Hydrobiologia

, Volume 100, Issue 1, pp 153–168

Method for biological quality assessment of watercourses in Belgium

  • Niels De Pauw
  • Gerard Vanhooren
Article

Abstract

A description is given of the method generally used in Belgium to assess the quality of running water. It involves the determination of a biotic index with scores between 0 and 10, based on samples of the aquatic macro-invertebrate community collected in situ, using a handnet.

The Belgium method combines the advantages of two existing biological assessment methods worked out by Woodiwiss (1964) for the Trent River Board in the U.K., and by Tuffery & Verneaux (1968) for the Department of Fisheries and Pisciculture in France.

Its major advantages are its simplicity, speed, reliability, low cost, and practical utility. Its limitations and difficulaties as well as the needs for further research are briefly discussed.

The method, called the Belgian Biotic Index Method, is applicable to various types of watercourses and has recently been proposed to the Belgian Institute for Normalisation for approval as a standard method.

For several years, the Belgian government has based its strategy towards surface water sanitation on water quality maps, visualizing the biotic indices obtained by the biological assessment method. As such, Belgium is advancing the recommendations for biological water quality monitoring being worked out by the Environmental and Consumer Protection Service of the Commission of the European Communities.

Keywords

method biological quality assessment watercourses biotic index macro-invertebrates 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bartsch, A. F. & Ingram, W. M., 1959. Stream Life and the pollution environment. Publ. Wks. 90: 104–110.Google Scholar
  2. Bartsch, A. F. & Ingram, W. M., 1966. Biological analysis of water pollution in North America. Verh. int. Ver. Limnol. 16: 786–800.Google Scholar
  3. Beck, W. M., 1954. Studies in stream pollution biology. I. A simplified ecological classification of organisms. Quart. J. Fla. Ac. Sci. 17: 211–227.Google Scholar
  4. Cairns, J. & Dickson, K. L., 1971. A simple method for the biological assessment of the effects of waste discharges on aquatic bottom dwelling organisms. J. Wat. Poll. Contr. Fed. 43 (5): 755–772.Google Scholar
  5. Chandler, J. R., 1970. A biological approach to water quality management. Wat. Poll. Contr. 69: 415–422.Google Scholar
  6. De Brabander, K., 1981. Het biologisch wateronderzoek. Belgisch Archief voor Sociale Geneeskunde, Hygiëne, Arbeidsgeneeskunde en Gerechtelijke Geneeskunde 24e jaar, 3: 157–165.Google Scholar
  7. De Brabander, K. & De Schepper, H., 1981. Beoordeling van de kwaliteit van oppervlaktewaters in België door middel van kwaliteitsindexen. Water, 1: 8 pp.Google Scholar
  8. De Brabander, K., Vanhooren, G., Goossens, A. De Schutter, H., Micha, J. C., Jadot, I,, Terroir, L, Schmitz, A., Reizer, C., Cosme-Jacqmin, N., Fetter, S., Nef, L., Weltens, R., Verheyen, R., Vercauteren, T., De Pauw, N. & Vanderhaegen, N., 1981. Cartes de la qualité biologique des eaux de quelques bassins hydrographiques. Institut d'Hygiène et d'Epidémiologie, 14, rue Juliette Wytsman, 1050 Bruxelles. 137 pp. + 4 cartes (also published in Dutch).Google Scholar
  9. Descy, J. P., 1976. Intérêt des végétaux dans la caractérisation de la qualité des eaux et principes des méthodes utilisées. 125–155. In: Amavis, R. & Smeets, J., (Eds.), Principles and Methods for Determining Ecological Critera on Hydrobiocenoses. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 531 pp.Google Scholar
  10. De Pauw, N., 1975. Bijdrage tot de kennis van Milieu en Plankton in het Westerschelde-estuarium. Part 1, 2 and 3. Ph.D. Thesis, State University of Ghent.Google Scholar
  11. De Pauw, N., Verreth, J. & Talloen, M., 1979. Biological Water Assessment Methods applied on the rivers Torrente Parma, Torrente Stirone and Fiume Po, 33–93. In: Ghetti, P. F. (Ed.). 3rd Technical Seminar, Biological Water Assessment Methods, Parma, October 1978, vol. 1. Published for the Commission of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  12. Depiereux, E., 1980. Utilisation de techniques d'analyse multivariée pour la description de l'information continue dans des relevés faunistiques en eau douce. Facultés Universitaires N-D de la Paix, Unité de Biologie Animale, Rue de Bruxelles 61, B-5000 Namur. Mimeogr. paper, 6 pp.Google Scholar
  13. Gardeniers, J. & Tolkamp, H, 1976. Biological assessment of water quality in the River Trent watershed. Mededelingen Vakgroep Natuurbeheer, 137. Wageningen (unpubl. report).Google Scholar
  14. Ghetti, P. F., 1979. 3rd Technical Seminar. Biological Water Assessment Methods. Parma, October 1978. Background information, Reports of the participants. Vol. 1. Published for the Commission of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  15. Ghetti, P. F. & Bonazzi, G., 1977. A comparison between various criteria for the interpretation of biological data in the analysis of the quality of running waters. Wat. Res. 11: 819–831.Google Scholar
  16. Ghetti, P. F. & Bonazzi, G., 1980. 3rd Technical Seminar. Biological Water Assessment Methods. Parma, October 1978. Final Report. Vol. 2. Published for the Commission of the European Communities. 39 pp.Google Scholar
  17. Illies, J. & Schmitz, W., 1980. Studien Zum Gewässerschutz — 5. Die Verfahren der biologischen Beurteilung des Gütezustandes der Fliessgewässer. Landesanstalt für Unweltschutz — Baden — Württemberg — Karlsruhe. 125 pp.Google Scholar
  18. Khalaf, G. & Tachet, H., 1978. Un problème d'actualité: revue de travaux en matière d'utilisation des substrats artificiels pour l'échantillonnage des macro-invertébrés des eaux courantes. Bull. Ecol. 9(1): 29–38.Google Scholar
  19. Khalaf, G. & Tachet, H., 1980. Colonization of artificial substrate by macro-invertebrates in a stream and variations according to stone size. Freshwat. Biol. 10: 475–482.Google Scholar
  20. Knöpp, H., 1954. Ein neuer Weg zur Darstellung biologischer Vorfluteruntersuchungen, erläutert an einem Gütelängschnitt des Maines. Wasserwirtschaft 45: 9–15.Google Scholar
  21. Kolkwitz, R. & Marsson, M., 1902. Grundsätze für die biologische Beurteiling des Wassers nach seiner Flora und Fauna. Mitt. Prüfungsanst. Wasserversorg. Abwasserreinig. 1: 33–72.Google Scholar
  22. Kolkwitz, R. & Marsson, M., 1908. Ökologie der pflanzlichen Saprobien. Ber. dt. bot. Ges. 26A: 505–519.Google Scholar
  23. Kolkwitz, R. & Marsson, M., 1908. Ökologie der tierischen Saprobien. Int. Rev. Hydrobiol. 2: 126–152.Google Scholar
  24. Lafontaine, A., De Brabander, K., Vanhooen G., Huygh, A., Nef, L., Persoone, G., De Pauw, N, Verheyen, R., Micha, J. C., Schmitz, A. & Reizer, C., 1979. Cartes de la Qualité Biologique des cours d'eau en Belgique. Ministère de la Santé Publique et de la Famille, Institutt d'Hygiène et d'Epidemiologie, 14, Rue Juliette Wijtsman, B-1050 Bruxelles. 61 pp. + 1 carte. (also published in Dutch).Google Scholar
  25. Liebmann, H., 1962. Handbuch der Frischwasser- und Abwasserbiologie. Vol. I. 2nd ed. R. Oldenburg, München. 588 pp.Google Scholar
  26. Macan, T. T., 1974. Freshwater Ecology. Longman, London. 343 pp.Google Scholar
  27. Macan, T. T., 1981. Modifications of populations of aquatic invertebrates and the quality of the water, 161–191. In: Hoestlandt, H. (Ed.). Dynamique de populations et qualité de l'eau. Gauthier-Villars, Paris.Google Scholar
  28. Mackenthun, K. M., 1969. The Practice of Water Pollution Biology. FWPCA, Washington 281 pp.Google Scholar
  29. Micha, J. C. & Jadot, I., 1980. Compte-rendu, carthographie Ecologique des Eaux de Surface. Facultés Universitaires N-D de la Paix, B-5000 Namur. Internal report. 14 pp.Google Scholar
  30. Micha, J. C. & Noiset, J. L., 1982. Evaluation biologique de la pollution des ruisseaux et rivières par les invertébrés aquatiques. Probio-Revue 5(5): 1–142.Google Scholar
  31. Moller-Pillot, H. K. M., 1971. Faunistische beoordeling van de verontreiniging in laaglandbeken. Ph.D. Thesis. Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen. Tilburg. 286 pp. + 96 tables.Google Scholar
  32. Pantle, R. & Buck, H., 1955. Die biologische Überwachung der Gewässer und die Darstellung der Ergebnisse. Gas Wasserfach 96: 604.Google Scholar
  33. Persoone, G., 1979. Proposal for a biotypological classification of watercourses in the European Communities, 1–28. In: James, A. & Evison, L. (Eds.). Biological Indicators of Water Quality. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  34. Persoone, G. & De Pauw, N., 1979. Systems of biological indicators for water quality assessment. 39–75. In: Ravera, O. (Ed.). Biological Aspects of Freshwater Pollution, Pergamon Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  35. Pittwell, L. R., 1976. Biological monitoring of rivers in the Community, 225–261. In: Amavis, R. & Smeets, J. (Eds.). Principles and Methods for Determining Ecological Criteria on Hydrobiocenoses. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 531 pp.Google Scholar
  36. Richardson, R. E., 1928. The bottom tauna of the middle Illinois River 1913–1925: its distribution, abundance, valuation and index value in the study of stream pollution. Bull. Illinois. State Nat. Hist. Survey. 17: 387–475.Google Scholar
  37. Rosenberg, D. M. & Resh, V. H., 1982. The use of artificial substrates in the study of freshwater benthic macroinvertebrates, 175–235. In: Cairns, J., Jr. (Ed.). Artificial Substrates. Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 279 pp.Google Scholar
  38. Schwoerbel, J., 1970. Methods of Hydrobiology — Freshwater Biology. Pergamon Press, London, 200 pp.Google Scholar
  39. Sladecek, V., 1973. System of water quality from the biological point of view. Arch. Hydrobiol. Beih. 7: 1–218.Google Scholar
  40. Tachet, H., Bournaud, M. & Richoux, Ph., 1980. Introduction à l'étude des macro-invertébrés des eaux douces. Université Lyon I, Biologie Animale et Ecologie. 69622 Villeurbanne Cedex. 155 pp.Google Scholar
  41. Tittizer, T. G., 1976. Comparative study of biological-ecological water assessment methods. Practical demonstration of the River Main (2–6 June, 1975). Summary Report. Comparison of biological-ecological procedures for assesment of water quality, 403–463. In: Amavis, R. & Smeets, I. (Eds.). Principles and methods for determining ecological criteria on hydrobiocenoses. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 531 pp.Google Scholar
  42. Tolkamp, H. H., 1980. Organism-substrate relationships in low-land streams. Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation, Wageningen, 211 pp.Google Scholar
  43. Tuffery, G. & Verneaux, J., 1968. Méthode de détermination de la qualité biologique des eaux courantes. Exploitation codifiée des inventaires de la faune du fond. Ministère de l'Agriculture (France), Centre National d'Etudes techniques et de recherches technologiques pour l'agriculture, les forêts et l'équipment rural ‘C.E.R.A.F.E.R.’, Section Pêche et Pisciculture, 23 ppGoogle Scholar
  44. Vanhooren, G., 1975. Report on the biological examination of the river Main. Germany (2–5 June 1975), 25 pp. In: Tittizer, T., 1975. Comparative Study of Biological-Ecological Water Assessment Methods. Reports of national experts. Koblenz. Published for the Commission of the European Communities.Google Scholar
  45. Vanhooren, G., 1976. Aspects biologiques dans l'étude du bassin de l'Yzer. Bulletin de Pisciculture 48, 261, 2e trimestre: 231–247.Google Scholar
  46. Vanhooren, G. & Dehavay, P., 1976. Report on the Biological Examination of the River Trent (27th Sept.–1st October 1976). Technical Seminar. Biological Water Assessment Methods, Nottingham. Instituut voor Hygiëne en Epidemiologie, B-1050 Brussel, Mimeogr. paper, 19 pp.Google Scholar
  47. Vanhooren, G., Ovaere, A., De Schutter, H. & Boelen, C., 1982. Liste codée des macro-invertébrés aquatiques — Codelijst van aquatische macro-invertebraten. Institut d'Hygiene et d'Epidemiologie, B-1050 Brussels, V + 61 pp.Google Scholar
  48. Vercauteren, T. & Bourgoing, L., 1981. Intercalibratie-oefening in Netekanaal, Molenbeek en Willborrebeek (29 oktober 1981). G.T.E. Internal Report. 4 pp. + 4 annexes.Google Scholar
  49. Verdonschot, P. F. M., Smies, M. & Sepers, A. B. J., 1982. The distribution of aquatic oligochaetes in brackish inland waters in the SN Netherlands. Hydrobiologia 89: 29–38.Google Scholar
  50. Verneaux, J., Faessel, B. & Malesieux, G., 1978. Note préliminaire à la proposition de nouvelles méthodes de détermination de la qualité des eaux courantes. Internal report. Centre Hydrobiol. Univ. Besançon et Lab. Hydroécol. C.T.G.-R.E.F.Google Scholar
  51. Verniers, G. & Micha, J. C., 1982. Le rôle de l'hydrobiologiste dans l'évaluation de l'impact des activités humaines sur les milieux aquatiques. Trib. Cebedeau 35: 117–131.Google Scholar
  52. Woodiwiss, F. S., 1964. The biological system of stream classification used by the River Trent Board. Chem. Indust. 14: 443–447Google Scholar
  53. Woodiwiss, F. S., 1978. Comparative Study of Biological-Ecological Water Quality Assessment Methods. Second practical demonstration, Nottingham (20 Sept. to 1 Oct. 1976). Summary Report. Commission of the European Communities, Environment and Consumer Protection Service.Google Scholar
  54. Woodiwiss, F. S., 1980. Biological Monitoring of Surface Water Quality. Summary Report. Commission of the European Communities. Environment and Consumer Protection Service. 45 pp.Google Scholar
  55. Zelinka, M. & Marvan, P., 1961. Zur Präzisierung der biologischen klassifikation der Reinheit fliessender Gewässer. Arch. Hydrobiol. 57: 389–407Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr W. Junk Publishers 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • Niels De Pauw
    • 1
  • Gerard Vanhooren
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratory for Biological Research in Aquatic PollutionState University of GhentGhentBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Environment, Section WaterInstitute for Hygiene and EpidemiologyBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations