Towards holistic assessment of the functioning of ecosystems under the Water Framework Directive

Abstract The assessment of chemical and ecological status in the context of the Water Framework Directive requires concrete, holistic knowledge about the abiotic and biotic structural properties and processes that determine the functioning of ecosystems. Ecological indicators typically exhibit non-linear responses to anthropogenic pressures together with great spatial and temporal variability, which underpin emerging key characteristics of natural systems. Recent research on the relationships between ecological indicators and anthropogenic pressures reveals several features of these relationships that can be used to predict meaningful changes of community structure and ecosystem functioning. The effective integration of strategies for assessing chemical status, including complementary biological tools, with strategies for assessing ecological status using functional end-points of ecosystems may reduce the inherent costs of monitoring and increase the level of protection of the environment.

[1]  R. Ptáčník,et al.  REBECCA databases: experiences from compilation and analyses of monitoring data from 5,000 lakes in 20 European countries , 2008, Aquatic Ecology.

[2]  Christian K. Feld,et al.  Cook book for the development of a Multimetric Index for biological condition of aquatic ecosystems: experiences from the European AQEM and STAR projects and related initiatives , 2006 .

[3]  D W Boening,et al.  Ecological effects, transport, and fate of mercury: a general review. , 2000, Chemosphere.

[4]  Mike T. Furse,et al.  Detection of ecological change using multiple organism groups: metrics and uncertainty , 2006, Hydrobiologia.

[5]  K. Siimes,et al.  Effects of pesticides on community structure and ecosystem functions in agricultural streams of three biogeographical regions in Europe. , 2007, The Science of the total environment.

[6]  A. Solimini,et al.  Performance of different biotic indices and sampling methods in assessing water quality in the lowland stretch of the Tiber River , 2000, Hydrobiologia.

[7]  O. Pietiläinen,et al.  Chlorophyll–nutrient relationships of different lake types using a large European dataset , 2008, Aquatic Ecology.

[8]  F. Eddy.  Ammonia in estuaries and effects on fish , 2005 .

[9]  W van de Bund,et al.  Towards good ecological status of surface waters in Europe--interpretation and harmonisation of the concept. , 2004, Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research.

[10]  Vladimir Novotny,et al.  Unlocking the relationship of biotic integrity of impaired waters to anthropogenic stresses. , 2005, Water research.

[11]  Matt R. Whiles,et al.  Biotic Indices and Stream Ecosystem Processes: Results from an Experimental Study , 1996 .

[12]  R. Nisbet,et al.  Indirect effects of contaminants in aquatic ecosystems. , 2003, The Science of the total environment.

[13]  Philippe Quevauviller.  Water protection against pollution , 2007 .

[14]  P. Quevauviller.  A TrAC journey into water-chemical metrology in the European Union☆ , 2007 .

[15]  F. Chapin,et al.  EFFECTS OF BIODIVERSITY ON ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING: A CONSENSUS OF CURRENT KNOWLEDGE , 2005 .

[16]  Geoff Phillips,et al.  Ecological threshold responses in European lakes and their applicability for the Water Framework Directive (WFD) implementation: synthesis of lakes results from the REBECCA project , 2008, Aquatic Ecology.

[17]  L. Sandin,et al.  Macroinvertebrate indicators of lake acidification: analysis of monitoring data from UK, Norway and Sweden , 2008, Aquatic Ecology.

[18]  L. Carvalho,et al.  Quantitative responses of lake phytoplankton to eutrophication in Northern Europe , 2008, Aquatic Ecology.

[19]  K. McCann.  The diversity–stability debate , 2000, Nature.

[20]  Philippe Quevauviller,et al.  Coordinating links among research, standardisation and policy in support of water framework directive chemical monitoring requirements. , 2007, Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM.

[21]  A A Koelmans,et al.  Integrated modelling of eutrophication and organic contaminant fate & effects in aquatic ecosystems. A review. , 2001, Water research.

[22]  Helen Wake.  Oil refineries: a review of their ecological impacts on the aquatic environment , 2005 .

[23]  B. Skjelkvåle,et al.  Critical limits for acid neutralizing capacity of brown trout (Salmo trutta) in Norwegian lakes differing in organic carbon concentrations , 2008, Aquatic Ecology.

[24]  R. Schulz.  Field studies on exposure, effects, and risk mitigation of aquatic nonpoint-source insecticide pollution: a review. , 2004, Journal of environmental quality.

[25]  B. Moss,et al.  The Water Framework Directive: total environment or political compromise? , 2008, The Science of the total environment.

[26]  Tristan Hatton-Ellis,et al.  The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Water Framework Directive , 2008 .

[27]  G. G. Stokes.  "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[28]  David S. Wilcove,et al.  How many endangered species are there in the United States , 2005 .

[29]  Branislav Vrana,et al.  A "toolbox" for biological and chemical monitoring requirements for the European Union's Water Framework Directive. , 2006, Talanta.

[30]  M. Liess,et al.  Analyzing effects of pesticides on invertebrate communities in streams , 2005, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[31]  F. Périé,et al.  Calibration, validation and sensitivity analysis of an ecosystem model applied to artificial streams. , 2008, Water research.

[32]  Krzysztof Szoszkiewicz,et al.  Assessment of european streams with diatoms, macrophytes, macroinvertebrates and fish : a comparative metric-based analysis of organism response to stress , 2006 .

[33]  P. Hansen.  Biosensors and Eco‐toxicology , 2008 .

[34]  P. Vanrolleghem,et al.  Is ecosystem structure the target of concern in ecological effect assessments? , 2008, Water research.

[35]  S. Carpenter,et al.  Rising variance: a leading indicator of ecological transition. , 2006, Ecology letters.

[36]  Eric Torng,et al.  A framework for developing ecosystem‐specific nutrient criteria: Integrating biological thresholds with predictive modeling , 2008 .

[37]  I. Donohue,et al.  Nutrient optima and tolerances of benthic invertebrates, the effects of taxonomic resolution and testing of selected metrics in lakes using an extensive European data base , 2008, Aquatic Ecology.

[38]  N. Willby,et al.  Using aquatic macrophyte community indices to define the ecological status of European lakes , 2008, Aquatic Ecology.

[39]  Robert Ptacnik,et al.  Diversity predicts stability and resource use efficiency in natural phytoplankton communities , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[40]  Robert Ptacnik,et al.  Performance of a new phytoplankton composition metric along a eutrophication gradient in Nordic lakes , 2009, Hydrobiologia.

[41]  A. Koelmans,et al.  Responses of benthic invertebrates to combined toxicant and food input in floodplain lake sediments , 2002, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[42]  A. Sih,et al.  Community ecology as a framework for predicting contaminant effects. , 2006, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[43]  O. Pietiläinen,et al.  Chlorophyll reference conditions for European lake types used for intercalibration of ecological status , 2008, Aquatic Ecology.

[44]  Damià Barceló,et al.  Effect-Directed Analysis of Key Toxicants in European River Basins. A Review (9 pp) , 2007, Environmental science and pollution research international.

[45]  P. Hansen.  Risk assessment of emerging contaminants in aquatic systems , 2007 .

[46]  Graham A. Mills,et al.  Strategic monitoring for the European Water Framework Directive , 2006 .

[47]  Richard A. Park,et al.  AQUATOX: Modeling environmental fate and ecological effects in aquatic ecosystems ☆ , 2008 .

[48]  L. Carvalho,et al.  Phosphorus reference concentrations in European lakes , 2007, Hydrobiologia.