Report on Harmonisation of freshwater biological methods

More documents

Recommendations

Info

countries also covers Non-EU Member States. All discussed methods are listed in theAnnex III comprising data on status and literature references. Detailed descriptions ofmost methods comprising the complete set of acquired data are available athttp://starwp3.eu-star.at (Waterview Database).41. The following section provides a short summary of the state-of-the-art ofbiological methods and watercourse monitoring using benthic macroinvertebrates ineach country. Information has mainly been taken from Waterview Database (2004)and Birk and Schmedtje (in print).Austria42. For WFD implementation a multimetric method for assessing the ecological statusof rivers is in preparation. This benthic invertebrate based stressor-specific (organicpollution and habitat alteration) multimetric index for monitoring running waters inAustria has been elaborated (Ofenböck et al. 2004) and will be finalised by the end of2004 covering all Austrian stream types. In this context it is planned to extend thenational monitoring network to a maximum of 900 sites and to all biological qualityelements (benthic invertebrates, macrophytes and phytobenthos, and fish) accordingto their relevance for the surface water type.Belgium43. Applied in Belgium since 1978 (standardised since 1984) the Belgian Biotic Index(BBI) represents a simple, rapid, reliable, low cost and practical assessment-tool forwatercourses using benthic invertebrates The calculation of the BBI is performed byusing a table with indicating faunistic groups and number of systematic units. Asystematic group involves mostly taxonomical groups at genus or family level. Theresulting value of the BBI is classified on a five-class quality scale ranging fromlightly polluted or unpolluted to very heavily polluted (cf Republic of Ireland system).44. The Biotic Sediment Index (BSI) is an adapted version of the Belgian Biotic Indexbased on the taxonomic diversity of benthic macroinvertebrate community and thepresence or absence of indicator taxa in a given sediment sample. The degree ofpollution sensitivity of a taxon is related to 13 contaminants (heavy metals, organictoxicants) resulting in five pollution tolerance ranks. BSI score can vary between 10and 0, corresponding with four sediment quality classes.76
Bulgaria44. In Bulgaria, the Danube and its tributaries have been studied on the basis ofbenthic invertebrate data for more than twenty years. The national method forbiological water quality assessment of running waters is a biotic index based on theIrish Quality Rating System. The Saprobic Index was formerly prescribed in theCOMECON 9 agreement, but today it is only used in the frame of scientific analyses(Peev and Gerassimov, 1999).Cyprus45. In Cyprus the biodiversity of the macroinvertebrate fauna is being quantifiedaccording to the Sequential Comparison Index (SCI) methodology and an estimate ofa Species Deficit Score (SDS), comparing the local number of species with thenumber of species at a reference or upstream area. Organic pollution is beingevaluated according to the method prescribed by the Biological Monitoring WorkingParty (BMWP).Czech Republic46. Saprobiological monitoring based on investigations of the benthic invertebratefauna is used for the standardised assessment of organic pollution in Czech rivers. Thedegree of pollution is evaluated according to the technical norm SN 75 7716 (1998)and is applied in a large monitoring network (approx. 1450 sites).47. Since 2002 small watercourses have been monitored by using the PERLAprediction system. Here, the observed fauna is compared with an expected streamtype-specific reference fauna in order to assess biological quality.48. Besides the PERLA system, a multimetric approach has been elaborated, which isa Czech modification of the AQEM system (Brabec et al., 2004). In this study organicpollution and morphological degradation have been assessed on three small and midsizedstream types. For WFD implementation the application of both predictive andmultimetric assessment are under discussion.Denmark9 Council for Mutual Economic Assistance77
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 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 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
Page 96 and 97: Sweden126. Swedish fish Index: Appe
Page 98 and 99: ut comparisons have been made with
Page 100 and 101: seasons for sampling are summer and
Page 102 and 103: 102
Page 104 and 105: Consultation open to ECOSTAT &inter
Page 106 and 107: Table 1. List of European standards
Page 108 and 109: 108
Page 110 and 111: development of typologySweden Yes,
Page 112 and 113: one or other option depends on the
Page 114 and 115: 114
Page 116 and 117: • An integrated holistic evaluati
Page 118 and 119: • Phytoplankton: Yes; Clorophyll
Page 120 and 121: • Macroalgae: No• Benthic inver
Page 122 and 123: • Macrophytes: No• Macroalgae:
Page 124: Mission of the JRCThe mission of th
show all

Report on Harmonisation of freshwater biological methods

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?