1. Manuals
  2. Brands
  3. Planet Manuals
  4. Network Router
  5. WGSW-24010
  6. User manual

Planet WGSW-24010 User Manual

10/100/1000mbps 24-port + 1 mini-gbic managed gigabit ethernet switch
Hide thumbs
Table of Contents

Advertisement

Quick Links

Download this manual
Enlarged version
Mean Tr ophic Rank: A User 's Manual
_
_
_
R&D Technical Report E38
_
_
_
3
NTH Holmes
, JR Newman
_
_
Research contractors:
NERC Institute of Freshwater Ecology
with IACR Centre for Aquatic Plant Management
and Alconbury Environmental Consultants
4
Environment Agency
Rio House
Waterside Drive
Aztec West
Almondsbury
BRISTOL
BS32 4UD
2
4
4
, S Chadd
, KJ Rouen
, L Saint
1
3
4
1
and FH Dawson
2

Advertisement

Table of Contents
loading

Related Manuals for Planet WGSW-24010

Summary of Contents for Planet WGSW-24010

  • Page 1 Mean Tr ophic Rank: A User ’s Manual R&D Technical Report E38 NTH Holmes , JR Newman , S Chadd , KJ Rouen , L Saint and FH Dawson Research contractors: NERC Institute of Freshwater Ecology with IACR Centre for Aquatic Plant Management and Alconbury Environmental Consultants Environment Agency Rio House...
  • Page 3 Publishing Or ganisation Environment Agency Rio House Waterside Drive Aztec West Almondsbury Bristol BS32 4UD Tel: 01454 624400 Fax: 01454 624409 ISBN: 1 85705 092 4 © Environment Agency 1999 All rights reserved. No parts of this document may be produced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the Environment Agency.
  • Page 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This document is intended as a description of a standard methodology for the assessment of the trophic status of rivers using macrophytes applicable throughout the United Kingdom. Its production would not have been possible without the cooperation and assistance of Dr Nigel H olmes, English Nature, Scottish Natural H eritage, The Countryside Commission for Wales, the Industrial Research and Technology Unit (Northern Ireland) and the Scottish and Northern Ireland Forum for Environmental Research (SNIFFER).
  • Page 5 This page has been left blank intentionally R&D Technical Report E38...

  • Page 6: Table Of Contents

    CONTENTS List of Figur es List of Tables Glossar y Executive Summar y Key Wor ds For ewor d About this manual Summary of the method Intr oduction to MTR What is MTR? Uses of MTR Principal application: Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive Other applications Sur vey Planning Alternative methods to consider...
  • Page 7 Interpretation for other purposes Interpretation of species diversity Interpretation of overall percentage cover values Quality Assur ance Introduction Training Audit surveys Inter-calibration exercise Database verification Survey length selection MTR Best Pr actice Checklist Uses of MTR Survey planning Survey methodology Data analysis Interpretation of results Quality assurance...
  • Page 8 R&D Technical Report E38...

  • Page 9: List Of Tables

    LIST OF FIGURES Diagrammatic representation of survey method Illustration of shading Macrophyte survey flow chart Interpretation of MTR results, Stage I ‘decision tree’: Is the site impacted by eutrophication? Interpretation of MTR results, Stage II ‘decision tree’: Is there a significant downstream impact from the qualifying discharge? LIST OF TABLES MTR scores summarised according to river community type Reasons for mismatch between audit and primary surveys, with suggested actions...

  • Page 10: Glossar Y Vi

    GLOSSARY Audit survey Repeat survey undertaken for quality assurance purposes. Countryside Council for Wales. Channel area The part of the river channel where macrophytes are seen submerged or partly submerged at low flow levels. At the sides of the channel this includes all macrophytes attached or rooted on parts of the substrata which are likely to be submerged for more than 85% of the year.
  • Page 11 The National Rivers Authority. A predecessor to the Environment Agency. Population equivalent. Phosphate Dissolved or non-particulate phosphate, normally analysed as soluble reactive (SRP) or by the molybdenum-blue method. Pool Either a discrete area of slow flowing water, usually relatively deeper than surrounding water, or between faster flowing stretches, as in a sequence of riffle-pool-riffle.
  • Page 12 Species Trophic Rank. A value assigned to a species on a scale of 1 to 10, designed to reflect the tolerance of that species to eutrophication. Low scores indicate tolerance or cosmopolitan distribution (ie no preference). High scores indicate preference for less enriched conditions or intolerance of eutrophic conditions.

  • Page 13: Executive Summar Y Ix

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The principal purpose of this manual is to provide comprehensive procedural guidance on how to carry out Mean Trophic Rank (MTR) macrophyte surveys to assess the trophic status of rivers, and on the use of the method for the designation of sensitive areas (eutrophic) (SA(E)) under the requirements of the EC Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (UWWTD).
  • Page 14 This page has been left blank intentionally R&D Technical Report E38...

  • Page 15: Foreword

    FOREWORD About this manual 1.1.1 Pur pose of the manual The principal purpose of this manual is to provide procedural guidance on how to carry out Mean Trophic Rank (MTR) macrophyte surveys to assess the trophic status of rivers, and on the use of the method for the designation of Sensitive Areas (Eutrophic) (SA(E)) under the requirements of the EC Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (UWWTD, 91/271/EEC).
  • Page 16 1.1.3 For mat of the manual A tabulated summary of the MTR method is provided below to give a broad overview of the methodology (1.2). This is then followed in Chapters 2–8 by detailed guidance on all the sections listed in the summary. The guidance is organised so that it progresses from general introductory information on the MTR system and its uses, to detailed survey procedures, interpretation of the results and quality assurance.

  • Page 17: Summary Of The Method

    Summar y of the method A summary of the MTR method is given below (cf DoE Standing Committee of Analysts 1987). Key words are underlined and are included in the index at the back of this manual. WHAT IS MTR? 1.
  • Page 18 Operator safety, shade, river flow and water clarity need to be considered when selecting a survey length. continued..10..continued Survey equipment includes sampling aids, camera and protective clothing/equipment. Surveyors should be familiar with the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act and should follow appropriate health and safety guidance.

  • Page 19: Introduction To Mtr

    17. Quality Quality assurance comprises measures integral to the survey method itself assurance (eg on-site checks and multiple-staffing), training requirements and audit procedures surveys. Two alternative audit protocols are provided. INTRODUCTION TO MTR This chapter describes the purpose of the MTR methodology, the biota used, the watercourses for which the method is suitable, the principles on which the method is based and a summary of how it operates.
  • Page 20 · The macrophyte species recorded for these surveys are large and readily identifiable with the naked eye. There are relatively few species in a particular river area (approximately 20), so it is normally possible to identify all to species level when the necessary seasonal attributes are present.
  • Page 21 considered to be the element which limits aquatic plant growth in fresh waters because of its low availability in relation to plant requirements. Where it is limiting, an increase in the level of phosphate in the water should cause accelerated growth of those plants present or a change in the species composition of the plant community to reflect the change in phosphate concentration.

  • Page 22: 2.2 Uses Of Mtr

    2.2 Uses of MTR The MTR method can be used to give a qualitative assessment of whether a river site is impacted by eutrophication and (for physically similar sites) downstream changes in trophic status. It should not be used to compare the trophic status of physically dissimilar sites, nor should it be used to make comparisons between the trophic status of different rivers unless the rivers are the same type.

  • Page 23: Principal Application: Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive

    Pr incipal application: Ur ban Waste Water Tr eatment Dir ective This is the principal application for which the Mean Trophic Rank has been developed and tested. The survey methodology and calculation of MTR are described in detail in Chapters 3–5 of this procedural manual and guidance given in Chapter 6 on interpretation of results.
  • Page 24 · is the river eutrophic, or shortly at risk of becoming eutrophic? · what is the impact of the QD? Guidance on sampling strategy and interpretation of MTR results to answer these questions is given in Sections 3.2.1 and 6.1. The latter includes flow-charts to enable decisions to be made in a consistent and structured manner.

  • Page 25: Other Applications

    Other applications 2.4.1 Non-qualifying point-sour ce dischar ges In many river systems in the UK, a significant proportion of the phosphate-loading comes from WWTWs of less than 10,000 pe although surface water run-off and storm sewer overflow may also be significant sources of phosphorus in urban areas. These discharges do not qualify under the UWWTD for statutory improvement works to remove P from the effluent discharge.
  • Page 26 To under take a ‘eutr ophication audit’ of an individual catchment to deter mine wher e nutr ient contr ol measur es would be tar geted most effectively The MTR is recommended for this purpose provided its inherent limitations in terms of other influencing factors, as outlined above, are taken into account in the sampling regime and interpretation of data.
  • Page 27 Compliance monitor ing The MTR may potentially be used to assess the efficacy of eutrophication control measures and hence monitor compliance with targets. The capacity of the macrophyte community to respond to nutrient reduction measures, however, is poorly understood (2.3.3). Until such time as this understanding is increased, best practice will be to continue MTR surveys after nutrient control measures are in place.
  • Page 28 This page has been left blank intentionally R&D Technical Report E38...

  • Page 29: Survey Planning

    SURVEY PLANNING This chapter describes the steps which should be taken when planning MTR surveys and should be read before the surveys are undertaken. The first step is to check that the MTR method is appropriate for the use required (see 2.3 and 2.4). The next steps are to consider alternative methods, devise a suitable sampling strategy, plan the logistics of the surveys (when and where to survey and what resources are required) and collect ancillary data.
  • Page 30 Comprehensive procedural guidance on the TDI methodology is given in the TDI User’s Manual (Kelly 1996b). Briefly, the method involves the collection of benthic diatom films from natural or artificial substrates within a 10m reach of river. Sampling of natural substrates is quick and easy, although sampling of artificial substrates requires two visits to a site.
  • Page 31 et al 1999b), although in some situations it may reflect a real difference in the response of the diatom and macrophyte communities to the prevailing trophic conditions, such as a difference in the time taken to respond to nutrient reduction measures (Box 1). The use of both methods has the advantage that a broader spectrum of the flora can be examined for the impact of nutrient inputs in sensitive areas, allowing judgements to be made on more comprehensive environmental information.
  • Page 32 Box 1 Factor s to consider when deciding whether to use MTR or DQI/TDI River type MTR may be more applicable to slow-flowing lowland silty rivers than the DQI because of lack of suitable substrates for diatom growth. Use of artificial substrates extends the range of situations where DQI is applicable, although suitable positions to leave the artificial substrates are still required (Kelly 1996b).
  • Page 33 Box 1 Factor s to consider when deciding whether to use MTR or DQI/TDI ..continued Distur bance Neither method should be carried out if conditions at the survey length are not typical of the survey site (see Box 2). Season MTR surveys are restricted to the period between mid-June and mid-September (3.3.1).

  • Page 34: Sampling Strategy

    Sampling str ategy 3.2.1 Assessing the impact of point-sour ces of nutr ients The general sampling strategy for assessing all point-sources of nutrients, whether UWWTD qualifying discharges or not, is very similar to other biological assessment methods. An MTR survey should be undertaken from a site upstream of the discharge and compared with an MTR survey downstream of the discharge.
  • Page 35 for UWWTD purposes or assessment of non-qualifying discharges) may provide a ‘coarse’ focus for initial prioritisation of areas worthy of more attention, but should then be followed up by more intensive surveys on a whole catchment or sub-catchment basis before recommendations are made regarding nutrient reduction measures.

  • Page 36: Logistics Of Sampling

    Logistics of sampling 3.3.1 Timing of sur veys Macrophyte surveys should be carried out between mid-June and mid-September (the ‘survey season’) after several days of low flow or low–normal flow as opposed to high flow/spate. Although some macrophytes are visible outside this survey season, others are not and hence the MTR score will not be an accurate representation of the trophic status because of the missing species.
  • Page 37 Although a minimum of three once-a-year surveys is recommended, to enable any inter-year variation to be taken into account, assessments of trophic status using MTR may be undertaken on the basis of a single survey in a single year. This may be particularly appropriate for catchment studies, where the aim is to gain an overview of the trophic status of a catchment in order to identify those areas which would most benefit from further investigation and/or eutrophication control measures.
  • Page 38 Surveys should not be undertaken when survey conditions are atypical for the site or prevent an adequate survey, or when the suitability of the site has otherwise been compromised. Some examples of unsuitable survey conditions are listed in Box 3. Box 2 Factor s to consider when selecting MTR sites and sur vey lengths Oper ator health and safety Follow health and safety guidelines in selecting the location of survey lengths.
  • Page 39 Where an assessment is being made of the impact of individual point discharges into a river (eg UWWTD surveys, non-qualifying discharges), site selection is also based upon a need to determine the effect, if any, of discharges and to avoid as far as possible other factors which influence macrophyte communities.
  • Page 40 lengths typical of the river should be selected. When back channels and main navigation channels are present, survey lengths being compared should be positioned either all/both on a back channel or all/both on the main channel so the survey results are comparable. R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 41 Box 3 Conditions when sur veys should not be under taken Do not carry out macrophyte surveys during steady/heavy rain and windy conditions as the disturbance of the water surface leads to reduced visibility and could affect operator safety. Surveys should not be undertaken after spates because of dangerous conditions for wading and the probable loss of plant material and disturbance of habitat caused by high flows.
  • Page 42 · Clipboard with waterproof shield/cover or a large clear plastic bag (to protect record sheet and make writing possible in damp conditions) · Grapnel with depth markings on the rope · Bank stick with depth markings · Plastic bags, labels and tubes for small specimens ·...
  • Page 43 subjective estimates may often be improved by achieving consensus from a ‘group decision’ rather than relying on a single surveyor. Such group-conferring may also help resolve difficulties of macrophyte identification and survey length relocation. Efficiency may be improved by allowing different tasks to be shared simultaneously. When assessing and recording the presence and abundance of macrophytes within the survey length, there are a number of items of equipment the surveyor is required to carry, and a number of tasks the surveyor is required to achieve.

  • Page 44: Ancillary Data Collection

    Ancillar y data collection Background information is needed about the macrophyte survey sites. The geological information will only need to be researched once for each site. The pollution and channel management information will need to be researched for each survey of a particular site. Find out what the geological type and operational management plan is for the area to be surveyed, and the nature of any known pollution incidents, before planning macrophyte surveys.
  • Page 45 Note the timing of any management work undertaken before the survey on the standard sheet. In subsequent years note any management work which has been carried out since the last survey as well as any planned work. Types of management wor k: ·...

  • Page 46: Limitations Of The Method

    Limitations of the method 3.5.1 Uses and applications The MTR score is influenced to some extent by the physical character of the river as well as the nutrient status. This means that the method cannot be used to make a quantitative assessment of the trophic status of an individual site —...
  • Page 47 3.5.5 Difficulties r esulting in sur veyor er r or and/or inter -sur veyor differ ences The most common sources of surveyor error and variation between surveyors are: differences in estimates of macrophyte cover; mis-identification of macrophytes; missing species that are present only in isolated small patches;...

  • Page 48: How To Carry Out An Mtr Survey

    HOW TO CARRY OUT AN MTR SURVEY This chapter describes the survey methodology, starting with an overview (4.1), then progressing to detailed procedural guidance on preparation (4.2), the field survey itself (4.3–4.6) and laboratory analysis (4.7). The method is summarised in Figure 3 in the form of a flow chart and in Appendix 7 as a checklist, either of which can be used as a field ‘prompt sheet’.
  • Page 49 Mar king the sur vey length 4.4.1 Length of r iver to be sur veyed For all applications, the standard survey length should be 100m, with macrophyte abundance recorded on the 9-point abundance scale C (see 4.5.5 for abundance scales). One exception is allowed for wide and deep rivers (Box 4).
  • Page 50 As it is best to survey macrophytes when the river has been at low flow for several days, the definition of channel area is fairly easy to interpret in a consistent manner. Obviously some degree of judgement and common sense is required to decide whether a macrophyte species is in the channel.
  • Page 51 Box 4 Non-standar d sur vey lengths Exceptions to the standar d 100m sur vey length If it is absolutely impossible, in a large river, to find two 100m sites of comparable character within close proximity of a discharge being assessed then choose 50m reaches of similar character, provided that the river is at least 10m wide (so that the survey area will be >500m Optional sur veying of 500m sur vey lengths, in addition to the 100m length...
  • Page 52 Box 5 Exceptions to sur veying the full channel width In all cases every reasonable attempt must be made to survey the full survey-length. There are a few exceptional cases where it is acceptable to modify the approach. Wide and deep r iver s In some very wide and deep rivers it may be impractical to carry out a survey of the full channel width on all surveying occasions.

  • Page 53: Carrying Out The Macrophyte Survey

    Car r ying out the macr ophyte sur vey Assess the presence and abundance (in terms of percentage cover) of macrophytes within the survey length and record this information using the standard field sheet (Appendix 5). In terms of survey technique, the majority of survey sites can be divided into two basic types: those that are wadeable and those requiring a boat to allow access to all areas of the site.
  • Page 54 inter-surveyor differences but also an erroneous MTR. Detached macrophyte material, except for actual floating macrophyte species such as Lemna sp and Azolla, should be disregarded. If a macrophyte is stranded above the water, eg in low flow conditions, then it should not be recorded on the standard checklist. A note of the species, should however, be made in the ‘Comments’...
  • Page 55 cover (4.5.5). On the standard sheet (Appendix 5), enter the appropriate Species Cover Value (SCV) next to each macrophyte species and the overall percentage cover estimate. 4.5.3 Sampling aids It is important that the bed of channel is clearly visible, to enable accurate assessment of the species present and their abundance.
  • Page 56 clarity of the water will determine the number of times it is necessary to lower and rotate the camera lens so that 360 degrees can be observed. If necessary a small weight (see manufacturers guidelines) can be attached to the base of the camera to ensure greater stability and upright orientation.
  • Page 57 or tube without any additional water, together with a waterproof label. Normally a slip of waterproof paper or semi-opaque matt film, labelled in pencil is sufficient; alternatively pre- marked consecutively-numbered strips can be used with the number recorded on the MTR field form.
  • Page 58 If possible, confer with survey colleagues to confirm identification. Preserve representative samples of ‘difficult’ specimens and place in a herbarium for future reference if necessary. Annotate the field sheet to indicate those taxa for which specimens have been placed in the herbarium.
  • Page 59 total area covered, m = marginal area + other areas = [(total area covered)/(total area of survey length)] ´ 100 Total percentage cover R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 60 Individual species per centage cover estimates For all percentage cover estimates of scoring and non-scoring species, the whole survey area surveyed equals 100%, ie the individual species percentage cover estimates are a percentage of the whole survey area and NOT of the overall percentage cover estimated. Estimate the percentage cover of each macrophyte species, then, depending on the percentage cover scale chosen, allocate each macrophyte a Species Cover Value.
  • Page 61 Box 7 Estimating per centage cover of individual species: width method Stand on one bank facing across the river channel to the opposite bank. Imagine a rectangle made between the banks and channel width, as illustrated below: The whole survey length multiplied by the channel width equals 100%. Work out how long the bank length needs to be to illustrate an actual area of channel corresponding to a particular percentage cover.
  • Page 62 channel-width will be allocated an SCV of C5. Box 8 Estimating per centage cover of individual species: squar e metr e method Estimate the approximate average width of the channel. Calculate the equivalent square metre areas that need to be covered in order for a macrophyte to be awarded a particular SCV.
  • Page 63 Quality assurance Check the overall percentage cover estimate by estimating the percentage of bare substrate and adding this to the overall percentage macrophyte cover: the total should be 100%. Check the SCV estimates of individual species, by adding up the individual percentage cover estimates to make certain that they at least equal the overall percentage cover estimate.
  • Page 64 excessive blanketing algae or floating vegetation growth obscuring the view or smothering other vegetation. Note that confidence in the results of a survey may be restricted by either one or both of the above factors. Surveyors should score on a scale of A to C the degree to which the above may have distorted their findings: ·...

  • Page 65: Assessing And Recording Physical Variables

    Assessing and r ecor ding physical var iables 4.6.1 Gener al method After recording the macrophyte information re-traverse the survey length, observing and entering details of the physical variables on the form provided in Appendix 5. The grapnel, bank stick/ranging pole and/or underwater camera/glass-bottom bucket can be used to give an indication of the substrate type at sites where the channel bed cannot be directly observed.
  • Page 66 4.6.2 Width The width is the channel width for which macrophyte species have been recorded, as defined in section 4.4.2, including any area of substratum above the actual water level that has been surveyed. The first time a survey length is surveyed the width of the channel should be measured using a tape measure/rope with 0.5m divisions or an optical range finder (Appendix 4).
  • Page 67 Record the depth by entering actual percentages in the appropriate boxes on the standard sheet (and categories if required for comparison with historical data). Measure the depth at various points along the survey length — the number and exact location of the measurement points should depend on the variability of depths encountered when surveying for macrophytes.
  • Page 68 Peat dead vegetation undergoing bacterial decay in stagnant deoxygenated water – strictly pure peat, not fine peaty deposits over more substantial substrate. The actual measurements given relate to the longest axis of each particle. Any rock with one or more sides greater than 256mm long is classed as a boulder. The particle size categories follow an adapted Udden-Wentworth system.
  • Page 69 Surveyors should regularly familiarise themselves with habitat variable definitions by consultation with other surveyors and by measurement of selected substrate types. 4.6.6 Shading This is the percentage of the channel area affected by shading, NOT the percentage of the bank on which vegetation causing shade stands. The shading for each bank is recorded separately.
  • Page 70 Quality assurance Carefully follow the method for estimating shade described and refer to the sketch map. If you are not sure about actual measurements, record the shading of the channel on the sketch map very carefully and on return to the office check with a colleague. R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 71 4.6.7 Water clarity Record the actual percentage of the channel in each water clarity category. More than one category may be present as a survey length may be clear in the shallow margins and progress through cloudy to turbid as the water depth increases. Percentage categories may be recorded in addition, if required for comparison with historical data.
  • Page 72 Fill in required details on standard sketch-map record sheet (Appendix 5), eg river name, site name, date etc. Draw a sketch of the survey length, showing only in the broadest terms the general physical character of the site. This should include important vegetation stands and permanent reference features (such as a distance from a bridge or footpath sign) which would enable anyone else to find the survey length with great precision in the future.
  • Page 73 Quality assurance Pace out 10m lengths and check that the relevant features are marked on the sketch map in the correct location. Check that the orientation is correct. It may be necessary to redraw the sketch map on return to the office to ensure labels etc are legible.

  • Page 74: Laboratory Analysis

    4.6.11 Comments In this section report any unusual features of the survey length, eg excessive growth of a particular macrophyte or a lack of macrophytes with no obvious cause. Record any problems encountered while surveying. Note distinguishing features of the survey length so that it can be relocated on subsequent occasions.
  • Page 75 identification of the fresh specimen with other experienced members of staff. Once pressed, label each specimen and list its key identification features. Do not include rare species in the collection but use photographs and annotated field drawings instead. The reference collection would be best kept in a cabinet with many shallow draws to avoid crushing of the dried specimens.
  • Page 76 extend the period for identification but may extract the chlorophyll (formalin should not be used). Alternatively, Lugol’s iodine may be used to preserve the sample (Jones 1979). Identify specimens one at a time as it is extremely important that the correct macrophyte is recorded under the correct survey and abundance class.
  • Page 77 START HERE Ñ Look for similar physical For UWWTD: Preliminary selection of variables. observe site u/s to d/s survey area Think about relocation features. for change in flora Fill out site and survey length details on standard sheet Measure out survey length and mark Survey length, identify and record macrophytes...

  • Page 78: Mtr Data Analysis

    MTR DATA ANALYSIS This Chapter describes how to use the macrophyte data collected to calculate a Mean Trophic Rank score for the survey and how to express the confidence in that score. It also provides guidance on data storage. Calculating Mean Tr ophic Ranks Selected, usually common, aquatic macrophytes have been assigned a number from 1 to 10 according to their tolerance/preference for enriched or un-enriched waters;...
  • Page 79 NB Where no scoring species are present in the survey length, there is no MTR score for the survey. An MTR value of zero may be recorded for data archiving purposes but this value must not be used to indicate trophic status. R&D Technical Report E38...

  • Page 80: Assigning A Measure Of Confidence To The Mtr

    Assigning a measur e of confidence to the MTR A selected number of scoring taxa on the species checklist (Appendix 5) are highlighted in bold type (and prefixed with a ‘Ø’ symbol). The number of these ‘highlighted’ or ‘bold’ species present in a survey length is used to assign a measure of confidence in the MTR score (Environment Agency 1996a, Holmes 1996).

  • Page 81: Assessment Of Confidence In The Data

    Assessment of confidence in the data The MTR score is suffixed by the three measures of confidence assigned based on site comparability (I, II, III: see 4.6.12), survey conditions/typicality (A, B, C: see 4.5.7) and the number of highlighted taxa (a, b, c: see 5.2), to enable an immediate interpretation of likely confidence in the data.

  • Page 82: Data Storage

    Data stor age Data should be stored on a standard computer database. All data should be handled in a standard meticulous manner. Remember your entry may be checked at random by someone else at any time. Accuracy of data entry is of prime importance. It is recommended that the initials of the data-archiver and the date of archive are entered onto the field sheet, to provide an ‘audit trail’...

  • Page 83: Interpretation Of Mtr Results

    INTERPRETATION OF MTR RESULTS This chapter provides guidance on presenting and interpreting results from MTR surveys. It focuses mainly on interpretation for UWWTD purposes but also considers other applications. Inter pr etation for the pur poses of the UWWTD 6.1.1 Gener al The aim of using the MTR in the context of UWWTD monitoring should be borne in mind at all times when interpreting MTR results and preparing these results for presentation.
  • Page 84 Interpret each set of results in terms both of trophic status and of the significance of impact from the QD, by use of a standard set of ‘rules’, a set of standard descriptors being used to describe the resulting conclusions. The ‘rules’ and descriptors are given below in Section 6.1.3.
  • Page 85 Secondly, reference may be made either to the provisional MTR values mapped by Holmes (1995) and/or to the top 10% of MTR values recorded for each of the River Community Types used by English Nature (EN), Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) and the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) to classify rivers for SSSI designation on the basis of their macrophyte communities (Table 1).
  • Page 86 Table 1 MTR scor es summar ised accor ding to r iver community types (DO NOT USE THIS TABLE TO PREDICT MTRs) Mean Mean No. of IVER ENERAL DESCRIPTION of top samples OMMUNITY Lowland rivers with minimal gradients. Predominantly in south and east England, but may occur 34.0 40.8 wherever substrates are soft and chemistry enriched...
  • Page 87 MTRs calculated from 1km sites, each split into consecutive 500m lengths, using a 5-point abundance scale, in England, Scotland and Wales. Data are unpublished but were prepared initially for the purposes of Holmes (1995). Macrophyte data are courtesy of Scottish Natural Heritage, English Nature and Countryside Council for Wales. R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 88 Standar d ‘r ules’: use of flowchar t ‘decision tr ees’ The trophic status of each site and the magnitude of impact of QDs should be assessed by following the steps below, these steps referring to the flowcharts shown in Figures 4 and 5. The flowcharts must only be used in conjunction with the information contained within this manual and not used in isolation.
  • Page 89 thereby producing a descriptor of trophic status for each survey and a descriptor of the significance of the QD impact for each set of surveys. R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 90 Is the MTR > 65? Unlikely to be eutrophic Is the MTR < 25? Is the score less than might be expected for a site of this physical type? (refer to Table 1 or other data) This site is likely to be This site is badly either eutrophic or at risk damaged by...
  • Page 91 Do the sites have acceptable suffixes of confidence for comparability? ³ Use other evidence Is the d/s MTR 4 units and/or collect more less or 15% less than the data u/s MTR ? QD is having QD unlikely a significant to be having impact a significant...
  • Page 92 Inter pr etation for other pur poses Interpretation of the MTR for other purposes follows the same essential principles as outlined in section 6.1. This is important as it ensures that a standard approach is taken to the assessment of riverine habitats on a national basis. Please also refer to Section 2.4, for an outline of the applications listed below.
  • Page 93 which should be based on a site-by-site interpretation as specified above. To avoid mis- interpretation of such maps, their use is discouraged. 6.2.4 Tempor al changes in tr ophic status Although this application is untried, it is recommended that in the interim, the same essential principles for interpretation of data be adopted as for spatial changes in trophic status.
  • Page 94 Inter pr etation of species diver sity Species diversity (the number of scoring species) should not be used by itself as an indicator of trophic status. The relationship between species number and phosphate concentration is not linear (Figure 6). Although phosphate concentration may determine, to some extent, the maximum diversity possible at a site, this potential may not be realised in many cases due to other factors.
  • Page 95 Figur e 6 Relationship between the number of scor ing species and the phosphate concentr ation. (Figure 39, R&D Technical Report E39, Dawson et al 1999b). Inter pr etation of over all per centage cover values Overall percentage cover is, by itself, of little use in terms of assessing trophic status. There is no relationship between overall percentage cover and phosphate concentration.

  • Page 96: Quality Assur Ance

    QUALITY ASSURANCE This chapter highlights the main sources of error and variation in MTR survey results, and the need for a quality assurance procedure to reduce these. It then gives detailed guidance on quality assurance for MTR surveys, including training requirements and protocols for audit surveys. Intr oduction 7.1.1 Sour ces of er r or and var iability Sur veyor er r or and differ ences between sur veyor s...
  • Page 97 be deemed significant, this being twice the mean difference to be expected from within-season variation (6.1.3). Other temporal changes in the MTR score which may arise, for example due to natural cycles of plant growth, river conditions or river management works, are allowed for by use of the suffix of confidence in the survey (4.5.7).

  • Page 98: Training

    Quality assurance measures relating to many of the above are described as an integral part of the implementation of the survey and the calculation of the MTR (shaded boxes in chapters 4 and 5). These MUST be adhered to as a very minimum. It is strongly recommended, however, that the following additional measures are also implemented to ensure the highest possible quality of data is maintained throughout the application of the method.
  • Page 99 Tr aining Each member of staff must have a personal training record with details of all courses and on-the- job training received. All surveyors should receive basic safety training. This may also include boat handling courses and First Aid training if appropriate. In addition to this basic training, training must be provided in the specific areas of MTR survey methodology, MTR calculation, database entry and interpretation of results.
  • Page 100 (i) each surveyor must read (or be trained in) this manual at the start of each survey season; (ii) each year, each surveyor must either undertake a set minimum number of MTR or other macrophyte surveys (the suggested minimum is five surveys per year), or attend a training course at which MTR surveys are undertaken (this may be the ‘refresher’...

  • Page 101: Audit Surveys

    Audit sur veys 7.3.1 Gener al Audit surveys (repeat surveys for quality assurance purposes) are useful in monitoring consistency of performance between surveyors/survey teams, highlighting mis-application or mis- interpretation of the method, and thus providing an additional means to minimise errors. Two re-survey protocols are described below —...
  • Page 102 7.3.3 Level 2 Audit Pr otocol: moder ate specification, best pr actice The aim of this protocol is to improve the quality of the results by improving the quality of the surveyor; with a ‘safety net’ to rectify gross mistakes. This provides a lower specification of quality assurance than the Level 1 protocol, incorporating: an indication of consistency;...
  • Page 103 Exter nal quality sur veyor This is an external expert. This may be difficult to organise, however, especially as the audits need to be done at short notice. There may also be problems in ensuring the external surveyor is using the method in the same way as internal staff. They must, however, have read this manual and attended an approved MTR training course prior to commencement of the audit surveys.
  • Page 104 Box 9 Audit pr ocedur e At the start of the survey season a surveyor not involved with the primary surveys is appointed as auditor (see 7.3.4). The auditor is provided with details of the planned survey programmes, including anticipated dates and a copy of the survey site sketch map and location description for each site.
  • Page 105 continued..Box 9 Audit pr ocedur e (..continued) v) difference of more than 4 in the MTR (either direction). If significant differences are found then the primary surveyor and auditor meet together to determine the reason(s) for the differences and whether they are attributable to surveyor error.
  • Page 106 It is recommended that these criteria are reviewed nationally in the future. Scoring species only. Records of free-floating species must be treated with care as these can move into or out of the survey length between the primary and audit survey. R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 107 Table 2 Reasons for mismatch between pr imar y and audit sur vey, with suggested actions REASON ACTION REQUIRED EXAMPLE(S) Changed conditions in the The comparison is rendered invalid for quality assurance purposes. Another survey Examples include where changes in flow conditions time lapse between the can be selected from the remainder of the batch for audit, if following the Level 2 have either up-rooted macrophytes or caused a change...
  • Page 108 Note: as errors solely due to mis-calculation do not require re-survey, verify the accuracy of the calculation before investigating further/other reasons for the MTR difference, but remember that a difference in MTR could be due to both mis-calculation and some other reason(s). R&D Technical Report E38...

  • Page 109: Inter-Calibration Exercise

    7.4 Inter -calibr ation exer cise It is recommended that each surveyor should attend an inter-calibration exercise every year. This is designed to assess the level of consistency between surveyors and has some similarities to a Level 2 audit survey, but involves more surveyors and the surveys are always done simultaneously on the same day.
  • Page 110 7.5 Database ver ification This is the element of the methodology most amenable to quality control. The ‘data entry unit’ being assessed may be either a team or individuals, depending on the number of surveys entered onto the database. It is helpful if the date of archive is marked on each sheet upon completion of data input: this reduces the chance of records being input twice by mistake, and facilitates the audit process.

  • Page 111: Survey Length Selection

    7.6 Sur vey length selection If there is any cause for concern that a survey length is not in an appropriate place to detect changes in MTR due to a change in nutrient concentration (or other factors) then due consideration should be given to changing the survey length within the parameters set out in the section for survey length selection (3.3.3 and Box 2).
  • Page 112 8 MTR BEST PRACTICE CHECKLIST This chapter summarises best practice for MTR surveys, as a “do” (_) and “don’t” (û) checklist. 8.1 Uses of MTR Use the MTR to assess the trophic status of rivers for the purposes of the EC Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive, including the designation of SA(E)s and monitoring the effects of phosphate removal.

  • Page 113: Data Analysis

    8.3 Sur vey methodology Check equipment list before departure to field sites and follow health and safety guidelines at all times. û Do not survey during or after periods of high flow, flooding or management operations, nor in windy conditions, turbid water (unless normal) or periods when boat traffic is heavy. Check that the survey length is correctly located and paced measurements are accurate.
  • Page 114 Check that data entered onto computer are correct. 8.5 Inter pr etation of r esults Use the underlying principles, ‘decision trees’ and standard descriptors set out in this manual, as a guide to interpretation of MTR results. Compare MTR results with relatively un-impacted reaches on the same river to indicate what MTR scores should be achieved.
  • Page 115 This page has been left blank intentionally R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 116 9 REFERENCES (see Appendix 3 for identification guides and preservation manuals) Anderson NJ & Rippey B (1994) Monitoring lake recovery from point-source eutrophication: the use of diatom-inferred epilimnetic total phosphorus and sediment chemistry. Freshwater Biology, 32: 625-639. Battarbee RW (1984) Diatom analysis and the acidification of lakes.
  • Page 117 H olmes NTH, Boon PJ & Rowell TA (1998) A revised classification system for British rivers based on their aquatic plant communities. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, 8 (4): 555-578. H olmes NTH & Whitton BA (1977) Macrophyte vegetation of the River Swale, Yorkshire. Freshwater Biology, 7: 545-558.
  • Page 118 Southey J (1995) Flora of some Welsh Rivers, MSc Thesis. Whitton BA & Kelly MG (1995) Use of algae and other plants for monitoring rivers. Australian Journal of Ecology, 20: 45-56. Zelinka & Marvan (1961) Zur Prazisierung der biologischen Klassifikation des Reinheit fliessender Gewasser.
  • Page 119 This page has been left blank intentionally R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 120 APPENDICES Appendix 1 Rare plants Appendix 2 Foreign invasive plant species Appendix 3 Identification guides and preservation manuals Appendix 4 Equipment suppliers Appendix 5 Standard record sheets Appendix 6 Example sketch maps Appendix 7 Summary of methodology, definitions and equipment checklist R&D Technical Report E38...

  • Page 121: Appendix 1 Rare Plants

    Appendix 1 Rar e plants Red Data Book and Nationally Scarce macrophytes associated with running waters: Potamogeton acutifolius Sharp-leaved Pondweed Potamogeton nodosus Loddon Pondweed Callitriche hermaphroditica Autumnal Water-starwort Carex aquatilis Water Sedge Ceratophyllum submersum Soft Hornwort Eleocharis acicularis Needle Spike-rush Myriophyllum verticillatum Whorled Water-milfoil Nymphoides peltata...

  • Page 122: Appendix 2 Foreign Invasive Plant Species

    Appendix 2 For eign invasive plant species Several foreign species of macrophytes have become established in the British Isles. Some of which are considered to be nuisance vegetation as they have spread rapidly and compete with other native species. While surveying for river macrophytes it takes little time to note the presence of these species.

  • Page 123: Appendix 3 Identification Guides And Preservation Manuals

    Appendix 3 Identification guides and pr eser vation manuals Macr ophyte Pr eser vation: Moore JA (1986) Charophytes of Great Britain and Ireland. BSBI Handbook No 5. Bridson D & Forman L (1992) The Herbarium Handbook Revised Edition. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (ISBN 0 947643 45 1).
  • Page 124 Gr asses: Hubbard CE (1968) Grasses (2nd ed). Penguin. Br yophytes: Watson EV (1968) British Mosses and Liverworts. CUP, 495pp. Smith AJE (1990) The Moss Flora of Britain and Ireland. CUP. Smith AJE (1991) The Liverworts of Britain and Ireland. CUP. Char ophytes: Allen GO (1950) British Stoneworts (Charophyta).

  • Page 125: Appendix 4 Equipment Suppliers

    Appendix 4 Equipment supplier s This list is provided for illustrative purposes only. It includes examples of current suppliers at the time of writing, but may NOT include all suppliers of the equipment. No responsibility is accepted for the reliability or otherwise of the information given, nor any recommendation attached to any of the equipment listed.
  • Page 126 Bathyscope Obtainable from SEAC Direct, Sheffield. Tel. 0114 270 1234 Fax. 0114275 8855 Price £35.95 (although a minimum order of £50.00). R&D Technical Report E38...

  • Page 127: Appendix 5 Standard Record Sheets

    Appendix 5 Standar d r ecor d sheets The following record sheets are appended: Survey record sheet Species checklist Standard Sketch Map sheet, 100m survey length Standard Sketch Map sheet, 500m survey length Reference sheet for % cover estimates Reference sheet for substrata R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 128 This page has been left blank intentionally R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 129 MTR MACROPHYTE SURVEY FIELD RECORD SHEET Site details River name Site name NGR top NGR bottom Sur vey details Date Start time Surveyor(s) Percentage cover scale: 9 point, C 5 point, A Survey length: 100 m 500 m Wadeable Non-wadeable Boat Overall percentage cover Measure of confidence of typicality...
  • Page 130 NGR top NGR bottom Sur vey date Macr ophyte Recor ds: Scor ing species SPECIES NAME CVS SPECIES NAME RUNNING TOTALS: Batrachospermum sp(p) Polytrichum commune Hildenbrandia rivularis Racomitrium aciculare Lemanea fluviatilis Ø Rhynchostegium r ipar ioides Ø Vaucher ia sp(p) Ø...
  • Page 131 River name Site name NGR top NGR bottom Sur vey date Macr ophyte Recor ds: Scor ing species, continued SPECIES NAME CVS SPECIES NAME RUNNING TOTALS: RUNNING TOTALS: Ø Ranunculus fluitans Ø Elodea nuttallii Ranunculus hederaceus Glyceria maxima Ranunculus omiophyllus Ø...
  • Page 132 River name Site name NGR top NGR bottom Sur vey date Macr ophyte Recor ds: Non-scor ing species SPECIES NAME SPECIES NAME Thick diatom scum Blue-green algal scum Filamentous green algae Sewage `fungus' Stigeoclonium tenue Callitriche species indeterminate Glyceria notata/fluitans/declinata Potamogeton species indeterminate ADDITIONAL SPECIES COMMENTS...

  • Page 133: Quality Assurance

    Quality Assurance Audit Protocol (tick as appropriate): Level 1 Level 2 None R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 134 Table A1 List of Mean Tr ophic Rank scor ing taxa, with r ecent synonyms Notes: Names of ‘highlighted species’ are indicated by Ø and are given in bold type. Recent synonyms (Syn.) are listed. These are based on Stace (1991) and in addition: Kent (1992) for angiosperms, Smith (1990) for bryophytes and Jermy et al (1982) for sedges.
  • Page 135 continued..MOSSES (continued..) SYNONYM(S), COMMENTS, HYBRIDS Dicranella palustris Syn. D. squarrosa or Anisothecium palustris Ø Fontinalis antipyr etica Ø Fontinalis squamosa Ø Hygr ohypnum ochr aceum Syn. Hypnum ochraceum Ø Hygr ohypnum lur idum Syn. Hypnum palustre Ø Hyocomium ar mor icum Syn.
  • Page 136 Ø Oenanthe fluviatilis Persicaria amphibia Syn. Polygonum amphibium continued..DICOTYLEDONS (continued..) SYNONYM(S), COMMENTS, HYBRIDS Potentilla erecta Syn. Tomentilla erecta or Comarum erecta. Include hybrids. Ø Ranunculus aquatilis Include hybrids Ø Ranunculus cir cinatus Ranunculus flammula Include hybrids Ø Ranunculus fluitans Ranunculus hederaceus Ranunculus omiophyllus Syn.
  • Page 137 Ø Butomus umbellatus Carex acuta Syn. C. gracilis Curtis. Include hybrids. Carex acutiformis Include hybrids Carex riparia Include hybrids continued..MONOCOTYLEDONS (continued..) SYNONYM(S), COMMENTS, HYBRIDS Carex rostrata Syn. C. ampullacea. Include hybrids. Carex vesicaria Syn. C. inflata. Include hybrids. Catabrosa aquatica Syn.
  • Page 138 Ø Spar ganium emer sum Syn. S. simplex. Include hybrids Ø Spar ganium er ectum Various subspecies Syn. Lemna polyrhiza Ø Spir odela polyr hiza Typha latifolia Include hybrids Typha angustifolia Ø Zannichellia palustr is R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 139 STANDARD SKETCH MAP SHEET (MACROPH YTE SURVEY, 100m) River name Site name Date NGR top NGR bottom 100 m LEFT BANK RIGH T BANK DIRECTION OF FLOW 90 m 80 m 70 m 60 m 50 m 40 m 30 m 20 m 10 m R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 140 Main features to mark on sketch map:- River channel Width of channel Relocation features Shading position and type Grid north (found from OS map) Dominant macrophyte stands Extent of riverbanks and adjacent land use Depth of water Label clearly. R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 141 STANDARD SKETCH MAP SH EET (MACROPH YTE SURVEY, 500m) River name Site name Date NGR top NGR bottom 500 m LEFT BANK RIGH T BANK DIRECTION OF FLOW 450 m 400 m 350 m 300 m 250 m 200 m 150 m 100 m 50 m...
  • Page 142 River channel Width of channel Relocation features Shading position and type Grid north (found from OS map) Dominant macrophyte stands Extent of riverbanks and adjacent land use Depth of water Label clearly. R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 143 Table A2 Cover (m ) for 100m Sections AVERAGE RIVER WIDTH (M) Cover Equivalent Value <0.1 0.1 - 1 0.1 - 1 0.2 - 2 0.3 - 3 0.4 - 4 0.5 - 5 0.6 - 6 0.7 - 7 0.8 - 8 0.9 - 9 1 - 10...
  • Page 144 R&D Technical Report E38...

  • Page 145: Appendix 6 Example Sketch Maps

    Appendix 6 Example sketch maps R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 146 R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 147 R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 148 R&D Technical Report E38...

  • Page 149: Appendix 7 Summary Of Methodology, Definitions And Equipment Checklist

    Appendix 7 Summar y of methodology, definitions and equipment checklist R&D Technical Report E38...
  • Page 150 MTR SURVEY: SUMMARY OF METHODOLOGY Befor e you go out Ensure that you have all the equipment you need and are familiar with appropriate health and safety guidance. Pr ior to commencing the sur vey 1. Confirm that the site is suitable for a MTR survey. Think again if: ·...
  • Page 151 · Take particular care to look out for small patches of species, which may otherwise be missed. · Only use grapnels to retrieve specimens for identification. · If you are unsure about the identification of a species, take a representative sample back to the laboratory to confirm identification: this is especially important for bryophytes, filamentous algae, Callitriche and Ranunculus species.
  • Page 152 Back at the Labor ator y Remember to keep representative specimens in a herbarium or ‘voucher collection’, for future reference or confirmation. MTR SURVEY: DEFINITIONS Channel All macrophytes seen submerged or partly submerged in the river, at low flow levels, within the survey length are recorded.
  • Page 153 None no shading Broken some direct sunlight hits the water surface in the shade affected area when the sun is directly overhead. Dense 5% or less of the shade-affected area receives direct sunlight when the sun is directly overhead. On the sketch map Broken shade should be indicated by: Dense shade should be indicated by: ·...
  • Page 154 The factors under consideration for comparison are Width, Depth, Substrata, Habitats, Shading, Water Clarity and Bed Stability. For each pair of survey lengths, assign one of the following categories: 5 or more of these characteristics are similar for more than 75% of each site. 3 or 4 of these categories are similar for more than 75% of each site.
  • Page 155 MTR: EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST · Safety equipment - refer to safety manuals and advice available from your manager or safety advisor. · Maps - Ordnance Survey 1:50 000 · Location and/or sketch map to enable accurate location of the survey length (if surveyed before) ·...

  • Page 156: Index

    INDEX This index is intended to help the user find key sections of the manual, and is not intended to be an exhaustive index of subjects covered. Abundance/cover, estimation of....................43 Alternative methods........................15 Ancillary data..........................29 Artificial structures ......................24, 31, 39 Audit surveys .........................vi, 82 Bank area ............................34 Bed stability ..........................54 Best practice ..........................91...
  • Page 157 Inter-calibration exercise ......................88 Islands ............................37 Laboratory Analysis........................58 Limitations ..........................31 Location map, general ....................23, 55, 56 Macrophyte definition ........................vi, 5 foreign invasive plant species ..................101 rare and protected species..................27, 100 Mean Trophic Rank biota sampled........................5 purpose ..........................5 scores..........................61 summary of method....................3, 33, 126 underlying principles......................6 Measures of confidence highlighted species......................62...
  • Page 158 Run............................vii, 52 Sampling aids..........................40 Scoring taxa list ........................111 Sensitive Area (Eutrophic) .....................vii, 9 Shade........................18, 24, 31, 52 Site ............................vii, 23 selection..........................24 Sketch map......................54, 115, 117, 121 Slack............................vii, 52 Species abundance/cover ......................43 diversity..........................74 identification ........................41 Species Cover Value........................44 Species Trophic Rank.........................61 Staffing level.........................27, 84 Standard descriptors .......................
  • Page 159 This page has been left blank intentionally R&D Technical Report E38...

Table of Contents