Department of Botany, School of Biology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 541 24, Thessaloniki, Greece.
GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, Germany, Düsternbrooker Weg 20, 24105, Kiel, Germany.
Environ Manage. 2019 Dec;64(6):675-688. doi: 10.1007/s00267-019-01226-y. Epub 2019 Nov 20.
The enactment of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) initiated scientific efforts to develop reliable methods for comparing prevailing lake conditions against reference (or nonimpaired) states, using the state of a set biological elements. Drawing a distinction between impaired and natural conditions can be a challenging exercise. Another important aspect is to ensure that water quality assessment is comparable among the different Member States. In this context, the present paper offers a constructive critique of the practices followed during the WFD implementation in Greece by pinpointing methodological weaknesses and knowledge gaps that undermine our ability to classify the ecological quality of Greek lakes. One of the pillars of WDF is a valid lake typology that sets ecological standards transcending geographic regions and national boundaries. The national typology of Greek lakes has failed to take into account essential components. WFD compliance assessments based on the descriptions of phytoplankton communities are oversimplified and as such should be revisited. Exclusion of most chroococcal species from the analysis of cyanobacteria biovolume in Greek lakes/reservoirs and most reservoirs in Spain, Portugal, and Cyprus is not consistent with the distribution of those taxa in lakes. Similarly, the total biovolume reference values and the indices used in classification schemes reflect misunderstandings of WFD core principles. This hampers the comparability of ecological status across Europe and leads to quality standards that are too relaxed to provide an efficient target for the protection of Greek/transboundary lakes such as the ancient Lake Megali Prespa.
《水框架指令》(WFD)的颁布促使科学界努力开发可靠的方法,使用一系列生物要素的状态,将当前湖泊状况与参照(或未受损)状态进行比较。区分受损和自然条件可能是一项具有挑战性的工作。另一个重要方面是确保水质评估在不同成员国之间具有可比性。在这方面,本文对希腊实施 WFD 期间遵循的实践提出了建设性的批评,指出了方法上的弱点和知识差距,这些弱点和差距削弱了我们对希腊湖泊生态质量进行分类的能力。WDF 的一个支柱是有效的湖泊分类法,它设定了超越地理区域和国家边界的生态标准。希腊湖泊的国家分类法未能考虑到基本组成部分。基于浮游植物群落描述的 WFD 合规性评估过于简单化,因此应该重新审视。在对希腊湖泊/水库中的蓝藻生物量和西班牙、葡萄牙和塞浦路斯的大多数水库中的蓝藻进行分析时,排除了大多数色球藻物种,这与这些分类单元在湖泊中的分布不一致。同样,总生物量参考值和分类方案中使用的指数反映了对 WFD 核心原则的误解。这阻碍了欧洲各地生态状况的可比性,并导致了过于宽松的质量标准,无法为保护希腊/跨界湖泊(如古老的 Megali Prespa 湖)提供有效的目标。