmental factor of aquatic ecosystems at the interface of
physicochemical and biological processes. It is regulated by carbonate equilibrium,
both in the ocean and in most inland waters, and is impacted by biological processes
such as photosynthesis and respiration. From Figure 4.12 shown here, it is can be
concluded that water in Sungai Batu Pahat is acidic water in close relation to the
geology such as acidic existing sediment. As study made by Weisse and Stadler
(2006), in Northern Europe and North America, the lowered pH is impacted by
poorly buffered waters as a consequence of acidic deposition.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Distance from first sampling point (km)
SS (mg/L)
high tide
low tide
66
At middle stream, which is within distance from 2.5 km to 4.24 km, the pH
value is lower rather than high tide with 1.03 mg/L difference due to heavy metal
discharged from urban areas which finally produce high hydrogen ions in water
column. The river is less acidic during high tide because the extra volume of water
somehow has neutralizing effect on the water (Chipman, 1934). It is must take into
account that, Sungai Batu Pahat still covered by riverbank vegetation especially
mangrove and mangrove roots is identified to lower the pH (Kristensen et al., 1991).
Figure 4.12: pH value within Sungai Batu Pahat that can be concluded as acidic
water because of natural geology and activities at mangroves’ roots that was
identified to lower the pH
According to Alongi et al. (1998), mangrove roots play a main role to acidic
waters by oxidation of reduced heavy metal compounds caused by translocation of
O2 by roots, bioturbating crabs, or the dominance of aerobic decomposition of
organic matter which results in the net production of carbonic acid. The chemical
reaction of acidic water is simple which is when carbon dioxide combines with
water, it forms carbonic acid and releases hydrogen ions (Victor et al., 2006). The
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Distance from first sampling point (km)
pH
high tide
low tide
67
varies of pH value during high tide because river waters usually contain a lower
concentration of excess bases than seawater (Alongi et al., 1998)
4.6 Biological Analysis
Analyses of biological parameter consist of riverbank vegetation, fisheries,
phytoplankton, zooplankton and benthic macroinvertebrate.
4.6.1 Riverbank Vegetation Result
In 1980, mangrove forest reserve in Selangor and west Johor were about 25
000 ha (Loneragan et al., 2005) and the abundance of mangrove may disappear time
by time because of logging activities and as aquaculture activities (Cheevaporn and
Menasveta, 2003; Alongi et al., 1999). In developing countries, the mangrove area
will decline of 1 percent every year (Alongi et al., 1999). Sungai Batu Pahat,
however, still covered by riverbank vegetation such as mangrove and nypa. At the
upstream of study area (length of 2.5 meter), total area from both sides of estuaries is
approximately 135.72 acre and middle stream covers 199.21 acre of riverbank
vegetation. Area of riverbank vegetation at middle stream is bigger than upstream
because of length covered for middle stream (3.76 meter). At downstream (length of
4.17 meter), which have open wide width were cover 388.85 acre of riverbank
vegetation. The abundance of vegetation at downstream was with respect to
undisturbed habitat.
From interviewing with forestry officers of Batu Pahat, Ranger Suliman bin
Omar and En. Rosli bin Kadir, the species of riverbank vegetation that most found in
Sungai Batu Pahat was as listed in Table 4.7. The status of tree whether it true
mangrove or mangrove associates were based on study by Ashton and Machintosh
(2002)
68
Table 4.7: Riverbank vegetation that mostly found at Sungai Batu Pahat
Species Local Name Status
Family Rhizophoraceae
Rhizophora Apiculata Rhizophora Mucronata Bruguiera Gymnorrhiza Bruguiera Parviflora Bruguiera Cylindrica Ceriops Tagal
Bakau Minyak Bakau Kurap
Tumu Lenggadai Berus Tengar
M M M M M M
Family Combretaecae
Lumnitzera Littorea Lumnitzera Racemosa
Teruntum Merah Teruntum Putih
M M
Family Plypodiaceae Acrostichum Sepciosum Acrostichum Aureum
Piai Lasa Piai Raya
M M
Family Meliaceae Xylocarpus Granatum Xylocarpus Moluccencis Nypa Fruiticans
Nyireh Bunga Nyireh Batu
Nipah
M M NM
Family Avicenniaceae Avicennia 4 spp Avicennia Alba
Api-api Api-api Putih
M M
Family Malvaceae
Thespesia Populnea
Bebaru
MA
Other
Plectrantus amboinicus
Jemuju
NM M=True Mangrove, NM= Not Mangove Species, MA= Mangrove Associated
There are 7 species with 17 type of riverbank vegetation that survive within
study area and parallel to shoreline mangrove plant species richness is high and
vegetation zonation was observed. This regarding to Ashton (2002) found that at
foreshore, there was a mixed mangrove species zone. From actual observation, at the
upstream and middle stream of estuaries, nypa seem to be found the most beside
mangrove species due to low salinity and calm water (Ng and Sivasothi, 2001).
Rhizophora are mostly found along water front and Avicenna is behind them on
landward side which is common in mangrove estuaries (Desai and Untawale, 2002).
A lot of study about the mangrove habitat in term of biomass, moisture
content, and productivity of leaves, flower buds, flowers and propagules (Clough et
al., 2000; Ashton, 2002; Christensen and Andersen, 1976). The above ground
biomass for R. Apiculata and R. Mucronata were the greatest followed by B.
69
parviflora, B. gymnorrhiza, C. tagal and X. granatum (Clough et al, 2000) due to its
props roots that formed 39% of total biomass above the ground (Christensen, 1976)
while decreasing of leaves moisture content between senescent and fresh mangrove
species leaves proportionally as follow; B. parviflora senescent >R. Apiculata
senescent > B. gymnorrhiza senescent >B. gymnorrhiza fresh > B. parviflora fresh >
R. apiculata fresh (Ashton, 2002).
In Matang Mangrove, Perak, R. Apiculata was a dominant species but decline
in time while abundance of B. parviflora and B. cylindrica increased (Putz and Chan,
2003) as well as in Kalimantan mangroves (Abdulhadi and Suhardjono, 1994).
Beside, X. granatum is dominant in Sungai Semantan, Sarawak because this species
prefer soils with high water content due to high freshwater run-off (>30%) and good
drainage (Ashton and Machintosh, 2002). In Kerala, India, B. gymnorrhiza is found
abundant in low saline area while A. aureum prefers the areas of low pH and salinity
(Balasubramaniam, 2002).
R. Apiculata which well recognizes by its props roots is main mangrove
species which are widely used in Southeast Asia as a source of fuel wood, to produce
timber for construction, and for the manufacture of charcoal (Clough et al., 2000).
Regarding to its high regeneration compared to C. Tagal that has poor regeneration.
The best way to make trees survive and regenerated well is by cutting at higher stem
that live branches (with leaves) are spared (Walters, 2005). Flowering of Rhizophora
species is greatest during wet season (Leach and Burgin, 1985) and development
flower bud primordia to mature propagules took nearly three years (Christensen and
Andersen, 1976).
4.6.2 Fish Result
Table 4.8 shows number of fisherman with respect to district in 2005 that
provided by the Department of Fisheries. There are approximately 1,156 fishermen
in the Batu Pahat District with about 12.5% of the total number fisherman in the state
70
of Johor. The total number of fish landed at Batu Pahat was 2,896.75 metric ton
which is approximately 3.5 % of the total fish landed in Johor.
Table 4.8: Number of fishermen according to district (Department of Fisheries,
2005)
Fisherman District of Johor
Bumiputera Chinese Indian Others Total
Muar 903 288 0 60 1,251
Batu Pahat 770 386 0 0 1,156
Pontian 676 554 0 0 1,230
Johor Bharu 814 101 1 0 916
Kota Tinggi Utara (Tg.Sedili) 678 239 0 115 1,032
Kota Tinggi Selatan (Pengerang ) 827 551 2 0 1380
Mersing 1,550 378 0 417 2,345
Total 6,218 2,497 3 592 9,310
There are two jetties within study area which is Teluk Wawasan and
Kampung Sungai Suloh. The types of fish that landed at these two jetties are
enclosed at Appendix A. Although the fish landed at the Teluk Wawasan and Kg
Sungai Suloh does not necessarily represent fishes caught at Sungai Batu Pahat, the
data indicates the type of commercially important fishes caught in the adjacent
coastal areas. There are 13 species from 9 families with a total 470 specimens and
total weight of 30.545 kg as shown in Table 4.9. From the survey, family Ariidae
(Figure 4.13) was dominant within study areas which represented by 2 species; Arius
thallasinus and Arius Maculatus or commonly call catfish (Duri) with 86 percent
from total fish species found as shown in Figure 4.14.
Figure 4.13: Family Ariidae (Catfish) that caught during study event
71
Figure 4.14: Percentage of species number found within study area
Liza Subviridis (Belanak) and Valamugil seheli (Belanak Angin) with 9
percent which represent family Mugillidae was the second dominated fish within
study area. They are known to form as schools in shallow coastal waters and enter
lagoons, estuaries, and fresh water to feed. The greenback mullet live in freshwater,
brackish water and marine water (Abu Khair Mohammad Mohsin et al., 1993).
Other commercial species that were caught in the field survey were Eleutheronem
tetradactylum (Senagin), Anondontostoma chacunda (Selangat), Scomberoides tala
(Talang) and Ilisha elongata (Puput). However, the number of this species is lesser
than catfish due to clearing of mangrove along the riverbank near the river mouth.
The overall catfish found were in a range of 14.0 to 20.5 cm of length but for
Arius Thallasinus, greater size of species is mostly found rather than small size with
the range of 20.0 to 22.5 cm as shown in Table 4.10. This could be of sensitivity to
suspended solids of early-life stages of catfish rather than an adult (Hadil Rajali and
Gambang, 2000). This species occurred mostly at the upstream part of study area
which near the jetty at the Department of Fisheries office and near the remaining
patches of mangrove at north and south of riverbank due to abundance pristine
mangrove habitat at downstream of study area. It is known that the Arius (Duri) is
86.38%
1.07%
0.21%
0.21%
0.21%
0.21%
0.64%
2.13%
8.94%
Ariidae Mugillidae Carangidae Tetradontidae Clupeidae
Polynemidae Pristigasteridae Engraulididae Ambassidae
72
usually found in inshore waters and estuaries but rarely enters freshwater (Kailola,
1999).
Table 4.9: Fish species found in Sungai Batu Pahat
Table 4.10: Range of fish species length
Family Species Length Range (cm)
Ariidae Arius thallasinus 13.6 - 29.0 Arius maculatus 11.2 - 28.3 Polynemidae Eleutheronem tetradactylum 19.4 Mugillidae Liza subviridis 13.0 - 18.6 Valamugil seheli 16.1 - 16.7 Carangidae Scomeroides tala 12.3 - 20.0 Tetradontidae Lagacephalus wheeli 13.3 - 15.0 Chelnodon patoca 10.0 - 12.0 Pristigasteridae Ilisha elongata 18.8 Engraulididae Thryssa hamiltonii 8.4 Ambassidae Ambassis sp 10.2 Clupeidae Anodontostoma chacunda 9.5 - 9.9
Family Species Local Common Number %
Numbers
Weight
(g)
Ariidae Arius thallasinus Duri pulutan Catfish 178 37.87 13660 Arius maculatus Duri Catfish 228 48.51 14680 Polynemidae Eleutheronem
tetradactylum
Senagin Fourfingers threadfin
1 0.21 20
Mugillidae Liza subviridis Belanak Greenback
mullet 39 8.30 1660
Valamugil seheli Kedera Bluespot mullet
3 0.64 90
Carangidae Scomeroides tala Talang Barred
queenfish 10 2.13 215
Tetradontidae Lagacephalus
wheeli
Buntal pisang
Toadfish 3 0.64 110
Chelnodon patoca Buntal Milk-spotted toadfish
2 0.43 80
Pristigasteridae Ilisha elongata Puput Elongate ilisha 1 0.21 10 Engraulididae Thryssa hamiltonii Kasai Hamilton's
thryssa 1 0.21 5
Ambassidae Ambassis sp Seriding Glass fish 1 0.21 5 Clupeidae Anodontostoma
chacunda
Selangat Gizzard shad 3 0.64 10
Total 470 30545
73
Compared to WQI for Sungai Batu Pahat which is Class III at upstream and
decrease to Class IV at middle stream, it is not surprisingly about the dominance of
catfish because bottom-dwelling fish species like the catfish is tolerant to suspended
solids and low water quality (Hadil Rajali and Gambang, 2000). Moreover,
according to Kailola (1999), catfish was considered as commercial fish and occurs
often in schools form. Small crabs, mollusk and small fishes are become dietary for
catfish.
For other foremost commercial fish, the water quality of this estuaries may
effect their population and habitat which implied by number of this species were
caught in study area because they are not in tolerant fish type. The main reason for
existing of this juvenile species (range of 10.0 to 20.0 cm) is because of patches of
mangrove that still remain along the riverbank. For Eleutheronema tetradactylum
(Senangin), adult fish length may reach over than 50.0 cm. Marine fish and low
commercial value fish such as Lagacephalus lunaris (Buntal pisang) and Chelnodon
patoca (Buntal) also enters this estuaries even only 5 numbers of them. Meaning
that, the water quality at Sungai Batu Pahat still can support marine fish. But for
juveniles’ fish, they may enter mangrove and rice field. They take small algae,
diatoms and benthic detrital material as feeding (Harrison and Senou, 1997).
The size and length distribution of the species within study area shows a
normal and stable population of predominantly young and adult fishes. However, the
length of the species found within study area is considered small because, the
greenback mullet’s length may reach to 40 cm (Harrison and Senou, 1997). This is
regarding to decreasing of mangrove area for them to feed. Even though the water
quality within study area not in ‘health’ status for most commercial species, but the
mangrove remaining along the riverbank would be act as shelter and breeding area.
It is true that, the class III of water quality provided by DOE (1986) may support
abundance of tolerant fish such as Arius. However, there still have juvenile
commercial fish such as Eleutheronem tetradactylum (Senagin), Anondontostoma
chacunda (Selangat), Scomberoides tala (Talang) and Ilisha elongata (Puput) shows
that, fish species does not rely on water quality alone but also rely on breeding and
feeding area; mangrove (Alfaro, 2004; Cheevaporn and Menasveta 2003; Kathiresan
and Bingham, 2001; Nagelkerken et al., 1999; Gilbert and Janssen 1996).
74
4.7 Phytoplankton Analysis
The phytoplanktons are one of the initial biological components, from which
energy is transferred into higher organisms through food web. Biomass and
production of phytoplankton of various sizes are important factors, which regulate
the availability and diversity of organisms at higher trophic levels.
Table 4.11: Phytoplankton taxa during high tide
Stations Upstream Middle stream Downstream
Bacillariophyceae Chaetoceros sp. √ √ √ Thalassionema nitzschiodes √ √ √ Thalassiothrix frauenfeldii - - √ Biddulphia sp. √ √ √ Biddulphia sinensis √ √ √ Fragilaria sp. - - - Dithylium sol √ - √ Dithylium brightwellii √
Nitzschia longgisima √ √ √
Nitzschia sigma √ √ √
Nitzschia sp. - √ √
Pleurosigma sp. √ √ √
Navicula sp. √ √ √
Closterium sp. - - - Codonella aspera - - - Codonella americana - - - Codonella sp. - √ √
Tintinnopsis sp. √ √ √
Flavella sp. √ √ √
Xystonella lohmanni - - √
Ethmodiscus sp. √ - - Coscinodiscus lineatus - √ √
Cosconidiscus sp. √ √ √
Triceratium √ √ √
Rhizosolenia sp. √ √ √
Hemialus sp. √ √ √
Skeletonema costatum √ √ √
Guinardia sp. √ √ - Spyrogyra sp. - - - Leptocylindrus danicus - - - Dinophyceae Ceratium sp. √ √ √ Total Species 19 20 23
75
The dominant phytoplanktons in Sungai Batu Pahat are Bacillariophyceae or
diatom and Dinophyceae (dinoflagellates) during high tide (Table 4.11) and only
Bacillariophyceae were found during low tide (Table 4.12). Khiteka et al. (1996)
also found out that diatoms and dinoflagellates is dominant phytoplankton in Bay.
Phytoplanktons have direct relationship with tides, strength of the current and
direction of flows (Balasubramaniam, 2002). Bacillariophyceae species such as
Navicula and Spirogyra are seen only during low tide where the freshwater influence
in the biotopes.
Table 4.12: Phytoplankton taxa during low tide
Stations Upstream Middle stream Downstream
Bacillariophyceae Chaetoceros sp. √ √ √ Thalassionema nitzschiodes - - - Thalassiothrix frauenfeldii - - - Biddulphia sp. √ √ √
Biddulphia sinensis √ √ √
Fragilaria sp. √ √ - Dithylium sol - - - Dithylium brightwellii - - - Nitzschia longgisima - - - Nitzschia sigma - - - Nitzschia sp. √ √ - Pleurosigma sp. √ √ √
Navicula sp. √ - √
Closterium sp. √ √ - Codonella aspera - - √ Codonella americana - - √
Codonella sp. - - √
Tintinnopsis sp. √ √ √
Flavella sp. - - √ Xystonella lohmanni - - √
Ethmodiscus sp. - - - Coscinodiscus lineatus - - √
Cosconidiscus sp. - √ √
Triceratium - - √
Rhizosolenia sp. - √ - Hemialus sp. - - - Skeletonema costatum √ √ √ Guinardia sp. - - - Spyrogyra sp. - √ √ Leptocylindrus danicus - √ - Dinophyceae Ceratium sp. - - - Total Species 10 13 16
76
The most abundant species found in this river were Thalassionema
nitzschiodes, Thalassiothrix frauenfeldii, Navicula sp, Nitzschia sp, Nitzschia
longgisima, Nitzschia sigma, and Codonella sp. These species are known to be
tolerant to organic pollution and eutrophication. Therefore we may conclude that
diatoms are useful for biological monitoring of disturbed tropical rivers. (Ana and
Silva, 1994; Jacob et al., 1982).
4.7.1 Distribution Pattern of Phytoplankton Due to Riverbank Vegetation
The phytoplanktons are represented by Chrysophyta (diatoms) and Pyrophyta
(dinoflagellates). A total of 31 taxa were identified during sampling event with 13
similar taxa occurred for both high tide and low tide. Figure 4.15 shows
phytoplankton taxanomy that was found during study event and being characterized
based on its tolerance to low water quality according to previous study (Donald et
al., 2002; Ana and Silva, 1994; Devi and Lakshminaryana, 1989; Jacob et al., 1982)
Figure 4.15: Distribution pattern of phytoplankton taxa which is slightly
increase towards downstream for high tide and low tide
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
upstream middlestream downstream
Location within the river
Total phytoplankton Taxa
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Riverbank vegetation (Acre)
high tide
low tide
riverbank vegetation
77
As shown in Figure 4.15, for high tide, there was 25 taxa occurred with the
distribution of phytoplankton 19 taxa at upstream, 20 taxa at middle stream and 23
taxa at downstream. Only 16 taxa were recognized to be at entire stream. While for
low tide, only 21 taxa were identified with 10 taxa (upstream), 13 taxa (middle
stream) and 16 taxa (downstream). There were 6 similar taxa identified within study
area. During high tide, total taxon of phytoplankton was found higher compared to
low tide event which dominated by Biddulphia spp and Chaetoceros spp. The
presence of diatoms, such as Chaetoceros spp., Thalassiosira spp., and Biddulphia
spp. is related to good quality water (Devi and Lakshminaryana, 1989) and most
common community found at warm water (Jacob et al., 1982).
Based on dissolved oxygen concentration during high tide, it showed an
acceptable level for aquatic life (>2 mg/L) (McCaull and Crossland, 1974) rather
than during low tide which is likely to have less than 2 mg/L except at downstream
(average of 5.25 mg/L). Other reason could be regarding to nutrient supply and light
ability which become an essential component for their productivity (Hoai et al.,
2006; Effler et al., 1991; Delizo et al., 2005). Injection of coastal water to estuaries
would be the main reason of increasing taxa during high tide. At mid high tide, the
concentrations of chlorophyll (associated with low levels of degraded pigments)
were higher than the concentrations (associated with a higher load of degraded
pigments) seen at mid low tide (Hoai et al., 2006). Chlorophyll was recognized to
identify the existing phytoplankton on water bodies (Tarim, 2002; Harris and
Piccinin, 1983).
Phytoplankton during low tide was much lower than high tide could be due to
lack of penetration of light to water column because of higher turbidity (Rao et al.,
1982). It is well known that, the low penetration of light into the water column
(rarely surpassing 10 cm) (Hoai et al., 2006) and anoxic condition (Ahsen et al.,
2006) does not allow a significant increase in phytoplankton productivity. Beside,
the decreasing of phytoplankton taxon during low tide was corresponding to
competition for nutrients with bacteria even there are nutrient supply from mangrove,
did not influence growth any further (Capo et al., 2005) and part of nutrient is used
to sustain zooplankton biomass (Khiteka et al., 1996).
78
Biddulphia spp and Codonella sp was identified to always present taxa during
low tide and it can be concluded that water quality of Sungai Batu Pahat still in good
condition and may support the high demanding phytoplankton such as Biddulphia
spp which rarely found in polluted water. Total phytoplankton was seen to be
increased towards downstream due to increasing of riverbank vegetation (main
supplier to their productivity) as well as imported nutrient from Strait of Malacca
water. While tidal change appears to determine the distribution pattern of
phytoplankton.
4.7.2 Distribution Pattern of Phytoplankton Due to Dissolved Oxygen
Phytoplanktons that were identified consist of two families which are diatom
and dinoflagellates. Diatoms are harmless and dinoflagellates that found in this
study were non-toxic species. During high tide and low tide, phytoplankton taxa
were increase with increasing of dissolved oxygen as shown in Table 4.13. The
decreasing taxa during low tide because of effluent discharge from tributaries such as
phosphorus from agriculture activities and quarry activites, and heavy metal from
urban area. Phytoplankton assemblage is sensitive to phosphorus and heavy metal
enrichment (Kitheka et al., 2000). Phytoplanktons that are not limited by nitrogen or
phosphorus are likely to have nutrient ratios of approximately 106C:16N:1P on a
molar basis (Donald et al., 2002). All phytoplankton found at study area were
tolerant to organic pollution.
Table 4.13: Phytoplankton taxa as compared to DO concentration
Location within the river
Variables Upstream Middle stream Downstream
DO
(mg/L)
Phytoplankton
(taxa)
DO
(mg/L)
Phytoplankton
(taxa)
DO
(mg/L)
Phytoplankton
(taxa)
High tide 3.02 19 3.78 20 5.34 23
Low tide 2.04 9 2.06 13 3.94 18 Riverbank vegetation (acre) 135.72 199.21 388.85
79
4.7.3 Distribution Pattern of Phytoplankton Due to pH
According to Weisse and Stadler (2006), pH is an important physicochemical
environmental parameter affecting ciliate species composition and species richness.
However, an experimental laboratory investigation of the pH reaction norm of
common species is still lacking. From Table 4.14, phytoplankton species were
increase as pH increase even the water still considered as acidic waters. As the pH
change, the species also change. Huang et al. (2003) identified that the
phytoplankton amount was highest in autumn, as was the pH value. When the pH
decreases, dinoflagellates tend to dominance. Dinoflagellate is toxic algae that could
harm fish and grazer (Rao et al., 1982) in toxic condition.
Table 4.14: Phytoplankton taxa as compared to pH
Location within the river
Variables Upstream Middle stream Downstream
pH
Phytoplankton
(taxa) pH
Phytoplankton
(taxa) pH
Phytoplankton
(taxa)
High tide 3.4 19 4.45 20 5.34 23
Low tide 3.54 9 3.87 13 5.78 18 Riverbank vegetation (acre) 135.72 199.21 388.85
4.8 Zooplankton Analysis
Zooplankton is significant food for fish and invertebrate predators and they
graze heavily on algae, bacteria, protozoa, and other invertebrates (Victor et al.,
2006). Table 4.15 shows numbers of zooplankton the present in Sungai Batu Pahat
in unit ind/m3 during high tide while during low tide is shown in Table 4.16.
The indices of species richness, Margalef index (D) and Shannon-Weiner index
(H’) with higher value showed that composition of zooplankton was more diverse at
the downstream stations than at the upstream stations (see Appendix B). The
evenness Pielou’s index (J’) also showed that the community of zooplankton in the
adjacent coastal waters (J’= 0.43) during low tides was constituted by various species
80
as compared to the river’s community which mainly dominated by rotifer. It can be
concluded that zooplankton species diversity and abundance at Sungai Batu Pahat is
mainly influenced by the sea and tides. Hoai et al. (2006) was identified rotifers,
copepods and cladoceran were dominant zooplankton during high tide and low tide
near the river mouth.
Table 4.15: Zooplankton during high tide in unit ind/m3
Taxa Upstream Middle stream Downstream
ROTIFERA Brachionus sp. 3391.7 7074.9 2118.6
CRUSTACEA Copepoda Copepod nauplius 36.7 184.5 1443.5
Calanoida Acartia sp. 0 5.7 747.9 Pontellidae copepodid 0 0 8.7 Pseudodiaptomus sp. 0 0 57.7 Parvocalanus sp. 0 0 60.4 Paracalanidae copepodid 0 0 113.3 Centropages sp. 0 0 34.9 Unidentified calanoid copepodid 0 16.2 0
Cyclopoida Oithona sp. 0 7.3 170.2 Cyclops sp. 23.2 76.6 95.2
Harpaticoida Euterpina sp. 0 3.6 0 Harpaticoid sp1 0 0 43.9
Decapoda Acetes protozoea 0 0 9.2 Lucifer mysis 0 0 8.7
Ostracoda 0 7.2 202.9
Cladoceran Moinodaphnia sp. 4.0 2.1 0
Cirripedia Cirripede nauplius 12.8 61.4 204.5
SARCOMASTIGOPHORA
(PROTOZOA) Tintinnopsis sp. 0 0 5.2 Favella sp. 32.7 43.2 245 Noctiluca sp. 108.6 235.1 1388.8 Total 3609.7 7717.6 6958.8
81
Table 4.16: Zooplankton during low tide in unit ind/m3
Taxa Upstream
Middle
stream Downstream
ROTIFERA Brachionus sp. 2911.6 6567.5 1700.2
CRUSTACEA Copepoda Copepod nauplius 0 12.8 19362.2
Calanoida Acartia sp. 0 0 7044.2 Pontellidae copepodid 0 0 1288.2 Pseudodiaptomus sp. 0 0 24305.0 Parvocalanus sp. 0 0 7337.5 Bestiolina sp. 0 0 14433.8 Paracalanus sp. 0 0 257.6 Paracalanidae copepodid 0 0 756.5 Eucalanus sp. 0 0 257.6 Temora sp. 0 0 257.6 Unidentified calanoid copepodid 0 0 16.5
Cyclopoida Oithona sp. 0 0 16895.6 Cyclops sp. 84.0 142.7 33.0
Harpaticoida Euterpina sp. 0 0 1408.8
Decapoda Acetes protozoea 0 0 257.6 Lucifer protozoea 0 0 2233.9 Lucifer sp. 0 0 704.4
Ostracoda 0 0 0
Cladoceran Anollela sp. 83.9 116.6 12.4 Moinodaphnia sp. 26.5 17.2 0
Cirripedia Cirripede nauplius 0 0 772.9
CHAETOGNATHA Sagitta sp. 0 0 772.9
CNIDARIA Leptomedusa (hydrozoa) 0 0 4.1
SARCOMASTIGOPHORA
(PROTOZOA) Tintinnopsis sp. 0 0 189.1 Favella sp. 0 0 257.6 Total 3106.1 6856.9 100559.6
82
4.8.1 Distribution Pattern of Zooplankton Due to Riverbank Vegetation
Zooplankton always present in marine, brackish and freshwater. The
common zooplankton species encountered for this study are Rotifera, Copepoda,
Cladocera and Protozoa. It is similar result with study carried out at Ogunpa and
Ona rivers, Nigeria by Gbemisola (2001) as well as a study by Khiteka et al, (1996)
at Kidogoweni and Mkurumuji rivers in Kenya. The dominant species and were
always present species during both high tide and low tide was rotifers-Brachionus sp
followed by calanoids copepoda. Existing of Rotifers and Cladocerans were
associated with ‘‘oligotrophic waters’’ (low productivity: low levels of nutrients,
active chlorophyll a biomass and luminosity, and high concentrations of humic
compounds) (Hoai et al., 2006).
According to Figure 4.16, during high tide, there are 20 species found, while
during low tide, there were added up 5 species (found mostly at downstream). This
regarding to detritus leaching from mangrove swamps towards downstream. It is
well known that the outgoing low tide will leach nutrient from the mangrove swamp
soils and act as exporter of dissolved inorganic nutrient from the mangroves and
adjacent coastal ecosystem (Khiteka et al., 1996) because low tide current is more
stronger rather than high tide current (Chapman and Tolhurst, 2006).
Figure 4.16: Zooplankton community distribution along the river
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
upstream middlestream downstream
Location within the river
Zooplankton (ind/m
3)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Riverbank Vegetation (Acre)
high tide
low tide
riverbank vegetation
83
Other zooplankton encountered for this study were Decapoda , Cirripedia At
upstream and middle stream, for both tides, the zooplankton species were diverse and
well distribute but in different percentage. At upstream, there are 7 species with
average 3609.7 ind/m3, whereas average number of zooplankton is 3858.8 ind/m3
were found at middle stream with 12 species during high tide. For average number
of zooplankton low tide density at upstream and middle stream was evaluated of
3106.1 ind/m3 with 4 species involved and 3428.6 ind/m3 with 5 species,
respectively.
There was less 12 percent reduction of zooplankton density with less species
found during low tide for both upstream and middle stream because of human
activities such as quarry, settlement and heavy boat traffics with respect to mangrove
loss and less detritus. Zooplankton consumes bacteria and detritus as their nutrition
(Rougier et al., 2004). Beside, this could be due to food availability, spawning
patterns of different zooplankton groups and tidal rhythms (Khiteka et al., 2006) and
their percentages were independent of the tidal cycles (Rougier et al., 2004).
At downstream, the abundance of zooplankton during low tide with 24
species (average of 50279.8 ind/m3) compared to high tide with only 18 species
(average of 3479.4 ind/m3) with 19.7 percent rotifers reduction. The number of
rotifers during high tide and low tide is 1700.2 ind/m3 and 2118.6 ind/m3,
respectively. According to Rougier et al, (2004), there are less 20 percent of rotifer
reduction between high tide and low tide period. The high in number of
zooplankton during low tide at downstream with respect to river mouth and
abundance of mangrove habitat which characterized by strong turbidity and high
amounts of organic detritus, the presence of bacteria and detritus could contribute to
the maintenance of this community (Rougier et al., 2004). Furthermore, the other
reason of abundance species at downstream during low tide could be the low salinity
water that outflow from freshwater during this period (Khiteka et al., 1996).
The existing of abundance copepods in Sungai Batu Pahat relating to water
quality which have acidic water (range 3-6) was common because copepods was
characterized as much hardier and strong motile than other zooplankton with their
tougher exoskeleton and longer and stronger appendages (Ramachandra et al., 2006).
84
This finding supported by Jha and Barat (2003) that, found abundance of copepods in
acidic pH of water bodies due to nature and other physicochemical factor.
The abundance of copepods relate to the stable condition of environment
(Das et al., 1996). Beside, it is well recognized that zooplankton is exists under a
wide range of environment, but there are many species are influenced by
temperature, dissolved oxygen, salinity and other physicochemical factors. For
example, rotifer is more sensitive to pollution rather than other groups of
zooplankton (Khan and Rao, 1981). However, Sungai Batu Pahat can be classified
as slightly polluted but abundance of rotifers found it most stream portion. Pandey et
al, (2004) found that there were negative correlation between rotifers and pH,
dissolved oxygen (DO) and turbidity while copepods showed negative correlation
with water temperature, nitrate and phosphate.
4.8.2 Distribution Pattern of Zooplankton Due to Dissolved Oxygen
Dissolved oxygen shows depletion during low tide at upstream with 20.5%,
45 % at middle stream and 26% at downstream. The depletion of DO concentration
resulting low water quality and only tolerant species may survive as shown in Table
4.17. At upstream, species that less tolerant will decrease during low tide and be
replaced by abundance of tolerant species which less in number during high tide.
Same thing goes at middle stream, which some species that exist during high tide,
suddenly disappeared during low tide.
Table 4.17: Zooplankton numbers as compared to DO concentration
Location within the river
Variables Upstream Middle stream Downstream
DO
(mg/L)
Zooplankton
(ind/m3)
DO
(mg/L)
Zooplankton
(ind/m3)
DO
(mg/L)
Zooplankton
(ind/m3)
High tide 3.02 3609.7 3.78 3858.8 5.34 3479.4
Low tide 2.4 3106.1 2.06 3428.6 3.94 50279.8 Riverbank vegetation (acre) 135.72 199.21 388.85
85
This species shows water quality during low tide much polluted. At
downstream, however, zooplankton species increase with decreasing of DO
concentration. This associated to rapid increasing of tolerant species with abundance
of nutrient leaching from riverbank vegetation and freshwater. According to Victor
et al. (2006), low DO will lead to decreasing of zooplankton taxa richness, however
increase the taxon or taxa that tolerant to low DO.
4.8.3 Distribution Pattern of Zooplankton Due to pH
There is little direct evidence of low pH induced changes in the total
zooplankton biomass. However, it is clear that species composition may vary as a
result of the different tolerances of species to low pH values. From Table 4.18,
zooplankton assemblages are varies with respect to increasing of pH value. Changes
in zooplankton may also alter the pressure due to predation on phytoplankton, thus
affecting species composition. In addition, sudden variations of pH, typical of
weakly buffered systems can shift to species that more tolerant to it.
Table 4.18: Zooplankton numbers as compared to pH
Location within the river
Variables Upstream Middle stream Downstream
pH
Zooplankton
(ind/m3) pH
Zooplankton
(ind/m3) pH
Zooplankton
(ind/m3)
High tide 3.4 3609.7 4.45 3858.8 5.34 3479.4
Low tide 3.54 3106.1 3.87 3428.6 5.78 50279.8 Riverbank vegetation (acre) 135.72 199.21 388.85
4.9 Macrobenthos Analysis
Table 4.19 and Table 4.20 show type of macrobenthos that had been caught
during high tide and low tide respectively. Number and types of benthic
86
communities were absolutely low due to human disturbance but still exist as existing
of detritus that acts as food and habitat provided by mangrove.
Table 4.19: Benthic macroinvetebrates within study area during high tide
Table 4.20: Benthic macroinvetebrates within study area during low tide
4.9.1 Distribution Pattern of Macobenthos Due to Riverbank Vegetation
Microinvertebrate or also known as macrobentos found in Sungai Batu Pahat
was poor diversity. According to Figure 4.17, during high tide, no macrobenthos
species was found at upstream and middle stream but polycate (4 Nereis sp and 4
Polycate sp 1) and primitive bivalves (6 Yoldia) was identified at downstream with
Stream Benthos
Total
No. Notes
Downstream Polychate : Nereis sp. 4 Fragments of bivalves, gastropods, oysters,
: Polychate sp. 1 Bivalves : Yoldia
1 6
detritus as well as presence of charcoal/ carbon
Middle stream
0
Sand, Twigs and broken branches, unidentified fruits, seeds, sea grass, weeds and fragment of plants
Upstream
0
Root, grass and sand
Stream Benthos
Total
No. Notes
Downstream
Polychate : Sabellidae :Polychate sp. 2 :Nereis sp.
1 1 4
Fragments of bivalves, gastropods, oysters and detritus as well as weeds.
Middle stream Gastropod: Nassarius sp. 3 Detritus, leaves and fragments of plants Diopatra 1 Polychate : Nereis sp. 2
Upstream
Polychate : Nereis sp.
1
Clay substrate, detritus, muddy substrate and fragments of bivalves
87
fragments of bivalves, gastropods and oyster was found. The substrate at
downstream at the river mouth is dark muddy and oily probably due to discharges or
spillages from vessels entering and exiting the river. The substrate is sandy at
downstream while at middle stream, the substrate is sandy with and rocky with
gravels that might have fallen of barges carrying gravel from the nearby quarry site.
Only fragments of plants and detritus were found at upstream and
downstream. During low tide, 1 polycate Nereis sp (upstream), and 2 Nereis sp
(middle stream) 1 polycate Sabellidae, 4 Nereis sp, 1 Polycate sp 2, 1 Diopatra and 3
Gastropod Nassarius sp (downstream) was found. The average value of total
macrobenthos during high tide and low tide were as follow, respectively; 0
(upstream), 0 (downstream), 5.5 (downstream) and 1 (upstream), 2 (upstream), 10
(downstream). The abundance of macrobenthos at downstream could be respond to
the great areas of riverbank vegetation and wide area.
Figure 4.17: Macrobenthos that found during study event which shows
low diversity during high tide and low tide
In general, the abundance of macrobenthos in the study area was relatively
low. This was probably due to the fact that the study area have been subjected to
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
upstream middlestream downstream
Location within the river
Numbers of Macrobenthos
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Riverbank Vegetation (Acre)
high tide
low tide
riverbank vegetation
88
significant environmental alteration that may have lead to heavy disturbance and
unstable river bed. High number of marine traffic and barges carrying gravel from
the nearby quarry may have contributed to this condition. Polycates and bivalves
which mostly present species of macrobenthos within study area was not something
new because this species has highly tolerant to organic pollution (Ahsen et al., 2006;
Luoma and Cloern, 1980).
4.9.2 Distribution Pattern of Macrobenthos Due to Dissolved Oxygen
Macrobenthos that had been caught during study event was poor in number as
shown in Table 4.21. During high tide, even DO increase, no species were found at
upstream and downstream because, at upstream, the substrate is sand which always
no species present (Chindah and Braide, 2001). While at middle stream, sediment
was disturbed by sandy with and rocky with gravels that might have fallen of barges
carrying gravel from the nearby quarry site. At downstream, number of benthos
increasing due to muddy substrate and quality of food supplied.
Table 4.21: Numbers of macrobenthos as compared to DO concentration
During low tide, a few species that tolerant to low DO concentration were
found. This is because, during high tide, this species will burrow deep beneath the
surface to avoid them from flushing to downstream when low tide event occurred
(Chindah and Braide, 2001). They only emerged to bring down food and oxygen.
DO concentration not directly related to macrobenthos assemblage because, the
sediment had already disturbed by human activities. Most of species found in this
study were tolerant to low water quality.
Location within the river
Variables Upstream Middle stream Downstream
DO
(mg/L)
Macrobenthos
(no)
DO
(mg/L)
Macrobenthos
(no)
DO
(mg/L)
Macrobenthos
(no)
High tide 3.02 0 3.78 0 5.25 5.5
Low tide 2.04 1 2.06 2 3.94 10 Riverbank vegetation (acre) 135.72 199.21 388.85
89
Hypoxia and anoxia degrade bottom habitats through a wide suite of
mechanisms. Under conditions of limited oxygen at the bottom, rates of nitrogen and
phosphorous remineralization and sulfate reduction increase. The resulting
production of sulfide in combination with low oxygen can prove lethal to benthic.
Because benthic macrofauna serve as essential prey resources for demersal fishes,
sustained hypoxia can have significant trophic implications (Lin et al., 2006)
The poor diversity of benthic macroinvertebrate assemblages in Sungai Batu
Pahat generally because alteration of ecosystem structure and function in streams
through habitat homogenization, oxygen depletion, organic matter retention
decreasing, as well as ammonium and phosphate uptake velocity decreasing, that
shifts towards tolerant organisms (Thomas, 2004)
4.9.3 Distribution Pattern of Macrobenthos Due to pH
According to Table 4.22, macrobenthos community were less influenced by
pH value because the sediment of Sungai Batu Pahat was already disturbed by
human activities such as oil disposal and gravel that fallen from quarry nearby
(Simpson and Pedini, 1985). They added that, benthic activity in the water column
and sediment is primarily limited by the low availability of organic matter
characteristic of these ponds, and not so much by the low pH. Only the tolerant
species and a lot of bivalve fragment and detritus were found during study event.
Table 4.22: Numbers of macrobenthos as compared to pH
Location within the river
Variables Upstream Middle stream Downstream
pH
Macrobenthos
(no) pH
Macrobenthos
(no) pH
Macrobenthos
(no)
High tide 3.4 0 4.45 0 5.34 5.5 Low tide 3.54 1 3.87 2 5.78 10 Riverbank vegetation (acre) 135.72 199.21 388.85
CHAPTER V
CONCLUSION
5.1 Conclusion
The study of water quality and biodiversity at Sungai Batu Pahat has
achieved its objectives. Water quality was analyzed by using DOE-WQI and was
found that, water quality at Sungai Batu Pahat during high tide and low tide was
consistent from upstream towards downstream with class III at upstream, down to
class IV at middle stream and eventually increase to class III at downstream. From
land use analysis, the fluctuating of water quality at Sungai Batu Pahat is strongly
related to human activities especially by untreated sewage and waste disposal from
urban area, settlement and barter-trades jetties.
While, since we go through to each parameter analysis, the most influence
parameter that causes the deteriorating of water quality to class IV at middle stream
for high tide and low tide are organic and inorganic matter which can be seen at
BOD and COD analysis. During high tide, water quality is much better rather than
during low tide due to mixing of coastal water and freshwater that resulting dilution.
During low tide, water quality much worst because of polluted water injected to
estuaries from tributaries.
Generally, the distribution of planktonic life and macroinvertebrates within
study area was tidal and mangrove dependent. Biodiversity was found abundance at
downstream and present with low number and species at upstream and downstream
91
probably because lands use activities. Biodiversity that mostly found within study
area is tolerant species to low dissolved oxygen concentration and pH.
Although physical and chemical variables are commonly used to determine
water quality, these parameters by themselves can only express the conditions of
water at the moment of sampling. On the other hand, biological monitoring can give
information about the water conditions for a longer period. From the analysis of
water quality and biodiversity at Sungai Batu Pahat, can be concluded that Sungai
Batu Pahat still can support the aquatic life such as fish, zooplankton, phytoplankton
and macrobenthos even though only the abundance of tolerant species appeared due
to slightly polluted river water classification. The abundance species of diatom in
Sungai Batu Pahat indicates that mangrove in this area are in a good health (Prepas
and Charette, 2003; Holguin et al., 2005)
Furthermore, high commercial fish and demanding species (require high
quality of water to survive) such as a juvenile gizzard shad, rotifers zooplankton and
Biddulphia sp phytoplankton was found within study area were strongly support this
finding. Although the WQI shows low quality of water, the existing riverbank such
as mangrove and tidal changes play an important role in determining the abundance
of quality food and safety home for aquatic life. The decreasing of riverbank
vegetation in the future may reduce the present of aquatic life in Sungai Batu Pahat
This finding was similar to study that made by Hajisame and Chou (2003) at
Johor Strait, Peninsular Malaysia. They conclude that, although the Johor Strait is
heavily impacted, there are still some tolerant habitats that remain because of
existing patches of mangrove as well as act as an important ecosystem for a diverse
assemblage of juveniles and small-sized fish species.
5.2 Recommendation
There are a few measures which can be taken in order to improve the quality
of Sungai Batu Pahat in term of water and biodiversity such as:
92
(i) Relocated the squatters along the riverbank to another proper place to
stay;
(ii) Governments should issue and enforce legislation to control industrial
activities in the coastal zone. Such legislation would profitably be
accompanied by monitoring and should be enforced by authorized
government agencies;
(iii) Enhance the total area covered by mangroves. The easiest and least
expensive way to achieve this goal is to assist natural mangrove
colonization in sheltered coastal segments by providing or enhancing
seedling fluxes to the area, protecting seedlings from herbivory and
increasing propagule retention time with artificial shelters.
In order to improve the accuracy as well as the effectiveness of this study,
there are a few recommendation that should been follow such as;
(i) Added more sampling station and water quality parameter such as heavy
metals and phosphate;
(ii) Sampling event should be made longer period to identify the actual
distribution of planktonic life and benthic macroinvertebrates;
(iii) Detail study should be made on mangrove activities in order to achieved
actual nutrient contributor to biota growth.
REFERENCES
Abu Khair Mohammad Mohsin, Mohd. Azmi Ambak and Muhamad Nasir Abdul
Salam. (1993). “Malay, English, and Scientific Names of the Fishes of
Malaysia.” Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Science, Universiti Pertanian
Malaysia, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia: Occasional Publication No. 11.
Ahsen, Y., Erdogan, O.I., Yilmaz, N., Yilmaz, A.A. and Tas, S. (2006). “Changes in
Biodiversity of the Extremely Polluted Golden Horn Estuary Following the
Improvements in Water Quality.” Marine Pollution Bulletin. 52. 1209-1218.
Alfaro, A.C. (2004). “Benthic Macro-Invertebrate Community Composition within a
Mangrove/Seagrass Estuary in Northern New Zealand.” Estuarine, Coastal
and Shelf Science. 66. 97-110.
Alongi, D.M. (1986). “Quantitative Estimates of Benthic Protozoa in Tropical
Marine Systems Using Silica Gel: A Comparison of Methods.” Estuarine,
Coastal and Shelf Science. 4(23). 443-450.
Alongi, D.M. , Sasekumar A., Tirendia, F. and Dixona, P.(1998). “The Influence of
Stand Age on Benthic Decomposition and Recycling Of Organic Matter in
Managed Mangrove Forests of Malaysia.” Journal of Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology. 225. 197-218.
Alongi, D.M., Chong, V.C., Dixona, P., Sasekumar, A. and Tirendia, F. (2003). “The
Influence of Fish Cage Aquaculture on Pelagic Carbon Flow and Water
Chemistry in Tidally Dominated Mangrove Estuaries of Peninsular
Malaysia.” Marine Environmental Research. 55. 313–333.
94
Alongi, D.M., Tirendi, F. and Trott, L.A. (1999). “Rates and Pathways of Benthic
Mineralization in Extensive Shrimp Ponds of the Mekong Delta, Vietnam.”
Aquaculture.175. 269–292.
Alonso, E., Santos, A., Callejon, M. and Jimenez, J.C. (2003). “Speciation as a
Screening Tool for the Determination of Heavy Metal Surface Water
Pollution in the Guadiamar River Basin.” Chemosphere. 56. 561–570.
Ana, M. and Silva, B. (1994). “The Use of Water Chemistry and Benthic Diatom
Communities for Qualification of a Polluted Tropical River in Costa Rica.”
Institute of Botanik, University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
APHA (2000). “ Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater.”
21st Edition. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association.
Ardebili, O., Didar, P. and Soheilinia, S. (2006). “Distribution and Probable Origin
of Heavy Metals in Sediments of Bakhtegan Lake, Fars Province, Iran.”
Goldschmidt Conference Abstracts. Iran.
Ashkan, F. (2000). “Magnitud and Extent of the Metal Contamination in Hudson
River Estuary Surficial Bottom Sediment.” The City University of New York:
PhD Thesis. 61-215.
Ashton, E.C. (2002). “Mangrove Sesarmid Crab Feeding Experiments in Peninsular
Malaysia.” Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 273. 97–
119.
Ashton, E.C. and Macintosh, D.J. (2002). “Preliminary Assessment of the Plant
Diversity and Community Ecology of the Sematan Mangrove Forest,
Sarawak, Malaysia.” Forest Ecology and Management. 160. 111-129.
Azrina, M.Z., Yap, C.K., Rahim Ismail, A., Ismail, A., dan Tan, S.G. (2006).
“Anthropogenic Impacts on the Distribution and Biodiversity of Benthic
95
Macroinvertebrates and Water Quality of the Langat River, Peninsular
Malaysia.” Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 64. 337-347.
Bahadir, T., Bakan, G., Altas, L. and Buyukgungor, H. (2005). “The Investigation of
Lead Removal by Biosorption: An Application at Storage Battery Industry
Wastewaters.” Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety.
Balasubramaniam, T. (2002). “Mangroves of India.” Annamalai University Tamil
Nadu, India.
Bano, N., Nisa, M., Khan, N., Saleem, M., Harrison, P.J., Ahmed, S.I., Azam, F.
(1997). “Significance of Bacteria in the Flux of Organic Matter in the Tidal
Creeks of the Mangrove Ecosystem of the Indus River Delta, Pakistan.”
Marine Ecological Program. 157. 1– 12.
Bayen, S., Wurl, O., Karuppiah, S., Sivasothi, N., Lee H. K. and Obbard, J.P. (2004).
“Persistent Organic Pollutants in Mangrove Food Webs in Singapore.”
Chemosphere .61. 303–313.
Bouillon, S., Koedamb, N., Baeyensa, W., Satyanarayanac, B. and Dehairsa, F.
(2002). “Selectivity of Subtidal Benthic Invertebrate Communities for Local
Microalgal Production in an Estuarine Mangrove Ecosystem during the Post-
Monsoon Period.” Journal of Sea Research. 51. 133– 144.
Butcher, J.T., Stewart P.M. and Simon, T.P. (2003). “A Benthic Community Index
for streams in the Northern Lakes and Forests Ecoregion.” Ecological
Indicators. 3. 181–193.
Capo, S., Sottolichio, A., Brenon, I., Castaing, P. and Ferry, L. (2005). “Morphology,
Hydrography and Sediment Dynamics in a Mangrove Estuary: The Konkoure
Estuary, Guinea.”Marine Geology .23. 199-215.
96
Carlos, S.L. and Marin, A. (2006). “Benthic Recovery during Open Sea Fish
Farming Abatement in Western Mediterranean, Spain.” Marine
Environmental Research. 62. 374–387.
Cech, T.V (2003). “Principles of Water Resources: History, Development,
Management, and Policy.” United State of America: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Chapman, M.G. and Tolhurst, T.J. (2006). “Relationships between Benthic
Macrofauna and Biogeochemical Properties of Sediments at Different Spatial
Scales and Among Different Habitats in Mangrove Forests.” Jounal of
Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology .343. 96-109.
Cheevaporn, V. and Menasveta, P. (2003). “Water Pollution and Habitat Degradation
in the Gulf of Thailand.” Marine Pollution Bulletin. 47. 43–51.
Chen, C.W., Kao, C.M, Chen, C.F. and Dong, C.D. (2006). “Distribution and
Accumulation of Heavy Metals in the Sediments of Kaohsiung Harbor,
Taiwan.” Chemosphere. 66. 1431–1440.
Chindah, A.C. and Braide, S.A. (2001). “Meiofauna Occurrence and Distribution in
Different Substrate Types of Bonny Brackish Wetland of the Niger Delta.”
Journal of Applied Sciences & Environmental Management. 33-41.
Chipman, W.A, J (1934). “The Role of pH in Determining the Toxicity of
Ammonium Compounds”. University of Missouri, Columbia: Ph.D. Thesis.
Christensen, B. (1976). “Biomass and primary production of Rhizophora apiculata
Bl. in a mangrove in southern Thailand.” Aquatic Botany. 4. 43-52.
Christensen, B. and Andersen, S.W. (1976). “Seasonal Growth of Mangrove Trees in
Southern Thailand.:The phenology of Rhizophora apiculata Bl.” Aquatic
Botany. 3. 281-286.
97
Clough, B., Tan, D.T., Phuong, D.X. and Buu, D.C. (2000). “Canopy Leaf Area
Index and Litter Fall in Stands of the Mangrove Rhizophora Apiculata of
Different Age in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam.” Aquatic Botany. 66. 311–320.
Colombini, I., Berti, R., Ercolini, A., Nocita, A. and Chelazzi, L. (1994).
“Environmental Factors Influencing the Zonation and Activity Patterns of a
Population of Periophthalmus Sobrinus Eggert in a Kenyan Mangrove.”
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 190. 135-149.
Corami, A., Mignardi, S. and Ferrini, V. (2006). “Copper and Zinc Decontamination
from Single- And Binary-Metal Solutions Using Hydroxyapatite.” Journal of
Hazardous Materials.
Corbitt, R.A. (1999). “Standard Handbook of Environmental Engineering.2nd Ed.
New York: McGraw Hill.
Costanzo, S.D., O’Donohue, M.J. and Dennison, W.C. (2004). “Assessing the
Influence and Distribution of Shrimp Pond Effluent in a Tidal Mangrove
Creek in North-East Australia.” Marine Pollution Bulletin. 48. 514–525.
Dalman, O., Demirak, A. and Balcı, A. (2004). “Determination of Heavy Metals (Cd,
Pb) and Trace Elements (Cu, Zn) in Sediments and Fish of the Southeastern
Aegean Sea (Turkey) by Atomic Absorption Spectrometry.” Food Chemistry.
95. 157–162.
Das, P.K., Micheal, R.G., and Gupta, A. (1996). “Zooplankton Community Structure
of Lake Tasek, a Tectonic Lake in Garo hills, India.” Tropical Ecology.
37(2). 257-263.
Davide, V., Pardos, M., Diserens, J., Ugazio, G., Thomas, R. and Dominik, J. (2002).
“Characterisation of Bed Sediments and Suspension of the River Po (Italy)
During Normal and High Flow Conditions.” Water Research. 37. 2847–2864.
98
Delizo, L., Walker, O.S.J. and Hall, J. (2005). “Taxonomic Composition and Growth
Rates of Phytoplankton Assemblages at the Subtropical Convergence East of
New Zealand.” Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences. 3. 32-54.
Demirak, A., Yilmaz, F., Tuna, A.L. and Ozdemir, N. (2005). “Heavy Metals in
Water, Sediment and Tissues of Leuciscus Cephalus from a Stream in
Southwestern Turkey.” Chemosphere. 63. 1451–1458.
Department of Fisheries. (2005). Annual Report of Fisheries at Johor for 2005.
Department of Fisheries, Malaysia.
Desa, E., Zingde, M.D., Vethamony, P., Babu, M.T., D’Sousa, S.N. and Verlecar,
X.N. (2005). “Dissolved Oxygen––A Target Indicator in Determining Use of
the Gulf of Kachchh Waters.” Marine Pollution Bulletin. 50. 73–79.
Desai, K.N. and Untawale, A.G. (2002). “Sand Dune Vegetation of Goa:
Conservation and Management.” Botanical Society of Goa, India.101 pp.
Devi, J.S. and Lakshminaryana. J.S.S. (1989). “Studies on the Phytoplankton and the
Water Quality of Malpaque Bay Prince Edward Island Canada.” Proc N S
Institution Science .39. 39 – 50.
DOE (1986). “Classification of Malaysian Rivers.” Department of Environment,
Malaysia.
DOE (1986). “Water Quality Criteria and Standards for Malaysia.” Department of
Environment, Malaysia.
DOE (2001). Malaysia Environmental Quality Report 2000. Department of
Environment, Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment, Malaysia:
Maskha Sdn. Bhd. Kuala Lumpur, 86pp.
99
Donald, A.M., Glibert, P.M. and Burkholder, J.M. (2002). “Harmful Algal Blooms
and Eutrophication: Nutrient Sources, Composition, and Consequences.”
Estuaries. 25. 704–726.
Dutrieux, E., Martin, F. and Guelorget, O. (1988). “Oil Pollution and Polychaeta in
an Estuarine Mangrove Community.” Oil and Chemical Pollution. 5. 239-
262.
Dwight, R.H. (2001). “Health and Economic Impact of Coastal Water Pollution in
North Orange Country, California: A Multi-Disciplinary.” University of
California, Irvine: PhD Thesis.
Effler, S. W., MaryGail Perkins, and Bruce A. Wagner (1991). “Optics of Little
Sodus Bay.” Journal of Great Lakes Research. 17(1).109-119.
Fabricius, K., Glenn, D., McCook, L., Turak, E., Williams, D.M. (2005). “Changes
in Algal, Coral and Fish Assemblages along Water Quality Gradients on the
Inshore Great Barrier Reef.” Marine Pollution Bulletin. 51. 384–398.
Fatimah Mohamad Noor, Hadibah Ismail, Mohamad Noor Hj. Salleh dan Abd. Aziz
Ibrahim (1969). “Hidologi Kejuruteraan.” Terjemahan Daripada Wilson, E.M
(1992) “Engineering Hydrology.” Johor Bahru: Unit Penerbitan Akademik,
UTM.
Franca, S., Vinagre, C., Ca, A.I. and Cabral, H.N. (2005). “Heavy Metal
Concentrations in Sediment, Benthic Invertebrates and Fish in Three Salt
Marsh Areas Subjected to Different Pollution Loads in the Tagus Estuary
(Portugal).” Baseline / Marine Pollution Bulletin. 50. 993–1018.
Gammons, C.H., Slotton, D.G., Gerbrandt, B., Weight, W., Young, C.A., McNearny,
R.L., Camac, E., Calderon, R. and Tapia, H. (2005). “Mercury
Concentrations of Fish, River Water, and Sediment in the Rıo Ramis-Lake
Titicaca Watershed, Peru.” Science of the Total Environment. 368. 7– 648.
100
Garrity, S.D., Levings, S.C. and Burns, K.A. (1994). “The Galeta Oil Spill. I. Long-
term Effects on the Physical Structure of the Mangrove Fringe.” Estuarine,
Coastal and Shelf Science. 38. 327-348.
Gbemisola, A.A.O. (2001). “Zooplankton Associations and Environmental Factors in
Ogunpa and Ona Rivers, Nigeria.” Review Biological Tropic. 51(2). 391-398.
Ghrefat, H.and Yusuf, N. (2006). “Assessing Mn, Fe, Cu, Zn, and Cd Pollution in
Bottom Sediments of Wadi Al-Arab Dam, Jordan.” Chemosphere. 65. 2114–
2121.
Gilbert, A.J. and Janssen, R. (1996). “Use of Environmental Functions to
Communicate the Values of a Mangrove Ecosystem under Different
Management Regimes.” Ecological Economics. 25. 323–346.
Gonzalez, R., Araújo, M.F., Burdloff, D., Cachão, M., Cascalho, J., Corredeira, C. J.
Dias, M.A., Fradique, C., Ferreira, J., Gomes, C., Machado, A., Mendes, I.
and Rocha, F. (2006). “Sediment and Pollutant Transport in the Northern
Gulf Of Cadiz: A Multi-Proxy Approach.” Journal of Marine Systems.
Hadil Rajali and Gambang (2000). “Ecological Balance of Batang Lupar Estuary:
Potential Impacts and Mitigations.” Fisheries Research Institute Sarawak
Branch. 11pp.
Hajisamae, S. and Chou, L.M. (2003). “Do Shallow Water Habitats of an Impacted
Coastal Strait Serve as Nursery Grounds for Fish?.” Estuarine, Coastal and
Shelf Science. 56. 281–290.
Halliday, I.A. and Young, W.R. (1996). “Density, Biomass and Species Composition
of Fish in a Subtropical Rhizophora Stylosa Mangrove Forest.” Marine and
Freshwater Research. 47. 609–615.
101
Harris, G.P. and Piccinin, B.B. (1983). “Physical Variability and Phytoplankton
Communities. Temporal Changes in the Phytoplankton Community of a
Physically Variable Lake.” Arch Hydrobiol. 89(4). 447-473.
Harrison, I.J. and Senou, H. (1997). “Order Mugiliformes. Mugilidae. Mullets.” In
Carpenter, K.E. and Niem, V.H. FAO species identification guide for fishery
purposes. The living marine resources of the Western Central Pacific. Vol. 4.
Bony fishes part 2 Mugilidae to Carangidae). FAO, Rome.
Hashim A.A.S, Ghanem, E.H. and Saleh, K.M. (2005). “Bacterial Community and
Some Physico-Chemical Characteristics in a Subtropical Mangrove
Environment in Bahrain.” Marine Pollution Bulletin. 50. 147–155.
Heininger, P., Hoss, S., Claus, E., Pelzer, J. and Traunspurger, W. (2006).
“Nematode Communities in Contaminated River Sediments.” Environmental
Pollution. 146. 4 – 76.
Hernandez-Romero, A.H., Hernandez, C.T., Malo, E.A. and Bello-Mendoza, R.
(2004). “Water Quality and Presence of Pesticides in a Tropical Coastal
Wetland in Southern Mexico.” Marine Pollution Bulletin. 48. 11- 41.
Hoai, T.L., Guiral, D. and Rougier, C. (2006). “Seasonal Change of Community
Structure and Size Spectra of Zooplankton in the Kaw River Estuary (French
Guiana).” Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science. 68. 47-61.
Holguin, G., Zamorano, P.G., De-Bashan, L.E., Mendoza, R., Amador, E., and
Bashan, Y. (2006). “Mangrove Health in an Arid Environment Encroached
by Urban Development—A Case Study.” Science of the Total Environment.
363. 260– 274.
Homens, M.M., Stevens, R.L., Abrantesa, F. and Cato, I. (2005). “Heavy Metal
Assessment for Surface Sediments from Three Areas of the Portuguese
Continental Shelf.” Continental Shelf Research. 26. 1184–1205.
102
Huang, L., Tan, Y., Song, X., Huang, X., Wang, H., Zhang, S., Dong. J. and Chen,
R. (2003). “The Status of the Ecological Environment and a Proposed
Protection Strategy in Sanya Bay, Hainan Island, China.” Marine Pollution
Bulletin. 47. 180–186.
IUCN (2006). “Red List for Threatened Species.” International Union for
Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, United Kingdom.
Jabatan Laut Malaysia (2006) “Times and Heights of High and Low Waters for
Kuala Batu Pahat, Johor Darul Takzim”. Jabatan Laut Malaysia.
Jack, R.P.E. (2006). “Nutrient Standards for Iowa Lakes: An Overview.” Iowa
Department of Natural Resources. June 2006.
Jacob, P.J., Zarba, M.A. and Mohammad, O.S. (1982). “Water Quality
Characteristics of Selected Beaches of Kuwait”. Indian Journal. 11. 233–8.
Jarviea, H.P., Neala, U.C., Smart, R., Owen, R., Fraser, Forbes, D.I. and Wade, A.
(2006). “Use of Continuous Water Quality Records for Hydrograph
Separation and to Assess Short-Term Variability and Extremes in Acidity and
Dissolved Carbon Dioxide for The River Dee, Scotland.” The Science of the
Total Environment. 265. 85-98.
Jha, P. and Barat, S. (2003). “Hydrobiological Study of Lake Mirik in Darjeeling,
Himalayas.” Journal of Environmental Biology. 24(3). 339-344.
Johannsson, O.E., Dermott, R.M., Feldkamp, R., and Moore, J.E. (1986). “Lake
Ontario USA Canada Long-Term Biological Monitoring Program Report for
1981 and 1982.” Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and Aquatic
Sciences. 207pp.
John D.M. and Lawson, G.W. (1990). “A Review of Mangrove and Coastal
Ecosystems in West Africa and Their Possible Relationships.” Estuarine,
Coastal and Shelf Science. 31. 505-518.
103
Jones, A.B., O’Donohue, M. J., Udy, J. and Dennison, W. C. (2000). “Assessing
Ecological Impacts of Shrimp and Sewage Effluent: Biological Indicators
with Standard Water Quality Analyses.” Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf
Science. 52. 91–109.
Kailola, P.J.1(1987). “The Fishes of Papua New Guinea: A Revised and Annotated
Checklist.” Research Section, Dept. of Fisheries and Marine Resources,
Papua New Guinea: Scorpaenidae to Callionymidae. Vol. II. Research
Bulletin No. 41.
Kathiresan, K. and Bingham, B. L. (2001). “Biology of Mangroves and Mangrove
Ecosystems.” Advances in Marine Biology. 40. 81-251.
Kehrig, H.A., Pinto, F.N., Moreira, I. and Malm, O. (2003). “Heavy Metals and
Methylmercury in a Tropical Coastal Estuary and a Mangrove in Brazil.”
Organic Geochemistry. 34. 661–669.
Khan, M.A. and Rao, I.S. (1981). “Zooplankton in the Evaluation of Pollution” Paper
presented at WHO workshop on biological indicators and indices of
environmental pollution. Cent.Bd.Prev.Cont.Poll/Osm.Univ, Hyderabad,
India.
Kitheka, J.U., Ohowa, B.O., Mwashote, B.M., Shimbira, W.S., Mwaluma, J.M. and
Kazungu, J.M. (1996). “Water Circulation Dynamics, Water Column
Nutrients and Plankton Productivity in a Well-Flushed Tropical Bay in
Kenya.” Journal of Sea Research. 35(4). 257-268.
Kristensen, E., Holmer, M. and Bussarawit, N. (1991). “Benthic Metabolism and
Sulfate Reduction in a Southeast Asian Mangrove Swamp.” Marine
Ecological Program. 73. 93–103.
104
Lampman, G.G. and Makarewicz, J.C. (1999). “The Phytoplankton and Zooplankton
Link in the Lake Ontario Food Web.” Journal of Great Lakes Research.
25(2). 239-249.
Leach, G. J. and Burgin, S. (1985). “Litter Production and Seasonality of Mangroves
in Papua New Guinea.” Aquatic Botany. 23. 215-224.
Lee, S.Y. (1999). “The Effect of Mangrove Leaf Litter Enrichment on Macrobenthic
Colonization of Defaunated Sandy Substrates.” Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf
Science. 49. 703–712.
Lin, J., Xie, L., Pietrafesa, L.J., Shen, J., Mallin, M.A. and Durako, M. J. (2004).
“Dissolved Oxygen Stratification in Two Micro-Tidal Partially-Mixed
Estuaries.” Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. 70. 423-437.
Loneragan, N.R., Adnan, N.A., Connolly, R.M. and Manson, F.J. (2005). “Prawn
Landings and Their Relationship with the Extent of Mangroves and Shallow
Waters in Western Peninsular Malaysia.” Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf
Science. 63. 187–200.
Low, K.S. (2007). “Water Quality Study of Sungai Batu Pahat.” Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru: Undergraduate Thesis.
Lung, D.S. (2001). “Kajian Kualiti Air Sungai Kempas.” Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia, Johor Bahru: Undergraduate Thesis.
Luoma, S.N. and Cloern, J.E. (1980). “The Impact of Waste-Water Discharge on
Biological Communities in San Francisco Bay.” Marine and Freshwater
Research. 45. 137-160.
Maketab Mohamad (1993). “Problems in the Management of Rivers for Drinking
Water Supply: Case Studies.” International Symposium Management of
Rivers for the Future, Kuala Lumpur. 16-18 November 1993.
105
Marchand, C., Lallier-Verge`s, E., Baltzer, F., Albe´ric, P., Cossa, D. and Baillif, P.
(2005). “Heavy Metals Distribution in Mangrove Sediments along the Mobile
Coastline of French Guiana.” Marine Chemistry. 98. 1 – 17.
Marina Majid (2000). “Merekabentuk Saiz dan Kedudukan Sungai Skudai.”
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru: Undergraduate Thesis.
Masson, M., Blanc, G. and Schäfer, J. (2006). “Geochemical Signals and Source
Contributions to Heavy Metal (Cd, Zn, Pb, Cu) Fluxes into the Gironde
Estuary via Its Major Tributaries.” Science of the Total Environment. 370.
133 – 146.
McCaull, J. and Crossland, J. (1974). “Water Polution.” Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,
Inc., USA.
Metcalf and Eddy. Inc. (2004). “Wastewater Engineering Treatment, Disposal and
Reuse.” 3rd Ed. New York:McGraw-Hill Publishing Co. Ltd.
Meziane, T. and Tsuchiya, M. (2001). “Organic Matter in a Subtropical Mangrove-
Estuary Subjected to Wastewater Discharge: Origin and Utilisation by Two
Macrozoobenthic Species.” Journal of Sea Research. 47. 1–11.
MKMA (1996) “Malaysian Knitting Manufacturers Association 's Statistics:
Malaysian Textile Industry”, Asia Electronic Publication.
Morrisey, D.J., Skilleter, G.A., Ellisa, J.I., Burns, B.R., Kempa, C.E. and Burta, K.
(2001). “(Avicennia Marina Var. Australasica) Stands of Different Ages in
New Zealand.” Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science .56. 581–592.
MPBP (2002) “Batu Pahat District Draft Local Plan”. Majlis Perbandaran Batu
Pahat, Johor.
Nagelkerken I., Veld, G.V.D., Gorissen, M.W., Meijer, G.J., Hof, T.V. and Hartog,
C.D. (1999). “Importance of Mangroves, Seagrass Beds and the Shallow
106
Coral Reef as a Nursery for Important Coral Reef Fishes, Using a Visual
Census Technique.” Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. 51. 31– 44.
Nathanson, J.A (1986). “Technology and Pollution Control.” United State of
America: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Ng, P.K. L. and Sivasothi, N. (2001). “A Guide to Mangroves of Singapore.” Vol. I.
The Ecosystem and Plant Diversity and Vol. II: Animal Diversity. Raffles
Museum of Biodiversity Research, The National University of Singapore and
The Singapore Science Centre.
Nielsen, O.I., Kristensen, E. and Macintosh, D.J. (2002). “Impact of Fiddler Crabs
(Uca Spp.) on Rates and Pathways of Benthic Mineralization in Deposited
Mangrove Shrimp Pond Waste.” Journal of Experimental Marine Biology
and Ecology. 289. 59– 81.
Nor Azman Kasan (2006) “Kualiti Air Sungai berdasarkan Analisis Kimia dan
Kepelbagaian Alga” Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru: MEng
Thesis.
Pandey, J. and Verma, A. (2004). “The Influence of Catchment on Chemical and
Biological Characteristics of Two Freshwater Tropical Lakes of Southern
Rajasthan.” Journal of Environmental Biology. 25(1). 81-87.
Peavy, H.S., Rowe, D.R. and Tchubanoglous, G. (1986). “Environmental
Engineering”. McGraw-Hill, Inc: New York.
Pekey, H. (2006). “The Distribution and Sources of Heavy Metals in Izmit Bay
Surface Sediments Affected By a Polluted Stream.” Marine Pollution
Bulletin. 52. 1197–1208.
Prepas, E.E. and Charette, T. (2003). “The Bioindex, or Long Term Biological
Monitoring Program, Worldwide Eutrophication of Water Bodies: Causes,
Concerns, Controls.” Treatise Geochemistry. 9. 11– 31.
107
Putz, F.E. and Chan, H.T. (2003). “Tree Growth, Dynamics, and Productivity in a
Mature Mangrove Forest in Malaysia.” Forest Ecology and Management.
17. 211-230.
Ramachandra, T.V., Rishiram, R. and Karthick, B. (2006). “Zooplankton as
Bioindicators: Hydro-Biological Investigations in Selected Bangalore Lakes
2006.” Centre for Ecological Sciences Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.
Rao, N.G.S., David, A., Raghavan S.L., and Rahman, M.P. (1982). “Observations of
Limnology of a Peninsular Perennial Tank.”Journal Agriculture Science. 16.
75-84.
Raut, D., Ganesh, T., Murty, N.V.S.S. and Raman, A.V. (2004). “Macrobenthos of
Kakinada Bay in the Godavari Delta, East Coast of India: Comparing
Decadal Changes.” Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. 62. 609–620.
Ray, A.K., Tripathy, S.C., Patra, S. and Sarma V.V. (2005). “Assessment of
Godavari Estuarine Mangrove Ecosystem Throughtrace Metal Studies.”
Environment International. 32. 219-223.
Rieumont, S.O., De La Rosa, D., Lima, L., Graham, D.W., Alessandro, K.D. and
Borroto, J. (2004). “Assessment of Heavy Metal Levels in Almendares River
Sediments—Havana City, Cuba.” Francisco Martıneza, J. Sanchez Water
Research. 39. 3945–3953.
Rojali Hj Othman (1995). “Kajian Kualiti Air Sungai Batu Pahat, Johor.” Universiti
Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru: Undegraduate Thesis.
Ronnback, P., Troell, M., Kautsky, N. and Primavera, J. H. (1998). “Distribution
Pattern of Shrimps and Fish Among Avicennia and Rhizophora Microhabitats
in the Pagbilao Mangroves, Philippines.” Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf
Science. 48. 223–234.
108
Rougier, C., Pourriot, R., Hoai, L.T.and Guiral, D. (2004). “Ecological Patterns of
the Rotifer Communities in the Kaw River Estuary (French Guiana).”
Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science. 63. 83–91.
Sarkar, S.K, Saha, M., Takada, H., Bhattacharya, A., Mishra, P. and Bhattacharya, B.
(2005). “Water Quality Management in the Lower Stretch of the River
Ganges, East Coast of India: An Approach through Environmental
Education.” Journal of Cleaner Production. 1-9.
Satumanatpan, S. and Keough, M.J. (2001). “Roles of Larval Supply and Behavior in
Determining Settlement of Barnacles in a Temperate Mangrove Forest.”
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 260.133–153.
Schaffelke, B., Mellors, J. and Duke, N.C. (2005). “Water Quality in the Great
Barrier Reef Region: Responses of Mangrove, Seagrass and Macroalgal
Communities.” Marine Pollution Bulletin. 51. 279–296.
Schiff, K. and Bay, S. (2003). “Impacts of Stormwater Discharges on the Nearshore
Benthic Environment of Santa Monica Bay.” Marine Environmental
Research. 56. 225–243.
Segura, R., Arancibia, V., Zúñiga, M.C. and Pastén, P. (2005). “Distribution of
Copper, Zinc, Lead and Cadmium Concentrations in Stream Sediments from
the Mapocho River in Santiago, Chile.” Journal of Geochemical Exploration.
91. 71–80.
Seidel, H., Gorsch, K. and Schumichen, A. (2005). “Effect of Oxygen Limitation on
Solid-Bed Bioleaching of Heavy Metals from Contaminated Sediments.”
Chemosphere. 65. 102-109.
Sharma, R.K., Agrawal, M. and Marshall, F. (2005). “Heavy Metal Contamination of
Soil and Vegetables in Suburban Areas of Varanasi, India.” Ecotoxicology
and Environmental Safety. 66. 258–266.
109
Shen, D.S., He, R., Liu, X.W. and Long, Y. (2006). “Effect Of Pentachlorophenol
and Chemical Oxygen Demand Mass Concentrations in Influent on
Operational Behaviors of Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB)
Reactor.” Journal of Hazardous Materials. 136. 645–653.
Sheridan, P. (1997). “Benthos of Adjacent Mangrove, Seagrass and Non-vegetated
Habitats in Rookery Bay, Florida, U.S.A.” Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf
Science. 44. 455–469.
Sholkovitz, E.R. (1985) “Redox Related Geochemical in Lakes: Alkali Metals,
Alkaline Earth Element and 137Cs. In Stum, W. Chemical Processes in
lakes” John Wiley, New York.
Shtiza, A., Swennen, R. and Tashko, A. (2004). “Chromium and Nickel Distribution
in Soils, Active River, Overbank Sediments and Dust around the Burrel
Chromium Smelter (Albania).” Journal of Geochemical Exploration. 87. 92–
108.
Silva, C.A.R., Silva, D.A.P. and Oliveira D.S.R. (2006). “Concentration, Stock and
Transport Rate of Heavy Metals in a Tropical Red Mangrove, Natal, Brazil.”
Marine Chemistry. 99. 2 –11.
Simpson, H.J. and Pedini, M. (1985). “Brackishwater Aquaculture in the Tropics:
The Problem of Acid Sulfate Soils.” FAO Fisheries Circular.
Smith, J.M. (2004). “Water Quality Trends in the Blackwater River Watershed
Canaan Valley, West Virginia.” West Virginia University: Master of Science
Theses. 8-80.
Spellman, F.R (1999). “Water Treatment and Sanitation: A Handbook of Simple
Method for Rural Areas in Developing Countries.” Vol.1- Fundamental
Level. Pennsylvania. U.S.A : Technomic Publishing Company, Inc.
110
Tam, N.F.Y. and Wong, Y.S. (2000). “Spatial Variation of Heavy Metals in Surface
Sediments of Hong Kong Mangrove Swamps.” Environmental Pollution.
110. 195 -205.
Tam, N.F.Y., Wong, Y.S., Lan, C.Y. and Wang, L.N. (1998). “Litter Production and
Decomposition in a Subtropical Mangrove Swamp Receiving Wastewater.”
Journal of Experiment In Marine Biological Ecology. 226. 1 –18.
Tarim, S. (2002). “ Relationships Among Fish Populations, Species Assemblages,
And Environmental Factors On A Heterogeneous Floodplain Landscape.”
Texas A&M University: PhD Thesis.
Terbutt, T.H.Y. (1983). “Principles of Water Quality Control” England: Pergamon
Press.
Thampanya, U., Vermaat, J.E., Sinsakul, S. and Panapitukkul, N. (2005). “Coastal
Erosion and Mangrove Progradation of Southern Thailand.” Estuarine,
Coastal and Shelf Science. 68. 75 – 85.
Thévenot, D.R., Moilleron, R., Lestel, L., Gromaire, M.C., Rocher, V., Cambier, P.,
Bonté, P., Colin J.L., Pontevès, C.D. and Meybeck, M. (2003). “Critical
Budget of Metal Sources and Pathways in the Seine River Basin (1994–2003)
For Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Ni, Pb and Zn.” Science of the Total Environment.
Thomas, H.II. (2004). “Relationship between Macroinvertebrate Assemblages and
Physicochemical Factor in Illinois Stream: Implications for Bioassessment
Methodologies and the Adjudication of Impairment.” B.S. Southern Illonois
University: MSc Thesis.
Turgut, C. (2002). “The Contamination with Organochlorine Pesticides and Heavy
Metals in Surface Water in Kucuk Menderes River in Turkey, 2000–2002.”
Environment International. 29. 29– 32.
111
Uni-technologies Sdn. Bhd. (2006). The DEIA Report of the Proposed Development
of Port, Marine and Riverine Facilities on Lots PTD 504 and Lots 1668 at
Sungai Batu Pahat for Second Port Logistic Sdn. Bhd.
UM-DOE. (1986). “Classification of Malaysian Rivers.” Vol.I. Executive Summary.
Final Report. Department of Environment, Ministry of Science, Technology
and Environment, Malaysia. Consultant Group on Water Quality. Institute of
Advance Studies, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 5-13.
USEPA (2006). “Estuarine and Coastal Marine Waters: Bioassessment and
Biocriteria Technical Guidance.” United State Environmental Protect
Agency, Washington DC, USA.
USEPA (1980). “Water Quality Criteria Documents: Availability. USEPA,. Federal
Register 45(231). Part V.
Vance, D.J., Haywood, M.D.E., Heales, D.S., Kenyon, R. A., Loneragan, N.R. and
Pendrey, R.C. (1996). “How Far Do Prawns and Fish Move into Mangroves?
Distribution of Juvenile Banana Prawns Penaeus Merguiensis and Fish in a
Tropical Mangrove Forest in Northern Australia.” Marine Ecology Progress
Series. 131. 115–124.
Victor D.V., Kevin, G., Dan, M., Robin, W. and Robert, H. (2006). “Survey of
Zooplankton Community Structure and Abundance in Agriculture-dominated
Waterways in the Lower Sacramento River Watershed.” University of
California.
Vincent, C. (2007). “The Faunistic Composition of Lot 504 and PTD 1668 Located
On the Northern Side of the River Bank of Sg. Batu Pahat.” Faculty of Civil
Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Walters, B.B. (2005). “Ecological Effects of Small-Scale Cutting of Philippine
Mangrove Forests.” Forest Ecology and Management. 206. 331–348.
112
Wang, S.T., McMillan, A.F. and Chen, B.H. (1978) “Dispersion of Pollutants in
Channels with Non Uniform Velocity Distribution” Water Research, The
Journal of the International Association on water Pollution Research. 12.
389-395: Pergamon Press, England.
Weisse, T. and Stadler, P. (2006). “Effect of pH on Growth, Cell Volume, and
Production of Freshwater Ciliates, and Implications for Their Distribution.”
Limnology and Oceanography. 51(4). 1708–1715.
Xu, Q.J., Nian, Y.G., Jin, X.C., Yan, C.Z., Liu, J. and Jiang, G.M. (2006). “Effects of
Chitosan on Growth of an Aquatic Plant (Hydrilla Verticillata) in Polluted
Waters with Different Chemical Oxygen Demands.” Journal of
Environmental Sciences. 19. 217-221.
Yılmaz, F., O¨ zdemir, N., Demirak, A. and Tuna, A.L. (2005). “Analytical,
Nutritional and Clinical Methods: Heavy Metal Levels in Two Fish Species
Leuciscus Cephalus and Lepomis Gibbosus.” Food Chemistry. 100. 830–835.
Yin, X., Liu, X., Sun, L., Zhu, R., Xie, Z. and Wang, Y. (2006). “A 1500-Year
Record of Lead, Copper, Arsenic, Cadmium, Zinc Level in Antarctic Seal
Hairs and Sediments.” Science of the Total Environment. 371. 252–257.
Zettler, M.L., Schiedek, D. and Bobertz, B. (2007). “Benthic Biodiversity Indices
versus Salinity Gradient in the Southern Baltic Sea.” Marine Pollution
Bulletin. 55. 258–270.
Zhang, X., Sun, H., Zhang, Z. Niu, Q., Chen, Y. and Crittenden, J.C. (2006).
“Enhanced Bioaccumulation of Cadmium in Carp in the Presence of
Titanium Dioxide Nanoparticles.” Chemosphere. 67. 160–166.
114 APPENDIX A
Data of Fish
Table A1:Types of fish landed at Kg Sungai Suloh fishing jetty.
Family Species Local Common
Ariidae Arius thallasinus Duri pulutan Catfish Arius arius Pedukang Catfish Arius maculatus Duri Catfish Cynoglossidae Gynoglossus arel Lidah Large scale tongue sole Plotosidae Plotosus canius Sembilang Canine catfish eel
Polynemidae Eleutheronem
tetradactylum Senagin Fourfingers threadfin Dasyatidae Dasyatis sp Pari Stingray Mugillidae Liza vaigiensis Loban Squaretail mullet Mugil sp Belanak Mullets
Scombroidae Scomberomorus
commerson Tenggiri batang Barred spanish mackerel Scomberomorus gittatus Tenggiri papan Spotted spanish mackerel Sciaenidae Otolithoides biauritus Gelam jarang gigi Bronze croaker Otolithes ruber Tengkerong Tiger-toothed croaker Stromateidae Pampus argenteus Bawal puteh Silver pomfret Pampus chinensis Bawal tambak Chinese silver pomfret Carangidae Parastromateus niger Bawal hitam Black pomfret Scomeroides tala Talang Barred queenfish Lutjanidae Lutjanus sp Merah Red snapper Lutjanus johnii Jenahak Johni snapper Serranidae Epinephalus sp Kerapu Groupers Tetradontidae Lagacephalus wheeli Buntal pisang Toadfish Centropomidae Lates calcarifer Siakap Giant sea perch Muraenesocidae Muraenesox cinereus Malong Pike conger eel Penaeidae Udang Penaeid shrimps Portunidae Portunus pelagicus Ketan renjong Swimming crab
115 APPENDIX A
Data of Fish
Table A2: Types of fish landed at Teluk Wawasan fishing jetty.
Family Species Local Common
Ariidae Arius thallasinus Duri pulutan Catfish Arius arius Pedukang Catfish Arius maculatus Duri Catfish Cynoglossidae Gynoglossus arel Lidah Large scale tongue sole Plotosidae Plotosus canius Sembilang Canine catfish eel Polynemidae Eleutheronem tetradactylum Senagin Fourfingers threadfin Dasyatidae Dasyatis sp Pari Stingray Mugillidae Liza vaigiensis Loban Squaretail mullet Mugil sp Belanak Mullets Scombroidae Scomberomorus commerson Tenggiri batang Barred spanish mackerel Scomberomorus gittatus Tenggiri papan Spotted spanish mackerel
Sciaenidae Otolithoides biauritus
Gelam jarang gigi Bronze croaker
Otolithes ruber Tengkerong Tiger-toothed croaker Stromateidae Pampus argenteus Bawal puteh Silver pomfret Pampus chinensis Bawal tambak Chinese silver pomfret Carangidae Parastromateus niger Bawal hitam Black pomfret Scomeroides tala Talang Barred queenfish Lutjanidae Lutjanus sp Merah Red snapper Lutjanus johnii Jenahak Johni snapper Serranidae Epinephalus sp Kerapu Groupers Tetradontidae Lagacephalus wheeli Buntal pisang Toadfish Centropomidae Lates calcarifer Siakap Giant sea perch Muraenesocidae Muraenesox cinereus Malong Pike conger eel Penaeidae Udang Penaeid shrimps Portunidae Portunus pelagicus Ketan renjong Swimming crab
116 APPENDIX B
Indices of species richness and evenness for Zooplankton
Table B1: Mean total biomass pf zooplankton (mg/m3), species richness,
Margalef index (D) and Shannon-Weiner index (H’), and eveness Pielou’s index
(J’) during high tide.
Table B2: Mean total biomass pf zooplankton (mg/m3), species richness,
Margalef index (D) and Shannon-Weiner index (H’), and eveness Pielou’s index
(J’) during low tide.
Site Wet Biomass D H' J'
mg/m3
Upstream 79.09 0.73 0.31 0.16 Middle stream 53.68 1.05 0.35 0.16 Downstream 115.6 1.41 1.32 0.52
Site Wet Biomass D H' J'
mg/m3
Upstream 44.85 0.37 0.30 0.21
Middle stream 44.53 0.37 0.21 0.16
Downstream 961.16 1.25 1.2 0.43
117 APPENDIX C
ANOVA analysis
Table C1: ANOVA analysis between distance and Water Quality Index (WQI)
during high tide with 95 % confident level (P <0.05)
Anova: Two-Factor Without Replication
SUMMARY Count Sum Average Variance Row 1 2 55 27.5 1512.5 Row 2 2 54.5 27.25 1225.125 Row 3 2 54.21 27.105 1141.942 Row 4 2 60.42 30.21 1330.248 Row 5 2 52.26 26.13 789.6338 Row 6 2 59.78 29.89 977.7042 Row 7 2 70.43 35.215 1228.592 Column 1 7 34.6 4.942857 12.26142 Column 2 7 372 53.14286 19.47619 ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 116.02 6 19.33666 1.559289 0.301555 4.283866 Columns 8131.34 1 8131.34 655.703 2.34E-07 5.987378 Error 74.4057 6 12.40095 Total 8321.766 13
Distance from WQI
Station 1
0 55
2.5 52
3.21 51
4.42 56
6.26 46 7.78 52 10.43 60
118 APPENDIX C
ANOVA analysis
Table C2: ANOVA analysis between distance and Water Quality Index (WQI)
during low tide with 95 % confident level (P <0.05)
Anova: Two-Factor Without Replication SUMMARY Count Sum Average Variance
Row 1 2 57 28.5 1624.5 Row 2 2 44.5 22.25 780.125 Row 3 2 50.21 25.105 958.7821 Row 4 2 39.42 19.71 467.5682 Row 5 2 49.26 24.63 674.9138 Row 6 2 56.78 28.39 849.5442 Row 7 2 63.43 31.715 906.1025 Column 1 7 34.6 4.942857 12.26142 Column 2 7 326 46.57143 53.95238 ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 201.03 6 33.505 1.024342 0.488728 4.283866 Columns 6065.283 1 6065.283 185.4327 9.74E-06 5.987378 Error 196.2528 6 32.70881 Total 6462.566 13
Distance from WQI
Station 1
0 57
2.5 42
3.21 47
4.42 35
6.26 43
7.78 49
10.43 53
119 APPENDIX C
ANOVA analysis
Table C3: ANOVA analysis between Dissolved Oxygen (DO) and Biochemical
Oxygen Demand (BOD) during high tide with 95 % confident level (P <0.05)
Anova: Two-Factor Without Replication
SUMMARY Count Sum Average Variance Row 1 2 6.82 3.41 0.3362 Row 2 2 11.65 5.825 15.51245 Row 3 2 23.74 11.87 128.3202 Row 4 2 24.78 12.39 134.1522 Row 5 2 23.18 11.59 137.4482 Row 6 2 24.19 12.095 134.6441 Row 7 2 24.67 12.335 65.55125 Column 1 7 27.9 3.985714 1.548995 Column 2 7 111.13 15.87571 46.11253 ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 164.8069 6 27.46782 1.360217 0.359125 4.283866 Columns 494.8024 1 494.8024 24.50281 0.002578 5.987378 Error 121.1622 6 20.1937 Total 780.7715 13
DO BOD
3 3.82
3.04 8.61
3.86 19.88
4.2 20.58
3.3 19.88
3.89 20.3
6.61 18.06
120 APPENDIX C
ANOVA analysis
Table C4: ANOVA analysis between Dissolved Oxygen (DO) and Biochemical
Oxygen Demand (BOD) during low tide with 95 % confident level (P <0.05)
Anova: Two-Factor Without Replication SUMMARY Count Sum Average Variance
Row 1 2 8.04 4.02 0.1682 Row 2 2 10.38 5.19 33.9488 Row 3 2 14.39 7.195 67.86125 Row 4 2 23.27 11.635 180.6901 Row 5 2 18.64 9.32 88.1792 Row 6 2 16.54 8.27 79.1282 Row 7 2 25.77 12.885 97.86005 Column 1 7 18.85 2.692857 2.751024 Column 2 7 98.18 14.02571 34.4262 ANOVA
Source of
Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit
Rows 124.7453 6 20.79089 1.268795 0.389965 4.283866 Columns 449.5178 1 449.5178 27.43249 0.001943 5.987378 Error 98.31797 6 16.38633 Total 672.5811 13
DO BOD
3.73 4.31
1.07 9.31
1.37 13.02
2.13 21.14
2.68 15.96
1.98 14.56
5.89 19.88
123 APPENDIX E
Examples of planktonic life and macroinvertebrates that had been caught
within study area
Figure E1: Biddulphia sp. Figure E2: Codonella sp.
(Bacillariophyceae-phytoplankton) (Bacillariophyceae-phytoplankton)
Figure E3: Ceratium sp. Figure E4: Brachionus sp.
(Dinophyceae-phytoplankton) (Rotifera-zooplankton)
Figure E5: Copepoda sp. Figure E6: Ostracoda sp.
(Crustacea-zooplankton) (Crustacea-zooplankton)
124 APPENDIX E
Examples of planktonic life and macroinvertebrates that had been caught
within study area
Figure E7: Cladoceran sp. Figure E8: Sagitta sp.
(Crustacea-zooplankton) (Chaetognatha -zooplankton)
Figure E9: Nereis sp. Figure E10: Yoldia sp.
(Polycate-Benthos) (Bivalve -benthos)
Figure E11: Nasarius sp.
(Gastropod-Benthos)