Back to Search Start Over

Identification versus counting protocols as sources of uncertainty in diatom-based ecological status assessments.

Authors :
Kahlert, Maria
Kelly, Martyn
Albert, Raino-Lars
Almeida, Salomé
Bešta, Tomáš
Blanco, Saúl
Coste, Michel
Denys, Luc
Ector, Luc
Fránková, Markéta
Hlúbiková, Daša
Ivanov, Plamen
Kennedy, Bryan
Marvan, Petr
Mertens, Adrienne
Miettinen, Juha
Picinska-Fałtynowicz, Joanna
Rosebery, Juliette
Tornés, Elisabet
Vilbaste, Sirje
Source :
Hydrobiologia. Oct2012, Vol. 695 Issue 1, p109-124. 16p. 5 Charts, 5 Graphs.
Publication Year :
2012

Abstract

In 2009, seventeen analysts participated in a pan-European diatom ring-test (intercalibration), analyzing nine samples from seven countries following the European standard EN 14407. The objective of this exercise was to agree on practical conventions on diatom identification to facilitate future intercalibration work and to assess the extent to which national differences in sample analysis (counting protocol and identification conventions) contribute to variability in EU-level comparisons of diatom-based methods. Differences in the reported taxa lists were large, but not a major source of variation in values of a common metric (the phytobenthos Intercalibration Common Metric, ICM). Therefore, every country can apply its own identification conventions for national assessments, and still be fairly confident that the ICM reflects the national classification of its streams. Part of the index variation was due to differences in counting protocols and care should be taken when handling broken valves, girdle views and small taxa. More work at both national and European level is needed to provide a harmonized way of using diatoms for ecological status assessments in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
00188158
Volume :
695
Issue :
1
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Hydrobiologia
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
78322275
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-012-1115-z