# L_2008332EN.01002001.xml

| 10.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 332/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 332/20

---

COMMISSION DECISION

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

(notified under document number C(2008) 6016)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2008/915/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

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 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Article 4(1)(a)(ii) of Directive 2000/60/EC requires the Member States to protect, enhance and restore all bodies of surface water with the aim of achieving good surface water status at the latest 15 years after the date of entry into force of the Directive, subject to certain exceptions, in accordance with the provisions laid down in Annex V thereto. Article 4(1)(a)(iii) of Directive 2000/60/EC requires the Member States to protect and enhance all artificial and heavily modified bodies of water, with the aim of achieving good ecological potential and good surface water chemical status at the latest 15 years from the date of entry into force of that Directive, subject to certain exceptions, in accordance with the provisions laid down in Annex V thereto. In accordance with point (i) of section 1.4.1 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC the references to ecological status should be construed as references to ecological potential as regards artificial and heavily modified water bodies. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Article 4(1)(a)(ii) of Directive 2000/60/EC requires the Member States to protect, enhance and restore all bodies of surface water with the aim of achieving good surface water status at the latest 15 years after the date of entry into force of the Directive, subject to certain exceptions, in accordance with the provisions laid down in Annex V thereto. Article 4(1)(a)(iii) of Directive 2000/60/EC requires the Member States to protect and enhance all artificial and heavily modified bodies of water, with the aim of achieving good ecological potential and good surface water chemical status at the latest 15 years from the date of entry into force of that Directive, subject to certain exceptions, in accordance with the provisions laid down in Annex V thereto. In accordance with point (i) of section 1.4.1 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC the references to ecological status should be construed as references to ecological potential as regards artificial and heavily modified water bodies.

| (2) | Section 1.4.1 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC provides a process to ensure the comparability between Member States of biological monitoring results, being a central part of the ecological status classification. This requires the results of the Member States' monitoring and classification systems to be compared through an intercalibration network comprised of monitoring sites in each Member State and in each ecoregion of the Community. 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 classification system with the normative definitions of section 1.2 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC and the comparability of the results of classification systems between the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Section 1.4.1 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC provides a process to ensure the comparability between Member States of biological monitoring results, being a central part of the ecological status classification. This requires the results of the Member States' monitoring and classification systems to be compared through an intercalibration network comprised of monitoring sites in each Member State and in each ecoregion of the Community. 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 classification system with the normative definitions of section 1.2 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC and the comparability of the results of classification systems between the Member States.

| (3) | 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 (2) established the register of sites to form the intercalibration network referred to in section 1.4.1(vii) of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

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 (2) established the register of sites to form the intercalibration network referred to in section 1.4.1(vii) of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC.

| (4) | 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 Decision 2005/646/EC. This has allowed each group to compare its results and to perform the intercalibration exercise among its members. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

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 Decision 2005/646/EC. This has allowed each group to compare its results and to perform the intercalibration exercise among its members.

| (5) | The intercalibration exercise is carried out at biological element level, comparing the classification results of the national monitoring systems for each biological element and for each common surface water body type among Member States in the same Geographical Intercalibration Group, and assessing the consistency of the results with the aforementioned normative definitions. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

The intercalibration exercise is carried out at biological element level, comparing the classification results of the national monitoring systems for each biological element and for each common surface water body type among Member States in the same Geographical Intercalibration Group, and assessing the consistency of the results with the aforementioned normative definitions.

| (6) | The ‘Technical report on the Water Framework Directive intercalibration exercise’ describes in detail how the intercalibration exercise has been carried out for the water categories and biological quality elements included in the Annex to this Decision. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

The ‘Technical report on the Water Framework Directive intercalibration exercise’ describes in detail how the intercalibration exercise has been carried out for the water categories and biological quality elements included in the Annex to this Decision.

| (7) | The Commission has facilitated the intercalibration exercise through the Institute of Environment and Sustainability of the Joint Research Centre in Ispra (Italy) that has coordinated the technical work. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

The Commission has facilitated the intercalibration exercise through the Institute of Environment and Sustainability of the Joint Research Centre in Ispra (Italy) that has coordinated the technical work.

| (8) | The intercalibration exercise is a complex scientific and technical task. The Geographical Intercalibration Groups have used different methodological options to carry out the exercise depending on the availability of monitoring data for the various biological quality elements and the status of development of the national monitoring and classification systems. In order to increase the statistical robustness of the results, most of the methodologies used by Geographical Intercalibration Groups involve the use of data from as many monitoring points as possible, covering the whole range of status classes, from high to bad status. Therefore, monitoring data has been used from sites that are not part of the intercalibration network, as this comprises only a limited number of sites of high, good or moderate status. |
| --- | --- |

(8)

The intercalibration exercise is a complex scientific and technical task. The Geographical Intercalibration Groups have used different methodological options to carry out the exercise depending on the availability of monitoring data for the various biological quality elements and the status of development of the national monitoring and classification systems. In order to increase the statistical robustness of the results, most of the methodologies used by Geographical Intercalibration Groups involve the use of data from as many monitoring points as possible, covering the whole range of status classes, from high to bad status. Therefore, monitoring data has been used from sites that are not part of the intercalibration network, as this comprises only a limited number of sites of high, good or moderate status.

| (9) | The Commission has received intercalibration results for a number of biological quality elements that comprise the definition of ecological status. In some cases results have been provided for only some parameters of the biological elements or for only some of the Member States participating in a Geographical Intercalibration Group. Hence, the Commission considers that, for those cases, comparability is not fully ensured. Further intercalibration results may therefore be subject to a future Decision when the relevant information in accordance with Section 1.4.1 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC will have been provided by Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(9)

The Commission has received intercalibration results for a number of biological quality elements that comprise the definition of ecological status. In some cases results have been provided for only some parameters of the biological elements or for only some of the Member States participating in a Geographical Intercalibration Group. Hence, the Commission considers that, for those cases, comparability is not fully ensured. Further intercalibration results may therefore be subject to a future Decision when the relevant information in accordance with Section 1.4.1 of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC will have been provided by Member States.

| (10) | It is necessary to adopt the available results of the intercalibration exercise on time to inform the development of the first river basin management plans and programmes of measures in accordance with Articles 11 and 13 of Directive 2000/60/EC. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

It is necessary to adopt the available results of the intercalibration exercise on time to inform the development of the first river basin management plans and programmes of measures in accordance with Articles 11 and 13 of Directive 2000/60/EC.

| (11) | As a result of the intercalibration exercise, the values of the ecological quality ratios for the boundaries between ecological status classes for the Member States classification systems should represent an equivalent ecological status. The differences in values for the same biological quality element are due to differences in national methods. In addition, due to the differences in calculation methods and other reasons, it is not possible to compare the values of the ecological quality ratios across different biological quality elements. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

As a result of the intercalibration exercise, the values of the ecological quality ratios for the boundaries between ecological status classes for the Member States classification systems should represent an equivalent ecological status. The differences in values for the same biological quality element are due to differences in national methods. In addition, due to the differences in calculation methods and other reasons, it is not possible to compare the values of the ecological quality ratios across different biological quality elements.

| (12) | Parameters like chlorophyll-a concentration, phytoplankton biovolume, percentage of cyanobacteria or depth limits of macroalgae and angiosperms do not cover full biological quality elements. However, due to the availability of data and assessment methods, they are one of the basis of the current intercalibration exercise for lakes and coastal waters. The values of those parameters are directly comparable across Member States, provided the differences in sampling and analytical methods are taken into account. For these reasons, in addition to the ecological quality ratios, absolute values for these parameters should be included in the Annex to this Decision as part of the results of the intercalibration exercise. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

Parameters like chlorophyll-a concentration, phytoplankton biovolume, percentage of cyanobacteria or depth limits of macroalgae and angiosperms do not cover full biological quality elements. However, due to the availability of data and assessment methods, they are one of the basis of the current intercalibration exercise for lakes and coastal waters. The values of those parameters are directly comparable across Member States, provided the differences in sampling and analytical methods are taken into account. For these reasons, in addition to the ecological quality ratios, absolute values for these parameters should be included in the Annex to this Decision as part of the results of the intercalibration exercise.

| (13) | The results should refer to the ecological status. If water bodies corresponding to the intercalibrated types are designated as heavily modified water bodies in accordance with Article 4(3) of Directive 2000/60/EC, the results presented in the Annex to this Decision may be used to derive their good ecological potential, taken into account their physical modifications and their associated water use, in accordance with the normative definitions in Annex V, section 1.2.5, to Directive 2000/60/EC. |
| --- | --- |

(13)

The results should refer to the ecological status. If water bodies corresponding to the intercalibrated types are designated as heavily modified water bodies in accordance with Article 4(3) of Directive 2000/60/EC, the results presented in the Annex to this Decision may be used to derive their good ecological potential, taken into account their physical modifications and their associated water use, in accordance with the normative definitions in Annex V, section 1.2.5, to Directive 2000/60/EC.

| (14) | As established in section 1.4.1(iii) of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC, Member States will have to translate the results of the intercalibration exercise into 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. Guidelines to translate the intercalibration results into the national classification systems and to derive reference conditions have been developed to support the application of the results. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

As established in section 1.4.1(iii) of Annex V to Directive 2000/60/EC, Member States will have to translate the results of the intercalibration exercise into 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. Guidelines to translate the intercalibration results into the national classification systems and to derive reference conditions have been developed to support the application of the results.

| (15) | The information that will be made available through the implementation of the monitoring programmes provided for in Article eight of Directive 2000/60/EC and the review and update of the characteristics of river basin districts provided for in Article five of Directive 2000/60/EC can bring new evidence that may lead to the adaptation to scientific and technical progress of the Member States' monitoring and classification systems and eventually to a review of the results of the intercalibration exercise in order to improve their quality. |
| --- | --- |

(15)

The information that will be made available through the implementation of the monitoring programmes provided for in Article eight of Directive 2000/60/EC and the review and update of the characteristics of river basin districts provided for in Article five of Directive 2000/60/EC can bring new evidence that may lead to the adaptation to scientific and technical progress of the Member States' monitoring and classification systems and eventually to a review of the results of the intercalibration exercise in order to improve their quality.

| (16) | 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, |
| --- | --- |

(16)

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

For the purpose 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 the Annex to this Decision.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 October 2008.

For the Commission

Stravros DIMAS

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 243, 19.9.2005, p. 1.

2

---

ANNEX

WATER CATEGORY: Rivers

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Alpine

Description of types that have been intercalibrated

| Type | River characterisation | Catchment (km2) | Altitude and geomorphology | Alkalinity | Flow regime |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| R-A1 | 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 |

Type

River characterisation

Catchment (km2)

Altitude and geomorphology

Alkalinity

Flow regime

R-A1

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 the types that have been intercalibrated

| Type R-A1: | Germany, Austria, France, Italy, Slovenia |
| --- | --- |
| Type R-A2: | Austria, France, Italy, Spain, Slovenia |

Type R-A1:

Germany, Austria, France, Italy, Slovenia

Type R-A2:

Austria, France, Italy, Spain, Slovenia

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Benthic invertebrate fauna

Results: Ecological quality ratios of the national classification systems intercalibrated

| Type and country | National classification systems intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-good boundary | Good-moderate boundary |
| Type R-A1 |
| Austria | Austrian System for Ecological River Status Assessment (Worst case between Multimetric Indices for General Degradation and Saprobic Index) | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| France | Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350 (1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007 | 0,93 | 0,79 |
| Germany | PERLODES — Bewertungsverfahren von Fließgewässern auf Basis des Makrozoobenthos | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Italy | STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi) | 0,97 | 0,73 |
| Slovenia | Slovenian Benthic Invertebrate Assessment System:
  Multimetric index (Hydromorphology/General degradation), Saprobic Index | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Type R-A2 |
| Austria | Austrian System for Ecological River Status Assessment (Worst case between Multimetric Indices for General Degradation and Saprobic Index) | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| France (Alps) | Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350 (1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No 14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007 | 0,93 | 0,71 |
| France (Pyrenees) | Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350 (1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No 14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007 | 0,94 | 0,81 |
| Italy | STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi) | 0,95 | 0,71 |
| Spain | Iberian BMWP (IBMWP) | 0,83 | 0,53 |

Type and country

National classification systems intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-good boundary

Good-moderate boundary

Type R-A1

Austria

Austrian System for Ecological River Status Assessment (Worst case between Multimetric Indices for General Degradation and Saprobic Index)

0,80

0,60

France

Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350 (1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007

0,93

0,79

Germany

PERLODES — Bewertungsverfahren von Fließgewässern auf Basis des Makrozoobenthos

0,80

0,60

Italy

STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

0,97

0,73

Slovenia

Slovenian Benthic Invertebrate Assessment System:

Multimetric index (Hydromorphology/General degradation), Saprobic Index

0,80

0,60

Type R-A2

Austria

Austrian System for Ecological River Status Assessment (Worst case between Multimetric Indices for General Degradation and Saprobic Index)

0,80

0,60

France (Alps)

Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350 (1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No 14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007

0,93

0,71

France (Pyrenees)

Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350 (1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No 14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007

0,94

0,81

Italy

STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

0,95

0,71

Spain

Iberian BMWP (IBMWP)

0,83

0,53

Biological Quality Element: Phytobenthos

Results: Ecological quality ratios of the national classification systems intercalibrated

| Type and country | National classification systems intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Type R-A1 |
| Austria | Multimetric method consisting of three modules/metrics (Trophic Index, Saprobic Index, Reference Species) | 0,87 | 0,56 |
| France | Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Diatomées (IBD) norme AFNOR NF T 90-354 (2000) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No 14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007 | 0,86 | 0,71 |
| Germany | Deutsches Bewertungsverfahren für Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB) | 0,73 | 0,54 |
| Slovenia | Multimetric method consisting of two modules/metrics | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Type R-A2 |
| Austria | Multimetric method consisting of three modules/metrics (Trophic Index, Saprobic Index, Reference Species) | 0,87 | 0,56 |
| France | Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Diatomées (IBD) norme AFNOR NF T 90-354 (2000) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No 14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007 | 0,86 | 0,71 |
| Spain | Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) (Lenoir & Coste, 1996) | 0,94 | 0,74 |

Type and country

National classification systems intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Type R-A1

Austria

Multimetric method consisting of three modules/metrics (Trophic Index, Saprobic Index, Reference Species)

0,87

0,56

France

Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Diatomées (IBD) norme AFNOR NF T 90-354 (2000) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No 14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007

0,86

0,71

Germany

Deutsches Bewertungsverfahren für Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB)

0,73

0,54

Slovenia

Multimetric method consisting of two modules/metrics

0,80

0,60

Type R-A2

Austria

Multimetric method consisting of three modules/metrics (Trophic Index, Saprobic Index, Reference Species)

0,87

0,56

France

Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Diatomées (IBD) norme AFNOR NF T 90-354 (2000) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No 14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007

0,86

0,71

Spain

Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) (Lenoir & Coste, 1996)

0,94

0,74

WATER CATEGORY: Rivers

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Central/Baltic

Description of types that have been intercalibrated

| Type | River characterisation | Catchment
  (km2) | Altitude & 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, 8-25m width (bankfull size) | > 0,4 |
| R-C5 | Large lowland mixed | 1 000 -10 000 | lowland, barbel zone, variation in velocity, max. altitude in catchment: 800m, > 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 |

Type

River characterisation

Catchment

(km2)

Altitude & 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, 8-25m width (bankfull size)

> 0,4

R-C5

Large lowland mixed

1 000 -10 000

lowland, barbel zone, variation in velocity, max. altitude in catchment: 800m, > 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 the types that have been intercalibrated:

| Type R-C1: | Belgium (Flanders), Germany, Denmark, France, Italy, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, United Kingdom |
| --- | --- |
| Type R-C2: | Spain, France, Ireland, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom |
| Type R-C3: | Austria, Belgium (Wallonia), Czech Republic, Germany, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, France, Latvia, Luxembourg, United Kingdom |
| Type R-C4: | Belgium (Flanders), Czech Republic, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, United Kingdom |
| Type R-C5: | Czech Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Spain, Ireland. Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Sweden, United Kingdom |
| Type R-C6: | Denmark, Estonia, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Sweden, United Kingdom |

Type R-C1:

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

Type R-C2:

Spain, France, Ireland, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom

Type R-C3:

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

Type R-C4:

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

Type R-C5:

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

Type R-C6:

Denmark, Estonia, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Sweden, United Kingdom

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Benthic invertebrate fauna

Results: Ecological quality ratios of the national classification system intercalibrated

The following results apply to all types as described above.

| Country | National classification system intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Austria | Austrian System for Ecological River Status Assessment (Worst case between Multimetric Indices for General Degradation and Saprobic Index | 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 ‘Provisional Definition of the Good Status’, Ministry of the Walloon Region (2007) | 0,97 | 0,74 |
| Denmark | Danish Stream Fauna Index (DSFI) | 1,00 | 0,71 |
| Germany | PERLODES –Bewertungsverfahren von Fließgewässern auf Basis des Makrozoobenthos | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| France | Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350 (1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 no14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007 | 0,94 | 0,80 |
| Ireland | Quality Rating System (Q-value) | 0,85 | 0,75 |
| Italy | STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi) | 0,96 | 0,72 |
| Luxembourg | Classification luxembourgeoise DCE, Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN), Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350, 1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 07 No 4 of 11 April 2007 | 0,96 | 0,72 |
| Netherlands | KRW-maatlat | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Poland | BMWP (BMWP-PL) verified by modified Margalef diversity index | 0,89 | 0,68 |
| Spain | North Spain Multimetric Indices | 0,93 | 0,70 |
| Sweden | DJ-index (Dahl & Johnson 2004) | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| United Kingdom | River Invertebrate Classification Tool (RICT) | 0,97 | 0,86 |

Country

National classification system intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Austria

Austrian System for Ecological River Status Assessment (Worst case between Multimetric Indices for General Degradation and Saprobic Index

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 ‘Provisional Definition of the Good Status’, Ministry of the Walloon Region (2007)

0,97

0,74

Denmark

Danish Stream Fauna Index (DSFI)

1,00

0,71

Germany

PERLODES –Bewertungsverfahren von Fließgewässern auf Basis des Makrozoobenthos

0,80

0,60

France

Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350 (1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 no14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007

0,94

0,80

Ireland

Quality Rating System (Q-value)

0,85

0,75

Italy

STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

0,96

0,72

Luxembourg

Classification luxembourgeoise DCE, Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN), Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350, 1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 07 No 4 of 11 April 2007

0,96

0,72

Netherlands

KRW-maatlat

0,80

0,60

Poland

BMWP (BMWP-PL) verified by modified Margalef diversity index

0,89

0,68

Spain

North Spain Multimetric Indices

0,93

0,70

Sweden

DJ-index (Dahl & Johnson 2004)

0,80

0,60

United Kingdom

River Invertebrate Classification Tool (RICT)

0,97

0,86

Biological Quality Element: Phytobenthos

Results: Ecological quality ratios of the national classification system intercalibrated

| Country | National classification system intercalibrated | Type | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Austria | Multimetric method consisting of three modules/metrics (Trophic Index, Saprobic Index, Reference Species) | All types, altitude < 500 m | 0,70 | 0,42 |
| All types, altitude > 500 m | 0,71 | 0,42 |
| Belgium (Flanders) | Proportions of Impact-Sensitive and Impact-Associated Diatoms (PISIAD) | All types | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Belgium (Wallonia) | Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) AFNOR norm NF T 90-354 (2000) and ‘Provisional Definition of the Good Status’, Ministry of the Walloon Region (2007) | All types | 0,93 | 0,68 |
| Estonia | Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) | All types | 0,85 | 0,70 |
| France | Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Diatomées (IBD) norme AFNOR NF T 90-354 (2000) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 no14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007 | National Types 1, 2 and 4 | 0,93 | 0,80 |
| National Type 3 | 0,92 | 0,77 |
| Germany | Deutsches Bewertungsverfahren für Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB) | 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 |
| Luxembourg | Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) | All types | 0,85 | 0,70 |
| Netherlands | KRW Maatlat | All types | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Spain | Diatom multimetric (MDIAT) | All types | 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 (DARES) | All types | 0,93 | 0,78 |

Country

National classification system intercalibrated

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Austria

Multimetric method consisting of three modules/metrics (Trophic Index, Saprobic Index, Reference Species)

All types, altitude < 500 m

0,70

0,42

All types, altitude > 500 m

0,71

0,42

Belgium (Flanders)

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

All types

0,80

0,60

Belgium (Wallonia)

Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) AFNOR norm NF T 90-354 (2000) and ‘Provisional Definition of the Good Status’, Ministry of the Walloon Region (2007)

All types

0,93

0,68

Estonia

Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

All types

0,85

0,70

France

Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Diatomées (IBD) norme AFNOR NF T 90-354 (2000) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 no14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007

National Types 1, 2 and 4

0,93

0,80

National Type 3

0,92

0,77

Germany

Deutsches Bewertungsverfahren für Makrophyten und Phytobenthos (PHYLIB)

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

Luxembourg

Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

All types

0,85

0,70

Netherlands

KRW Maatlat

All types

0,80

0,60

Spain

Diatom multimetric (MDIAT)

All types

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 (DARES)

All types

0,93

0,78

WATER CATEGORY: Rivers

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Eastern Continental

Description of types that have been intercalibrated

| Type | River characterisation | Ecoregion | Catchment
  (km2) | Altitude
  (m) | Geology | Substrate |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| R-E1 | Carpathians: small to medium, mid-altitude | 10 | 10 — 1 000 | 500 — 800 | siliceous | gravel and boulder |
| R-E2 | Plains: medium-sized, lowland | 11 and 12 | 100 — 1 000 | < 200 | mixed | sand and silt |
| R-E4 | Plains: medium-sized, mid-altitude | 11 and 12 | 100 — 1 000 | 200 — 500 | mixed | sand and gravel |

Type

River characterisation

Ecoregion

Catchment

(km2)

Altitude

(m)

Geology

Substrate

R-E1

Carpathians: small to medium, mid-altitude

10

10 — 1 000

500 — 800

siliceous

gravel and boulder

R-E2

Plains: medium-sized, lowland

11 and 12

100 — 1 000

< 200

mixed

sand and silt

R-E4

Plains: medium-sized, mid-altitude

11 and 12

100 — 1 000

200 — 500

mixed

sand and gravel

Countries sharing the types that have been intercalibrated:

| Type R-E1: | Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia |
| --- | --- |
| Type R-E2: | Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia |
| Type R-E4: | Austria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia |

Type R-E1:

Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia

Type R-E2:

Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia

Type R-E4:

Austria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Benthic invertebrate fauna

Results: Ecological quality ratios of the national classification systems intercalibrated

| Type and country | National classification system intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Type R-E1, R-E2, R-E4 |
| Slovakia | Slovak System for Ecological River Status Assessment | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Type R-E4 |
| Austria | Austrian System for Ecological River Status Assessment (Worst case between Multimetric Indices for General Degradation and Saprobic Index) | 0,80 | 0,60 |

Type and country

National classification system intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Type R-E1, R-E2, R-E4

Slovakia

Slovak System for Ecological River Status Assessment

0,80

0,60

Type R-E4

Austria

Austrian System for Ecological River Status Assessment (Worst case between Multimetric Indices for General Degradation and Saprobic Index)

0,80

0,60

WATER CATEGORY: Rivers

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Mediterranean

Description of types that have been intercalibrated

| Type | River characterisation | Catchment (km2) | Altitude (m) | Geology | Flow regime |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| R-M1 | Small mid-altitude Mediterranean streams | 10-100 | 200-800 | Mixed | Highly seasonal |
| R-M2 | Small/Medium lowland Mediterranean streams | 10-1 000 | < 400 | Mixed | Highly seasonal |
| R-M4 | Small/Medium Mediterranean mountain streams | 10-1 000 | 400-1 500 | Non-silicious | Highly seasonal |
| R-M5 | Small, lowland, temporary | 10-100 | < 300 | Mixed | Temporary |

Type

River characterisation

Catchment (km2)

Altitude (m)

Geology

Flow regime

R-M1

Small mid-altitude Mediterranean streams

10-100

200-800

Mixed

Highly seasonal

R-M2

Small/Medium lowland Mediterranean streams

10-1 000

< 400

Mixed

Highly seasonal

R-M4

Small/Medium Mediterranean mountain streams

10-1 000

400-1 500

Non-silicious

Highly seasonal

R-M5

Small, lowland, temporary

10-100

< 300

Mixed

Temporary

Countries sharing the types that have been intercalibrated:

| Type R-M1: | France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain |
| --- | --- |
| Type R-M2: | France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain |
| Type R-M4: | Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Spain |
| Type R-M5: | Cyprus, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain |

Type R-M1:

France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain

Type R-M2:

France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain

Type R-M4:

Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Spain

Type R-M5:

Cyprus, Italy, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Benthic invertebrate fauna

Results: Ecological quality ratios of the national classification systems intercalibrated

| Type and country | National classification system intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| R-M1 |
| France | Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350 (1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 no14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007 | 0,94 | 0,81 |
| Greece | STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi) | 0,95 | 0,71 |
| Italy | STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi) | 0,97 | 0,72 |
| Portugal | North Invertebrate Portuguese Index, IPtIN | 0,92 | 0,69 |
| Spain | IBMWP | 0,78 | 0,48 |
| R-M2 |
| Greece | STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi) | 0,94 | 0,71 |
| Italy | STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi) | 0,94 | 0,70 |
| Portugal | North Invertebrate Portuguese Index, IPtIN | 0,87 | 0,66 |
| R-M4 |
| Cyprus | STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi) | 0,97 | 0,73 |
| Greece | STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi) | 0,96 | 0,72 |
| Italy | STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi) | 0,94 | 0,70 |
| Spain | IBMWP | 0,83 | 0,51 |
| R-M5 |
| Italy | STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi) | 0,97 | 0,73 |
| Portugal | South Invertebrate Portuguese Index, IPtIS | 0,98 | 0,72 |
| Spain | IBMWP | 0,91 | 0,55 |

Type and country

National classification system intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

R-M1

France

Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Global Normalisé (IBGN). Norme AFNOR NF T 90 350 (1992) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 no14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007

0,94

0,81

Greece

STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

0,95

0,71

Italy

STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

0,97

0,72

Portugal

North Invertebrate Portuguese Index, IPtIN

0,92

0,69

Spain

IBMWP

0,78

0,48

R-M2

Greece

STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

0,94

0,71

Italy

STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

0,94

0,70

Portugal

North Invertebrate Portuguese Index, IPtIN

0,87

0,66

R-M4

Cyprus

STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

0,97

0,73

Greece

STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

0,96

0,72

Italy

STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

0,94

0,70

Spain

IBMWP

0,83

0,51

R-M5

Italy

STAR Intercalibration Common Metric Index (STAR_ICMi)

0,97

0,73

Portugal

South Invertebrate Portuguese Index, IPtIS

0,98

0,72

Spain

IBMWP

0,91

0,55

Biological Quality Element: Phytobenthos

Results: Ecological quality ratios of the national classification systems intercalibrated

| Type and country | National classification system intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| R-M1 |
| France | Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Diatomées (IBD) norme AFNOR NF T 90-354 (2000) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No 14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007 | 0,93 | 0,80 |
| Portugal | Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) | 0,84 | 0,62 |
| Spain | Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) | 0,90 | 0,67 |
| R-M2 |
| France | Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Diatomées (IBD) norme AFNOR NF T 90-354 (2000) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 no14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007 | 0,93 | 0,80 |
| Portugal | Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) | 0,84 | 0,62 |
| Spain | Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) | 0,93 | 0,70 |
| R-M4 |
| Spain | Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) | 0,91 | 0,68 |
| R-M5 |
| Portugal | European Index (CEE) | 0,85 | 0,64 |
| Spain | Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) | 0,95 | 0,71 |

Type and country

National classification system intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

R-M1

France

Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Diatomées (IBD) norme AFNOR NF T 90-354 (2000) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 No 14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007

0,93

0,80

Portugal

Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

0,84

0,62

Spain

Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

0,90

0,67

R-M2

France

Classification française DCE Indice Biologique Diatomées (IBD) norme AFNOR NF T 90-354 (2000) and circular MEDD/DE/MAGE/BEMA 05 no14 of 28 July 2005 modified on 13 June 2007

0,93

0,80

Portugal

Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

0,84

0,62

Spain

Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

0,93

0,70

R-M4

Spain

Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

0,91

0,68

R-M5

Portugal

European Index (CEE)

0,85

0,64

Spain

Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

0,95

0,71

WATER CATEGORY: Rivers

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Northern

Description of types that have been intercalibrated

| Type | River characterisation | Catchment area (of stretch) | Altitude & geomorphology | Alkalinity
  (meq/l) | Organic material
  (mg Pt/l) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| R-N1 | Small lowland siliceous moderate alkalinity | 10-100 km2 | < 200 m or below the highest coastline | 0,2 — 1 | < 30
  (< 150 in Ireland) |
| R-N3 | Small/medium lowland organic | 10-1 000  km2 | < 0,2 | > 30 |
| R-N4 | Medium lowland siliceous moderate alkalinity | 100-1 000  km2 | 0,2 — 1 | < 30 |
| R-N5 | Small mid-altitude siliceous | 10-100 km2 | Between lowland and highland | < 0,2 | < 30 |

Type

River characterisation

Catchment area (of stretch)

Altitude & geomorphology

Alkalinity

(meq/l)

Organic material

(mg Pt/l)

R-N1

Small lowland siliceous moderate alkalinity

10-100 km2

< 200 m or below the highest coastline

0,2 — 1

< 30

(< 150 in Ireland)

R-N3

Small/medium lowland organic

10-1 000  km2

< 0,2

> 30

R-N4

Medium lowland siliceous moderate alkalinity

100-1 000  km2

0,2 — 1

< 30

R-N5

Small mid-altitude siliceous

10-100 km2

Between lowland and highland

< 0,2

< 30

Countries sharing the types that have been intercalibrated:

| Type R-N1: | Finland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom |
| --- | --- |
| Type R-N3: | Finland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom |
| Type R-N4: | Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom |
| Type R-N5: | Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom |

Type R-N1:

Finland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom

Type R-N3:

Finland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom

Type R-N4:

Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom

Type R-N5:

Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Benthic invertebrate fauna

Results: Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

The following results apply to all types as described above

| Country | National classification system intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Finland | Multimetric system, first version established | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Ireland | Quality Rating System (Q-value) | 0,85 | 0,75 |
| Norway | Average Score per Taxon (ASPT) | 0,99 | 0,87 |
| Sweden | DJ-index (Dahl & Johnson 2004) | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| United Kingdom | River Invertebrate Classification Tool (RICT) | 0,97 | 0,86 |

Country

National classification system intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Finland

Multimetric system, first version established

0,80

0,60

Ireland

Quality Rating System (Q-value)

0,85

0,75

Norway

Average Score per Taxon (ASPT)

0,99

0,87

Sweden

DJ-index (Dahl & Johnson 2004)

0,80

0,60

United Kingdom

River Invertebrate Classification Tool (RICT)

0,97

0,86

Biological Quality Element: Phytobenthos

Results: Ecological quality ratios of the national classification systems intercalibrated

The following results apply to all types as described above

| Country | National classification system intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Finland | Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) | 0,91 | 0,80 |
| Ireland | Revised form of Trophic Diatom Index (TDI) | 0,93 | 0,78 |
| Sweden | Swedish assessment methods, Swedish EPA regulations (NFS 2008:1) based on Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS) | 0,89 | 0,74 |
| United Kingdom | Diatom Assessment for River Ecological Status (DARES) | 0,93 | 0,78 |

Country

National classification system intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Finland

Indice de Polluosensibilité Spécifique (IPS)

0,91

0,80

Ireland

Revised form of Trophic Diatom Index (TDI)

0,93

0,78

Sweden

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

0,89

0,74

United Kingdom

Diatom Assessment for River Ecological Status (DARES)

0,93

0,78

WATER CATEGORY: Lakes

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Atlantic

Description of types that have been intercalibrated

| Type | Lake characterisation | Altitude
  (m above sea level) | Mean depth
  (m) | Alkalinity
  (meq/l) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| LA1/2 | Lowland, shallow, calcareous, small and large | < 200 | 3-15 | > 1 |

Type

Lake characterisation

Altitude

(m above sea level)

Mean depth

(m)

Alkalinity

(meq/l)

LA1/2

Lowland, shallow, calcareous, small and large

< 200

3-15

> 1

Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

Ireland and United Kingdom

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton parameter indicative of biomass (Chlorophyll a)

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

The following results refer to growing season mean values and apply to all countries sharing the type

| Type | Ecological Quality Ratios | Chlorophyll a concentrations (μg/l) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| LA1/2 | 0,55 | 0,32 | 4,6 — 7,0 | 8,0 — 12,0 |

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

Chlorophyll a concentrations (μg/l)

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

LA1/2

0,55

0,32

4,6 — 7,0

8,0 — 12,0

WATER CATEGORY: Lakes

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Alpine

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 |

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 and L-AL4: | Austria, France, Germany, Italy and Slovenia |
| --- | --- |

Types L-AL3 and L-AL4:

Austria, France, Germany, Italy and Slovenia

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton: parameters indicative of biomass

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

The following results refer to annual mean values and apply to all countries sharing the type. Member States may choose to use Chlorophyll a, total biovolume, or both parameters.

Chlorophyll a

| Type | Ecological Quality Ratios | Chlorophyll a concentrations (μg/l) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| L-AL3 | 0,70 | 0,40 | 2,1 — 2,7 | 3,8 — 4,7 |
| L-AL4 | 0,75 | 0,41 | 3,6 — 4,4 | 6,6 — 8,0 |

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

Chlorophyll a concentrations (μg/l)

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

L-AL3

0,70

0,40

2,1 — 2,7

3,8 — 4,7

L-AL4

0,75

0,41

3,6 — 4,4

6,6 — 8,0

Total biovolume

| Type | Ecological Quality Ratios | Total biovolumes (mm3/l) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| L-AL3 | 0,60 | 0,25 | 0,3 — 0,5 | 0,8 — 1,2 |
| L-AL4 | 0,64 | 0,26 | 0,8 — 1,1 | 1,9 — 2,7 |

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

Total biovolumes (mm3/l)

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

L-AL3

0,60

0,25

0,3 — 0,5

0,8 — 1,2

L-AL4

0,64

0,26

0,8 — 1,1

1,9 — 2,7

Phytoplankton: parameters indicative of taxonomic composition and abundance

Results: Ecological quality ratios of the national parameters intercalibrated

| Country | National parameters intercalibrated | Type | Ecological Quality Ratios | Class boundaries |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Austria
  Slovenia | Brettum index | L-AL3 | 0,94 | 0,83 | 4,12 —4,34 | 3,64 —3,83 |
| L-AL4 | 0,94 | 0,81 | 3,69 —3,87 | 3,20 —3,34 |
| Germany | PTSI (Phytoplankton Taxa Lake Index) | L-AL3 | 0,60 | 0,43 | 1,25 | 1,75 |
| L-AL4 | 0,71 | 0,56 | 1,75 | 2,25 |
| Italy | PTIot (Phytoplankton Taxa Index) | L-AL3 (mean depth < 100m) | 0,95 | 0,89 | 3,43 | 3,22 |
| L-AL4 | 0,95 | 0,85 | 3,37 | 3,01 |
| PTIspecies (Phytoplankton Taxa Index) | L-AL 3 (mean depth > 100m) | 0,93 | 0,82 | 4,00 | 3,50 |

Country

National parameters intercalibrated

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

Class boundaries

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Austria

Slovenia

Brettum index

L-AL3

0,94

0,83

4,12 —4,34

3,64 —3,83

L-AL4

0,94

0,81

3,69 —3,87

3,20 —3,34

Germany

PTSI (Phytoplankton Taxa Lake Index)

L-AL3

0,60

0,43

1,25

1,75

L-AL4

0,71

0,56

1,75

2,25

Italy

PTIot (Phytoplankton Taxa Index)

L-AL3 (mean depth < 100m)

0,95

0,89

3,43

3,22

L-AL4

0,95

0,85

3,37

3,01

PTIspecies (Phytoplankton Taxa Index)

L-AL 3 (mean depth > 100m)

0,93

0,82

4,00

3,50

Biological Quality Element: Macrophytes

Results: Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

| Type and country | National classification systems intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Austria
  Type L-AL3 and L-AL4 | Austrian macrophyte assessment system: Austrian Index Macrophytes for Lakes (AIM for Lakes), Module 1 | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Germany
  Type L-AL3 | German macrophyte/phytobenthos assessment system: Module 1 | 0,78 | 0,51 |
| Germany
  Type L-AL4 | German macrophyte/phytobenthos assessment system: Modules 1 + 2 | 0,71 | 0,47 |

Type and country

National classification systems intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Austria

Type L-AL3 and L-AL4

Austrian macrophyte assessment system: Austrian Index Macrophytes for Lakes (AIM for Lakes), Module 1

0,80

0,60

Germany

Type L-AL3

German macrophyte/phytobenthos assessment system: Module 1

0,78

0,51

Germany

Type L-AL4

German macrophyte/phytobenthos assessment system: Modules 1 + 2

0,71

0,47

WATER CATEGORY: Lakes

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Central/Baltic

Description of types that have been intercalibrated

| Type | Lake characterisation | Altitude (m above sea level) | Mean depth (m) | Alkalinity (meq/l) | Hydrological 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 |

Type

Lake characterisation

Altitude (m above sea level)

Mean depth (m)

Alkalinity (meq/l)

Hydrological 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

Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

| Types L-CB1 and L-CB2: | Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, France, Lithuania, Latvia, Netherlands, Poland, United Kingdom. |
| --- | --- |
| Type L-CB3: | Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, France, Latvia, Poland. |

Types L-CB1 and L-CB2:

Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, France, Lithuania, Latvia, Netherlands, Poland, United Kingdom.

Type L-CB3:

Belgium, Denmark, Estonia, France, Latvia, Poland.

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton: parameter indicative of biomass

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

The following results refer to growing season mean values and apply to all countries sharing the type.

| Type | Ecological Quality Ratios | Chlorophyll a concentrations (μg/l) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| L-CB1 | 0,55 | 0,32 | 4,6 — 7,0 | 8,0 — 12,0 |
| L-CB2 | 0,63 | 0,30 | 9,9 — 11,7 | 21,0 — 25,0 |
| L-CB3 | 0,57 | 0,31 | 4,3 — 6,5 | 8,0 — 12,0 |

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

Chlorophyll a concentrations (μg/l)

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

L-CB1

0,55

0,32

4,6 — 7,0

8,0 — 12,0

L-CB2

0,63

0,30

9,9 — 11,7

21,0 — 25,0

L-CB3

0,57

0,31

4,3 — 6,5

8,0 — 12,0

Biological Quality Element: Macrophytes

Results: Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems intercalibrated

The following results apply to LCB1 and LCB2 types

| Country | National classification systems intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Belgium | Flemish macrophyte assessment system | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Germany | German macrophyte assessment system: Reference Index | 0,75 | 0,50 |
| Estonia | Estonian macrophyte assessment system | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Latvia | Latvian macrophyte assessment system | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Netherlands | Dutch macrophyte assessment system (KRW Maatlat) | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| United Kingdom | UK macrophyte assessment system: LEAFPACS | 0,80 | 0,60 |

Country

National classification systems intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Belgium

Flemish macrophyte assessment system

0,80

0,60

Germany

German macrophyte assessment system: Reference Index

0,75

0,50

Estonia

Estonian macrophyte assessment system

0,80

0,60

Latvia

Latvian macrophyte assessment system

0,80

0,60

Netherlands

Dutch macrophyte assessment system (KRW Maatlat)

0,80

0,60

United Kingdom

UK macrophyte assessment system: LEAFPACS

0,80

0,60

WATER CATEGORY: Lakes

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Mediterranean

Description of types that have been intercalibrated

| Type | Lake characterisation | Altitude
  (m) | Annual mean Precipitation (mm) and T ( oC) | Mean depth
  (m) | Alkalinity
  (meq/l) | Lake size
  (km2) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| L-M5/7 | Reservoirs, deep, large, siliceous, ‘wet areas’, catchment < 20 000 km2 | 0 — 800 | > 800 or < 15 | > 15 | < 1 | > 0,5 |
| L-M8 | Reservoirs, deep, large, calcareous, catchment < 20 000 km2 | 0 — 800 | — | > 15 | > 1 | > 0,5 |

Type

Lake characterisation

Altitude

(m)

Annual mean Precipitation (mm) and T ( oC)

Mean depth

(m)

Alkalinity

(meq/l)

Lake size

(km2)

L-M5/7

Reservoirs, deep, large, siliceous, ‘wet areas’, catchment < 20 000 km2

0 — 800

> 800 or < 15

> 15

< 1

> 0,5

L-M8

Reservoirs, deep, large, calcareous, catchment < 20 000 km2

0 — 800

—

> 15

> 1

> 0,5

Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

| Type L-M5/7: | Greece, France, Portugal, Spain, Romania. |
| --- | --- |
| Type L-M8: | Cyprus, Greece, France, Italy, Spain, Romania. |

Type L-M5/7:

Greece, France, Portugal, Spain, Romania.

Type L-M8:

Cyprus, Greece, France, Italy, Spain, Romania.

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton: parameters indicative of biomass

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

The following results refer to summer mean values, euphotic depth and apply to all countries sharing the type. Member States may choose to use Chlorophyll a, total biovolume, or both parameters.

Chlorophyll a

| Type | Ecological Quality Ratios | Chlorophyll a concentrations (μg/l) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Good-Moderate boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| L-M5/7 | 0,21 | 6,7 — 9,5 |
| L-M8 | 0,43 | 4,2 — 6,0 |

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

Chlorophyll a concentrations (μg/l)

Good-Moderate boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

L-M5/7

0,21

6,7 — 9,5

L-M8

0,43

4,2 — 6,0

Total biovolume

| Type | Ecological Quality Ratios | Total biovolumes (mm3/l) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Good-Moderate boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| L-M5/7 | 0,19 | 1,9 |
| L-M8 | 0,36 | 2,1 |

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

Total biovolumes (mm3/l)

Good-Moderate boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

L-M5/7

0,19

1,9

L-M8

0,36

2,1

Phytoplankton: parameters indicative of taxonomic composition and abundance

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

The following results refer to summer mean values, euphotic depth and apply to all countries sharing the type. Member States must use at least one of the intercalibrated parameters (percentage of Cyanobacteria, Catalan index, Med PTI index)

Percentage of Cyanobacteria

| Type and country | Ecological Quality Ratios | % of Cyanobacteria |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Good-Moderate boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Type L-M5/7 |
| All countries sharing the type | 0,91 | 9,2 |
| Type L-M8 |
| All countries sharing the type | 0,72 | 28,5 |

Type and country

Ecological Quality Ratios

% of Cyanobacteria

Good-Moderate boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Type L-M5/7

All countries sharing the type

0,91

9,2

Type L-M8

All countries sharing the type

0,72

28,5

Ecological quality ratios calculated as EQR = (100 - boundary value)/(100 - reference value)

Catalan index

| Type and country | Ecological Quality Ratios | Catalan index |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Good-Moderate boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Type L-M5/7 |
| All countries sharing the type | 0,97 | 10,6 |
| Type L-M8 |
| All countries sharing the type | 0,98 | 7,7 |

Type and country

Ecological Quality Ratios

Catalan index

Good-Moderate boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Type L-M5/7

All countries sharing the type

0,97

10,6

Type L-M8

All countries sharing the type

0,98

7,7

Ecological quality ratios calculated as EQR = (400 - boundary value)/(400 - reference value)

Med PTI index

| Type and country | Ecological Quality Ratios | Med PTI |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Good-Moderate boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Type L-M5/7 |
| All countries sharing the type | 0,75 | 2,32 |
| Type L-M8 |
| All countries sharing the type | 0,77 | 2,38 |

Type and country

Ecological Quality Ratios

Med PTI

Good-Moderate boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Type L-M5/7

All countries sharing the type

0,75

2,32

Type L-M8

All countries sharing the type

0,77

2,38

WATER CATEGORY: Lakes

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Northern

Description of the types that have been intercalibrated

| Type | Lake characterisation | Altitude
  (m above sea level) | Mean depth
  (m) | Alkalinity
  (meq/l) | Colour
  (mg Pt/l) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| LN1 | Lowland, shallow, moderate alkalinity, clear | < 200 | 3–15 | 0,2 –1 | < 30 |
| LN2a | Lowland, shallow, low alkalinity, clear | < 200 | 3–15 | < 0,2 | < 30 |
| LN2b | Lowland, deep, low alkalinity, clear | < 200 | > 15 | < 0,2 | < 30 |
| LN3a | Lowland, shallow, low alkalinity, meso-humic | < 200 | 3–15 | < 0,2 | 30–90 |
| LN5 | Mid-altitude, shallow, low alkalinity, clear | 200-800 | 3–15 | < 0,2 | < 30 |
| LN6a | Mid-altitude, shallow, low alkalinity meso-humic | 200-800 | 3–15 | < 0,2 | 30–90 |
| LN8a | Lowland, shallow, moderate alkalinity, meso-humic | < 200 | 3–15 | 0,2 –1 | 30–90 |

Type

Lake characterisation

Altitude

(m above sea level)

Mean depth

(m)

Alkalinity

(meq/l)

Colour

(mg Pt/l)

LN1

Lowland, shallow, moderate alkalinity, clear

< 200

3–15

0,2 –1

< 30

LN2a

Lowland, shallow, low alkalinity, clear

< 200

3–15

< 0,2

< 30

LN2b

Lowland, deep, low alkalinity, clear

< 200

> 15

< 0,2

< 30

LN3a

Lowland, shallow, low alkalinity, meso-humic

< 200

3–15

< 0,2

30–90

LN5

Mid-altitude, shallow, low alkalinity, clear

200-800

3–15

< 0,2

< 30

LN6a

Mid-altitude, shallow, low alkalinity meso-humic

200-800

3–15

< 0,2

30–90

LN8a

Lowland, shallow, moderate alkalinity, meso-humic

< 200

3–15

0,2 –1

30–90

Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

| Types LN1, LN2a, LN3a, LN8a: | Ireland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom. |
| --- | --- |
| Types LN2b, LN5 and LN6a: | Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom. |

Types LN1, LN2a, LN3a, LN8a:

Ireland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom.

Types LN2b, LN5 and LN6a:

Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom.

Biological Quality Element: Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton: parameter indicative of biomass

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

The following results refer to growing season mean values and apply to all countries sharing the type

| Type | Ecological Quality Ratios | Chlorophyll a concentrations (μg/l) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| LN1 | 0,50 | 0,33 | 5,0 — 7,0 | 7,5 — 10,5 |
| LN2a | 0,50 | 0,29 | 3,0 — 5,0 | 5,0 — 8,5 |
| LN2b | 0,50 | 0,33 | 3,0 — 5,0 | 4,5 — 7,5 |
| LN3a | 0,50 | 0,30 | 5,0 — 7,0 | 8,0 — 12,0 |
| LN5 | 0,50 | 0,33 | 2,0 — 4,0 | 3,0 — 6,0 |
| LN6a | 0,50 | 0,33 | 4,0 — 6,0 | 6,0 — 9,0 |
| LN8a | 0,50 | 0,33 | 7,0 — 10,0 | 10,5 — 15,0 |

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

Chlorophyll a concentrations (μg/l)

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

LN1

0,50

0,33

5,0 — 7,0

7,5 — 10,5

LN2a

0,50

0,29

3,0 — 5,0

5,0 — 8,5

LN2b

0,50

0,33

3,0 — 5,0

4,5 — 7,5

LN3a

0,50

0,30

5,0 — 7,0

8,0 — 12,0

LN5

0,50

0,33

2,0 — 4,0

3,0 — 6,0

LN6a

0,50

0,33

4,0 — 6,0

6,0 — 9,0

LN8a

0,50

0,33

7,0 — 10,0

10,5 — 15,0

Biological Quality Element: Macrophytes

Description of the types that have been intercalibrated (for macrophytes intercalibration only)

| Type | Lake characterisation | Alkalinity (meq/l) | Color(mg Pt/l) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 101. | Low alkalinity, clear | 0,05 — 0,2 | < 30 |
| 102. | Low alkalinity, humic | 0,05 — 0,2 | > 30 |
| 201. | Moderate alkalinity, clear | 0,2 — 1,0 | < 30 |
| 202. | Moderate alkalinity, humic | 0,2 — 1,0 | > 30 |
| 301. | High alkalinity, clear | > 1,0 | < 30 |
| 302. | High alkalinity, humic | > 1,0 | > 30 |

Type

Lake characterisation

Alkalinity (meq/l)

Color(mg Pt/l)

101.

Low alkalinity, clear

0,05 — 0,2

< 30

102.

Low alkalinity, humic

0,05 — 0,2

> 30

201.

Moderate alkalinity, clear

0,2 — 1,0

< 30

202.

Moderate alkalinity, humic

0,2 — 1,0

> 30

301.

High alkalinity, clear

> 1,0

< 30

302.

High alkalinity, humic

> 1,0

> 30

Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

| Types 101, 102, 201 and 202: | Ireland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom. |
| --- | --- |
| Type 301: | Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom. |
| Type 302: | Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom. |

Types 101, 102, 201 and 202:

Ireland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom.

Type 301:

Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom.

Type 302:

Ireland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom.

Results: Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems methods

| Country | National classification system intercalibrated | Type | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Ireland | Free Macrophyte Index | All types intercalibrated | 0,90 | 0,68 |
| Sweden | Macrophyte Trophic index (Ecke) | Type 101 | 0,98 | 0,79 |
| Type 102 | 0,98 | 0,88 |
| Type 201 | 0,94 | 0,83 |
| Type 202 | 0,96 | 0,83 |
| Norway | Macrophyte Trophic Index (Mjelde) | Type 101 | 0,94 | 0,61 |
| Type 102 | 0,96 | 0,65 |
| Type 201 | 0,91 | 0,72 |
| Type 202 | 0,9 | 0,77 |
| Type 301 | 0,92 | 0,69 |
| United Kingdom | UK macrophyte assessment system: LEAFPACS | All types intercalibrated | 0,80 | 0,60 |

Country

National classification system intercalibrated

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Ireland

Free Macrophyte Index

All types intercalibrated

0,90

0,68

Sweden

Macrophyte Trophic index (Ecke)

Type 101

0,98

0,79

Type 102

0,98

0,88

Type 201

0,94

0,83

Type 202

0,96

0,83

Norway

Macrophyte Trophic Index (Mjelde)

Type 101

0,94

0,61

Type 102

0,96

0,65

Type 201

0,91

0,72

Type 202

0,9

0,77

Type 301

0,92

0,69

United Kingdom

UK macrophyte assessment system: LEAFPACS

All types intercalibrated

0,80

0,60

WATER CATEGORY: Coastal and transitional

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Baltic Sea GIG

Description of types that have been intercalibrated

| Type | Salinity psu | Exposure | Depth | Ice days | Other Characteristics |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| CW B0 | 0,5 - 3 | Sheltered | Shallow | > 150 | Sites in Botnian Bay (Northern Quark) |
| CW B2 | 3-6 | Sheltered | Shallow | 90 — 150 | Sites in Bothnian Sea |
| CW B3 a | 3-6 | Sheltered | Shallow | ~90 | Sites in the area extending from the southern Bothnian Sea to the Archipelago Sea and the western Gulf of Finland |
| CW B3 b | 3-6 | Exposed | Shallow | ~90 |
| CW B12 a

  Eastern Baltic Sea | 5-8 | Sheltered | Shallow | — | Sites in the Gulf of Riga, |
| CW B12 b

  Western Baltic Sea | 8 — 22 | Sheltered | Shallow | — | Sites at the Southern Swedish coast and the South western Baltic Sea open coast along Denmark and Germany |
| CW B13 | 6-22 | Exposed | Shallow | — | Sites along the coast of the Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, the Polish coast and the Danish island Bornholm |
| CW B 14 | 6-22 | Sheltered | Shallow | — | Lagoons |
| TW B 13 | 6-22 | Exposed | Shallow | — | Transitional water. Sites along the coast of Lithuania and Poland |

Type

Salinity psu

Exposure

Depth

Ice days

Other Characteristics

CW B0

0,5 - 3

Sheltered

Shallow

> 150

Sites in Botnian Bay (Northern Quark)

CW B2

3-6

Sheltered

Shallow

90 — 150

Sites in Bothnian Sea

CW B3 a

3-6

Sheltered

Shallow

~90

Sites in the area extending from the southern Bothnian Sea to the Archipelago Sea and the western Gulf of Finland

CW B3 b

3-6

Exposed

Shallow

~90

CW B12 a

Eastern Baltic Sea

5-8

Sheltered

Shallow

—

Sites in the Gulf of Riga,

CW B12 b

Western Baltic Sea

8 — 22

Sheltered

Shallow

—

Sites at the Southern Swedish coast and the South western Baltic Sea open coast along Denmark and Germany

CW B13

6-22

Exposed

Shallow

—

Sites along the coast of the Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, the Polish coast and the Danish island Bornholm

CW B 14

6-22

Sheltered

Shallow

—

Lagoons

TW B 13

6-22

Exposed

Shallow

—

Transitional water. Sites along the coast of Lithuania and Poland

Countries sharing types that have been intercalibrated:

| Types CWB0, CWB2, CWB3a, CWB3b: | Finland, Sweden. |
| --- | --- |
| Type CWB12a: | Estonia |
| Type CWB12b: | Germany, Denmark, Sweden. |
| Type CWB13: | Denmark, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland. |
| Type CWB14: | Denmark, Poland |
| Type TWB13: | Lithuania, Poland. |

Types CWB0, CWB2, CWB3a, CWB3b:

Finland, Sweden.

Type CWB12a:

Estonia

Type CWB12b:

Germany, Denmark, Sweden.

Type CWB13:

Denmark, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland.

Type CWB14:

Denmark, Poland

Type TWB13:

Lithuania, Poland.

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Benthic invertebrate fauna

Results: Ecological quality ratios of the national classification systems intercalibrated

| Type and country | National classification system intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| CW B0 |
| Finland | BBI- Finnish Brackish water Benthic Index | 0,99 | 0,59 |
| Sweden | BQI–Swedish multimetric biological quality index (soft sediment infauna) | 0,77 | 0,31 |
| CW B2 |
| Finland | BBI- Finnish Brackish water Benthic Index | 0,95 | 0,57 |
| Sweden | BQI–Swedish multimetric biological quality index (soft sediment infauna) | 0,76 | 0,29 |
| CW B3 a |
| Finland | BBI- Finnish Brackish water Benthic Index | 0,89 | 0,53 |
| Sweden | BQI–Swedish multimetric biological quality index (soft sediment infauna) | 0,76 | 0,29 |
| CW B3 b |
| Finland | BBI- Finnish Brackish water Benthic Index | 0,90 | 0,54 |
| Sweden | BQI–Swedish multimetric biological quality index (soft sediment infauna) | 0,76 | 0,29 |

Type and country

National classification system intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

CW B0

Finland

BBI- Finnish Brackish water Benthic Index

0,99

0,59

Sweden

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

0,77

0,31

CW B2

Finland

BBI- Finnish Brackish water Benthic Index

0,95

0,57

Sweden

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

0,76

0,29

CW B3 a

Finland

BBI- Finnish Brackish water Benthic Index

0,89

0,53

Sweden

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

0,76

0,29

CW B3 b

Finland

BBI- Finnish Brackish water Benthic Index

0,90

0,54

Sweden

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

0,76

0,29

Biological Quality Element: Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton: parameter indicative of biomass (Chlorophyll a)

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

The following results refer to summer mean May/June — September

| Type and country | Ecological Quality Ratios for the national classification systems | Parameter values/ranges
  Chlorophyll a μg/l |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High/-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| CW B0 | | | | |
| All countries sharing the type | 0,76 | 0,56 | 1,7 (1,5 — 1,8 ) | 2,3 (2,0 -2,7 ) |
| CW B2 | | | | |
| All countries sharing the type | 0,78 | 0,56 | 1,8 | 2,5 (2,3 -2,6 ) |
| CW B3 a | | | | |
| Sheltered
  All countries sharing the type | 0,71 | 0,49 | 2,4 (2,2 — 2,6 ) | 3,5 (2,9 — 4,0 ) |
| CW B3 b | | | | |
| Exposed
  All countries sharing the type | 0,81 | 0,68 | 1,5 | 1,8 |
| CW B 12 a | | | | |
| Eastern Baltic Sea
  Salinity 5-8 psu
  All countries sharing the type | 0,82 | 0,66 | 2,2 | 2,7 |
| CW B 12 b | | | | |
| Western Baltic Sea
  Salinity8 -22 psu
  All countries sharing the type | 0,92 | 0,63 | 1,3 (1,1 — 1,5 ) | 1,9 |
| CW B 13 | | | | |
| Denmark, Estonia and Latvia | 0,92 | 0,75 | 1,3 | 1,6 |
| CW B 14 | | | | |
| Denmark | 0,82 | 0,56 | 1,1 | 1,6 |
| TW B 13 | | | | |
| All countries sharing the type | 0,90 | 0,66 | 4,2 | 5,8 |

Type and country

Ecological Quality Ratios for the national classification systems

Parameter values/ranges

Chlorophyll a μg/l

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High/-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

CW B0

All countries sharing the type

0,76

0,56

1,7 (1,5 — 1,8 )

2,3 (2,0 -2,7 )

CW B2

All countries sharing the type

0,78

0,56

1,8

2,5 (2,3 -2,6 )

CW B3 a

Sheltered

All countries sharing the type

0,71

0,49

2,4 (2,2 — 2,6 )

3,5 (2,9 — 4,0 )

CW B3 b

Exposed

All countries sharing the type

0,81

0,68

1,5

1,8

CW B 12 a

Eastern Baltic Sea

Salinity 5-8 psu

All countries sharing the type

0,82

0,66

2,2

2,7

CW B 12 b

Western Baltic Sea

Salinity8 -22 psu

All countries sharing the type

0,92

0,63

1,3 (1,1 — 1,5 )

1,9

CW B 13

Denmark, Estonia and Latvia

0,92

0,75

1,3

1,6

CW B 14

Denmark

0,82

0,56

1,1

1,6

TW B 13

All countries sharing the type

0,90

0,66

4,2

5,8

Biological Quality Element: Angiosperms

Angiosperms: parameter indicative of abundance (Depth limit of Eelgrass Zostera marina)

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

| Type and country | Ecological Quality Ratios for the national classification systems | Parameter values/ranges
  Depth limit (m) Eelgrass Zostera marina |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High/-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| CW B 12 b | | | | |
| Denmark and Germany
  Open coast | 0,90 | 0,74 | 8,5 (8,0 — 9,4 ) | 7 (6,6 — 7,1 ) |

Type and country

Ecological Quality Ratios for the national classification systems

Parameter values/ranges

Depth limit (m) Eelgrass Zostera marina

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High/-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

CW B 12 b

Denmark and Germany

Open coast

0,90

0,74

8,5 (8,0 — 9,4 )

7 (6,6 — 7,1 )

WATER CATEGORY: Coastal and transitional

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 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| NEA1/26a | Open oceanic, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow | > 30
  Mesotidal 1 — 5
  < 30 | Medium 1 — 3
  Exposed or sheltered | Fully mixed
  Days |
| NEA1/26b | Enclosed seas, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow | > 30
  Mesotidal 1 — 5
  < 30 | Medium 1 — 3
  Exposed or sheltered | Fully mixed
  Days |
| NEA1/26c | Enclosed seas, enclosed or sheltered, partly stratified | > 30
  Microtidal/Mesotidal < 1 — 5
  < 30 | Medium 1 — 3
  Exposed or sheltered | Partly stratified
  Days to weeks |
| NEA1/26d | Scandinavian coast, exposed or sheltered, shallow | > 30
  Microtidal < 1
  < 30 | Low < 1
  Exposed or moderately exposed | Partly stratified
  Days to weeks |
| NEA1/26e | Areas of upwelling, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow | > 30
  Mesotidal 1 — 5
  < 30 | Medium 1 — 3
  Exposed or sheltered | Fully mixed
  Days |
| NEA3/4 | 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 |
| NEA7 | Deep fjordic and sea loch systems | > 30
  Mesotidal 1 -5
  > 30 | Low < 1
  Sheltered | Fully mixed
  Days |
| NEA8 | Skagerrak Inner Arc Type, polyhaline, microtidal, sheltered, shallow | Polyhaline 18 — 30
  Microtidal < 1
  < 30 | Low < 1
  Sheltered | Partly stratified
  Days to weeks |
| NEA9 | Fjord with a shallow sill at the mouth with a very deep maximum depth in the central basin with poor deepwater exchange | Polyhaline 18 — 30
  Microtidal < 1
  > 30 | Low < 1
  Sheltered | Partly stratified
  Weeks |
| NEA10 | Skagerrak Outer Arc Type, polyhaline, microtidal, exposed, deep | Polyhaline 18 — 30
  Microtidal < 1
  > 30 | Low < 1
  Exposed | Partly stratified
  Days |
| NEA11 | Transitional Waters | Oligohaline 0 — 35
  Micro to macrotidal
  < 30 | Variable
  Sheltered or moderately exposed | Partly or permanently stratified
  Days to weeks |

Type

Characterisation

Salinity (psu)

Tidal Range(m)

Depth(m)

Current Velocity (knots)

Exposure

Mixing

Residence Time

NEA1/26a

Open oceanic, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow

> 30

Mesotidal 1 — 5

< 30

Medium 1 — 3

Exposed or sheltered

Fully mixed

Days

NEA1/26b

Enclosed seas, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow

> 30

Mesotidal 1 — 5

< 30

Medium 1 — 3

Exposed or sheltered

Fully mixed

Days

NEA1/26c

Enclosed seas, enclosed or sheltered, partly stratified

> 30

Microtidal/Mesotidal < 1 — 5

< 30

Medium 1 — 3

Exposed or sheltered

Partly stratified

Days to weeks

NEA1/26d

Scandinavian coast, exposed or sheltered, shallow

> 30

Microtidal < 1

< 30

Low < 1

Exposed or moderately exposed

Partly stratified

Days to weeks

NEA1/26e

Areas of upwelling, exposed or sheltered, euhaline, shallow

> 30

Mesotidal 1 — 5

< 30

Medium 1 — 3

Exposed or sheltered

Fully mixed

Days

NEA3/4

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

NEA7

Deep fjordic and sea loch systems

> 30

Mesotidal 1 -5

> 30

Low < 1

Sheltered

Fully mixed

Days

NEA8

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

Polyhaline 18 — 30

Microtidal < 1

< 30

Low < 1

Sheltered

Partly stratified

Days to weeks

NEA9

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

Polyhaline 18 — 30

Microtidal < 1

> 30

Low < 1

Sheltered

Partly stratified

Weeks

NEA10

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

Polyhaline 18 — 30

Microtidal < 1

> 30

Low < 1

Exposed

Partly stratified

Days

NEA11

Transitional Waters

Oligohaline 0 — 35

Micro to macrotidal

< 30

Variable

Sheltered or moderately exposed

Partly or permanently stratified

Days to weeks

Countries sharing the types that have been intercalibrated:

| Type NEA1/26a: | Spain, France, Ireland, Norway, United Kingdom |
| --- | --- |
| Type NEA1/26b: | Belgium, France, Netherlands, United Kingdom |
| Type NEA1/26c: | Germany, Denmark |
| Type NEA1/26d: | Denmark |
| Type NEA1/26e: | Portugal, Spain |
| Type NEA3/4: | Germany, Netherlands |
| Type NEA7: | Norway, United Kingdom |
| Type NEA8: | Denmark, Norway, Sweden |
| Type NEA9: | Norway, Sweden |
| Type NEA10: | Norway, Sweden |
| Type NEA11: | Belgium, Germany, Spain, France, Ireland, Netherlands, Portugal, United Kingdom |

Type NEA1/26a:

Spain, France, Ireland, Norway, United Kingdom

Type NEA1/26b:

Belgium, France, Netherlands, United Kingdom

Type NEA1/26c:

Germany, Denmark

Type NEA1/26d:

Denmark

Type NEA1/26e:

Portugal, Spain

Type NEA3/4:

Germany, Netherlands

Type NEA7:

Norway, United Kingdom

Type NEA8:

Denmark, Norway, Sweden

Type NEA9:

Norway, Sweden

Type NEA10:

Norway, Sweden

Type NEA11:

Belgium, Germany, Spain, France, Ireland, Netherlands, Portugal, United Kingdom

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Benthic invertebrate fauna

Results: Ecological quality ratios of the national classification systems intercalibrated

The results are applicable to soft sediment habitats only (subtidal mud/sand habitats).

| Type and country | National classification system | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Types NEA1/26, NEA 3/4 and NEA7 (Indices responsive primarily to organic enrichment and toxic pollution pressures in soft sediment habitats) |
| Denmark | DKI | 0,67 | 0,53 |
| France | M-AMBI | 0,77 | 0,53 |
| Germany | M-AMBI | 0,85 | 0,70 |
| Ireland | IQI | 0,75 | 0,64 |
| Norway | NQI | 0,92 | 0,81 |
| Portugal | P-BAT | 0,79 | 0,58 |
| Spain | M-AMBI | 0,77 | 0,53 |
| United Kingdom | IQI | 0,75 | 0,64 |
| Types NEA1/26 and NEA3/4 (Index responsive to multiple pressures in multiple habitats) |
| Belgium | BEQI | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Netherlands | BEQI | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Types NEA8/9/10 |
| Denmark | DKI | 0,82 | 0,63 |
| Norway | NQI | 0,92 | 0,81 |
| Sweden | BQI | 0,89 | 0,68 |

Type and country

National classification system

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Types NEA1/26, NEA 3/4 and NEA7 (Indices responsive primarily to organic enrichment and toxic pollution pressures in soft sediment habitats)

Denmark

DKI

0,67

0,53

France

M-AMBI

0,77

0,53

Germany

M-AMBI

0,85

0,70

Ireland

IQI

0,75

0,64

Norway

NQI

0,92

0,81

Portugal

P-BAT

0,79

0,58

Spain

M-AMBI

0,77

0,53

United Kingdom

IQI

0,75

0,64

Types NEA1/26 and NEA3/4 (Index responsive to multiple pressures in multiple habitats)

Belgium

BEQI

0,80

0,60

Netherlands

BEQI

0,80

0,60

Types NEA8/9/10

Denmark

DKI

0,82

0,63

Norway

NQI

0,92

0,81

Sweden

BQI

0,89

0,68

Biological Quality Element: Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton: parameter indicative of biomass parameter (Chlorophyll a)

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

The following results apply to all countries sharing the types. Parameter values are expressed in μg/l as the 90 %ile value calculated over the defined growing season in a six year period. The results relate to geographic areas within the types as described in the technical report.

| Type | Ecological Quality Ratios | Values (μg/l, 90 %ile |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| NEA1/26a | 0,67 | 0,33 | 1 — 5 | 2 — 10 |
| NEA1/26b | 0,67 | 0,44 | 6 — 10 | 9 — 15 |
| NEA1/26c | 0,67 | 0,44 | 5 | 7,5 |
| NEA1/26d | 0,67 | 0,50 | 3 | 4 |
| NEA1/26e | 0,67 | 0,44 | 6 — 8 | 9 — 12 |
| NEA8 | 0,67 | 0,33 | 1,5 | 3 |
| NEA9 | 0,67 | 0,33 | 2,5 | 5 |
| NEA10 | 0,67 | 0,33 | 3 | 6 |

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

Values (μg/l, 90 %ile

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

NEA1/26a

0,67

0,33

1 — 5

2 — 10

NEA1/26b

0,67

0,44

6 — 10

9 — 15

NEA1/26c

0,67

0,44

5

7,5

NEA1/26d

0,67

0,50

3

4

NEA1/26e

0,67

0,44

6 — 8

9 — 12

NEA8

0,67

0,33

1,5

3

NEA9

0,67

0,33

2,5

5

NEA10

0,67

0,33

3

6

Phytoplankton: parameter indicative of blooms

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

| Type and country | National parameter intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios | Values ( % single taxa counts above thresholds) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| NEA1/26a/b, NEA3/4 |
| Belgium | | | | | |
| Germany | | | | | |
| Netherlands | | | | | |
| UK | Phaeocystis Blooms | 0,92 | 0,49 | 9 | 17 |
| NEA1/26a/b |
| Spain | | | | | |
| France | | | | | |
| Ireland | | | | | |
| UK | Taxa cell counts | 0,84 | 0,43 | 20 | 39 |
| NEA1/26e |
| Portugal | | | | | |
| Spain | Taxa cell counts | 0,83 | 0,51 | 30 | 49 |

Type and country

National parameter intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

Values ( % single taxa counts above thresholds)

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

NEA1/26a/b, NEA3/4

Belgium

Germany

Netherlands

UK

Phaeocystis Blooms

0,92

0,49

9

17

NEA1/26a/b

Spain

France

Ireland

UK

Taxa cell counts

0,84

0,43

20

39

NEA1/26e

Portugal

Spain

Taxa cell counts

0,83

0,51

30

49

Biological Quality Element: Macroalgae

Macroalgae: parameter indicative of composition

Results: Ecological quality ratios of national parameter intercalibrated

| Type and country | National parameter intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| NEA1/26 |
| Ireland | Rocky Shore Reduced Species List Multimetric System | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Norway | Rocky Shore Reduced Species List Multimetric System | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| United Kingdom | Rocky Shore Reduced Species List Multimetric System | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| Spain | Multimetric System CFR | 0,81 | 0,57 |
| Portugal | Multimetric System p-MarMAT | 0,82 | 0,64 |
| Ireland
  United Kingdom | Opportunistic Macroalgae Multimetric System | 0,80 | 0,60 |
| NEA8/9/10 |
| Norway
  Sweden | Subtidal Algae (Depth Limit of macroalgal Species) | 0,81 | 0,61 |

Type and country

National parameter intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

NEA1/26

Ireland

Rocky Shore Reduced Species List Multimetric System

0,80

0,60

Norway

Rocky Shore Reduced Species List Multimetric System

0,80

0,60

United Kingdom

Rocky Shore Reduced Species List Multimetric System

0,80

0,60

Spain

Multimetric System CFR

0,81

0,57

Portugal

Multimetric System p-MarMAT

0,82

0,64

Ireland

United Kingdom

Opportunistic Macroalgae Multimetric System

0,80

0,60

NEA8/9/10

Norway

Sweden

Subtidal Algae (Depth Limit of macroalgal Species)

0,81

0,61

Biological Quality Element: Angiosperms

Angiosperms: parameter indicative of taxonomic composition and abundance

Results: Ecological quality ratios of national parameter intercalibrated

| Type and country | National parameter intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios | Parameter values (*1) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| NEA1/26, NEA 3/4, NEA11 |
| Ireland
  Netherlands
  UK | Intertidal Seagrass Abundance (density) and Species Composition Multimetric | 0,90 | 0,70 | Not applicable | Not applicable |
| NEA1/26, NEA3/4 |
| Germany
  Ireland
  Netherlands
  UK | Intertidal Seagrass (Area: Acreage/bed extent) | 0,90 | 0,70 | 10 | 30 |

Type and country

National parameter intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

Parameter values (*1)

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

NEA1/26, NEA 3/4, NEA11

Ireland

Netherlands

UK

Intertidal Seagrass Abundance (density) and Species Composition Multimetric

0,90

0,70

Not applicable

Not applicable

NEA1/26, NEA3/4

Germany

Ireland

Netherlands

UK

Intertidal Seagrass (Area: Acreage/bed extent)

0,90

0,70

10

30

WATER CATEGORY: Coastal and transitional

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Mediterranean

Results apply to coastal waters only.

Typology has been developed for specific quality elements only (see below).

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Benthic invertebrate fauna

Results: Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems

The following results apply to soft sediments only

| Country | National classification systems intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Cyprus | Bentix | 0,75 | 0,58 |
| Greece | Bentix | 0,75 | 0,58 |
| Slovenia | M-AMBI | 0,83 | 0,62 |
| Spain | MEDOCC index | 0,73 | 0,47 |

Country

National classification systems intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Cyprus

Bentix

0,75

0,58

Greece

Bentix

0,75

0,58

Slovenia

M-AMBI

0,83

0,62

Spain

MEDOCC index

0,73

0,47

Biological Quality Element: Phytoplankton

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

| Type | Description | Density (kg/m3) | Annual mean Salinity (psu) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Type I | Highly influenced by freshwater input | < 25 | < 34,5 |
| Type IIA | 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

Description

Density (kg/m3)

Annual mean Salinity (psu)

Type I

Highly influenced by freshwater input

< 25

< 34,5

Type IIA

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

Countries sharing the types that have been intercalibrated

| Type I: | France, Italy |
| --- | --- |
| Type IIA: | France, Spain, Italy, Slovenia |
| Type IIIW: | France, Spain, Italy |
| Type IIIE:: | Greece, Cyprus |

Type I:

France, Italy

Type IIA:

France, Spain, Italy, Slovenia

Type IIIW:

France, Spain, Italy

Type IIIE::

Greece, Cyprus

Phytoplankton: parameter indicative of biomass (Chlorophyll a)

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

The following results apply to all countries sharing the types. 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. The results relate to geographic areas within the types as described in the technical report..

| Type | Ecological Quality Ratios | Values (μg/l, 90 %ile) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Type IIA | 0,80 | 0,53 | 2,4 | 3,6 |
| Type IIIW | 0,80 | 0,50 | 1,1 | 1,8 |
| Type IIIE | 0,80 | 0,20 | 0,1 | 0,4 |

Type

Ecological Quality Ratios

Values (μg/l, 90 %ile)

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Type IIA

0,80

0,53

2,4

3,6

Type IIIW

0,80

0,50

1,1

1,8

Type IIIE

0,80

0,20

0,1

0,4

Biological Quality Element: Macroalgae

Results: Ecological quality ratios of national classification systems

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

| Country | National classification systems intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Cyprus | EEI- Ecological Evaluation Index | 0,75 | 0,50 |
| France | CARLIT — Cartography of Littoral and upper-sublittoral rocky-shore communities | 0,75 | 0,60 |
| Greece | EEI- Ecological Evaluation Index | 0,75 | 0,50 |
| Slovenia | EEI- Ecological Evaluation Index | 0,75 | 0,50 |
| Spain | CARLIT-BENTHOS | 0,75 | 0,60 |

Country

National classification systems intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Cyprus

EEI- Ecological Evaluation Index

0,75

0,50

France

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

0,75

0,60

Greece

EEI- Ecological Evaluation Index

0,75

0,50

Slovenia

EEI- Ecological Evaluation Index

0,75

0,50

Spain

CARLIT-BENTHOS

0,75

0,60

WATER CATEGORY: Coastal and transitional

GEOGRAPHICAL INTERCALIBRATION GROUP: Black Sea

Description of types that have been intercalibrated

| Type | Description |
| --- | --- |
| CW-BL1 | Mesohaline, microtidal (< 1 m), shallow (< 30 m), moderately exposed, mixed substratum |

Type

Description

CW-BL1

Mesohaline, microtidal (< 1 m), shallow (< 30 m), moderately exposed, mixed substratum

Countries sharing the types that have been intercalibrated:

Bulgaria and Romania

RESULTS

Biological Quality Element: Phytoplankton

Phytoplankton: parameter indicative of biomass

Results: Ecological quality ratios and parameter values

| Season | Ecological Quality Ratios | Biomass values (mg/m3) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary | High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Winter | 0,93 | 0,78 | 1 770 | 3 420 |
| Spring | 0,93 | 0,78 | 3 515 | 5 690 |
| Summer | 0,93 | 0,78 | 1 281 | 2 526 |
| Autumn | 0,93 | 0,78 | 1 840 | 3 640 |

Season

Ecological Quality Ratios

Biomass values (mg/m3)

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Winter

0,93

0,78

1 770

3 420

Spring

0,93

0,78

3 515

5 690

Summer

0,93

0,78

1 281

2 526

Autumn

0,93

0,78

1 840

3 640

Biological Quality Element: Benthic invertebrates fauna

Results: Ecological quality ratios of national parameters intercalibrated

Member States must use at least one of the intercalibrated parameters (Shannon diversity index H’, AMBI, M-AMBI)

| National parameters intercalibrated | Ecological Quality Ratios |
| --- | --- |
| High-Good boundary | Good-Moderate boundary |
| Shannon diversity index H’ | 0,89 | 0,69 |
| AMBI | 0,83 | 0,53 |
| M-AMBI | 0,85 | 0,55 |

National parameters intercalibrated

Ecological Quality Ratios

High-Good boundary

Good-Moderate boundary

Shannon diversity index H’

0,89

0,69

AMBI

0,83

0,53

M-AMBI

0,85

0,55

---

(*1)  Intertidal seagrass values expressed as percentage areal loss from reference area.

---