A comparison of national approaches to setting ecological status boundaries in phytobenthos assessment for the European Water Framework Directive: results of an intercalibration exercise

被引:2
作者
Martyn Kelly
Cathy Bennett
Michel Coste
Cristina Delgado
François Delmas
Luc Denys
Luc Ector
Claude Fauville
Martial Ferréol
Malgorzata Golub
Amelie Jarlman
Maria Kahlert
John Lucey
Bernadette Ní Chatháin
Isabel Pardo
Peter Pfister
Joanna Picinska-Faltynowicz
Juliette Rosebery
Christine Schranz
Jochen Schaumburg
Herman van Dam
Sirje Vilbaste
机构
[1] Bowburn Consultancy,REQUE Research Unit
[2] SEPA,Departamento de Ecología y Biología Animal
[3] Cemagref – Bordeaux Centre,Laboratory of Freshwater Ecology
[4] Universidad de Vigo,Department of Aquatic Sciences and Assessment
[5] Research Institute for Nature and Forest,Shannon River Basin District Project
[6] Centre de Recherche Public – Gabriel Lippmann,Referat 8.4
[7] URBO FUNDP,undefined
[8] Institute of Environmental Protection,undefined
[9] Jarlman HB,undefined
[10] Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences,undefined
[11] Environmental Protection Agency,undefined
[12] Mulkear House,undefined
[13] Newtown Centre,undefined
[14] ARGE Limnologie,undefined
[15] Institute of Meteorology and Water Management,undefined
[16] Wrocław Branch,undefined
[17] Bayerisches Landesamt für Umwelt (Bavarian Environmental Agency),undefined
[18] Consultant for Water and Nature,undefined
[19] Estonian University of Life Sciences (former Estonian Agricultural University),undefined
来源
Hydrobiologia | 2009年 / 621卷
关键词
Diatoms; Algae; Monitoring; Intercalibration; Eutrophication; Pollution;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The European Union (EU)’s Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires that all Member States participate in intercalibration exercises in order to ensure that ecological status concepts and assessment levels are consistent across the EU. This paper describes one such exercise, performed by the countries in the Central/Baltic Geographical Intercalibration Group stretching from Ireland in the west to Estonia in the east and from the southern parts of Scandinavia to the northern regions of Spain and Italy (but excluding alpine regions, which were intercalibrated separately). In this exercise, methods used to measure ecological status of rivers using benthic diatoms were compared. Ecological status is estimated as the ratio between the observed value of a biological element and the value expected in the absence of significant human impact. Approaches to defining the ‘reference sites’, from which these ‘expected’ values were derived, varied from country to country. Minimum criteria were established as part of the exercise but there was still considerable variation between national reference values, reflecting typological differences that could not be resolved during the exercise. A simple multimetric index was developed to compare boundary values using two widely used diatom metrics. Boundary values for high/good status and good/moderate status set by each participant were converted to their equivalent values of this intercalibration metric using linear regression. Variation of ±0.05 EQR units around the median value was considered to be acceptable and the exercise provided a means for those Member States who fell significantly above or below this line to review their approaches and, if necessary, adjust their boundaries.
引用
收藏
页码:169 / 182
页数:13
相关论文
共 95 条
[1]  
Besse-Lotoskaya A(2006)Uncertainty in diatom assessment: sampling, identification and counting variation Hydrobiologia 566 247-260
[2]  
Verdonschot PFM(1989)Periphyton biomass dynamics in gravel bed rivers—the relative effects of flows and nutrients Freshwater Biology 22 209-231
[3]  
Sinkeldam JA(2006)Intercalibration of assessment methods for macrophytes in lowland streams: direct comparison and analysis of common metrics Hydrobiologia 566 417-430
[4]  
Biggs BJF(2000)Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy Official Journal of the European Communities L327 1-73
[5]  
Close ME(2006)Assessment of European streams with diatoms, macrophytes, macroinvertebrates and fish: a comparative metric-based analysis of organism response to stress Freshwater Biology 51 1757-1785
[6]  
Birk S(2007)Evaluation of the Trophic Diatom Index for assessing water quality in the River Gharasou, western Iran Hydrobiologia 589 165-173
[7]  
Korte T(1995)The Trophic Diatom Index: a new index for monitoring eutrophication in rivers Journal of Applied Phycology 7 433-444
[8]  
Hering D(1998)Recommendations for the routine sampling of diatoms for water quality assessments in Europe Journal of Applied Phycology 10 215-224
[9]  
Hering D(2008)Assessment of ecological status in U.K. rivers using diatoms Freshwater Biology 53 403-422
[10]  
Johnson RK(2008)Validation of diatoms as proxies for phytobenthos when assessing ecological status in lakes Hydrobiologia 610 125-129