INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 562

Trace Elements Determination and Health Risk Assessment of

Groundwater Quality in Southern Kaduna, Kaduna State, Nigeria

*Ndaks, B. I

., *Abashiya, D. O

Department of Chemistry, Kaduna State College of Education, Gidan Waya

Department of Environmental Management, Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Kaduna State University, Nigeria

Correspondance Autho

DOI: https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2025.1410000072

Received: 02 October 2025; Accepted: 08 October 2025; Published: 10 November 2025

Abstract: Groundwater contamination is a growing concern for water quality. This study examined the concentration of trace

elements in groundwater and their implications to human health in Southern Kaduna, Nigeria. A stratified random sampling

technique was adopted in stratifying the twelve (12) local government areas into four strata, while the sampling locations were

selected using a purposive sampling technique. Fourty groundwater samples were collected, that is, twenty (20) samples from

hand-dug wells and twenty (20) samples from boreholes. Furthermore, the concentrations of lead (Pb), chromium (Cr),

manganese (Mn), iron (Fe), and zinc (Zn) were determined by direct aspiration into an air-acetylene flame using a Buck Scientific

235 atomic absorption spectrometer (AAS) and compared with the national drinking water quality standards (NDWQS). On the

other hand, the human health risk assessment model was utilised to evaluate the health implications. The results of the analysis

reveals that most of the trace elements (measured in mg/l) were within permissible limits, except for Chikun Borehole 2 (0.062),

Chikun Well 5 (0.080), Sanga Well 5 (0.080), Zango Kataf Well 4 (0.062), Jaba Well 1 (0.054), and Jaba Well 5 (0.120) for Mn

and Chikun Borehole 2 (2.7), Zango Kataf Borehole 2 (0.450), Zango Kataf Borehole 5 (0.400), Jaba Borehole 3 (0.300), Jaba

Well 3 (0.250) for Fe. Additionally, the human health risk assessment for Cr indicates a very low likelihood of 0.0002 for cancer

development due to oral exposure. Lastly, the study recommends continuous monitoring of groundwater quality and mapping

contamination hotspots for targeted intervention.

Keywords: Groundwater, Contamination, Trace Elements, Human Health Risk, Southern Kaduna

I. Introduction

Globally, groundwater (GW) serves as a vital freshwater source that supports various anthropogenic activities such as domestic

consumption, industrial activities, agriculture, unrestricted mineral exploration amongst others. According to Li et al. (2021), GW

used for domestic activities accounts for approximately one-third of the global population dependency. However, the quality of

this water source is threatened by contamination. GW contamination, which refers to the addition of undesirable substances into

GW, is caused by both natural and anthropogenic activities such as weathering, improper waste disposal, mining, agriculture, and

can be grouped into three, namely, biological, chemical, and radioactive contamination (Government of Canada, 2017). While the

consumption of GW increases annually, approximately twenty-five thousand people die daily as a result of water-related diseases,

as well as a continuous dwindling in the world’s water resources due to improper environmental management practices, especially

in developing countries (Yohanna et al., 2021).

For example, in Nigeria, the demand for GW due to deteriorating water infrastructure is increasing as more than half of the

Nigerian population relies on GW for domestic purposes, irrigation, and industrial production, among others (Adekunle et al.,

2013; Omole, 2013; Yohanna et al., 2021). Similarly, GW quality presents a significant challenge in Southern Kaduna, due to its

intricate lithological and hydrogeological characteristics accelerated by anthropogenic activities (Huang et al., 2024). Although

quite some studies (Ijah et al., 2020; Ugya et al., 2015; Wali et al., 2020) have been conducted concerning water quality in

Kaduna State, the rate of water pollution (accelerated by anthropogenic activities) and its associated hazards to human health call

for a more extensive assessment of water quality, especially for domestic purposes (Tong et al., 2021). The proliferation of GW

within the Southern Kaduna increases this concern, as Obada & Oladejo (2013) highlighted that most rural communities in the

Southern parts of Kaduna State depend largely on GW extracted from wells and boreholes for their water needs, as most surface

sources are more susceptible to pollution.

It is against this backdrop that this study aims to examine the uses and sources of GW contamination, the concentration of trace

elements in groundwater sources, and their effects on human health in Southern Kaduna, Nigeria. Although

required in

micro

quantities

maintain

certain

physiological

needs in the human body, excessive concentration of these elements can be very

detrimental to human health. Hence, this study investigates the concentration of five trace elements, namely, Lead (Pb),

Chromium (Cr), Iron (Fe), Manganese (Mn), and Zinc (Zn). This is very crucial as man has continually been exposed to these

elements through the food and water we consume as well as the air we inhale. This study bridges a gap in knowledge by

providing valuable information for water resource planning and management in Southern Kaduna and the state at large. It also

provides useful information which when implemented can optimise decision making, especially in creating community awareness

and environmental campaigns on water quality, hygiene and sanitation.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 563

II. Materials and Methods

Study Area

Location, Position and Size

Southern Kaduna is situated in the Northwestern part of Nigeria. The region occupies an estimated landmass of 24,500 square

kilometres and lies between latitudes 9° 00’- 10° 45’ N of the Equator and longitudes 7° l0’ - 8° 45’ E of the Greenwich Meridian.

It is bounded by Niger State, Federal Capital Territory (FCT) and Plateau State in the West, South and southeast, respectively

(Obada & Oladejo, 2013). The region also comprises twelve (12) local government areas, namely, Chikun, Jaba, Jema’a, Kachia,

Kaduna South, Kagarko, Kajuru, Kaura, Kauru, Lere, Sanga and Zangon Kataf (as shown in figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1: Map of Nigeria showing the study area.

Source: Author’s Work (2025).

Geology and Hydrogeology

Southern Kaduna is underlain by crystalline basement rocks, which are dominated by a migmatite and gneiss complex (Nigerian

Geological Survey Agency, 2020). GW occurrence in this region is categorized into three, namely:

(a) The Weathered/Fractured Basement Complex

(b) The Newer Basalts

The weathered granular sandy zone, which is composed of coarse-grained sands, forms a level below the loose clayey laterite.

The granular sands consist of sands or gravels derived from the disintegration of the crystalline rock. The Newer Basalts occur in

the vicinity of Kafanchan and Manchok along the western edge of the Jos Plateau. The Basalts erupted after the Plateau had

achieved almost its present-day topography and are themselves little affected by erosion. Thus, they often overlie alluvial

deposits. Zones of weathering and beds of alluvium also occur between individual basalt flows. The dry season flow of this spring

is about 11,000 m3/day. It forms the headwater of a tributary of the Kaduna River.

Socio-Economic Activities

The people of Southern Kaduna are predominantly farmers and traders. However, the region is increasingly becoming urbanised

because of infrastructural development, growing population and aesthetic endowments such as the Mastriga waterfall, Nok

settlement and rich cultural diversity. Southern Kaduna serves as home for many educational institutions such as, Kaduna State

University, Kafanchan Campus, Kaduna State College of Education, and College of Nursing, amongst others.

III. Methodology

Research Design

A mixed research design was implored for this study. This research design is complex and allows the use of both qualitative and

quantitative elements in achieving the research questions. Most importantly, this research design makes the most of the strengths

of each data type while neutralising their weaknesses.

Data Collection and Sampling Technique

GW samples were retrieved from hand-dug wells and boreholes for analysis. To achieve this, a stratified sampling technique was

implored to stratify the twelve LGAs in Southern Kaduna State into four strata, giving a total of three (3) LGAs in each stratum

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 564

(as shown in table 2.1). While purposive sampling, adopted from (Ijah et al., 2020), was used in selecting sampling locations. Ten

(10) samples were obtained from each LGA, that is, five (5) samples from boreholes and five (5) samples from hand-dug wells,

making a total of fourty (40) GW samples altogether (as appendix for coordinates of each sample location).

Table 2.1: Sampling Collection Procedures.

LGAs in Southern

Kaduna

Stratify sampling of LGAs in

Southern Kaduna

Sample LGAs

Chikun

Kaduna South

Kajuru

Kauru

Lere

Zangon-Kataf

Kachia

Kagarko

Jaba

Jema’a

Sanga

Kaura

Chikun

Kaduna South

Kajuru

Chikun

Kauru

Lere

Zangon-Kataf

Kachia

Kagarko

Jaba

Jema’a

Sanga

Kaura

Sanga

Source: Author’s Work (2025).

Sampling Procedures and Quality Assurance

The sampling procedure used was adopted and modified from (Opasola & Otto, 2024; Riaz et al., 2022). Fourty (40) pieces of

250ml propylene containers were used to store the GW samples. The propylene containers were properly cleaned and rinsed using

deionised water before retrieving and storing the GW samples. Each sampling container was well labelled to avoid errors. The

trace elements, i.e Lead (Pb), Iron (Fe), Zinc (Zn), Manganese (Mn) and Chromium (Cr) were preserved for analysis by adding 2–

3 drops of concentrated nitric acid (HNO3) to dissolve metal ions and reduce their precipitation. All collected samples were

stored in an insulated cooler containing ice at 4 °C and transported to the National Water Resources Institute (NWRI), Mando,

Kaduna, for water quality analysis.

Data Analysis – Trace Element Concentration and Human Health Risk Assessment

The concentration of trace elements, i.e Lead (Pb), Iron (Fe), Zinc (Zn), Manganese (Mn) and Chromium (Cr), were determined

by direct aspiration into an air-acetylene flame using a Buck Scientific 235 atomic absorption spectrometer (as shown in plate

2.1a and b). The concentration of each metal in a sample was determined at a specific wavelength by using an appropriate hollow

cathode lamp and a freshly prepared standard calibration solution using APHA (2017).

Plate 2.1: Laboratory Assessment of Trace Element Concentration in GW samples.

Source: Author’s Work (2025).

On the other hand, the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (US-EPA) human health risk assessment model

Equations (1) and (3) were applied to calculate human health risk associated with consumption of chromium-contaminated water

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 565

(adopted from Riaz et al., 2022). The parameters used in the health risk assessment are presented in Table 2.2. This approach

allows for individual human health risk assessment via initial calculation of the average daily dose (ADD) of Cr due to ingestion

of Cr contaminated drinking water via equation (1):

Average daily dose (ADD) = ED × C × IR × EF / AT × BW ………. Eqn (1)

where;

ED represents exposure duration (assumed to be 10 and 18 years for children and adolescents, respectively, and 67 years each for

males and females, which is comparable with other studies).

C represents Cr concentration in water (µg/L),

IR represents the ingestion rate of water (L day1),

EF represents exposure frequency (365 days per year),

AT represents average lifetime (days) and

BW represents body weight (10 for children, 18 for adolescents, 67 for males and 67 for females in kgs).

Cancer Risk

The cancer risk (CR) was also calculated using the following equation.

Cancer risk = ADD / CSF ------- Eqn (3)

where the cancer slope factor (CSF) for Cr is 0.5 (mg/kg/day) for oral exposure according to US-EPA.

Table 2.2: Parameters used for Health Risk Assessment

Age Group

IR (L/Day)

BW (kg)

EF (Days)

ED (Years)

AT (Days)

Children

365

3650

Adolescents

1.6

365

6570

Adult male

365

24,455

Adult female

365

24,455

Source: Author’s Work (2025).

IV. Results and Discussions

The findings of this study are presented according to the study objectives. These are:

GW Uses and Sources of Contamination

The study reveals that GW extracted from hand-dug wells and boreholes in Southern Kaduna are used for domestic consumption

(such as drinking, cooking, washing and bathing), agriculture, mineral exploration, and business; these findings aligns with the

study of (Adekunle et al., 2013; Ocheri et al., 2014). The study also highlights improper waste disposal, mining activities,

unprecedented urbanisation, application of pesticides and herbicides, sewage from septic tanks as well as run-off as the major

sources of GW contamination in Southern Kaduna (see plate. 3.1a and b). Increase in GW contamination from these sources if not

monitored can pose threat to human health as well as used the viability of businesses and other related activities. The result of this

analysis correlates with the works of (Yohanna et al., 2021).

Plate 3.1: Sources of Groundwater Contamination in Southern Kaduna.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 566

Source: Author’s Work (2025).

Trace Elements Concentration

As earlier mentioned, the concentration of five trace elements, namely: Manganese (Mn), Iron (Fe), Zinc (Zn), Lead (Pb), and

Chromium (Cr), were investigated and compared with the national drinking water quality standards (NDWQS) to ascertain their

suitability for domestic consumption. Figure 3.1 shows the sampling location points.

Figure 3.1: Map showing the sampling location points

The results of the analysis are as follows:

Manganese (Mn)

More than half of the samples from Chikum, Sanga, Jaba, and Zangon-Kataf LGA (as shown in fig 3.2) were below the

permissible limit (0.05mg/l). Exceedances were Chikun Borehole 2 (0.062), Chikun Well 5 (0.080), Sanga Well 5 (0.080), Zango

Kataf Well 4 (0.062), Jaba Well 1 (0.054), and Jaba Well 5 (0.120). The exceedances are largely driven by agricultural activities

(such as maize cultivation, rice, millet, amongst others) as well as improper waste disposal taking place within the sampling areas.

It is worth noting that high concentrations of Mn can cause discolouration, metallic taste, and long-term neurological effects if

consumed at elevated levels. The result of this study correlates with the works of Andrew E. (2021), which reveals a high

concentration of Mn in GW when compared with surface water.

Figure 3.2: Concentration of Mn in Groundwater, Southern Kaduna, Nigeria.

Iron (Fe)

Similarly, quite a number of GW samples obtained from boreholes and hand-dug wells (as shown in table 3.1) exceeded the

permissible limit of 0.3mg/l (e.g., Chikun Borehole 2 at 2.7 mg/L, Zango Kataf Borehole 2 at 0.450 mg/L, Zango Kataf Borehole

5 at 0.400 mg/L, Jaba Borehole 3 at 0.300 mg/L, Jaba Well 3 at 0.250 mg/L) for Fe. This is largely attributed to weathering

activities taking place within the basement complex and is of concern as excessive concentration of Fe causes reddish-brown

staining, unpleasant taste, and can harbour iron bacteria, though it is not acutely toxic. Findings from this analysis correlate with

the works of (Yohanna et al., 2021). This is because both studies are situated in the same region and are underlaid by the same

geology.

0.05

0.1

0.15

Concentration (Mg/l)

Sample ID

Mangnese (Mn)

Sanga Chikun Zangon-Kataf Jaba Permissible Limit

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 567

Table 3.1: Concentration of Iron (Fe)

Borehole1

Borehole2

Borehole3

Borehole4

Borehole5

Well 1

Well 2

Well 3

Well 4

Well 5

Sanga

0.05

0.2

0.5

0.15

0.1

0.2

0.15

Chikun

0.25

2.7

0.25

0.15

0.25

0.3

0.02

Zangon-

Kataf

0.3

0.45

0.2

0.4

0.15

0.05

0.1

0.2

0.4

Jaba

0.25

0.1

0.15

0.25

0.1

0.3

0.05

0.25

Permissible

Limit

0.3

Source: Author’s Work (2025).

Zinc (Zn)

This is an essential element in drinking water. The result of the analysis (as shown in table 3.2) reveals that the concentration of

Zn in all GW samples obtained from both hand-dug wells and boreholes in Southern Kaduna were within the permissible limit

(the highest is 0.370 mg/L at Zango Kataf Borehole 5) – largely due to the intensive agricultural activities taking place within the

sample collection point. However, the result of the analysis is at variance with the findings of (Ocheri et al., 2014).

Table 3.2: Concentration of Iron (Zn)

Borehole1

Borehole2

Borehole3

Borehole4

Borehole5

Well 1

Well2

Well3

Well4

Well5

Sanga

0.014

0.024

0.007

0.008

0.023

0.016

0.046

0.044

0.061

Chikun

0.043

0.006

0.023

0.006

0.011

0.033

0.015

0.019

0.178

0.031

Zangon-

Kataf

0.027

0.057

0.043

0.048

0.37

0.05

0.055

0.061

0.087

0.077

Jaba

0.027

0.002

0.023

0.015

0.024

0.035

0.034

0.05

Permissible

Limit

Source: Author’s Work (2025).

Lead (Pb

Several groundwater samples from wells exceeded the permissible limit of Pb concentration for domestic use, as shown in fig 3.3.

For example, Sanga Well 1 had 0.028, Sanga Well 2 had 0.032, Sanga Well 3 had 0.032, Sanga Well 4 had 0.047, Sanga Well 5

had 0.060, while Zango Kataf Wells 1–5 ranged from 0.042 to 0.068, and Jaba Wells 2–5 ranged from 0.025 to 0.046. This is of

critical concern, as high or very low Pb concentrations can cause developmental delays in children, kidney damage, and in severe

cases, cancer and neurological problems. The analysis results also align with the findings of

Figure 3.3: Concentration of Pb in Groundwater, Southern Kaduna, Nigeria.

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

Concentration (mg/l)

Sample ID

Lead (Pb)

Sanga Chikun Zangon-Kataf Jaba Permissible Limit

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 568

Chromium (Cr)

Similar to the findings on the concentration of Zn, the result of the analysis (as shown in fig 3.4) reveals that the concentration of

zinc for all GW samples obtained from both hand-dug wells and boreholes within Southern Kaduna were below the permissible

limit (0.05mg/l) except Jaba Well 3 (0.038, still below but notable). Although the concentration of this element is safe for

domestic consumption, there is a need for continuous monitoring.

Figure 3.4: Concentration of Pb in Groundwater, Southern Kaduna, Nigeria.

Human Health Risk Assessment

Using the US-EPA human health risk assessment model equations (1) and (3), adopted from (Riaz et al., 2022). The human health

risk assessment for average daily dose (ADD) of Cr due to ingestion of Cr contaminated drinking water was investigated as

follows:

Average daily dose (ADD) = ED × C × IR × EF / AT × BW ………. Eqn (1)

a. For children: ADD = 10 × 0.004 × 1 × 365 /3650 × 13

ADD = 0.00031

b. Adolescents: ADD = 18 × 0.004 × 1.6 × 365 /6570 × 28

ADD = 0.00023

c. Adult male: ADD = 67 × 0.004 × 2 × 365 /24,455 × 72

ADD = 0.0001

d. Adult female: ADD = 67 × 0.004 × 2 × 365 /24,455 × 53

ADD = 0.00015

Cancer Risk

The cancer risk (CR) was also calculated using the following equation.

Cancer risk = ADD / CSF ------- Eqn (3)

where the cancer slope factor (CSF) for Cr is 0.5 (mg/kg/day) for oral exposure according to US-EPA.

a. For children: Cancer risk = 0.00031 × 0.5

Cancer risk = 0.00062

b. Adolescents: Cancer risk = 0.00023 × 0.5

Cancer risk = 0.00046

c. Adult male: Cancer risk = 0.0001 × 0.5

Cancer risk = 0.0002

d. Adult female: Cancer risk = 0.00015 × 0.5

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

Concentration (mg/l)

Sample ID

Chromium (Cr)

Sanga Chikun Zangon-Kataf Jaba Permissible Limit

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 569

Cancer risk = 0.0003

The result of the human health risk assessment reveals 0.00062, 0.00046, 0.0002, and 0.0003 for children, adolescents, adult

males, and adult females, respectively. This shows that the probability of contracting cancer through oral ingestion of GW

extracted from hand-dug wells and boreholes in Southern Kaduna is grossly insignificant. However, the likelihood of contraction

increases with increased exposure to Cr. A very similar result to our study was reported by Riaz et al. (2022).

V. Conclusion

In conclusion, the growing population, unprecedented urbanization, and increasing agricultural and mining activities taking place

within Southern Kaduna are accelerating the threat to GW quality and human health. This calls for continuous monitoring,

especially for Cr, which is cancerogenic.

Recommendations

Given the results of the analysis, the study deems it fit to recommend the following.

a. Immediate Actions:

I. Hand-dug wells with high concentrations of Pb (especially in Sanga, Zango Kataf, and Jaba) should not be used for

domestic consumption (particularly drinking and cooking) except it has been treated.

II. Also, alternative and safe water sources (e.g., tanker supply, rainwater harvesting, or treated borehole water) should be

provided within the Pb-contaminated regions.

b. Treatment Solutions:

I. Lead removal: use point-of-use filters with activated carbon, reverse osmosis, or ion-exchange systems.

II. Iron and manganese removal: apply aeration, oxidation (chlorine or potassium permanganate), and sand filtration.

III. Well rehabilitation: seal leaking walls and replace corroded pumps or pipes that may leach metals.

c. Policy & Community Measures:

I. Regular monitoring of groundwater quality (quarterly testing).

II. Launch community awareness campaigns on the dangers of lead and safe water handling.

III. Government/NGOs should invest in centralised water treatment plants or small-scale packaged treatment for high-risk

communities.

d. Long-Term Actions:

i. Extensively investigate sources of GW contamination (geological vs. anthropogenic). For instance, Pb contamination

may be from old pipes, batteries, or nearby mining/industrial activities. In contrast, Fe and Mn are usually geological.

ii. Map contamination hotspots for targeted interventions.

Reference

1. Andrew E. (2021). Assessment of Manganese Occurrence in Drinking Water in the United States. ACS EST Water 2021,

1, 2450 – 2458.

2. Adekunle, A. A., Badejo, A. O., & Oyerinde, A. O. (2013). Pollution studies on groundwater contamination: water

quality of Abeokuta, Ogun State, Southwest Nigeria. Journal of Environment and Earth Science, 3(5), 161-166.

3. APHA (2017). Standards Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (23

ed.). Washington, D.C: American

Public Health Association.

4. Delve, Ho L., and Limpaecher, A. (2023). Qualitative, Quantitative Mixed Methods.

https://delvetool.com/blog/mixedmethods.

5. Ijah, A., Zakka, E., Oladele, O., & Olagunju, O. (2020). Assessment of Ground Water Quality (A Case Study of Mando,

Igabi Local Government Area, Kaduna State). Asian Journal of Geological Research, 3(4), 16-25.

6. Government of Canada (2017). Groundwater contamination. https://www.canad a.ca/en/envir onment-climate-

change/services/water-overview/pollution-causes-effects/groundwate r-conta minat ion. html. Accessed 17 Oct 2020

7. Li, P., Karunanidhi, D., Subramani, T., & Srinivasamoorthy, K. (2021). Sources and consequences of groundwater

contamination. Archives of environmental contamination and toxicology, 80, 1-10.

8. Nigerian Geological Survey Agency (2020). Hydrogeological Mapping of Kaduna and Its Environment.

9. Obada, E. M., & Oladejo, O. I. (2013). Groundwater Quality Appraisal in the Southern parts of Kaduna State, Nigeria.

Am J Environ Eng, 3(1), 77-83.

10. Ocheri, M., Odoma, L., & Umar, N. (2014). Groundwater Quality in Nigerian Urban Areas: A Review. Global journal of

science frontier research, 14(3).

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XIV, Issue X, October 2025

www.ijltemas.in Page 570

11. Opasola, O., & Otto, E. (2024). Evaluation of Heavy Metal Levels and Contamination Indices of Groundwater Sources

in Kaduna South Local Government Area, Kaduna State, Northern Nigeria. Journal of Applied Sciences and

Environmental Management, 28(6), 1841-1852.

12. Riaz, R. M. Y., Murtaza, G., Farooqi, Z. U. R., Ali, S., Aziz, H., Mahboob, S., Al-Ghanim, K. A., Owens, G., Ahmad, H.

R., & Riaz, U. (2022). Assessment of arsenic contamination in groundwater and associated human health risk.

Sustainability, 14(19), 12460.

13. Tong, S., Li, H., Tudi, M., Yuan, X., & Yang, L. (2021). Comparison of Characteristics, Water Quality and Health Risk

Assessment of Trace Elements in Turface water and groundwater in China. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety,

219, 112283.

14. Ugya, A., Umar, S., & Yusuf, A. (2015). Assessment of Well Water Quality: A Case Study of Kaduna South Local

Government Area, Kaduna State, Nigeria. Merit Res. J. Environ. Sci. Toxicol, 3, 39-43.

15. United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (US-EPA) human health risk assessment model

16. Wali, S. U., Alias, N., & Harun, S. B. (2020). Quality Reassessment using Water Quality Indices and Hydrochemistry of

Groundwater from the Basement Complex Section of Kaduna Basin, NW Nigeria. SN Applied Sciences, 2(10), 1742.

17. Yohanna, P., Apeh, O. V., & Lawuyi, T. (2021). Analyzing the Quality of Ground Water in Kaduna South Local

Government Area, Kaduna State, Nigeria. FUDMA Journal of Sciences, 5(2), 413-418.