Search

Nutrient targets based on pressure-response models are essential for defining ambitions and managing eutrophication. However, the scale of biogeographical variation in these pressure-response relationships is poorly understood, which may hinder eutrophication management in regions where lake ecology is less intensively studied. In this study, we derive ecology-based nutrient targets for five major ecoregions of Europe: Northern, Central-Baltic, Alpine, Mediterranean and Eastern Continental. As a first step, we developed regressions between nutrient concentrations and ecological quality ratios (EQR) based on phytoplankton and macrophyte communities. Significant relationships were established for 13 major lake types; in most cases, these relationships were stronger for phosphorus than for nitrogen, and stronger for phytoplankton than for macrophytes. Using these regressions, we estimated the total phosphorus (TP) and total nitrogen (TN) concentrations at which lakes of different types are likely to achieve good ecological status. However, in the very shallow lakes of the Eastern Continental region, relations between nutrient and biological communities were weak or non-significant. This can be attributed to high nutrient concentrations (in the asymptotic zone of phosphorus-phytoplankton models) suggesting other factors (light, grazing) limit primary production. However, we also show that fish stocking is a major pressure on Eastern Continental lakes, negatively affecting ecological status: lakes with low fish stocking show low chlorophyll-a concentrations and good ecological status despite high nutrient levels, while the lakes with high fish stocking show high chlorophyll-a and low ecological status. This study highlights the need to better understand lakes in biogeographic regions that have been, for historical reasons, less studied. This, in turn, helps reveal factors that challenge the dominant paradigms of lake assessment and management., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Eutrophication caused by an excessive presence of nutrients is affecting large portions of European waters with more than 60% of the surface water bodies failing to achieve the primary ambition of water management in Europe, that of good ecological status (GES) with diffuse emission from agriculture being the second most important pressure affecting surface waters. We developed EU wide and regional nutrient targets that define the boundary concentrations between good and moderate status for river and lake total P (TP) and total N (TN) and assessed the gap between actual nutrient concentrations and these targets and considered strategies of nutrient reductions necessary to achieve GES and deliver ecosystem services. The nutrient targets established for rivers ranged from 0.5-3.5 mg/L TN and 11-105 μg/L TP and for lakes 0.5-1.8 mg/L TN and 10-60 μg/L TP. Based on the EU wide targets, 59% of the TN and 57% of the TP river monitoring sites and 64% of the TN and 61% of the TP lake monitoring sites exceed these value and are thus at less than GES. The PCA and step-wise regression for EU basins clearly showed that the basin nutrient export is predominantly related to agricultural inputs. In addition, the step-wise regression models for TN and TP provided the ability to extrapolate the results and quantify the input reductions necessary for reaching the nutrient targets at the EU level. The results suggest that a dual water management strategy would be beneficial and should focus a) on those less polluted rivers and lakes that can easily attain the GES goal and b) on the more highly polluted systems that will improve the delivery of ecosystem services., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)