Report on Harmonisation of freshwater biological methods

• Phytoplankton: Yes; Clorophyll as alga biomass measure.• Phytobenthos: No• Macrophytes: No• Macroalgae: No• Benthic invertebrates: No• Fish: No• Physicochemical quality: No• Pressure criteria: NoFrance• WFD compatible? No• Based on trophic level.• Phytoplankton: No• Phytobenthos: No• Macrophytes: No• Macroalgae: No• Benthic invertebrates: No• Fish: No• Physicochemical quality: Yes; nutrients, chlorophyll, transparency.• Pressure criteria: NoUnited Kingdom• WFD compatible? Yes (13 sites); NO (19 sites)• The 13 compatible sites: SEPA's Standing Water Classification Scheme (1994,SEPA Internal <strong>Report</strong>). Sediment diatoms to assess the degree of floristicchange (diatom species turnover) between core bottom and surface sedimentsample using chord distance dissimilarity measure.• The non-compatible sites: mostly, based on definitions given in Annex V forthe biological elements - expert opinion (9 sites). Several differentcombinations of these definitions, expert judgement, pressure information,ratio of reference to current lake total phosphorus concentration and sedimentdiatoms used to assess the degree of floristic change (diatom species turnover)between core bottom and a surface sediment sample.• Boundary criteria have been based on an interpretation of the normativedefinitions, which have been related to monitoring methodologies used in theUK.• Phytoplankton: Yes21 out of 32; fossil diatom assemblages (14 sites) andOccasional blooms (7 sites).• Phytobenthos: Yes 22 out of 32 sites; fossil Diatom record (14 sites) andabsence of bacterial tufts, but occasional algal mats of Cladophora agg (8sites).• Macrophytes: Yes 11 out of 32 sites; absence of indicator species typical oftype and abundances lower than expected for a good quality lake of this type,species presence and absence and relative abundance DAFOR, speciescomposition.118