No abstract

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 Hydrobiologia (2013) 704:57-74 DOI 10.1007/s10750-012-1436 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.

Legislation in Europe has been adopted to determine and improve the ecological integrity of inland and coastal waters. Assessment is based on four biotic groups, including benthic macroinvertebrate communities. For lakes, benthic invertebrates have been recognized as one of the most difficult organism groups to use in ecological assessment, and hitherto their use in ecological assessment has been limited. In this study, we review and intercalibrate 13 benthic invertebrate-based tools across Europe. These assessment tools address different human impacts: acidification (3 methods), eutrophication (3 methods), morphological alterations (2 methods), and a combination of the last two (5 methods). For intercalibration, the methods were grouped into four intercalibration groups, according to the habitat sampled and putative pressure. Boundaries of the 'good ecological status' were compared and harmonized using direct or indirect comparison approaches. To enable indirect comparison of the methods, three common pressure indices and two common biological multimetric indices were developed for larger geographical areas. Additionally, we identified the best-performing methods based on their responsiveness to different human impacts. Based on these experiences, we provide practical recommendations for the development and harmonization of benthic invertebrate assessment methods in lakes and similar habitats.

No abstract

No abstract