Report on Harmonisation of freshwater biological methods
Report on Harmonisation of freshwater biological methods Report on Harmonisation of freshwater biological methods
Sampling frequencyNOMEECCEBAAT1x2-6x year7-12x yearmore 12x yearAL0 20 40 60 80 100%Figure 2. Sampling frequencies for chlorophyll a in times (x) per year in the GIG.Sampling period1009080706050403020100%AL AT BA CE EC ME NOwhole yrice freevegetationspringwintersummerautumnFigure 3. Chlorophyll a sampling periods in the GIGs.3. Most lakes, are monitored for chlorophyll a at only one station, a smallerpercentage is sampled at two stations, particularly in the EC and ME GIGs (Fig. 4.).46
Number of sampling stations10080%6040201 sampling station2-10 samplingstations0AL AT BA CE EC ME NOFigure 4. Number of sampling stations for chlorophyll a in the GIGs.4. The sampling depth and volume sampled may contribute to large differences inthe determination of chlorophyll a concentrations in a lake. The most frequent methodin all the GIGs involves the collection of surface samples. In some GIGs (mostcountries in the AL, ME and NO GIGs), for a few lakes chlorophyll a is estimatedfrom integrated samples (Fig. 5). In the AL and BA GIGs the collection of more thanone discrete sample at different depths is regularly practiced.Sampling depth10080%6040200AL AT BA CE EC ME NO1 surface sample 1 integrated sample more than 1 discrete depthsFigure 5. Sampling depth for chlorophyll a in the GIGs.5. Among the most heterogeneous steps in the assessment of chlorophyll a are,however, the extraction methods (e.g. Marker, 1972; Pepe et al, 2001), which varywidely within GIGs, among GIGs and even within a single country (Table 1). Thesecan explain considerable variance in the measurement of chlorophyll a concentration.47
- 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 and 38: Shannon, C.E. and W. Weaver, 1949.
- Page 39: Annex I: Composition of the Geograp
- Page 43 and 44: Annex III: River biological assessm
- Page 45: Annex IV: Analysis of lake biologic
- 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
- Page 88 and 89: water bug genus (Aphelocheirus) and
- Page 90 and 91: Table 5. Common abundance classific
- Page 92 and 93: 108. Process Assessment focuses on
- Page 94 and 95: Austria120. MuLFA: Ecological Integ
Sampling frequencyNOMEECCEBAAT1x2-6x year7-12x yearmore 12x yearAL0 20 40 60 80 100%Figure 2. Sampling frequencies for chlorophyll a in times (x) per year in the GIG.Sampling period1009080706050403020100%AL AT BA CE EC ME NOwhole yrice freevegetati<strong>on</strong>springwintersummerautumnFigure 3. Chlorophyll a sampling periods in the GIGs.3. Most lakes, are m<strong>on</strong>itored for chlorophyll a at <strong>on</strong>ly <strong>on</strong>e stati<strong>on</strong>, a smallerpercentage is sampled at two stati<strong>on</strong>s, particularly in the EC and ME GIGs (Fig. 4.).46
Change language