Use of biotic indices in semi-enclosed coastal ecosystems and transitional waters habitats - Implications for the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive
| Type | Article | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Date | 2008-07 | ||||||||
| Language | English | ||||||||
| Author(s) | Blanchet H1, Lavesque Nicolas1, Ruellet T2, 3, Dauvin J2, 3, Sauriau Pierre-Guy4, Desroy Nicolas 5, Desclaux C1, Leconte M1, Bachelet G1, Janson A2, 3, Bessineton C6, Duhamel S6, Jourde J6, Mayot S7, Simon S7, de Montaudouin X1 |
||||||||
| Affiliation(s) | 1 : Univ Bordeaux 1, CNRS, UMR 5805, EPOC,Stn Marine Arcachon, F-33120 Arcachon, France. 2 : Univ Sci & Technol Lille 1, CNRS, FRE 2816, ELICO,Stn Marine Wimereux, F-62930 Wimereux, France. 3 : Grp Interet Publ Seine Aval, F-76000 Rouen, France. 4 : Univ Rochelle, CNRS, UMR 6217, IFREMER,CRELA, F-17137 Lhoumeau, France. 5 : IFREMER, Lab Environm & Ressources St Malo, F-35042 St Malo, France. 6 : Maison Estuaire, F-76600 Le Havre, France. 7 : Cellule Suivi Littoral Haut Normand, F-76600 Le Havre, France. |
||||||||
| Source | Ecological Indicators (1470-160X) (Elsevier), 2008-07 , Vol. 8 , N. 4 , P. 360-372 | ||||||||
| DOI | 10.1016/j.ecolind.2007.04.003 | ||||||||
| WOS© Times Cited | 134 | ||||||||
| Keyword(s) | Transitional waters, Semi enclosed coastal ecosystems, Benthic invertebrates, Directive, European Water Framework, Biotic index | ||||||||
| Abstract | This study deals with the application of macrozoobenthos-based biotic indices (BI) within the frame of the implementation of the European Water Framework Directive. More precisely, this study aimed at assessing the performance of five recently developed methodologies (BI) for the assessment of ecological quality status (EcoQ) in two semi-enclosed, sheltered coastal ecosystems and in one transitional water body situated along the Western French coast, namely Marennes-Oleron Bay, Arcachon Bay, and the Seine Estuary. This study showed that these five indices rarely agreed with each other, describing very different pictures of the overall EcoQ of the three study sites. This work also clearly underlined the limitations of these approaches, notably the dependency of most of these BI and the resulting EcoQ classifications on habitat characteristics, more particularly to natural levels of sediment silt-clay content and the location of stations in the subtidal or the intertidal. The implication of our observations concerning the use of these BI for implementation of the WFD is discussed in terms of definition of habitat-specific reference conditions and necessity to adjust thresholds to the particular habitat occurring in semi-enclosed ecosystems. Meanwhile, the unmodified use of these BI severely impaired accurate assessment of EcoQ and decision-making on the managers' point of view. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. | ||||||||
| Full Text |
|