Hindawi

Journal of Environmental and Public Health

Volume 2017, Article ID 7515130, 12 pages
[Link]

Research Article
Land Use Land Cover Changes in Detection of Water Quality:
A Study Based on Remote Sensing and Multivariate Statistics

Ang Kean Hua

Department of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Environmental Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM),
43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

Correspondence should be addressed to Ang Kean Hua; angkeanhua@[Link]

Received 6 December 2016; Revised 15 February 2017; Accepted 19 February 2017; Published 9 March 2017

Academic Editor: Evelyn O. Talbott

Copyright © 2017 Ang Kean Hua. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Malacca River water quality is affected due to rapid urbanization development. The present study applied LULC changes towards
water quality detection in Malacca River. The method uses LULC, PCA, CCA, HCA, NHCA, and ANOVA. PCA confirmed DS, EC,
salinity, turbidity, TSS, DO, BOD, COD, As, Hg, Zn, Fe, E. coli, and total coliform. CCA confirmed 14 variables into two variates;
first variate involves residential and industrial activities; and second variate involves agriculture, sewage treatment plant, and animal
husbandry. HCA and NHCA emphasize that cluster 1 occurs in urban area with Hg, Fe, total coliform, and DO pollution; cluster 3
occurs in suburban area with salinity, EC, and DS; and cluster 2 occurs in rural area with salinity and EC. ANOVA between LULC
and water quality data indicates that built-up area significantly polluted the water quality through E. coli, total coliform, EC, BOD,
COD, TSS, Hg, Zn, and Fe, while agriculture activities cause EC, TSS, salinity, E. coli, total coliform, arsenic, and iron pollution; and
open space causes contamination of turbidity, salinity, EC, and TSS. Research finding provided useful information in identifying
pollution sources and understanding LULC with river water quality as references to policy maker for proper management of Land
Use area.

1. Introduction LULC changes, especially from the perspective of demand

for built-up area, agricultural activities, and water resources.
Land Use Land Cover (LULC) refers to two separate ter- Ecological expertise is very concerned with LULC changes
minologies that are often used interchangeably [1, 2]. Land that impact biodiversity and aquatic ecosystems [4]. LULC
Cover can be defined as the physical characteristics of the changes in a watershed will affect water quality, leading to
earth’s surface which involve vegetation, water, soil, and increased surface runoff, reduced groundwater discharge,
other physical features created through human activities like and transfer of pollutants [2, 4]. Therefore, LULC information
settlements, while Land Use refers to land used by humans for at the watershed level is important for selection, planning,
habitats concerning economic activities [1]. LULC patterns monitoring, and management of water resource so that the
depend on human usage in terms of natural and socioe- changes in Land Use meet the increasing demand for human
conomic development through space and time. In other needs and welfare without compromising water quality.
words, Land Use changes have the ability to affect the Land Various research studies have been conducted about
Cover and vice versa. Shifting into possibility negative impact the change analysis of watersheds, which are important
through the Land Use perspective for social activities is affect- in developing effective management strategies to protect
ing Land Cover to change, especially in biodiversity, water water resources [1, 5–7]. Watershed management is necessary
and earth radiation, trace gas emission, and other processes because a watershed is not only a hydrological unit [8] but
that come together to affect the climate and biosphere [2, 3]. also plays an important part in socioecological perspective
These changes are attributed to only one main factor in terms by providing economical, food, and social security as well
of size and pattern, namely, “population growth.” Increasing as provision of life support services to local residents [9].
population growth directly and indirectly contributes to LULC changes in the watershed area for urbanization and
 4642, 2017, 1, Downloaded from [Link] by Nat Prov Indonesia, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
2 Journal of Environmental and Public Health

deforestation will continuously have negative impacts on N

water quality and indirectly affect the nature of a watershed W E
ecosystem. Hence, understanding of the spatial and temporal
variations that occur in a watershed over time as well as S
explanation of the interaction between hydrological compo-
nents of the watershed will allow better water conservation
strategies to be formulated [5]. Specifically, remote sensing
has been widely used to classify and map LULC changes
with different techniques and data sets, such as Landsat
images that provide better classification of different landscape
components at a large scale [10]. Several change detection
techniques have been developed in remotely sensed image
with continuous debate on the advantages and disadvantages
of each technique. These include unsupervised classification
or clustering, supervised classification, PCA, hybrid classi-
fication, and fuzzy classification, which are all commonly
applied and used in classification [1, 2, 11, 12]. Although vari-
ous classification techniques have been proposed, supervised
classification methods are considered as favorable for change
detection analysis. More recently, researchers have applied
supervised classification for several LULC change detection
for several research aims and purpose [1–3, 13]. Decimal degrees
The Malacca River watershed area has been selected for a

0.0125
0.025
change detection study because of its uncontrolled urbaniza- 1 cm = 1 km

0.05
tion, unmanageable sewage discharge, and active soil erosion

0
and tree cutting. Apart from these actions, pesticide residues
and animal husbandry residues are suspected to become
major concerns in the watershed area due to increasing sampling_area
agricultural and poultry farm activities [14]. Rapid urban Malacca River
development in the study area has led to several problems Tributary Malacca River
like fragmentation of aquatic animals, soil erosion, and river Malacca Watershed
Sub_Basin
pollution due to deforestation and discharge of municipal <all other values>
garbage and industrial waste [15]. This study is carried out SB_Area
using the remote sensing application to differentiate the Kampung Batu Berendam subbasin
extent of changes which occurred in the Malacca River Kampung Cheng subbasin
watershed for 15 years. The objectives of this study are to Kampung Harmoni Belimbing Dalam subbasin
examine the potential sources of pollutants in the Malacca Kampung Kelemak subbasin
River between 2001, 2009, and 2015; identify the different Kampung Panchor subbasin
Kampung Sungai Petai subbasin
LULC classes and the pattern of changes in watershed from
Kampung Tualang subbasin
2001 to 2009 and 2009 to 2015; and determine the connection
of LULC changes in contributing to pollutant sources in the Figure 1: Sampling stations and subbasin of the study area.
Malacca River.

2. Materials and Methods

Panchor subbasin, Kampung Pulau subbasin, Kampung Sun-
2.1. Study Area. Malacca state is located in the South West gai Petai subbasin, Kampung Tamah Merah subbasin, and
of Peninsular Malaysia. The geographical coordinates are Kampung Tualang subbasin. Only 7 subbasins of 13 were
2∘ 23󸀠 16.08󸀠󸀠 N to 2∘ 24󸀠 52.27󸀠󸀠 N for latitude and 102∘ 10󸀠 36.45󸀠󸀠 E selected, with 9 sampling stations along the river (Figure 1).
to 102∘ 29󸀠 17.68󸀠󸀠 E for longitude. Malacca state can be divided Malacca state has a reservoir located between Alor Gajah
into three districts, namely, Alor Gajah, Jasin, and Malacca and Malacca Central. This is the Durian Tunggal Reservoir,
Central. The catchment areas in Malacca state are approxi- with a catchment of 20 km2 . It acts as a source of water
mately 670 km2 and contain an 80 km length of the Malacca for Malacca residents. Increasing local population has led
River that flows through Alor Gajah and Malacca Central. to increasing public facilities such as transport, healthcare,
Generally, the river is formed by 13 subbasins of watershed, accommodation, sewage, and water supply services [14–16].
namely, Kampung Ampang Batu Gadek subbasin, Kampung Due to the drastic population growth, rapid urban develop-
Balai subbasin, Kampung Batu Berendam subbasin, Kam- ment in the Strait of Malacca has also increased, especially
pung Buloh China subbasin, Kampung Cheng subbasin, from a Land Use perspective. A majority of residents are
Kampung Gadek subbasin, Kampung Harmoni Belimbing centralized in the city, which extends about 10 km to the west,
Dalam subbasin, Kampung Kelemak subbasin, Kampung 10 km to the east, and 20 km to the north. The changes in Land
 4642, 2017, 1, Downloaded from [Link] by Nat Prov Indonesia, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Environmental and Public Health 3

Use have continuously developed until today, which is in line (PCA), canonical correlation analysis (CCA), hierarchical
with the vision and mission of sustainable tourism sector. cluster analysis (HCA) and nonhierarchical cluster analysis
Eventually, these actions indirectly contribute to economic (NHCA), and analysis of variance (ANOVA). Generally,
growth and political changes, strengthened cultural and PCA can be expressed through (1) original data reduced to
social relationships, and also impact environmental quality, dominant components of factors (source of variation) that
especially the water in Malacca River. influence the observed data variance and (2) the whole data
set extracted to produce eigenvalue and eigenvectors [18].
3. Data Collection Only eigenvalues greater than 1 are considered significant
[19] to perform new group variable Varimax Factor (VFs).
Nine sampling stations were chosen along the Malacca River. A VFs coefficient with 0.6 is considered “moderate” and will
River water quality data included samples in year 2015 be taken into account as factor loadings. PCA is applied in
analyzed based on APHA [17], while river water quality this study to define possibility of pollutant sources in the
data for 2001 and 2009 were collected from the Department Malacca River. Continuously, the components of PCA will be
of Environment (DOE), Malaysia. The primary data was extracted into CCA for further analysis. CCA have an ability
collected in 2015 to obtain recent water quality data status to investigate relationship between the two groups. In other
as well as field data verification. There are only two methods words, (1) CCA will seek for vectors of a and b in random
of measurements involved: in situ analysis and laboratory variables of 𝛼𝑋 and 𝛽𝑌 to maximize the correlation of 𝜌 =
analysis. River water quality was analyzed according to corr(𝛼𝑋, 𝛽𝑌); (2) random variable of 𝑈 = 𝛼𝑋 and 𝑉 = 𝛽𝑌
physicochemical parameters, that is, pH, temperature, elec- will be constructed to perform new sets of canonical variates
trical conductivity (EC), salinity, turbidity, total suspended that are linear combinations from the original variables with
solid (TSS), dissolved solids (DS), dissolved oxygen (DO), simple correlation between 𝑈 and V; (3) then other vectors
biological oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand 𝑈 and 𝑉 having maximal correlation subject but being
(COD), and ammoniacal nitrogen (NH3 N), trace elements uncorrelated with the first canonical variate will be produced
(i.e., mercury, cadmium, chromium, arsenic, zinc, lead, and as the second canonical variates [20]. CCA is applied in this
iron), and biological parameters (i.e., Escherichia coliform study to determine accurately and precisely pollutant sources
and total coliform) as shown in Table 5. Additionally, the in the river. HCA is able to sort different objects into the same
remote sensing imagery of selected research areas for 2001, group based on similarity between objects, which involve
2009, and 2015 was obtained from ARSM and downloaded (1) Ward’s methods using variance analysis to minimize
from the USGS Earth Explorer of the selected research area between any two clusters [18, 21]; (2) measuring the similarity
in Malacca state. Landsat 5 TM data were obtained for 2001 through Euclidean distance between two samples [18, 21]; and
and 2009, while Landsat 8 data was obtained for 2015. (3) a dendogram to provide the results for high similarity
with small distances between clusters in a group [12]. This
4. Data Analysis study employed HCA to determine possible area contributing
to pollution in the study area. Unlike HCA, NHCA with
4.1. River Water Data the involvement of 𝐾-means method is used to obtain the
correct classification of pollutant sources based on the PCA
4.1.1. Water Quality Analysis. Water samples were analyzed components provided. Lastly, ANOVA will be used to analyze
based on in situ measurement and laboratory analysis. In between Land Use classes of LULC changes analysis with
situ measurement involves pH testing using a SevenGo water quality from factor loadings of PCA analysis. The main
Duo pro probe (Mettler Toledo AG); turbidity test using purposes of using ANOVA are to determine and to prove
a portable turbidity meter (Handled Turbidimeter Hach the existing of LULC classes that react as pollutant sources
2100); and multiparameter probe (Orion Star Series Portable to impact the water quality and cause contamination in the
Meter) tests on temperature, EC, DS, salinity, and DO. Malacca River.
Meanwhile, laboratory analysis involves measurement on
NH3 N using a spectrophotometer based Hach Method 8038;
4.2. Remote Sensing Data
COD parameter using APHA 5220B open reflux technique;
BOD parameter measure using APHA 5210B (Hach Method 4.2.1. Image Preprocessing, LULC Classification, and Change
8043); TSS measure using APHA 2540D method; E. coli Detection Analysis. Satellite images required preprocessing
and coliform test using membrane filtration method based to ensure that the primary object could be established into a
APHA 9221B; and trace metal test using an inductive coupled more direct affiliation between acquired data and biophysical
plasma-mass spectrometry (ICP-MS, ELAN DRC-e, Perkin phenomena [1]. The preprocessing was accomplished using
Elmer). Each sample underwent the tests in triplicate before ArcGIS version 10.0 for georeferencing, mosaicking, and
calculating the mean value, and standard deviation (SD) was subsetting of the image for the Area of Interest (AOI).
used as an indication of the precision of each parameter Landsat 8 images underwent spatial sharpening using the
measured with less than 20%. panchromatic bands which resulted in images with a 15 m
resolution. Meanwhile, Landsat 5 TM images for 2001 and
4.1.2. Statistical Analysis. The analysis results are then input 2009 were in an original 30 m resolution. Further image
into Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) version 23 processing analysis was carried out using ENVI 5.0. The
for statistical analysis using principal component analysis image was displayed in natural color composite using a band
 4642, 2017, 1, Downloaded from [Link] by Nat Prov Indonesia, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
4 Journal of Environmental and Public Health

Table 1: Classes delineated on the basis of supervised classification.

Class name Description

Vegetation Including all agricultural and forest lands.
Built-up area Including all residential, commercial, industrial, and transportation.
Water Including all water bodies (river, lakes, gravels, stream, canals, and reservoirs).
Open space Including all land areas that exposed soil and barren area influenced by human.

Table 2: Magnitude and percentage of LULC change from 2001–2009–2015.

Total area and percentage Magnitude of change

Class 2001 2009 2015 2001–2009 2009–2015
Km2 % Km2 % Km2 % Km2 % Km2 %
Built-up area 196 29.3 245 36.6 337 50.3 +49 +7.3 +92 +13.7
Vegetation 271 40.4 202 30.1 221 33 −69 −10.3 +19 +2.9
Water 138 20.6 97 14.5 30 4.5 −41 −6.1 −67 −10
Open space 65 9.7 126 18.8 82 12.2 +61 +9.1 −44 −6.6
Total 670 100 670 100 670 100 0 0 0 0

combination of 3, 2, and 1 for Landsat 5 TM and 4, 3, and 2 where 𝑃(𝐴) is the number of times the 𝑘 raters agree and 𝑃(𝐸)
for Landsat 8. Maximum likelihood supervised classification is the number of times the 𝑘 raters are expected to agree only
was performed using several selected regions, with Regions by chance [1, 23]. Meanwhile, user accuracy can be defined
of Interest (ROIs) based on delineated classes of agriculture, as the probability that a pixel in an image actually represents
built-up areas, water, and open space area (Table 1). a class on the ground, while producer’s accuracy indicates
In performing LULC change detection, a postclassifi- the probability a pixel being correctly classified and is mainly
cation detection method is applied in ENVI 5.0, which used to determine how well an area can be classified [23].
involves two independently classified images used to make As described previously, the four categories of classes that
comparisons to produce change information on a pixel basis. have been delineated should have a minimum of 50 points
The interpretation between images provides changes in “- for each considered category to increase the percentage of
from, -to” information. Classified images of two different data accuracy assessment [1]. Therefore, this study indicates the
sets were compared using cross-tabulation in determining overall classification accuracies for 2001, 2009, and 2015 are
qualitative and quantitative aspects of changes for the periods 89.51%, 88.49%, and 92.21%, with kappa statistics of 0.87, 0.85,
from 2001 to 2009 and 2009 to 2015. The magnitude of change and 0.90, respectively. According to Weng [24], the minimum
and percentage of changes can be expressed in a simple level for accuracy assessment in identification of Land Use
formula as follows: and LULC classes in remote sensing data should be at least
85%.
𝐾 = 𝐹 − 𝐼,
(𝐹 − 𝐼) (1) 5. Results and Discussions
𝐴= × 100,
𝐼 5.1. Magnitude and Percentage of LULC Changes between
where 𝐾 is magnitude of changes, 𝐴 is percentage of changes, 2001–2009 and 2009–2015. The magnitude and percentage
𝐹 is first data, and 𝐼 is reference data [11]. of LULC changes from 2001 to 2009 and 2009 to 2015 are
summarized in Table 2. The results indicate Land Use type
4.2.2. Accuracy Assessment. Accuracy classification assess- in 2001 for built-up area is 196 km2 (29.3%), agriculture is
ments for 2001, 2009, and 2015 images were carried out 271 km2 (40.4%), water is 138 km2 (20.6%), and open space
to determine the quality of information provided from the is 65 km2 (9.7%). In 2009, only built-up area and open space
data. If classification data is to be used for change detection had increased, by about 49 km2 (7.3%) and 61 km2 (9.1%) to
analysis, it is important to conduct accuracy assessments for become the total of 245 km2 (36.6%) and 126 km2 (18.8%),
individual classifications [1]. Kappa test is used to perform respectively. However, agriculture and water are reduced by
measurement of the classification accuracy as the test is able about 10.3% and 6.1%, which resulted in the total area of
to account for all elements in confusion matrix including 202 km2 and 97 km2 . Lastly, built-up areas have continuously
diagonal elements [22]. A kappa test is a measure calculated increased by about 13.7% to provide a total area of 337 km2 ,
using predefined producer and user assigned ratings, which and agricultural land also increases for 2.9% to perform
can be expressed as follows: total area of 221 km2 . Nevertheless, open space areas have
decreased about 44 km2 to end up total area of 82 km2
𝑃 (𝐴) − 𝑃 (𝐸) (12.2%), and water coverage continues to decrease by 10% or
𝐾= , (2)
1 − 𝑃 (𝐸) 67 km2 to result in the total area of 30 km2 (14.5%). Generally,
 4642, 2017, 1, Downloaded from [Link] by Nat Prov Indonesia, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Environmental and Public Health 5

Table 3: Cross-tabulation of LULC classes between 2001 and 2009 in (km2 ).

Class Built-up area Agriculture Water Open space Total

Built-up area 196 27 22 0 245
Vegetation 0 136 66 0 202
Water 0 46 35 16 97
Open space 0 62 15 49 126
Total 196 271 138 65 670

Table 4: Cross-tabulation of LULC classes between 2009 and 2015 in (km2 ).

Class Built-up area Agriculture Water Open space Total

Built-up area 245 62 12 18 337
Vegetation 0 140 40 41 221
Water 0 0 11 19 30
Open space 0 0 34 48 82
Total 245 202 97 126 670

cross-tabulation is used in this study to determine quantities within residential areas adjacent to the river. Next, PC 3 show
of conversions from a particular Land Cover to another Land positive loading on BOD and COD with the total of variance
Cover category from a particular later date. The magnitudes of 10.1%, which can be related to anthropogenic sources,
of LULC class changes from agricultural land and water into having high possibility of coming from sewage treatment
open space and built-up area from 2001 to 2009 are tabulated plant that contributed as point sources pollution [19].
in Table 3. In other words, the majority of the water body area PC 4 loadings with 10% of total variance have positive
is reduced and converted into open space and agricultural loadings on zinc and iron. Zinc pollution exists due to large
land, including certain areas that already transformed into numbers of houses and building development in urban and
built-up (Figures 3(a) and 3(b)). Meanwhile, Table 4 shows rural area that uses metallic roofs coated with zinc, where it
the LULC class changes from water and open space area can be mobilized into the atmosphere and waterways when
into built-up area and agricultural land, as built-up areas are contacting with acid rain or smog [19], while iron pollution
continuously increasing from open space and water coverage happens because of agricultural activities in most parts of the
is transformed into agricultural land from 2009 to 2015 rural area [18] and originating from industrial effluents in
(Figures 3(b) and 3(c)). urban area [19]. PC 5 indicated positive loading of arsenic
with total variance of 8.5%, showing that the pollutions are
5.2. Water Quality Assessment Based on Determination of strong possibility of involving with the agricultural land [25].
Pollutant Sources. PCA was applied to compare composition PC 6 loadings with 8.0% of total variance have positive
patterns between water quality parameters and to determine loadings on E. coli and total coliform, while negative loadings
the factors influenced by the identified regions in Malacca are dissolved oxygen. The presence of E. coli and total
state. According to Table 6, there are 7 PCs identified through coliform pollution in the river is strongly connected with
eigenvalues larger than 1 with 69% of total variance. Principal raw and municipal sewage from domestic and poultry farm
component (PC) 1 loadings with 15.3% of total variance have mainly in rural and urban area. In addition to this, surface
positive loadings for dissolved solids, electrical conductivity, runoff and discharge from wastewater treatment plants from
and salinity, which are connected to agricultural activities urban areas as well as dissolved oxygen pollution may be
and contribute to nonpoint source pollution through surface impacted by high levels of dissolved organic matter that
runoff [18]. Salinity pollution exists due to pesticide usage in consume large amounts of oxygen [19] and are suspected to
oil palm and rubber plantations as well as animal husbandry come from agriculture activities and forest areas which are
(chickens, cows, and goats) carried out by some local resi- the dominant Land Use type in rural regions. Lastly, PC 7
dents along the Malacca River. Apart from that, erosion of resulted in positive loading of mercury with total variance
riverbank due to dredging activity in the river is contributed of 6.8%, highly suspected to link with chemical industrial
to electrical conductivity pollution in the river. PC 2 explains wastewater [25] that the majority occur at middle-stream
positive loadings of turbidity and total suspended solid and downstream of Malacca River. Therefore, the most
with total variance of 10.3%. This condition could happen likely sources of pollutants in terms of physicochemical and
when there are interruptions of human activities in terms of biological parameters are agriculture, residential activities,
hydrologic modifications like dredging, water diversions, and septic tank and sewage treatment plant activities, animal
channelization causing disruption in the Malacca River [16]. husbandry, industrial activities, and open space activities,
On the other hand, increasing population growth leading which have an important role in specifying changes in LULC.
to land clearing increase for urban development [18, 19] Continuously, CCA is carried out on the sets of data
and surface runoff cause road edge erosion [19] to happen obtained from 7 PCs. There are 14 variables in the response
 6
Table 5: Mean (and standard deviation) values of water quality data along the Malacca River for years 2001, 2009, and 2015 (𝑛 = 20).
Mean/SD
Category Unit
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9
6.95 6.71 6.60 6.69 6.73 6.74 7.16 6.79 6.71
pH —
0.54 0.34 0.31 0.43 0.29 0.37 0.57 0.46 0.41
∘ 28.16 28.39 28.10 27.83 27.69 27.72 28.47 29.12 28.43
Temp C
1.39 1.62 1.49 1.50 1.33 1.27 1.10 1.70 1.09
15.58 3.22 1.38 0.19 0.04 0.04 15.89 0.22 0.04
Sal %
10.62 4.84 2.65 0.33 0.03 0.02 11.69 0.19 0.03
19675.85 669.08 751.91 149.84 131.26 94.81 21440.05 575.97 421.67
EC 𝜇S/cm
15404.51 804.15 1153.24 128.93 84.43 38.87 17392.75 452.25 597.87
87.22 50.44 92.31 137.89 172.25 168.11 103.11 38.25 110.61
TSS mg/l
98.09 55.81 60.05 127.04 176.29 156.76 98.85 14.56 99.65
11596.37 496.24 367.15 136.13 53.87 55.05 6342.73 741.55 102.86
DS mg/l
9874.23 547.70 488.24 168.28 23.44 22.50 9143.48 2557.64 115.34
115.93 72.32 298.37 170.26 220.29 180.42 57.86 120.63 174.35
Tur NTU
137.47 75.14 356.98 196.22 227.55 156.13 61.15 146.48 191.67
5.36 7.14 4.83 3.94 3.97 4.11 5.61 8.64 4.69
BOD mg/l
3.42 3.49 2.37 1.82 1.59 1.45 1.86 1.82 2.35
40.86 39.53 31.72 24.56 26.83 21.94 33.86 41.69 25.36
COD mg/l
23.79 19.64 12.46 12.60 11.46 4.93 16.44 16.47 8.36
3.03 3.17 3.94 5.26 5.82 6.04 4.21 4.35 5.96
DO mg/l
1.61 1.54 1.74 1.32 1.11 0.95 1.25 2.43 0.74
1.91 2.64 1.54 0.42 0.32 0.38 1.95 3.64 0.48
NH3 N mg/l
1.95 1.68 1.11 0.33 0.27 0.33 1.86 2.17 0.26
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
As mg/l
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Hg mg/l
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cd mg/l
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Cr mg/l
0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Pb mg/l
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.04 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04
Zn mg/l
0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.02 0.03
0.23 0.45 0.72 1.00 0.81 0.85 0.21 0.72 0.85
Fe mg/l
0.32 0.38 0.60 0.69 0.59 0.76 0.26 0.54 0.51
413219.44 308180.56 295641.67 372263.89 246772.22 280902.78 110611.11 153483.33 113047.22
Total coliform Count/100 ml
489224.47 253164.67 394028.86 665998.32 331636.34 304712.75 106139.77 89787.51 87121.27
73322.22 45211.11 26426.86 11952.08 8181.39 31202.78 14315.08 31331.94 22167.50
E. coli Count/100 ml
60836.76 42416.73 31735.22 16765.82 7885.95 48253.61 16147.08 35706.19 33138.80
Tur means turbidity; DS means dissolved solid; Con means electrical conductivity; Sal means salinity; Temp means temperature; DO means dissolved oxygen; BOD means biological oxygen demand; COD means
chemical oxygen demand; TSS means total suspended solids; pH means acidic or basic water; NH3 N means ammoniacal nitrogen; E. coli means Escherichia coliform; Coli means coliform; As means arsenic; Hg
means mercury; Cd means cadmium; Cr means chromium; Pb means lead; Zn means zinc; Fe means iron; SD means standard deviation; S1 to S9 means Station 1 to Station 9.
Journal of Environmental and Public Health

4642, 2017, 1, Downloaded from [Link] by Nat Prov Indonesia, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
 4642, 2017, 1, Downloaded from [Link] by Nat Prov Indonesia, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Environmental and Public Health 7

Table 6: Varimax rotation PCs for water quality data within Malacca River basin.

Principle component
Variables (unit)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Turbidity (NTU) −.084 .761 .020 .162 .154 −.087 −.040
Dissolved solid (mg/l) .806 −.048 .016 −.087 .093 .111 −.021
Electrical conductivity (uS) .924 .011 .045 −.034 −.120 .050 .003
Salinity (ppt) .913 −.018 .010 −.014 .064 .031 .007
Temperature (∘ C) .024 −.290 .318 −.370 −.525 .011 −.229
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l) −.127 .254 −.207 −.184 .051 −.636 −.095
Biological oxygen demand (mg/l) −.070 −.154 .806 −.074 .089 .053 −.014
Chemical oxygen demand (mg/l) .233 .186 .781 .087 −.005 .083 .041
Total suspended solid (mg/l) .056 .816 −.061 −.005 −.181 −.184 −.033
Acidity/alkalinity (pH) .454 −.009 .198 −.396 −.546 −.084 −.023
Ammoniacal nitrogen (mg/l) −.149 −.291 .549 −.275 −.124 .385 −.301
E. coli (cfu/100 ml) .113 −.133 .076 .000 .105 .679 −.047
Coliform (cfu/100 ml) −.001 −.188 −.019 .178 .500 .602 .497
Arsenic (mg/l) .130 −.017 .217 −.124 .763 .048 −.155
Mercury (mg/l) −.001 −.009 .068 −.065 −.064 −.013 .870
Chromium (mg/l) −.079 .507 −.092 −.113 .008 .015 −.062
Zinc (mg/l) .089 .080 .014 .855 .059 .056 .106
Iron (mg/l) −.319 .023 −.056 .746 .018 −.008 −.173
Initial eigenvalue 3.297 2.797 2.357 2.061 1.856 1.821 1.535
% of variance 15.539 10.310 10.115 10.024 8.526 8.088 6.852
Cumulative % 15.539 25.849 35.964 45.987 54.514 62.602 69.455
∗
The bold values are factor loadings above 0.6 that were taken after Varimax rotation is performed.

data set, namely, biological parameter with E. coli and total water quality data. The analysis of HCA using Ward’s method
coliform and physicochemical parameter including turbidity, indicates the results of three cluster areas, which can be
DS, EC, salinity, DO, BOD, COD, TSS, As, Hg, Zn, and Fe divided into C1 with S7, S8, and S9; C2 with S1 and S2; and C3
(Table 7). Table 7 represents the results of CCA for biological with S3, S4, S5, and S6 (Figure 2(a)). The result provided will
and physicochemical variables. Correlation coefficients for be further analyzed using nonhierarchical cluster analysis to
canonical variates 1 and 2 were 0.841 and 0.660, respectively, obtain the correct classification of pollutant sources based on
indicating both are statistically significant (𝑝 < 0.000). The the PCA components in the location area involved. According
test statistic for canonical variates 1 and 2 is found to be to Table 8, NHCA confirmed four samples detected in
𝑥2 1 = 620 with 24 degrees of freedom and 𝑥2 2 = 311 cluster 1 with 275 cases involved to produce Hg, Fe, total
with 11 degrees of freedom. This result indicates that both coliform, and DO; cluster 2 has only 5 cases to produce
variates of 1 and 2 are having strong relationship with high two samples with salinity and EC; and cluster 3 detected
correlation between the response and predictor sets of data; three samples in 44 cases to produce salinity, EC, and DS.
only variate 2 is higher than variate 1. The dominant variable In other words, cluster 1 is significantly subjected to be
in first canonical variate for biological variables (𝑈1 ) is E. involved with the industrial and residential activities, as well
coli, while the dominant variables in 𝑉1 (physicochemical as sewage treatment plant [19], while cluster 3 is suspected
parameters) are DS, EC, DO, BOD, COD, Hg, and Zn. to carry out agriculture, sewage treatment plant, and animal
Next, the second canonical variates indicating the predictor husbandry activities; and cluster 2 is involved with minor
variables are E. coli and total coliform, while the response impact caused by agriculture and animal husbandry activities
variables have the result of turbidity, EC, salinity, TSS, As, [18] (Figure 2(b)). Therefore, cluster 1 is likely to occur in
and Fe. Considering the mentioned results, a regular pattern urban area, cluster 3 is suburban area, and cluster 2 is rural
can be seen. From the first canonical variate it is indicated area.
that residential and industrial activities have high percentage Lastly, as described in statistical analysis, analysis of
to cause pollutant sources, while second canonical variate variance (ANOVA) is carried out to obtain accurate result
indicates that agriculture, sewage treatment plant including between LULC classes with river water quality of 15 years.
septic tank, and animal husbandry activities proved to cause Among the LULC classes, built-up areas are having the high-
as pollutant sources and to react as nonpoint source pollution est significance with 9 variables of water quality; vegetation is
in the river. the second highest to have 8 variables significant with water
Further analysis is carried out in hierarchical cluster anal- quality; and the lowest significance is the open space with
ysis (HCA) and nonhierarchical cluster analysis (NHCA), as only 4 variables of water quality that resulted in ANOVA
well as ANOVA between the LULC classes changes with river (Table 9). Built-up area is subjected to cause pollution in E.
 4642, 2017, 1, Downloaded from [Link] by Nat Prov Indonesia, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
8 Journal of Environmental and Public Health

Table 7: Canonical correlation analysis of the data set.

Canonical variates 1 2
Canonical correlation 0.841 0.660
Chi-square 620 311
Degree of freedom 24 11
Significant level 0.000 0.000
Biological parameter (unit)
E. coli (cfu/100 ml) −0.975 −0.276
Total coliform (cfu/100 ml) −0.118 1.006
Physicochemical parameter (unit)
Turbidity (NTU) 0.100 0.024
Dissolved solid (mg/l) −0.212 0.097
Electrical conductivity (uS) 0.464 −0.527
Salinity (ppt) −0.404 0.264
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l) 0.724 0.311
Biochemical oxygen demand (mg/l) −0.211 0.037
Chemical oxygen demand (mg/l) −0.128 −0.092
Total suspended solid (mg/l) 0.118 −0.377
Arsenic (mg/l) −0.016 0.246
Mercury (mg/l) 0.176 0.518
Zinc (mg/l) −0.173 0.623
Iron (mg/l) 0.197 −0.098

Table 8: The physicochemical and biological properties classified by the 𝐾-mean method.

Variable (unit) Frequency Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3

Mean −0.63 1.56 −0.4
Turbidity (NTU)
range −0.71∼−0.55 3.07∼0.05 −0.56∼−0.24
Mean 0.36 −0.33 0.71
Dissolved solid (mg/l)
range 0.66∼0.06 −0.37∼−0.28 −0.32∼1.73
Mean 0.26 −0.39 0.92
Electrical conductivity (uS)
range 0.55∼−0.03 −0.42∼−0.36 −0.39∼2.23
Mean 0.13 −0.42 0.93
Salinity (ppt)
range 0.21∼0.04 −0.48∼−0.36 −0.41∼2.26
Mean −0.77 0.49 −0.22
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l)
range −0.71∼−0.83 0.91∼0.07 −0.11∼−0.33
Mean 0.16 −0.06 −0.11
Biochemical oxygen demand (mg/l)
range 0.23∼0.08 −0.13∼0.01 −0.13∼−0.08
Mean 0.54 0.27 −0.53
Chemical oxygen demand (mg/l)
range 0.56∼0.52 0.62∼−0.08 −1.51∼0.46
Mean −0.66 3.54 −0.09
Total suspended solid (mg/l)
range −0.77∼−0.55 7.09∼−0.01 −0.32∼0.15
Mean 0.32 −0.33 0.06
Arsenic (mg/l)
range 0.37∼0.27 −0.61∼−0.04 −0.12∼0.24
Mean 8.67 −0.13 −0.13
Mercury (mg/l)
range 10.02∼7.31 −0.15∼−0.11 −0.15∼−0.11
Mean −0.51 −0.53 0.49
Zinc (mg/l)
range −1.04∼0.02 −1.04∼−0.02 0.85∼0.12
Mean −0.9 −0.22 0.79
Iron (mg/l)
range −1.06∼−0.74 −0.58∼0.13 2.29∼−0.72
Mean −0.37 −0.28 −0.07
E. coli (cfu/100 ml)
range −0.58∼−0.16 −0.51∼−0.05 −0.48∼0.35
Mean 0.62 −0.32 4.33
Total coliform (cfu/100 ml)
range −0.44∼1.68 −0.63∼−0.01 8.81∼−0.16
Number of samples 4 2 3
Sampling stations 7, 8, 9 1, 2 3, 4, 5, 6
 4642, 2017, 1, Downloaded from [Link] by Nat Prov Indonesia, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Environmental and Public Health 9

Table 9: ANOVA between LULC classes changes with water quality in 2001, 2009, and 2015.

LULC classes (ha) ANOVA results

Parameter (unit)
Built-up area Vegetation Open space DF F 𝑝 value
E. coli (cfu/100 ml) 181.14 88.22 45.00 2 13.43 0.0001
Total coliform (cfu/100 ml) 219.63 80.71 55.53 2 14.48 0.0000
Turbidity (NTU) 64.35 28.75 7.10 2 9.77 0.0001
Dissolved solid (mg/l) 111.46 59.81 12.77 2 2.65 0.0773
Electrical conductivity (uS) 78.71 22.57 6.01 2 7.54 0.0001
Salinity (ppt) 1.773 0.891 0.221 2 2.33 0.0243
Dissolved oxygen (mg/l) 15.72 8.61 2.22 2 1.38 0.1634
Biochemical oxygen demand (mg/l) 21.34 19.18 7.46 2 11.71 0.0000
Chemical oxygen demand (mg/l) 68.47 32.21 18.59 2 9.63 0.0001
Total suspended solid (mg/l) 54.98 47.33 12.76 2 6.66 0.0001
Arsenic (mg/l) 0.0015 0.0007 0.0005 2 19.27 0.0000
Mercury (mg/l) 0.0017 0.0013 0.0007 2 25.85 0.0000
Zinc (mg/l) 0.0156 0.0120 0.0090 2 4.26 0.0178
Iron (mg/l) 0.34 0.18 0.12 2 10.16 0.0000
∗
One-way ANOVA with 𝑝 < 0.05 is significant.

Rescaled distance cluster combination

0 5 10 15 20 25
3
8
5
C3
4
6
6
4
1
Values

C2
2
2
7

C1 0
9

8 −2
Cluster 1 Cluster 2 Cluster 3
Cluster
Variables
Z score: turbidity (NTU)
Z score: dissolved Solid (mg/l)
Z score: conductivity (uS)
Z score: salinity (ppt)
Z score: dissolved oxygen (mg/l)
Z score: biochemical oxygen demand (mg/l)
Z score: chemical oxygen demand (mg/l)
Z score: total suspended solid (mg/l)
Z score: E. coli (facel coliform) (cfu/100 ml)
Z score: total coliform (cfu/100 ml)
Z score: arsenic (mg/l)
Z score: mercury (mg/l)
Z score: zinc (mg/l)
Z score: iron (mg/l)
(a) Dendrogram using Ward linkage (b) Final cluster centers

Figure 2: (a) Hierarchical cluster analysis using Ward’s methods through Euclidean distance. (b) Nonhierarchical cluster analysis through
𝐾-means method.
 4642, 2017, 1, Downloaded from [Link] by Nat Prov Indonesia, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
10 Journal of Environmental and Public Health

N N N
2001 2009 2015
W E W E W E

S S S

(Miles) (Miles) (Miles)

0 1.25 2.5 5 0 1 2 4 0 1 2 4

1 cm = 1 km 1 cm = 1 km 1 cm = 1 km
Build-up area Build-up area Agriculture
Agriculture Agriculture Water
Water Water Open space
Open space Open space Build-up area
(a) (b) (c)

Figure 3: (a) Classified maps of Malacca River watershed in 2001. (b) Classified maps of Malacca River watershed in 2009. (c) Classified maps
of Malacca River watershed in 2015.

coli, total coliform, EC, BOD, COD, TSS, Hg, Zn, and Fe. watershed for river water quality over the span of 15 years.
In this condition, residential activities (BOD, COD, E. coli, It is divided into two parts: 2001 to 2009 for 9 years and
total coliform, and Zn), industrial activities (Hg, Zn, and 2009 to 2015 for 7 years. This research study has highlighted
Fe), and sewage treatment plant (BOD, COD, E. coli, and the application of remote sensing to develop LULC changes
total coliform) as well as animal husbandry (E. coli, total over time for the river water quality pollution based on
coliform) are suspected to become main pollutant sources pollutant sources. 7 PCs had been identified through PCA
to contaminate the Malacca River, as the majority occur to result in DS, EC, salinity, turbidity, TSS, DO, BOD, COD,
in urban and suburban area. Meanwhile, vegetation area As, Hg, Zn, Fe, E. coli, and total coliform detected in the
involves agriculture activities and forest land is suspected river water quality, which contribute possible detection of
to cause pollution in river water quality. Agriculture activ- pollutant sources as agriculture activities, residential activi-
ities with high usage of pesticide would cause salinization ties, industrial activities, septic tank, and sewage treatment
pollution; and high percentage of fertilizer would cause E. plant activities, as well as animal husbandry activities. Simul-
coli, total coliform, arsenic, and iron pollution. Indirectly, taneously, selected variables from PCA will be applied into
agriculture activities could disrupt the soil structure and CCA to seek the relationship between the physicochemical
cause EC as well as TSS in the river. These activities happen to parameters of response data and biological parameters of
result in nonpoint source pollution. Continuously, although predictor data, with the result showing strong relationship
DO is suspected to have contaminated in vegetation area, and high correlation. The CCA indicate first canonical variate
however, the variable is not considered due to no significance as E. coli, DS, EC, DO, BOD, COD, Hg, and Zn, to prove the
in analysis to provide the result of 𝐹 (df = 2, 𝑝 > 0.16) existing of residential and industrial activities. Meanwhile,
= 1.38. Probably minor cause of pollution from DO can be second canonical variate produces E. coli, total coliform,
connected with forest land activities. Open space activities of turbidity, EC, salinity, TSS, As, and Fe, which resulted as
LULC classes can be described as transition area for built-up agriculture, sewage treatment plant as well as septic tank, and
area that converted from agriculture, as well as several areas animal husbandry activities are carried out in the Malacca
from forest land into agriculture activities. On the other hand, River watershed.
hydrologic modification like dredging, water diversion, and Afterwards, HCA is applied to determine possible area
channelization will cause erosion of riverbank to increase the based on the pollution which occurred, indicating three
pollution of turbidity, salinity, EC, and TSS. clusters that consist of C1 with S7, S8, and S9; C2 with S1 and
S2; and C3 with S3, S4, S5, and S6. Next, NHCA is used to
6. Conclusion obtain the correct classification of pollutant sources based
Remote sensing is a tool to aid in detecting the magnitude on HCA cluster and PCA components, which defined that
of LULC change that has taken place in the Malacca River cluster 1 produces Hg, Fe, total coliform, and DO; cluster 2
 4642, 2017, 1, Downloaded from [Link] by Nat Prov Indonesia, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Journal of Environmental and Public Health 11

produces salinity and EC; and cluster 3 produces salinity, EC, [4] C. K. Wright and M. C. Wimberly, “Recent land use change
and DS. Overall, HCA and NHCA emphasize that cluster 1 in the Western Corn Belt threatens grasslands and wetlands,”
occurs in urban area, cluster 3 is suburban area, and cluster 2 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United
is rural area. Lastly, ANOVA between LULC and water quality States of America, vol. 110, no. 10, pp. 4134–4139, 2013.
data showed built-up area having contamination of E. coli, [5] A. Ashraf, Changing Hydrology of the Himalayan Watershed,
total coliform, EC, BOD, COD, TSS, Hg, Zn, and Fe, which InTech, Rijeka, Croatia, 2013.
highlighted the residential activities, industrial activities, and [6] S. Gajbhiye and S. K. Sharma, “Land use and land cover change
sewage treatment plant as well as animal husbandry that detection of Indra river watershed through remote sensing
occur in urban and suburban area. Meanwhile, vegetation using multi-temporal satellite data,” International Journal of
area of agriculture activities is suspected to cause EC, TSS, Geomatics and Geosciences, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 89, 2013.
salinity, E. coli, total coliform, arsenic, and iron pollution, [7] H.-B. Hu, H.-Y. Liu, J.-F. Hao, and J. An, “Analysis of land
while forest land has minor impact to contaminate the river use change characteristics based on remote sensing and GIS in
by DO pollution. Most of vegetation area occurs in suburban the Jiuxiang River watershed,” International Journal on Smart
and rural area. Lastly, open space activities have pollution of Sensing and Intelligent Systems, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 811–823, 2012.
turbidity, salinity, EC, and TSS due to hydrologic modifica- [8] P. Singh, A. Gupta, and M. Singh, “Hydrological inferences
tion such as dredging, water diversion, and channelization. from watershed analysis for water resource management using
Overall, these research findings offer an effective solution to remote sensing and GIS techniques,” Egyptian Journal of Remote
water quality management when large complex water quality Sensing and Space Science, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 111–121, 2014.
data is involved, provided useful information in identifying [9] A. Fernald, V. Tidwell, J. Rivera et al., “Modeling sustainability
pollution sources and understanding the river water quality of water, environment, livelihood, and culture in traditional
with LULC change detection information providing refer- irrigation communities and their linked watersheds,” Sustain-
ability, vol. 4, no. 11, pp. 2998–3022, 2012.
ences to policy maker in proper management of Land Use
area. [10] M. C. Hansen and T. R. Loveland, “A review of large area
monitoring of land cover change using Landsat data,” Remote
Sensing of Environment, vol. 122, pp. 66–74, 2012.
Conflicts of Interest [11] A. Mahmud and A. S. Achide, “Analysis of land use/land cover
changes to monitor urban sprawl in Keffi-Nigeria,” Environmen-
The author declares that there are no conflicts of interest tal Research Journal, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 129–134, 2012.
regarding the publication of this paper. [12] N. M. Gazzaz, M. K. Yusoff, M. F. Ramli, A. Z. Aris, and
H. Juahir, “Characterization of spatial patterns in river water
quality using chemometric pattern recognition techniques,”
Acknowledgments Marine Pollution Bulletin, vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 688–698, 2012.
The author would like to thank the Department of Envi- [13] I. R. Hegazy and M. R. Kaloop, “Monitoring urban growth and
ronment (DOE), Malaysia, Department of Irrigation and land use change detection with GIS and remote sensing tech-
niques in Daqahlia governorate Egypt,” International Journal of
Drainage (JPS), Malaysia, Department of Town and Coun-
Sustainable Built Environment, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 117–124, 2015.
try Planning (JPBD), Malaysia, Malaysian Remote Sens-
ing Agency (ARSM), and United States Geological Survey [14] A. K. Hua, “Law enforcement and water resources of the
Malacca river a case study of public perception,” International
(USGS) for providing the base data for water quality, river,
Journal of Scientific Research in Science & Technology, vol. 3, no.
GIS-map based maps including Land Use activities, and
1, pp. 111–116, 2015.
remote sensing imageries.
[15] A. K. Hua, “An indication of policy study towards water
resources in Malacca state: a case study of Malacca river,
References Malaysia,” International Research Journal of Social Sciences, vol.
4, no. 6, pp. 15–20, 2015.
[1] J. S. Rawat and M. Kumar, “Monitoring land use/cover change [16] S. N. Rosli, A. Z. Aris, and N. M. Majid, “Spatial variation
using remote sensing and GIS techniques: a case study of assessment of malacca river water quality using multivariate
Hawalbagh block, district Almora, Uttarakhand, India,” The statistical analysis,” Malaysian Applied Biology, vol. 44, no. 1, pp.
Egyptian Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, vol. 18, 13–18, 2015.
no. 1, pp. 77–84, 2015.
[17] American Public Health Association (APHA), Standard Meth-
[2] A. Butt, R. Shabbir, S. S. Ahmad, and N. Aziz, “Land use ods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, American
change mapping and analysis using remote sensing and GIS: a Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation,
case study of simly watershed, Islamabad, Pakistan,” Egyptian Washington, DC, USA, 21st edition, 2005.
Journal of Remote Sensing and Space Science, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. [18] A. Z. Aris, S. M. Praveena, N. M. Isa et al., “Application of
251–259, 2015. environmetric methods to surface water quality assessment of
[3] M. S. Boori and V. Vozenilek, “Land cover disturbance due to langkawi geopark (Malaysia),” Environmental Forensics, vol. 14,
tourism in Jeseniky mountain region: a remote sensing and GIS no. 3, pp. 230–239, 2013.
based approach,” in Earth Resources and Environmental Remote [19] H. Juahir, S. M. Zain, M. K. Yusoff et al., “Spatial water quality
Sensing/GIS Applications V, 92450T, vol. 9245 of Proceedings of assessment of Langat River Basin (Malaysia) using environ-
SPIE, International Society for Optics and Photonics, Amster- metric techniques,” Environmental Monitoring and Assessment,
dam, The Netherlands, September 2014. vol. 173, no. 1-4, pp. 625–641, 2011.
 4642, 2017, 1, Downloaded from [Link] by Nat Prov Indonesia, Wiley Online Library on [05/09/2025]. See the Terms and Conditions ([Link] on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
12 Journal of Environmental and Public Health

[20] R. Noori, M. S. Sabahi, A. R. Karbassi, A. Baghvand, and

H. T. Zadeh, “Multivariate statistical analysis of surface water
quality based on correlations and variations in the data set,”
Desalination, vol. 260, no. 1-3, pp. 129–136, 2010.
[21] I. A. Najar and A. B. Khan, “Assessment of water quality and
identification of pollution sources of three lakes in Kashmir,
India, using multivariate analysis,” Environmental Earth Sci-
ences, vol. 66, no. 8, pp. 2367–2378, 2012.
[22] M. D. Behera, S. N. Borate, S. N. Panda, P. R. Behera,
and P. S. Roy, “Modelling and analyzing the watershed
dynamics using cellular automata (CA)-Markov model-a geo-
information based approach,” Journal of Earth System Science,
vol. 121, no. 4, pp. 1011–1024, 2012.
[23] R. G. Pontius Jr and M. Millones, “Death to Kappa: birth of
quantity disagreement and allocation disagreement for accu-
racy assessment,” International Journal of Remote Sensing, vol.
32, no. 15, pp. 4407–4429, 2011.
[24] Q. Weng, “Thermal infrared remote sensing for urban climate
and environmental studies: methods, applications, and trends,”
ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, vol. 64,
no. 4, pp. 335–344, 2009.
[25] W. Y. Lim, A. Z. Aris, and S. M. Praveena, “Application of the
chemometric approach to evaluate the spatial variation of water
chemistry and the identification of the sources of pollution in
Langat River, Malaysia,” Arabian Journal of Geosciences, vol. 6,
no. 12, pp. 4891–4901, 2013.