Report on Harmonisation of freshwater biological methods

More documents

Recommendations

Info

water bug genus (Aphelocheirus) and species of Baetis rhodani. The British method isbased on identification of all genera of the family Chironomidae (Ruse, 2000).Table 4. Selected methods determining particular organism groups to genus level.MethodBelgian Biotic Index (De Pauw and Vanhooren, 1983)and Biotic Sediment Index (De Pauw and Heylen,2001)Danish Stream Fauna Index (Skriver et al., 2000)Extended Biotic Index (Ghetti, 1997) and Indice aRapporto (Stoch, 1986)Quality Rating Scheme (McGarrigle et al., 1992)Chironomid Pupal Exuviae Technique (Ruse, 2000)Determined generaall genera of the phylum/class/order Plathelminthes,Hirudinea, Mollusca, Plecoptera, Ephemeroptera,Odonata, Megaloptera, HemipteraBrachyptera, Capnia, Leuctra, Isogenus, Isoperla,Isoptena, Perlodes, Protonemura, Siphonoperla,Limnius, Amphinemura, Taeniopteryx, Elmis, Elodes,Ancylus, Asellus, Chironomus, Gammarus, Sialisall genera of the class/order Tricladia, Hirudinea,Plecoptera, Ephemeroptera, OdonataLeuctra, Aphelocheirus, Rheotanytarsus, Gammarus,Baetis rhodani, Asellus, Chironomusall genera of Chironomidae93. The French Oligochaeta Index for Sediment Bioindication focuses on selectedorders to indicate the quality of watercourses combining achievement of preciseecological information through identification to species or species group level withlow-cost sample processing. In general, this approach allows application of specificsampling techniques, ensuring maximum coverage of the group studied.94. It must be noted that in several assessment methods taxa are identified to lowerlevels than required to adequately compute the respective quality index.Record of abundance95. In general, there are two alternatives to indicate the abundance of particular taxaof benthic invertebrates found in the sample: (1) number of individuals per area, (2)abundance stated in ranges e.g. logarithmic, (3) abundance not recorded - notrecording is not an estimate of abundance.96. The option with the most substantial information content is the specification of thenumber of individuals per area. Nearly 50 percent of macroinvertebrate methodsrecord the abundance of individuals that way. In fact, purely quantitative data requirearea-related sampling procedures by means of quadrate samplers, grabs or similardevices. Since these requirements are only met by a few schemes, abundancestatements based on semi-quantitative hand-net sampling are in most cases ofrestricted reliability but they are cheap, practical and.effective.88
97. The use of range values to record individual occurrence allows the estimation oftaxa abundance. Compared to the first option, this alternative is time saving becausean exact count of individual organisms is not necessary. Different abundanceclassification schemes are in use, the most common are listed in Table 5.98. The 3-class scheme derives from the well-known publication of Pantle and Buck(1955) and is mostly used in eastern European countries applying the Saprobic Index(Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Slovenia).99. Two systems to classify abundance in a five-fold scheme exist in Europe: Theclasses of the British system are based on a logarithmic scale of organisms’abundance (Murray-Bligh, 1999). Different from this is the allocation of classes in theQuality Rating System as applied by Bulgaria. Here, the presence of more than 100individuals of a certain taxon is assigned to the highest class. Hungary specifiesrelative taxa abundance of a sample (five metres section kicked for 15 minutes). Otherschemes do not specify numerical boundary values but provide only verbaldescriptions of abundance classes (e.g. McGarrigle et al., 1992).100. In German watercourse bioassessment abundance is stated in seven classes.Established by Knöpp (1955) this classification has been included in the Germanstandard DIN 38 410 (1990, 2003): Determination of Saprobic Index of RunningWaters. Beyond its broad application in Germany, methods in Serbia-Montenegro,Slovakia and Switzerland operate on the basis of a seven-class abundance scheme.101. Assessment methods operating on the basis of presence/absence data ofmacroinvertebrate taxa do not necessarily need to record taxa abundance. Many bioticindices like I.B.G.N. (France, Luxembourg), IBE (Italy), BMWP-ASPT (e.g. Cyprus,Portugal, Spain, United Kingdom) or BBI (Belgium) are not designed to includeabundance information. Their outputs may be biased by single organisms drifting intothe sample from upstream reaches. Therefore, the individual systems prescribe toinclude only taxa that exceed a certain threshold of abundance to avoid false results.89
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 84 and 85: Identification is predominantly to
Page 86 and 87: size of the net range between 250 t
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?