Harmonising the bioassessment of large rivers in the absence of near-natural reference conditions - a case study of the Danube River

Freshwater Biology

Volumn 57, Issue 8, 2012, Pages 1716-1732

  Birk, Sebastian ^a,b   van Kouwen, Leon ^c   Willby, Nigel ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUISBURG ESSEN   (Germany)

^b SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^c University of Applied Sciences   (Netherlands)

^d UNIVERSITY OF STIRLING   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Alternative benchmarks; Biological metrics; Heavily modified waterbodies; Intercalibration; Least disturbed conditions

Indexed keywords

BACILLARIOPHYTA;

EID: 84863604081     PISSN: 00465070     EISSN: 13652427     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2012.02831.x     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Amoros C. & Bornette G. (2002) Connectivity and biocomplexity in waterbodies of riverine floodplains. Freshwater Biology, 47, 761-776.
2. Angradi T.R., Pearson M.S., Taylor D.L., Bolgrien D.W., Moffett M.F., Blocksom K.A. et al. (2009) Using stressor gradients to determine reference expectations for great river fish assemblages. Ecological Indicators, 9, 748-764.
3. Applegate J.M., Baumann P.C., Emery E.B. & Wooten M.S. (2007) First steps in developing a multimetric macroinvertebrate index for the Ohio River. River Research and Applications, 23, 683-697.
4. Baattrup-Pedersen A., Kristensen E.A., Skriver J., Kronvang B., Andersen H.E., Hoffman C.C. et al. (2009) Can a priori defined reference criteria be used to select reference sites in Danish streams? Implications for implementing the Water Framework Directive Journal of Environmental Monitoring, 11, 1-13.
5. Baron J.S., Poff N.L., Angermeier P.L., Dahm C.N., Gleick P.H., Hairston N.G. et al. (2002) Meeting ecological and societal needs for freshwater. Ecological Applications, 12, 1247-1260.
6. Barrow C. (1998) River basin development planning and management: a critical review. World Development, 26, 171-186.
7. Bennett C., Owen R., Birk S., Buffagni A., Erba S., Mengin N. et al. (2011) Bringing European river quality into line: an exercise to intercalibrate macro-invertebrate classification methods. Hydrobiologia, 667, 31-48.
8. Birk S. & Böhmer J. (2007) Die Interkalibrierung nach EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie - Grundlagen und Verfahren. Wasserwirtschaft, 9, 10-14.
9. Birk S., Bonne W., Borja A., Brucet S., Courrat A., Poikane S. et al. (2012) Three hundred ways to assess Europe's surface waters: an almost complete overview of biological methods to implement the Water Framework Directive. Ecological Indicators, 18, 31-41.
10. Birk S. & Hering D. (2009) A new procedure for comparing class boundaries of biological assessment methods: a case study from the Danube Basin. Ecological Indicators, 9, 528-539.
11. Birk S. & Willby N. (2010) Towards harmonization of ecological quality classification: establishing common grounds in European macrophyte assessment for rivers. Hydrobiologia, 652, 149-163.
12. Blocksom K.A. & Johnson B.R. (2009) Development of a regional macroinvertebrate index for large river bioassessment. Ecological Indicators, 9, 313-328.
13. Borja A., Franco J., Valencia V., Bald J., Muxika I., Belzunce M.J. et al. (2004) Implementation of the European water framework directive from the Basque country (northern Spain): a methodological approach. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 48, 209-218.
14. Brenden T.O., Wang L., Seelbach P.W., Clark R.D., Wiley M.J. & Sparks-Jackson B.L. (2008) A spatially constrained clustering program for river valley segment delineation from GIS digital river networks. Environmental Modelling & Software, 23, 638-649.
15. Breugnot E., Dutartre A., Laplace-Treyture C. & Haury J. (2008) Local distribution of macrophytes and consequences for sampling methods in large rivers. Hydrobiologia, 610, 13-23.
16. Buckles D. (1999) Cultivating Peace: Conflict and Collaboration in Natural Resource Management. IDRC/World Bank, Ottowa.
17. Buijse A.D., Coops H., Staras M., Jans L.H., van Geest G.J., Grift R.E. et al. (2002) Restoration strategies for river floodplains along large lowland rivers in Europe. Freshwater Biology, 47, 889-907.
18. Chessman B.C. & Royal M.J. (2004) Bioassessment without reference sites: use of environmental filters to predict natural assemblages of river macroinvertebrates. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 23, 599-615.
19. De Leeuw J.J., Buijse A.D., Haidvogl G., Lapinska M., Noble R., Repecka R. et al. (2007) Challenges in developing fish-based ecological assessment methods for large floodplain rivers. Fisheries Management and Ecology, 14, 483-494.
20. DIN 38410:2004 (2004) Deutsche Einheitsverfahren zur Wasser-, Abwasser- und Schlammuntersuchung - Biologisch-ökologische Gewässeruntersuchung (Gruppe M) - Teil 1: Bestimmung des Saprobienindex in Fließgewässern (M1). Normentwurf. Deutsches Institut für Normung, Berlin.
21. Dynesius M. & Nilsson C. (1994) Fragmentation and flow regulation of river systems in the northern 3rd of the world. Science, 266, 753-762.
22. EN 15204:2006 (2006) Water Quality - Methods of Biological Sampling - Guidance Standard on the Enumeration of Phytoplankton using Inverted Microscopy (Utermoehl Technique). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.
23. EN 27828:1994 (1994) Water Quality - Methods of Biological Sampling - Guidance on Handnet Sampling of Aquatic Benthic Macro-Invertebrates. European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.
24. European Commission (2010) Guidance Document on the Intercalibration Process 2008-2011. Guidance Document No. 14. Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). European Commission, Luxembourg.
25. Extence C.A., Balbi D.M. & Chadd R.P. (1999) River flow indexing using British benthic macroinvertebrates: a framework for setting hydroecological objectives. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management, 15, 543-574.
26. Gayraud S., Statzner B., Bady P., Haybach A., Schöll F., Usseglio-Polatera P. et al. (2003) Invertebrate traits for the biomonitoring of large European rivers: an initial assessment of alternative metrics. Freshwater Biology, 48, 2045-2064.
27. Gleick P. (1998) The human right to water. Water Policy, 1, 487-503.
28. Goffaux D., Grenouillet G. & Kestemont P. (2005) Electrofishing versus gillnet sampling for the assessment of fish assemblages in large rivers. Archiv für Hydrobiologie, 162, 73-90.
29. Günther-Diringer D. (2001) Evaluation of wetlands and floodplain areas in the Danube River basin. In: River Restoration in Europe - Practical Approaches (Eds H. Nijland & M. Cals), pp. 91-94. 2001.023. RIZA, Lelystad.
30. Haury J., Peltre M.C., Trémolières M., Barbe J., Thiébaut G., Bernez I. et al. (2006) A new method to assess water trophy and organic pollution - the Macrophyte Biological Index for Rivers (IBMR): its application to different types of river and pollution. Hydrobiologia, 570, 153-158.
31. Heiskanen A.S., van de Bund W., Cardoso A.C. & Nõges P. (2004) Towards good ecological status of surface waters in Europe - interpretation and harmonisation of the concept. Water Science and Technology, 49, 169-177.
32. ICPDR (2010) Water Quality in the Danube River Basin - 2007. TNMN - Yearbook 2007. Imprint. International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River, Vienna.
33. ISO 10260:1992 (1992) Water Quality - Measurement of Biochemical Parameters - Spectrometric Determination of the Chlorophyll-a Concentration. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
34. Janauer G.A. & Exler N. (2004) Distribution and habitat conditions of the six most frequent hydrophytes in the Danube River corridor: status 2002. In: Proceedings 35th IAD Conference (Eds I. Teodorović, S. Radulović & J. Bloesch), pp. 407-411. Novi Sad, Serbia, 19-23 April 2004. International Association for Danube Research, Vienna.
35. Janauer G.A., Schmidt-Mumm U. & Schmidt B. (2010) Aquatic macrophytes and water current velocity in the Danube River. Ecological Engineering, 36, 1138-1145.
36. Jongman R.H.G., Ter Braak C.J.F. & van Tongeren O.F.R. (1995) Data Analysis in Community Ecology and Landscape Ecology. Cambridge University Press, New York.
37. Josefson A.B., Blomqvist M., Hansen J.L.S., Rosenberg R. & Rygg B. (2009) Assessment of marine benthic quality change in gradients of disturbance: comparison of different Scandinavian multi-metric indices. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 58, 1263-1277.
38. Junk W.J., Bayley P.B. & Sparks R.E. (1989) The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems. Canadian Special Publication of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 106, 110-127.
39. Kelly M.G., Bennett C., Coste M., Delgado C., Delmas F., Denys L. et al. (2009) A comparison of national approaches to setting ecological status boundaries in phytobenthos assessment for the European Water Framework Directive: results of an intercalibration exercise. Hydrobiologia, 621, 169-182.
40. Kelly M.G., Cazaubon A., Coring E., Dell'Uomo A., Ector L., Goldsmith B. et al. (1998) Recommendations for the routine sampling of diatoms for water quality assessments in Europe. Journal of Applied Phycology, 10, 215-224.
41. Kern K., Fleischhacker T., Sommer M. & Kinder M. (2002) Ecomorphological survey of large rivers - monitoring and assessment of physical habitat conditions and its relevance to biodiversity. Archiv für Hydrobiologie Suppl. Large Rivers, 141, 1-28.
42. Keruzoré A.A., Willby N.J. & Gilvear D.J. (in press) The role of lateral connectivity in the maintenance of macrophyte diversity and productivity in large rivers. Aquatic Conservation - Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems.
43. Kirk E.J. & Perry S.A. (1994) A comparison of three artificial substrate samplers: macroinvertebrate densities, taxa richness, and ease of use. Water Environment Research, 66, 193-198.
44. Liška I., Wagner F. & Slobodnik J. (2008) Joint Danube Survey 2. Final Scientific Report. ICPDR - International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River. International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River, Vienna.
45. Literáthy P., Koller-Kreimel V. & Liška I. (2002) Joint Danube Survey. Technical Report of the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River. International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River, Vienna.
46. Lóczy D. (2007) The Danube: morphology, evolution and environmental issues. In: Large Rivers: Geomorphology & Management (Ed. A. Gupta), pp. 235-260. Wiley, Chichester.
47. McCune B., Grace J.B. & Urban D.L. (2002) Analysis of Ecological Communities. MjM Software Design, Gleneden Beach, OR.
48. McCune B. & Mefford M.J. (1999) PC-ORD. Multivariate Analysis of Ecological Data, Version 4.0. MjM Software, Gleneden Beach, OR.
49. Meier C., Haase P., Rolauffs P., Schindehütte K., Schöll F., Sundermann A. et al. (2006) Methodisches Handbuch Fließgewässerbewertung. Handbuch zur Untersuchung und Bewertung von Fließgewässern auf der Basis des Makrozoobenthos vor dem Hintergrund der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie. Universität Duisburg-Essen, Essen.
50. Moog O. (2002) Fauna Aquatica Austraca - Inventory of Austrian Aquatic Organisms with Ecological Notes. Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management, Vienna.
51. Moog O., Sommerhäuser M., Robert S., Battisti T., Birk S., Hering D. et al. (2008) Typology of Danube River sections based on environmental characteristics and benthic invertebrate assemblages. Archiv für Hydrobiologie Suppl. Large Rivers, 166, 127-144.
52. Naiman R. (1992) Watershed Management: Balancing Sustainability and Environmental Change. Springer, New York.
53. Newman P.J. (1988) Classification of Surface Water Quality. Review of Schemes Used in EC Member States. Heinemann Professional Publishing Ltd, Oxford.
54. Nijboer R.C., Johnson R.K., Verdonschot P.F.M., Sommerhäuser M. & Buffagni A. (2004) Establishing reference conditions for European streams. Hydrobiologia, 516, 91-105.
55. Oťaheľová H. & Valachovič M. (2002) Effects of the Gabcikovo hydroelectric station on the aquatic vegetation of the Danube river (Slovakia). Preslia, Praha, 74, 323-331.
56. Oťaheľová H., Valachovič M. & Hrivnák R. (2007) The impact of environmental factors on the distribution pattern of aquatic plants along the Danube River corridor (Slovakia). Limnologica, 37, 290-302.
57. Pan Y.D., Hughes R.M., Herlihy A.T. & Kaufmann P.R. (2012) Non-wadeable river bioassessment: spatial variation of benthic diatom assemblages in Pacific Northwest rivers, USA. Hydrobiologia, 684, 241-260.
58. Pardo I., Gómez-Rodríguez C., Wasson J.-G., Owen R., van de Bund W., Kelly M.G. et al. (2012) The European reference condition concept: a scientific and technical approach to identify minimally-impacted river ecosystems. Science of the Total Environment, 420, 33-42.
59. Pehofer H.E. (1998) A new quantitative air-lift sampler for collecting invertebrates designed for operation in deep, fast-flowing gravelbed rivers. Archiv für Hydrobiologie Suppl. Large Rivers, 115, 213-232.
60. Schöll F., Haybach A. & König B. (2005) Das erweiterte Potamontypieverfahren zur ökologischen Bewertung von Bundeswasserstraßen (Fließgewässertypen 10 und 20: kies- und sandgeprägte Ströme, Qualitätskomponente Makrozoobenthos) nach Maßgabe der EU-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie. Hydrologie und Wasserbewirtschaftung, 49, 234-247.
61. Seegert G. (2000) Considerations regarding development of index of biotic integrity metrics for large rivers. Environmental Science Policy, 3, 99-106.
62. Sommerwerk N., Bloesch J., Paunović M., Baumgartner C., Venohr M., Schneider-Jacoby M. et al. (2010) Managing the world's most international river: the Danube River Basin. Marine and Freshwater Research, 61, 736-748.
63. Stoddard J.L., Larsen D.P., Hawkins C.P., Johnson R.K. & Norris R.H. (2006) Setting expectations for the ecological condition of streams: the concept of reference condition. Ecological Applications, 16, 1267-1276.
64. Strayer D.L. (2010) Alien species in fresh waters: ecological effects, interactions with other stressors, and prospects for the future. Freshwater Biology, 55, 152-174.
65. Ter Braak C.J.F. & Šmilauer P. (2003) Canoco for Windows, Version 4.5. Biometrics - Plant Research International, Wageningen.
66. Underwood A.J. (1994) Spatial and temporal problems with monitoring. In: The Rivers Handbook: Hydrological and Ecological Principles (Eds P. Calow & G. Petts), pp. 101-123. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.
67. Van Looy K., Meire P. & Wasson J.-G. (2008) Including riparian vegetation in the definition of morphologic reference conditions for large rivers: a case study for Europe's Western Plains. Environmental Management, 41, 625-639.
68. Vannote R.L., Minshall G.W., Cummins K.W., Sedell J.R. & Cushing C.E. (1980) The river continuum concept. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 37, 130-137.
69. Vukov D., Boža P., Igić R. & Anačkov G. (2008) The distribution and the abundance of hydrophytes along the Danube River in Serbia. Central European Journal of Biology, 3, 177-187.
70. Willby N.J. (2007) Managing invasive aquatic plants: problems and prospects. Aquatic Conservation - Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 17, 659-665.
71. Willby N.J., Pitt J.A. & Phillips G. (2009) The Ecological Classification of UK Rivers Using Aquatic Macrophytes. Science Report. Environment Agency, Bristol.
72. Yoder C.O. & Kulik B.H. (2003) The development and application of multimetric indices for the assessment of impacts to fish assemblages in large rivers: a review of current science and applications. Canadian Water Resources Journal, 28, 301-328.