Measurements of uncertainty in macrophyte metrics used to assess European lake water quality

Hydrobiologia

Volumn 704, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 179-191

  Dudley, Bernard ^a   Dunbar, Michael ^a   Penning, Ellis ^b   Kolada, Agnieszka ^c   Hellsten, Seppo ^d   Oggioni, Alessandro ^e   Bertrin, Vincent ^f   Ecke, Frauke ^g,h   Søndergaard, Martin ⁱ  

^a CENTRE FOR ECOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY   (United Kingdom)

^b DELTARES   (Netherlands)

^c INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION NATIONAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Poland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OULU   (Finland)

^e INSTITUTE FOR ELECTROMAGNETIC SENSING OF THE ENVIRONMENT   (Italy)

^f CEMAGREF   (France)

^g SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^h LULEÅ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

ⁱ AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Lake; Macrophyte; Metric; Mixed linear model; Uncertainty; WFD

Indexed keywords

AQUATIC PLANT; CLASSIFICATION; COLONIZATION; COMMUNITY STRUCTURE; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; EUTROPHICATION; LAKE WATER; MACROPHYTE; MEASUREMENT METHOD; NUTRIENT CYCLING; POLLUTION EFFECT; SPECIES RICHNESS; TAXONOMY; TROPHIC STATUS; UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS; WATER QUALITY;

EUROPE;

EID: 84873749456     PISSN: 00188158     EISSN: 15735117     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10750-012-1338-z     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Alahuhta, J., K. M. Vuori & M. Luoto, 2011. Land use, geomorphology and climate as environmental determinants of emergent aquatic macrophytes in boreal catchments. Boreal Environment Research 16(3): 185-202.
2. Birk, S. & N. Willby, 2010. Towards harmonization of ecological quality classification: establishing common grounds in European macrophyte assessment for rivers. Hydrobiologia 652: 149-163.
3. Birk, S., W. Bonne, A. Borja, S. Brucet, A. Courrat, S. Poikane, A. G. Solimini, W. van de Bund, N. Zampoukas & D. Hering, 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.
4. Capers, R. S., R. Selsky & G. J. Bugbee, 2010. The relative importance of local conditions and regional processes in structuring aquatic plant communities. Freshwater Biology 55: 952-966.
5. Clarke, R. T., 2012. Estimating confidence of European WFD ecological status class and WISER Bioassessment Uncertainty Guidance Software (WISERBUGS). Hydrobiologia. doi: 10. 1007/s10750-012-1245-3.
6. Clarke, R. T. & D. Hering, 2006. Errors and uncertainty in bioassessment methods - major results and conclusions from the STAR project and their application using STARBUGS. Hydrobiologia 566: 433-439.
7. Coops, H., N. Geilen & G. van der Velde, 1994. Distribution and growth of the helophyte species Phragmites australis and Scirpus lacustris in water depth gradients in relation to wave exposure. Aquatic Botany 48: 273-284.
8. Ellenberg, H., H. E. Weber, R. Düll, V. Wirth, W. Werner & D. Paulissen, 1991. Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa. Scripta Geobotanica 18: 1-248.
9. Heegaard, E., 2004. Trends in aquatic macrophyte species turnover in Northern Ireland - which factors determine the spatial distribution of local species turnover? Global Ecology and Biogeography 13: 397-408.
10. Heino, J. & H. Toivonen, 2008. Aquatic plant biodiversity at high latitudes: patterns of richness and rarity in Finnish freshwater macrophytes. Boreal Environment Research 13: 1-14.
11. Hering, D., A. Borja, L. Carvalho & C. K. Feld, 2012. Assessment and recovery of European water bodies: Key messages from the WISER project. Hydrobiologia, this issue.
12. Hill, M. O., J. O. Mountford, D. B. Roy & R. G. H. Bunce, 1999. Ellenberg's indicator values for British plants. ECOFACT Volume 2 Technical Annex. Huntingdon, Institute of Terrestrial Ecology: 46 pp. (ECOFACT, 2a). Available at http://nora. nerc. ac. uk/6411/.
13. Hurford, C., 2010. Observer variation in river macrophyte surveys: the results of multiple-observer sampling trials on the Western Cleddau. In Hurford, C., M. Schneider & I. Cowx (eds), Conservation Monitoring in Freshwater Habitats: A Practical Guide and Case Studies. Springer, Dordrecht: 137-146.
14. Janauer, G. A., 2002. Water Framework Directive, European Standards and the Assessment of macrophytes in lakes: a methodology for scientific and practical application. Verhandlungen des Zoologisch-Botanischen Vereins Wien Jg 139: 143-147.
15. Jensen, S., 1977. An objective method for sampling the macrophyte vegetation in lakes. Vegetatio 33: 107-118.
16. Jones, J. I., W. Li & S. C. Maberly, 2003. Area, altitude and aquatic plant diversity. Ecography 26: 411-420.
17. Kolada, A., S. Hellsten, M. Søndergaard, M. Mjelde, B. Dudley, G. van Geest, B. Goldsmith, T. Davidson, H. Bennion, P. Nõges & V. Bertrin, 2011. Report on the most suitable lake macrophyte based assessment methods for impacts of eutrophication and water level fluctuations. Available at: www. wiser. eu.
18. Murphy, K. J., 2002. Plant communities and plant diversity in softwater lakes of northern Europe. Aquatic Botany 73: 287-324.
19. Penning, W. E., B. Dudley, M. Mjelde, S. Hellsten, J. Hanganu, A. Kolada, M. van den Berg, S. Poikane, G. Phillips, N. Willby & F. Ecke, 2008a. Using aquatic macrophyte community indices to define the ecological status of European lakes. Aquatic Ecology 42: 253-264.
20. Penning, W. E., M. Mjelde, B. Dudley, S. Hellsten, J. Hanganu, A. Kolada, M. van den Berg, S. Poikane, G. Phillips, N. Willby & F. Ecke, 2008b. Classifying aquatic macrophytes as indicators of eutrophication in European lakes. Aquatic Ecology 42: 237-251.
21. Pinheiro, J. C. & D. M. Bates, 2000. Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-PLUS. Springer, New York.
22. Poikane, S., M. van den Berg, S. Hellsten, C. de Hoyos, J. Ortiz-Casas, K. Pall, R. Portielje, G. Phillips, A. Lyche Solheim, D. Tierney, G. Wolfram & W. van de Bund, 2011. Lake ecological assessment systems and intercalibration for the European Water Framework Directive: aims, achievements and further challenges. Procedia Environmental Sciences 9: 153-168.
23. R Development Core Team, 2011. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
24. Rørslett, B., 1991. Principal determinants of aquatic macrophyte richness in northern European lakes. Aquatic Botany 39: 173-193.
25. Smolders, A. J. P., L. P. M. Lamers, E. C. H. E. T. Lucassen, G. van der Velde & J. G. M. Roelofs, 2006. Internal eutrophication: how it works and what to do about it - a review. Chemistry and Ecology 22(2): 93-111.
26. Staniszewski, R., K. Szoszkiewicz, J. Zbierska, J. Lesny, S. Jusik & R. T. Clarke, 2006. Assessment of sources of uncertainty in macrophyte surveys and the consequences for river classification. Hydrobiologia 566: 235-246.
27. Szoszkiewicz, K., S. Jusik, T. Zgola, M. Czechowska & B. Hryc, 2007. Uncertainty of macrophyte-based monitoring for different types of lowland rivers. Belgian Journal of Botany 140(1) Special Issue: 7-16 International Symposium on Aquatic Vascular Plants. Vrije Univ, Brussels, Belgium, January 11-13, 2006.
28. Szoszkiewicz, K., J. Zbierska & R. Staniszewski, 2009. The variability of macrophyte metrics used in river monitoring. Oceanological and Hydrobiological Studies 38(4): 117-126.
29. UKTAG, 2009. UKTAG Lake Assessment Methods: Macrophyte and Phytobenthos. Macrophytes (Lake LEAFPACS). Water Framework Directive - United Kingdom Technical Advisory Group (WFD-UKTAG). Available at: http://www. wfduk. org/bio_assessment/.
30. Vestergaard, O. & K. Sand-Jensen, 2000. Aquatic macrophyte richness in Danish lakes in relation to alkalinity, transparency, and lake area. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 57: 2022-2031.