Search

The first German intercalibration exercise for benthic diatoms was conducted to improve the application of the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive for running waters and lakes in Germany. The intercalibration exercise revealed several taxonomic problems. Among others, considerable problems occurred with identifying and differentiating species of the following four groups: (I) Amphora indistincta Levkov and A. pediculus (Kützing) Grunow, (II) Cocconeis placentula var. euglypta Ehrenberg and C. placentula var. lineata (Ehrenberg) Van Heurck, (III) Navicula cryptotenella Lange-Bertalot and N. cryptotenelloides Lange-Bertalot and (IV) N. reichardtiana Lange-Bertalot and N. caterva Hohn & Hellermann. The taxonomic problems that emerged occurred due to both insufficient use of given taxonomic details (by limnologists) and ambiguous species descriptions and documentation (by taxonomists). Thus, we recommend to the applied limnologist to use the mandatory identification literature and to document any ambiguous valves during routine counts. Also, it would be desirable to further investigate certain species by taxonomists and, in general, to provide more basic data with species descriptions or in identification manuals. These measures will improve the use of diatoms as bioindicators and consequently benefit both applied limnologists and taxonomists.

Within the Mediterranean region each country has its own assessment method based on aquatic macroinvertebrates. However, independently of the classification system, quality assessments should be comparable across members of the European Commission, which means, among others, that the boundaries between classes should not deviate significantly. Here we check for comparability between High-Good and Good-Moderate classifications, through the use of a common metric. Additionally, we discuss the influence of the conceptual and statistical approaches used to calculate a common boundary within the Mediterranean countries participating in the Intercalibration Exercise (e.g., using individual national type-boundaries, one value for each common type or an average boundary by country; weighted average, median) in the overall outcome. All methods, except for the IBMWP (the Iberian BMWP) when applied to temporary rivers, were highly correlated (0.82 < R < 0.98) with the common metric STAR-ICMi. This index was shown to respond well to a variety of pressures (especially local habitat alterations, riparian vegetation degradation, nutrient enrichment and chemical contamination, land use and global degradation; p < 0.00001) affecting Mediterranean streams. However, depending on the statistical approach used, a different number of class boundaries failed the acceptable deviation from the common boundary (a quarter of class width). That leads to a different percentage of national sites failing to achieve good status and ultimately to a different technical and economic effort in the recovery of streams to that condition. We argue that low/high boundaries might have different meanings not restricted to the quality (good/bad) of reference conditions but also to the natural spatial and temporal variability contained in national and intercalibration types. The highly variable hydrological regimes of Mediterranean streams may influence the reference condition and require further investigation. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

As part of the WFD implementation, Member-States must intercalibrate their ecological status evaluation systems in the context of geographical intercalibration groups (GIGs) working in comparable natural biogeographic zones and driving exercises targeted at the same typologies of watercourses (mainly based on integrated surface of the watershed at the survey site, mineralization of water and, if necessary, on altitude criteria). Phytobenthic assessment methods of the Central-Baltic GIG watercourses had been subjected to a first intercalibration cycle which was completed in 2007. Since that date, specific work has been carried out through the ECOSTAT Group in order to clarify and improve the criteria used for the validation of reference sites at the European level. That work could have changed the appropriate reference level to be retained by national watercourse type and, at the same time, the level of deviation from the appropriate reference used to establish the Ecological Status of European rivers. Therefore, it was considered necessary to renew the previous intercalibration work, following the revision of criteria for reference sites validation, by conducting a second round intercalibration involving 14 member states, or member states administrative areas using different evaluation systems. The present document is the final report of the 2nd "Central-Baltic" GIG Intercalibration Round for Rivers, currently submitted to E.U. validation.; Dans le cadre d'application de la DCE, les Etats-Membres doivent intercalibrer leurs systèmes d'évaluation de l'état écologique, dans le cadre de groupes géographiques d'intercalibration (GIGs) permettant de travailler sur des zones biogéographiques naturelles comparables, et dans le cadre d'exercices ciblés sur les mêmes typologies de cours d'eau (essentiellement basés sur la surface intégrée du bassin versant au site, la minéralisation de l'eau et, si nécessaire, sur des critères d'altitude). Les méthodes d'évaluation phytobenthiques des cours d'eau du GIG Central-Baltique avaient fait l'objet d'un premier cycle d'intercalibration qui s'est achevé en 2007. Depuis cette date, un travail spécifique a été mené sous l'égide du Groupe ECOSTAT pour préciser et améliorer les critères servant à la validation des sites de référence au niveau européen. Ces travaux ont pu changer le niveau de référence adéquat à retenir par type national de cours d'eau et, du même coup, le niveau d'écart à la référence adéquate servant à établir l'Etat Ecologique. De ce fait, il a été jugé nécessaire de renouveler les travaux d'intercalibration, suite à cette révision des critères de validation des sites de référence, par la réalisation d'un 2ème Round d'intercalibration auquel ont participé 14 Etats-Membres ou zones administratives différentes d'Etats-Membres utilisant un système d'évaluation différent. Le présent document constitue le rapport final du 2ème Round d'intercalibration des cours d'eau du GIG Central-Baltique, soumis à l'U.E. et actuellement en cours de validation.

As part of the WFD implementation, Member-States must intercalibrate their ecological status evaluation systems in the context of geographical intercalibration groups (GIGs) working in comparable natural biogeographic zones and driving exercises targeted at the same typologies of watercourses (mainly based on integrated surface of the watershed at the survey site, mineralization of water and, if necessary, on altitude criteria). Phytobenthic assessment methods of the Central-Baltic GIG watercourses had been subjected to a first intercalibration cycle which was completed in 2007. Since that date, specific work has been carried out through the ECOSTAT Group in order to clarify and improve the criteria used for the validation of reference sites at the European level. That work could have changed the appropriate reference level to be retained by national watercourse type and, at the same time, the level of deviation from the appropriate reference used to establish the Ecological Status of European rivers. Therefore, it was considered necessary to renew the previous intercalibration work, following the revision of criteria for reference sites validation, by conducting a second round intercalibration involving 14 member states, or member states administrative areas using different evaluation systems. The present Volume 2 contains the appendices of the final report of the 2nd "Central-Baltic" GIG Intercalibration Round for Rivers, currently submitted to E.U. validation.; Dans le cadre d'application de la DCE, les Etats-Membres doivent intercalibrer leurs systèmes d'évaluation de l'état écologique, dans le cadre de groupes géographiques d'intercalibration (GIGs) permettant de travailler sur des zones biogéographiques naturelles comparables, et dans le cadre d'exercices ciblés sur les mêmes typologies de cours d'eau (essentiellement basés sur la surface intégrée du bassin versant au site, la minéralisation de l'eau et, si nécessaire, sur des critères d'altitude). Les méthodes d'évaluation phytobenthiques des cours d'eau du GIG Central-Baltique avaient fait l'objet d'un premier cycle d'intercalibration qui s'est achevé en 2007. Depuis cette date, un travail spécifique a été mené sous l'égide du Groupe ECOSTAT pour préciser et améliorer les critères servant à la validation des sites de référence au niveau européen. Ces travaux ont pu changer le niveau de référence adéquat à retenir par type national de cours d'eau et, du même coup, le niveau d'écart à la référence adéquate servant à établir l'Etat Ecologique. De ce fait, il a été jugé nécessaire de renouveler les travaux d'intercalibration, suite à cette révision des critères de validation des sites de référence, par la réalisation d'un 2ème Round d'intercalibration auquel ont participé 14 Etats-Membres ou zones administratives différentes d'Etats-Membres utilisant un système d'évaluation différent. Le présent Tome 2 contient les annexes du rapport final du 2ème Round d'intercalibration des cours d'eau du GIG Central-Baltique, qui a été soumis à l'U.E. et qui est en cours de validation.

International audience; Macrophytes were recognized in the Water Framework Directive, WFD [1] as one of the biological elements required for the ecological quality assessment of European surface waters. The Intercalibration Exercise, IC, aims to achieve a coherent implementation of the WFD between Member States, MS, by ensuring the comparability of the classification results of the monitoring systems for the biological quality elements [2]. IC of river macrohytes has been carried out within Geographical Intercalibration Group areas (GIGs), i.e. areas where MS share same intercalibration river types. First steps on the Intercalibration Exercise for Med GIG river macrophytes Limited data availability from the few participating MS and a poor advancement of national assessment systems for the river macrophytes were identified in the first phase of the IC for the Mediterranean GIG, Med GIG [3]. The present IC (2nd phase, 2007-2011) involve all MS except Malta (i.e. Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain), and can provide data from more than 800 sites, however with a limited number of reference sites and comparable MedGIG river types. Different MS viewpoints were detected for the data collection, quality assessing methods and reference criteria. Two Med GIG subgroups were identified: i) Cyprus, Greece, Portugal, and ii) France, Italy, Slovenia and Spain corresponding to different approaches of the river system, including the sampling facies and taxonomic groups observed, sampling season, and scope of the assessment method (trophic-oriented as opposed to compositional/structural-based methods). The different approaches result from the magnitude of Summer drought experienced throughout the region. The IC of the Med GIG for river macrophytes represents a huge and interesting challenge since such diverse perspectives and will have to be discussed and harmonized towards the success of the exercise.