Uncertainty in Diatom Assessment: Sampling, Identification and Counting Variation

Despite the widespread application of periphytic diatoms to water quality assessment at a regional level, there is no standard European sampling protocol or associated assessment metrics. Furthermore, relatively little is known about the uncertainty in the results of such assessments. One of the objectives of the European project for the Standardisation of River Classifications (STAR) is to improve and standardise diatom assessment methods. An extensive diatom ring test, together with an audit of the project results, provided a better understanding and quantification of the uncertainty in quality assessment of running waters using diatoms. The variation in multimetric analysis shows that the choice of site and substrate for sampling, the inter-operator differences in diatom taxonomy and the counting techniques are the primary sources of uncertainty. To some extent, this variation also reveals the robustness of specific metrics in relation to the sources of uncertainty. Of the three most common substrate types tested (stone, macrophyte and sediment), macrophytes emerge as the most preferred substrate for diatom sampling when performing multimetric water quality assessment.

[1]  A. Dell'uomo Assessment of water quality of an Apennine river as a pilot study for diatom-based monitoring of Italian watercourses. , 1996 .

[2]  H. D. Patterson,et al.  Recovery of inter-block information when block sizes are unequal , 1971 .

[3]  H. Dam Partial recovery of moorland pools from acidification: Indications by chemistry and diatoms , 1996, Netherland Journal of Aquatic Ecology.

[4]  Michel Coste,et al.  A test of methods for assessing water quality based on diatoms , 1991 .

[5]  J. Descy A new approach to water quality estimation using diatoms , 1979 .

[6]  L. Denys A check list of the diatoms in the Holocene deposits of the western Belgian coastal plain, with a survey of their apparent ecological requirements. I. Introduction, ecological code and complete list , 1991 .

[7]  R. Flower,et al.  The relationship between diatoms and surface water quality in the Høylandet area of Nord-Trøndelag, Norway , 1997, Hydrobiologia.

[8]  B. Whitton,et al.  The Trophic Diatom Index: a new index for monitoring eutrophication in rivers , 1995, Journal of Applied Phycology.

[9]  A. Cazaubon,et al.  Methodical approach to distribution of epilithic and drifting algae communities in a French subalpine river: Inferences on water quality assessment , 1997, Aquatic Sciences.

[10]  H. Duthie,et al.  Monitoring organic pollution and eutrophication in the Grand River, Ontario, by means of diatoms , 1998 .

[11]  L. Leclercq,et al.  Deux nouveaux indices diatomiques et de qualité chimique des eaux courantes. Comparaison avec différents indices existants , 1987 .

[12]  N. Gómez Use of epipelic diatoms for evaluation of water quality in the Matanza-Riachuelo (Argentina), a pampean plain river , 1998 .

[13]  M. Kelly USE OF THE TROPHIC DIATOM INDEX TO MONITOR EUTROPHICATION IN RIVERS , 1998 .

[14]  V. Sládeček Diatoms as Indicators of Organic Pollution , 1986 .

[15]  Peter Haase,et al.  The STAR project: context, objectives and approaches , 2006, Hydrobiologia.

[16]  N. Gómez,et al.  The Pampean Diatom Index (IDP) for assessment of rivers and streams in Argentina , 2001, Aquatic Ecology.

[17]  S. Lek,et al.  Using bioindicators to assess rivers in Europe: An overview , 2005 .

[18]  L. Denys A check list of the diatoms in the Holocene deposits of the western Belgian coastal plain, with a survey of their apparent ecological requirements. II. Centrales , 1991 .