You are here:Home//Results//Methods database (results)//Czech national method of the river ecological status classification according to the fish biocoenosis

back to overview methods

CZI [id:]

Method: Czech national method of the river ecological status classification according to the fish biocoenosis [Ceský index hodnocení ekologické kvality toku pomocí rybích spolecenstev]

1. General information

1.01 GIG: Cross-GIG (Central-Baltic, Eastern Continental)
Relevant intercalibration types: n.a.
1.02 Category: Rivers
1.03 BQE: Fish Fauna
1.04 Country: Czech Republic
1.05 Specification: n.a.
1.06 Method name:
Czech national method of the river ecological status classification according to the fish biocoenosis
1.07 Original name:
Ceský index hodnocení ekologické kvality toku pomocí rybích spolecenstev
1.08 Status: Method is/will be used in neither first nor second RBMP
1.09 Detected pressure(s):
General degradation, Habitat destruction, Hydromorphological degradation, Pollution by organic compounds (e.g. DDT, PCB) Specification of pressure-impact-relationship:
CZI value decreases with increasing number of obstacles on the particular river and with decreasing relative distance between two consecutive obstacles in relation to river length (F1, 108 = 4.72; P<0.0321). In other words, the more obstacles and the shorter distance between them, the more degraded fish assemblage.
Pressure-impact-relationship:
Yes, with quantitative data (e.g. against range of sites reflecting continuous gradient of pressure).
1.10 Internet reference:
http://circa.europa.eu/Members/irc/jrc/jrc_eewai/library?l=/intercalibration_1/newupdated_national/national_methodpdf/_EN_1.0_
1.11 Pertinent literature of mandatory character:
Jurajda, P., O. Slavík & Z. Adámek, 2006. Metodika odlovu a zpracování vzorku pludkových spolecenstev tekoucích vod. CSN EN 14011-757706 Jakost vod. Odber vzorku pomocí elektrického proudu. [In Czech]
Horky, P. et al., 2009. Czech national method of the river ecological status classification according to the fish biocoenosis. Report for the Ministry of Environment of the Czech Republic, Prague.
1.12 Scientific literature: n.a.
1.13 Method developed by: Pavel Horky
Email of developer: pavel_horky@vuv.cz
Institute of developer: T.G.Masaryk Water Research Institute, Prague
1.14 Method reported by: Pavel Horky
Email of person reporting the method: pavel_horky@vuv.cz
Email of institute reporting the method: T.G.Masaryk Water Research Institute, Prague
1.15 Comments:
Comparative study "YOUNG-OF-THE-YEAR (YOY) ASSEMBLAGE SAMPLING AS A TOOL FOR ASSESSING THE ECOLOGICAL QUALITY OF RUNNING WATERS" submitted to Journal of Applied Ichthyology

2. Data acquisition

Field sampling/surveying

2.01 Sampling/Survey guidelines:
Jurajda, P., O. Slavik & Z. Adamek, 2006. Metodika odlovu a zpracovani vzorku pludkovych spolecenstev tekoucich vod. CSN EN 14011-757706 Jakost vod. Odber vzorku pomoci elektrickeho proudu. [In Czech].
2.02 Short description:
Partial sampling procedure is applied, covering all types of habitats to obtain a representative sample of the site. Sampling area borders are determined with help of the portable GPS receiver. All sampling occasions are undertaken during late summer, to assure efficiency of YOY sampling (Copp, 1989).Electrofishing of YOY is conducted by wading the bank in an upstream direction, regardless of the river size (electroshocker maximum output 225 - 300 V, 6 A, pulsed D.C.). Although point abundance and continuous sampling of YOY are comparable in terms of qualitative analyses, continuous sampling is preferred in order to allow quantitative interpretation of results (Janác & Jurajda, 2007). Most fish are identified to species and immediately released at the site of capture. Specimens that could not be reliably identified are fixed in 4% formaldehyde solution for laboratory identification.
2.03 Method to select the sampling/survey site or area: Expert knowledge, Stratified sampling/surveying
2.04 Sampling/survey device: Electrofishing gear
2.05 Specification: Efko or Bednar electrofishing units tuned for sampling of YOY
2.06 Sampled/surveyed habitat:
Sampled habitat: All available habitats per site (Multi-habitat)
2.07 Sampled/surveyed zones in areas with tidal influence: not relevant
2.08 Sampling/survey month(s): Late summer (preferably August)
2.09 Number of sampling/survey occasions (in time) to classify site or area: One occasion per sampling season
2.10 Number of spatial replicates per sampling/survey occasion to classify site or area:
At least one sampling occassion per microhabitat present is required (depending on the structure of the site - uniform vrs. heterogenous sites).
2.11 Total sampled/surveyed area or volume or total sampling duration to classify site or area:
n.a.

Sample processing

2.12 Minimum size of organisms sampled and processed: ca. 0.5 cm
2.13 Sample treatment:
Organisms of the complete sample are identified.
2.14 Level of taxonomical identification:
Level: Species/species groups
Specification of level of determination: n.a.
2.15 Record of abundance:
Determination of abundance: n.a.
Abundance is related to: n.a.
Unit of the record of abundance: number of individuals per one meter of shoreline
Other relation of abundance:
overall abundance and also relative abundance of particular fish ecological guild
Other record of abundance: meters of shoreline sampled
2.16 Quantification of biomass: n.a.
2.17 Other biological data: none
2.18 Special cases, exceptions, additions: none
2.19 Comments:
The Czech method is focused on the young-of-the-year (YOY) sampling. Separate study was performed in order to verify its applicability for the ecological quality assessment. YOY sampling was validated as a tool that is comparable with sampling of adults. Furthermore, it was suggested as a useful method for assessing river ecological quality with the ability to provide a sensitive response to several pressures regardless of the effect of stocking or river size. Functional river typology and multimetric index were also developed, suggesting the Czech national method as a relevant tool according to the Water Framework Directive requirements. Method description including full results of statistical analyses is downloadable from the above mentioned link (Circa database) or could be sent via e-mail if needed.

3. Data evaluation

Evaluation

3.01 List of biological metrics:
Presence of typical species; Overall abundance; Relative abundance of rheophillic species; Relative abundance of eurytopic species
3.02 Does the metric selection differ between types of water bodies: No
3.03 Combination rule for multi-metrics: Average metric scores
3.04 From which biological data are the metrics calculated:
List of biological metrics: Data from single sampling/survey occasion in time

Reference conditions

3.05 Scope of reference conditions: Surface water type-specific
3.06 Key source(s) to derive reference conditions:
Scope of reference conditions:
Existing near-natural reference sites, Expert knowledge, Historical data
3.07 Reference site characterisation:
Number of sites: 82
Geographical coverage:
28 river types representing 84.26 % of the overall area of the Czech Republic.
Location of sites:
All available sites from the national monitoring programme, covering almost the whole area of the Czech Republic.
Data time period: 2006-2008 (late summer period)
Criteria:
Several hydromorphological and chemical variables were measured in order to define no or low level of disturbance (sediment, geomorphology, impoundment, lateral obstacles, channelization,riparian vegetation, toxicity, nutrients, standard chemical water quality).
3.08 Reference community description:
Reference community depends on the river type (type-specific ref. comm. criteria). Generally is the reference
community represented by the high abundance of rheophyllic species (e.g. Salmo trutta m. fario, Barbus barbus...)
and presence of type-specific species sensitive to disturbances (e.g. Cottus gobio).
3.09 Results expressed as EQR: Yes

Boundary setting

3.10 Setting of ecological status boundaries:
High-good boundary derived from metric variability at near-natural reference sites
3.11 Boundary setting procedure:
HG boundary - assemblage is clearly dominated by intolerant species (rheophyllic group), however some type-specific species sensitive to disturbances could be missing or less abundant
GM boundary - abundance of rheophyllic species is decreasing and abundance of eurytopic species is increasing, however sensitive species are still present (cca. 50 - 60% of the whole assemblage)
MP boundary - the situation change and tolerant eurytopic species become dominant; however cca. 30% of sensitive species is still present
PB boundary - almost all type-specific species sensitive to disturbances are extinct and the assemblage is clearly dominated by tolerant eurytopic species
3.12 "Good status" community:
High abundance of rheophyllic species (e.g. Salmo trutta m. fario, Barbus barbus...) and presence of type-specific
species sensitive to disturbances (e.g. Cottus gobio). Abundance of rheophyllic species is decreasing and abundance of eurytopic species is increasing at moderate and lower classes.

Uncertainty

3.13 Consideration of uncertainty: No (to be done)
3.14 Comments:

back to overview methods


WISER: "Water bodies in Europe: Integrative Systems to assess Ecological status and Recovery"
Online: http://www.wiser.eu/results/method-database/detail.php [date: 2017/10/22]
© 2017 WISER (Contract No. 226273). All rights reserved.