Results Thirty dry Barki female sheep

Results
Thirty dry Barki female sheep ( 2–3 years), with average body weight 30.17±1.28 kg, were used in the experiment. They were divided randomly into 3 groups and housed in 3 well ventilated stables 10 sheep each and given concentrated cubes and hay ad libitum according to Kearl (1982). Animals were given fresh tap water as the control group and drainage water from the studied area as the second group (first treatment) and drainage water plus 4% bentonite (remediated agent) as the third group (second treatment).

Blood Analyses :
Heart functions:
Table (1): Comparison of the mean values of serum AST, LDH and CPK activities of sheep between different treatments.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Items Control Polluted water Treated Water S.O.V.

Mean + SE Mean + SE Mean + SE AST (U/L) 18.53 0.559c 35.00 3.163a 25.23 1.146b **
LDH (U/L) 194.05 8.740c 314.40 12.069a 241.37 12.924b **
CPK (U/L) 47.13 6.049c 112.52 9.535a 77.47 3.591b **
ns = Non-significant, P?0.05 = significant(*), P?0.01 = highly significant(**). S.O.V. =source of Variance, ± SE= Standard Error, Treated Water= Polluted water + 4% bentonite , Means with the same letter within the same row are not significantly different.

Fig. ( 1 ): The mean values of serum AST, LDH and CPK activities of sheep between different treatments.

It was observed that LDH and AST activities of the sheep receiving polluted water from the drain in the study area (314.40± 12.069 IU/L; 35.00± 3.163 IU/L, respectively) had increased substantially in comparison to the sheep in the control group (194.05± 8.740 IU/L; 18.53± 0.559 IU/L) (P<0.01). Although it was observed that serum CPK activity increased substantially in sheep having polluted water (112.52± 9.535 IU/L) in comparison to sheep in the control group (47.13± 6.049 IU/L). There was also highly significant increase in the activity of the three enzymes of the sheep in the treated group, receiving polluted water plus 4% bentonite, in comparison to sheep in the control group.

Aspartate amino-transferase (AST):
The AST values ranged between 18.53, 35.00 and 25.23 IU/L for G1,G2 and G3 respectively. The highest value was recorded in group No. 2, while the lowest one was found in group No. 1.
Serum AST activity was highly significantly (p<0.001) influenced by the drinking water being 18.53, 35.00 and 25.23 IU / L for G1,G2 and G3 respectively. The highest serum AST activities were reported in animals in G2 (35.00 IU/L) while the lowest one was in G1 (18.53 IU/L).

Fig. ( 2 ): Serum AST activity in different groups through study duration.

Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH)
The LDH values ranged between 194.05, 314.40 and 241.37 IU/L for G1,G2 and G3 respectively. The highest value was recorded in group No. 2, while the lowest one was found in group No. 1.
Serum LDH activity was highly significantly (p<0.001) influenced by the drinking water being 194.05, 314.40 and 241.37 IU / L for G1,G2 and G3 respectively. The highest serum LDH activities were reported in animals in G2 (314.40 IU/L) while the lowest one was in G1 (194.05 IU/L).

Fig. ( 3 ): Serum LDH activity in different groups through study duration.

Creatine phospho-kinase (CPK)
CPK is found in high concentration in skeletal muscle, myocardium and brain but not found in liver and kidney, small amounts are found in lungs not found in RB cells and its level is not affected by hemolysis. It appears to be a sensitive measure of myocardial infarction.

The CPK activity ranged between 47.13, 112.52and 77.47 IU/L for G1,G2 and G3 respectively. The highest value was recorded in group No. 2, while the lowest one was found in group No. 1.
Serum CPK activity was highly significantly (p<0.001) influenced by the drinking water being 47.13, 112.52and 77.47 IU / L for G1,G2 and G3 respectively. The highest serum CPK activities were reported in animals in G2 (112.52 IU/L) while the lowest one was in G1 (47.13 IU/L).

Fig. ( 4 ): Serum CPK activity in different groups through study duration .

Liver functions:
Table (2): Comparison the mean values of serum ALT, ALP and total protein of sheep between different treatments
Items Control Polluted water Treated Water S.O.V.

Mean + SE Mean + SE Mean + SE ALT (U/L) 5.38 0.161c 9.52 0.732a 6.89 0.191b **
ALP (U/L) 185.02 19.724c 569.60 63.754a 321.50 33.734b **
T. P. (g/dl) 4.51 0.089c 6.21 0.076a 5.40 0.119b **
ns = Non-significant, P?0.05 = significant(*), P?0.01 = highly significant(**). S.O.V. =source of Variance, ± SE= Standard Error, Treated Water= Polluted water + 4% bentoniteMeans with the same letter within the same row are not significantly different.

Fig. ( 5 ): The mean values of serum ALT, ALP and total protein of sheep in different treatments.

It was observed that ALT and ALP activities of the sheep receiving polluted water from the drain in the study area (9.52± 0.732 IU/L; 569.60± 63.754 IU/L, respectively) had increased virtually coparable to the sheep in the control group (5.38± 0.161 IU/L; 185.02± 19.724 IU/L) (P<0.01). Although it was found that serum total protein increased extraordinarily in sheep having polluted water (6.21± 0.076 g/dl) in comparison to sheep in the control group (4.51± 0.089 g/dl). There was also highly significant increase in the activity and concentration of the three parameters of the sheep in the treated group, receiving polluted water plus 4% bentonite, in comparison to sheep in the control group.

Alanine amino-transferase (ALT)
The ALT activities ranged between 5.38, 9.52 and 6.89IU/L for G1,G2 and G3 respectively. The highest activity was reported in group No. 2, while the lowest one was found in group No. 1

Fig. ( 6 ): Serum ALT activity in different groups through study duration .

Alkaline phosphatase (ALP)
The ALP activities ranged between 185.02, 569.60 and 321.50IU/L for G1,G2 and G3 respectively. The highest activity was recorded in group No. 2, while the lowest one was found in group No. 1
Serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity was highly significantly (p<0.001) differed among the experimental groups, being 185.02, 569.60 and 321.50 IU/L for G1, G2 and G3, respectively. These results were in agreement with Ibrahim (2001) and Mahamoud (2001) who reported increasing levels of ALP with introducing polluted water to sheep in comparison to the control diet.

Fig. (7): Serum ALP activity in different groups through study duration.

Serum total protein (TP):
Serum total protein concentration levels ranged between 4.51, 6.21 and 5.40 g/dl in group 1, group 2 and group 3 respectively.

Fig. (8): Serum total protein levels in different groups through study duration .

Kidney functions:
Table (3): Comparison of the mean values of serum creatinine and blood urea of sheep between different treatments
Items Control Polluted water Treated Water S.O.V.

Mean + SE Mean + SE Mean + SE Urea (mg/dl) 34.57 0.763c 57.10 0.801a 48.28 1.105b **
Creat. (mg/dl) 0.90 0.035c 1.33 0.049a 1.10 0.046b **
ns = Non-significant, P?0.05 = significant(*), P?0.01 = highly significant(**). S.O.V. =source of Variance, ± SE= Standard Error, Treated Water= Polluted water + 4% bentoniteMeans with the same letter within the same row are not significantly different.

Fig. ( 9 ): The mean values of serum creatinine and blood urea of sheep in different treatments.

Blood urea level
The urea levels ranged between 34.57, 57.10 and 48.28 mg/dl for G1,G2 and G3 respectively. The highest value was observed in group No. 2, while the lowest one was found in group No. 1.

Fig. ( 10 ): Blood urea levels of different groups through study duration .

Serum creatinineSerum creatinine was highly significantly (p<0.001) affected by the drinking water being 0.90, 1.33 and 1.10 mg/dl in G1, G2 and G3 respectively. The highest serum creatinine levels were reported in animals in G2 (1.33mg/dl) while the lowest one was in G1 (0.90mg/dl). These results could be explained by high heavy metal concentration in drain water.

Fig. ( 11 ): Serum creatinine levels in different groups through study duration .

Blood Glucose level:
Table (4): Comparison the mean values of serum metabolites of sheep between different treatments
Items Control Polluted water Treated Water S.O.V.

Mean + SE Mean + SE Mean + SE Glucose (mg/dl) 45.92 1.614c 65.97 3.108a 54.48 1.630b **
ns = Non-significant, P?0.05 = significant(*), P?0.01 = highly significant(**). S.O.V. =source of Variance, ± SE= Standard Error, Treated Water= Polluted water + 4% bentoniteMeans with the same letter within the same row are not significantly different.

Fig. ( 12 ): Blood glucose levels of different groups through study duration .

The glucose levels ranged between 45.92, 65.97 and 54.48 mg/dl for G1,G2 and G3 respectively. The highest value was observed in group No. 2, while the lowest one was recorded in group No. 1.
Ranges of quality control for glucose analysis were 32–56 mg/dL (control-low), 131–160 mg/dL (control-medium), and 396–594 mg/dL (control-high) (Huang et al., 2015).

From analyzing bio-chemical parameters in sheep Table(1,2,3 &4) it can be observed that there were no major deviations from the reference values for sheep as adopted by (Kaneko et al., 2008 and Kramer, 2000).

Correlation analysis:
Correlation matrix illustrated in table (5) showed that AST exhibited a positive correlation with both ALT and creatinine ( r= 0.642 and 0.505 respectively ) & ALP revealed a positive correlation with both urea and glucose (r= 0.561 and 0.503 respectively ), while urea showed a positive correlation with T. protein (r= 0.622).
Table ( 5 ): Correlation between different serum metabolites in different groups:
AST LDH CPK ALT ALP Urea CreatinineT. Protein Glucose
AST 1 LDH 0.272 1 CPK 0.253 0.292 1 ALT 0.642 0.365 0.295 1 ALP 0.205 0.355 0.273 0.265 1 Urea 0.220 0.399 0.184 0.318 0.561 1 Creatinine0.505 0.340 0.232 0.386 0.331 0.450 1 T. Protein 0.023 0.359 -0.002 0.077 0.373 0.622 0.327 1 Glucose 0.135 0.290 0.215 0.144 0.503 0.409 0.242 0.375 1
Heamatological indices ( CBC)
Table (6): Comparison of the mean values of blood picture and the weight of sheep between different treatments.

Items Control Polluted water Treated Water S.O.V.

Mean + SE Mean + SE Mean + SE Hb(g/dl) 10.24 0.238a 9.67 0.243a 9.68 0.243a Ns
RBCs(x106 µl) 3.61 0.079a 3.43 0.081a 3.43 0.081a Ns
WBCs(x103/µl) 6.03 0.149a 5.90 0.143a 6.03 0.132a Ns
HCT(%) 30.71 0.715a 29.02 0.727a 29.04 0.729a Ns
MCV(fl) 84.92 0.120a 84.67 0.155a 84.61 0.127a Ns
MCH(pg) 28.31 0.040a 28.22 0.051a 28.21 0.042a Ns
MCHC(g/dl) 33.28 0.027a 33.30 0.018a 33.28 0.027a Ns
PLT(x103µl) 212.50 5.605a 199.75 13.300a 205.95 3.625a Ns
Wt.(Kg) 30.12 1.669a 29.80 1.203a 30.61 1.042a Ns
ns = Non-significant, P?0.05 = significant(*), P?0.01 = highly significant(**). S.O.V. =source of Variance, ± SE= Standard Error, Treated Water= Polluted water + 4% bentoniteMeans with the same letter within the same row are not significantly different.

Fig.13 : Means of blood Hb and hematological parameters in treatment groups compared to control group.

The means of hematological parameters in all studied sheep are presented in table (6) and figure (13) as follows; PCV ranged from 29.02 to 30.71%, Hb ranged from 9.67 to 10.24g/dl, RBC’s ranged from 3.43 to 3.61×106 /?L, MCV ranged from 84.61 to 84.92fl, MCH ranged from 28.21 to 28.31pg, MCHC ranged from 33.28 to 33.30g/dl, platelets ranged from 199.75 to 212.50×103 /?L and WBC’s ranged from 5.90 to 6.03×103 /?L. The hematological values showed no significant differences between groups.

Serum heavy metals:
Table (7): Comparison of the mean values of serum minerals between different treatments
Items
(ppm) Control Polluted water Treated Water S.O.V.

Mean + SE Mean + SE Mean + SE Al 0.155 0.0533b 0.550 0.1410a 0.228 0.1072b *
Cd 0.001 0.0002a 0.087 0.0771a 0.021 0.0193a Ns
Co 0.011 0.0024a 0.016 0.0048a 0.015 0.0028a Ns
Cr 0.089 0.0261a 0.114 0.0340a 0.092 0.0394a Ns
Cu 0.902 0.0493b 0.971 0.1242a 0.635 0.0747b *
Fe 4.904 0.5908a 4.886 0.4097a 4.281 0.2489a Ns
Mn0.034 0.0057b 0.105 0.0279a 0.081 0.0194ab *
Mo 0.003 0.0006a 0.004 0.0009a 0.003 0.0006a Ns
Ni 0.039 0.0063b 0.322 0.1241a 0.043 0.0149b *
Pb0.062 0.0227a 0.281 0.1468a 0.020 0.0092a Ns
Sr0.607 0.0312b 0.767 0.0143a 0.710 0.0155a **
V 0.095 0.0448a 0.130 0.0430a 0.031 0.0126a Ns
Zn 1.435 0.0945a 1.600 0.1283a 1.523 0.1114a Ns
ns = Non-significant, P?0.05 = significant(*), P?0.01 = highly significant(**). S.O.V. =source of Variance, ± SE= Standard Error, Treated Water= Polluted water + 4% bentoniteMeans with the same letter within the same row are not significantly different.

Fig.14 : Means of serum minerals in treatment groups compared to control group .

The selected heavy metals measured in serum of sheep included: Al, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Mo, Ni, Pb, Sr, V and Zn. Results showed significant increase (P?0.05) for some metals compared to control group (Al, Cu, Mn and Ni) and highly significant increase (P?0.01) for Sr, while others revealed no significant change (Cd, Co, Cr, Fe, Mo, Pb, V and Zn). The average heavy metals concentrations were in the following order Fe > Zn > Cu >Sr> Al > Ni >Pb> V > Cr >Mn> Cd > Co > Mo.
Iron was the most abundant heavy metal in the present study. Fe ranged between 4.281 ppm in the treated group and 4.904 ppm in the control group . Molybdenum was the least abundant heavy metal in the investigation. Mo showed a minimum value of 0.003 ppm in the control group and its maximum value ( 0.004 ppm ) in the polluted–water group .

Aluminium (Al):
Results showed significant increase (P?0.05) when compared to control group. Aluminium ranged between 0.155 ppm in the control group and 0.550 ppm in the polluted-water group.

Cadmium (Cd):
Cadmium showed a minimum value of 0.001 ppm in the control group and its maximum value ( 0.087 ppm ) in the polluted –water group. Results revealed no significant change when compared to the control group .

The average mean of cadmium concentration in the present study lie within the maximum tolerable dietary level for cadmium for domestic animals, set by (NRC, 1980).
Cobalt (Co):
Cobalt showed a minimum value of 0.0028 ppm in the treated group and its maximum value ( 0.016 ppm ) in the polluted –water group. Results revealed no significant change when compared to the control group .

Chromium (Cr):
Chromium ranged between 0.089 ppm in the control group and 0.114 ppm in the polluted-water group. Chromium revealed no significant change when compared to the control group .

Copper (Cu):
Copper results showed significant increase (P?0.05) when compared to control group. Copper ranged between 0.635 ppm in the treated group and 0.971 ppm in the polluted-water group.

Iron (Fe):
Iron was the most abundant heavy metal in the present study, ranging between 4.281 ppm in the treated group and 4.904 ppm in the control group. Results revealed no significant change when compared to the control group .

Manganese (Mn):
Results showed significant increase (P?0.05) when compared to control group. Manganese ranged between 0.034 ppm in the control group and 0.105 ppm in the polluted-water group.

Molybdenum (Mo):
Molybdenum was the least abundant heavy metal in the investigation. Results showed significant increase (P?0.05) when compared to control group. Results revealed no significant change when compared to the control group. Molybdenum ranged between 0.003 ppm in the control group and 0.004 ppm in the polluted-water group.

Nickel (Ni):
Results showed significant increase (P?0.05) when compared to control group. Nickel ranged between 0.039 ppm in the control group and 0.322 ppm in the polluted-water group.

Lead (Pb):
Lead ranged between 0.020 ppm in the treated group and 0.281 ppm in the polluted-water group. Results revealed no significant change when compared to the control group .

Strontium (Sr):
Strontium ranged between 0.607 ppm in the control group and 0.767 ppm in the polluted-water group. Results revealed high significant increase when compared to the control group.
Vanadium (V):
Vanadium results showed no significant change when compared to the control group . Vanadium ranged between 0.031 ppm in the treated group and 0.130 ppm in the polluted-water group.

Zinc (Zn):
Zinc ranged between 1.435 ppm in the control group and 1.600 ppm in the polluted-water group. Results revealed no significant change when compared to the control group. This result agrees with that recorded by Amer (2009).

Correlation between serum minerals in different groups
Correlation matrix illustrated in table ( 8 ) showed that lead exhibited a positive correlation with Cadmium ( r= 0.931) & Nickel revealed a positive correlation with Manganese (r= 0.573). while Zinc showed a positive correlation with Strontium (r= 0.646).

Table ( 8 ): Correlation matrix between serum minerals in different groups .

Al Cd Co Cr Cu Fe MnMo Ni PbSrV Zn
Al 1 Cd 0.005 1 Co 0.138 -0.022 1 Cr 0.149 -0.023 0.170 1 Cu -0.020 -0.096 0.171 -0.171 1 Fe 0.001 0.032 0.059 0.023 0.398 1 Mn-0.007 -0.012 0.476 0.120 0.448 0.243 1 Mo -0.155 -0.061 -0.023 -0.089 0.087 -0.023 0.037 1 Ni -0.047 -0.020 0.411 0.119 -0.036 0.017 0.573 0.066 1 Pb0.087 0.931 0.074 0.002 -0.080 0.019 0.010 -0.101 -0.034 1 Sr-0.183 -0.070 -0.070 -0.160 -0.124 -0.334 -0.009 0.344 0.035 -0.127 1 V 0.070 0.381 0.111 0.010 -0.219 0.038 -0.018 -0.114 -0.003 0.331 -0.102 1 Zn -0.210 -0.030 -0.073 -0.159 0.009 -0.077 0.105 0.362 0.284 -0.117 0.646 -0.105 1
Milk Analyses:
Heavy metals :
Table (9): Comparison of The mean values of milk mineral levels between different treatments.

Elements
(ppm) Control polluted water polluted water + 4% bentoniteS.O.V.

Mean + SE Mean + SE Mean + SE Al 6667.9 3297.27a 13854.67 3938.05a 9316.67 3523.41a Ns
Cd 0.0001 0.000058a 0.00013 0.00009a 0.0001 0.000058a Ns
Co 0.053 0.028a 0.11 0.024a 0.08 0.01a Ns
Cr 0.180 0.018b 2.827 0.211a 0.763 0.076b *
Cu 0.0 0.0a 1.02 0.513a 0.850 0.609a Ns
Fe 92.180 13.614b 204.733 35.439a 125.043 35.296ab Ns
Mn1.747 0.141ab 3.523 0.508a 2.630 0.746ab Ns
Mo 0.150 0.064 a 0.253 0.035a 0.217 0.035a Ns
Ni 0.913 0.696a 7.320 5.254a 1.883 0.660a Ns
Pb0.023 0.023a 0.230 0.123a 0.163 0.061a Ns
Sr2.060 0.095a 2.460 0.280a 2.430 0.139a Ns
V 0.250 0.250b 2.670 1.072a 1.223 0.263ab Ns
Zn 4.327 0.194a 7.493 1.752a 4.373 0.679a Ns
N.S. = Non-significant, P?0.05 = significant, P?0.01 = highly significant. S.O.V. =source of Variance
Data is represented as mean & ± SE= Standard Error, M=Month,
Means with the same letter within the same row are not significantly different.

Fig.15 : Means of milk minerals in treatment groups compared to control group .

The selected heavy metals measured in milk samples of sheep included: Al, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Mo, Ni, Pb, Sr, V and Zn. Results showed significant increase (P?0.05) for chromium only compared to control group, while the other metals revealed no significant change. The average heavy metals concentrations were in the following order Al > Fe > Zn >Ni> Mn > Cr >V> Sr > Cu >Mo> Pb > Co > Cd.
Aluminium was the most abundant heavy metal in the present study. Aluminium ranged between 13854.67 ppm in the poluted group and 6667.9 ppm in the control group . Cadmium was the least abundant heavy metal in the investigation. Cadmium showed a minimum value of 0.0001 ppm in the control group and its maximum value ( 0.0013 ppm ) in the polluted–water group .

Lead (Pb):
lead results showed no significant change when compared to the control group . Lead ranged between 0.023 ppm in the control group and 0.230 ppm in the polluted-water group.

Cadmium (Cd):
Cadmium results showed no significant change when compared to the control group . Cadmium ranged between 0.0001 ppm in the treated group and 0.00013 ppm in the polluted-water group.

Copper (Cu):
Copper results showed no significant change when compared to the control group . Cadmium ranged between 0.0 ppm in the control group and 1.02 ppm in the polluted-water group. This result was in agreement with Al-Wabel, (2008) who measured the mean concentration of copper in camel milk in Qassim region of Saudi Arabia through ICP method resulting in the amount of 1.610 mg/kg.

Iron (Fe):
Iron results showed no significant change when compared to the control group . Iron ranged between 92.180 ppm in the control group and 204.733 ppm in the polluted-water group.

Zinc (Zn):
Zinc results showed no significant change when compared to the control group . Zinc ranged between 4.327 ppm in the control group and 7.493 ppm in the polluted-water group.

Vanadium (V):
Vanadium results showed no significant change when compared to the control group . Vanadium ranged between 0.250 ppm in the control group and 2.670 ppm in the polluted-water group.
Nickel (Ni):
As shown in Table ( 9 ) and Figure ( 15 ), the mean value of nickel in this study ranged between (0.913 ± 0.696) mg/L (ppm) in the control group and (7.320± 5.254) ppm in the polluted-water group.
Chromium (Cr):
Chromium ranged between 0.180 ppm in the control group and 2.827 ppm in the polluted-water group. Results revealed significant increase when compared to the control group.
4.2.2. Pesticide residues :
It was found that the translocation of the pesticide from water to animal ( milk) was very low and was non detected in some milk samples . i.e.: the persistence of the pesticide in the water was higher than that found in milk samples (Nag et al., 2007).
It was recognized that the pesticide residues found in milk samples decreased or disappeared by adding 4% bentonite and this indicates the efficiency of bentonite in chelating impurities and pollutants from water .

Fig. ( 16 ): Chromatogram of pesticide residue detection analysis in milk sample from animals in control group.

Fig. ( 17 ): Chromatogram of pesticide residue detection analysis in milk sample from animals in treatment 1 group .

Fig. ( 18 ): Chromatogram of pesticide residue detection analysis in milk sample from animals in treatment 2 group.

Water Analyses :
Table (10): Showing the Chemical and physical analysis of drinking water samples during different periods.

Period pH EC
(dS/m) TDS(ppm) soluble cations (me/L) soluble anions (me/L) SAR
Ca++ Mg++ Na+ K+ CO3-² HCO3- Cl- SO4-² zero time 7.15 6.58 4211.2 15.21 12.67 46.91 1.27 Nil 5.06 48.12 22.88 12.56
2nd month 7.23 4.61 2950.4 10.5 7.6 27.3 0.7 Nil 5.5 22.5 18.1 9.07
4th month 7.11 4.17 2668.8 9 6.45 25.52 0.73 Nil 6.27 22.22 13.21 9.18
6th month 7.55 5.42 3468.8 13.78 9.6 38.17 1.11 Nil 6.16 39.9 16.6 11.16
SAR: sodium adsorption ratio – TDS: EC * 640 .

The physicochemical analysis of water from the drain under investigation is shown in Tables ( 10 ), where pH values were (7.11 – 7.55 )with moderate values of EC (417 – 658 dS/cm), Total dissolved solids (2668.8 – 4211.2 ppm). Besides, the major constituents including Calcium and Magnesium (9.0 –15.21me/L and 6.45 -12.67me/L, respectively), CO3-2 and HCO3- (nil, and 5.06 –6.27me/L), Sulfates (13.21–22.88 me/L), Chloride (22.22-48.12me/L),Sodium (25.52-46.91 me/L) and Potassium (0.7–1.27 me/L).

Physical analyses :
pH (hydrogen ion concentration):
The pH values in the present study ranged between 7.15 and 7.55 for zero time of experiment and at the end of the experiment, respectively. These values were found to lie within the United States Public Health Standards (USPHS) limits of pH for drinking water (6.0-8.5) (De, 2002). Results are in a good agreement with El-Sheikh et al., (2010).Water pH was generally on the alkaline side in all samples . (7.11–7.55).

EC (Electrical conductivity) :
In the present study the total salinity (EC) is shown in table (10) expressed in deciSemens per meter (dS/m). Electrical conductivity ranged between (4.17 – 6.58 dS/m), through the study duration.

It is measured with the aid of EC meter which measures the resistance of water between two platinized electrodes. The instrument is standardized with known values of KCl solution .

Electrical conductivity is a measure of the potency of aqueous solution to carry an electric current. This ability depends on the occurrence of ions, their total concentration, mobility, parity and temperature of the medium. Thus, the more abundant the ions, the higher is the conductivity and vice versa APHA (1995).

The high value of EC may be due to domestic and agricultural wastes that contain high amount of organic and inorganic constituents .

TDS (total dissolved solids):
The TDS values in the present study were ranged between 4211.2, 2950.4, 2668.8 and 3468.8 ppm for zero time of experiment, after 2 months, after 4 months and at the end of the experiment, respectively.

Chemical analyses:
Hardness:
Hard water is the water having high mineral content. It has high concentrations of calcium and magnesium ions. These ions enter a water supply via leaching of minerals from rocks and soil (Disli et al., 2004).

Calcium:
Source of Ca+2 ion is mainly calcium minerals with carbonate and sulphate. In this respect, different concentrations of calcium may exist in water(Elmaci et al., 2008).

The Ca+2 ion concentrations in the present study ranged from 15.21 to 13.78 me/L for zero time of experiment and at the end of the experiment, respectively.

Magnesium (Mg+2):
Mg+2 is the most abundant elements in nature and it is a significant member in water hardness, it gives an unsatisfied taste to water WHO, 1996.
In the present study, Mg+2 ion concentration in water samples from the drain under investigation ranged between (6.45 -12.67) me/L.

Alkalinity:
It is composed mainly of carbonate (CO3-2) and bicarbonate (HCO3-1), alkalinity acts as pH stabilizer. Alkalinity, pH and hardness can affect the toxicity of many substances in the water. It is determined by simple titration with dil HCl in presence of phenolphthalein and methyl orange indicators.
Carbonate:
Once the pH touches 8.3, the presence of carbonates is indicated. It is measured by titration with standardized hydrochloric acid in the presence of phenolphthalein as indicator. Below pH 8.3, the carbonates are converted into equal amount of bicarbonates. The titration can also be done pH metrically or gravimetrically.
In the present study, carbonate is not detected,(nil), in any of the studied water samples .

Bicarbonate:
In the present study, bicarbonate value ranged between 5.06, 5.5, 6.27 and 6.16 me/L for zero time of experiment, after two months, after four months and at the end of the experiment, respectively , as shown in table (10 ).

Sulphate:
Sulfate values in the present study were ranged between 22.88, 18.1, 13.21 and 16.6 me/L for zero time of experiment, after 2 months, after 4 months and at the end of the experiment, respectively, as shown in table ( 10 ).

Chloride:
Chloride is very predominant in water systems as it is added to drinking water for different health and sanitary reasons. However, chloride level can be increased by contamination resulted from fertilizers, road salt, and industrial pollution as well as human and animal waste. The contaminants can cause exciting increases in chloride concentration, which should be closely controlled. The concentration of chloride is the indicator of sewage pollution and also imparts laxative effect (Behailu et al., 2017).

Chloride values in the present study were ranged between 48.12, 22.5, 22.22 and 39.9 me/L for zero time of experiment, after 2 months, after 4 months and at the end of the experiment, respectively, as shown in table ( 10 ).

Sodium:
As obvious, Na is the highest concentration among all of the cations in all water samples. Sodium values were ranged between 46.91, 27.3, 25.52 and 38.17 me/L for zero time of experiment, after 2 months, after 4 months and at the end of the experiment, respectively, as shown in table ( 10 ).

Potassium:
As obvious, K is the lowest concentration among all of the cations in all water samples. Potassium values were ranged between 1.27, 0.7, 0.73 and 1.11 me/L for zero time of experiment, after 2 months, after 4 months and at the end of the experiment, respectively, as shown in table ( 10 ).

Heavy metals :
Table (11): The mean values of mineral levels in different water samples .

Elements
(ppm) Fresh tap water Drain water polluted water + 4% bentoniteS.O.V.

Mean + SE Mean + SE Mean + SE Al 0.0302 0.000058c 8.135 0.00052a 1.315 0.00023b **
Cd 0.000067 0.000033b 0.005 0.00058ab 0.0001 0.000058a **
Co 0.000067 0.000033a 0.0085 0.0048a 0.0023 0.00095a ns
Cr 0.000007 0.000003b 0.0077 0.0037a 0.0114 0.000023a *
Cu 0.0028 0.000058c 0.021 0.0004a 0.011 0.00058b **
Fe 0.004 0.000058b 4.759 0.688a 1.371 0.013b **
Mn0.00036 0.00008c 0.098 0.001a 0.047 0.0019b **
Mo 0.002 0.0006b 0.041 0.0024 a 0.004 0.0006 b **
Ni 0.001 0.0003b 0.03 0.003a 0.006 0.001b **
Pb0.0001 0.00006b 0.004 0.001a 0.003 0.0004a *
Sr0.476 0.009b 139.285 8.846a 6.682 1.449b **
V 0.008 0.004a 0.051 0.029a 0.005 0.004a ns
Zn 0.003 0.0005c 0.043 0.0002a 0.011 0.0002b **
N.S. = Non-significant, P?0.05 = significant, P?0.01 = highly significant. S.O.V. =source of Variance
Data is represented as mean & ± SE= Standard Error, M=Month,
Means with the same letter within the same row are not significantly different.

Fig. 19 : The mean values of mineral levels in different water samples .

Selected heavy metals measured in different water samples included: Al, Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Mo, Ni, Pb, Sr, V and Zn. The results were represented in table (11) and figure ( 19 ). Results showed significant increase (P?0.05) for some metals compared to control group (Cr & Pb) and highly significant increase (P?0.01) for (Cd, Al, Fe, Cu , Sr, Mn, Mo, Ni and Zn) while others showed no significant change (Co& V). The average mean of heavy metals concentrations were in the following order Sr> Al > Fe >Mn> V > Zn >Mo> Ni > Cu > Co > Cr > Cd >Pb.
Cadmium (Cd):
Cadmium source to the environment is from paint and pigments, and plastic stabilizers mining and smelting operations and industrial operations, including electroplating, reprocessing cadmium scrap, and incineration of cadmium containing plastics. The remaining cadmium releases are from fossil fuel use, fertilizer application, and sewage sludge disposal. Cadmium may enter drinking water because of corrosion of galvanized pipe.

The mean values of cadmium levels in different water samples is shown in table (11) and figure (19); All water samples had low cadmium concentration, ranging from ?0.0001 ppm in control group to 0.005 ppm in polluted-water group.
Molybdenum (Mo):
The mean values of Molybdenum levels in different water samples is shown in table (11) and figure (19); All water samples had low molybdenum concentration, ranging from 0.002 ppm in control group, ?0.001 ppm in bentonite-treated water group and 0.041 ppm in polluted-water group.

Copper (Cu):
The mean values of copper levels in different water samples is shown in table (11) and figure (19); All water samples had low copper concentration, ranging from 0.0028 ppm in control group to 0.021 ppm in polluted-water group.

Iron (Fe):
The mean values of iron levels in different water samples is shown in table (11) and figure (19); All water samples had low iron concentration, ranging between 0.004, 4.759 and 1.371 ppm in control group, bentonite-treated water group and polluted-water group, respectively.

Nickel (Ni):
The mean values of nickel levels in different water samples is shown in table (11) and figure (19); All water samples had low nickel concentration, ranging between 0.001, 0.03 and 0.006 ppm in control group, bentonite-treated water group and polluted-water group, respectively.

Zinc (Zn):
The mean values of zinc levels in different water samples is shown in table (11) and figure (19); All water samples had low zinc concentration, ranging between 0.003, 0.043 and 0.011 ppm in control group, bentonite-treated water group and polluted-water group, respectively.

Manganese (Mn):
The mean values of manganese levels in different water samples is shown in table (11) and figure (19); All water samples had low manganese concentration, ranging between 0.00036, 0.098 and 0.047 ppm in control group, bentonite-treated water group and polluted-water group, respectively.

Lead (Pb):
The mean values of lead levels in different water samples is shown in table (11) and figure (19); All water samples had low lead concentration, ranging between 0.0001, 0.004 and 0.003 ppm in control group, bentonite-treated water group and polluted-water group, respectively.

Pesticide residues :
Pesticide is a general term for substances used for poisoning pests (weeds, insects, molds, rodents etc.) The pesticides most acutely dangerous to humans are insecticides and rodenticides. Not every pesticide is exactly toxic to humans or other non-target species (Aspelin AL, 1994). Synthetic pesticides have been popular with farmers, because of their simplicity in application, efficacy and economic returns.

Fig. ( 20 ): Chromatogram of pesticide residue detection analysis in water sample from control group.

Fig. ( 21 ): Chromatogram of pesticide residue detection analysis in polluted water sample from treatment 1 group.

Fig. ( 22 ): Chromatogram of pesticide residue detection analysis in water sample treated with 4% bentonite from treatment 2 group.

Microbiological analyses
Escherichia coli detection is widely used as an indicator of fecal pollution when controlling the drinking water microbial quality (Rompré et al., 2002) .

Low levels of E. coli (10–110 cfu/ml) were detected in water samples used for drinking animals. Only one water sample was positive for E. coli (50cfu/ ml) during the study.

The water samples contained E. Coli in a limited number of samples and in low concentrations during the experiment duration. In beginning sample, E. coli was detected in ( 25%), Among a total of 4 water samples analysed during the study duration, only one sample (25%) contained E. coli, and in the rest water samples, E. coli was not detected in any water sample.

Histopathological studies :
Histological changes of liver
Histopathological findings of liver tissue of sheep in the control group (G1), received fresh tap water, there was no histopathological alteration and the normal histological structure of the central vein and surrounding hepatocytes in the parenchyma was recorded in Fig.23).

Histopathological findings of liver tissue of sheep of (G2), received drainage water, massive inflammatory cells infiltration was detected in the portal area associated with congestion and dilatation in the portal vein (Fig.24). The portal area showed also hyalinization with lose of fibrillar structure (Fig.25), as well as fibrosis (Fig.26), multiple newly formed bile ducts (Fig.27) and hyperplasia with hypertrophy I n the lining epithelium of the bile ducts (Fig.28). These findings are in the same line with (Stentiford, 2003) who studied the histopathological biomarkers in estuarine fish species for the assessment of biological effects of contaminants, and recorded presence of inflammatory lesions, hepatocellular fibrillar inclusions, and preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions in a higher degree in fish captured in polluted environments than in fish from reference sites.

Histopathological findings of liver tissue of sheep of (G3), received drainage water plus bentonite, There was mild dilatation in the portal vein (Fig.29).

Fig.23 Sheep liver in ( G1), Showing normal histlogical structure of the central vein and surrounding hepatocytes in hepatic parenchyma . (H&E,x40)

Fig. 24 Sheep liver in (G2), Showing massive inflammatory cells infiltration in the portal area with dilation and congestion in Portal vein. (H&E,x40)

Fig. 25 Sheep liver in (G2), Showing hyalinization in the fibrous tissue of the portal area with lose of fibrillation. (H&E,x40)

Fig. 26 Sheep liver in (G2), Showing fibrosis in the portal area.(H&E,x40)

Fig . 27 Sheep liver in (G2), Showing multiple newly formed bile ducts formation in the portal area. (H&E,x40)

Fig . 28 Sheep liver in (G2), Showing hyperplasia and hypertrophy in lining epithelium of the bile duct in the portal area. (H&E,x40)

Fig. 29 liver of sheep in (G3) Showing mild dilatation in portal vein. (H&E,x40)
4.4. 2. Histological changes of Kidney
Histopathological findings of kidney tissue of sheep kept as control (G1), received fresh tap water, There was no histopathological alteration and the normal histological structure of the glomeruli and tubules at the cortex were recorded in (Fig.30).

Histopathological findings of kidney tissue of sheep of (G2), received drainage water, focal inflammatory cells infiltration in between the tubules. (Fig. 31), degeneration and necrosis in tubules lining epithelium. (Fig. 32),focal haemorrhage in between the tubules at corticomedullary junctions. (Fig. 33)
Histopathological findings of kidney tissue of sheep of (G3), received drainage water plus bentonite,Mild congestion was detected in the cortical blood vessels (Fig.34). The corticomedullary portion showed focal haemorrhage (Fig.35).

Fig. 30 Sheep kidney in (G1) Showing normal histological structure of the glomeruli and tubules at the cortex. (H&E,x40)

Fig . 31 Sheep kidney in (G2)Showing focal inflammatory cells infiltration in between the tubules. (H&E,x40)

Fig. 32 Sheep kidney in (G2) Showing degeneration and necrosis in tubules lining epithelium. (H&E,x40)

Fig. 33 Sheep kidney in (G2) Showing focal haemorrhage in between the tubules at corticomedullary junctions. (H&E,x40)

Fig. 34 Sheep kidney in (G3) Showing mild congestion in cortical blood vessels. (H&E,x40)

Fig .35 Sheep kidney in (G3) Showing focal hemorrhage in between the tubules at cortico-medullary junctions. (H&E,x40)
4.4.3. Histological changes of Heart
Histopathological findings of heart tissue of sheep kept as control (G1), received fresh tap water, There was no histopathological alteration and the normal histological structure of the myocardial bundles was recorded in (Fig.36).
Histopathological findings of heart tissue of sheep of (G2), received drainage water,focal inflammatory cells infiltration in between the myocardial bundles. (Fig. 37), There was parasitic cysts embedded in the myocardium (Fig.38).

Histopathological findings of heart tissue of sheep of (G3), received drainage water plus bentonite, Focal inflammatory cells infiltration was detected in between the myocardial bundles (Fig.39). The myocardium showed also parasitic cysts (Fig.40).

Fig. 36 Sheep heart in (G1)Showing normal histological structure of the myocardial bundles. (H&E,x40)

Fig . 37 Sheep heart in (G2)Showing focal inflammatory cells infiltration in between the myocardial bundles. (H&E,x40)

Fig . 38 Sheep heart in (G2) Showing parasitic cysts embedded in the myocardial bundles. (H&E,x40)

Fig. 39 Sheep heart in (G3) Showing focal Inflammatory cells infiltration in between the myocardial bundles. (H&E,x40)

Fig . 40 Sheep heart in (G3) Showing parasitic cysts embedded in the myocardial bundles. (H& E,x40)

x

Hi!
I'm Simon!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out