Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Phytobenthos of the River Danube

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Danube River Basin

Part of the book series: The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry ((HEC,volume 39))

Abstract

Benthic algal flora of the River Danube is presented with implications for ecological status assessment. Structure of algal biofilms, species diversity, algal abundance, and biomass are described and discussed based on most recent algal investigations supplemented by methodological insight to community structure evaluation. Comparisons of literature data are provided. Seasonal and longitudinal changes of benthic algal assemblages are evaluated in terms of species abundance and biomass as well as community structure. In contrast to previous studies of Danubian periphyton that detected prevailing diatom abundance in the biofilms, recent research has found that cyanobacteria and green algae dominated almost along the whole Danube stretch. Ecological status of the entire Danube stretch is evaluated by means of the diatom-based “Indice de Polluosensibilité Specifique” (IPS), which showed distinct differences between the upper and middle section of the River Danube indicating longitudinal increase of general degradation of aquatic environment and increasing nutrient concentrations. The overall indication of ecological status varied between good and moderate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

ICPDR:

The International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River

IPS:

“Indice de Polluosensibilité Specifique” (The polluo-sensitivity index)

JDS:

Joint Danube Survey

SI:

Saprobic index

WFD:

The water framework directive

References

  1. Minshall GW (1978) Autotrophy in stream ecosystems. Bioscience 28:767–771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Lamberti GA (1996) The role of periphyton in benthic food webs. In: Stevenson RJ, Bothwell ML, Lowe RL (eds) Algal ecology: freshwater benthic ecosystems. Academic, San Diego, pp 533–573

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mulholland PJ (1996) Role in nutrient cycling in streams. In: Stevenson RJ, Bothwell ML, Lowe RL (eds) Algal ecology: freshwater benthic ecosystems. Academic, San Diego, pp 605–639

    Google Scholar 

  4. Vymazal J (1988) The use of periphyton communities for nutrient removal from polluted streams. Hydrobiologia 166:225–237

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Biggs BJF, Stevenson RJ, Lowe RL (1998) A habitat matrix conceptual model for stream periphyton. Arch Hydrobiol 143:21–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Vannote RL, Minshall GW, Cummins KW, Sedell JR, Gushing CE (1980) The river continuum concept. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 37:130–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Danube River Basin Management Plan (2009) International commission for the protection of the Danube River, Vienna, Austria. http://www.icpdr.org/main/publications/danube-river-basin-management-plan

  8. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 20000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. Offi J Eur Commun L327:1–72

    Google Scholar 

  9. Porter SD, Cuffney TF, Gurtz ME, Meadorr MR (1993) Methods for collecting algal samples as part of the national water-quality assessment program. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 93–409. Rayleigh, North Carolina

    Google Scholar 

  10. Stevenson RJ, Bahls L (1999) Chapter 6: periphyton protocols. In: Barbour MT, Gerritsen J, Snyder BD, Stribling JB (eds) Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and wadeable rivers: periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrates and fish, 2nd edn. EPA 841-B-99-002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  11. Biggs BJF, Kilroy C (2000) Stream periphyton monitoring manual. NIWA, Christchurch

    Google Scholar 

  12. Österreichisches Normuginstitut (1997). ÖNORM M6232. Guidelines for the ecological study and assessment of rivers (bilingual edition). Wien

    Google Scholar 

  13. Jarlman A, Lindstrøm EA, Eloranta P, Bengtsson R (1996) Nordic standard for assessment of environmental quality in running water. In: Whitton BA, Rott E (eds) Use of algae for monitoring rivers II. Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck, pp 17–28

    Google Scholar 

  14. Pipp E, Rott E (1996) Recent developments in the use of benthic algae (excluding diatoms) for monitoring rivers in Austria and Germany. In: Whitton BA, Rott E (eds) Use of algae for monitoring rivers II. Proceedings of the 2nd European Workshop, Innsbruck, 1995. Universität Innsbruck, Innsbruck, pp 160–165

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lindstrøm E-A, Johansen SW, Saloranta T (2004) Periphyton in running waters -long-term studies of natural variation. Hydrobiologia 521:63–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Schaumburg J, Schranz C, Foerster J, Gutowski A, Hoffmann G, Meilinger P, Schneider S (2004) Ecological classification of macrophytes and phytobenthos for rivers in Germany according to the Water Framework Directive. Limnologica 34:283–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Yallop ML, Kelly MG (2006) From pattern to process: understanding stream phytobenthic assemblages and implications for determining ‘ecological status’. Nova Hedwigia S130:357–372

    Google Scholar 

  18. King L, Barker P, Jones RI (2000) Epilithic algal communities and their relationship to environmental variables in Lakes of the English Lake District. Freshw Biol 45:425–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Stroemer EF, Smol JP (1999) The diatoms: applications for the environmental and earth sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, p 469

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Kelly MG (2008) A comparison of diatoms with other phytobenthos as indicators of ecological status in streams in Northern England. Proceedings of the 18th international diatom symposium. Poland, September 2004. Biopress, Bristol, pp 139–151

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kelly MG, Bennett C, Coste M, Delgado C, Delmas F, Denys L, Ector L, Fauville C, Ferréol M, Golub M, Jarlman A, Kahlert M, Lucey J, Chathain BN, Pardo I, Pfister P, Picinska-Faltynowicz J, Rosebery J, Schranz C, Schaumburg J, Van Dam H, Vilbaste S (2009) A comparison of national approaches to setting ecological status boundaries in phytobenthos assessment for the European Water Framework Directive: results of an intercalibration exercise. Hydrobiologia 621:169–182

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kelly MG (2013) Data rich, information poor? Phytobenthos assessment and the water framework directive. Eur J Phycol 48:437–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kelly MG, Juggins S, Guthrie R, Pritchard S, Jamieson BJ, Rippey B, Hirst H, Yallop ML (2008) Assessment of ecological status in U.K. rivers using diatoms. Freshw Biol 53:403–422

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kelly MG, King L, Jones RI, Barker PA, Jamieson BJ (2008) Validation of diatoms as proxies for phytobenthos when assessing ecological status of lakes. Hydrobiologia 610:125–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kelly M, Urbanic G, Ács É, Bennion H, Bertrin V, Burgess A, Denys L, Gottschalk S, Kahlert M, Karjalainen SM, Kennedy B, Kosi G, Marchetto A, Morin S, Picinska-FałTynowicz J, Poikane S, Rosebery J, Schoenfelder I, Schoenfelder J, Varbiro G (2014) Comparing aspirations: intercalibration of ecological status concepts across European lakes for littoral diatoms. Hydrobiologia 734: 125–141

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lange-Bertalot H (1979) Pollution tolerance as a criterion for water quality estimation. Nova Hedwigia 64:285–304

    Google Scholar 

  27. CEMAGREF (1982) Etude des Méthodes Biologiques Quantitatives d’Appréciation de la Qualité des Eaux. Rapport Q.E. Lyon – Agence de l’Eau Rhône-Méditerranée-Corse, Pierre-Bénite, 218 pp

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kelly MG, Whitton BA (1995) The trophic diatom index: a new index for monitoring eutrophication in rivers. J Appl Phycol 7:433–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kelly MG, Whitton BA, Lewis A (1996) Use of diatoms to monitor eutrophication in U. K. rivers. In: Whittton BA, Pipp E, Rott E (eds) Use of algae to monitor rivers. University of Innsbruck Press, Innsbruck, pp 79–86

    Google Scholar 

  30. Coring E, Hamm A, Schneider S (1999) Durchgehendes Trophiesystem auf der Grundlage der Trophieindikation mit Kieselalgen. DVWK Mitteilungen Nr. 6/1999. Deutscher Verband für Wasserwirtschaft und Kulturbau e.V., Bonn, 219 pp

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rott E, Van Dam H, Pfister P, Pipp E, Pall K, Binder N, Ortler K (1999) Indikationslisten für Aufwuchsalgen. Teil 2: Trophieindikation, geochemische Reaktion, toxikologische und taxonomische Anmerkungen. Publ. Wasserwirtschaftskataster, BMfLF, pp 1–248

    Google Scholar 

  32. Rott E, Pipp E, Pfister P (2003) Diatom methods developed for river quality assessment in Austria and a cross-check against numerical trophic indication methods used in Europe. Algol Stud 110:91–115

    Google Scholar 

  33. Eloranta P, Andersson K (1998) Diatom indices in water quality monitoring of some South-Finnish rivers. Verhandlungen des Internationalen Verein Limnologie 26:1213–1215

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kwandrans J, Eloranta P, Kawecka B, Wojtan K (1999) Use of benthic diatom communities to evaluate water quality in rivers of southern Poland. In: Prygiel J, Whitton BA, Bukowska J (eds) Use of algae for monitoring rivers III. Agence de l’Eau Artois-Picardie, Douai, pp 154–165

    Google Scholar 

  35. Montesanto B, Ziller S, Coste M (1999) Epilithic diatoms and biological quality of Stratonikon mountain creeks. Chalkidiki (Greece). Cryptogam Algol 20:235–251

    Google Scholar 

  36. Prygiel J, Coste M (2000) Guide méthodologique pour la mise en oeuvre de l’Indice Biologique Diatomées. NF T 90–354. Agences de l’eau – Cemagref Bordeaux, 133 pp

    Google Scholar 

  37. Almeida SFP (2001) Use of diatoms for freshwater quality evaluation in Portugal. Limnetica 20:205–213

    Google Scholar 

  38. Gomà J, Ortiz R, Cambra J, Ector L (2004) Water quality evaluation in Catalonian mediterranean rivers using epilithic diatoms as bioindicators. Vie Milieu 54:81–90

    Google Scholar 

  39. Vilbaste S (2004) Application of diatom indices in the evaluation of the water quality in Estonian streams. Proc Eston Acad Sci Biol Ecol 53:37–51

    Google Scholar 

  40. Van Dam H, Padisák J, Kovács C (2005) BQE Report Phytobenthos, Ecosurv, Ministry of Environment and Water, Hungary, EuropeAid/114951/D/SV/2002-000-180-04-01-02-02, 54 p

    Google Scholar 

  41. Miho A, Çullaj A, Lazo V, Hasko A, Kupe L, Bachofen R, Brandl H, Schanz F (2006) Assessment of water quality of some Albanian rivers using diatom-based monitoring. Alban J Nat Sci 19:94–105

    Google Scholar 

  42. Blanco S, Bécares E, Cauchie H-M, Hoffmann L, Ector L (2007) Comparison of biotic indices for water quality diagnosis in the Duero Basin (Spain). In: Ács É, Kiss KT, Padisák J (eds) Proceedings of 6th international symposium on use of algae for monitoring rivers, Hungary, Balatonfüred, 12–16 September 2006. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 161:267–286

    Google Scholar 

  43. Hlúbiková D, Hindáková A, Haviar M, Miettinen J (2007) Application of diatom water quality indices in influenced and non-influenced sites of Slovak rivers (Central Europe). In: Ács É, Kiss KT, Padisák J (eds) Proceedings of 6th international symposium on use of algae for monitoring rivers, Hungary, Balatonfüred, 12–16 September 2006. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 161:443–464

    Google Scholar 

  44. Szemes G (1964) Untersuchungen über das Phytoplankton der ungarischen Donaustrecke in Sommermonaten (Danubialia Hungarica 25). Ann Univ Sci Bp Sect Biol 7:169–199

    Google Scholar 

  45. Szemes G (1966) Untersuchungen über das Phytoplankton der ungarischen Donaustrecke in Herbstmonaten (Danubialia Hungarica 38). Opuscula Zool 6:157–185

    Google Scholar 

  46. Szemes G (1967) Systematisches Verzeichnis der Pflanzenwelt der Donau mit einer zusammenfassenden Erläuterung. In: Liepolt R (ed) Limnologie der Donau. Liefg, vol 3. Schweizerbart’sehe Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart, pp 70–131

    Google Scholar 

  47. Szemes G (1968) Zusammenhänge zwischen den Schwankungen der Wasserhöhe der Donau und der periodisch auftretenden Algenprodiction, mit besonderer Berückzichtung der Bescha_enheit des aus dem Oberflächenwasser gewonnenen Trinkwassers, vol 10. Arbeitstagung der IAD Sofia/Bulgaria, pp 529–535

    Google Scholar 

  48. Szemes G (1969) The phytoplankton of the Hungarian reach of the Danube during the winter months (Danubialia Hungarica 47). Ann Univ Sci Bp Sect Biol 11:75–117

    Google Scholar 

  49. Szemes G (1971) Untersuchungen über das Phytoplankton des ungarischen Donauabschnittes in Frühjahrsmonaten. Ann Univ Sci Bp Sect Biol 13:173–252

    Google Scholar 

  50. Schmidt A (1978) Angaben zur Kenntnis des Phytoplanktons der Donau, vol 20. Arbeitstagung der IAD, Kiev

    Google Scholar 

  51. Schmidt A (1984) Über die Trophitätsverhältnisse der Donau in den Jahren 1975–1983, vol 24. Arbeitstagungder IAD, Szentendre/Ungarn, I, pp 129–132

    Google Scholar 

  52. Schmidt A (1994) Main characteristics of the phytoplankton of the Southern Hungarian section of the river Danube. In: Descy JP, Reynolds CS, Padisák J (eds) Phytoplankton in turbid environments: rivers and shallow lakes. Hydrobiologia 289:97–108

    Google Scholar 

  53. Hindák F, Záhumenský L (1983) Algenverzeichnis im tschechoslowakischen Donauabshnitt. Arch Hydrobiol 68:114–133

    Google Scholar 

  54. Kiss KT (1984) Phytoplanktonuntersuchungen in den Donauabschnitten oberhalb und unterhalb von Budapest im Jahre 1983, vol 24. Arbeitstagung der IAD, Szentendre/Ungarn, I, pp 105–108

    Google Scholar 

  55. Kiss KT (1985) Changes of trophity conditions in the river Danube at Göd. Danubialia Hungarica XCIV. Ann Univ Sci Bp Sect Biol 24–26:47–59

    Google Scholar 

  56. Kiss KT (1986) Species of the Thalassiosiraceae in the Budapest section of the Danube. Comparison of samples collected in 1956–63 and 1979–83. In: Ricard M (ed) Proceedings 8th international diatom symposium, Koeltz, Koenigstein, pp 23–31

    Google Scholar 

  57. Kiss KT (1997) The main results of phytoplankton studies on the river Danube and its side-arm system at the Szigetköz area during the nineties (Hungary). IAD Tagung, Kurzreferaten 32:153–158

    Google Scholar 

  58. Draganov S, Stoyneva M, Georgiev B (1987) Algal flora of the Bulgarian Sector of River Danube and its adjacent water basins. In: Collected works of international symposium ‘role of wetlands in preserving the genetic material’, Srebarna, 8–12. 10. 1984, Sofia, BAS, 42–51 (in Russian, English summary)

    Google Scholar 

  59. Bothár A, Kiss KT (1990) A phytoplankton and zooplankton (Cladocera, Copepoda) relationship in the eutrophicated River Danube (Danubialia Hungarica, CXI). In: Biro P, Tailing JF (eds) Trophic relationships in inland waters. Hydrobiologia 191:165–171

    Google Scholar 

  60. Stoyneva MP (1990) Spring-phytoplankton of the River Danube in the year 1990. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 115/2 Large Rivers 11(2)(1998):167–194

    Google Scholar 

  61. Stoyneva MP (2002) Review of algological studies in the Bulgarian sector of River Danube (848–375 km) with a list of recorded species. I. Phytologia Balcanica 8:327–340

    Google Scholar 

  62. Makovinská J (1994) Planktonic green algae of the river Danube from Bratislava (Slovakia) to Szob (Hungary). Biologia (Bratisl) 49:539–545

    Google Scholar 

  63. Hindák F (1995) Súpis siníc a rias slovenského úseku Dunaja (1982–1994). In: Svodobová A, Lisický MJ (eds) Výsledky a skúsenosti z monitorovania bioty územia ovplyvneného VD Gabčíkovo, Bratislava, pp 207–225

    Google Scholar 

  64. Kusel-Fetzmann E (1998) Das Phytoplankton. In: Kutzel-Fetzmann E, Naidenow W, Russev B (eds) PLankton und Benthos der Donau. Internat. Arbeitsgem. Donauforschung. Ergebnisse der Donau-Forschung 4:11–161

    Google Scholar 

  65. Makovinská J, Hindák F (1999) Phytoplankton of the river Danube between Bratislava and Visegrád in 1990 − 1997. In: Mucha I (ed) Gabčíkovo part of the hydroelectric power - Environmental impact review, pp 155 − 166

    Google Scholar 

  66. Hindák F, Hindáková A (2000) Checklist of the cyanophytes/cyanobacteria and algae of the Slovak stretch of the Danube river (1926–1999). Biologia (Bratisl) 55:7–34

    Google Scholar 

  67. Verasztó CS, Kiss KT, Sipkay CS, Gimesi L, Vadai-Fülöp CS, Türei D, Hufnagel L (2010) Long-term dynamics patterns and diversity of phytoplankton communities in a large eutrophic river (the case of River Danube, Hungary). Appl Ecol Environ Res 8:329–349

    Google Scholar 

  68. Kiss KT, Klee R, Ector L, Ács È (2012) Centric diatoms of large rivers and tributaries in Hungary: morphology and biogeographic distribution. Acta Bot Croat 71:311–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Szemes G (1967) Das Phytobenthos der Donau. In: Liepolt R (ed) Limnologie der Donau. Liefg, vol 3. Schweizerbart’sehe Verlagsbuchhandlung, Stuttgart, pp 225–241

    Google Scholar 

  70. Kusel-Fetzmann E (1998) Mikrophytobenthos und Periphyton. In: Kutzel-Fetzmann E, Naidenow W, Russev B (eds) Plankton und Benthos der Donau. Internat. Arbeitsgem. Donauforschung. Ergebnisse der Donau-Forschung, vol 4, pp 249–256

    Google Scholar 

  71. Backhaus D (1965) Ökologische und experimentelle Untersuchungen an den Aufwuchsalgen der Donauquellenflüsse Breg und Brigach und der obersten Donau bis zur Versickerung bai Immendingen. Inaugural-Diss., Naturwissensch.-Math.Fak., Univ. Freiburg i. Br., Hildesheim, 310 pp

    Google Scholar 

  72. Backhaus D (1967) Ökologische Untersuchungen an der Aufwuchsalgen der obersten Donau und ihrer Quellflüsse. I. Voruntersuchungen. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 30(Donauforschung 2):364–399

    Google Scholar 

  73. Backhaus D (1968) Ökologische Untersuchungen an der Aufwuchsalgen der obersten Donau und ihrer Quellflüsse. II. Die räumliche und zeitliche Verteilung der Algen. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 34(Donauforschung 3):24–73

    Google Scholar 

  74. Backhaus D (1968) Ökologische Untersuchungen an der Aufwuchsalgen der obersten Donau und ihrer Quellflüsse. III. Die Algenverteilung und ihre Beziehungen zur Milieuofferte. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 34(Donauforschung 3):130–149

    Google Scholar 

  75. Backhaus D (1968) Ökologische Untersuchungen an der Aufwuchsalgen der obersten Donau und ihrer Quellflüsse. IV. Systematisch-autökologischer Teil. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 34(Donauforschung 3):251–320

    Google Scholar 

  76. Backhaus D (1969) Ökologische Untersuchungen an der Aufwuchsalgen der obersten Donau und ihrer Quellflüsse. V. Biomassebestimmung und Driftmessungen. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 36(Donauforschung 4):1–26

    Google Scholar 

  77. Ács È, Szabó K, Kiss KT, Hindák F (2003) Benthic algal investigations in the Danube river and some of its main tributaries from Germany to Hungary. Biologia 58:545–554

    Google Scholar 

  78. Cholnoky BJ (1955) Diatomeengesellschaften aus den Donauauen oberhalb von Wien. Verh Zool Bot Ges Wien 95:76–87

    Google Scholar 

  79. Bursik H (1970) Aufwuchsbiozönosen auf Pontons in der Donau bei Wien. Unpubl. report presented at 13. Arbeitstagung der Internat. Arbeitsgemeinschaft Donauforschung

    Google Scholar 

  80. Weber E (1960) Über die Diatomeen im lithoralen Benthos der österreichischen Donau. Wasser Abwasser 2:133–150

    Google Scholar 

  81. Kann E (1983) Die benthischen Algen der Donau im Raum von Wien. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 86:15–36

    Google Scholar 

  82. Schagerl M, Donabaum K (1998) Aufwuchsalgen im Donaustrom bei Klosterneuburg (Österreich). Verh Zool-Bot Ges Österreich 135:205–230

    Google Scholar 

  83. Schagerl M, Donabaum K (1998) Epilithic algal communities on natural and artificial substrata in the River Danube near Vienna (Austria), pp 153–165

    Google Scholar 

  84. Juriš Š (1969) Die Entwicklung der Algenkomponente des Periphytons im tschechoslowakischen Bereich der Donau im Jahre 1966. Limnologische Donauforschungen. Berichte der II. Internat. Konferenz zur Limnologie der Donau, pp 253–257

    Google Scholar 

  85. Juriš Š (1973) Quantitative Studien der Algenkomponente des Periphytons des Tschechoslovakischen Teiles der Donau, Ac Rer Nat Mus Nat Slov Bratislava, 19(1):5–56

    Google Scholar 

  86. Ertl M, Tomajka J (1973) Primary production of the periphyton in the littoral of the Danube. Hydrobiologia 42:429–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Hlúbiková D, Fidlerová D, Hindáková A (2012) Checklist of taxa examined at localities monitored in the Slovak surface water bodies. Part 2: Benthic diatoms. In: Fidlerová D (ed) Checklist of taxa examined at localities monitored in the Slovak surface water bodies. Part 2: Benthic diatoms. Acta Environmentalica Universitatis Comanianae (Bratislava) 18(Suppl. 1):5–127

    Google Scholar 

  88. Istvánffi G (1891) Kítaibel herbáriumának algái (Les Algues d‘herbier Kitaibel). Természetvédelmi Füzetek 14:92–93

    Google Scholar 

  89. Tamás G (1964) Mikroflora aus dem Periphyton der Landungsmolen der Donau zwischen Nagymaros und Római fürdö (Danubialia Hungarica XXVII.). Ann Univ Sci Bp Biol 7:229–240

    Google Scholar 

  90. Tamás G (1966) Mikroflora aus dem Periphyton der Landungsmolen der Donau zwischen Budapest und Mohács (Danubialia Hungarica XXVIII). Ann Univ Sci Bp Biol 8:1–20

    Google Scholar 

  91. Szemes G (1961) Die Algen des Periphytons der Donaupontons/Danubialia Hungarica XI. Ann Univ Sci Bp Biol 4:179–215

    Google Scholar 

  92. Ács È, Buczkó K (1994) Comparative algological studies on the periphyton in the branch-system of the River-Danube at Ásványráró, vol 30. Arbeitstagung der IAD, Zuoz-Schweiz, pp 413–416

    Google Scholar 

  93. Buczkó K, Ács È (1992) Preliminary studies on the periphytic algae in the branch-system of the Danube at Cikolasziget (Hungary). Stud Bot Hung 23:49–62

    Google Scholar 

  94. Buczkó K, Ács È (1994) Algological studies on the periphyton in the branch-system of the Danube at Cikolasziget (Hungary). Verh Internat Limnol Ver 25:1680–1683

    Google Scholar 

  95. Ács È, Kiss KT (1993) Effects of the water discharge on periphyton abundance and diversity in a large river (River Danube, Hungary). In: Padisák J, Reynolds CS, Sommer U (eds) Intermediate disturbance hypothesis in phytoplankton ecology. Hydrobiologia 249:125–133

    Google Scholar 

  96. Szabó K, Ács È, Pápista É, Kiss KT, Barreto S, Makk J (2001) Periphyton and phytoplankton in the Soroksár-Danube in Hungary. I. Periphytic algae on red stems. Acta Bot Hung 43:13–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Ács È, Buczkó K (1996) The changes of relative importance value of periphytic algal taxa in Szigetköz section of River Danube (Hungary), vol 31. Arbeitstagung der IAD, Baja, Ungarn, pp 441–446

    Google Scholar 

  98. Makk J, Ács È (1996) Interaction between diatoms and bacteria in the biofilm of the River Danube, vol 31. Arbeitstagung der IAD, Baja, Ungarn, pp 109–114

    Google Scholar 

  99. Makk J, Ács È (1997) Investigation of epilithic biofilms in the River Danube, vol 32. Arbeitstagung der IAD, Wien, pp 199–202

    Google Scholar 

  100. Makk J, Ács È, Károly M, Kovács G (2003) Investigations on the Danube gravel-biofilm diatom-associated bacterial communities. Biologia (Bratisl) 58:729–742

    Google Scholar 

  101. Ács È, Kiss KT (1991) Investigation of periphytic algae in te Danube at Göd (1669 river km, Hungary). Algol Stud 62:47–67

    Google Scholar 

  102. Ács È, Kiss KT (1993) Colonization processes of diatoms on artificial substrates in the River Danube near Budapest (Hungary). Hydrobiologia 269/270:307–315

    Google Scholar 

  103. Ács È (1998) Short-term fluctuations in the benthic algal compositions on artificial substratum in a large river (River Danube, near Budapest). Verh Internat Verein Limnol 26:1653–1656

    Google Scholar 

  104. Ács È, Kiss KT, Szabó K, Makk J (2000) Short-term colonization sequence of periphyton on glass slides in a large river (River Danube, near Budapest). Algol Stud 100 Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 136:135–156

    Google Scholar 

  105. Szabó K, Ács È, Kiss KT, Eiler A, Makk J, Plenkovic-Moraj A, Toth B, Bertilsson S (2007) Periphyton-based water quality analysis of a large river (River Danube, Hungary): exploring the potential of molecular fingerprinting for biomonitoring. Arch Hydrobiol Large Rivers 17:365–382

    Google Scholar 

  106. Szabó-Taylor K, Kiss KT, Logares R, Eiler A, Ács È, Tóth B, Bertilsson S (2010) Composition and dynamics of microeukaryote communities in the River Danube. FOTTEA 10:99–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Stoyneva MP (1985) Algal flora of the Bulgarian sector of the Danube River and possibilities for its use as indicator for pollution of riverine waters. In: Proceedings of national students conference with international participation on investigation of the ecosystems and environmental protection, Sofia, May 1985, pp 173–179 (In Bulgarian)

    Google Scholar 

  108. Stoyneva MP (1988) The summer phytobenthos in the Bulgarian sector of the river Danube. Species Composition and Indicator Species. In: Proceedings national scientific session of the young scientific workers on ecology and environmental protection, 24–25 November 1988, Plovdiv, pp 17–19 (In Bulgarian)

    Google Scholar 

  109. Draganov S, Stoyneva M (1989) Some changes in the phytoplankton and phytobenthos of Danube river during the period 1981–1988. In: Symposium with international participation on the protection of the waters of Danube river, 19–20 October 1989, Sofia, pp 149–154

    Google Scholar 

  110. Draganov S, Stoyneva M (1990) Algal flora of the River Danube (Bulgarian sector) and the adjoined water basins. II. Composition and distribution of the phytobenthos of the River Danube. Ann Sof Univ 80:11–24

    Google Scholar 

  111. Vladimirova KS (1961) Fitomikrobentos Dunaja iz zalivov Kilijskoj delty. Trudy Inst Gidobiol 36:128–144

    Google Scholar 

  112. Vladimirova KS (1961) Fitomikrobentos pridunajskich vodojemov. Trudy Inst Gidobiol 36:242–263

    Google Scholar 

  113. Serbanescu M (1963) Beiträge zur Kentntnis der Algenarten in der Bioderma des Schilfrohres (Phragmites communis) aus der Donaudelta. S.I.L. Arbeitsgemeinschaft Donauforschung VIII. Tagung, Bukarest, pp 137–139

    Google Scholar 

  114. Oltean M (1968) Observatii experimentale asupra dinamicii calitative a perifitonului vegetal din ghiolul Porcu (Delta Dunarii). Hidrobiologica 9:145–159

    Google Scholar 

  115. Oltean M (1969) Über das Mikrophytobenthos der Donaudelta - Flachseen. Hidrobiologica 10:53–61

    Google Scholar 

  116. Rudescu L, Popescu-Marinescu V (1970) Vergleichende Untersuchungen über benthische und phytophile Biocönosen einiger emerser Makrophyten des Donaudeltas, mit besonderer Berücksichtigung von Phragmites communis Trin. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl 34:279–292

    Google Scholar 

  117. Oksiyuk OP, Davydov OA, Karpezo YI (2009) Assessment of the ecological state of water bodies in terms of phytoplankton and phytobenthos (on the example of the Ukrainian section of the Danube River). Hydrobiol J 45:3–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Literáthy P, Koller-Kreimel V, Liška I (2002) Joint Danube Survey, Technical Report, ICPDR. http://www.icpdr.org/main/activities-projects/joint-danube-survey-1

  119. Liška I, Wagner F, Slobodník J (2008) Joint Danube Survey 2, Final Scientific Report. ICPDR. http://www.icpdr.org/main/activities-projects/joint-danube-survey-2

  120. Makovinská J (2002) In: Literáthy P, Koller-Kreimel V, Liška I (eds) Joint Danube Survey. Technical Report. ICPDR, Vienna

    Google Scholar 

  121. Makovinská J, de Hoog C, Hlúbiková D, Haviar M (2008) Phytobenthos. In: Liška I, Wagner F, Slobodník J (eds) Joint Danube Survey 2. Final Scientific Report. ICPDR, Vienna, pp 53–61

    Google Scholar 

  122. CEN 13946 (2003) Water quality. Guidance standard for the routine sampling and pre-treatment of benthic diatoms form rivers. Comitée European de Normalisation, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  123. CSN EN 15708 (2009) Water quality. Guidance standard for the surveying, sampling and laboratory analysis of phytobenthos in shallow running water

    Google Scholar 

  124. CEN 14407 (2004) Water quality – guidance standard for the identification, enumeration and interpretation of benthic diatom samples from running waters. Comitée European de Normalisation, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  125. Lecointe C, Coste M, Prygiel J, Ector L (1999) Le logiciel OMNIDIA version 2. une puissante base de données pour les inventaires de diatomées et pour le calcul des indices diatomiques européens. Cryptogam Algol 20:132–134

    Google Scholar 

  126. Aberle N, Beutler M, Moldaenke C, Wiltshire KH (2006) ‘Spectral fingerprinting’ for specific algal groups on sediments in situ: a new sensor. Arch Hydrobiol 167:575–592

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  127. Ács È, Szabó K, Kiss ÁK, Tóth B, Záray G, Kiss KT (2006) Investigation of epilithic algae on the River Danube from Germany to Hungary and the effect of a very dry year on the algae of the River Danube. Arch Hydrobiol Suppl Large Rivers 16:389–417

    Google Scholar 

  128. Utermöhl H (1958) Zur Vorvollkommnung der quantitativen Phytoplankton-Methodik. Mitt Internat Verein Limnol 9:1–38

    Google Scholar 

  129. Rott E, Salmaso N, Hoehnn E (2007) Quality control of Utermöhl-based phytoplankton counting and biovolume estimates - an easy task or a Gordian knot? Hydrobiologia 578:141–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  130. Ghosh M, Gaur JP (1998) Current velocity and the establishment of stream algal periphyton communities. Aquat Bot 60:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  131. Asaeda T, Son DH (2000) Spatial structure and populations of a periphyton community: a model and verification. Ecol Modell 133:195–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  132. Mulholland PJ, Steinman AD, Marzolf ER, Hart DR, DeAngelis DL (1994) Effect of periphyton biomass on hydraulic characteristics and nutrient cycling in streams. Oecologia 98:40–47

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  133. Schwartz W, Kreier U (2008) Hydromorphology. In: Liška I, Wagner F, Slobodník J (eds) Joint Danube Survey 2. Final Scientific Report. ICPDR, Vienna, pp 72–80

    Google Scholar 

  134. Makovinská J, Ettl H (1988) The Bedeutung der Untersuchungen des Lebensczyklus bei der Bestimmung fadenförmiger grünalgen (Chlorophyta). Arch Protistenkunde 135:173–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  135. Mann DG (1990) The species concept in diatoms. Phycologia 38:437–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Dokulil MT, Kaiblinger CH (2008) Phytoplankton. In: Liška I, Wagner F, Slobodník J (eds) Joint Danube Survey 2, Final Scientific Report. ICPDR, Vienna, pp 68–71

    Google Scholar 

  137. Zelinka M, Marvan P (1961) Zur Präzisierung der biologischen Klassifikation des Reinheit fliessender Gewässer. Arch Hydrobiol 57:389–407

    Google Scholar 

  138. Lecointe C, Coste M, Prygiel J (1993) OMNIDIA: software for taxonomy. Calculation of diatom indices and inventories management. Hydrobiologia 269(270):509–513

    Article  Google Scholar 

  139. Ács È, Szabó K, Toth B, Kiss KT (2004) Investigation of Benthic algal communities especially diatoms of some Hungarian streams in connection with reference conditions of the water framework directives. Acta Bot Hung 46:255–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  140. Prygiel J, Coste M (1993) The assessment of water quality inthe Artois-Picardie water basin (France) by the use of diatomindices. Hydrobiologia 269(270):343–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Water Research Institute, Bratislava, Slovakia

    Jarmila Makovinska & Dasa Hlubikova

Authors
  1. Jarmila Makovinska
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dasa Hlubikova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jarmila Makovinska .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River, Vienna International Centre, Vienna, Austria

    Igor Liska

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Makovinska, J., Hlubikova, D. (2014). Phytobenthos of the River Danube. In: Liska, I. (eds) The Danube River Basin. The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, vol 39. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2014_310

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation