Deliverables

The outcome of the first 18-month period of the project has been summarised in the first periodic report to the European Commission. The scientific extract is available as 'WISER half-time public report'.

Download WISER half-time public report (4 mb, pdf)

The WISER metadatabase provides information on the content, availability and accessibility of databases from previous EU projects and monitoring activities, as well as new data from the WISER field exercises. The information was provided by the data owners through an online questionnaire and further treated within workpackage 2.1.

Online query metadatabase

EU Member States are monitoring the ecological status of their surface waters by the use of biological a ssessment methods. These methods address various biological groups (i.e. Biological Quality Elements) such as phytoplankton, benthic flora, benthic invertebrates and fish fauna. Most Member States have developed their own assessment methods, thus many different methods currently exist to monitor the ecological status.

To provide an overview of the different methods, the WISER project has collected detailed information by means of a questionnaire-based survey. Data of more than 200 national methods were received and have been stored in the WISER methods database. All information will be made publicly available via the project's website. This de liverable contains the detailed descriptions of more than 230 national assessment methods.

Wiser methods database

Download D2.2-1 (5 mb, pdf)

Update 09 April 2010:
We are sorry, but a little error ocured in the first version of this deliverable. This has been corrected.

This guidance provides "cook books" for the development of common metrics and assessment systems to be applied for different Biological Quality Elements and water types. It is for internal use within the WISER project and might in a later stage be extended by best practise examples and be made available to the Geographical Intercalibration Groups.

The first purpose of the guidance is to develop common metrics, i.e. common yardsticks ("international currencies") against which national assessment systems can be compared. The common metrics which will be developed by the WISER project will support the intercalibration process for the Water Framework Directive.

Due to the strict time schedule of the intercalibration exercise the common metrics must be based on preliminary data evaluation; this guidance outlines the procedure to ensure that common metrics will be developed in a comparable way for different organism groups (Biological Quality Elements) and water types.

Second, the guidance outlines a methodology for developing assessment systems. This methodology has several commonalities with the common metric development, but is based on a more sophisticated data evaluation.

This deliverable is the background for Common metrics for lakes and for transitional/coastal waters

 
Download D2.2-2 (200 kb, pdf)

Download annex to D2.2-2 (220 kb, pdf)

This is a draft version of the deliverable.

Annex V of the WFD requires that ecological status of phytoplankton in lakes should be assessed using biomass, composition and bloom metrics. In many countries of Europe, the national assessment systems for phytoplankton in lakes, however, still lack metrics for phytoplankton composition (and blooms) (Poikane 2009, Birk et al. 2010). Thus, to facilitate efficient development of WFD-compliant national assessment systems across Europe, there is an urgent need for metrics for phytoplankton composition, including common metrics that can be used as a tool for intercalibration of existing national metrics (IC guidance 2010). The new metrics should be based on Guidelines for Indicator Development given by WISER D.2.2.2 (Hering et al. 2010).

The objective of this report is to present new candidate metrics for phytoplankton composition and suggest common metrics for use in intercalibration of phytoplankton phase 2 in close dialogue with Geographical Intercalibration Groups (GIGs).

This deliverable is the background for Common metrics for lakes

 
Download D3.1-1 draft (2.4 mb, pdf)

Download annex to D3.1-1 draft (500 kb, pdf)

The enrichment of ecosystems with plant nutrients, or eutrophication, is one of the most widespread pressures affecting European freshwaters. There are numerous socio-economic problems associated with eutrophication, particularly with increasing frequency and intensity of harmful algal blooms (HABs). These include detrimental effects on drinking water quality, filtration costs for water supply, access for water-based activities, and conservation status (particularly sensitive fish species, such as salmonids and coregonids). Phytoplankton blooms, are a widespread feature of freshwater lakes across lowland Europe. There is strong evidence that the development of phytoplankton blooms has been increasing in both frequency and intensity in recent decades (Smith 2003). This is widely believed to be due to nutrient enrichment, but also in response to warmer and drier summer conditions (Paerl & Husiman 2009, Weyhenmeyer et al. 2002).In this report we examine two candidate metrics for phytoplankton blooms for use as common metrics in Europe in the WFD Intercalibration (IC) process.

This deliverable is the background for Common metrics for lakes

Download D3.1-2 (1.5 mb, pdf)

Lake phytoplankton metrics proposed by the EC WISER Project for ecological quality assessment of European lakes are shown to be robust metrics. Latest results from the WISER pan-European field campaign reveal that variability in metric scores is largely due to variability between lakes and is significantly related to differences in eutrophication pressure (total phosphorus concentrations). Differences in locations around a lake, or sampling and analytical variability, only accounted for a small proportion of the variability in metric scores.

These results are especially true for four candidate phytoplankton metrics being considered for Intercalibration: chlorophyll, PTI, MFGI and cyanobacteria abundance, for which >85% of the variability in metric scores was attributed between lakes and total phosphorus concentration was the best single predictor of variation in these metrics. Although, much among-lake metric variation still remained unexplained by the available environmental data, we conclude that these four proposed metrics are sufficiently robust metrics for ecological status assessment and are suitable for adoption in the Intercalibration process.

This deliverable is the background for Common metrics for lakes

Download D3.1-3 (1 mb, pdf)

Aquatic macrophyte vegetation has often been neglected in lake monitoring programmes in Europe until recently. Several aspects are important to consider when selecting the appropriate method for the investigation of aquatic plants. Amongst other aspects, it is necessary to develop and apply methods that allow comprehensive, quick and cost-effective surveys. Furthermore, the resulting data should provide an accuracy which enables the reliable and unequivocal assessment of the ecological status of a lake water body.

Deliverable D3.2-1 includes an overview of the macrophyte field survey methods which have been developed and applied in Europe to date, together with an estimation of their practical aspects in the light of biological monitoring of lakes consistent with the Water Framework Directive. In addition, a detailed review of the different methods used for taxonomic composition surveys and measurements of aquatic macrophyte abundance is given.

This deliverable is the background for Common metrics for lakes

Download D3.2-1 (400 kb, pdf)

For macrophyte status assessment the sampling methodology is an important source of uncertainty. Quantitative estimates of uncertainty related to bioassessment methods are required to reach accurate waterbody ecological classification decisions. Standardised, objective, and repeatable monitoring methods are essential in monitoring programs with aims to detect anthropogenic impact on lake ecosystems. Results of lake macrophyte surveys are extremely sensitive to errors due to both vertical and horizontal variability of macrophyte communities (Jensen 1977, Janauer, 2002). In addition to spatial variability there are errors related to recognition and identification of individual species and also especially to coverage estimations of vegetation.

This study aims to assess the relative importance of different sources of (spatial) variation in the sampling data on uncertainty in the available metrics. Previous work on uncertainty in macrophyte status assessment methods and metrics (especially from the STAR project on running waters) showed that inter-surveyor differences were low and the influences of temporal variation (years and seasons) and shading slightly stronger (Clarke and Hering, 2006). The strongest variation was due to habitat modifications, but several metrics were of sufficient precision in terms of sampling uncertainty to be useful for estimating the ecological status of rivers (Staniszewski et al., 2006). However, the probability of misclassification of a site was found to be largely associated with classification methodology (Szoszkiewicz et al., 2007, 2009).

This deliverable is the background for Common metrics for lakes

Download D3.2-2 (900 kb, pdf)

The Annex V of the Water Framework Directive requires that assessment of the ecological status of lakes based on aquatic vegetation should include taxonomic composition and abundance of macrophytes. The main objectives of our study presented in the report were to validate and supplement macrophyte metrics based on species composition, abundance and community structure for assessment of impacts of eutrophication, and to determine and evaluate their sensitivity and usefulness as indicators. Our aim was also to develop relevant metrics to assess response of lake macrophytes to water level fluctuations. Moreover, the use of palaeoecological approaches (plant macrofossil records) to define reference conditions and to assess ecological status for selected lake types was addressed.

As most of the Member States have developed and intercalibrated their assessment systems or are in the process of intercalibration, suggestions about the most suitable assessment systems could be valuable for those MS who have not developed their assessment systems yet, but also for those who would like to improve them. The developed common metrics for eutrophication and hydromorphological pressures give an opportunity to evaluate the current assessment systems in the course of intercalibration (metrics included, assessment concept etc.).

When searching the best responding macrophyte metrics for eutrophication and hydromorphological alterations the procedure recommended by Hering et al. 2010 in Guideline for indicator development (Deliverable 2.2-2) was applied. The issue of uncertainty in macrophyte metrics was also addressed and the results are included in complementary report by Penning et al. 2011 (Deliverable 3.2-2; in prep.).

This deliverable is the background for Common metrics for lakes

Download D3.2-3 (3.3 mb, pdf)

European lakes are affected by many human induced disturbances. In principle, ecological theories predict that the structure and functioning of benthic invertebrate assemblage, one of the Biological Quality Elements following the Water Framework Directive (WFD) terminology, change according to the level of disturbances, making this biological element suitable to assess the status and manage lake ecosystems. In practice, to set up assessment systems based on invertebrates, we need to distiguish community changes that are related to human pressures from those that are inherent natural variability. This task is complicated by the fact that invertebrate communities hinhabiting the littoral and the profundal zones of lakes are costrained by different factors and respond unevenly to distinct human disturbances. For example it is not clear yet how the invertebrates assemblages respond to watershed and shoreline alterations, the relative importance of spatial and temporal factors on assemblage dynamics and relative bioindicative values of taxa, the habitat constraints on species traits and other taxonomic and methodological limitations.

The current lack of knowledge on basic features of invertebrate temporal and spatial variations is limiting the fulfillment of the EU-wide intercalibration of the lake ecological quality assessment systems in Europe, and thus compromising the basis for setting the environmental objectives as required by the WFD. The aim of this deliverable is to provide a contribution towards the understanding of basic sources of spatial and temporal variation of lake invertebrate assemblages. The report is structured around selected case studies, manly involving the analysis of existing datasets collected within Wiser. The case studies come from different European lake types in the Northern, Central, Alpine and Mediterranean regions. All chapters have an obvious applied objective and our aim is to provide to those dealing with WFD implementation at various levels hopefully useful information to account for when designed monitoring programs and or invertebrate based classification systems.

Download D3.3-2 (2 mb, pdf)

In order to obtain quality assessment of lakes, benthic macroinvertebrates, as one of the Biological Quality Elements (BQEs), must be analysed in terms of taxonomic and functional composition, abundance, disturbance sensitive taxa, diversity and absence of major taxonomic groups.

This can be achieved by means of metrics and multimetric indices. A metric is a measurable part or process of a biological system shown to change in value along a gradient of anthropogenic influence, while a multimetric index is a combination of standardized single metrics. Multime- tric indices are often used in assessment systems because they synthesize information on different biological attributes into a single index value.

Here we show different approaches to the development of invertebrate based metrics suitable to indicate hydromorphological alterations in (sub-)Alpine and Central Baltic lakes. The first analysis by Pilotto et al. is focused on the sublittoral zone while the second (by Böhmer et al.) is focused on the eulittoral zone. The dataset on which this analysis is based comes from different sources and, unavoidably, has several drawbacks in terms of variance heterogeneity and statistical power.

This deliverable anticipates in a preliminary way some aspects that will further elaborated in Deliverable 3.3.4, which will be dedicated to the development of multimetric indices for hydromorphological degradation based on a more homogeneous eulittoral dataset that was collected within the Wiser WP3.3 field campaign (see D3.3.2 for details).

Download D3.3-3 (2.7 mb, pdf)

Measurement of ecological integrity using fish fauna is widely applied in the monitoring of freshwater ecosystems, including lakes. According to the European Water Framework Directive fish fauna has to be assessed, via analyses of the composition, abundance and age structure. However, aging of fish is time-consuming and expensive, whereas analyses of the size structure, which can be used as a surrogate for the age structure, is more feasibly because size of fish caught by multi-mesh gillnets is in general recorded during field campaigns. Furthermore, analyses of the size structure of lake fish assemblages can be a promising tool to develop metrics that are comparable across large geographical scales, because differences in fish species composition which can be substantial across Europe have not to be taken into account.

In a preliminary analyses on a small geographical scale (78 lakes in northern Germany) we tested the suitability of non-taxonomic size metrics derived from fish catches by multi-mesh gillnets as a tool for elucidating systematic shifts in lake fish assemblages along gradients of environmental factors (lake size and depth, nutrient status) and lake-use intensity (influence of anthropogenic shore structures, boating, bathing). Several size metrics were correlated to gradients of nutrient concentration, lake area and depth as well as variables related to the proportion and size of predatory fishes in the lakes suggesting size metrics as a useful tool to assess the ecological status of lakes at regional scale.

Download D3.4-2 (2.5 mb, pdf)

The use of transmitted underwater sound to survey fish populations (known effectively interchangeably as hydroacoustics, echo sounding or sonar) has a long and extensive record of successful application, particularly in the marine environment where most of its major developments have historically taken place. In recent decades, technological developments, including the miniaturisation of electronic components and rapidly increasing computing power, have facilitated the production of hydroacoustic systems which can be readily deployed from small vessels on fresh waters.

The present document gives an introduction to this still developing field and provides a set of guidelines specifically for the application of hydroacoustics to the investigation of fish populations in European standing freshwater bodies. As such it will help to produce hydroacoustic surveys which are compatible with current best practice, well reported and will facilitate the future valid comparison of hydroacoustic datasets for lakes and reservoirs from across Europe. In addition to explaining the basic principles of hydroacoustics and reviewing appropriate hardware and software currently available, guidance is also given on pre-survey planning (general considerations, design of survey route, sound transmission and recording parameters), survey and data acquisition (immediate pre-survey activities, survey itself, immediate post-survey activities), post-survey data analysis (general considerations, choice of analysis method, echo counting, trace counting, echo integration, further processing of analysis results), and finally reporting and data archiving.

Download D3.4-3 (600 kb, pdf)

Fish play a key role in the trophic dynamics of lakes, not least in shallow systems. With climate warming, complex changes in fish community structure may be expected owing to the direct effects of temperature, and indirect effects of eutrophication, water level changes and salinisation on fish metabolism, biotic interactions and geographic distribution. We review published and new data supporting the hypotheses that, with a warming climate, there will be changes in:

• fish community structure (e.g. higher or lower richness depending on local conditions);
• life history traits (e.g. smaller body size, shorter life span, earlier and less synchronized reproduction);
• feeding mode (i.e. increased omnivory and herbivory); behaviour (i.e. stronger association with littoral areas and a greater proportion of benthivores);
• and winter survival.

All these changes imply higher predation on zooplankton and macroinvertebrates with increasing temperatures, suggesting that the changes in the fish communities partly resemble, and may intensify, the effects triggered by eutrophication. Modulating factors identified in cold and temperate systems, such as the presence of submerged plants and winter ice cover, seem to be weaker or non-existent in warm(ing) lakes. Consequently, lower nutrient thresholds may be needed to obtain clear-water conditions and good ecological status in the future in currently cold or temperate lakes. Although examples are still scarce and more research is needed, we foresee biomanipulation to be a less successful restoration tool in warm(er) lakes without a strong reduction of the nutrient load.

This deliverable is the background for Common metrics for lakes and for transitional/coastal waters

Download D3.4-4 (2.1 mb, pdf)

The European Water Framework Directive requires the Member States to assess the ecological status of the marine coastal and estuarine waters. In this assessment, several aspects of the phytoplankton communities, such as composition, abundance and biomass, must be included.

A key step in the development of indicators for the assessment of the phytoplankton quality is the establishment of the reference conditions (the conditions that would exist under no or very minor anthropogenic impact). The aim of this study is to gain a better understanding of the reference conditions for phytoplankton composition in three different ecoregions: the Baltic, the Northeast Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea ecoregion.

This technical report gives a description of the composition of the phytoplankton communities in several water bodies in Europe that are considered to be at high ecological quality status. These communities are representative of the reference conditions. In addition, data from the non-pristine Baltic Sea are evaluated to provide a characterisation of phytoplankton under good or high ecological status.

This report also provides information about different methodologies for the study of the phytoplankton communities. These methodologies involve a range of aspects: from the approach for selecting the most suitable data sets, to the laboratory techniques and the mathematical and statistical analyses employed.

Download D4.1-1 (2 mb, pdf)

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD) requires the Member States to assess the ecological status of the marine coastal and estuarine waters. In this assessment, several aspects of the phytoplankton communities, such as composition, abundance and biomass, must be included.In the first round of WFD intercalibration only the sub element chlorophyll a (Chl a) of the biological quality element phytoplankton was intercalibrated. The present report provides results from analysis of phytoplankton composition described from pigment content. The phytoplankton communities analysed were sampled as part of the WISER field work during the summer of 2009.

While the total concentration of Chl a was significantly correlated with TN across the geographically different WISER sampling localities, the distribution patterns of pigment samples and communities showed the major correlation with salinity and temperature and only minor correlation with TN as a measure of eutrophication. The variation in phytoplankton composition at a Danish station included in the analyses showed inter-annual variations over a three year sampling period in the same range as variations found among the WISER stations. The concentration of individual pigments increased with increasing TN whereas no clear relationships were found for relative contributions of the different phytoplankton groups.

A prerequisite for the use of pigment based community composition as a WFD indicator is the establishment of reference conditions. The major influence from salinity and temperature on the distribution pattern of the WISER samples hindered the use of any of these sampling stations as reference sites for a pigment based phytoplankton indicator. Different and commonly unknown accumulation and preservation rates of the different pigments in sediments reduce the possibility of describing quantitative reference phytoplankton communities from the fossil record. The most specific pigments may have a potential as indicators. However, this requires that the phytoplankton group they characterise is also a useful indicator. At present very few such single species/group indicators have been identified.

This deliverable is the background for Common metrics for transitional/coastal waters

Download D4.1-2 (600 kb, pdf)

The increasing human pressure on the coastal zone is rapidly deteriorating coastal environmental quality, particularly since year 1950. Policies aiming at improving coastal water and ecosystem quality are a priority in European countries (Water Framework Directive, Marine Strategy Framework Directive, Habitats Directive) as well as in other countries and regions in the Globe (e.g. USA, Clean Water Act). Well developed seagrass beds provide many important services to coastal ecosystems, such as increased biodiversity and coastal protection, which disappear when seagrass distribution and abundance decline in response to human pressure. Seagrasses therefore have a large potential as indicators of ecological quality.

This deliverable represents a compilation of seagrass indicators included in European monitoring programs. The compilation shows that a strikingly diverse range of seagrass metrics is in use, i.e. 35 specific seagrass metrics and 20 metrics on associated vegetation, fauna and macroalgae are making part of the seagrass indicators. The widespread use of seagrass indicators in European monitoring programs reflects the value of these marine benthic vegetation components as canaries of marine ecologic status.

The metrics composing the compiled seagrass indicators describe various aspects of the seagrass community and associated flora and fauna and can, on this basis, be categorised in seven different categories: 'distribution', 'abundance', 'shoot characteristics', 'processes', 'chemical constituents', 'associated flora and fauna' and 'macroalgae', of which the first five relate directly to the seagrasses.

The indicators and their metrics can typically not be extracted from the same type of raw data, and the different categories of metrics may also show different sensitivities and time scales of response to pressures. The metrics are, therefore, not directly comparable but may supplement each other in the evaluation ecological status.

The large diversity of metrics highlights a need to further explore the sensitivity and time scales of responses of metrics and indicators to pressures in order to assist managers selecting the most appropriate tools for a given purpose and type of ecosystem.

Download D4.2-1 (1.2 mb, pdf)

The increasing human pressure on the coastal zone is rapidly deteriorating coastal environmental quality, particularly since year 1950. Policies aiming at improving coastal water and ecosystem quality are a priority in European countries (Water Framework Directive, Marine Strategy Framework Directive, Habitats Directive) as well as in other countries and regions in the Globe (e.g., USA, Clean Water Act). Well-developed seagrass and macroalgal beds provide many important services to coastal ecosystems, such as increased biodiversity and coastal protection, which disappear when seagrass and macroalgal distribution and abundance decline in response to human pressure. This study provides examples of how seagrass and macroalgal indicators respond to anthropogenic pressure in the European coastal zone.

Download D4.2-2 (4.7 mb, pdf)

The structure of the benthic macroinvertebrate fauna is one of the quality elements used in the Water Framework Directive (WFD) to assess ecological quality status in Europe. Several different indices have been proposed and may be used to classify benthic status.

In this Deliverable we compared single metrics and multimetric methods to assess coastal and transitional benthic status along human pressure gradients in five distinct environments across Europe: Varna bay (Bulgaria), Lesina lagoon (Italy), Mondego estuary (Portugal), Basque coast (Spain) and Oslofjord (Norway). Hence, 13 single metrics and 8 of the most common indices used within the WFD for benthic assessment were selected. As single metrics, abundance, species richness (as number of taxa), Shannon's diversity, AMBI (AZTI's Marine Biotic Index), five ecological groups (from sensitive to opportunistic species), Margalef index, SN, ES100, and ES50, were calculated. As multimetric or multivariate methods ISS (Index of Size Spectra), BAT (Benthic Assessment Tool), NQI (Norwegian Quality Index), M-AMBI (multivariate AMBI), BQI (Biological Quality Index), BEQI (Benthic Ecosystem Quality Index), BITS (Benthic Index based on Taxonomic Sufficiency), and IQI (Infaunal Quality Index) were calculated. Within each system, sampling sites were ordered in an increasing pressure gradient according to a preliminary classification based on professional judgement, and the response of single metrics and assessment methods to different human pressure levels was evaluated.

The different indices are largely consistent in their response to pressure gradient, except in some particular cases (i.e. BITS, in all cases, or ISS when a low number of individuals is present). Inconsistencies between indicator responses were mostly in transitional waters (i.e. IQI, BEQI), highlighting the difficulties of the generic application of indicators to all marine, estuarine and lagoonal environments. However, some of the single (i.e. ecological groups approach, diversity, richness, SN) and multimetric methods (i.e. BAT, M-AMBI, NQI) were able to detect such gradients both in transitional and coastal environments. This study highlights the importance of survey design and good reference conditions for some indicators. The agreement observed between different methodologies and their ability to detect quality trends across distinct environments constitutes a promising result for the implementation of the WFD's monitoring plans.

This deliverable is the background for Common metrics for transitional/coastal waters

Download D4.3-1 (900 kb, pdf)

Bayesian models were built for predicting the status of macroalgae, macrofauna, and macroalgae+macrofauna, within hard-bottom substrata of the Basque coast (Bay of Biscay, north Atlantic), at different shore levels. However, these models were not useful when applied to data from Portugal and Denmark, for validation. The model classification was too assertive, with small differences in the classification between stations in each country. This is usually desirable because it shows a classification with low uncertainty.

However, in this specific domain it is a disadvantage since the spatial heterogeneity must be observed in the classification of different stations in an area. Bayesian models can be useful if a large data set is available, including different levels of quality, within a gradient of human pressure.

Download D4.3-4 (1 mb, pdf)

Estuaries (areas where rivers meet with the sea) and other coastal areas have been under the damaging influence of human habitation since historical times. Human alteration to once pristine habitats for wildlife has resulted in symptoms of degradation including alteration of watercourses, water quality problems and loss of aquatic fauna such as fish. It is important that these habitats and wildlife are protected from further damage, and that damaged areas are restored through effective management plans. One way to assess habitat conservation status is to analyse a sample of fish living in an estuary. The presence of any fish species indicates that the basic ecological requirements (food, shelter and reproduction) and a minimum water quality or habitat availability are being met. Likewise, finding species with stricter habitat requirements indicates better conservation status and hence less disturbed conditions for that area. Researchers worldwide have used this basic principle to define habitat integrity in monitoring programs.

This work reviews sixteen published fish-based indices of estuarine habitat integrity and summarises common development strategies with the aim of improving fish-based monitoring tools in Europe. Most indices are computed from a number of independent fish diversity measures, presence-absence of key species and composition of functional guilds (i.e. group of fish that rely on the same quality attribute). All index developers invest a large amount of effort on the formulation of the reference values, that is the quality or conservation value given to pristine, undisturbed, condition or reference status.

This deliverable is the background for Common metrics for transitional/coastal waters

Download D4.4-1 (220 kb, pdf)

Anthropogenic degradation of aquatic ecosystems—rivers, lakes, estuaries and coastal waters— is manifold, pervasive and dates back for centuries in Europe. The ecosystems are affected by physical, chemical, hydrological and morphological modifications, all of which impose environmental pressures on the structure and function of aquatic communities. Human impacts on aquatic ecology have frequently been studies and numerous indicators for assessment and monitoring of various environmental impacts on aquatic ecosystems were developed.

In response, the knowledge about the linkages between environmental pressures and aquatic communities was used to derive appropriate measures to rehabilitate and restore aquatic ecosystems. Restoration ecology is often assuming that communities are beginning to recover as soon as the pressures are reduced or removed. However, the simple reversal of degradation equally often does not show the desired and anticipated ecological effect and the biota continue to stay 'degraded'. Firstly, the small spatial scale of many restoration measures does not fit the often very broad-scale degradation at the catchment level; secondly monitoring activities are rather short-term and do not sufficiently account for long time periods required for restoration; and thirdly, the knowledge about a catchment's potential for recovery is sparse.

Module 5 of the WISER project will model relationships between restoration measures, their effect on environmental pressures and finally their ecological effect on aquatic communities. This report on Conceptual Models of degradation and recovery aims at providing a conceptual framework for guiding such studies within the WISER project. The models transfer the relationships between environmental pressures and biological impact and between restoration measures and biological recovery into cause-effect chains, while the linkages are based on an evaluation of the peer-reviewed literature. Hypotheses can be derived from well-referenced chains and can be tested with causative data analyses. Moreover, the results will be used to set up predictive models on the community's recovery after restoration. Finally, knowledge gaps can be identified and summarised to guide future research.

This draft version aims at outlining the general approach to develop the Conceptual Models. General examples are derived from the existing restoration literature and are illustrated. More examples will be provided with the final version due in May 2010. The final version will also address the quantification of cause-effect chains and the identification of important knowledge gaps.

Download D5.1-1_draft (510 kb, pdf)

Anthropogenic degradation of aquatic ecosystems—rivers, lakes, estuaries and coastal waters—is manifold, pervasive and dates back for centuries in Europe. The ecosystems are affected by physical, chemical, hydrological and morphological modifications, all of which impose environmental pressures on the structure and function of aquatic communities. The knowledge about the linkages between environmental pressures and aquatic communities can be used to derive appropriate measures to rehabilitate and restore aquatic ecosystems. Module 5 of the WISER project is going to model the relationships between restoration measures, their effect on environmental pressures and finally their ecological effect on aquatic communities.

Deliverable 5.1-1 is a report on "Conceptual Models of degradation and recovery" and aims at providing a conceptual framework for guiding such studies within the WISER project. The models transfer the relationships between environmental pressures and biological impact and between restoration measures and biological recovery into cause-effect chains, while the linkages are based on an evaluation of the peer-reviewed literature. Hypotheses can be derived from well-referenced chains and can be tested with causative data analyses. Moreover, the results will be used to set up predictive models on the community's recovery after restoration. Finally, knowledge gaps can be identified and summarised to guide future research.

Download D5.1-1 (500 kb, pdf)

This report summarises the results of empirical analysis and literature surveys on both the response of biological assemblages to environmental pressures (stressors) and to pressure reduction (restoration/management) in river ecosystems. Part one of the report introduces the reader to the WISER WP5.1 database underlying all empirical analysis presented in the following. Part II continues with the analysis of pressure-impact relationships for four major groups of environmental pressures (physico-chemical/water quality, hydrological, morphological and land use-related degradation) and four biological assemblages (BQEs: benthic diatoms, macrophytes, benthic invertebrates and fishes). This part highlights the impacts of different stressors and its hierarchy with regard to the effects on different organism groups. The strengths (intensity) of relationships between pressures and organisms as well as the detectable stress (sensitivity) levels are referred to. Part III of the report is dedicated to the analysis of the effects of restoration on riverine organisms. This Chapter is building a on previous report (Deliverable 5.1-1) that outlined the conceptualised effects of river restoration and management on river biota based on a literature survey of restoration studies worldwide. Finally, part IV attempts to summarise the observed and predicted (predictable) effects and draws appropriate implications for River Basin Management to inform the restoration and management practitioners.

Download D5.1-2 (7.5 mb, pdf)

This report encompasses several studies that try to assess the consequences of climate change on the future presence/absence of fish species in European rivers. In the first part of this report we estimate the ecological preferences of fish species, such as the temperatures in which this species could occur. The part II uses these preferences to assess how fish species would be able to cope with the future climatic conditions. These modifications have been computed for four scenarios of climate change. This part highlights the sensitivity of species preferring cool- or coldwaters to climate change. Brown trout or grayling will suffer from temperature increase and their habitat will be greatly reduced. On contrary species living in warm rivers will benefit from temperature increase. The third part of this report concerns a long term study of a grayling population in the Traun River in Austria. During the last 30 years, the water temperature of this river increase by 2.2 °C and the abundance of the grayling sharply decrease.

Download D5.1-3_draft (15 mb, pdf)

The usage of models in lake and river basin management is often cumbersome and confusing due to the insufficient monitoring data, the opacity of complex models and to the uncertainty of predictions. Thus, clear guidance and criteria for model usage in lake management is needed. Deliverable 5.2-1:"Analysis of applied modeling approaches in the case studies" consists of results from the evaluation of case study models as a part of efforts of Task 4 and WP5.2 to provide river basin managers, stake holders and model end users with the guidance of model usage in the prediction of implications of pressure reduction and of management and in the optimal use of models in lake and catchment management. Interaction of monitoring, modeling and management will be particularly emphasized.

The usability of empirical and mechanistic models in the prediction of impact of catchment management strategies and of climate change on pressures and ecological status of Lake Veluwe in Netherlands and Lake Pyhäjärvi in Finland were analyzed. Communication between modelers and users throughout the modeling processes were reviewed. Supplementary experience from the modeling of Norwegian lakes was gained.

The analysis was based on the model benchmark criteria and the quality assurance (QA) guidance tools developed by BMW ( Benchmark models for the water framework directive ), the criteria of models in the implementation of TMDL analysis in US (Reckhow 2001) and HarmoniQuA (HArmonised Modelling Tools for Integrated Basin Management for implementing the Water Framework Directive") projects, respectively. The criteria and the guidelines were used to assess the choosing and using of models in the implementation of WFD.

Download D5.2-1 (5.2 mb, pdf)

Hypoxia is a mounting problem affecting the world's coastal waters, with severe consequences for marine life, including death and catastrophic changes. The deleterious effects of hypoxia can be amplified by warming. Global warming will contribute to decrease the global average dissolved oxygen in the oceans worldwide, and may also affect the oxygen requirements of marine benthic macrofauna. Increasing temperature diminishes oxygen solubility and increases the respiration rates of organisms, as temperature plays a fundamental role in regulating metabolic processes. Increased temperature will likely affect the responses of marine benthic organisms to hypoxia because metabolic rates increase exponentially with temperature. Ocean warming is expected to increase the vulnerability of benthic macrofauna to reduced oxygen concentrations and expand the area of coastal ecosystems affected by hypoxia. Here we evaluate the effects of warming in the oxygen thresholds for benthic macrofauna with the basis of a literature survey.

Download D5.3-1 (900 kb, pdf)

Empirical relationships between phytoplankton biomass and nutrient concentrations established across a wide range of different ecosystems constitute fundamental quantitative tools for predicting effects of nutrient management plans. Nutrient management plans based on such relationships, mostly established over trends of increasing rather than decreasing nutrient concentrations, assume full reversibility of coastal eutrophication. Monitoring data from 28 ecosystems located in four well-studied regions were analyzed to study the generality of chlorophyll a versus nutrient relationships and their applicability for ecosystem management.

We demonstrate significant differences across regions as well as between specific coastal ecosystems within regions in the response of chlorophyll a to changing nitrogen concentrations. We also show that the chlorophyll a versus nitrogen relationships over time constitute convoluted trajectories rather than simple unique relationships. The ratio of chlorophyll a to total nitrogen almost doubled over the last 30-40 years across all regions. The uniformity of these trends, or shifting baselines, suggest they may result from large-scale changes, possibly associated with global climate change and increasing human stress on coastal ecosystems. Ecosystem management must, therefore, develop adaptation strategies to face shifting baselines and maintain ecosystem services at a sustainable level rather than striving at restoring an ecosystem state of the past.

Download D5.3-2 (2 mb, pdf)

In this report, the aim was to compare mechanistic and statistical models including Bayesian techniques to identify linkage between pressure variables and the responses of biological quality elements in the non-tidal, oligohaline River Vantaa estuary in the Baltic Sea and in the meso- macro-tidal Nervión estuary in Basque coast.

In River Vantaa estuary, trophic conditions are elevated due to huge nutrient loading. Based on the model simulations, reducing TN concentrations in river water would decrease concentrations in the estuary, whereas reduction of phosphorus inputs from the river alone would not improve the trophic status, meaning that the reduction of the level of TP in the Gulf of Finland is required, as well.

However, exchange of water with the open sea did not alone explain elevated trophic level in the estuary. The huge loading in the 1970s and 1980s raised nutrient reserves in the bottom sediment and accelerated benthic release of nutrients, i.e. internal loading, proved by an atypical seasonal distribution of phosphorus and high amounts of chlorophyll a in summer.

Download D5.3-3 (5.5 mb, pdf)

Hypoxia is a mounting problem affecting the world's coastal waters, with severe consequences for marine life, including death and catastrophic changes. The deleterious effects of hypoxia are amplified by warming. Global warming will contribute to decrease the global average dissolved oxygen in the oceans worldwide, and will also affect the oxygen requirements of marine benthic macrofauna. Increasing temperature diminishes oxygen solubility and increases the respiration rates of organisms, as temperature plays a fundamental role in regulating metabolic processes. Ocean warming increases the vulnerability of benthic macrofauna to reduced oxygen, increasing the mortality of benthic fauna and greatly extending the area of coastal ecosystems affected by hypoxia-driven mortality...

Download D5.3-5 (700 kb, pdf)

Any index of ecological status according to the Water Framework Directive is of little use without some knowledge of the associated uncertainty connected with, for instance, sampling and identification of the organisms. Could we have classified a lake quite differently if we had taken another sample or just surveyed a different part of it? What confidence do we have that an estuary is really of good or better status? What is the likelihood that there has been a real improvement in lake quality based on the sampling method and indices we have used?

A major part of the WISER project is a field sampling and surveying campaign for phytoplankton, invertebrates, plants and fish at each of a range of types and qualities of lakes, coastal and transitional waters. Deliverable 6.1-1 summarises the outcome of an uncertainty workshop that was used to learn from past experiences, especially from rivers, in assessing sampling variability of different methods and indices, with quantifying variability in space and time, and with sample processing, sub-sampling and taxonomic identification errors and their quality assurance.

Download D6.1-1 (1.1 mb, pdf)

Since the introduction of the European Union Water Framework Directive in 2000, considerable effort has been made the Member States to develop biological assessment and monitoring systems for the ecological status class of all of their water bodies (river stretches, lakes, transitional and coastal waters) based on one or more biological quality elements (fish, macroinvertebrates, diatoms-phytoplankton, macrophytes and physical habitats). In accordance with the WFD, these assessment systems have usually been derived by the use of one or more biological indices (often termed metrics) derived from the sampled biological taxonomic composition and diversity, which are converted to Ecological Quality Ratios (EQRs) through standardised by reference condition values of the metric(s) for each water body type and then classified into one of five ecological status classes. All of these steps and every sampling and other methodological decisions you make can affect the waterbody assessment and are potential sources error or uncertainty.

In this paper, the various sources of uncertainty are considered in more detail. The best-available datasets for assessing uncertainty in WFD status class of UK rivers based on macroinvertebrate sampling are used to demonstrate how spatial and temporal variance in metric values can be estimated. New free-available software WISERBUGS (WISER Bioassessment Uncertainty Guidance Software) is described which can help to quantify the effect of this estimated sampling variability on the confidence of assigning water bodies to status classes.

Download D6.1-2 (500 kb, pdf)

The WISERBUGS software program has been written to provide a general means of using simulations to assess uncertainty in estimates of ecological status class for water bodies based on either single metrics or a combination of metrics, multi-metric indices (MMIs) and multi- metric rules. The User provides prior estimates of the relevant sampling uncertainty for each metric and metric value to be involved in the water body assessments, together with metric status class limits and the rules for combining metrics into an overall water body assessment.

WISERBUGS can also be used just to test the effect of new status class limits and multi-metric rules on site/waterbody status assessments, without any uncertainty assessment (by setting all uncertainty components to zero).

Although initially designed for use with river macroinvertebrate data and metrics, program WISERBUGS is designed to be as generic as possible, so that it can be used with a wide range of metrics derived from field site sampling and survey data for any single or combination of biological quality elements (BQEs, namely phytoplankton, aquatic flora, macroinvertebrates and/or fish) and any type of water body (rivers, lakes, transitional or coastal waters).

Download D6.1-3 (580 kb, pdf)

Download WISERBUGS setup (4.5 mb, zip/exe, please read included "readme.txt")

The EU Water Framework Directive (WFD, 2000/60/EC) represents a modern and holistic water policy for the European Union and defines clear specific tasks. The environmental objectives laid down in Article 4 require Member States (MS) to prevent deterioration of surface waters and to protect, enhance and restore all waters with the aim of achieving good ecological status and good chemical status by 2015.

The first WFD Implementation Report of the Commission (2007) showed that many water bodies across Europe were at risk of failing to reach these objectives. The next step is then to assess and classify the status of the water bodies in line with the requirements established in Annex V of the WFD. The Commission encourages Member States to put in place a comprehensive national ecological assessment and classification system as the basis for implementing the WFD and meeting its 'good ecological status' objective.

New methods for assessing ecological status have been developed or are being developed in most of the Member States. Intercalibration (IC) wants to ensure that the understanding of good ecological status is the same across Europe and comparability in classification results of assessment methods for the biological quality elements. However, the results of the first phase of intercalibration (van de Bund 2009, Poikane 2009, Carletti & Heiskanen 2009) showed a number of gaps. Firstly some water categories (transitional waters) were not intercalibrated at all, secondly results did not cover the full biological quality elements (BQEs) but only a part of them. The second phase of intercalibration aims to close these gaps and to improve comparability of the results in time for the second river management basin plans due in 2015 (ECOSTAT Guidance on intercalibration process, 2009).

Download D6.2-1 (6.6 mb, pdf)

The main aims of workpackage 6.3 are to study the responses of different Biological Quality Elements (BQE) in different surface water types; to determine if/how responses of different organism groups differ between ecosystems (e.g. lake vs stream) and between habitats within ecosystems (e.g. pelagic vs benthic) to stress gradients related to hydromorphological alteration and nutrient enrichment.

During the mid-term meeting in Debe, Poland, in September 2010 the workpackage participants discussed the aims and objectives of the workpackage. A roadmap was developed with particular focus on data accrual and analyses. This report summarizes the outcome and decisions agreed upon during the meeting.

Download D6.3-1 (450 kb, pdf)

In this review a literature study and results from EURO-LIMPACS are used to define relevant biological processes of connectivity and metapopulation dynamics as parts of the development of cause-effect and recovery chains. The review focuses on the over-arching biological processes of connectivity and metapopulation dynamics for freshwaters (lakes, rivers and marine ecosystems). The report starts with general definitions, concepts and ecological theory behind connectivity and metapopulation dynamics in relation to restoration. Some of the methods to describe and quantify dispersal behaviour, metapopulation dynamics, connectivity and colonization events are reviewed.

Specific case studies are described that show the role of connectivity and metapopulation dynamics in restoration success. Restoration success is dependent on the possibility of populations to colonize the new and restored habitat. Due to knowledge gaps and scale discrepancies, both habitat and dispersal constraints still restrict restoration outcome in many programmes. Determining the right scale for species, the extent of the required (different) habitats, the scale a which processes like dispersal and connectivity occur in the context of restoration and even the scale at which large-scale processes that eventually influence habitat quality is an important aspect of successful restoration. However the spatial scales that are most important often remain poorly understood. Finally, our main aim was to construct a driver – pressure – state – impact – recovery chain for the biological processes of metacommunity dynamics and connectivity.

Download D6.4-1 (3.8 mb, pdf)

The WFD aims to combine catchment scale understanding across a range of aquatic ecosystems to improve ecological status within specific river basins. Catchment-wide integrated river basin management requires knowledge on cause-effect-recovery chains within water bodies as well as on the interactions between water bodies and categories.

The aim of Deliverable 6.4-2 is to compare differences between cause-effect-recovery chains of different drivers/stressors within different water categories for different organism groups. To meet the deliverable’s aim, the current body of literature was surveyed for recovery studies. More specific recovery processes from eutrophication and acidification in lakes and from hydromorphological degradation in rivers. For estuarine and coastal (marine) waters, different anthropogenic pressures were studied.

Download D6.4-2 (2.9 mb, pdf)

WISER final conference will take place on 23-26 January 2012 in Tallinn, Estonia. The objectives of the conference is to disseminate the major scientific results of WISER and to provide a platform to present applicability of the developed tools and approaches. The focus will be on a science-policy interface with specific sessions for in-depth scientific presentations and hands-on sessions for the end users. The meeting will start with the final WISER project meeting (Monday and Tuesday) and continues with the final conference on Wednesday and Thursday.

Download D7.2-1 (400 kb, pdf)