You are here:Home//Results//Methods database (results)//Macrophyte-based indication method for lakes - Ecological Status Macrophyte Index

back to overview methods

ESMI [id:]

Method: Macrophyte-based indication method for lakes - Ecological Status Macrophyte Index [Metoda makrofitoindykacji jezior]

1. General information

1.01 GIG: Central-Baltic
Relevant intercalibration types: LCB1, LCB2
1.02 Category: Lakes
1.03 BQE: Macrophytes
Specification of angiosperm taxa:
Elodeids (charophytes - macroalgae, bryophytes and flowery plant), nymphaeides, helophytes
Specification others:
Elodeids (charophytes - macroalgae, bryophytes and flowery plant), nymphaeides, helophytes
1.04 Country: Poland
1.05 Specification: none
1.06 Method name:
Macrophyte-based indication method for lakes - Ecological Status Macrophyte Index
1.07 Original name: Metoda makrofitoindykacji jezior
1.08 Status: Method is/will be used in First RBMP (2009)
1.09 Detected pressure(s):
Eutrophication, General degradation, Pollution by organic matter, Riparian habitat alteration Specification of pressure-impact-relationship:
Biological and environmental data from 47 stratified lakes and 40 non-stratified lakes (all highly alkaline, >1meq/l, >25 mgCa/l) were examined to establish pressure-impact relationship between macrophyte metrics and eutrophication gradient. The relationship between macrophyte index - ESMI (Ecological Status Macrophyte Index) and TP, TN, SD, chlorophyll "a" concentration (spring, summer and mean values) showed significant correlation (Monte Carlo permutation test, p<0.005)
Pressure-impact-relationship:
Yes, with quantitative data (e.g. against range of sites reflecting continuous gradient of pressure).
1.10 Internet reference: n.a.
1.11 Pertinent literature of mandatory character:
Ciecierska, H., A. Kolada, H. Soszka & M. Golub, 2005- 06. Methodological Aspects of Macrophyte-Based Biological Monitoring of Lakes ? a Pilot Study. In Koda, A., H. Soszak, M. Golub, H. Ciecierska, K. Szoszkiewicz, J. Zbierska, S.Z. Jusik & T. Zgola (eds), Methodological Aspects of Macrophyte. Based Biological Monitoring of Surface Waters ? a Pilot Study, stage I ? November 2005, stage II ? 24 November 2006. Ministry of the Environment, Warsaw.
1.12 Scientific literature:
Ciecierska, H., 2008. Makrofity jako wskazniki stanu ekologicznego jezior [Macrophyte-based indices of the ecological state of lakes]. Dissertations and Monographs 139. University of Warmia and Mazury, Olsztyn.
1.13 Method developed by: Hanna Ciecierska, Agnieszka Kolada
Email of developer: makrof@uwm.edu.pl, akolada@ios.edu.pl
Institute of developer:
Department of Botany and Nature Protection, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Department of Freshwater Assessment Methods and Monitoring, Institute of Environmental Protection in Warsaw
1.14 Method reported by: Hanna Ciecierska, Agnieszka Kolada
Email of person reporting the method: makrof@uwm.edu.pl; akolada@ios.edu.pl
Email of institute reporting the method:
Department of Botany and Nature Protection, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Department of Freshwater Assessment Methods and Monitoring, Institute of Environmental Protection in Warsaw
1.15 Comments:
A paper describing the proposed method will be published in an international scientific journal.

2. Data acquisition

Field sampling/surveying

2.01 Sampling/Survey guidelines:
Kolada, A. & H. Ciecierska, 2009. Wytyczne do prowadzenia badan terenowych makrofitow w jeziorach oraz do sposobu zestawiania i przetwarzania danych [Guidelines for a study of macrophyte communities in lakes and for data compilation and processing], Department of Freshwater Assessment Methods and Monitoring. Institute of Environmental Protection, Warsaw.
2.02 Short description:
The following data is collected for each transect: * all plant communities (not species - only the occurrence of a predominant species over a surface area of at least 1 m2 with 25% coverage is considered a community - phytosociological approach) in which vegetation abundance is measured using the quantitative Braun-Blanquet scale (1951), ** maximum vegetation depth, *** vegetation cover (%)
2.03 Method to select the sampling/survey site or area: Expert knowledge Other method to select the sampling/survey site or area:
The minimum number of belt transects is calculated using the Jensen formula (1977) and depends on the lake size and shoreline length), transects evenly distributed around a lake, location of a specific transect according to expert judgement (representat
2.04 Sampling/survey device: Grapnel
2.05 Specification:
A grapnel on a scaled rope, dense enough to enable reaching submerged macrophytes
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): Mid-June to mid-September (optimally July - August)
2.09 Number of sampling/survey occasions (in time) to classify site or area:
One lake is examined once every 6 years, once in a year during a vegetation season
2.10 Number of spatial replicates per sampling/survey occasion to classify site or area:
One transect is one survey area of the width of 30 m and the length from shoreline to maximum colonisation depth.
2.11 Total sampled/surveyed area or volume or total sampling duration to classify site or area:
Data from all transects is then recalculated as average to provide a basis for the assessment of the ecological status of a lake.

Sample processing

2.12 Minimum size of organisms sampled and processed: No limit
2.13 Sample treatment:
Organisms of the complete sample are identified.
2.14 Level of taxonomical identification:
Level: Other
Specification of level of determination:
Communities of the following ecological groups: charophytes, elodeids, nymphaeids and helophytes
2.15 Record of abundance:
Determination of abundance: Percent coverage
Abundance is related to: Area
Unit of the record of abundance:
The cover of each plant community in B-B point scale; afterwards recalculated to absolute area occupied by each plant community in m2 /ha
2.16 Quantification of biomass: n.a.
2.17 Other biological data:
No of syntaxa, syntaxonomic composition, abundance in B-B scale, maximum colonisation depth, overall vegetation %cover within a transect
2.18 Special cases, exceptions, additions: none
2.19 Comments: none

3. Data evaluation

Evaluation

3.01 List of biological metrics:
Measure of taxonomic composition - phytocenotic diversity index H (Shannon-Wiener index based on a syntaxa level) and maximum phytocenotic diversity index Hmax (lnS, where S - number of syntaxa);
Measure of abundance - colonization index Z (the proportion of a total area occupied by macrophytes and area of phytolittoral where water is shallower than 2.5 m)
The ecological status of lakes is assessed based on the values of the multimetric Ecological State Macrophyte Index - ESMI (combination of H, Hmax and Z; exponential function)
3.02 Does the metric selection differ between types of water bodies: No
3.03 Combination rule for multi-metrics: Not relevant
Other rules: All metics combined in one multimetric formula
3.04 From which biological data are the metrics calculated:
List of biological metrics: n.a.
Other metric calculation:
Data from all transects surveyed recalculated to the whole lake level; all metrics calculated for a lake

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, Least Disturbed Conditions
3.07 Reference site characterisation:
Number of sites: n.a.
Geographical coverage:
All lakelands in Poland (lowland, CB-GIG); reference lakes more or less evenly distributed but some areas less affected and more reference rich (NE Poland)
Location of sites: All lakelands in Poland but most lakes situated in NE part
Data time period: Contemporary data (existing lakes surveyed in 2000-2006)
Criteria:
Mainly pressure criteria - no evidence of pressure (on sources of pollution, no urban and agricultural areas, forests dominating, no tourist pressure); the vegetation composition and spatial structure correspond to the description of non-disturbed community.
3.08 Reference community description:
Highly alkaline, lowland lakes: vegetation well developed, dense and extensive Chara-meadows dominating, in deep lakes high maximum colonisation depth (>3-4 m, even 5m and more), in shallow lakes high %cover of bottom area (∼100%); rush vegetation developed only to a small or at least moderate extent (not dominating).
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
Equidistant division of the EQR gradient
Other boundary setting:
H/G boundary set as median of ESMI values of reference sites; remaining boundaries set by division of ESMI gradient between H/G and the lowest ESMI value recorded in the dataset in logarithmic scale; class boundaries set for shallow and deep lakes separately (type-specific class boundaries)
3.11 Boundary setting procedure:
H/G boundary set as median of ESMI values of reference sites; remaining boundaries set by division of ESMI gradient between H/G and the lowest ESMI value recorded in the dataset in logarithmic scale; class boundaries set for shallow and deep lakes separately (type-specific class boundaries)
3.12 "Good status" community:
Highly alkaline, lowland lakes: Vegetation is still well developed, Chara meadows are not dominating but still exist. Dense and extensive submerged vegetation is dominating (vascular plants communities). In deep lakes maximum colonisation depth is not lower than 2.5 m. Rush vegetation developed only to a moderate extent (still not dominating).

Uncertainty

3.13 Consideration of uncertainty: No (to be done)
3.14 Comments: none

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: 2019/06/25]
© 2019 WISER (Contract No. 226273). All rights reserved.