Standardisation of River Classifications
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Standardisation of river classifications: Framework method for calibrating different biological survey results against ecological quality classifications to be developed for the Water Framework Directive Contract No: EVK1-CT 2001-00089 Deliverable N4 Compiled by Krzysztof Szoszkiewicz, Janina Zbierska, Ryszard Staniszewski, Szymon Jusik, Tomasz Zgoła, Jerzy Kupiec Workpackage number 19: Errors and variation associated with field protocols for the collection and application of macrophyte and hydro-morphological data Partner no 18 Department of Ecology and Environmental Protection August Cieszkowski Agricultural University, Poland Assistant to Contractor No 17 University of Łódź A project under the 5th Framework Programme Energy, Environment and Sustainable Development Key Action 1: Sustainable Management and Quality of Water 2 Contents LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 5 1 AIMS AND SCOPE ..................................................................................................7 2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................9 2.1 Staff................................................................................................................................................................ 9 2.2 Field survey ................................................................................................................................................... 9 2.3 Research area.............................................................................................................................................. 10 2.4 Site selection ................................................................................................................................................ 10 2.5 Water chemistry of rivers .......................................................................................................................... 11 2.6 Environmental conditions of studied rivers.............................................................................................. 11 3 MACROPHYTES ...................................................................................................12 3.1 Methods ....................................................................................................................................................... 12 Plant examination................................................................................................................................................... 12 Recording of physical variables ............................................................................................................................. 13 Design of experiments............................................................................................................................................ 13 3.2 Overview of the analysed database ........................................................................................................... 14 3.3 Variation of MTR score ............................................................................................................................. 17 3.4 Variation of other macrophyte metrics..................................................................................................... 24 Nitrogen Ellenberg index ....................................................................................................................................... 24 IBMR index............................................................................................................................................................ 29 Number of species.................................................................................................................................................. 34 Shannon’s index ..................................................................................................................................................... 39 Conclusions................................................................................................................................................................ 52 4 RIVER MORPHOLOGY .........................................................................................53 4.1 Methodological principles .......................................................................................................................... 53 4.2 Assessment of variation of the RHS numerical scores............................................................................. 53 Inter-surveyor variation.......................................................................................................................................... 53 Temporal variation – years..................................................................................................................................... 65 Temporal variation – seasons................................................................................................................................. 75 Discussion and Conclusions...................................................................................................................................... 84 4.3 Criteria and procedures for quality control/Software for quality control............................................. 88 Background ............................................................................................................................................................ 88 RHS sensitivity in different regions in Europe....................................................................................................... 88 Criteria and procedures for quality control/Software for quality control ............................................................... 93 Conclusions................................................................................................................................................................ 98 3 5 LITERATURE.......................................................................................................100 APPENDIX 1 ............................................................................................................ STAFF LIST 105 APPENDIX 2 .............................................................................................. WP SURVEY SITES 106 APPENDIX 3 ..............WP19 SITES – LIST OF RIVERS WITH THE EXTENT OF WORK UNDERTAKEN ...........................................................................................................108 APPENDIX 4 ...SURVEY SITES – DESCRIPTION OF CATCHMENTS AREA AND THE FLOODPLAIN .............................................................................................................109 APPENDIX 5 .................... FIRST LEVEL OF CRITERIA FOR RHS QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES ...........................................................................................................113 APPENDIX 6 ...................................................................................... TRAINING WORKSHOP 120 4 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CVS - Cover Value Score CV – Coefficient of Variation GIS - Geographic Information System GPS - Global Positioning System IBMR - Macrophyte Biological Index for Rivers MTR – Mean Trophic Rank RHS – River Habitat Survey SCV - Species Cover Value SD – standard deviation STR - Species Trophic Rank 5 6 1 AIMS AND SCOPE The objectives of this Workpackage were: (1) to estimate the different types of possible variability and/or errors that occur in macrophyte and hydromorphological assessment, (2) to support quality control of collected data and (3) to minimise the impact of errors on final result. For this purpose experiments based on replicate sampling were undertaken on Polish lowland rivers. Analysis based on the series of experiments carried out as a part of this Workpackage, several surveys were combined with the WP7 (Core stream types) and a few comparisons with the STAR hydromorphological database were included. Concerning macrophyte methods, much attention was paid to the main STAR macrophyte method - Mean Trophyic Rank (MTR). Although, several analyses of variability of other methods were conducted. Concerning hydromorphological assessment, studies were focused on the main STAR hydromorphological method – River Habitat Survey (RHS). The workpackage provided an error estimations. Also the vulnerability of the tested methods were analysed and guidance for quality assurance was delivered. It supplements STAR error module in error estimations of MTR and RHS. The computer program module based on the developed set of criteria was prepared for quality support in hydromorphological assessment. 7 8 2 GENERAL DESCRIPTION Analyses based on the series of experiments were carried out from Spring 2003 to Summer 2004. Several surveys, which had been undertaken in 2003, were combined with the WP7 (Core stream types). Also several comparisons with the STAR hydromorphological database were included. 2.1 Staff The Workpackage was mainly completed by nine members of the staff of the Department of Ecology and Environmental Protection of August Cieszkowski Agricultural University in Poznan. Some support was gained by scientists from the Department of Agrometeorology and from the Department of Land Improvement, Environmental Development and Geodesy. Site selection process was partly carried out in cooperation with the University of Lodz group. Full list of involved