1. Suggestions for improved WFD water quality monitoring programs
Eric de Deckere, Joop Bakker, Werner Brack, Dick de Zwart, Edwin Foekema, Marja Lamoree, Pim Leonards, Isabel Munoz, Claus Orendt, Bert Van Hattum, Sander Van Vliet, Georg Wolfram & Peter Von der Ohe

2. ? ? Surveillance & operational monitoring Effective measures
Surveillance & operational monitoring ≈ status & trend monitoring focusing on chemical and ecological status
WFD classification
Chemical status
≥good
≤ moderate
≤ moderate
≥good
Ecological status
≥good
≤ moderate
≥good
≤ moderate
Effective measures
No action
needed
Improve
chemical
status ?
Improve
chemical
status ?

3. Status/trend monitoring: Zenne
Can we identify the relevant stressors with the current monitoring programmes?

4. Identification of relevant stressors
(De Zwart et al., 2009)
Lack of specific data, eg. sediment related pollutants and habitat, results in a big fraction unknown stress

5. dominating stressor can change
Identification of relevant stressors
Example: Critical prometryn concentrations for flagellate population under nitrogen limitation
dominating stressor can change
(Bontje et al., 2009)

6. Total of 27 pollutants with TU > 0.01!  only 6 Priority pollutants
Assess monitoring data with ‘MODELKEY’ tools
Total of 27 pollutants with TU > 0.01!
 only 6 Priority pollutants

7. TUmax algae Danube top 15 Assess monitoring data with ‘MODELKEY’ toolsno
Stream
site ID
year n
TUmax
Compound
conc.
(µg l-1) 1
Danube
108
1999
2.0
-0.03
4,4'- DDT
2.67 2
098
1997
-0.26
1.59 3
Sulina
097
1.7
-0.36
1.25 4
095
-0.38
1.20 5
070
2.3
0.98 6
Arges
087
1.5
-0.41
1.11 7
064
1998
1.3
-0.51
0.88 8
089
-0.52
0.93 9
Morava
MO1
2007
16.0
-1.12
terbuthylazine
0.245 10
MO2
-1.40
0.128 11
080
2000
1.0
-1.47
0.10 12
016
15.0
-1.80
0.050 13
Sio
042
12.0
-1.77
0.054 14
050
14.0
-1.70
0.063 15
044
3.0
0.05

8. Number of measured chemicals

9. Contaminants in the sediment have to be considered
Analysis of monitoring data
AA-EQS exceeded
AA-EQS not exceeded
A list of chemicals is always limited, and the list will influence the identification of the stressor in the present status and trend monitoring
Contaminants in the sediment have to be considered
(De Zwart et al., 2009)
The number of compounds that can be analysed over the different matrices is the limiting factor; Effect monitoring should be included in an early stage
(Bron: De Zwart et al., 2007)

10. Surveillance & operational monitoring
Requires adequate monitoring
Monitoring 1900-WFD

11. DEFINITION MONITORING (UN/ECE)
A process of repetitive observing (~ trend analyses)
for defined purposes (~ policy)
of one or more elements of the environment (~ environmental themes/compartiments)
according to pre-arranged schedules in space and time (~ monitoring strategy)
using comparable methods for environmental sensing and data collection (~ development assessment methods)
providing information on present state and past trends in environmental behaviour (~ reporting)
A tool to prepare, assess and evaluate a program of measures
Cause-effect links should be established

12. ? ? Surveillance & operational monitoring Effective measures
Surveillance & operational monitoring ≈ status & trend monitoring focusing on chemical and ecological status
WFD classification
Chemical status
≥good
≤ moderate
≤ moderate
≥good
Ecological status
≥good
≤ moderate
≥good
≤ moderate
Effective measures
No action
needed
Improve
chemical
status ?
Improve
chemical
status ?

13. ? Effective measures WFD classification ≤ moderate ≤ moderate ≥good
Bioavailability
Chemical status
Ecological status
Internal
response
concentration
External
Community
development
Population
Individual
effect
ECOLOGY
TOXICOLOGY
CHEMISTRY
WFD classification
≤ moderate
≤ moderate
≥good
≥good
Effective measures
Improve
chemical
status ?

14. water managers perspective
Bioavailability
Chemical status
External
concentration
Internal
response
Ecological status
Community
development
Population
Individual
effect
ECOLOGY
TOXICOLOGY
CHEMISTRY
Chemical analysis
In-vitro assays
Biometric extracts
In-vivo biomarkers
In-vivo bioassays
Population indices
Community indices
Tools
water managers perspective
Poor ecological status
Are toxicants involved?
Identify key toxicants
Take cost effective measures

15. Genus composition of macro invertebrates in the Schijn
Identification of cause-effect relationship
Genus composition of macro invertebrates in the Schijn

16. Identification of cause-effect relationship
For the first test, we choose the samples, where reference and polluted sites had the bigest difference, which was, as you may remember at the Elbe Most and Jirkov and at the Scheldt Rundvoort and Eenhoorn.
(Bron: Schmitt et al., in prep.)

17. Identification of cause-effect relationship
Field sediments
Extraction/Fractionation
Laboratory culture of
Potamyrgus antipodarum
Spiked artificial sediment
Endpoint reproduction
0.2 mm
embryo with shell
embryo without shell
Sediment contact test
Endpoint growth
4 mm
We used the same field sediments as before, extracted all the compounds with Soxhlet and spiked artificial sediments with a solution of those extracts. Then we took the same snails from the culture together with the spiked sediments and reconstituted water in beakers and followed the same procedure as in the previuos test, where we hat growth and reproduction as endpoints.
(Bron: Schmitt et al., in prep.)

18. Identification of cause-effect relationship
Cause-effect relationships between ecological status and chemical compounds can be made, the results of MODELKEY confirm this, but the tools should be further established.
Fractionation studies (EDA) helped to identify the co mpounds that are responsible for the lack of certain species at the hot spot
This graph shows the results of the sediment extraction test after 28 days of expoure. In this experiment, beside a control, also a solvent control had to be carried out, because the extractions were solved in dichlormethane and we had to be sure that there is no impact of Dichlormethane on the snails. Apparently there was no impact of the solvent as you see by looking at this two bars, but surprisingly we see a totally different picture for the samples than in the experiment before. We now have a decrease in reproducton at the polluted sites which is almost obvious at the Scheldt but significant fo the Elbe.
Those results show, that due to the higher bioavailability of compounds in the artificial sediment the effects are changing enormously and we now have to find out, which group of substances courses which effects.

19. Conclusions
Current status and trend monitoring programs are not adequate to identify the relevant stressors
Modelkey tools can be used to identify main stressors and/or key pollutants
The relation between sediments, suspended solids, water and biota is not well identified, but it is clear that the role of sediments is underestimated and needs to be addressed more in further research
Investigative monitoring should be focused on establishing the cause-effect link to be able to develop an adequate program of measures
Ecotoxicologal tests, TIE and EDA like tools, such as developed in Modelkey, are useful tools, however a lot of these tools are still under development and there are clear research needs to be able to establish this cause-effect link

20. THANK YOU
Ziet er goed uit, wel benieuwd naar conclusies

21. Responsible Substance(s)
WFD classification
Chemical status
≥good
≤ moderate
≤ moderate
≥good
Improve
chemical
status
Monitoring
Ecological status
≥good
≤ moderate
≥good
≤ moderate
In Vivo Bioassays
Biomarkers OK
In Vivo Bioassays
Biomarkers
No effect
Optional
Effects are
compensated
Effect
Effect
In-vitro assays
EDA
Identify & Remove
Responsible Substance(s)
Other stressors than
chemicals (mainly)
responsible
No effect