RIVPACS database documentation. Final report

With the advent of the EU Water Framework Directive the concept of the 'reference condition' has become explicit within the legislative framework of the European Union. Reference condition has been established as a quality standard against which assessments of biological degradation must be compared. It is therefore essential that Member States can demonstrate that the biological datasets used to define their reference conditions meet the criteria of the WFD. The RIVPACS reference site dataset is therefore central to the definition of reference conditions for macroinvertebrates in streams and rivers in the United Kingdom. Objectives of research: • To establish the ownership of the RIVPACS reference site dataset • To liaise with all stakeholders of the dataset to establish unhindered access to the RIVPACS reference site dataset for the UK agencies (in perpetuity) • To deliver the RIVPACS reference site dataset to the UK agencies and to the public domain in a readily accessible database together will its accompanying physicochemical variables (both existing and newly collated as part of this project), historical and current anthropogenic stress data, and a range of calculated biotic indices. Key findings and recommendations: Ownership of the RIVPACS dataset resides with no single organization and several different organizations consider that they own different portions of the dataset. Formal permissions to release the dataset into the public domain have been obtained from all twelve extant organizations that have been identified as having funded various phases of RIVPACS research. In addition, CEH/NERC has also agreed to release the RIVPACS dataset to the public domain. Terms and conditions relating to the end use of the RIVPACS dataset have now been established. The RIVPACS database has been assembled in Microsoft® Access and can now be downloaded from the CEH web site. This report details the terms and conditions that apply to all end users of the database and it documents the tables given in the database, their structure and the origin of their data. A separate Pressure Data Analysis report describes the screening of the RIVPACS sites in terms of the current and emerging definitions of reference condition

River Habitat Survey In the Picos de Europa, Northern Spain. Results from 2008

River Habitat Survey (RHS) and macrophyte surveys were tested on a selection of rivers in the Picos de Europa to provide advice on an effective training and sampling strategy for RHS in the Cantabrian region of Spain. The objectives included recommended improvements to the RHS guidance manual for European river and to collect RHS and macrophyte data for European inter-calibration purposes. The results of twenty surveys are included in the report

Hydromorphology - major results and conclusions from the STAR project

The major results and conclusions of the two papers in the hydromorphology section of the Hydrobiologia special issue on the EU STAR project are summarised. Several key findings have emerged from this research. Firstly, the hydromorphological characteristics of rivers between different geographical regions of Europe were found to vary considerably with rivers in each region possessing distinctive hydromorphological characteristics. Secondly, the hydromorphological attributes that most strongly influence two existing hydromorphological indices (the Habitat Quality Assessment and the Habitat Modification Score) were identified and attention was drawn to the accurate definition and recording of these attributes in field surveys and training courses. Thirdly, links between hydromorphological characteristics and macroinvertebrate quality indices were investigated. Two types of bank modification (resectioning and reinforcement) were significantly correlated with two biotic indices (EPT taxa and MTS), while channel modifications were negatively correlated with ASPT. While biotic indices were often strongly correlated with Habitat Quality Assessment they were less strongly related to Habitat Modification Score suggesting that physical habitat diversity may be more important in determining macroinvertebrate community structure than morphological alteration. The papers in this section provide important underpinning research for the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive. In both papers suggestions are made for further research on the hydromorphology of European rivers

A simple procedure to harmonize class boundaries of assessment systems at the pan-European scale

A procedure for a large scale harmonization of assessment systems is delineated. The data collected for the two E.U. co-funded projects STAR and AQEM have been used as a benchmark dataset against which a test dataset derived from Italian standard monitoring programs was compared. A central step in the procedure adopted is the calculation of Intercalibration Common Metrics (STAR_ICMs). For both the benchmark and test datasets, six metrics were calculated, normalized and averaged to obtain an ICM index. The median values obtained for this index within each of the High and Good status classes, as defined within the STAR/AQEM dataset, were compared to the classes defined by the National method applied in Italy before WFD approval. The process of harmonization involved the re-positioning of the boundaries between Italian method quality classes until no more differences were found with the values observed in the STAR/AQEM samples. The re-setting of the Italian assessment boundaries by a step-by-step procedure lead to comparable STAR_ICM index values in the two datasets. Within this example, small refinements of the boundaries between high/good and good/moderate status were sufficient to harmonize the Italian assessment quality classes to the benchmark classification. Once a benchmark dataset is agreed among different countries, the procedure outlined can be easily applied to compare and harmonize assessment systems within and outside Europe. The main scientific and practical advantages of the procedure are listed and commented, especially facing the next steps of the Water Framework Directive Intercalibration process

The ecological status of European rivers: evaluation and intercalibration of assessment methods

Foreword to thematic issu

Ecological relationships between stream communities and spatial scale: implications for designing catchment-level monitoring programmes

1. Stream communities are structured by factors acting over multiple spatial and temporal scales. Identifying what factors are driving spatial patterns in stream communities is a central aim of ecology. 2. Here we used two large European data sets of fish, invertebrates, macrophytes, benthic diatoms and environmental data in two stream groups (lowland and mountain) to determine the importance of variables at different spatial scales (geographical, regional, local) on community structure. 3. Both geographical position and ecoregion were selected first in canonical correspondence analysis (CCA), clearly showing the broad spatial gradients covered in the data set. Secondary predictors (after accounting for spatial and/or ecoregion effects) were similar between stream groups and among the four organism groups. In particular, conductivity and N concentration were strong predictors reflecting catchment land use. 4. Using partial CCA, we assessed the individual importance of the three spatial scales on the community structure of the four organism groups in the two stream groups. The majority of among-site variability (22–29%) was accounted for by local scale variables (e.g. water chemistry and substratum type), with regional and spatial variables accounting 11–13% and 5–6%, respectively. Our findings indicate that the four organism groups are responding similarly to the different levels of spatial scale, implying much redundancy which should be consider when implementing studies of bioassessment

Detection of ecological change using multiple organism groups: metrics and uncertainty

A number of biological approaches are commonly used to assess the ecological integrity of stream ecosystems. Recently, it is becoming increasingly common to use multiple organism groups in bioassessment. Advocates of the multiple organism approach argue that the use of different organism groups should strengthen inference-based models and ultimately result in lower assessment error, while opponents argue that organism groups often respond similarly to stress implying a high degree of redundancy. Using fish, macroinvertebrate, macrophyte and benthic diatom data, site-specific parameters (e.g., water chemistry and substratum) and catchment variables from European mountain (n = 77) and lowland (n = 85) streams we evaluated the discriminatory power and uncertainty associated with the use of a number of biological metrics commonly used in stream assessment. The primary environmental gradient for both streams types was land use and nutrient enrichment. Secondary and tertiary gradients were related to habitat quality or alterations in hydromorphology. Benthic diatom and macroinvertebrate metrics showed high discriminatory power (R2 values often >0.50) and low error (<30%) with the primary (nutrient) gradient, while both fish and macrophyte metrics performed relatively poorly. Conversely, both fish and macrophyte metrics showed higher response (high coefficients of determination) than either benthic diatom or macroinvertebrate metrics to the second (e.g., alteration in habitat/hydromorphology) gradient. However, the discriminatory power and error associated with individual metrics varied markedly, indicating that caution should be exercised when selecting the ‘best’ organism group or metric to monitor stres

Comparison of macroinvertebrate sampling methods in Europe

The aim of this study was to describe in detail the national macroinvertebrate sampling methods used and to compare them with a common standard, the STAR-AQEM sampling method. Information on national methods and field data were collected from 11 countries (Austria, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Portugal, Sweden, and UK). The sampling included 22 stream types situated in 11 different Ecoregions. Within each country samples were taken in spring and one additional season (summer or autumn) using both the national method and the STAR-AQEM method. A single anthropogenic stressor was also defined for each stream type sampled within the project, with the three main stressor types being organic pollution (including eutrophication), toxic pollution and habitat degradation. In addition, not impacted reference sites were sampled in each country. A common set of metrics was calculated and compared between the methods. The majority of national methods employed had many features in common. Most of the 12 metrics analysed using the values derived from the STAR-AQEM method and the various national methods correlated significantly, and positively to each other. There was no clear pattern with respect to the differences between metric results obtained using STAR-AQEM and national methods. For some metrics, number of EPT-taxa and families, the value obtained was higher when using the majority of national methods when compared to the STAR-AQEM method. Variability in metric results between methods could not be explained from differences in sampling effort. Sorting in the field and sub-sampling appeared to affect e.g., number of taxa found negatively. The results of the present study supports that inter-calibration in Europe can be undertaken using samples collected with the existing national method