Report on Harmonisation of freshwater biological methods

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Identification is predominantly to family level to meet the demands of a rapid, lowexpenditure system. The two parts of the assessment are the standardised calculationof two quality indices (1. calculation either according to BBI or I.B.G.N., 2. numberof scoring taxa) and a verbal characterisation of the river status (discussion of specialaspects concerning the invertebrate-community). The values of both quality indicesare used to determine the quality class (5-class scheme).United Kingdom78. Widely used by the Environment Agency for England and Wales for reportingNational River Quality surveys since 1996, the Biological GQA method is applied incombination with chemical examinations (Chemical GQA). It is based on thepresence of major groups of invertebrates (mostly families). The two indices used forthe classification are the average BMWP-score per taxon (ASPT) and the number ofscoring taxa (N-taxa, i.e. the number of major groups used in the scheme). Havingcalculated these indices, they are compared to those expected in an unpolluted riverby means of RIVPACS (River Invertebrate Prediction and Classification System -computer-based, mathematical model which predicts the river fauna using physicalstream data). This comparison is expressed in the Ecological Quality Index (observed:predicted ratio) for both the number of taxa and the ASPT. The resulting EQI-valuesare assigned to one of six quality classes. It is planned to include the LoticinvertebrateIndex for Flow Evaluation (LIFE) Index into the GQA scheme.79. In addition, the Acidification Index is a biological classification scheme forsensitivity to acidification (index of acid conditions). The System for EvaluatingRivers for Conservation (SERCON) is used to identify important rivers forconservation and to monitor river rehabilitation schemes.B. Comparative analysisPressures targeted80. Table 2 lists the percentage of assessment methods using benthic invertebrates todetect certain anthropogenic pressures. Within the range of particular stressorsbiodegradable organic pollution represents the main focus of bioassessment inEuropean rivers. All other specific pressures are less prevalent. With nearly 30percent the detection of general degradation (stressor not specified) holds the secondlargest portion.84
Table 2. Percentage of assessment methods detecting specific pressures.pressurepercentageOrganic Pollution 48General Degradation 29Morphological Degradation 9Acidification 9Toxic Substances 5Sampling techniques81. The sampling procedure of a large number of methods applied in monitoringprogrammes using benthic invertebrates is based on the International Standard ISO7828 (1985) or the adopted European Norm EN 27828 (1994): Water quality –Methods of biological sampling - Guidance on handnet sampling of aquatic benthicmacro-invertebrates. Several methods which do not directly refer to theseinternational standards carry out ‘kick and sweep’ sampling that is regulated bynational norms/methods.82. In general, this technique is the most common sampling procedure and applied in30 methods using a hand-net. The nets used differ in size of the opening and mesh.Net-openings specified by the assessment methods vary between approximately 600and 900 square centimetres. In half of the schemes, animals are retained by meshsizesof about 500 µm. Mesh-sizes of 1 mm are particularly used in British schemesoperating at family level (Biological GQA, Hungarian adaptation of the BMWPscore). Hand-nets of less than 350 µm mesh-size are used in methods focussing onselected orders (e.g. Oligochaetes: Oligochaeta Index for Sediment Bioindication). Inaddition, small mesh-sizes are in use in some Mediterranean countries (Croatia, Italy,Spain). To sample sandy or silty substrates or sites with large amount of detritushydrobiological sieves are used in Bulgaria with a mesh-size of 1.5 mm.83. The procedure of quantitative sampling is standardised by the guidance ISO 8265(1988) or EN 28265 (1994): Methods of biological sampling - Guidance on the designand use of quantitative samplers for benthic macro-invertebrates on stony substratain shallow freshwaters. Surber samplers are most commonly used for quantitative,area-related sampling. The recommendations of this standard for maximum aperture85
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 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 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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?