Large-scale relationships between basin and riparian land cover and the ecological status of European rivers

Freshwater Biology

Volumn 55, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 1465-1482

  Wasson, Jean Gabriel ^a   Villeneuve, Bertrand ^a   Iital, Arvo ^b   Murray Bligh, John ^c   Dobiasova, Marcela ^d   Bacikova, Stanislava ^d   Timm, Henn ^e   Pella, Hervé ^a   Mengin, Nicolas ^a   Chandesris, André ^a  

^a UR MALY   (France)

^b TALLINN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Estonia)

^c ENVIRONMENT AGENCY   (United Kingdom)

^d Slovak Hydrometeorological Institute SHMI   (United Kingdom)

^e ESTONIAN UNIVERSITY OF LIFE SCIENCES   (Estonia)

Author keywords

Agricultural impact; Hydro ecoregion; Partial least squares regression; Pressure impact models; Riparian buffer; Streams; Urbanisation; Water framework directive

Indexed keywords

INVERTEBRATA;

EID: 77954572701     PISSN: 00465070     EISSN: 13652427     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2010.02443.x     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Essai des eaux. Détermination de l'Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). 1992, A.F.N.O.R.,,1-8
2. Allan JD. Landscapes and riverscapes: the influence of land use on stream ecosystems. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 2004, 35:257-284.
3. Allan JD, Johnson LB. Catchment-scale analysis of aquatic ecosystems. Freshwater Biology 1997, 37:107-111.
4. Armitage PD, Moss D, Wright JF, Furse MT. The performance of a new biological water quality score system based on macro-invertebrates over a wide range of unpolluted running-water sites. Water Research 1983, 17:333-347.
5. Borchardt D, Richter S. Identification of significant pressures and impacts upon receiving waters. Water Science and Technology 2003, 48:33-38.
6. Buffagni A, Erba S, Cazzola M, Murray-Bligh J, Soszka H, Genoni P. The STAR common metrics approach to the WFD intercalibration process: full application for small, lowland rivers in three European countries. Hydrobiologia 2006, 566:379-399.
7. Burcher CL, Benfield EF. Physical and biological responses of streams to suburbanization of historically agricultural watersheds. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 2006, 25:356-369.
8. Cormier SM, Smith M, Norton S, Neiheisel T. Assessing ecological risk in watersheds: a case study of problem formulation in the Big Darby Creek watershed, Ohio, U.S.A. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 2000, 19:1082-1096.
9. Cramer RD, Bunce JD, Patterson DE, Frank IE. Crossvalidation, bootstrapping, and partial least squares compared with multiple regression in conventional QSAR studies. Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationships 1988, 7:18-25.
10. Cuffney TF, Meador MR, Porter SD, Gurtz ME. Responses of physical, chemical, and biological indicators of water quality to a gradient of agricultural land use in the Yakima River Basin, Washington. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 2000, 64:259-270.
11. Davy-Bowker J, Clarke R, Corbin T, Vincent H, Pretty J, Hawczak A, Blackburn J, Murphy J, Jones I. River Invertebrate Classification Tool 2008, SNIFFER, Edinburgh, U.K.
12. Donohue I, McGarrigle ML, Mills P. Linking catchment characteristics and water chemistry with the ecological status of Irish rivers. Water Research 2006, 40:91-98.
13. Dovciak AL, Perry JA. In search of effective scales for stream management: does agroecoregion, watershed, or their intersection best explain the variance in stream macroinvertebrate communities? Environmental Management 2002, 30:365-377.
14. Europe's Water: An Indicator-Based Assessment 2003, EEA, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
15. Efron B, Gong G. A leisurely look at the bootstrap, the jackknife, and cross-validation. The American Statistician 1983, 37:36-48.
16. Fuller RM, Smith GM, Sanderson JM, Thomson AG. The UK Land Cover Map 2000: construction of a parcel-based vector map from satellite images. Cartographic Journal 2002, 39:15-25.
17. Furse MT, Hering D, Brabec K, Buffagni A, Sandin L, Verdonschot PFM. The ecological status of European rivers: evaluation and intercalibration of assessment methods. Hydrobiologia 2006, 566:1-2.
18. Garcia A, Villeneuve B, Wasson JG. Large scale evaluations of pressures. Indicators and Methods for Water Framework Directive Ecological Status Assessment. Linkages Between Chemical and Biological Quality of Surface Waters 2006, 213-224. Heiskanen AS, Solimini AG, Cardoso AC. Eds,Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
19. Gergel SE, Turner MG, Miller JR, Melack JM, Stanley EH. Landscape indicators of human impacts to riverine systems. Aquatic Sciences 2002, 64:118-128.
20. Harding JS, Benfield EF, Bolstad PV, Helfman GS, Jones EBD. Stream biodiversity: the ghost of land use past. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science U.S.A. 1998, 95:14843-14847.
21. Hemsley-Flint B. Classification of the biological quality of rivers in England and Wales. Assessing the Biological Quality of Fresh Waters: RIVPACS and Other Techniques 2000, 55-69. Wright JFSutcliffe DWFurse MT. Eds,Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside, U.K
22. Hering D, Verdonschot PFM, Moog O, Sandin L. Integrated assessment of running waters in Europe. Hydrobiologia 2004, 516:1-20.
23. Hering D, Johnson RK, Kramm S, Schmutz S, Szoszkiewicz K, Verdonschot PFM. Assessment of European streams with diatoms, macrophytes, macroinvertebrates and fish: a comparative metric-based analysis of organism response to stress. Freshwater Biology 2006, 51:1757-1785.
24. Höskuldsson A. PLS regression methods. Journal of Chemometrics 1988, 2:211-228.
25. Hughes RM, Larsen DP. Ecoregions: an approach to surface water protection. Journal of the Water Pollution Control Federation 1988, 60:486-493.
26. Illies J. Limnofauna Europaea. A Checklist of the Animals Inhabiting European Inland Waters, with Accounts of their Distribution and Ecology (Except Protozoa) 1978, Ed, Gustav Fisher Verlag, Stuttgart, Germany
27. Johnson TE, McNair JN, Srivastava P, Hart DD. Stream ecosystem responses to spatially variable land cover: an empirically based model for developing riparian restoration strategies. Freshwater Biology 2007, 52:680-695.
28. Lammert M, Allan JD. Assessing biotic integrity of streams: effects of scale in measuring the influence of land use/cover and habitat structure on fish and macroinvertebrates. Environmental Management 1999, 23:257-270.
29. Maridet L, Wasson JG, Philippe M, Amoros C, Naiman RJ. Trophic structure of three streams with contrasting riparian vegetation and geomorphology. Archiv für Hydrobiologie 1998, 144:61-85.
30. Martens H, Martens M. Modified jack-knife estimation of parameter uncertainty in bilinear modelling (PLSR). Food Quality and Preference 2000, 11:5-16.
31. Meador MR, Goldstein RM. Assessing water quality at large geographic scales: relations among land use, water physicochemistry, riparian condition, and fish community structure. Environmental Management 2003, 31:504-517.
32. Meiner A. Implementation of CORINE Land Cover project in Estonia 1999, Estonian Environment Information Centre, Tallinn, Estonia
33. Moore AA, Palmer MA. Invertebrate biodiversity in agricultural and urban headwater streams: implications for conservation and management. Ecological Applications 2005, 15:1169-1177.
34. Naiman RJ, Lonzarich DG, Beechie TJ, Ralph SC. General principles of classification and the assessment of conservation potential in rivers. Rivers Conservation and Management 1992, 93-123. Boon P, Calow P, Petts G, Eds, Wiley & Sons, Chichester, U.K
35. Naiman RJ, Décamps H, Mcclain M. Riparia. Ecology, Conservation, and Management of Streamside Communities 2005, Academic Press, San Diego, U.S.A
36. Omernik JM. Ecoregions of the conterminous United States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 1987, 77:118-125.
37. Omernik JM. Perspectives on the nature and definition of ecological regions. Environmental Management 2004, 34:S27-S38.
38. Palmer MA, Bernhardt ES, Hassett B. Standards for ecologically successful river restoration. Journal of Applied Ecology 2005, 42:208-217.
39. Paul MJ, Meyer JL. Streams in the urban landscape. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 2001, 32:333-365.
40. Pella H, Chandesris A, Wasson JG. Constitution d'un système d'information à référence spatiale dans le contexte de la Directive Cadre européenne sur l'eau. Ingénieries - Eau Agriculture Territoires 2004, 40:11-20.
41. Pont D, Hugueny B, Beier B, Goffaux D, Melcher A, Noble R, Rogers C, Roset N, Schmutz S. Assessing river biotic condition at a continental scale: a European approach using functional metrics and fish assemblages. Journal of Applied Ecology 2006, 73:70-80.
42. Rivers and lakes - typology, reference conditions and classification systems. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/ec), Guidance Document no 10 2003, REFCOND, Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg
43. Roth NE, Allan JD, Erickson DL. Landscape influences on stream biotic integrity assessed at multiple spatial scales. Landscape Ecology 1996, 11:141-156.
44. Roy AH, Rosemond AD, Paul MJ, Leigh DS, Wallace JB. Stream macroinvertebrate response to catchment urbanisation (Georgia, U.S.A.). Freshwater Biology 2003, 48:329-346.
45. Skinner JA, Lewis KA, Bardon KS, Tucker P, Catt JA, Chambers BJ. An overview of the environmental impact of agriculture in the U.K. Journal of Environmental Management 1997, 50:111-128.
46. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ. Biometry. The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research 1995, W. H. Freeman and Company, New York
47. Sponseller RA, Benfield EF, Valett HM. Relationships between land use, spatial scale and stream macroinvertebrate communities. Freshwater Biology 2001, 46:1409-1424.
48. Steedman RJ. Modification and assessment of an index of biotic integrity to quantify stream quality in Southern Ontario. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 1988, 45:492-501.
49. Stepenuck KF, Crunkilton RL, Wang LZ. Impacts of urban landuse on macroinvertebrate communities in southeastern Wisconsin streams. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 2002, 38:1041-1051.
50. Stewart JS, Wang L, Lyons J, Horwatich JA, Bannerman R. Influences of watershed riparian-corridor, and reach-scale characteristics on aquatic biota in agricultural watersheds. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 2001, 37:1475-1487.
51. Tenenhaus M. La regression PLS 1998, Editions Technip, Paris, France
52. Tenenhaus M, Gauchi JP, Menardo C. Régression PLS et applications. Revue de Statistique Appliquée 1995, 43:7-63.
53. Tormos T, Kosuth P, Durrieu S, Wasson JG, Pella H, Villeneuve B. Contribution of remote sensing for the spatial analysis of land use in river corridors to model relationship between land use pressures and the ecological status of rivers. Man and River Systems - Interactions among Rivers, their Watersheds, and the Sociosystem 2006, 249-252. Presses de l'école nationale des Ponts et chaussées, Paris, France
54. Van de Bund W. WFD intercalibration technical report, Part 1 Rivers 2008, Ed,Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy
55. Verdonschot PFM, Nijboer RC. Testing the European stream typology of the Water Framework Directive for macroinvertebrates. Hydrobiologia 2004, 516:35-54.
56. Walser CA, Bart HL. Influence of agriculture on in-stream habitat and fish community structure in Piedmont watersheds of the Chattahoochee River System. Ecology of Freshwater Fish 1999, 8:237-246.
57. Walsh CJ, Waller KA, Gehling J, Mac Nally R. Riverine invertebrate assemblages are degraded more by catchment urbanisation than by riparian deforestation. Freshwater Biology 2007, 52:574-587.
58. Wang L, Kanehl P. Influences of watershed urbanization and instream habitat on macroinvertebrates in cold water streams. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 2003, 35:1181-1196.
59. Wang L, Lyons J, Kanehl P, Bannerman R, Emmons E. Watershed urbanization and changes in fish communities in southeastern Wisconsin streams. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 2000, 36:1173-1189.
60. Wang L, Lyons J, Kanehl P. Impacts of urbanization on stream habitat and fish across multiple spatial scales. Environmental Management 2001, 28:255-266.
61. Warry ND, Hanau M. The use of terrestrial ecoregions as a regional-scale screen for selecting representative reference sites for water quality monitoring. Environmental Management 1993, 17:267-276.
62. Wasson JG. Structures régionales du bassin de la Loire. La Houille Blanche 1996, 6/7:25-31.
63. Wasson JG, Barrera S, Barrère B, Binet D, Collomb D, Gonzales I, Gourdin F, Guyot JL, Rocabado G. Hydro-ecoregions of the Bolivian Amazon: a geographical framework for the functioning of river ecosystems. The Ecohydrology of South American Rivers and Wetlands, vol. Special publication n°6, Chap. 5 2002a, 69-91. McClain ME, Ed,International Association of Hydrological Sciences (IAHS) Press, Wallingford, U.K.
64. Wasson JG, Chandesris A, Pella H, Blanc L. Typology and reference conditions for surface water bodies in France: the hydro-ecoregion approach. TemaNord 2002b, 566:37-41.
65. Wasson JG, Chandesris A, Pella H, Blanc L. Les hydro-écorégions de France métropolitaine. Approche régionale de la typologie des eaux courantes et éléments pour la définition des peuplements de référence d'invertébrés 2002c,Cemagref Lyon, France
66. Wasson JG, Chandesris A, Garcia A, Pella H, Villeneuve B. Relationships between ecological and chemical status of surface waters. European Hydro-Ecoregions 2007,Cemagref, Lyon, France
67. Wold S. Estimation of Principal Components and Related Models by Iterative Least Squares. Multivariate analysis 1966, Academic Press, New York, US
68. Wold H. Soft modeling: the basic design and some extensions. Systems under indirect observation, Vol II 1982, 1-54. Jöreskog KGWold H. Eds, North-Holland, Amsterdam, New York, Oxford
69. Wold S, Sjöström M, Eriksson L. PLS regression: a basic tool of chemometrics. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems 2001, 58:109-130.
70. Wright JF, Sutcliffe DW, Furse MT. Assessing the Biological Quality of Freshwaters: RIVPACS and Other Techniques 2000, Freshwater Biological Association, Ambleside, U.K
71. Zelinka M, Marvan P. Saprobní index, jeho varianty a možnosti použití. Sb. Biologické hodnocení jakosti povrchových vod. Metodický pokyn MLVH ČSR 1986, 50:19-37.