Institute of Marine Research (IMAR-CMA), Dept. of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra, Portugal.
Portuguese Environment Agency (APA, I.P.), Portugal.
Sci Total Environ. 2014 Apr 1;476-477:777-84. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.07.085. Epub 2013 Aug 28.
Within the Mediterranean region each country has its own assessment method based on aquatic macroinvertebrates. However, independently of the classification system, quality assessments should be comparable across members of the European Commission, which means, among others, that the boundaries between classes should not deviate significantly. Here we check for comparability between High-Good and Good-Moderate classifications, through the use of a common metric. Additionally, we discuss the influence of the conceptual and statistical approaches used to calculate a common boundary within the Mediterranean countries participating in the Intercalibration Exercise (e.g., using individual national type-boundaries, one value for each common type or an average boundary by country; weighted average, median) in the overall outcome. All methods, except for the IBMWP (the Iberian BMWP) when applied to temporary rivers, were highly correlated (0.82<R<0.98) with the common metric STAR-ICMi. This index was shown to respond well to a variety of pressures (especially local habitat alterations, riparian vegetation degradation, nutrient enrichment and chemical contamination, land use and global degradation; p<0.00001) affecting Mediterranean streams. However, depending on the statistical approach used, a different number of class boundaries failed the acceptable deviation from the common boundary (a quarter of class width). That leads to a different percentage of national sites failing to achieve good status and ultimately to a different technical and economic effort in the recovery of streams to that condition. We argue that low/high boundaries might have different meanings not restricted to the quality (good/bad) of reference conditions but also to the natural spatial and temporal variability contained in national and intercalibration types. The highly variable hydrological regimes of Mediterranean streams may influence the reference condition and require further investigation.
在地中海地区,每个国家都有自己基于水生大型无脊椎动物的评估方法。然而,无论分类系统如何,质量评估应该在欧盟成员国之间具有可比性,这意味着,除其他外,类别的边界不应有很大差异。在这里,我们通过使用共同的指标来检查高良好和良好-中等分类之间的可比性。此外,我们还讨论了在参与相互校准(例如,使用每个共同类型的单个国家类型边界、每个共同类型的一个值或按国家平均的共同边界;加权平均值、中位数)的地中海国家中,用于计算共同边界的概念和统计方法的影响在整体结果中。除了适用于临时河流的 IBMWP(伊比利亚 BMWP)之外,所有方法(0.82<R<0.98)与共同指标 STAR-ICMi 高度相关。该指数对各种压力(特别是局部生境变化、河岸植被退化、营养富化和化学污染、土地利用和全球退化)的响应良好(p<0.00001),这些压力会影响地中海溪流。然而,根据所使用的统计方法,不同数量的类边界无法满足与共同边界的可接受偏差(类宽度的四分之一)。这导致有不同比例的国家站点无法达到良好状态,最终在恢复溪流到良好状态方面需要不同的技术和经济努力。我们认为,高低边界可能具有不同的含义,不仅限于参考条件的质量(良好/不良),还包括国家和相互校准类型中包含的自然时空变异性。地中海溪流高度可变的水文状况可能会影响参考条件,需要进一步研究。