Alpine GIG - Rivers Gisela Ofenböck Intercalibration Alpine GIG - Rivers Gisela Ofenböck
Alpine river types Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004 X Type River characterisation Catchment area (of stretch) Altitude & geomorphology** Alkalinity Flow regime R-A1 Pre-alpine - Small to medium, high altitude calcareous 10-1000 km2 Site: 400-800 m. max. altitude of the catchment <2500 m, boulders/cobble Medium to high alkalinity Nival R-A2 Alpine -Small to medium, high altitude, siliceous Site: 500-1000m max. altitude of catchment > 2500m, boulders medium to low alkalinity nival-glacial flow regime Type River characterisation DE AT FR IT* ES SI R-A1 Pre-alpine - Small to medium, high altitude calcareous X R-A2 Alpine - Small to medium, high altitude, siliceous Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Proposal for Alpine GIG „hybrid option“: establish boundary values with national assessment methods (as in Option 3) Subsequent comparison of boundary values could then be done with the help of a common metrics method (as in Option 2). Two steps 1. Comparison using common metric 2. if there are major differences investigate reason (differences in sampling, methodology,…) Proposal for harmonisation procedure Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Major differences No major differences Agree on Criteria for Reference conditions GIG level Test common metrics method in relation to national data set MS level Identify common metrics method Apply boundary setting protocol developed on national level and calculate corresponding EQR for common metrics Apply national method and common metrics method to national data set (including range high – bad and IC sites) Major differences Compare EQR values (high/good and good/ moderate) for common metrics method Investigate reasons External benchmarking AQEM/STAR?? No major differences Identify IC sites representing agreed boundaries Make proposal for harmonisation Accept/Set EQR values for both methods
Reference conditions Criteria for reference sites seem comparable (Austria, France, Spain) More Information on criteria is needed from Slovenia, Germany At the moment no criteria available in Italy For definition of reference condition median value of metric (common metric & national metric) for reference sites should be used Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Availability of data x (x) ? Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004 family Genus species Quant. Qual. Semiquant. Italy x (x) ? France Spain Slovenia Austria Germany Definition of “presence”: certain number of individuals, semiquantitative estimation,… Please send information! Please check availability of data for for fish and phytobenthos! Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Proposed key metrics Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004 Metrics Stressors Organic + Nutrient pollution Hydromorphology Toxic pollution Total # taxa X #EPT taxa % EPT taxa XX (X) ASPT' (x) % sensitive taxa* x Sensitive taxa…to be defined for each type For the calculation of metrics AQEM-Software can be used (free download from: www.aqem.de) Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Testing against national data set… If possible test also other level of determination Additional metrics (if possible) % active filterers (taxa) % passive filterers (taxa) % grazers & shredders (taxa) Saprobic Index Longitudinal Zonation Index …. Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Major differences Definition of „major“ is necessary Range between the different EQR boundary values – which differences are acceptable? For a definition, results (at least of pilot IC) are needed! Differences have to be seen in relation to the sensitivity of the national method Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Timetable criteria for reference conditions Information on sensitive taxa availability of data for for fish, phytobenthos & macrophytes has to be checked Testing of proposed IC- option Test preliminary key metrics & Additional metrics Send results of Test and make proposal for MMI End of Sept =Decision for going on in the process Identify set of common metrics (MMI) Apply to national data set Send relationship of common metric to national method End of October Next meeting: Oct. 6 (ECOSTAT Oct. 7/8) Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Alpine GIG - Lakes Gisela Ofenböck Intercalibration Alpine GIG - Lakes Gisela Ofenböck
Lake characterisation Altitude & geomorphology Alpine lake types Type Lake characterisation Altitude & geomorphology Mean depth (m) Geology alkalinity (meq l–1) Lake size (km2) L-AL3 Lowland or mid-altitude, deep, moderate to high alkalinity. (alpine influence), large 50–800 >15 >1 meq l–1 moderate to high alkalinity >0.5 L-AL4 Mid-altitude, shallow, moderate to high aklaklinity (alpine influence), large 200–800 3–15 Type Lake characterisation AT FR DE IT SI L-AL3 Lowland or Mid-altitude, deep calcareous. (alpine influence), large + L-AL4 Mid-altitude, shallow, calcareous. (alp. influence), large Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Availability of data Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004 Phytoplankton Macrophytes + diatoms Zoobenthos Fish AT most lakes spp. list and quant. data (Chl, PB) some lakes spp. list and quant. data – FR all lakes Chl-a, some lakes spp. list few old data all lakes oligochaetes and molluscs very few data GE spp. list and quant. data (Chl, PB) spp. list and quant. data few data IT chla in all lakes; some lakes (e.g. Lago di Como) spp. list and quant. data data only from Lago Maggiore SI macrophytes: spp. list and quant. data Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Availability of WFD compliant assessment systems phytoplankton will be regarded at the first step of IC by all countries. GE, AT and SI will intercalibrate for macrophytes Phytoplankton Macrophytes + phytobenthos AT currently under development, will be available until the end of 2004 for submerged macrophytes and helophytes currently under development, will be available until end of 2004; no assessment scheme for diatoms, will maybe adopt the German method FR will partially be available in 2005 – GE assessment method will be available until the end of 2004 assessment method for macrophytes and diatoms already available IT SI only 2 lakes, therefore no own assessment scheme will be developed, but probably adopted from other countries Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Reference conditions L-AL4: Deep Alpine lakes are considered to be oligotrophic in the reference state. This is based on old data (e.g. Carinthian lakes: reference period 1930ies), paleolimnological methods (e.g. some German lakes, Austria: Mondsee) or the present trophic state (several lakes). It is doubtful whether a finer subdivision (ultra-oligotrophic vs oligotrophic) is justified or necessary. L-AL3: no general agreement on the reference state of shallow Alpine lakes (L-AL3). Hence, the participants of the Alpine lakes groups decided to concentrate on deep lakes (L-AL4) first. Lakes with a mean depth of 3–15 m are considered to be oligotrophic in the reference state in Germany, based on paleolimnological methods (e.g. Waginger See, Tachinger See). Phytoplankton data from the 1930ies also indicate that the reference trophic state of shallow lakes in Carinthia is oligotrophic. However, analyses of the nutrient budgets for some shallow Pre-Alpine lakes in the district of Salzburg indicate oligo-mesotrophy or mesotrophy as reference trophic state for these lakes. Italian shallow lakes may also have a higher trophic levels than deep lakes in reference conditions. Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Compilation of an Alpine lake data set A data set of Alpine lakes, distributed via CIRCA and/or Email, will be compiled during summer and autumn. It shall comprise not only IC sites, but any Alpine lake where phytoplankton data are available. The table shall include the following information: general information supplement data (mainly on trophic state) phytoplankton sampling data phytoplankton data ecoregion IC site (y/n) Altitude (m) max depth (m) mean depth (m) lake area(km2) catchment area (km2) residence time (a) mixing type (depth, frequency estimation of ecological state (only pressure eutrophication) Alkalinity (meq/l) total phosphorus during winter/spring circ., whole water column, volume weighted (µg/l) Secchi depth annual avg (m) Secchi depth range (m) Secchi affected (inorganic turbidity, biogenic decalcification) year single date or annual mean with indication of number of samling dates per year sampling depth chl-a (µg/l) biovolume (mg/l) percentage of algal groups based on biovolume (Cyano-, Crypto-, Chryso-, Bacillario-, Chloro-, Eugleno-, Dinophyceae) percentage of Cyclotella and Planktothrix based on biovolume number of genera dominant taxa [source of information] Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Proposed option for IC Phytoplankton Option 2 is persued by the Alpine GIG, but will be combined with option 3 (= hybrid option). Countries without existing WFD compliant assessment methods will try to apply existing methods from the other countries = option 1. Jun 04 agreement on some common metrics (see above), still looking for others (based on the taxonomic composition End of Sep 04 data compilation End of Oct 04 preliminary statistical analyses Nov 04 Alpine Lakes Group meeting discussion about reference conditions, discussion about boundaries for selected metrics define next steps Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Proposed option for IC Macrophytes: Countries that already have WFD compliant assessment methods will follow option 3. Countries without WFD compliant assessment methods will probably adopt methods from other countries during the IC exercise = option 1. Autumn 05 getting new data, if possible 2004–2005 exchange data sets analysis of data based on WFD compliant national methods developed in AT and GE 2005 Alpine Lakes Group meeting compare the results of the assessment based on WFD compliant national methods define next steps Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004
Proposed option for IC Benthic diatoms: If diatoms will be regarded during the IC exercise by the Alpine GIG, probably the German method will be adopted = option 1. 2004–2006 getting new data, if possible 2005–2006 apply German WFD compliant assessment method to sites in other countries Alpine Lakes Group meeting compare the results of the assessment based on WFD compliant national methods compare results of lake assessment derived by different biological quality elements (phytoplankton, macrophytes, diatoms) define next steps Alpine GIG-Meeting, 29.-30.6.2004