Abstract
The results of four macrophyte assessment methods (French Indice Biologique Macrophytique en Rivière, German Reference Index, British Mean Trophic Rank and Dutch Macrophyte Score) were compared, based on plant survey data of medium-sized lowland streams in Central Europe. To intercalibrate the good quality class boundaries two alternative methods were applied: direct comparison and the use of “common metrics”. While the French and British methods were highly related (R2>0.75), the German RI showed less (0.20<R2<0.55) and the Dutch DMS least correlation (R2<0.10) with other methods. Of 70 macrophyte metrics tested only Ellenberg_N was considerably related to three of the national assessment methods, thus representing a potential common metric for intercalibration. Comparison of quality class boundaries via regression analysis using both intercalibration approaches revealed major differences between classifications of the French, German and British methods, which are, in addition, related in a nonlinear way.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
NF T90-395, 2003. Water quality – Determination of the Macrophytes biological index for rivers (IBMR). Association Française de Normalisation (AFNOR), Saint Denis La Plaine
S. Birk D. Hering (2006) ArticleTitleDirect comparison of assessment methods using benthic macroinvertebrates: a contribution to the EU Water Framework Directive intercalibration exercise Hydrobiologia 566 401–415
S. Birk D. Hering (2002) ArticleTitleWaterview Web-Database: a comprehensive review of European assessment methods for rivers FBA News 20 4
S. Birk U. Schmedtje (2005) ArticleTitleTowards harmonisation of water quality classification in the Danube River Basin: overview of biological assessment methods for running waters Archiv für Hydrobiologie, Supplement “Large Rivers” 16 171–196
A. Buffagni S. Erba S. Birk M. Cazzola C. Feld T. Ofenböck J. Murray-Bligh M. T. Furse R. T. Clark D. Hering H. Soszka W. v. d. Bund (2005) ArticleTitleTowards European Inter-calibration for the Water Framework Directive: Procedures and examples for different river types from the E.C. project STAR. 11th STAR deliverable. STAR Contract No: EVK1-CT 2001-00089 Quaderni Istituto di Ricerca sulle Acque 123 1–468
A. Buffagni S. Erba M. Cazzola J. Murray-Bligh H. Soszka P. Genoni (2006) ArticleTitleThe STAR common metrics approach to the WFD intercalibratin process: Full application for small, lowland rivers in three European countries Hydrobiologia 566 379–399
Council of the European Communities, 1991. Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive 91/271/EEC. Official Journal of the European Communities, L135/40–52, 30 May 1991, Brussels
CIS WG 2.A Ecological Status (ECOSTAT), 2004. Guidance on the intercalibration process. Agreed version of WG 2.A Ecological Status meeting held 7–8 October 2004 in Ispra. Version 4.1. 14. October 2004. ECOSTAT, Ispra
Elbersen, J. W. H., P. F. M. Verdonschot, B. Roels & J. G. Hartholt, 2003. Definitiestudie KaderRichtlijn Water (KRW). I. Typologie Nederlandse Oppervlaktewateren. Alterra-rapport 669. ALTERRA, Wageningen
H. Ellenberg H. E. Weber R. Düll V. Wirth W. Werner D. Paulißen (1992) Indicator Values of Plants in Central Europe Erich Goltze Göttingen
European Commission, 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC. Establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. European Commission PE-CONS 3639/1/100 Rev 1, Luxembourg
Furse, M., D. Hering, O. Moog, P. Verdonschot, R. K. Johnson, K. Brabec, K. Gritzalis, A. Buffagni, P. Pinto, N. Friberg, J. Murray-Bligh, J. Kokes, R. Alber, P. Usseglio-Polatera, P. Haase, R. Sweeting, B. Bis, K. Szoszkiewicz, H. Soszka, G. Springe, F. Sporka & I. Krno, 2006. The STAR project: context, objectives and approaches. Hydrobiologia 566: 3–29
Hering, D., R. K. Johnson, S. Kramm, S. Schmutz, K. Szoszkiewicz & P. F. M. Verdonschot, in prep. Assessment of European rivers with diatoms, macrophytes, invertebrates and fish: A comparative metric-based analysis
N. T. H. Holmes J. R. Newman S. Chadd K. J. Rouen L. Saint F. H. Dawson (1999) Mean Trophic Rank: A User’s Manual. R & D Technical Report E38 Environment Agency Bristol
N. T. H. Holmes B. A. Whitton (1975) ArticleTitleMacrophytes of the river Tweed Transactions of the Botanical Society of Edinburgh 42 369–381
G. A. Janauer (2001) ArticleTitleIs what has been measured of any direct relevance to the success of the macrophyte in its particular environment? Journal of Limnology 60 IssueIDSuppl. 33–38
Janauer, G. A., P. Hale & R. Sweeting (eds), 2003. Macrophyte inventory of the river Danube: A pilot study. Archiv für Hydrobiologie, Supplement “Large Rivers” 147 (1–2): 1–229
M. G. Kelly B. A. Whitton (1998) ArticleTitleBiological monitoring of eutrophication in rivers Hydrobiologia 384 55–67 Occurrence Handle10.1023/A:1003400910730
A. Kohler (1978) ArticleTitleMethoden der Kartierung von Flora und Vegetation von Süßwasserbiotopen Landschaft & Stadt 10 73–85
T. Korte K. Weyer ParticleVan de (2005) ArticleTitleDie Bewertung von Fließgewässern mit Makrophyten gemäß EU-WRRL - Ergebnisse des Vergleichs von zwei Bewertungsverfahren Wasser und Abfall 9/2005 46–49
Leyssen, A., P. Adriaens, L. Denys, J. Packet, A. Schneiders, K. van Looy & L. Vanhecke, 2005. Toepassing van verschillende biologische beoordelingssystemen op Vlaamse potentiële interkalibratielocaties overeenkomstig de Europese Kaderrichtlijn Water – partim “Macrofyten”. Instituut voor Natuurbehoud in opdracht van VMM, Brussels
P. Meilinger S. Schneider A. Melzer (2005) ArticleTitleThe reference index method for the macrophyte-based assessment of rivers – a contribution for the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive in Germany International Review of Hydrobiology 90 322–342 Occurrence Handle1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2MXmtl2gsLc%3D Occurrence Handle10.1002/iroh.200410768
Pall, K., V. Moser, J. Schaumburg, C. Schranz, & P. Meilinger, 2005. Ergebnisse zur Interkalibrierung der Fließgewässerbewertung mit Makrophyten (Option 3: Vergleich Deutschland-Österreich). Oral presentation held at the conference of the “Deutsche Gesellschaft für Limnologie” in Karlsruhe, 28 September 2005
E. C. Pielou (1966) ArticleTitleThe measurement of diversity in different types of biological collections Journal of Theoretical Biology 13 131–144 Occurrence Handle10.1016/0022-5193(66)90013-0
Pot, R., 2005. QBWat – ecologische beoordeling van waterkwaliteit conform de Europese Kaderrichtlijn Water. Version 1.01
InstitutionalAuthorNameSYSTAT Software Inc (2002) TableCurve 2D – Version 5.01 SSI Richmond CA
J. Schaumburg C. Schranz J. Foerster A. Gutowski G. Hofmann P. Meilinger S. Schneider U Schmedtje (2004) ArticleTitleEcological classification of macrophytes and phytobenthos for rivers in Germany according to the Water Framework Directive Limnologica 34 283–301
Schaumburg, J., U. Schmedtje, B. Köpf, C. Schranz, S. Schneider, P. Meilinger, D. Stelzer, G. Hofmann, A. Gutowski & J. Foerster, 2005. Makrophyten und Phytobenthos in Flüssen und Seen. Leitbildbezogenes Bewertungsverfahren zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie. Informationsbericht Heft 1/05. Bayerisches Landesamt für Wasserwirtschaft, München
S. Schneider (2000) Entwicklung eines Makrophytenindex zur Trophieindikation in Fließgewässern Shaker Verlag Aachen
C. E. Shannon W. Weaver (1949) Mathematical Theory of Communication University of Illinois Press Urbana
E. H. Simpson (1949) ArticleTitleMeasurement of diversity Nature 163 688
V. Sládeček (1973) ArticleTitleSystem of water quality from the biological point of view Archiv für Hydrobiologie Beiheft Ergebnisse der Limnologie 7 1–218
K. Szoszkiewicz T. Ferreira T. Korte A. Baattrup-Pedersen J. Davy-Bowker M. O’Hare (2006) ArticleTitleEuropean river plant communities: the importance of organic pollution and the usefulness of existing macrophyte metrics Hydrobiologia 566 211–234
Van de Weyer, K., 2003. Kartieranleitung zur Erfassung und Bewertung der aquatischen Makrophyten der Fließgewässer in Nordrhein-Westfalen gemäß den Vorgaben der EU-Wasser-Rahmenrichtlinie. LUA-Merkblätter Nr. 39. Landesumweltamt (LUA) NRW, Düsseldorf
Van den Berg, M. S., H. C. Coops, R. Pot, W. Altenburg, R. Nijboer, T. v. d. Broek, M. Fagel, G. Arts, R. Bijkerk, H. v. Dam, T. Ietswaart, J. v. d. Molen, K. Wolfstein, D. d. Jong & H. Hartholt, 2004. Achtergronddocument referenties en maatlatten waterflora. RIZA, Lelystad
D. T. Molen Particlevan der M. Beers M. S. v. d. Berg T. v. d. Broek R. Buskens H. C. Coops H. v. Dam G. Duursema M. Fagel T. Ietswaart M. Klinge R. A. E. Knoben J. Kranenbarg J. d. Leeuw R. Noordhuis R. C. Nijboer R. Pot P. F. M. Verdonschot T. Vriese (2004) Referenties en maatlatten voor rivieren ten behoeve van de Kaderrichtlijn Water – version July 2004 Alterra Wageningen
G. Wiegleb (1988) Analysis of flora and vegetation in rivers: concepts and applications J. J. Symoens (Eds) Vegetation of Inland Waters Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht 311–340
Wiegleb, G., 1991. Die Lebens- und Wuchsformen der makrophytischen Wasserpflanzen und deren Beziehung zur Ökologie, Verbreitung und Vergesellschaftung der Arten Tuexenia 11: 135–147
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Birk, S., Korte, T. & Hering, D. Intercalibration of assessment methods for macrophytes in lowland streams: direct comparison and analysis of common metrics. Hydrobiologia 566, 417–430 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-006-0080-9
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-006-0080-9