Ecological status assessment of European lakes: a comparison of metrics for phytoplankton, macrophytes, benthic invertebrates and fish

Data on phytoplankton, macrophytes, benthic invertebrates and fish from more than 2000 lakes in 22 European countries were used to develop and test metrics for assessing the ecological status of European lakes as required by the Water Framework Directive. The strongest and most sensitive of the 11 metrics responding to eutrophication pressure were phytoplankton chlorophyll a, a taxonomic composition trophic index and a functional traits index, the macrophyte intercalibration taxonomic composition metric and a Nordic lake fish index. Intermediate response was found for a cyanobacterial bloom intensity index (Cyano), the Ellenberg macrophyte index and a multimetric index for benthic invertebrates. The latter also responded to hydromorphological pressure. The metrics provide information on primary and secondary impacts of eutrophication in the pelagic and the littoral zone of lakes. Several of these metrics were used as common metrics in the intercalibration of national assessment systems or have been incorporated directly into the national systems. New biological metrics have been developed to assess hydromorphological pressures, based on aquatic macrophyte responses to water level fluctuations, and on macroinvertebrate responses to morphological modifications of lake shorelines. These metrics thus enable the quantification of biological impacts of hydromorphological pressures in lakes.     

A phytoplankton trophic index to assess the status of lakes for the Water Framework Directive

Despite improvements in wastewater treatment systems, the impact of anthropogenic nutrient sources remains a key issue for the management of European lakes. The Water Framework Directive (WFD) provides a mechanism through which progress can be made on this issue. The Directive requires a classification of the ecological status of phytoplankton, which includes an assessment of taxonomic composition. In this paper, we present a composition metric, the plankton trophic index, that was developed in the WISER EU FP7 project and demonstrate how it has been used to compare national phytoplankton classification systems in Northern and Central Europe. The metric was derived from summer phytoplankton data summarised by genus from 1,795 lakes, covering 20 European countries. We show that it is significantly related to total phosphorus concentrations, but that it is also sensitive to alkalinity, lake size and climatic variables. Through the use of country-specific reference values for the index, we demonstrate that it is significantly related to other national phytoplankton assessment systems and illustrate for a single European (intercalibration) lake type how it was used to intercalibrate WFD boundaries from different countries.     

First steps in the Central-Baltic intercalibration exercise on lake macrophytes: where do we start?

The Water Framework Directive (WFD 2000) defines macrophytes as one of the biological groups required for the ecological assessment of European surface waters. Several indices for macrophyte assessment have been proposed or are currently in use by different European states. As a first step towards performing an intercalibration of these indices a common dataset was developed. This dataset contains abundance data on 789 macrophyte species from 316 different lake sites in ten European countries. Various common species and genera were identified as indicators of reference and impacted conditions within the dataset. Cluster analysis of macrophyte data, supported by non-metric multidimensional scaling, indicated that clusters formed were more reflective of their source country rather than lake type. This might be caused by differences in regional climate, biogeography, monitoring techniques, or a combination of these factors. A total of six national indices were applied to assign quality classes to the lakes. However, this produced results that often differed by one or two quality classes for the same site. We foresee that a more precise intercalibration exercise is necessary, and it should be based on more detailed data considering both seasonality and the latitudinal differences within the area covered.     

Bringing European river quality into line: an exercise to intercalibrate macro-invertebrate classification methods

The Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires intercalibration to be performed to ensure that ecological status, as defined by the boundary values of national biological assessment systems, is consistent with the definitions outlined in the WFD and comparable between Member States (MS). This article describes an intercalibration of 17 national river macro-invertebrate assessment methods from the Central and Baltic regions of Europe. We explore the hypothesis that intercalibration should be successful if ratios of the observed biota to that expected in reference condition are used to compare assessments of different national assessment systems. National boundaries expressed as ecological quality ratios (EQRs) were converted to values of a common multi-metric for the purpose of comparison. Twelve MS for the High/Good boundary and nine MS for the Good/Moderate boundary (and four MS who subsequently harmonised their boundaries) were within ±0.05 EQR units of the intercalibration boundaries and were deemed to be of comparable ecological standard. The use of a reference-based approach was deemed to be successful given that all the critical pre-requisites for intercalibration were satisfied. The boundaries derived from this intercalibration represent the first common interpretation of the ecological status of rivers based on macro-invertebrate assessment methods across Europe.     

REBECCA databases: experiences from compilation and analyses of monitoring data from 5,000 lakes in 20 European countries

Chemical and biological data from more than 5,000 lakes in 20 European countries have been compiled into databases within the EU project REBECCA. The project’s purpose was to provide scientific support for implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD). The databases contain the biological elements phytoplankton, macrophytes, macroinvertebrates and fish, together with relevant chemistry data and station information. The common database strategy has enabled project partners to perform analyses of chemical–biological relationships and to describe reference conditions for large geographic regions in Europe. This strategy has obvious benefits compared with single-country analyses: results will be more representative for larger European regions, and the statistical power and precision will be larger. The high number of samples within some regions has also enabled analysis of type-specific relationships for several lake types. These results are essential for the intercalibration of ecological assessment systems for lakes, as required by the WFD. However, the common database approach has also involved costs and limitations. The data process has been resource-demanding, and the requirements for a flexible database structure have made it less user-friendly for project partners. Moreover, there are considerable heterogeneities among datasets from different countries regarding sampling methods and taxonomic precision; this may reduce comparability of the data and increase the uncertainty of the results. This article gives an overview of the contents and functions of the REBECCA Lakes databases, and of our experiences from constructing and using the databases. We conclude with recommendations for compilation of environmental data for future international projects.     

Assessing ecological quality of shallow lakes: Does knowledge of transparency suffice?

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires that all aquatic ecosystems in their member states should reach ‘good’ ecological quality by 2015. To assess ecological quality, the WFD requires the definition of reference conditions using biological, physical and chemical indicators and the assignment of each water body to one of five quality classes using these indicators. Elaborate assessment schemes using large sets of variables are now being developed. Here we address the question whether all this is really needed and what the simplest assessment approach would be for the case of shallow lakes. We explore the relationships between the quality class assigned to a lake by experts in shallow lake ecology and a rich set of biological, physical, and chemical data. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were carried out based on data from 86 shallow lakes throughout Europe that were sampled in 2000 and/or 2001. Ecological quality of shallow lakes judged by experts was strongly correlated to physical and chemical variables associated with light regime and nutrients and much less to biological variables.Our regression model showed that ecological quality of this set of shallow lakes judged by experts could be predicted quite well from water transparency expressed as Secchi depth and that other variables did not contribute to it significantly. According to the WFD, lakes should at least have a ‘good’ ecological quality. Quality judged by experts and predicted quality were similar for 78% of the lakes with respect to meeting this standard. As a cautionary note we stress that Secchi depth alone will be a less useful indicator if effects of stressors other than eutrophication (e.g. lake acidification and toxic pollution) are to be considered.     

Quantifying uncertainties in biologically-based water quality assessment: A pan-European analysis of lake phytoplankton community metrics

Lake phytoplankton are adopted world-wide as a sensitive indicator of water quality. European environmental legislation, the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD), formalises this, requiring the use of phytoplankton to assess the ecological status of lakes and coastal waters. Here we provide a rigorous assessment of a number of proposed phytoplankton metrics for assessing the ecological quality of European lakes, specifically in response to nutrient enrichment, or eutrophication, the most widespread pressure affecting lakes. To be useful indicators, metrics must have a small measurement error relative to the eutrophication signal we want them to represent among lakes of different nutrient status. An understanding of variability in metric scores among different locations around a lake, or due to sampling and analytical variability can also identify how best this measurement error is minimised.To quantify metric variability, we analyse data from a multi-scale field campaign of 32 European lakes, resolving the extent to which seven phytoplankton metrics (including chlorophyll a, the most widely used metric of lake quality) vary among lakes, among sampling locations within a lake and through sample replication and processing. We also relate these metrics to environmental variables, including total phosphorus concentration as an indicator of eutrophication.For all seven metrics, 65–96% of the variance in metric scores was among lakes, much higher than variability occurring due to sampling/sample processing. Using multi-model inference, there was strong support for relationships between among-lake variation in three metrics and differences in total phosphorus concentrations. Three of the metrics were also related to mean lake depth. Variability among locations within a lake was minimal (<4%), with sub-samples and analysts accounting for much of the within-lake metric variance. This indicates that a single sampling location is representative and suggests that sub-sample replication and standardisation of analyst procedures should result in increased precision of ecological assessments based upon these metrics.For three phytoplankton metrics being used in the WFD: chlorophyll a concentration, the Phytoplankton Trophic Index (PTI) and cyanobacterial biovolume, >85% of the variance in metric scores was among-lakes and total phosphorus concentration was well supported as a predictor of this variation. Based upon this study, we can recommend that these three proposed metrics can be considered sufficiently robust for the ecological status assessment of European lakes in WFD monitoring schemes.     

Using aquatic macrophyte community indices to define the ecological status of European lakes

Defining the overall ecological status of lakes according to the Water Framework Directive (WFD) is to be partially based on the species composition of the aquatic macrophyte community. We tested three assessment methods to define the ecological status of the macrophyte community in response to a eutrophication pressure as reflected by total phosphorus concentrations in lake water. An absolute species richness, a trophic index (TI) and a lake trophic ranking (LTR) method were tested at Europe-wide, regional and national scales as well as by alkalinity category, using data from 1,147 lakes from 12 European states. Total phosphorus data were used to represent the trophic status of individual samples and were plotted against the calculated TI and LTR values. Additionally, the LTR method was tested in some individual lakes with a relatively long time series of monitoring data. The TI correlated well with total P in the Northern European lake types, whereas the relationship in the Central European lake types was less clear. The relationship between total P and light extinction is often very good in the Northern European lake types compared to the Central European lake types. This can be one of the reasons for a better agreement between the indices and eutrophication pressure in the Northern European lake types. The response of individual lakes to changes in the abiotic environment was sometimes represented incorrectly by the indices used, which is a cause of concern for the use of single indices in status assessments in practice.     

Intercalibration and comparison – major results and conclusions from the STAR project

The main results of the STAR project on the intercalibration of boundaries of European assessment systems and comparison between assessment methods are summarized here. The main findings are outlined in the context of the Water Framework Directive that requires reliable instructions to be set up on how to use and harmonise assessment systems and methods for European rivers. The main papers published on these subjects by STAR partners are reviewed, with focus on major questions addressed and approaches used for investigation. The need for broad coverage of geographic ranges and pressure gradients, together with the goal of providing outcomes appropriate to the effective application of the WFD are emphasized. Extensive datasets from a wide range of countries, stream types and sites and a large number of methods, metrics and approaches are compared and tested and various cross-cutting themes emerged. Among these, the value of the use of benchmarking systems for comparison and intercalibration is highlighted. Two ways of looking for comparability of assessment systems results were analyzed: a) by adopting identical sampling techniques across Europe and b) by harmonizing the classification results of the national assessment systems. In addition, the need, in the intercalibration process, for a proper definition of the criteria for reference conditions is underlined. This is because their imprecision now represents one of the major weaknesses of the whole intercalibration process. Direct and indirect approaches to intercalibration are considered and commented on for their potential use in distinct circumstances. Finally, the use common metrics for the intercalibration process, which make comparability across Europe valid, is tested and indeed encouraged.     

Effects of counting variances on water quality assessments: implications from four benthic diatom samples,each counted by 40 diatomists

The European Water Framework Directive (EU WFD) aims to improve and maintain the water quality of lakes and rivers. Diatoms play an important role for implementing the EU WFD as they are widely used to assess water quality. To asses and use diatom-based evaluations in practice, it is essential to know and to minimize the analyst-dependent variability of the primary diatom results. We compare the counting results of benthic diatoms from two river and two lake samples as identified by 40 participants of the first German benthic diatom intercalibration exercise. Differences among participants and auditors are calculated with the Bray-Curtis distance, and similarities are graphically displayed by detrended correspondence analyses. Additionally, this study identifies the effects of counting variances on the ecological water assessment with the German PHYLIB method for implementing the EU WFD using the above dataset. Counting result differences among participants may have a significant impact on the assessed water quality. Some taxonomically problematic taxa do not have indicator values (no impact), sometimes, several taxonomic mistakes counterbalance each other during assessment (no or minor impact), and sometimes, taxonomic differences greatly influence the assessment due to highly deviating taxon abundances and/or strongly differing indicator values between mistaken taxa. Intercalibration exercises promote discussion about taxonomy, identify problematic taxa, and harmonize taxonomic concepts among diatomists. Thus, the shown analyst-induced variability of diatom counts may be reduced with an intercalibration exercise, thereby further refining the accuracy of water quality assessments.     

Potential conflicts between environmental legislation and conservation exemplified by aquatic macrophytes

It is important that legislation on water quality issues of freshwaters is not in conflict with nature conservation purposes. So far, it is however unknown how the assessment of ecological status according to for example the Water Framework Directive (WFD) of the European Community relates to the status of lakes according to the Habitat Directive (HD) or to national environmental objectives including, e.g., the protection of important wetland areas and red-listed species. We used lake macrophyte classification schemes of Norway, Sweden, and Finland and a total of 1,014 lakes to evaluate the possible conflict between these directives and national legislation. The classification schemes represent mainly trophic indices penalizing lakes with elevated phosphorous concentrations. In general, high ecological status according to the WFD did not mean high number of red-listed species or high status according to the HD or other national environmental objectives. In Sweden 78%, in Norway 47%, and in Finland 29% of lakes with red-listed species were classified as lakes of moderate or worse ecological status based on the macrophyte classification scheme. These lakes thus did not fulfill the demands of the WFD. Restoration of surface water toward fulfilling the demands requires in practice a reduction of the trophic status. This might potentially result in for example the loss of red-listed species. To avoid such potential conflicts, we primarily suggest revising the national quality assessment systems toward implicitly incorporating nature conservation aspects, e.g., the number of red-listed species in a multi-metric assessment system.     

Direct comparison of assessment methods using benthic macroinvertebrates: a contribution to the EU Water Framework Directive intercalibration exercise

The aim of the intercalibration exercise presently performed by the EU is to identify and resolve significant inconsistencies between the ecological quality classifications of EU Member States and the normative definitions of the EU Water Framework Directive. Based on benthic macroinvertebrate data of two European stream types (small siliceous mountain streams and medium-sized lowland streams in Central and Western Europe) we correlated the indices of 10 river quality assessment methods (ASPT, BMWP, DSFI, German Multimetric Index, Saprobic Indices) applied in Austria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Poland, Slovak Republic, Sweden and United Kingdom. National class boundaries were compared via regression analysis. Assessment methods of the same type (Saprobic Indices, BMWP/ASPT scores) showed best correlation results (R²>0.7). The good quality status boundaries of the national methods deviated up to 25%; thus indicating the necessity to harmonize the national classification schemes. Prerequisites of the presented intercalibration approach are (1) a sufficiently large and consistent dataset representative of the respective common intercalibration types and (2) agreement on common type specific reference conditions.     

Development of a fish-based index to assess the eutrophication status of European lakes

The use of the CEN (European Committee for Standardization) standard method for sampling fish in lakes using multi-mesh gillnets allowed the collection of fish assemblages of 445 European lakes in 12 countries. The lakes were additionally characterised by environmental drivers and eutrophication proxies. Following a site-specific approach including a validation procedure, a fish index including two abundance metrics (catch per unit effort expressed as fish number and biomass) and one functional metric of composition (abundance of omnivorous fish) was developed. Correlated with the proxy of eutrophication, this index discriminates between heavily and moderately impacted lakes. Additional analyses on a subset of data from Nordic lakes revealed a stronger correlation between the new fish index and the pressure data. Despite an uneven geographical distribution of the lakes and certain shortcomings in the environmental and pressure data, the fish index proved to be useful for ecological status assessment of lakes applying standardised protocols and thus supports the development of national lake fish assessment tools in line with the European Water Framework Directive.     

The validation of common European class boundaries for river benthic macroinvertebrates to facilitate the intercalibration process of the Water Framework Directive

The Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires that all the water bodies in Europe be protected and enhanced to achieve Good Ecological Status by 2015. The intercalibration of the biological monitoring results of Member States has to be carried out in relation to classification tasks to guarantee a common understanding of ‘Good Ecological Status’ at a European level. An intercalibration exercise was carried out within the framework of different Geographical Intercalibration Groups (GIGs), each composed of a group of countries that share similar river types and have a discrete geographical range. By means of the intercalibration exercise, common European boundaries were proposed for river invertebrate assessment methods within each GIG. The purpose of this study was to validate the boundaries proposed for the formal intercalibration exercise. A benchmark data set was used, which comprised data, collected in different European countries that satisfied WFD requirements. The data set included a set of reference sites and provided evidence of a high degree of comparability among countries. The STAR Intercalibration Common Metric index (STAR_ICMi) was calculated for benchmark samples and was selected as the index in which national assessment boundaries were expressed. It was applied for the intercalibration exercise in two GIGs. For the STAR_ICMi, the coefficient of variation was also calculated, demonstrating a comparable variability with indices that are based on species level identification. A fixed percentile of reference samples STAR_ICMi values was selected as the boundary between High and Good status. The range from this fixed percentile to the lowest possible value was divided into four equal parts to obtain the remaining class boundaries. The resulting High/Good and Good/Moderate boundaries were compared to the boundaries proposed by GIGs and proved to be in line with those defined in the intercalibration exercise. Even if, for the intercalibration exercise, some procedures to check the Member States (MS) data sets where put into practice, it is the responsibility of each state to guarantee the WFD compliancy of their reference conditions and methods. Accordingly, the process of validation explained in this article, or similar ones, can be an important step forward and demonstrate the comparability of the actual boundaries.     

Ecological threshold responses in European lakes and their applicability for the Water Framework Directive (WFD) implementation: synthesis of lakes results from the REBECCA project

The objective of this synthesis is to present the key messages and draw the main conclusions from the work on lakes in the REBECCA project, pointing out their links to theoretical ecology and their applicability for the WFD implementation. Type-specific results were obtained from analyses of large pan-European datasets for phytoplankton, macrophytes, macroinvertebrates and fish, and indicators and relationships showing the impact of eutrophication or acidification on these biological elements were constructed. The thresholds identified in many of the response curves are well suited for setting ecological status class boundaries and can be applied in the intercalibration of classification systems. Good indicators for phytoplankton (chrysophytes, cyanobacteria) and macrophytes (isoetids and charaphytes) responses to eutrophication were identified, and the level of eutrophication pressure needed to reach the thresholds for these indicators was quantified. Several existing metrics developed for macrophytes had low comparability and need further harmonisation to be useful for intercalibration of classification systems. For macroinvertebrates, a number of metrics developed for rivers turned out to be less useful to describe lake responses to eutrophication and acidification, whereas other species based indicators were more promising. All the biological elements showed different responses in different lake types according to alkalinity and humic substances, and also partly according to depth. Better harmonisation of monitoring methods is needed to achieve better precision in the dose–response curves. Future research should include impacts of hydromorphological pressures and climate change, as well as predictions of timelags involved in responses to reduction of pressures.     

An extension of the floodpulse concept (FPC) for lakes

This paper delivers a conceptual framework for the ecological functioning and biodiversity patterns of lakes that is based on the floodpulse concept (FPC). The specific characteristics of rivers and lakes considering water-level fluctuations are compared, with respect to catchment linkages, temporal patterns, and hydraulic forces of flooding and drawdown. The influences of floodpulses on element cycles, biodiversity, and adaptations of lake biota are analyzed, and the importance of multi-annual flooding cycles is highlighted. The degree by which these water-level fluctuations influence lake ecosystems strongly depends on lake morphology, where shallow lakes or those with large shallow margins are the most sensitive. Although floodpulses play a major role for ecosystem services such as lake management and climate change mitigation schemes, this issue is only scarcely dealt with. Tenets of the extended FPC for lakes are formulated in order to overcome this problem.     

A review of dystrophic lake and pool habitat in Europe: An Irish perspective

Freshwater lakes and pools contained within peatlands are unique habitats that support rare and specialised species. Despite this, these ecosystems have been overlooked in conservation and management practices. One of these habitats, ‘3160 Natural dystrophic lakes and ponds’, is protected under the European Union (EU) Habitats Directive with a concerning proportion of these habitats having an “unfavourable-bad” or an “unfavourable-inadequate” conservation status across Europe. Our current understanding of the key physico-chemical and ecological features of this habitat is inadequate which is hindering the implementation of effective conservation measures. This review summarises the current knowledge of this protected lake habitat as defined under the EU Habitats Directive. With a focus on Ireland, we demonstrate how the current monitoring and assessment methods used to characterise and assess the structure and function and conservation status of this habitat, which relies largely on the use of macrophyte community composition and surrogate physico-chemical data collected under the EU Water Framework Directive, is ineffective. We propose the incorporation of further or alternative ecological metrics including, but not limited to, algae and macroinvertebrates which are needed to improve our understanding of the structure and function of this priority lake habitat. In addition, application of such data via ecological metrics would allow for the quantification of biodiversity and species rarity metrics which would aid in identifying sites of conservation importance.     

Morphological alterations of lake shores in Europe: A multimetric ecological assessment approach using benthic macroinvertebrates

Besides pollution, lakes are affected by human alterations of lake-shore morphology. However, ecological effects of such alterations have rarely been studied systematically. Hence, we developed tools to assess the ecological effects of anthropogenic morphological alterations on European lake-shores based on pressure-specific response patterns of littoral macroinvertebrate community composition. Littoral invertebrates were sampled from 51 lakes in seven European countries. Sampling covered a range of natural to heavily morphologically degraded sites including natural shorelines, recreational beaches, ripraps and retaining walls. Biological data were supplemented by standardized morphological data that were collected via a Lake Habitat Survey (LHS) protocol and subsequently used to develop a morphological stressor index. Two biotic multimetric indices were developed based on habitat-specific samples (Littoral Invertebrate Multimetric based on HAbitat samples, LIMHA) and composite samples (Littoral Invertebrate Multimetric based on COmposite samples, LIMCO) through correlations with the morphological stressor index. Similarity analyses showed strong spatial differences in macroinvertebrate community composition between four main geographical regions, i.e. Western, Northern, Central and Southern Europe. The morphological stressor index as well as LIMCO and LIMHA have been developed for each geographical region specifically, thereby optimizing correlations of LIMCO and LIMHA with the respective morphological stressor index. The metric composition of LIMCO and LIMHA and their correlation coefficients with the morphological stressor index are comparable to existing national and regional methods that assess morphological lakeshore degradation via macroinvertebrate communities. Hence, LIMCO and LIMHA indices constitute a new stressor-specific assessment tool that enables comparable lake morphology assessment across Europe, as it has been developed involving a uniform methodology followed by regionalized optimization. These tools fulfil the standards of the EU Water Framework Directive and thus may complement existing assessment approaches used in lake monitoring focusing solely on lake eutrophication so far.