Report on Harmonisation of freshwater biological methods
Report on Harmonisation of freshwater biological methods Report on Harmonisation of freshwater biological methods
Wright, J.F., D.W. Sutcliffe and M.T. Furse, 2000. Assessing the biological quality of fresh waters -RIVPACS and other techniques. Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside.Zelinka, M. and P. Marvan 1961. Zur Präzisierung der biologischen Klassifikation der Reinheitfließender Gewässer. Arch. Hydrobiol. 57: 389-407.38
Annex I: Composition of the Geographic Intercalibration GroupsTable 1. Distribution of countries by Geographic Intercalibration Groups (GIGs) andwater categories, with numbers of sites in the draft register for each country (25May 2005).CountriesGIGRALRCERiversRECRMELakesAustria 20 10 4 15Belgium 21 2ulgaria 5Cyprus 2 2Czech Republic 22Germany 9 61 13 12Denmark 14 21Estonia 10 13Spain 11 35 55 18Finland 8 12France 22 127 11 8 3 2UK 59 36 11 35Greece 15 2Hungary 16 5Ireland 15 8 19 9Italy 18 6 55 9 4Lithuania 21 6Luxemburg 4Latvia 8 6Malta 1Netherlands 18 21Norway 55 49Poland 13 21Portugal 32 8Romania 14 8Sweden 2 13 25Slovenia 4 2Slovakia 12TOTAL 84 446 51 171 120 47 41 121 44 130RNOLALLATLCELMELNO39
- Page 1 and 2: Institute for Environment and Susta
- Page 3 and 4: CONTENTSBackground and purpose of t
- Page 5 and 6: Background and purpose of the docum
- Page 7 and 8: States and candidate countries. Inf
- Page 9 and 10: classification, each of these being
- Page 11 and 12: BIOLOGICAL QUALITY ELEMENT: PHYTOPL
- Page 13 and 14: indicators, species lists, frequenc
- Page 15 and 16: 53. The identification and enumerat
- Page 17 and 18: 64. In general, this technique is t
- Page 19 and 20: RIVER BIOLOGICAL QUALITY ELEMENT: F
- Page 21 and 22: 84. The development of specific sta
- Page 23 and 24: practice guides for identification
- Page 25 and 26: 100. The information received from
- Page 27 and 28: Evaluation of the suitability of cu
- Page 29 and 30: group should update its primary fin
- Page 31 and 32: ReferencesAFNOR (Association Franç
- Page 33 and 34: EN ISO 8689-2 Water quality - Biolo
- Page 35 and 36: Lazaridou-Dimitriadou, M., C. Kouko
- Page 37: Shannon, C.E. and W. Weaver, 1949.
- Page 43 and 44: Annex III: River biological assessm
- Page 45 and 46: Annex IV: Analysis of lake biologic
- Page 47 and 48: Number of sampling stations10080%60
- Page 49 and 50: IT 90% acetone spectrophotometricPT
- Page 51 and 52: 10. The sampling depth and volume s
- Page 53 and 54: PTESFIIE5667-2/98 Romanianstandardi
- Page 55 and 56: Sampling stations%1008060402001 2-1
- Page 57 and 58: MACROPHYTES16. The aquatic Macrophy
- Page 59 and 60: Plants sampled per GIG1008060%40Eme
- Page 61 and 62: NO qualitativ method species number
- Page 63 and 64: indicators, species lists, frequenc
- Page 65 and 66: 26. The sampling frequency is varia
- Page 67: CEN/TC 230/WG 2/ TG 4 N28, 2 nd wor
- Page 70 and 71: programs are based only on the diat
- Page 72 and 73: 21. Some countries like France, Est
- Page 74 and 75: Table 1. European methods for monit
- Page 76 and 77: countries also covers Non-EU Member
- Page 78 and 79: 49. The Danish Stream Fauna Index i
- Page 80 and 81: Hungary58. Since 2002 a modificatio
- Page 82 and 83: Acidification Index, based on the s
- Page 84 and 85: Identification is predominantly to
- Page 86 and 87: size of the net range between 250 t
Wright, J.F., D.W. Sutcliffe and M.T. Furse, 2000. Assessing the <strong>biological</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> fresh waters -RIVPACS and other techniques. Freshwater Biological Associati<strong>on</strong>, Ambleside.Zelinka, M. and P. Marvan 1961. Zur Präzisierung der biologischen Klassifikati<strong>on</strong> der Reinheitfließender Gewässer. Arch. Hydrobiol. 57: 389-407.38