The relationship between macrophyte assemblage and selected environmental variables in reservoirs of Slovakia examined for the purpose of ecological assessment

• Autorzy: Baláži P. , Hrivnák R. , Oťahelová H.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

According to the requirements of the European Water Framework Directive, the Member States of the European Union are obliged to assess and report on the ecological potential of heavily modified and artificial water bodies; water reservoirs on rivers were also designated among them. The objective of this study was to gain more knowledge about macrophyte assemblages in reservoirs in Slovakia, where it was necessary to start analyses leading to the ecological assessment. The research was carried out in 14 multipurpose reservoirs during the vegetation seasons 2008–2010. Analyses focused on the determination of species composition considering the similarity between reservoirs, the impact of selected environmental variables on species composition and evaluation of the Macrophyte Biological Index for Lakes (IBML) in relation to its use for ecological assessment. In total, 60 taxa of macrophytes were identified. More than 90% of all determined taxa are indicators of IBML. The statistical analysis performed was based on the study of macrophyte assemblages and environmental variables and gave the following results: i) based on species composition, two main clusters of reservoirs were identified respecting altitude (reservoirs at an altitude above and less than 300 m a.s.l.) and affiliation to phytogeographical ecoregion (reservoirs in Pannonian lowland and Carpathians); ii) water temperature, followed by dissolved oxygen and chemical oxygen demand, were found to be the main environmental variables influencing the composition of macrophyte assemblages using DCA analysis. Water temperature and phosphates were determined to be the variables responsible for species composition using CCA analysis; iii) differences of the mean IBML values between clusters corresponded with the results of cluster analysis. A significant correlation was found between IBML and two variables: conductivity and alkalinity. Based on the results, it is recommended to use the IBML for analyses leading to the assessment of ecological potential based on biological quality elements.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

ecological potential; Heavily Modified Water Bodies (HMWB); Macrophyte Biological Index for Lakes (IBML); macrophytes; reservoirs; Water Framework Directive (WFD)

PL

potencjał ekologiczny; zbiornik wodny; modyfikacja; zbiornik; ramowa dyrektywa wodna

• Wydawca: Museum and Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Ecology
• Rocznik: 2014
• Tom: Vol. 62, nr 3
• Strony: 541--558
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 67 poz., il.

Twórcy

autor

Baláži P.

• Water Research Institute, L. Svobodu 5, 812 49 Bratislava, Slovak Republic,

autor

Hrivnák R.

• Institute of Botany, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská cesta 9, 845 23 Bratislava, Slovak Republic

autor

Oťahelová H.

• Institute of Botany, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Dúbravská cesta 9, 845 23 Bratislava, Slovak Republic

Bibliografia

• 1. Alahuhta J., Vuori K., Hellsten S., Järvinen M., Olin M., Rask M., Palomäki A. 2009 – Defining the ecological status of small forest lakes using multiple biological quality elements and palaeolimnological analysis – Fund. Appl. Limnol. 175: 203–216.
• 2. APHA, AWWA, WEF 2005 – Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 21st ed. Method 5220B.4b – American Public Health Association, Washington D.C. pp. 5–16.
• 3. Barko J.W., Smart R.M. 1986 – Sedimentrelated mechanisms of growth limitation in submerged macrophytes – Ecology, 67: 1328–1340.
• 4. Bavarian Environment Agency 2008 – Action Guidelines, Classification of Heavily Modified Water bodies and Derivation of the Ecological Potential in Bavaria within the framework of the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive (WFD), 14 pp.
• 5. Bernez I., Daniel H., Haury J., Ferreira M.T. 2004 – Combined effects of environmental factors and regulation on macrophyte vegetation along three rivers in Western France – Riv. Res. Appl. 20: 43–59.
• 6. Bertrin V., Boutr y S., Dutartre A. 2012 - Ecological quality assessment of lakes based on aquatic macrophyte assemblages in the context of the Water Framework Directive (WFD): The French Macrophyte Index for Lakes (IBML) – Journées Internationales de Limnologie et d’Océanographie, Clermont–Ferrand, France, 18 pp.
• 7. Bornette G., Puijalon S. 2011 – Response of aquatic plants to abiotic factors: a review – Aquat Sci. 73:1–14
• 8. Brucet S., Poikane S., Lyche-Solheim A., Birk S. 2013 – Biological assessment of European lakes: ecological rationale and human impacts - Freshwater Biol. doi: 10.1111/fwb.12111
• 9. CEN 1998 – The European Standard. Water quality. Determination of biochemical oxygen demand after n days (BODn) – Part 2: Method for undiluted samples. EN 1899-2 – European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, (ISO 5815: 1989, modified).
• 10. CEN 2007 – The European Standard. Water quality. Guidance standard for the surveying of macrophytes in lakes. EN 15460 – European Committee for Standardization, Brussels.
• 11. Chytrý, M. (ed.) 2011 – Vegetace České republiky 3. Vodní a mokřadní vegetace [Vegetation of the Czech Republick 3. Macrophytes] - Academia, Praha (in Czech).
• 12. Ciecierska H., Kolada A., Soszka H., Gołub M. 2006 – Opracovanie podstaw metodycznych dla monitoringu biologicznego wód powierzchniowych w zakresie makrofitów i pilotowe ich zastosowanie dla części wód reprezentujących wybrane kategorie i typy. Etap II. Opracowanie metodyki badań terenowych makrofitów na potrzeby rutynowego monitoringu wód oraz metoda oceny i klasyfikacji stanu ekologicznego wód na podstawie makrofitow [Methodological improvements in the macrophyte-based biological monitoring of surface waters – a pilot study of waters representing selected categories and types. Stage II. Methods for field investigations of macrophytes for the purpose of routine water monitoring, and macrophyte-based assessment and classification of the ecological status of waters] – Institute of Environmental Protection, Warszawa, 52 pp. (in Polish), http://dewelopment.eu/p/Ciecierska_Macrophyte_method_BALWOIS2010.pdf
• 13. Directive 2000 – Directive /2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community actionies in the field of water policy - Official Journal of the European Communities. L 327/1. 22.12.2000: 1–72.
• 14. Edvardsen A., Økland R.H. 2006 – Variation in plant species composition in and adjacent to 64 ponds in SE Norwegian agricultural landscapes – Aquat. Bot. 85: 97–102.
• 15. Feráková V., Maglocký Š., Marhold K. 2001 – Červený zoznam papraďorastov a semenných rastlín Slovenska (december 2001) [The red list of ferns and seed plants of Slovakia (december 201)] – Ochr. Prír. Banská Bystrica, 20: 44–77 (in Slovak).
• 16. Futák J. 1984 – Fytogeografické členenie Slovenska [Phytogeographical classification of Slovakia] (In: Flóra Slovenska IV/1, Ed: L. Bertová) - Veda, Bratislava, pp. 418–419, http://dataflos.sav.sk/ (in Slovak).
• 17. Gecheva G.M., Cheshmedjiev S.D., Dimitrova-Dyulgerova I.Zh. 2011 – Macrophyte-Based Assessment of the Ecological Status of Lakes in Bulgaria – Ecologia Balkanica, 3 (2): 25–40.
• 18. Haslam S.M. 1978 – River Plants: The Macrophytic Vegetation of Watercourses – Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 396 pp.
• 19. Haury J., Peltre M.C., Tremolières M., Barbe J., Thiebaut G., Bernez I., Daniel H., Chatenet P., Muller S., Dutartre A., Laplace-Treyture C., Cazaubon A., Lambert-Servien E. 2006 – A new method to assess water trophy and organic pollution: the Macrophyte Biological Index for Rivers (IBMR). Its application to different types of rivers and pollution – Hydrobiologia, 570: 153–158.
• 20. Henderson P.A., Seaby R.M.H. 2007 – Community Analysis Package 4.0 Pisces Conservation Ltd – Lymington, UK
• 21. Hrivnák R., Oťaheľová H., Valachovič M., Paľove–Balang P., Kubinská A. 2010 – Effect of environmental variables on the aquatic macrophyte composition pattern in streams: a case study from Slovakia – Fund. Appl. Limnol. 177: 115–124.
• 22. Hrivnák R., Kochjarová, J., Oťaheľová H. 2011 – Vegetation of the aquatic and marshland habitats in the Orava region, including the first records of Potametum alpini, Potametum zizii and Ranunculo-Juncetum bulbosi in the territory of Slovakia – Biologia, 66: 626–637.
• 23. ISO 1984 – The International Standard. Water quality. Determination of ammonium – Part 1: Manual spectrometric method. ISO 7150-1 - International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
• 24. ISO 1988 – The International Standard. Water quality. Determination of nitrate – Part 3: Spectrometric method using sulfosalicylic acid. ISO 7890-3 – International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
• 25. ISO 1992 – The International Standard. Water quality. Measurement of biochemical parameters. Spectrometric determination of the chlorophyll-a concentration. ISO 10260 – International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
• 26. ISO 1994 – The International Standard. Water quality. Determination of alkalinity – Part 1: Determination of total and composite alkalinity. ISO 9963-1 – International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
• 27. ISO 1997 – The International Standard. Water quality. Determination of nitrogen – Part 1: Method using oxidative digestion with peroxodisulfate. ISO 11905-1 – International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
• 28. ISO 2004 – The International Standard. Water quality. Determination of phosphorus – Ammonium molybdate spectrometric method. ISO 6878 – International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
• 29. Janauer G.A. 2002 – Water Framework Directive, European Standards and the Assessment of Macrophytes in Lakes: a methodology for scientific and practical application – Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-Botanischen-Gesellschaft in Österreich, 139: 143–147.
• 30. Janauer G.A. 2003 – Methods. In: Janauer G. A., Hale P., Sweeting R. (eds) – Macrophyte inventory of the river Danube. A pilot study – Arch. Hydrobiol. Suppl. 147 (1–2), Large Rivers 14 (1–2): 195–203.
• 31. Janauer G.A., Pall K. 2003 – Impoundment Abwinden-Asten, Austria (river km 2136–2119.5): Species distribution features and aspect of historical status – Arch. Hydrobiol. 14 (1–2, Suppl. 147): 87–196.
• 32. Janauer G., Dokulil M.T. 2006 – Macrophytes and algae in running waters (In: Biological monitoring of rivers. Application and perspectives, Eds: G. Ziglio, M. Siligardi, G. Flaim) – Wiley, Chichester, pp. 89–109
• 33. Khan F.A., Ansari A.A. 2005 – Eutrophication: an ecological vision – The Botanical Review, 71: 449–482.
• 34. Kochjarová J., Hrivnák R., Oťaheľová H. 2010 – Súčasné chorologické a ekologické poznatky o vodných rastlinách na Orave [The current chronological and environmental knowledge of the aquatic plants in the Orava region] – Bull. Slov. Bot. Spoločn. Bratislava, 32 (2): 37–46 (in Slovak).
• 35. Kubalová S. 2003 – Zaujímavé biotopy vodnej a močiarnej vegetácie v alúviu dolného Hrona [Interesting habitats of macrophytes in the alluvial deposits of the Hron river] – Bull. Slov. Bot. Spoločn. Bratislava, 25: 239–242 (in Slovak).
• 36. Kuhar U., Germ M., Gaberščik A., Urbanič G. 2011 – Development of a River Macrophyte Index (RMI) for assessing river ecological status – Limnologica – Ecology and Management of Inland Waters, 41: 235–243.
• 37. Lacoul P., Freedman B. 2006a – Environmental influences on aquatic plants in freshwater ecosystems – Environ. Rev. 14: 89–136.
• 38. Lacoul P., Freedman B. 2006b – Relationships between aquatic plants and environmental factors along a steep Himalayan altitudinal gradient – Aquat. Bot. 84: 3–16.
• 39. Lammens E., van Luijn F., Wessels Y., Bouwhuis H., Noordhuis R., Portielje R., van der Molen D. 2008 – Towards ecological goals for the heavily modified lakes in the Ijsselmeer area, The Netherlands – Hydrobiologia, 599: 239-247.
• 40. Lapin M., Faško P., Mešo M., Šťastný P., Tomlain J. 2002 – Klimatické oblasti [Climatic districts] (In: Atlas krajiny SR, 1 vydanie [Landscape Atlas of the Slovak Republic. 1st ed.], Ed. L. Miklóš) – Ministry of Environment Slovak Republic, Bratislava, map no. 27 (in Slovak).
• 41. Lewin L., Szoszkiewicz K. 2012 – Drivers of macrophyte development in rivers in an agricultural area: indicative species reactions – Cent. Eur. J. Biol. 7: 731–740.
• 42. Marhold K., Hindák F., (eds.) 1998 – Zoznam nižších a vyšších rastlín Slovenska [Checklists of nonvascular and vascular plants of Slovakia] – Veda, Bratislava, 687 pp. (in Slovak).
• 43. Medvecká J., Kliment J., Májeková J., Halada Ľ, Zaliberová M., Gojdičová E., Fráková V., Jarolímek I. 2012 – Inventory of alien species of Slovakia – Preslia, 84: 257–309.
• 44. Mjelde M., Hellsten S., Ecke F. 2013 – A water level drawdown index for aquatic macrophytes in Nordic lakes – Hydrobiologia, 704: 141-151.
• 45. Oťaheľová H. 1995 – Potametea R. Tx. et Preising 1942 (In: Rastlinné spoločenstvá Slovenska Pionierska vegetácia [Plant communities of Slovakia 1. The pioneer vegetation] Ed: M. Valachovič) – Veda, Bratislava, pp. 151–179 (in Slovak).
• 46. Oťaheľová H., Oťaheľ J. 2006 – Distribution of aquatic macrophytes in pit lakes in relation to the environment (Borská nížina lowland, Slovakia) – Ekologia, Bratislava, 25: 398–411.
• 47. Oťaheľová H., Valachovič M. 2002 – Effects of the Gabčíkovo hydroelectric-station on the aquatic vegetation of the Danube River (Slovakia) – Preslia, 74 : 323–331.
• 48. Oťaheľová H., Valachovič M. 2006 – Diversity of macrophytes in aquatic habitats of the Danube River (Bratislava region, Slovakia) – Thaiszia – J. Bot. 16: 27–40.
• 49. Oťaheľová H., Valachovič M., Hrivnák R. 2007 – The impact of environmental factors on the distribution pattern of aquatic plants along the Danube River corridor (Slovakia) –Limnologica, 37/4: 290–302
• 50. Pall K., Janauer G.A. 2003 – Impoundment Höchstädt (river-km 2538.01–2530.8) in the upper reach of the Danube River in Germany – Arch. Hydrobiol. 14 (1–2, Suppl. 147), 55–64.
• 51. Pall K., Moser V. 2009 – Austrian Index Macrophytes (AIM-Module 1) for lakes: a Water Framework Directive compliant assessment system for lakes using aquatic macrophytes – Hydrobiologia, 633: 83–104.
• 52. Penning W.E., Dudley B., Mjelde M., Hellsten S., Hanganu J., Kolada A., Van der Berg M., Poikane S., Philips G., Willby N., Ecke F. 2008 – Using aquatic macrophyte community indices to define the ecological status of European lakes - Aquat. Ecol. 42: 253–264
• 53. Riis T., Sand-Jensen K., Larsen S.E. 2001 - Plant distribution and abundance in relation to physical conditions and location within Danish stream systems – Hydrobiologia, 448: 217–228.
• 54. Sârbu A., Janauer G., Schmidt-Mumm U., Filzmoser P., Smarandache D., Pascale G. 2011 – Characterisation of the potamal Danube River and the Delta: Connectivity determines indicative macrophyte assemblages – Hydrobiologia, 671: 75–93.
• 55. Schaumburg J., Schranz Ch., Hofmann G., Stelzer D., Schneider S., Schmedtje U. 2004a – Macrophytes and phytobenthos as indicators of ecological status in German lakes - a contribution to the implementation of the Water Framework Directive – Limnologica, 34: 302–314.
• 56. Schaumburg J., Schranz Ch., Foester J., Gutowski A., Hofmann G., Meilinger P., Schneider S., Schmedtje U. 2004b - Ecological classification of macrophytes and phytobenthos for rivers in Germany according to the Water Framework Directive – Limnologica, 34: 283–301.
• 57. Schaumburg J., Schranz Ch., Stelzer D., Hofmann G. 2007 – Action Instructions for the ecological Evaluation of Lakes for Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive: Macrophytes and Phytobenthos – Bavarian Environment Agency, 69 pp.
• 58. Schmidt B., Straif M., Waidbacher H., Janauer G. A. 2006 – Man-made nearnatural structures offer new habitats to macrophytes, as well as fish –Proceedings 36th international conference of IAD, Austrian Committee Danube Research (Ed.) Vienna, pp. 112–116.
• 59. Schwerdtfeger F. 1975 – Synökolgie. Struktur. Funktion und Produktivität mehrartiger Tiergemeinschaften [Synecology. Structure. Function and productivity of populous animal communities] – Verlag Paul Parey. Hamburg, Berlin, 451 pp. (in German).
• 60. Søndergaard M., Jeppesen E., Jensen J.P., Amsinck S.L. 2005 – Water framework directive: ecological classification of Danish lakes – J. Appl. Ecol. 42: 616–629.
• 61. StatSoft Inc. 2011 – STATISTICA for Windows [Computer program Manual] Tulsa, OK: StatSoft Inc., 2300 – Tulsa, http://www. stat.soft.com
• 62. Svitok M., Hrivnák R., Oťaheľová H., Dúbravová D., Paľove-Balang P., Slobodník V. 2011 – The importance of local and regional factors on the vegetation of created wetlands in Central Europe – Wetlands, 3: 663–674.
• 63. Szoszkiewicz K., Kayzer D., Staniszewski R., Dawson H.F. 2010 – Measures of central tendency of aquatic habitat parameters: Application to river macrophyte communities - Pol. J. Ecol. 58: 693–706.
• 64. ter Braak C.J.F., Šmilauer P. 2002. – CANOCO Reference Manual and CanoDraw for Windows User’s Guide, Software for Canonical Community Ordination (version 4.5) - Microcomputer Power, Ithaca, NY.
• 65. Van Geest G.J., Coops H., Roijackers R.M.M., Buijse A.D., Scheffer M. 2005 - Succession of aquatic vegetation driven by reduced water–level fluctuations in floodplain lakes – J. Appl. Ecol. 42: 251–260.
• 66. Vukov D., Anačkov G., Igic R., Janauer G.A. 2004 – The Aquatic macrophytes of ‘‘Mali Derdap’’ (Danube, river km 1039–999) - Limnological Reports, 35: 421–426.
• 67. Vukov D., Boža P., Igić R., Anačkov G. 2008 – The distribution and the abundance of hydrophytes along the Danube River in Serbia – Cen. Eur. J. Biol. 3: 177–187.