Poikane Sandra, Portielje Rob, Denys Luc, Elferts Didzis, Kelly Martyn, Kolada Agnieszka, Mäemets Helle, Phillips Geoff, Søndergaard Martin, Willby Nigel, van den Berg Marcel S
European Commission Joint Research Centre, Directorate Sustainable Resources, Water and Marine Resources Unit, I-21027 Ispra, VA, Italy.
Rijkswaterstaat Water, Traffic and the Environment, PO Box 2232, 3500 GE Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Ecol Indic. 2018 Nov;94:185-197. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2018.06.056.
The European Water Framework Directive has been adopted by Member States to assess and manage the ecological integrity of surface waters. Specific challenges include harmonizing diverse assessment systems across Europe, linking ecological assessment to restoration measures and reaching a common view on 'good' ecological status. In this study, nine national macrophyte-based approaches for assessing ecological status were compared and harmonized, using a large dataset of 539 European lakes. A macrophyte common metric, representing the average standardized view of each lake by all countries, was used to compare national methods. This was also shown to reflect the total phosphorus (r = 0.32), total nitrogen (r = 0.22) as well as chlorophyll- (r = 0.35-0.38) gradients, providing a link between ecological data, stressors and management decisions. Despite differing assessment approaches and initial differences in classification, a consensus was reached on how type-specific macrophyte assemblages change across the ecological status gradient and where ecological status boundaries should lie. A marked decline in submerged vegetation, especially Charophyta (characterizing 'good' status), and an increase in abundance of free-floating plants (characterizing 'less than good' status) were the most significant changes along the ecological status gradient. Macrophyte communities of 'good' status lakes were diverse with many charophytes and several species. A large number of taxa occurred across the entire gradient, but only a minority dominated at 'less than good' status, including filamentous algae, lemnids, nymphaeids, and several elodeids (e.g., and ). Our findings establish a 'guiding image' of the macrophyte community at 'good' ecological status in hard-water lakes of the Central-Baltic region of Europe.
欧洲成员国已采用《欧洲水框架指令》来评估和管理地表水的生态完整性。具体挑战包括协调欧洲各地不同的评估系统,将生态评估与恢复措施联系起来,并就“良好”生态状况达成共识。在本研究中,利用539个欧洲湖泊的大型数据集,对九种基于大型植物的国家生态状况评估方法进行了比较和协调。使用一种大型植物通用指标来比较各国方法,该指标代表了所有国家对每个湖泊的平均标准化看法。研究还表明,该指标反映了总磷(r = 0.32)、总氮(r = 0.22)以及叶绿素(r = 0.35 - 0.38)梯度,在生态数据、压力源和管理决策之间建立了联系。尽管评估方法不同且分类存在初始差异,但就特定类型的大型植物组合如何随生态状况梯度变化以及生态状况边界应位于何处达成了共识。沉水植被显著减少,尤其是轮藻(代表“良好”状况),而漂浮植物的丰度增加(代表“不太好”状况),这是沿生态状况梯度最显著的变化。“良好”状况湖泊的大型植物群落多样,有许多轮藻和几种其他物种。大量分类群出现在整个梯度中,但只有少数在“不太好”状况下占主导地位,包括丝状藻类、浮萍科植物、睡莲科植物和几种伊乐藻属植物(如 和 )。我们的研究结果建立了欧洲中波罗的海地区硬水湖泊“良好”生态状况下大型植物群落的“指导形象”。