You are here:Home//Results//Methods database (results)//Specific Pollution-sensitivity Index

back to overview methods

IPS [id:]

Method: Specific Pollution-sensitivity Index [Indice de Pollusensibilité Spécifique]

1. General information

1.01 GIG: Mediterranean
Relevant intercalibration types: n.a.
1.02 Category: Rivers
1.03 BQE: Benthic Diatoms
1.04 Country: Cyprus
1.05 Specification: none
1.06 Method name: Specific Pollution-sensitivity Index
1.07 Original name: Indice de Pollusensibilité Spécifique
1.08 Status: Method is/will be used in First RBMP (2009), Second RBMP (2015)
1.09 Detected pressure(s):
n.a. Specification of pressure-impact-relationship:
Physicochemical pressures (NO3, NH3, BOD, %DO) were tested against various indices including the IPS. However, due to the small data set no significant pressure-impact relationship could be detected.
Pressure-impact-relationship:
Yes, with quantitative data (e.g. against range of sites reflecting continuous gradient of pressure).
Other detected pressures: Physicochemical pressures (NO3, NH3, BOD, %DO)
1.10 Internet reference: n.a.
1.11 Pertinent literature of mandatory character: n.a.
1.12 Scientific literature:
CEMAGREF, 1982. Etude des methodes biologiques d'appreciation quantitative dela qualite des eaux. Rapport Q.E. Lyon - A.F. Bassin Rhone-Mediterranee-Corse. 218pp.
1.13 Method developed by: Dr. Varvara Montesantou
Email of developer: bmontes@biol.uoa.gr
Institute of developer: National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
1.14 Method reported by: Iakovos Tziortzis
Email of person reporting the method: itziortzis@wdd.moa.gov.cy
Email of institute reporting the method:
Water Development Department - Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Environment
1.15 Comments: none

2. Data acquisition

Field sampling/surveying

2.01 Sampling/Survey guidelines:
CEN 13946, 2003. Water quality. Guidance standard for the routine sampling and pretreatment of benthic diatoms from rivers. European Committee of Standardization 2003.
CEN 14407: 2004 Water quality. Guidance standard for the identification, enumeration and interpretation of benthic diatom samples from running waters. European Committee of Standardization 2004.
2.02 Short description:
A minimum of 5 cobbles (total area about 100cm2) are randomly selected from areas of running water deeper than 10cm, well lighted (if possible). The upper part of the stones is sampled with a hard toothbrush for epilithic diatoms, rinsed with distilled water and the sample is preserved using formaldehyde 4%, in small plastic bottles.
2.03 Method to select the sampling/survey site or area: Expert knowledge
2.04 Sampling/survey device: Brush
2.05 Specification: Toothbrush
2.06 Sampled/surveyed habitat:
Specification of sampled habitat: Hard bottom (Cobbles - Mesolithal preferred)
Sampled habitat: Single habitat(s)
2.07 Sampled/surveyed zones in areas with tidal influence: not relevant
2.08 Sampling/survey month(s): February - March
2.09 Number of sampling/survey occasions (in time) to classify site or area: One
2.10 Number of spatial replicates per sampling/survey occasion to classify site or area: 5 replicates
2.11 Total sampled/surveyed area or volume or total sampling duration to classify site or area:
A total of 100 cm2 of hard bottom surface

Sample processing

2.12 Minimum size of organisms sampled and processed: n.a.
2.13 Sample treatment:
Two drops of the sample are used to prepare two permanent slides.
Sample is divided (sub-sampling) and organisms of a sub-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: Relative abundance
Abundance is related to: n.a.
Unit of the record of abundance: Percentage
Other record of abundance:
Percentage of each species' individuals in relation to total number of individuals
2.16 Quantification of biomass: n.a.
2.17 Other biological data: none
2.18 Special cases, exceptions, additions: none
2.19 Comments: none

3. Data evaluation

Evaluation

3.01 List of biological metrics:
IPS metrics: Relative abundance of each species, Pollution sensitivity of each species (5 classes of sensitivity), Indicator value or stenoecy degree of each species (3 classes)
3.02 Does the metric selection differ between types of water bodies: No
3.03 Combination rule for multi-metrics: Not relevant
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
3.07 Reference site characterisation:
Number of sites: 8 (4 sites each for R-M4 and R-M5 type)
Geographical coverage: Central, southern and western part of the island
Location of sites:
Upstream parts of Pyrgos, Limnitis, Vasilikos, Ayia (R-M5) and Kargotis, Gialia, Xeros rivers (R-M4)
Data time period: April 2007-May 2008
Criteria:
Diatoms community structure and IPS values were the main criterion. pressure data (Land Use, Hydromorphological and Physicochemical) were also used and their intensity and impact was evaluated using experts judgment, following the guidelines of MedGIG's template.
3.08 Reference community description: n.a.
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:
Possible reference sites were selected based on the diatom community structure and IPS values and were screened for pressures using expert judgment. Sites with minimum pressures were then selected as reference sites.
The H/G boundary was set as the 25th percentile of STAR ICMi values at reference sites.
The G/M boundary was set as H/G boundary*0.75.
The M/P boundary was set as H/G boundary*0.5.
The P/B boundary was set as H/G boundary*0.25.
3.12 "Good status" community: n.a.

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: 2019/08/19]
© 2019 WISER (Contract No. 226273). All rights reserved.