Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative monitoring of diatoms, macroinvertebrates and macrophytes in the Woluwe River (Brussels, Belgium)

  • Published:
Aquatic Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The river Woluwe in Brussels and Flanders (Belgium) is a small tributary of 15 km length that drains an area of 9400 ha in the Schelde river basin. The headwaters of the Woluwe are highly fragmented by diverse pond systems and are vaulted in the Brussels agglomeration. Hyporheic zones locally influence the water quality. The downstream stretch of the river receives sewage waters from households and industry. As the river Woluwe within a short distance represents a typical gradient from groundwater-fed sources in the forest towards severely polluted water, a comparative monitoring using diatoms, macroinvertebrates and macrophytes was done. The saprobic index based on diatoms, the Belgian Biotic Index (BBI) for macroinvertebrates and a macrophyte index based on the N-values of Ellenberg were used in this comparison and for estimating the correlation with the bimonthly measured chemical variables in 16 sampling stations. The diatom saprobic index and the macrophyte index were strongly correlated. Both groups showed strong correlations with phosphate, ammonium and chemical oxygen demand. The Belgian Biotic Index showed lower correlations with the nutrient variables, but was slightly better correlated to chemical oxygen demand, chloride and dissolved oxygen. None of the indices showed a correlation with nitrate. Local substrate or light conditions could interfere with the indicator system, especially for the macrophytes and occasionally for the macroinvertebrates. It was concluded that at least in this particular river system, the indices based on the primary producers were more indicative for the trophic status, whereas the BBI showed a broader relationship to the general degree of pollution. Therefore, these three indices are considered as complementary for monitoring the biological quality and the ecological status of a river system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AFNOR (1992) Essai des eaux: détermination de l'indice Biologique global normalisé (IBGN). Norme française NF T 90–350

  • AFNOR (2000) Détermination de l'Indice biologique Diatomées (IBD). Norme française NF T 90–354

  • American Public Health Association (1989) Standard methods for the examination of the water and wastewater 17th ed. APHA, Washington, 1197 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson E, Nilsson C and Johansson ME (2000) Effects of river fragmentation on plant dispersal and riparian flora. Regul Rivers: Res Mgmt 16: 83–89

    Google Scholar 

  • Arts GHP, Roelofs JGM and de Lyon MJH (1990) Differential tolerances among soft-water macrophytes species to acidification. Can J Bot 68: 2127–2134

    Google Scholar 

  • Batterbee RW, Charles DF, Dixit SS and Renberg I (1999) Diatoms as indicators of surface water acidity. In: Stoermer EF and Smol JP (eds.) The Diatoms: Applications for the Environmental and Earth Sciences. University Press, Cambridge, pp. 85–127

    Google Scholar 

  • Blandin P (1986) Bioindicateurs et diagnostic de systèmes écologiques. Bull Ecol 17: 215–307

    Google Scholar 

  • Caffrey J (1986) Macrophytes as biological indicators of organic pollution in Irish rivers. In: Richardson DHS (ed.), Biological Indicators of Pollution. Royal Irish Academy, pp. 77–87

  • Canfield DE Jr, Langeland KA, Maceina MJ, Haller WT, Shireman JV and Jones JR (1983) Trophic state classification of lakes with aquatic macrophytes. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 40: 1713–1718

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements WH (1994) Benthic community responses to heavy metals in the upper Arkansas River Basin, Colorado. J North Amer Benthol Soc 13: 30–44

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements WH, Cherry DS and Hassel JH (1992) Assessment of the impact of heavy metals on benthic communities at the Clinch River (Virginia): Evaluation of an index of community sensitivity. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 49: 1686–1694

    Google Scholar 

  • Coste M, Bosca C and Dauta A (1991) Use of algae for monitoring rivers in France. In: Whitton BA, Rott E and Friedrich G (eds.), Use of Algae for Monitoring Rivers. Innsbruck University, pp. 75–88.

  • De Lange L and van Zon JCJ (1983) A system for the evaluation of aquatic biotopes based on the composition of the macrophyte vegetation. Biol Cons 25: 273–284

    Google Scholar 

  • De Pauw N and Hawkes HA (1993) Biological monitoring of river water quality. In: Walley WJ and Judd S (eds.), River Water Quality Monitoring and Control. Aston University, UK, 249 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • De Pauw N and Vanhooren G (1983) Method for biological quality assessment of watercourses in Belgium. Hydrobiologia 100: 153–168

    Google Scholar 

  • De Pauw N and Vannevel R (1991) Macroinvertebrates and water quality. Identification keys of macroinvertebrates and water quality assessment methods. Dossier Stichting Leefmilieu 11. Antwerpen, 316 pp (in Dutch)

  • De Pauw N, Ghetti P F, Manzini P and Spaggiari P (1992) Biological assessment methods for running water. River Water Quality-Ecological Assessment and Control. Commission of the European Communities. EUR 14606 EN-FR, 1992-III. Brussels. 751 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixit SS, Smol JP, Kingston JC and Charles DF (1992) Diatoms: powerful indicators of environmental change. Environ Sci Technol 26: 23–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellenberg H, Weber HE, Düll R, Wirth V, Werner W and Paulissen D (1992) Zeigerwerte von Pflanzen in Mitteleuropa, 2nd ed. Scr. Geobot 18: 1–258

    Google Scholar 

  • EU (2000) Directive of the European Parliament and of the council 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. European Union. The European Parliament. The Council. PE-CONS 3639/1/00 REV 1 EN

  • Germain H (1981) Flore des diatomées. Société Nouvelle des éditions Boubée Paris, 441 pp

  • Ghetti PF and Ravera O (1994) European perspective on biological monitoring. 46. In: Loeb L and Spacie A (eds.), Biological Monitoring of Aquatic Systems. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, 381 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Grasmück N, Haury J, Léglize L and Muller S (1995) Assessment of the bio-indicator capacity of aquatic macrophytes using multivariate analysis. Hydrobiologia 300/301: 115–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregg WW and Rose FL (1982) The effects of aquatic macrophytes on the stream micro-environment. Aquat Bot 14: 309–324

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall RI and Smol JP (1999) Diatoms as indicators of lake eutrophication. In: Stoermer EF and Smol JP (eds.), The diatoms: Applications for the Environmental and Earth Sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 128–168

    Google Scholar 

  • Haury J, Peltre M-C, Muller S, Trémolières M, Barbe J, Dutartre A and Guerlesquin M (1996) Des indices macrophytiques pour estimer la qualité des cours d'eau Français: premières propositions. Écologie 27 (4): 233–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkes HA (1979) Invertebrates as indicators of river water quality. 2. In: James A and Evison L (eds.), Biological Indicators of Water Quality. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp. 1–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Helawell JM (1986) Biological Indicators of Freshwater Pollution and Environmental Management. Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, London, 546 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Hills JM and Murphy KJ (1996) Evidence for consistent functional groups of wetland vegetation across a broad geographical range of Europe. Wetlands Ecol Manag 4 (1): 51–63

    Google Scholar 

  • Husák S, Sládecek V and Sládecková A (1989) Freshwater macrophytes as indicators of organic pollution. Acta Hydrochim Hydrobiol 17: 693–701

    Google Scholar 

  • Hynes HBN (1960) The Biology of Polluted Waters. Liverpool University Press, Liverpool, 202 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaenel BR, Mathaei CD and Uehrlinger U (1998) Disturbance by aquatic plant management in streams: effects on benthic invertebrates. Regul Rivers: Res Mgmt 14: 341–356

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly MG, Cazauban A, Coring E, Dell'Uomo A, Ector L, Goldsmith B, Guasch H, Hürlimann J, Jarlman A, Kawecka B, Kwandrans J, Laugaste R, Lindstrøm EA, Leitao M, Marvan P, Padisák J, Pipp E, Prygiel J, Rott E, Sabater S, van Dam H and Vizinzt (1998) Recommendations for the routine sampling of diatoms for water quality assessment in Europe. J Appl Phycol 10: 215–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Knoben RAE, Roos C and van Oirschot MCM (1995) Biological assessment methods for watercourses. UN/ECE Task Force on Monitoring and Assessment, Vol. 3. RIZA, P.O. Box 17, 8200 AA Lelystad, The Netherlands, 86 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohler A (1975) Submerse Makrophyten und ihre Gesellschaften als Indikatoren der Gewässerbelastung. Beitr naturk Forsch Südw.-Dtl 34: 149–159

    Google Scholar 

  • Krammer K and Lange-Bertalot H (1986) Bacillariophyceae. I. Teil. Naviculaceae. In: Susswasserflora von Mitteleuropas (Ettl H, Gerloff J, Heynig H and Mollenhauer D eds.) Fischer, Stuttgart, 2/1, 876 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Krammer K and Lange-Bertalot H (1988) Bacillariophyceae. II. Teil. Epithemiaceae, Surirellaceae. In: Ettl H, Gerloff J, Heynig H and Mollenhauer D (eds.), Susswasserflora von Mitteleuropas. Fischer, Stuttgart, 2/2, 596 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Krammer K and Lange-Bertalot H (1991a) Bacillariophyceae. III. Teil. Centrales, Fragilariaceae, Eunotiaceae. In: Ettl H, Gerloff J, Heynig H and Mollenhauer D (eds.), Susswasserflora von Mitteleuropas. Fischer, Stuttgart, 2/3, 576 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Krammer K and Lange-Bertalot H (1991b) Bacillariophyceae. IV. Teil. Achnanthaceae. In: Ettl H, Gärtner G, Gerloff J, Heynig H and Mollenhauer D (eds.), Susswasserflora von Mitteleuropas. Fischer, Stuttgart, 2/4, 437 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Lafont M, Coste M, Wasson JG and Faessel B (1988) Comparaison de quatre indices biologiques pour apprécier l'impact de la pollution dans les cours d'eau français. Naturaliste Can (Rev Ecol Syst) 115: 77–87

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann A and Lachavanne J-B (1999) Changes in the water quality of Lake Geneva indicated by submerged macrophytes. Freshw Biol 42: 457–466

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenthun KM (1969) The practice of water pollution biology. FWPCA, Washington. 281 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Metcalfe-Smith JL (1994) Biological water quality assessment of rivers: use of macroinvertebrate communities. In: Calow P and Petts G E (eds.), The Rivers Handbook, Vol. 2. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, pp. 144–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muller S (1990) Une séquence de groupements végétaux bioindicateurs d'eutrophisation croissante des cours d'eau faiblement minéralisés des Basses Vosges gréseuses du Nord. CR Acad Sci Paris 310 (III): 509–514

    Google Scholar 

  • NBN (1984) Norme belge T 92–402. Qualité biologique des cours d'eau. Détermination de l'indice biotique se basant sur les macroinvertébrés aquatiques. Institut Belge de Normalisation, Bruxelles. 11 pp. (also published in Dutch)

    Google Scholar 

  • Pantle R and Buck H (1955) Die biologische Uberwachung der Gewasser und die Darstellung der Ergebnisse. Gas-uWasserfach 96: 604

    Google Scholar 

  • Prygiel J, Rosso-Darmet A, Lafont M, Lesniak C, Durbec A and Ouddane B (1999) Use of oligochaete communities for assessment of ecotoxicological risk in fine sediment of rivers and canals of the Artois-Picardie water basin (France). Hydrobiologia 410: 25–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Riis T, Sand-Jensen K and Vestergaard O (2000) Plant communities in lowland Danish streams: species composition and environmental factors. Aquat Bot 66: 255–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg DM and Resh VH (1993) Freshwater biomonitoring and benthic macroinvertebrates. Chapman & Hall, New York, London, 488 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffers AP and Sýkora KV (2000) Reliability of Ellenberg indicator values for moisture, nitrogen and soil reaction: a comparison with field measurements. J Veget Sci 11: 225–244

    Google Scholar 

  • Seddon B (1972) Aquatic macrophytes as limnological indicators. Freshw Biol 2: 107–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Sladeček V (1973) Systems of water quality from the biological point of view. Arch Hydrobiol Beih 7: 1–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Sladeček V (1986) Diatoms as indicators of organic pollution. Acta Hydrochim Hydrobiol 14: 555–566

    Google Scholar 

  • Slepukhina TD (1984) Comparison of different methods of water quality evaluation bymeans of Oligochaetes. Hydrobiologia 115: 183–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Thiébaut G and Muller S (1998) The impact of eutrophication on aquatic macrophyte diversity in weakly mineralised streams in the Northern Vosges mountains (NE France). Biodiv Cons 7: 1051–1068

    Google Scholar 

  • Vestergaard O and Sand-Jensen K (2000) Alkalinity and trophic state regulate aquatic plant distribution in Danish lakes. Aquat Bot 67: 85–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrhovsek D, Martincic A and Kralj M (1981) Evaluation of the polluted river Savinja with the help of macrophytes. Hydrobiologia 8: 97–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitton BA and Rott E (1996) Use of algae for monitoring rivers. II. Proceedings of 2nd European Workshop, Innsbruck, 1995. Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck, 196 pp

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiegleb G (1981) Application of multiple discriminant analysis on the analysis of the correlation between macrophyte vegetation and water quality in running waters of Central Europe. Hydrobiologia 79: 91–100

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research Group, Plant Science and Nature Management, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, B-1050, Brussels, Belgium

    Ludwig Triest & Parminder Kaur

  2. Laboratory of Environmental Toxicology and Aquatic Ecology, Ghent University, J. Plateaustraat 22, B-9000, Gent, Belgium

    Steven Heylen & Niels De Pauw

Authors
  1. Ludwig Triest
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Parminder Kaur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Steven Heylen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Niels De Pauw
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Triest, L., Kaur, P., Heylen, S. et al. Comparative monitoring of diatoms, macroinvertebrates and macrophytes in the Woluwe River (Brussels, Belgium). Aquatic Ecology 35, 183–194 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011468615246

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011468615246

Search

Navigation