Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 32018D0229

    Commission Decision (EU) 2018/229 of 12 February 2018 establishing, pursuant to Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, the values of the Member State monitoring system classifications as a result of the intercalibration exercise and repealing Commission Decision 2013/480/EU (notified under document C(2018) 696)Text with EEA relevance.

    C/2018/0696

    OJ L 47, 20.2.2018, p. 1–91 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    Legal status of the document No longer in force, Date of end of validity: 07/03/2024; Repealed by 32024D0721 The end of validity date is based on the date of publication of the repealing act taking effect on the date of its notification. The repealing act was notified but the date of notification is not available on EUR-Lex – the date of publication is used instead.

    ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2018/229/oj

    20.2.2018   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    L 47/1


    COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2018/229

    of 12 February 2018

    establishing, pursuant to Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, the values of the Member State monitoring system classifications as a result of the intercalibration exercise and repealing Commission Decision 2013/480/EU

    (notified under document C(2018) 696)

    (Text with EEA relevance)

    THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

    Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

    Having regard to Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy (1), and in particular Section 1.4.1(ix) of Annex V thereto,

    Whereas:

    (1)

    Directive 2000/60/EC requires the Member States to protect enhance and restore all bodies of surface waters with the aim of achieving good ecological and chemical status. It furthermore requires Member States to protect and enhance all artificial and heavily modified bodies of water, with the aim of achieving good ecological potential and good chemical status.

    (2)

    In order to define one of the main environmental objectives of Directive 2000/60/EC, namely good ecological status, that Directive provides for a process to ensure the comparability between the biological monitoring results of Member States and their monitoring system classifications. Member States’ biological monitoring results and their monitoring system classifications are to be compared through an intercalibration network comprised of monitoring sites in each Member State and in each ecoregion of the Union. Directive 2000/60/EC requires the Member States to collect, as appropriate, the necessary information for the sites included in the intercalibration network, in order to enable the assessment of the consistency of the national monitoring system classifications with the normative definitions of Section 1.2 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC. In order to carry out the intercalibration exercise Member States are organised in Geographical Intercalibration Groups, consisting of Member States sharing particular surface water body types, as defined in Section 2 of the Annex to Commission Decision 2005/646/EC (2).

    (3)

    In accordance with Directive 2000/60/EC the intercalibration exercise is to be carried out at biological element level, comparing the classification results of the national monitoring system for each biological element and for each common surface water body type among Member States and ensuring the consistency of the results with the normative definitions set out in Section 1.2 of Annex V to that Directive.

    (4)

    The Commission has facilitated three phases of the intercalibration exercise through the Joint Research Centre. Under the Water Framework Directive Common Implementation Strategy four guidance documents (No 6 (3), 14 (two versions (4)) and 30 (5)) were prepared to facilitate the intercalibration process. They provide an overview of the key principles of the intercalibration process and the options for carrying out the exercise including timescales, and reporting requirements. They also provide a procedure to fit new or revised national classification methods to the harmonised definition of good ecological status.

    (5)

    By 2007 the Commission had received intercalibration results for a number of biological quality elements. They were included in Commission Decision 2008/915/EC (6), which sets out the values of the boundaries between classes that Member States were to use in their national monitoring system classifications. The results of the first phase of the intercalibration exercise were incomplete, in so far as not all biological quality elements were covered. It was necessary however to adopt the available results of the intercalibration exercise to inform the development of the first river basin programme of measures and the first river basin management plans in accordance with Articles 11 and 13 of Directive 2000/60/EC.

    (6)

    In order to close the gaps and improve the comparability of the intercalibration results in time for the second river basin management plans due in 2015, the Commission initiated a second phase of the intercalibration exercise. The results of this exercise were included in Commission Decision 2013/480/EU (7). The results revealed that in some cases intercalibration was only partially achieved. There were also Geographical Intercalibration Groups and biological quality elements for which there were no intercalibration results for inclusion in that Decision.

    (7)

    A third phase of the intercalibration exercise was therefore necessary in order to close these gaps and improve the comparability of the intercalibration results in time for the third river basin management plans due in 2021. The results of this third phase of the intercalibration exercise are included in the Annex to this Decision.

    (8)

    The Annex to this Decision sets out the results of the intercalibration exercise. For the results in Part 1 of the Annex all steps of the intercalibration process set out in the guidance documents have been fully completed. Part 2 of the Annex contains the national classification methods and their respective boundary values for which it has not been technically feasible to complete the comparability assessment due to a lack of common types, different pressures addressed or different assessment concepts. Since the results set out in Part 1 and Part 2 of the Annex are consistent with the normative definitions set out in Section 1.2 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC, the respective boundary values should be used in Member States monitoring systems classifications.

    (9)

    Where water bodies corresponding to the intercalibrated types are designated as artificial or heavily modified water bodies in accordance with Article 4(3) of Directive 2000/60/EC, Member States should be allowed to use the results presented in the Annex to this Decision to derive their good ecological potential, taking into account their physical modifications and their associated water use in accordance with the normative definitions in point 1.2.5 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC.

    (10)

    Member States should apply the results of the intercalibration exercise to their national classification systems in order to set the boundaries between high and good status and between good and moderate status for all their national types.

    (11)

    The information that is made available through the establishment of the monitoring programmes provided for in Article 8 of Directive 2000/60/EC and the review and update of the characteristics of river basin districts provided for in Article 5 of that Directive could bring new evidence that may lead to the adaptation to scientific and technical progress of the Member States’ monitoring and classification systems. Member States may also develop new national classification methods covering biological quality elements or sub biological quality elements and respective boundary values for which the consistency with the normative definitions set out in Section 1.2 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC should be assessed. These matters may lead to a review of the results of the intercalibration exercise to close gaps and improve the quality and comparability of the intercalibration results which in turn may warrant an update of the results contained in the Annex to this Decision.

    (12)

    Decision 2013/480/EU should therefore be repealed and replaced accordingly.

    (13)

    The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee referred to in Article 21(1) of Directive 2000/60/EC,

    HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

    Article 1

    1.   For the purposes of Section 1.4.1(iii) of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC, Member States shall use in their monitoring systems classification the values of the boundaries between classes that are set out in Part 1 of the Annex to this Decision.

    2.   Where a comparability assessment for a biological quality element has not been completed within a Geographical Intercalibration Group, Member States shall, for the purpose of Section 1.4.1(iii) of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC, use in their monitoring systems classification the methods and the values of the boundaries between classes that are set out in Part 2 of the Annex to this Decision.

    3.   Member States may use the methods and the values of the boundaries between classes set out in the Annex to this Decision to establish the good ecological potential of water bodies designated as artificial or heavily modified water bodies in accordance with Article 4(3) of Directive 2000/60/EC.

    Article 2

    Decision 2013/480/EU is repealed.

    Article 3

    This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

    Done at Brussels, 12 February 2018.

    For the Commission

    Karmenu VELLA

    Member of the Commission


    (1)   OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.

    (2)  Commission Decision 2005/646/EC of 17 August 2005 on the establishment of a register of sites to form the intercalibration network in accordance with Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 243, 19.9.2005, p. 1).

    (3)  Common implementation strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), Guidance Document No 6, Towards a Guidance on Establishment of the Intercalibration Network and the Process on the Intercalibration Exercise, European Communities, 2003. ISBN 92-894-5126-2.

    (4)  Common implementation strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), Guidance document No 14. Guidance document on the Intercalibration Process 2004-2006, ISBN 92-894-9471-9;

    Common implementation strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC), Guidance document No 14. Guidance document on the Intercalibration Process 2008-2011, ISBN: 978-92-79-18997-5.

    (5)  Procedure to fit new or updated classification methods to the results of a completed intercalibration exercise, Guidance document No 30. Technical Report 2015-085, ISBN: 978-92-79-38434-9.

    (6)  Commission Decision 2008/915/EC of 30 October 2008 establishing, pursuant to Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, the values of the Member State monitoring system classifications as a result of the intercalibration exercise (OJ L 332, 10.12.2008, p. 20).

    (7)  Commission Decision 2013/480/EU of 20 September 2013 establishing, pursuant to Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, the values of the Member State monitoring system classifications as a result of the intercalibration exercise and repealing Decision 2008/915/EC (OJ L 266, 8.10.2013, p. 1).


    ANNEX

    Part 1 of this annex includes the results of the intercalibration exercise for which all steps of the intercalibration process have been fully completed, including their respective boundary values.

    Part 2 includes national methods and their boundary values which are consistent with the normative definition set out in Section 1.2 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC but where it has not been technically feasible to complete the comparability assessment within a Geographical Intercalibration Group due to lack of common types, different pressures addressed or different assessment concepts.

    -- PART 1 --

    Water category

    Rivers

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Alpine rivers

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    River characterisation

    Catchment (km2)

    Altitude (m a.s.l.) and geomorphology

    Alkalinity

    Flow regime

    R-A1

    Pre-Alpine, small to medium, high altitude calcareous

    10 — 1 000

    800 — 2 500  m (catchment), boulders/cobble

    High (but not extremely high) alkalinity

     

    R-A2

    Small to medium, high altitude, siliceous

    10 — 1 000

    500 — 1 000  m (max altitude of catchment 3 000  m, mean 1 500  m), boulders

    Non-calcareous (granite, metamorphic) medium to low alkalinity

    Nival-glacial flow regime

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

    Type R-A1:

    Germany, Austria, France, Italy, Slovenia

    Type R-A2:

    Austria, France, Italy, Spain

    ALPINE RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country and Type

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Type R-A1

     

     

     

    Austria

    Assessment of the biological quality elements — part benthic invertebrates [Erhebung der biologischen Qualitätselemente — Teil Makrozoobenthos (Detaillierte MZB-Methode)]

    0,80

    0,60

    France

    Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). AFNOR NF-T-90-350 and arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,93

    0,79

    Germany

    PERLODES — Bewertungsverfahren von Fließgewässern auf Basis des Makrozoobenthos

    0,80

    0,60

    Italy

    MacrOper, based on STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

    0,97

    0,73

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi bentoških nevretenčarjev

    0,80

    0,60

    Type R-A2

     

     

     

    Austria

    Assessment of the biological quality elements — part benthic invertebrates [Erhebung der biologischen Qualitätselemente — Teil Makrozoobenthos (Detaillierte MZB-Methode)]

    0,80

    0,60

    France (Alps)

    Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). AFNOR NF-T-90-350 and arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,93

    0,71

    France (Pyrenees)

    Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). AFNOR NF-T-90-350 and arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,94

    0,81

    Italy

    MacrOper, based on STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

    0,95

    0,71

    Spain

    Iberian BMWP (IBMWP)

    0,83

    0,53

    ALPINE RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Phytobenthos

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Type and country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Type R-A1

     

     

     

    Austria

    Assessment of the biological quality elements — part phytobenthos [Leitfaden zur Erhebung der biologischen Qualitätselemente, Teil A3 — Fließgewässer/Phytobenthos]

    0,88

    0,56

    France

    IBD 2007 (Coste et al, Ecol. Ind. 2009). AFNOR NF-T-90-354, December 2007. Arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,94

    0,78

    Germany

    Verfahrensanleitung für die ökologische Bewertung von Fließgewässern zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie: Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB), Modul Diatomeen

    0,735

    0,54

    Italy

    Intercalibration Common Metric Index (ICMi) (Mancini & Sollazzo, 2009)

    0,87

    0,7

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi fitobentosa in makrofitov, fitobentos

    0,80

    0,60

    Type R-A2

     

     

     

    Austria

    Assessment of the biological quality elements — part phytobenthos [Leitfaden zur Erhebung der biologischen Qualitätselemente, Teil A3 — Fließgewässer/Phytobenthos]

    0,88

    0,56

    France

    IBD 2007 (Coste et al, Ecol. Ind. 2009). AFNOR NF-T-90-354, December 2007. Arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,94

    0,78

    Spain

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982)

    0,94

    0,74

    Italy

    Intercalibration Common Metric Index (ICMi) (Mancini & Sollazzo, 2009)

    0,85

    0,64

    Water category

    Rivers

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Central-Baltic rivers

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    River characterisation

    Catchment (km2)

    Altitude and geomorphology

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    R-C1

    Small lowland siliceous sand

    10 — 100

    Lowland, dominated by sandy substrate (small particle size), 3 — 8 m width (bankfull size)

    > 0,4

    R-C2

    Small lowland siliceous — rock

    10 — 100

    Lowland, rock material

    3 — 8m width (bankfull size)

    < 0,4

    R-C3

    Small mid-altitude siliceous

    10 — 100

    Mid-altitude, rock (granite) — gravel substrate, 2 — 10 m width (bankfull size)

    < 0,4

    R-C4

    Medium lowland mixed

    100 — 1 000

    Lowland, sandy to gravel substrate, 8 — 25 m width (bankfull size)

    > 0,4

    R-C5

    Large lowland mixed

    1 000  — 10 000

    Lowland, barbel zone, variation in velocity, max. altitude in catchment: 800 m a.s.l., > 25 m width (bankfull size)

    > 0,4

    R-C6

    Small, lowland, calcareous

    10 — 300

    Lowland, gravel substrate (limestone), width 3 — 10 m (bankfull size)

    > 2

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

    Type R-C1:

    Belgium (Flanders), Belgium (Wallonia), Germany, Denmark, France, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, United Kingdom

    Type R-C2:

    Spain, France, Ireland, Sweden, United Kingdom

    Type R-C3:

    Austria, Belgium (Wallonia), Czech Republic, Germany, Poland, Spain, Sweden, France, Luxembourg, United Kingdom

    Type R-C4:

    Belgium (Flanders), Belgium (Wallonia), Czech Republic, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, United Kingdom

    Type R-C5:

    Belgium (Wallonia), Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Spain, Ireland. Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, United Kingdom

    Type R-C6:

    Belgium (Wallonia), Denmark, Estonia, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Sweden, United Kingdom

    CENTRAL-BALTIC RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Austria

    Assessment of the biological quality elements — part benthic invertebrates

    0,80

    0,60

    Belgium (Flanders)

    Multimetric Macroinvertebrate Index Flanders (MMIF)

    0,90

    0,70

    Belgium (Wallonia)

    Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN) (Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350, 1992) and Arrêté du Gouvernement wallon du 13 septembre 2012 relatif à l’identification, à la caractérisation et à la fixation des seuils d’état écologique applicables aux masses d’eau de surface et modifiant le Livre II du Code de l’Environnement, contenant le Code de l’Eau. Moniteur belge 12.10.2012

    0,94

    (type R-C1)

    0,97

    (types R-C3, R-C5, R-C6)

    0,75

    (type R-C1)

    0,74

    (types R-C3, R-C5, R-C6)

    Czech Republic

    Czech system for ecological status assessment of rivers using benthic macroinvertebrates

    0,80

    0,60

    Denmark

    Danish Stream Fauna Index (DSFI)

    1,00

    0,71

    Estonia

    Estonian surface water ecological quality assessment — river macroinvertebrates

    0,90

    0,70

    Germany

    PERLODES — Bewertungsverfahren von Fließgewässern auf Basis des Makrozoobenthos

    0,80

    0,60

    France

    Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). AFNOR NF T90-350 et arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,94

    0,80

    Ireland

    Quality Rating System (Q-value)

    0,85

    0,75

    Italy

    MacrOper, based on STAR_ICM index calculation

    0,96

    0,72

    Latvia

    Latvian Macroinvertebrate Index (LMI)

    0,92

    0,72

    Lithuania

    Lithuanian River Macroinvertebrate Index (LRMI)

    0,80

    0,60

    Luxembourg

    Classification luxembourgeoise DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). AFNOR NF-T-90-350, AFNOR XP T 90-333 and XP T 90-388

    0,96

    0,72

    Netherlands

    KRW-maatlat

    0,80

    0,60

    Poland

    RIVECOmacro — MMI_PL

    0,91 (type R-C1)

    0,72 (type R-C1)

    Spain

    METI

    0,93

    0,70

    Sweden

    DJ-index (Dahl & Johnson 2004)

    0,80

    0,60

    United Kingdom

    River Invertebrate Classification Tool (RICT)- WHPT

    0,97

    0,86

    CENTRAL-BALTIC RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Type

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Austria

    AIM for Rivers (Austrian Index Macrophytes for rivers)

    RC-3

    0,875

    0,625

    Belgium (Flanders)

    MAFWAT — Flemish macrophyte assessment system

    R-C1

    0,80

    0,60

    Belgium (Wallonia)

    IBMR-WL — Biological Macrophyte Index for Rivers (Arrêté du Gouvernement wallon du 13 septembre 2012 relatif à l’identification, à la caractérisation et à la fixation des seuils d’état écologique applicables aux masses d’eau de surface et modifiant le Livre II du Code de l’Environnement, contenant le Code de l’Eau. Moniteur belge 12.10.2012)

    R-C3

    0,925

    0,607

    Czech Republic

    Assessment method of surface running water bodies in the Czech Republic using biological quality element macrophytes

    R-C3 (national type 1)

    0,83

    0,67

    R-C3 (national type 4)

    0,82

    0,64

    R-C4

    0,86

    0,62

    Denmark

    DSPI — Danish Stream Plant Index

    R-C1, R-C4

    0,70

    0,50

    Germany

    Verfahrensanleitung für die ökologische Bewertung von Fließgewässern zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie: Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB), Modul Makrophyten

    R-C1

    0,745

    0,495

    R-C3

    0,80

    0,55

    R-C4

    0,575

    0,395

    Germany

    NRW-Verfahren zur Bewertung von Fließgewässern mit Makrophyten

    R-C1, R-C3, R-C4

    0,995

    0,695

    France

    IBMR — Indice Biologique Macrophytique en Rivière French standard NF T90-395 (2003-10-01)

    R-C3

    0,93

    0,79

    R-C4

    0,905

    0,79

    Ireland

    MTR — IE — Mean Trophic Ranking

    R-C4

    0,74

    0,62

    Italy

    IBMR — IT — Biological Macrophyte Index for Rivers

    R-C1

    0,90

    0,80

    R-C4

    0,90

    0,80

    Lithuania

    Lithuanian River Macrophyte Index

    R-C4

    0,61

    0,41

    Latvia

    Latvian assessment method using macrophytes

    R-C4

    0,75

    0,55

    Luxembourg

    IBMR — LU — Biological Macrophyte Index for Rivers

    R-C3, R-C4, R-C5 and R-C6

    0,89

    0,79

    Netherlands

    Revised assessment method for rivers in The Netherlands using macrophytes

    R-C1 and R-C

    0,80

    0,60

    Poland

    MIR — Macrophyte Index for Rivers

    R-C1

    0,90

    0,65

    R-C3

    0,910

    0,684

    R-C4

    0,90

    0,65

    United Kingdom

    River LEAFPACS 2

    R-C1, R-C3 and R-C4 (*1)

    0,80

    0,60

    CENTRAL-BALTIC RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Phytobenthos

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Type

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Austria

    Assessment of the biological quality elements — part Phytobenthos [Leitfaden zur Erhebung der biologischen Qualitätselemente, Teil A3 -Fließgewässer/Phytobenthos]

    All types, altitude < 500 m

    0,70

    0,42

    All types, altitude > 500 m

    0,71

    0,43

    Belgium (Flanders)

    Proportions of Impact-Sensitive and Impact-Associated Diatoms (PISIAD)

    All types

    0,80

    0,60

    Belgium (Wallonia)

    IPS (Coste, in CEMAGREF, 1982; Lenoir & Coste, 1996 and Arrêté du Gouvernement wallon du 13 septembre 2012 relatif à l’identification, à la caractérisation et à la fixation des seuils d’état écologique applicables aux masses d’eau de surface et modifiant le Livre II du Code de l’Environnement, contenant le Code de l’Eau. Moniteur belge 12.10.2012)

    All types

    0,98

    0,73

    Czech Republic

    Czech assessment method for rivers using phytobenthos

    R-C3, R-C4, R-C5

    0,80

    0,63

    Estonia

    Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

    All types

    0,85

    0,70

    France

    IBD 2007 (Coste et al, Ecol. Ind. 2009). AFNOR NF-T-90-354, December 2007. Arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    All types

    0,94

    0,78

    Germany

    Verfahrensanleitung für die ökologische Bewertung von Fließgewässern zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie: Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB), Modul Diatomeen

    R-C1

    0,67

    0,43

    R-C3

    0,67

    0,43

    R-C4

    0,61

    0,43

    R-C5

    0,73

    0,55

    Ireland

    Revised form of Trophic Diatom Index (TDI)

    All types

    0,93

    0,78

    Italy

    Intercalibration Common Metric Index (ICMi) (Mancini & Sollazzo, 2009)

    All types

    0,89

    0,70

    Ireland

    Revised form of Trophic Diatom Index (TDI)

    All types

    0,93

    0,78

    Lithuania

    Lithuanian Phytobenthos Index

    R-C1, R-C4, R-C5, R-C6

    0,73

    0,55

    Luxembourg

    Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

    R-C3, R-C4 (low alkalinity)

    0,98

    0,78

    R-C4 (high alkalinity), R-C5 and R-C6

    0,99

    0,78

    Netherlands

    KRW Maatlat

    All types

    0,80

    0,60

    Poland

    Indeks Okrzemkowy IO dla rzek (Diatom Index for rivers)

    All types

    0,80

    0,58

    Spain

    Diatom multimetric (MDIAT)

    R-C2, R-C3, R-C4

    0,93

    0,70

    Sweden

    Swedish assessment methods, Swedish EPA regulations (NFS 2008:1) based on Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

    All types

    0,89

    0,74

    United Kingdom

    Diatom Assessment for River Ecological Status (DARLEQ2)

    All types

    1,00

    0,75

    Water category

    Rivers

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Eastern Continental rivers

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    River characterisation

    Ecoregion

    Catchment (km2)

    Altitude (m a.s.l.)

    Geology

    Substrate

    R-E1a

    Carpathians: small to medium, mid-altitude

    10

    10 — 1 000

    500 — 800

    Mixed

     

    R-E1b

    Carpathians: small to medium, mid-altitude

    10

    10 — 1 000

    200 — 500

    Mixed

     

    R-E2

    Plains: medium-sized, lowland

    11 and 12

    100 — 1 000

    < 200

    Mixed

    Sand and silt

    R-E3

    Plains: large, lowland

    11 and 12

    > 1 000

    < 200

    Mixed

    Sand, silt and gravel

    R-E4

    Plains: medium-sized, mid-altitude

    11 and 12

    100 — 1 000

    200 — 500

    Mixed

    Sand and gravel

    R-EX4

    Large, mid-altitude

    10, 11 and 12

    > 1 000

    200 — 500

    Mixed

    Gravel and boulder

    R-EX5

    Plains: small lowland

    11 and 12

    10 — 100

    < 200

    Mixed

    Sand and silt

    R-EX6

    Plains: small, mid-altitude

    11 and 12

    10 — 100

    200 — 500

    Mixed

    Gravel

    R-EX7

    Balkan: small, calcareous, mid-altitude

    5

    10 — 100

    200 — 500

    Calcareous

    Gravel

    R-EX8

    Balkan: small to medium-sized, calcareous karst spring

    5

    10 — 1 000

     

    Calcareous

    Gravel, sand and silt

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

    R-E1a:

    Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Romania, Slovakia

    R-E1b:

    Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia

    R-E2:

    Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia

    R-E3:

    Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia

    R-E4:

    Austria, Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia

    R-EX4:

    Czech Republic, Romania, Slovakia

    R-EX5:

    Hungary, Romania, Slovenia, Slovakia

    R-EX6:

    Hungary, Romania, Slovenia

    R-EX7:

    Slovenia

    R-EX8:

    Slovenia

    EASTERN CONTINENTAL RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Type

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Austria

    Assessment of the biological quality elements — part benthic invertebrates

    R-E4

    0,80

    0,60

    Bulgaria

    IBI (BG) (Irish Biotic Index (BG))

    R-E1a, R-E1b

    0,86

    0,67

    R-E2, R-E3

    0,80

    0,60

    Czech Republic

    Czech system for ecological status assessment of rivers using benthic macroinvertebrates

    R-E1a, R-E1b, R-E2, R-E3

    0,80

    0,60

    Hungary

    Hungarian Multimetric Macroinvertebrate Index

    R-E1b, R-E3, R-E4, R-EX5, R-EX6

    0,80

    0,60

    Romania

    Assessment method for ecological status of water bodies based on macroinvertebrates

    R-E1a, R-E1b, R-E3, R-EX4

    0,74

    0,58

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi bentoških nevretenčarjev

    R-E4, R-EX5, R-EX6

    0,80

    0,60

    Slovakia

    Slovak assessment of benthic invertebrates in rivers

    R-E1a, R-E1b, R-E2, R-E3, R-E4, R-EX4

    0,80

    0,60

    EASTERN CONTINENTAL RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Type

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Austria

    AIM for Rivers (Austrian Index Macrophytes for rivers)

    R-E4

    0,875

    0,625

    Bulgaria

    Reference Index

    R-E2, R-E3

    0,570

    0,370

    R-E4

    0,510

    0,270

    Czech Republic

    Assessment method of surface running water bodies in the Czech Republic using biological quality element macrophytes

    R-E2, R-E3

    0,750

    0,500

    Czech Republic

    Assessment method of surface running water bodies in the Czech Republic using biological quality element macrophytes

    R-E4

    0,770

    0,560

    Hungary

    Reference Index

    R-E2, R-E3

    0,700

    0,370

    Romania

    Romanian Macrophyte-based assessment system for rivers (Macrophyte River Index (MARI))

    R-E2, R-E3, R-E4

    R-E2 and R-E3: 0,875 , R-E4: 0,783

    all types: 0,625

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi fitobentosa in makrofitov, makrofiti

    R-E2, R-E3, R-E4

    0,800

    0,600

    Slovakia

    Macrophyte Biological Index for Rivers (IBMR-SK)

    R-E2, R-E3, R-E4

    0,800

    0,600

    EASTERN CONTINENTAL RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Phytobenthos

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Type

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Austria

    Assessment of the biological quality elements — part phytobenthos

    R-E4

    0,70

    0,42

    Bulgaria

    Ecological status assessment of rivers in Bulgaria based on IPS diatom index

    R-E1a, R-E1b, R-E3

    0,87 (national type R2, R4)

    0,85 (national type R7, R8)

    0,66 (national type R2, R4)

    0,64 (national type R7, R8)

    Czech Republic

    Assessment system for rivers using phytobenthos

    R-E1a, R-E1b, R-E2, R-E3, R-EX4

    0,80

    0,60

    Hungary

    Ecological status assessment for rivers based on diatoms

    R-E2, R-E3, R-EX5

    0,80

    0,60

    Romania

    National (Romanian) Assessment Method for Rivers Ecological Status based on Phytobenthos (Diatoms) RO-AMRP

    R-E1a, R-E1b, R-E3

    0,80

    0,60

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi fitobentosa in makrofitov, fitobentos

    R-E4, R-EX5, R-EX6, R-EX7, R-EX8

    0,80

    0,60

    Slovakia

    Ecological status assessment system for rivers using phytobenthos

    R-E1a, R-E1b, R-E2, R-E3, R-E4, R-EX4

    0,90

    0,70

    Water category

    Rivers

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Mediterranean rivers

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    River characterisation

    Catchment (km2)

    Geology

    Flow regime

    R-M1

    Small Mediterranean streams

    < 100

    Mixed (except silicious)

    Highly seasonal

    R-M2

    Medium Mediterranean streams

    100 — 1 000

    Mixed (except silicious)

    Highly seasonal

    R-M4

    Mediterranean mountain streams

     

    Non-silicious

    Highly seasonal

    R-M5

    Temporary streams

     

     

    Temporary

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

    R-M1:

    Bulgaria, France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain

    R-M2:

    Bulgaria, France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain

    R-M4:

    Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Spain

    R-M5:

    Cyprus, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain

    MEDITERRANEAN RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Type and Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    R-M1

     

     

     

    France

    Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). AFNOR NF T90-350 et arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,940

    0,700

    Greece

    Hellenic Evaluation System-2 (HESY-2)

    0,943

    0,750

    Italy

    MacrOper (based on STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index ICMi)

    0,970

    0,720

    Portugal

    Rivers Biological Quality Assessment Method-Benthic Invertebrates (IPtIN, IPtIS)

    0,870 (type 1)

    0,678 (type 1)

    0,850 (type 3)

    0,686 (type 3)

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi bentoških nevretenčarjev

    0,800

    0,600

    Spain

    Iberian Biological Monitoring Working Party (IBMWP)

    0,845

    0,698

    Spain

    Iberian Mediterranean Multimetric Index—using quantitative data (IMMi-T)

    0,811

    0,707

    R-M2

     

     

     

    Bulgaria

    IBI (BG) (Irish Biotic Index (BG))

    0,800

    0,600

    France

    Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). AFNOR NF T90-350 et arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,940

    0,700

    Greece

    Hellenic Evaluation System-2 (HESY-2)

    0,944

    0,708

    Italy

    MacrOper (based on STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index ICMi)

    0,940

    0,700

    Portugal

    Rivers Biological Quality Assessment Method-Benthic Invertebrates (IPtIN, IPtIS)

    0,830 (type 2)

    0,693 (type 2)

    0,880 (type 4)

    0,676 (type 4)

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi bentoških nevretenčarjev

    0,800

    0,600

    Spain

    Iberian Biological Monitoring Working Party (IBMWP)

    0,845

    0,698

    Spain

    Iberian Mediterranean Multimetric Index—using quantitative data (IMMi-T)

    0,811

    0,707

    R-M4

     

     

     

    Cyprus

    STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

    0,972

    0,729

    France

    Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). AFNOR NF T90-350 et arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,940

    0,700

    Greece

    Hellenic Evaluation System-2 (HESY-2)

    0,850

    0,637

    Italy

    MacrOper (based on STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index ICMi)

    0,940

    0,700

    Spain

    Iberian Biological Monitoring Working Party (IBMWP)

    0,840

    0,700

    Spain

    Iberian Mediterranean Multimetric Index—using quantitative data (IMMi-T)

    0,850

    0,694

    R-M5

     

     

     

    Cyprus

    STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

    0,982

    0,737

    Greece

    Hellenic Evaluation System-2 (HESY-2)

    0,963

    0,673

    Italy

    MacrOper (based on STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index ICMi)

    0,970

    0,730

    Portugal

    Rivers Biological Quality Assessment Method-Benthic Invertebrates (IPtIN, IPtIS)

    0,973 (type 5)

    0,705 (type 5)

    0,961 (type 6)

    0,708 (type 6)

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi bentoških nevretenčarjev

    0,800

    0,600

    Spain

    Iberian Biological Monitoring Working Party (IBMWP)

    0,830

    0,630

    Spain

    Iberian Mediterranean Multimetric Index—using quantitative data (IMMi-T)

    0,830

    0,620

    MEDITERRANEAN RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Type and Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    R-M1, M2, M4

     

     

     

    Bulgaria (R-M1 and R-M2)

    RI (BG) (Reference Index (BG))

    0,640

    0,350

    Cyprus

    IBMR — Biological Macrophyte Index for Rivers

    0,795

    0,596

    France

    IBMR — Indice Biologique Macrophytique en Rivière French standard NF T90-395 (2003-10-01)

    0,930

    0,745

    Greece

    IBMR — Biological Macrophyte Index for Rivers

    0,750

    0,560

    Italy

    IBMR — Biological Macrophyte Index for Rivers

    0,900

    0,800

    Portugal

    IBMR — Biological Macrophyte Index for Rivers

    0,920

    0,690

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi fitobentosa in makrofitov, makrofiti

    0,800

    0,600

    Spain

    IBMR — Biological Macrophyte Index for Rivers

    0,950

    0,740

    MEDITERRANEAN RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Phytobenthos

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Type and Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    R-M1

     

     

     

    Bulgaria

    IPS (Indice de polluo-sensibilité)

    0,820

    0,630

    France

    IBD 2007 (Coste et al, Ecol. Ind. 2009). AFNOR NF-T-90-354, December 2007. Arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,940

    0,780

    Greece

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982) Intercalibrated (EQR IPS)

    0,956

    0,717

    Italy

    Intercalibration Common Metric Index (ICMi) (Mancini & Sollazzo, 2009)

    0,800

    0,610

    Portugal

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982)

    0,970 (type 1)

    0,730 (type 1)

    0,910 (type 3)

    0,680 (type 3)

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi fitobentosa in makrofitov, fitobentos

    0,800

    0,600

    Spain

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982)

    0,937

    0,727

    R-M2

     

     

     

    Bulgaria

    IPDS (Indice de polluo-sensibilité)

    0,820

    0,630

    France

    IBD 2007 (Coste et al, Ecol. Ind. 2009). AFNOR NF-T-90-354, December 2007. Arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,940

    0,780

    Greece

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982) Intercalibrated (EQR IPS)

    0,953

    0,732

    Italy

    Intercalibration Common Metric Index (ICMi)

    (Mancini & Sollazzo, 2009)

    0,800

    0,610

    Portugal

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982))

    0,910 (type 2)

    0,680 (type 2)

    0,970 (type 4)

    0,730 (type 4)

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi fitobentosa in makrofitov, fitobentos

    0,800

    0,600

    Spain

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982)

    0,938

    0,727

    R-M4

     

     

     

    Cyprus

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982)

    0,910

    0,683

    France

    IBD 2007 (Coste et al, Ecol. Ind. 2009). AFNOR NF-T-90-354, December 2007. Arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,940

    0,780

    Greece

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982) Intercalibrated (EQR IPS)

    0,932

    0,716

    Italy

    Intercalibration Common Metric Index (ICMi)

    (Mancini & Sollazzo, 2009)

    0,800

    0,610

    Spain

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982)

    0,935

    0,727

    R-M5

     

     

     

    Cyprus

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982)

    0,958

    0,718

    Italy

    Intercalibration Common Metric Index (ICMi)

    (Mancini & Sollazzo, 2009)

    0,880

    0,650

    Portugal

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982)

    0,800 (Type 5)

    0,651 (Type 5)

    0,940 (Type 6)

    0,700 (Type 6)

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi fitobentosa in makrofitov, fitobentos

    0,800

    0,600

    Spain

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982)

    0,935

    0,700

    Water category

    Rivers

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Northern rivers

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    River characterisation

    Catchment area

    of stretch (km2)

    Altitude and geomorphology

    Alkalinity

    (meq/l)

    Organic material

    (mg Pt/l)

    R-N1

    Small lowland siliceous moderate alkalinity

    10 — 100

    < 200 m a.s.l. or below the highest coastline

    0,2  — 1

    < 30

    (< 150 in Ireland)

    R-N3

    Small/medium lowland organic low alkalinity

    10 — 1 000

    < 0,2

    > 30

    R-N4

    Medium lowland siliceous moderate alkalinity

    100 — 1 000

    0,2  — 1

    < 30

    R-N5

    Small mid-altitude siliceous low alkalinity

    10 — 100

    Between lowland and highland

    < 0,2

    < 30

    R-N9

    Small/medium mid-altitude siliceous low alkalinity organic (humic)

    10 — 1 000

    Between lowland and highland

    < 0,2

    > 30

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

    R-N1:

    Finland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom

    R-N3:

    Finland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom

    R-N4:

    Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom

    R-N5:

    Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom

    R-N9:

    Finland, Norway, Sweden

    NORTHERN RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna (methods sensitive for organic enrichment and general degradation)

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Finland

    Revised Finnish river invertebrate fauna assessment method

    0,80

    0,60

    Ireland

    Quality Rating System (Q-value)

    0,85

    0,75

    Norway

    ASPT

    0,99

    0,87

    Sweden

    DJ-index (Dahl & Johnson 2004)

    0,80

    0,60

    United Kingdom

    River Invertebrate Classification Tool (RICT)- WHPT

    0,97

    0,86

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna (methods sensitive for acidification)

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    The following results apply to clear, low alkalinity river types

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Norway

    AcidIndex2 (Modified Raddum index2) (river acidification)

    0,675

    0,515

    United Kingdom — Scotland

    WFD-AWIC

    0,910

    0,830

    United Kingdom — England and Wales

    WFD-AWIC

    0,980

    0,890

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    The following results apply to humic, low alkalinity river types

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Sweden

    MISA: Multimetric Invertebrate Stream Acidification index

    0,550

    0,400

    United Kingdom

    WFD-AWIC

    0,930

    0,830

    NORTHERN RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Type and Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    R-N3 and R-N9

     

     

     

    Finland

    Trophic index TIc

    0,889

    0,610

    Sweden

    Trophic index TIc

    0,889

    0,610

    Norway

    Trophic index TIc

    0,889

    0,610

    NORTHERN RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Phytobenthos

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Finland

    Finnish river phytobenthos method

    0,80

    0,60

    Sweden

    Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

    0,89

    0,74

    Ireland

    Revised form of Trophic Diatom Index (TDI)

    0,93

    0,78

    United Kingdom

    DARLEQ 2

    1,00

    0,75

    Norway

    Periphyton Index of Trophic Status (PIT)

    0,99

    (Ca ≤ 1 mg/l)

    0,83

    0,95

    (Ca > 1 mg/l)

    Water category

    Rivers

    Geographical Intercalibration Groups

    All

    Biological Quality Element

    Fish fauna

    Overview of regional groups that have been established for the river fish intercalibration:

    Lowland-Midland group  — Belgium (Flanders), Belgium (Wallonia), France, Germany, Netherlands, Lithuania, Luxembourg, United Kingdom (England and Wales), Poland, Latvia, Estonia, Denmark, Hungary

    Nordic group  — Finland, Ireland, Sweden, United Kingdom (Scotland and Northern Ireland), Norway

    Alpine-type Mountains group  — Austria, France, Germany, Slovenia, Italy

    Mediterranean South Atlantic group  — Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, Bulgaria

    Danubian group  — Czech Republic, Romania, Slovakia, Bulgaria

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Lowland-Midland group

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Belgium Flanders

    Upstream and Lowland IBI

    0,850

    0,650

    Belgium Wallonia

    IBIP (Arrêté du Gouvernement wallon du 13 septembre 2012 relatif à l’identification, à la caractérisation et à la fixation des seuils d’état écologique applicables aux masses d’eau de surface et modifiant le Livre II du Code de l’Environnement, contenant le Code de l’Eau. Moniteur belge 12.10.2012)

    0,958

    0,792

    France

    FBI (Fish-Based Index): Indice Poissons Rivière (IPR). AFNOR NF-T-90-344.

    1,131

    0,835

    Germany

    FIBS — fischbasiertes Bewertungssystem für Fließgewässer zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie in Deutschland

    1,086

    0,592

    Latvia

    Latvian Fish Index

    0,880

    0,660

    Lithuania

    Lithuanian River Fish Index

    0,940

    0,720

    Luxembourg

    Classification française DCE Indice Poissons Rivière (IPR). AFNOR NF-T-90-344

    1,131

    0,835

    Netherlands

    NLFISR

    0,800

    0,600

    Poland

    EFI+PL index

    0,800

    0,600

    Nordic group

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Finland

    Finnish Fish Index (FiFi) — type L2

    0,665

    0,499

    Finland

    Finnish Fish Index (FiFi) — type L3

    0,658

    0,493

    Finland

    Finnish Fish Index (FiFi) — type M1

    0,709

    0,532

    Finland

    Finnish Fish Index (FiFi) — type M2

    0,734

    0,550

    Finland

    Finnish Fish Index (FiFi) — type M3

    0,723

    0,542

    Ireland

    Fish Classification Scheme 2 Ireland (FCS2)

    0,845

    0,540

    Sweden

    Swedish method VIX

    0,739

    0,467

    United Kingdom — Northern Ireland

    IR_FCS2

    0,845

    0,540

    United Kingdom — Scotland

    FCS2 Scotland

    0,850

    0,600

    Mediterranean group

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Greece

    Hellenic Fish Index (HeFI)

    0,800

    0,600

    Portugal

    F-IBIP — Fish-based Index of Biotic Integrity for Portuguese Wadeable Streams

    0,850

    0,675

    Spain

    IBIMED — type T2

    0,816

    0,705

    Spain

    IBIMED — type T3

    0,929

    0,733

    Spain

    IBIMED — type T4

    0,864

    0,758

    Spain

    IBIMED — type T5

    0,866

    0,650

    Spain

    IBIMED — type T6

    0,916

    0,764

    Alpine group

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Austria

    FIA

    0,875

    0,625

    France

    FBI (Fish-Based Index): Indice Poissons Rivière (IPR). AFNOR NF-T90-344

    1,131

    0,876

    Germany

    FIBS — fischbasiertes Bewertungssystem für Fließgewässer zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie in Deutschland

    1,086

    0,592

    Italy

    NISECI index (New Index of Ecological Status of Fish Communities)

    0,800

    0,520

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi rib

    0,800

    0,600

    Danubian group

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Bulgaria

    TsBRI (Type Specific Bulgarian Fish Index)

    0,860

    0,650

    Czech Republic

    Czech multimetric method CZI

    0,780

    0,585

    Romania

    EFI+ European Fish index (cyprinid wading type)

    0,939

    0,700

    Romania

    EFI+ European Fish index (salmonid type)

    0,911

    0,755

    Slovakia

    Fish Index of Slovakia FIS

    0,710

    0,570

    Water Category

    Rivers

    Geographical Intercalibration Groups

    All — Very Large Rivers

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    River characterisation

    Catchment area of stretch (km2)

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    R-L1

    Very large low alkalinity rivers

    > 10 000

    < 0,5

    R-L2

    Very large medium to high alkalinity rivers

    > 10 000

    > 0,5

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

    R-L1:

    Finland, Norway, Sweden

    R-L2:

    Austria, Belgium (Flanders), Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden

    VERY LARGE RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Austria

    Assessment of the Biological Quality Elements — part benthic invertebrates (for large alpine rivers)

    0,80

    0,60

    Austria

    Slovak assessment of benthic invertebrates in large rivers (for large lowland rivers)

    0,80

    0,60

    Belgium (Flanders)

    Multimetric Macroinvertebrate Index Flanders (MMIF)

    0,90

    0,70

    Bulgaria

    mRBA — Modified Rapid Biological Assessment

    0,80

    0,60

    Croatia

    Ecological status assessment system based on benthic invertebrates in very large rivers

    0,80

    0,60

    Czech Republic

    Czech system for ecological status assessment of large non-wadeable rivers using benthic macroinvertebrates

    0,80

    0,60

    Germany

    Germany PTI — Potamon-Typie-Index

    0,80

    0,60

    Estonia

    Estonian surface water ecological quality assessment _ large river macroinvertebrates

    0,90

    0,70

    Spain

    IBMWP — Iberian Biological Monitoring Working Party

    0,79

    0,48

    Finland

    Revised Finnish river invertebrate fauna assessment method

    0,80

    0,60

    Hungary

    Hungary HMMI_II — Hungarian Multimetric Macroinvertebrate Index for large and very large rivers

    0,80

    0,60

    Italy

    ISA (Indice per la classificazione sulla base dei Substrati Artificiali) — mediterranean rivers

    0,94

    0,70

    Italy

    ISA (Indice per la classificazione sulla base dei Substrati Artificiali) — non-mediterranean rivers

    0,96

    0,72

    Lithuania

    Lithuanian River Macroinvertebrate Index

    0,80

    0,60

    Latvia

    LRMI — Latvian large River Macroinvertebrate Index

    0,88

    0,63

    Netherlands

    WFD metrics for natural water types

    0,80

    0,60

    Norway

    Norway ASPT — Average Score Per Taxon

    0,99

    0,87

    Poland

    RIVECOmacro — MMI_PL

    0,91

    0,71

    Romania

    ECO-BENT — Assessment method for ecological status of water bodies based on macroinvertebrates

    0,79

    0,53

    Sweden

    Average Score Per Taxon (ASPT) and DJ-index

    0,80

    0,60

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi bentoških nevretenčarjev

    0,80

    0,60

    Slovakia

    Slovak assessment of benthic invertebrates in large rivers

    0,80

    0,60

    VERY LARGE RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP

    Biological Quality Element

    Phytoplankton

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    Austria

    German PhytoFluss-Index 4.0

    0,80

    0,60

    Belgium (Flanders)

    German PhytoFluss-Index 2.0

    0,80

    0,60

    Bulgaria

    German PhytoFluss-Index 4.0

    0,80

    0,60

    Croatia

    HRPI — Hungarian River Phytoplankton Index

    0,80

    0,60

    Czech Republic

    CZ — Assessment method for ecological status of rivers based on phytoplankton

    0,80

    0,60

    Germany

    German PhytoFluss-Index

    0,80

    0,60

    Estonia

    EST_PHYPLA_R — Estonian Large River Phytoplankton Index

    0,85

    0,65

    Hungary

    HRPI — Hungarian River Phytoplankton Index

    0,80

    0,60

    Lithuania

    German PhytoFluss-Index for lowland rivers of type 15.2

    0,80

    0,60

    Latvia

    Latvian Large River Phytoplankton Index

    0,80

    0,60

    Poland

    IFPL metric — Method for large rivers assessment using phytoplankton

    1,08

    0,92

    Romania

    ECO-FITO — Assessment Method for Ecological Status of the Water Bodies based on Phytoplankton

    0,92

    0,76

    Slovakia

    Phytoplankton-SK — Slovak assessment of phytoplankton in large rivers

    0,80

    0,60

    VERY LARGE RIVERS GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Phytobenthos

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country and Type

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-Good boundary

    Good-Moderate boundary

    R-L1

     

     

     

    Finland

    Finnish river phytobenthos method

    0,80

    0,60

    Sweden

    Benthic algae in running water — diatom analysis

    0,89

    0,74

    R-L2

     

     

     

    Austria

    Assessment of the Biological Quality Elements — part phytobenthos

    0,85

    0,57

    Bulgaria

    IPS (Indice de Polluo-Sensibilité)

    0,76

    0,58

    Czech Republic

    Assessment system for rivers using phytobenthos

    0,80

    0,60

    Estonia

    Estonian surface water ecological quality assessment — river phytobenthos

    0,83

    0,64

    France

    IBD 2007 (Coste et al, Ecol. Ind. 2009). AFNOR NF T90-354, April 2016. Arrêté ministériel du 25 janvier 2010 modifié relatif aux méthodes et critères d’évaluation de l’état écologique {…} des eaux de surface

    0,92

    0,76

    Spain

    IPS (Coste in Cemagref, 1982)

    0,68

    0,48

    Germany

    Verfahrensanleitung für die ökologische Bewertung von Fließgewässern zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie: Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB), Modul Diatomeen

    0,725

    0,55

    Croatia

    Ecological status assessment system for phytobenthos in rivers based on diatoms

    0,8

    0,61

    Hungary

    Ecological status assessment for rivers based on diatoms

    0,762

    0,60

    Italy

    Intercalibration Common Metric Index (ICMi) (Mancini &Sollazzo 2009)

    0,89 (national type C)

    0,70 (national type C)

    0,82 (national type M3)

    0,62 (national type M3)

    Netherlands

    WFD-metrics for natural water types

    0,80

    0,60

    Portugal

    IPS — Specific Pollution Sensitivity Index

    0,90 (national type R_GRS/Guadiana river)

    0,67 (national type R_GRS/Guadiana river)

    Slovakia

    Ecological status assessment system for rivers using phytobenthos

    0,90

    0,70

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja vodotokov na podlagi fitobentosa in makrofitov, fitobentos

    0,80

    0,60

    Water category

    Lakes

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Alpine lakes

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    Lake characterisation

    Altitude (m above sea level)

    Mean depth (m)

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    Lake size (km2)

    L-AL3

    Lowland or mid-altitude, deep, moderate to high alkalinity (alpine influence), large

    50 — 800

    > 15

    > 1

    > 0,5

    L-AL4

    Mid-altitude, shallow, moderate to high alkalinity (alpine influence), large

    200 — 800

    3 — 15

    > 1

    > 0,5

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

    Types L-AL3:

    Austria, France, Germany, Italy and Slovenia

    Types L-AL4:

    Austria, France, Germany, Italy

    ALPINE LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Phytoplankton

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Austria

    Evaluation of the biological quality elements, Part B2 — phytoplankton

    0,80

    0,60

    France

    Phytoplankton Index for Lakes (IPLAC): Indice Phytoplancton Lacustre

    0,80

    0,60

    Germany

    PSI (Phyto-Seen-Index) — Bewertungsverfahren für Seen mittels Phytoplankton zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie in Deutschland

    0,80

    0,60

    Italy

    Italian Phytoplankton Assessment Method (IPAM)

    0,80

    0,60

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja jezer na podlagi fitoplanktona

    0,80

    0,60

    ALPINE LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    IC type

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Austria

    AIM for Lakes (Austrian Index Macrophytes for lakes)

    L-AL3+

    L-AL4

    0,80

    0,60

    France

    French Macrophyte Index for Lakes (IBML): Indice Biologique Macrophytique en Lacs

    L-AL3+

    L-AL4

    0,92

    0,72

    Germany

    Verfahrensanleitung für die ökologische Bewertung von Seen zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie: Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB), Modul Makrophyten

    L-AL3+

    L-AL4

    0,76

    0,51

    Germany

    Verfahrensanleitung für die ökologische Bewertung von Seen zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie: Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB), Modul Makrophyten und Phytobenthos

    LAL4

    0,74

    0,47

    Italy

    MacroIMMI (Macrophytic index for the evaluation of the ecological quality of the Italian lakes)

    L-AL3+

    L-AL4

    0,80

    0,60

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja jezer na podlagi fitobentosa in makrofitov, makrofiti

    L-AL3

    0,80

    0,60

    ALPINE LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja jezer na podlagi bentoških nevretenčarjev

    0,80

    0,60

    Germany

    AESHNA — Bewertungsverfahren für das eulitorale Makrozoobenthos in Seen zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie in Deutschland

    0,80

    0,60

    ALPINE LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Fish fauna

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Austria

    ALFI (Austrian lake fish index): A multimetric index to assess the ecological status of alpine lakes based on fish fauna

    0,80

    0,60

    Germany

    DeLFI_SITE — Deutsches probennahmestandort-spezifisches Bewertungsverfahren für Fische in Seen zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie

    0,85

    0,69

    Italy

    Lake Fish Index (LFI)

    0,82

    0,64

    Water category

    Lakes

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Central/Baltic lakes

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    Lake characterisation

    Altitude (m above sea level)

    Mean depth (m)

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    Residence time (years)

    L-CB1

    Lowland, shallow, calcareous

    < 200

    3 — 15

    > 1

    1 — 10

    L-CB2

    Lowland, very shallow, calcareous

    < 200

    < 3

    > 1

    0,1  — 1

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated

    Types L-CB1:

    Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Lithuania, Latvia, Netherlands, Poland, United Kingdom

    Types L-CB2:

    Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Lithuania, Latvia, Netherlands, Poland, United Kingdom

    CENTRAL-BALTIC LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Phytoplankton

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Belgium (Flanders)

    Flemish phytoplankton assessment method for lakes

    0,80

    0,60

    Denmark

    Danish Lake Phytoplankton Index

    0,80

    0,60

    Estonia

    Estonian surface water ecological quality assessment — lake phytoplankton

    0,80

    0,60

    Germany

    PSI (Phyto-Seen-Index) — Bewertungsverfahren für Seen mittels Phytoplankton zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie in Deutschland — German Phyto-Lake-Index (Phyto-See-Index)

    0,80

    0,60

    Ireland

    IE Lake Phytoplankton Index

    0,80

    0,60

    Latvia

    Latvian Lake Phytoplankton Index

    0,81

    0,61

    Lithuania

    German Phytoplankton Index (PSI)

    0,81

    0,61

    Netherlands

    WFD — metrics for natural water types

    0,80

    0,60

    Poland

    Phytoplankton method for Polish Lakes (PMPL)

    0,80

    0,60

    UK

    Phytoplankton Lake Assessment Tool with Uncertainty Module (PLUTO)

    0,80

    0,60

    CENTRAL-BALTIC LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    IC type

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Belgium (Flanders)

    Flemish macrophyte assessment system

    All types

    0,80

    0,60

    Denmark

    Danish Lake Macrophytes Index

    All types

    0,80

    0,60

    Estonia

    Estonian surface water ecological quality assessment — lake macrophytes

    LCB1

    0,78

    0,52

    LCB2

    0,76

    0,50

    Germany

    Verfahrensanleitung für die ökologische Bewertung von Seen zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie: Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB), Modul Makrophyten

    All types

    0,80

    0,60

    Latvia

    Latvian macrophyte assessment method

    All types

    0,80

    0,60

    Lithuania

    Lithuanian Lake Macrophyte Index

    All types

    0,75

    0,50

    Netherlands

    WFD-metrics for natural water types

    All types

    0,80

    0,60

    Poland

    Macrophyte based indication method for lakes — Ecological Status Macrophyte Index ESMI (multimetric)

    All types

    0,68

    0,41

    UK

    Lake LEAFPACS 2 (*2)

    All types

    0,80

    0,66

    CENTRAL-BALTIC LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate

    Belgium (Flanders)

    Multimetric Macroinvertebrate Index Flanders (MMIF)

    0,90

    0,70

    Estonia

    Estonian surface water ecological quality assessment — lake macroinvertebrates

    0,86

    0,70

    Germany

    AESHNA — Bewertungsverfahren für das eulitorale Makrozoobenthos in Seen zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie in Deutschland

    0,80

    0,60

    Latvia

    Latvian Lake Macroinvertebrate Multimetric Index (LLMMI)

    0,85

    0,52

    Lithuania

    Lithuanian Lake Macroinvertebrate Index

    0,74

    0,50

    Netherlands

    WFDi — Metric for Natural Watertypes

    0,80

    0,60

    UK

    Chironomid Pupal Exuvial Technique (CPET)

    0,77

    0,64

    CENTRAL-BALTIC LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Fish fauna

    Description of common intercalibration types

    Type

    Lake characterisation

    Altitude (m above sea level)

    Mean depth (m)

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    Residence time (years)

    L-CB1

    Lowland, shallow, calcareous

    < 200

    3 — 15

    > 1

    1 — 10

    L-CB2

    Lowland, very shallow, calcareous

    < 200

    < 3

    > 1

    0,1  — 1

    L-CB3

    Lowland, shallow, small, siliceous (moderate alkalinity)

    < 200

    3 — 15

    0,2  — 1

    1 — 10

    L-CB4

    Heavily modified water bodies

    200 — 700

    3 — 30

    > 0,2

    0,1  — 5

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated

    Types L-CB1:

    Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Lithuania, Latvia, Netherlands, Poland, United Kingdom

    Types L-CB2:

    Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Lithuania, Latvia, Netherlands, Poland, United Kingdom

    Types L-CB3:

    Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, France, Latvia, Poland

    Types L-CB4:

    Czech Republic

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate

    Czech Republic

    CZ-FBI

    0,870

    0,619

    Denmark

    Danish Lake Fish Index

    0,75

    0,54

    EE

    LAFIEE

    0,80

    0,61

    Germany

    DeLFI_SITE — Deutsches probennahmestandort-spezifisches Bewertungsverfahren für Fische in Seen zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie

    0,95

    0,80

    France

    ELFI (European Lake Fish Index): Indice Ichtyofaune Lacustre (IIL)

    0,73

    0,49

    Latvia

    Latvian Lake Fish Index

    0,76

    0,57

    Lithuania

    Lithuanian Lake Fish Index

    0,865

    0,605

    Netherlands

    VISMAATLAT

    0,80

    0,60

    Poland

    LFI+

    0,866

    0,595

    Poland

    LFI EN

    0,804

    0,557

    Water category

    Lakes

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Eastern Continental lakes

    Description of common intercalibration types

    Type

    Lake characterisation

    Altitude (m above sea level)

    Mean depth (m)

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    Conductivity (μS/cm)

    L-EC1

    Lowland very shallow hard-water

    < 200

    < 6

    1 — 4

    300 — 1 000

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated

    Types L-EC1:

    Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania

    EASTERN CONTINENTAL LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP

    Biological Quality Element

    Phytoplankton

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Bulgaria

    HLPI-Hungarian lake phytoplankton index

    0,80

    0,60

    Hungary

    HLPI-Hungarian lake phytoplankton index

    0,80

    0,60

    Romania

    HLPI-Hungarian lake phytoplankton index

    0,80

    0,60

    EASTERN CONTINENTAL LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good

    boundary

    Good-moderate

    boundary

    Bulgaria

    RI-BG — Adapted Reference Index

    0,83

    0,58

    Hungary

    HU-RI — Adapted Reference Index

    0,89

    0,67

    Romania

    MIRO — Macrophyte Index for Romanian Lakes (Adapted Reference Index)

    0,86

    0,66

    EASTERN CONTINENTAL LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification methods intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Bulgaria

    HMMI_lakes (Hungarian Macrozoobenton Multimetric Index for Lakes

    0,85

    0,65

    Hungary

    HMMI_lakes (Hungarian Macrozoobenton Multimetric Index for Lakes

    0,85

    0,65

    Romania

    ECO-NL-BENT Romanian ecological status assessment system for natural lakes using benthic invertebrates

    0,93

    0,60

    EASTERN LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP

    Biological Quality Element

    Fish fauna

    INTERCALIBRATION RESULTS NOT COMPLETED

    Water category

    Lakes

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Mediterranean lakes

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    Lake characterization

    Altitude

    (m)

    Annual mean precipitation (mm) and T ( oC)

    Mean depth (m)

    Area (km2)

    Catchment (km2)

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    L-M5/7

    Reservoirs, deep, large, siliceous, ‘wet’ areas

    < 1 000

    > 800 and/or < 15

    > 15

    0,5  — 50

    < 20 000

    < 1

    L-M8

    Reservoirs, deep, large, calcareous

    < 1 000

    > 15

    0,5  — 50

    < 20 000

    > 1

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated

    Types L-M5/7:

    France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain

    Types L-M8:

    Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Spain

    MEDITERRANEAN LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Phytoplankton

    Country and Type

    National classification

    methods intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good

    boundary

    Good-moderate

    boundary

    LM 5/7

    France

    Phytoplankton Index for Lakes (IPLAC): Indice Phytoplancton Lacustre

    n.d. (*3)

    0,60

    Greece

    New Mediterranean Assessment System for Reservoirs (NMASRP)

    n.d. (*3)

    0,60

    Italy

    New Italian Method (NITMET)

    n.d. (*3)

    0,60

    Portugal

    Reservoirs Biological Quality Assessment Method — Phytoplankton (New Mediterranean Assessment System for Reservoirs Phytoplankton: NMASRP).

    n.d. (*3)

    0,60

    Spain

    Mediterranean Assessment System for Reservoirs Phytoplankton (MASRP).

    n.d. (*3)

    0,58

    L-M8

    Cyprus

    New Mediterranean Assessment System for Reservoirs Phytoplankton (NMASRP).

    n.d. (*3)

    0,60

    France

    Phytoplankton Index for Lakes (IPLAC): Indice Phytoplancton Lacustre

    n.d. (*3)

    0,60

    Greece

    New Mediterranean Assessment System for Reservoirs (NMASRP)

    n.d. (*3)

    0,60

    Italy

    New Italian Method (NITMET)

    n.d. (*3)

    0,60

    Spain

    Mediterranean Assessment System for Reservoirs Phytoplankton (MASRP).

    n.d. (*3)

    0,60

    Water category

    Lakes

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Northern lakes

    NORTHERN LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Phytoplankton

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    Lake characterisation

    Altitude (m above sea level)

    Mean depth (m)

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    Colour

    (mg Pt/l)

    L-N1

    Lowland, shallow, moderate alkalinity, clear

    < 200

    3 — 15

    0,2  — 1

    < 30

    L-N2a

    Lowland, shallow, low alkalinity, clear

    < 200

    3 — 15

    < 0,2

    < 30

    L-N2b

    Lowland, deep, low alkalinity, clear

    < 200

    > 15

    < 0,2

    < 30

    L-N3a

    Lowland, shallow, low alkalinity, meso-humic

    < 200

    3 — 15

    < 0,2

    30 — 90

    L-N5

    Mid-altitude, shallow, low alkalinity, clear

    200 — 800

    3 — 15

    < 0,2

    < 30

    L-N6a

    Mid-altitude, shallow, low alkalinity, meso-humic

    200 — 800

    3 — 15

    < 0,2

    30 — 90

    L-N8a

    Lowland, shallow, moderate alkalinity, meso-humic

    < 200

    3 — 15

    0,2  — 1

    30 — 90

    Types L-N1, L-N2a, L-N3a, LN-8a:

    Ireland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom.

    Types L-N2b:

    Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom

    Types L-N5, L-N6a:

    Norway, Sweden

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification

    methods intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good

    boundary

    Good-moderate

    boundary

    Finland

    Finnish phytoplankton assessment method for lakes

    0,80

    0,60

    Ireland

    IE Lake Phytoplankton Index

    0,80

    0,60

    Norway

    Lake phytoplankton ecological status classification method

    0,80

    0,60

    Sweden

    Ecological assessment methods for lakes. quality factor phytoplankton

    0,80

    0,60

    UK

    Phytoplankton Lake Assessment Tool with Uncertainty Module (PLUTO)

    0,80

    0,60

    NORTHERN LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes and Phytobenthos

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Macrophytes

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    Lake characterisation

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    Color(mg Pt/l)

    L-N-M 101

    Low alkalinity, clear

    0,05  — 0,2

    < 30

    L-N-M 102

    Low alkalinity, humic

    0,05  — 0,2

    > 30

    L-N-M 201

    Moderate alkalinity, clear

    0,2  — 1,0

    < 30

    L-N-M 202

    Moderate alkalinity, humic

    0,2  — 1,0

    > 30

    L-N-M 301a

    High alkalinity, clear, atlantic subtype

    > 1,0

    < 30

    L-N-M 302a

    High alkalinity, humic, atlantic subtype

    > 1,0

    > 30

    Types 101, 102, 201 and 202:

    Ireland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom.

    Type 301a:

    Ireland, United Kingdom.

    Type 302a:

    Ireland, United Kingdom

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification

    methods intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate

    Finland

    Finnish macrophyte classification system (Finnmac)

    0,8 (all types)

    0,6 (all types)

    Ireland

    Free Macrophyte Index

    0,9 (all types)

    0,68 (all types)

    Norway

    National macrophyte index (Trophic Index — TIc)

    Type 101: 0,98

    Type 102: 0,96

    Type 201: 0,95

    Type 202: 0,99

    Type 101: 0,87

    Type 102: 0,87

    Type 201: 0,75

    Type 202: 0,77

    Sweden

    Trophic Macrophyte Index (TMI)

    Type 101: 0,93

    Type 102: 0,93

    Type 201: 0,89

    Type 202: 0,91

    Type 101: 0,80

    Type 102: 0,83

    Type 201: 0,78

    Type 202: 0,78

    UK

    Lake LEAFPACS 2 (*4)

    0,8 (all types)

    0,66 (all types)

    UK

    Free Macrophyte Index (*5)

    0,9 (all types)

    0,68 (all types)

    NORTHERN LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrates Fauna

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    Lake characterisation

    Ecoregion

    Altitude

    (m absl)

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    Colour (mg Pt/l)

    Lake littoral acidification

     

     

     

     

    L-N-BF1

    Lowland/mid-altitude, low alkalinity, clear

    n.d.

    < 800

    0,05  — 0,2

    < 30

    Lake profundal eutrophication

     

     

     

     

    L-N-BF2

    Ecoregion 22, low alkalinity, clear and humic

    22

    Area > 1 km2, max depth > 6 m

    < 0,2

    n.d.

    Types L-N-BF1:

    Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom, Ireland, Finland

    Types L-N-BF2:

    Finland, Sweden

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification

    methods intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good

    Good-moderate

     

    Lake littoral acidification

     

     

    Norway

    MultiClear: Multimetric Invertebrate Index for Clear Lakes

    0,95

    0,74

    Sweden

    MILA: Multimetric Invertebrate Lake Acidification index

    0,85

    0,60

    UK

    LAMM (Lake Acidification Macroinvertebrate Metric)

    0,86

    0,70

     

    Lake profundal eutrophication

     

     

    Finland

    Revised Finnish lake invertebrate fauna assessment method (PICM)

    0,80

    0,60

    Sweden

    BQI (Benthic Quality Index)

    0,84

    0,67

    NORTHERN LAKES GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Fish fauna

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    Lake characterisation

    Lake area km2

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    Colour (mg Pt/l)

    L-N-F1

    Dimictic clear water lakes

    < 40

    < 0,2

    < 30

    L-N-F2

    Dimictic humic lakes

    < 5

    < 0,2

    30 — 90

    Types L-N-F1:

    Ireland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom

    Types L-N-F2:

    Ireland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification

    methods intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Eutrophication

    Finland

    EQR4

    0,80

    0,60

    Ireland

    FIL2

    0,76

    0,53

    UK (Northern Ireland)

    FIL2

    0,76

    0,53

    Norway

    EindexW3

    0,75

    0,56

    Sweden

    EindexW3

    0,75

    0,56

    Acidification

    Norway

    AindexW5

    0,74

    0,55

    Sweden

    AindexW5

    0,74

    0,55

    Water category

    Lakes

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Cross-GIG Phytobenthos

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    Lake characterisation

    Alkalinity (meq/l)

    Ecoregions

    HA

    High alkalinity lakes

    > 1

    Alpine, Central-Baltic, Eastern Continental, Mediterranean

    MA

    Moderate alkalinity lakes

    0,2  — 1

    Alpine, Central-Baltic, Eastern Continental, Mediterranean, Northern

    LA

    Low alkalinity lakes

    < 0,2

    Northern

    Types HA:

    Belgium, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Poland, Sweden, Slovenia, United Kingdom

    Types MA:

    Belgium, Finland, Ireland, Italy, Romania, Sweden, United Kingdom

    Types LA:

    Finland, Ireland, Sweden, United Kingdom

    Country a and Type

    National classification

    methods intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    HA type

    Belgium (Flanders)

    Proportions of Impact-Sensitive and Impact-Associated Diatoms (PISIAD)

    0,80

    0,60

    Germany

    Verfahrensanleitung für die ökologische Bewertung von Seen zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie: Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB), Modul Phytobenthos

    0,80

    0,55

    Hungary

    MIL — Multimetric Index for Lakes

    0,80

    0,69

    Ireland

    Lake Trophic Diatom Index (IE)

    0,90

    0,63

    Italy

    Italian national method for the evaluation of the ecological quality of lake waterbodies using benthic diatoms (EPI-L)

    0,75

    0,5

    Lithuania

    Lithuanian Lake Phytobenthos Index

    0,63

    0,47

    Poland

    PL IOJ (Multimetryczny Indeks Okrzemkowy dla Jezior = Multimetric Diatom Index for Lakes)

    0,91

    0,76

    Sweden

    IPS

    0,89

    0,74

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja jezer na podlagi fitobentosa in makrofitov, fitobentos

    0,80

    0,60

    UK

    DARLEQ 2

    0,92

    0,70

    MA type

    Belgium (Flanders)

    Proportions of Impact-Sensitive and Impact-Associated Diatoms (PISIAD)

    0,80

    0,60

    Finland

    Finnish lake phytobenthos method

    0,80

    0,60

    Ireland

    Lake Trophic Diatom Index (IE)

    0,90

    0,63

    Italy

    Italian national method for the evaluation of the ecological quality of lake waterbodies using benthic diatoms (EPI-L)

    0,75

    0,5

    Romania

    National (Romanian) Assessment Method for Natural Lakes Ecological Status based on Phytobenthos (Diatoms) RO-AMLP

    0,80

    0,60

    Sweden

    IPS

    0,89

    0,74

    UK

    DARLEQ 2

    0,93

    0,66

    LA type

    Ireland

    Lake Trophic Diatom Index (IE)

    0,90

    0,66

    UK

    DARLEQ 2

    0,92

    0,70

    Water category

    Coastal waters

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Baltic Sea

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    Surface salinity (psu)

    Bottom salinity

    (psu)

    Exposure

    Ice days

    Other Characteristics

    BC1

    0,5  — 6 Oligohaline

    1 — 6

    Exposed

    90 — 150

    Sites in the Quark and the Bothnian Sea, extending to the Archipelago Sea (for phytoplankton the latter is excluded and integrated in type BC9). Influence of humic substances

    BC2

    6 — 22 Mesohaline

    2 — 6

    Very Sheltered

     

    Lagoons

    BC3

    3 — 6 Oligohaline

    3 — 6

    Sheltered

    90 — 150

    Finnish and Estonian coasts of Gulf of Finland

    BC4

    5 — 8 Lower mesohaline

    5 — 8

    Sheltered

    < 90

    Sites of Estonia and Latvia in the Gulf of Riga

    BC5

    6 — 8 Lower mesohaline

    6 — 12

    Exposed

    < 90

    Sites in the southeastern Baltic Sea along the coast of Latvia, Lithuania and Poland

    BC6

    8 — 12 Mid mesohaline

    8 — 12

    Sheltered

    < 90

    Sites along the Western Baltic Sea at the southern Swedish coast and the southeastern Danish coast

    BC7

    6 — 8 Mid mesohaline

    8 — 11

    Exposed

    < 90

    Western Polish coast and eastern German coast

    BC8

    13 — 18 Upper mesohaline

    18 — 23

    Sheltered

    < 90

    Danish and German coasts in the Western Baltic Sea

    BC9

    3 — 6 Lower mesohaline

    3 — 6

    Moderately exposed to exposed

    90 — 150

    Sites in the western Gulf of Finland, Archipelago Sea and Asko archipelago (only for phytoplankton)

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

    Type BC1:

    Finland Sweden

    Type BC2:

    Germany

    Type BC3:

    Estonia, Finland

    Type BC4:

    Estonia, Latvia

    Type BC5:

    Latvia, Lithuania

    Type BC6:

    Sweden, Denmark

    Type BC7:

    Germany, Poland

    Type BC8:

    Germany, Denmark

    Type BC9:

    Finland, Sweden, Estonia (type only relevant for phytoplankton)

    BALTIC SEA GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Phytoplankton

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country and Type

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    BC7

    Germany

    German coastal phytoplankton method

    0,8

    0,6

    Poland

    Polish coastal phytoplankton method

    0,8

    0,6

    BC8

    Denmark

    Danish coastal phytoplankton method

    0,8

    0,6

    Germany

    German coastal phytoplankton method

    0,8

    0,6

    Results for parameter indicative of biomass (Chlorophyll-a)

    Country and Type

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    Values (μg/l)

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    BC1

    Finland (Quark outer)

    0,76

    0,59

    1,7

    2,2

    Finland (Bothnian Sea outer)

    0,78

    0,60

    1,6

    2,1

    Sweden (Quark outer)

    0,75

    0,58

    1,6

    2,1

    Sweden (Bothnian Sea outer)

    0,80

    0,60

    1,5

    2,0

    BC4

    Estonia

    0,830

    0,670

    2,4

    3,0

    Latvia

    0,82

    0,67

    2,2

    2,7

    BC5

    Latvia

    0,650

    0,390

    1,85

    3,1

    Lithuania

    0,880

    0,600

    2,5

    4,9

    BC6

    Denmark

    0,78

    0,62

    1,36

    1,72

    Sweden

    0,79

    0,64

    1,44

    1,78

    BC9

    Estonia

    0,82

    0,67

    2,20

    2,70

    Finland

    0,79

    0,65

    1,90

    2,30

    Sweden

    0,80

    0,67

    1,50

    1,80

    BALTIC SEA GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macroalgae and Angiosperms

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country and Type

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    BC3

    Estonia

    EPI — Estonian coastal water phytobenthos Index (macroalgae and angiosperms)

    0,98

    0,86

    Finland

    Fucus depth limit (macroalgae)

    0,92

    0,79

    BC4

    Estonia

    EPI — Estonian Phytobenthos Index (macroalgae and angiosperms)

    0,91

    0,70

    Latvia

    PEQI — Phytobenthos Ecological Quality Index

    0,90

    0,75

    BC5

    Latvia

    MDFLD — Maximum depth of the red alga Furcellaria lumbricalis distribution (macroalgae)

    0,90

    0,75

    Lithuania

    MDFLD — Lithuanian maximum depth of the red alga Furcellaria lumbricalis distribution (macroalgae)

    0,84

    0,68

    BALTIC SEA GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country and Type

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    BC1

    Finland

    BBI — Finnish Brackish water Benthic Index

    0,96

    0,56

    Sweden

    BQI — Swedish multimetric biological quality index (soft sediment infauna)

    0,77

    0,31

    BC3

    Estonia

    ZKI — Estonian coastal water macrozoobenthos community index

    0,39

    0,24

    Finland

    BBI — Finnish Brackish water Benthic Index

    0,94

    0,56

    BC5

    Latvia

    BQI — Benthic quality index

    0,87

    0,61

    Lithuania

    BQI — Lithuanian benthic quality index

    0,94

    0,81

    BC6

    Denmark

    Danish Quality Index version 2 (DKI ver2)

    0,84

    0,68

    Sweden

    BQI — Swedish multimetric biological quality index (soft sediment infauna)

    0,76

    0,27

    BC7

    Germany

    MarBIT- Marine Biotic Index Tool

    0,60

    Poland

    B — Macrozoobenthos BQE assessment by multimetric index

    0,58

    BC8

    Denmark

    Danish Quality Index version 2 (DKI ver2)

    0,86

    0,72

    Germany

    MarBIT — Marine Biotic Index Tool

    0,80

    0,60

    Water category

    Coastal waters

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    North East Atlantic

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated

    Type

    Characterisation

    Salinity (psu)

    Tidal range (m)

    Depth (m)

    Current Velocity (knots) Exposure

    Mixing

    Residence Time

    Type for opportunistic blooming macroalgae, seagrasses, saltmarshes and benthic invertebrate fauna

    NEA 1/26

    Open oceanic or enclosed seas, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow

    < 30

    Mesotidal 1-5

    < 30

    Medium 1 — 3

    Exposed or sheltered

    Fully mixed

    Days (to weeks in the Wadden Sea)

    Subtypes for intertidal macroalgae

    NEA 1/26 A2

    Open oceanic, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow, Temperate waters (mainly, > 13 oC) and high irradiance (mainly, PAR > 29 Mol/m2 day)

    > 30

    Mesotidal 1 — 5

    < 30

    Medium 1 — 3

    Exposed or sheltered

    Fully mixed Days

    NEA 1/26 B21

    Open oceanic or enclosed seas, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow Cool waters (mainly, < 13 oC) and medium irradiance (mainly, PAR < 29 Mol/m2 day)

    > 30 Mainly mesotidal 1 — 5 < 30

    Medium 1 — 3 Exposed or sheltered

    Fully mixed Days

    Subtypes for phytoplankton

    NEA 1/26a

    Open oceanic, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow

    > 30 Mesotidal 1 — 5 < 30

    Medium 1 -3 Exposed or sheltered

    Fully mixed Days

    NEA 1/26b

    Enclosed seas, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow

    > 30 Mesotidal 1 — 5 < 30

    Medium 1 — 3 Exposed or sheltered

    Fully mixed Days

    NEA 1/26c

    Enclosed seas, enclosed or sheltered, partly stratified

    > 30 Microtidal/Mesotidal < 1 — 5 < 30

    Medium 1 — 3 Exposed or sheltered

    Partly stratified Days to weeks

    NEA 1/26d

    Scandinavian coast, exposed or sheltered, shallow

    > 30 Microtidal < 1 < 30

    Low < 1 Exposed or moderately exposed

    Partly stratified Days to weeks

    NEA 1/26e

    Areas of upwelling, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow

    > 30 Mesotidal < 1 < 30

    Medium 1 — 3 Exposed or sheltered

    Fully mixed Days

    Types for phytoplankton, macroalgae, seagrasses, saltmarshes, benthic invertebrate fauna

    NEA 5

    Helgoland (German Bight), rocky, exposed and partly stratified

    > 30

    Mesotidal

    < 30

    Medium 1 — 3 Exposed

    Partly stratified Days

    NEA 3/4

    Polyhaline, Exposed or moderately exposed (Wadden Sea type)

    Polyhaline 18 — 30 Mesotidal 1 — 5 < 30

    Medium 1 — 3 Exposed or moderately exposed

    Fully mixed Days

    NEA 7

    Deep fjordic and sea loch systems

    > 30 Mesotidal 1 -5 > 30

    Low < 1 Sheltered

    Fully mixed Days

    NEA 8a

    Skagerrak Inner Arc Type, polyhaline, microtidal, moderately exposed, shallow

    Polyhaline 25 — 30 Microtidal < 1 > 30

    Low < 1 Moderately exposed

    Fully mixed Days to weeks

    NEA 8b

    Skagerrak Inner Arc Type, polyhaline, microtidal, moderately sheltered, shallow

    Polyhaline 10 — 30 Microtidal < 1 < 30

    Low < 1 Sheltered to moderately exposed

    Partly stratified Days to weeks

    NEA 9

    Fjord with a shallow sill at the mouth with a very deep maximum depth in the central basin with poor deepwater exchange

    Polyhaline 25 — 30 Microtidal < 1 > 30

    Low < 1 Sheltered

    Partly stratified Weeks

    NEA 10

    Skagerrak Outer Arc Type, polyhaline, microtidal, exposed, deep

    Polyhaline 25 — 30 Microtidal < 1 > 30

    Low < 1 Exposed

    Partly stratified Days

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

    Type NEA1/26 opportunistic blooming macroalgae, seagrasses, saltmarshes, benthic invertebrate fauna: Belgium, France, Germany, Denmark, Ireland, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, United Kingdom

    Type NEA1/26 A2: intertidal macroalgae: France, Spain, Portugal

    Type NEA1/26 B21: intertidal macroalgae: France, Ireland, Norway, United Kingdom

    Type NEA1/26a phytoplankton: Spain, France, Ireland, Norway, United Kingdom

    Type NEA1/26b phytoplankton: Belgium, France, Netherlands, United Kingdom

    Type NEA1/26c phytoplankton: Germany, Denmark

    Type NEA1/26d phytoplankton: Denmark

    Type NEA1/26e phytoplankton: Portugal, Spain

    Type NEA 5: Germany

    Type NEA3/4: Germany, Netherlands

    Type NEA7: Norway, United Kingdom

    Type NEA8a: Norway, Sweden

    Type NEA8b: Denmark, Sweden

    Type NEA9: Norway, Sweden

    Type NEA10: Norway, Sweden

    NORTH EAST ATLANTIC GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Phytoplankton

    Phytoplankton:

    parameter indicative of biomass parameter (Chlorophyll a)

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

    Parameter values are expressed in μg/l as the 90 %ile value calculated over the defined growing season in a six year period.

    Country and Type

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    Values (μg/l)

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    NEA 1/26a

    France

    0,76

    0,33

    4,40

    10,00

    Ireland

    0,82

    0,60

    9,90

    15,00

    Norway

    0,67

    0,33

    2,50

    5,00

    Spain (Eastern Cantabrian coast)

    0,67

    0,33

    1,50

    3,00

    Spain (Western-Central Cantabrian Coast)

    0,67

    0,33

    3,00

    6,00

    Spain (Gulf of Cadiz coast)

    0,67

    0,33

    5,00

    10,00

    United Kingdom

    0,80

    0,60

    5,00

    10,00

    NEA 1/26b

    Belgium

    0,80

    0,67

    12,50

    15,00

    France

    0,67

    0,44

    10,00

    15,00

    Netherlands

    0,67

    0,44

    10,00

    15,00

    United Kingdom (south)

    0,82

    0,63

    9,80

    14,30

    United Kingdom (north)

    0,80

    0,60

    10,00

    15,00

    NEA 1/26c

     

     

     

     

    Germany

    0,67

    0,44

    5,0

    7,5

    Denmark

    0,67

    0,44

    5,0

    7,5

    NEA 1/26e

    Portugal (Iberian strong upwelling-A5)

    0,670

    0,440

    8,000

    12,000

    Portugal (upwelling-A6,A7)

    0,880

    0,490

    4,500

    8,200

    Spain (Western Iberian upwelling coast)

    0,67

    0,44

    6,00

    9,00

    Spain (Western Iberian upwelling coast — rías)

    0,67

    0,44

    8,00

    12,00

    NEA 3/4

    Germany (Eems Dollard)

    0,80

    0,60

    7,00

    11,00

    Germany (Wadden Sea)

    0,80

    0,60

    7,00

    11,00

    Netherlands (Eems Dollard)

    0,80

    0,60

    6,75

    10,13

    Netherlands (Wadden Sea)

    0,80

    0,60

    9,60

    14,40

    Netherlands (North Sea)

    0,80

    0,60

    11,25

    16,88

    NEA 8a

    Norway

    0,79

    0,57

    3,95

    5,53

    Sweden

    0,75

    0,49

    1,54

    2,35

    NEA 8b (The Sound)

    Denmark

    0,79

    0,59

    1,22

    1,63

    Sweden

    0,80

    0,60

    1,18

    1,56

    NEA 8b (The Kattegat and Great Belt)

    Denmark

    0,83

    0,64

    1,22

    1,58

    Sweden

    0,84

    0,65

    1,18

    1,52

    NEA 9

    Norway

    0,76

    0,43

    3,92

    6,90

    Sweden

    0,73

    0,38

    1,89

    3,60

    NEA 10

    Norway

    0,73

    0,49

    3,53

    5,26

    Sweden

    0,71

    0,46

    1,39

    2,14

    NORTH EAST ATLANTIC GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macroalgae and Angiosperms

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Macroalgae

    Intertidal or subtidal macroalgae rocky bottom

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country and Type

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Type NEA1/26 A2 intertidal macroalgae

    France

    CCO — Cover, Characteristic species, Opportunistic species on intertidal rocky bottoms

    0,80

    0,60

    Portugal

    PMarMAT — Marine Macroalgae Assessment Tool

    0,80

    0,61

    Spain

    CFR — Quality of Rocky Bottoms

    0,81

    0,60

    Spain

    RICQI — Rocky Intertidal Community Quality Index

    0,82

    0,60

    Spain

    RSL — Reduced Species List

    0,75

    0,48

    Type NEA1/26 B21 intertidal macroalgae

    Ireland

    RSL — Rocky Shore Reduced Species List

    0,80

    0,60

    Norway

    RSLA — Rocky Shore Reduced Species List with Abundance

    0,80

    0,60

    United Kingdom

    RSL — Rocky Shore Reduced Species List

    0,80

    0,60

    Type NEA 7 intertidal macroalgae

     

    Norway

    RSLA — Rocky Shore Reduced Species List with Abundance

    0,80

    0,60

    United Kingdom

    RSL — Rocky Shore Reduced Species List

    0,80

    0,60

    Type NEA8a/9/10 subtidal macroalgae

    Norway

    MSMDI — Multi Species Maximum Depth Index

    0,80

    0,60

    Sweden

    MSMDI — Multi Species Maximum Depth Index

    0,80

    0,60

    NORTH EAST ATLANTIC GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macroalgae and Angiosperms

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Macroalgae

    Intertidal blooming macroalgae soft bottom, indicative of abundance

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country and Type

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Type NEA 1/26

    Germany

    OMAI — Opportunistic Macroalgae-cover/acreage on soft sediment intertidal in coastal waters

    0,78

    0,59

    France

    CWOGA — Macroalgal Bloom Assessment

    0,825

    0,617

    Ireland

    OGA tool — Opportunistic Green Macroalgal Abundance

    0,80

    0,60

    United Kingdom

    OMBT — Opportunistic macroalgal blooming tool

    0,80

    0,60

    NORTH EAST ATLANTIC GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macroalgae and Angiosperms

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Angiosperms

    Seagrasses

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country and Type

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Type NEA 1/26

    Germany

    SG — Assessment tool for intertidal seagrass in coastal and transitional waters

    0,80

    0,60

    France

    SBQ — Seagrass beds quality in coastal and transitional water bodies

    0,80

    0,645

    Ireland

    Intertidal Seagrass tool

    0,80

    0,61

    Netherlands

    SG — Monitoring beds of SG per waterbody using aerial photographs, ground truth and specifying surface & density per species

    0,80

    0,60

    Portugal

    SQI — Seagrass quality index

    0,80

    0,60

    United Kingdom

    Intertidal Seagrass tool

    0,80

    0,61

    Type NEA 3/4

    Germany

    SG — Bewertungssystem für Makroalgen und Seegräser der Küsten- und Übergangsgewässer zur Umsetzung der EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie in Deutschland

    0,80

    0,60

    Netherlands

    Monitoring beds of SG per waterbody using aerial photographs, ground truth and specifying surface and density per species

    0,80

    0,60

    NORTH EAST ATLANTIC GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country and Type

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Type NEA 1/26

    Belgium

    BEQI — Benthic Ecosystem Quality Index

    0,80

    0,60

    Denmark

    Danish Quality Index (DKI)

    0,80

    0,60

    Germany

    M-AMBI — Multivariate AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index

    0,85

    0,70

    France

    M-AMBI — Multivariate AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index

    0,77

    0,53

    Ireland

    IQI — Infaunal Quality Index

    0,75

    0,64

    Netherlands

    BEQI2 -Benthic Ecosystem Quality Index 2

    0,80

    0,60

    Norway

    NQI — Norwegian Quality Index

    0,72

    0,63

    Portugal

    BAT — Benthic Assessment Tool

    0,79

    0,58

    Spain

    M-AMBI — Multivariate AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index

    0,77

    0,63

    United Kingdom

    IQI — Infaunal Quality Index

    0,75

    0,64

    Type NEA 3/4

    Germany

    M-AMBI — Multivariate AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index

    0,85

    0,70

    Netherlands

    BEQI2 — Benthic Ecosystem Quality Index 2

    0,80

    0,60

    Type NEA 7

    Norway

    NQI — Norwegian Quality Index

    0,72

    0,63

    United Kingdom

    IQI — Infaunal Quality Index

    0,75

    0,64

    Type NEA 8b

    Denmark

    Danish Quality Index (DKI)

    0,84

    0,68

    Sweden

    BQI — Swedish multimetric biological quality index (soft sediment infauna)

    0,71

    0,54

    Type NEA 8a/9/10

    Norway

    NQI — Norwegian Quality Index

    0,82

    0,63

    Sweden

    BQI — Swedish multimetric biological quality index (soft sediment infauna)

    0,71

    0,54

    Water category

    Coastal waters

    Geographical Intercalibration Group

    Mediterranean Sea

    Description of types that have been intercalibrated (for phytoplankton only)

    For benthic invertebrate fauna, macroalgae and seagrasses the intercalibration results apply to the entire Mediterranean Sea covered by the Country

    Type

    Description

    Density (kg/m3)

    Annual mean salinity (psu)

    Type I

    Highly influenced by freshwater input

    < 25

    < 34,5

    Type IIA, IIA Adriatic

    Moderately influenced by freshwater input (continent influence)

    25 — 27

    34,5  — 37,5

    Type IIIW

    Continental coast, not influenced by freshwater input (Western Basin).

    > 27

    > 37,5

    Type IIIE

    Not influenced by freshwater input (Eastern Basin)

    > 27

    > 37,5

    Type Island-W*

    Island coast (Western Basin)

    All range

    All range

    Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

    Type I:

    France, Italy

    Type IIA:

    France, Spain, Italy

    Type IIA Adriatic:

    Italy, Slovenia

    Type Island-W* (no boundaries for this type and no possible the intercalibration due to justified reasons):

    France, Spain, Italy

    Type IIIW:

    France, Spain, Italy

    Type IIIE:

    Greece, Cyprus

    MEDITERRANEAN SEA GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Phytoplankton

    Phytoplankton:

    parameter indicative of biomass parameter (Chlorophyll a)

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

    Parameter values are expressed in μg/l of Chlorophyll a, for the 90th percentile calculated over the year in at least a five year period.

    Country and Type

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    Values (μg/l)

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Type II A

    France

    0,67

    0,37

    1,92

    3,50

    Spain

    0,67

    0,37

    1,92

    3,50

    Type II A Adriatic

    Croatia

    0,82

    0,61

    1,70

    4,00

    Italy

    0,82

    0,61

    1,70

    4,00

    Slovenia

    0,82

    0,61

    1,70

    4,00

    Type IIIW

    France

    0,67

    0,42

    1,18

    1,89

    Spain

    0,67

    0,42

    1,18

    1,89

    Type IIIE

    Cyprus

    0,66

    0,37

    0,29

    0,53

    Greece

    0,66

    0,37

    0,29

    0,53

    MEDITERRANEAN SEA GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macroalgae and Angiosperms

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Macroalgae

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    The following results apply to the upper infralittoral zone (3,5-0,2 m depth) in a rocky coasts:

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Cyprus

    EEI-c — Ecological Evaluation Index

    0,76

    0,48

    France

    CARLIT — Cartography of Littoral and upper-sublittoral rocky-shore communities

    0,75

    0,60

    Greece

    EEI-c — Ecological Evaluation Index

    0,76

    0,48

    Croatia

    CARLIT — Cartography of Littoral and upper-sublittoral rocky-shore communities

    0,75

    0,60

    Italy

    CARLIT — Cartography of Littoral and upper-sublittoral rocky-shore communities

    0,75

    0,60

    Malta

    CARLIT — Cartography of Littoral and upper-sublittoral rocky-shore communities

    0,75

    0,60

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja obalnega morja na podlagi makroalg

    0,76

    0,48

    Spain

    CARLIT — Cartography of Littoral and upper-sublittoral rocky-shore communities

    0,75

    0,60

    MEDITERRANEAN SEA GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Macroalgae and Angiosperms

    Sub-Biological Quality Element

    Angiosperms

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Croatia

    POMI — Posidonia oceanica Multivariate Index

    0,775

    0,55

    Cyprus

    PREI — Posidonia oceanica Rapid Easy Index

    0,775

    0,55

    France

    PREI — Posidonia oceanica Rapid Easy Index

    0,775

    0,55

    Italy

    PREI — Posidonia oceanica Rapid Easy Index

    0,775

    0,55

    Malta

    PREI — Posidonia oceanica Rapid Easy Index

    0,775

    0,55

    Spain

    POMI — Posidonia oceanica Multivariate Index

    0,775

    0,55

    Spain

    Valencian-CS

    0,775

    0,55

    MEDITERRANEAN SEA GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP RESULTS

    Biological Quality Element

    Benthic invertebrate fauna

    Biological Quality Element

     

    Results:

    Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

    Country

    National classification systems intercalibrated

    Ecological Quality Ratios

    High-good boundary

    Good-moderate boundary

    Italy

    M-AMBI — Multivariate AZTI’s Marine Biotic Index

    0,81

    0,61

    Slovenia

    Metodologija vrednotenja ekološkega stanja obalnega morja na podlagi bentoških nevretenčarjev

    0,83

    0,62

    Cyprus

    Bentix

    0,75

    0,58

    France

    AMBI

    0,83

    0,58

    Greece

    Bentix

    0,75

    0,58

    Spain

    BOPA

    0,95

    0,54

    Spain

    MEDOCC

    0,73

    0,47