, Volume 584, Issue 1, pp 3–12 | Cite as

Phosphorus reference concentrations in European lakes

  • A. C. Cardoso
  • A. Solimini
  • G. Premazzi
  • L. Carvalho
  • A. Lyche
  • S. Rekolainen
Shallow Lakes


As part of an assessment of the ecological quality of surface waters, recent European water legislation, the water framework directive (WFD), requires the setting of environmental objectives for particular chemicals. As part of this, many European countries are choosing to develop a quality classification scheme for total phosphorus (TP) concentration. The assessment of ecological quality and its component parts, such as TP, must be based on the degree of divergence of a water body from an appropriate baseline, or ‘reference condition’. For this reason, it is important to determine TP reference conditions for all lake types, or alternatively, models for predicting reference TP concentrations on a site-specific basis. With this purpose in mind, we have assembled a large dataset of European lakes considered to be in reference condition; 567 lakes in total. Data has been collated on TP concentration, mean depth, alkalinity, humic type, altitude, area, and geographical region. Reference TP concentrations have been derived from this dataset using two empirical approaches. Firstly, lake-type specific TP reference conditions were derived simply from descriptive statistics (median and percentiles) of TP concentrations by lake type. Secondly, empirical models were developed for estimating site-specific reference TP concentrations from a set of potential predictor variables. TP concentrations were found to vary with lake type and by geographical region. TP increased with colour and alkalinity, and decreased with lake depth and altitude. There was no clear relationship between TP and lake area. Altitude, mean depth and alkalinity were selected as independent explanatory variables for prediction of site-specific reference TP concentrations, with different models developed for humic and non-humic lakes. A simpler site-specific predictive model based solely on the morphoedaphic index (MEI) (a combination of a site’s alkalinity and mean depth) was also shown to be comparably effective.


Reference lake Total phosphorus reference concentration Morphoedaphic index WFD 



This work has been carried out within the framework of the EU FP6 Research Project REBECCA ‘Relationships Between Ecological and Chemical Status of Surface Waters’. We would like to thank our colleagues in the Project, in particular for those that supplied the data and those responsible for the database. Namely we would like to thank Jannicke Moe for her invaluable work building up the REBECCA Project lake database. We would also like to thank GIG representatives and data providers for their cooperation and comments on several aspects of the work.


  1. Anonymous, 2003. River and Lakes – Typology, Reference Conditions and Classification Systems. Guidance No 10. CIS Working Group 2.3 REFCOND, European Communities, Luxembourg, 87 pp.Google Scholar
  2. Bradshaw, E. G. & J. Anderson, 2001. Validation of a diatom-phosphorus calibration set for Sweden. Freshwater Biology 46: 1035–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brooks, S. J., H. Bennion & H. J. B. Birks, 2001. Tracing lake trophic history with a chironomid-total phosphorus inference model. Freshwater Biology 46: 513–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dillon, P. J. & W. B. Kirchner, 1975. The effects of geology and land use on the export of phosphorus from watersheds. Water Research 9(2): 135–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. EEA, 2003. Europe’s environment: the third assessment. Environment assessment report No 10, EEA, Luxembourg, 343 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Hughes, R. M., 1995. Defining acceptable biological status by comparing with reference conditions. In Davis, W. S. & T. P. Simpson (eds), Biological assessment criteria. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, Florida, 31–47.Google Scholar
  7. Moss, B., P. Johnes & G. Phillips, 1996. The monitoring of ecological quality and the classification of standing water in temperate regions: A review and proposal based on a worked scheme for British waters. Biological Review 71: 301–339.Google Scholar
  8. Nielsen, K., B. Sømod C. Ellegaard & D. Krause-Jensen, 2003. Assessing reference conditions according to the European Water Framework Directive using modelling and analysis of historical data: an example from Randers Fjord, Denmark. Ambio 32: 287–294.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nixon, S., Z. Trent, C. Marcuello & C. Lallana, 2003. Europe’s water: an indicator-based assessment. Topic report N.1/ 2003, EEA, Copenhagen, 97 pp.Google Scholar
  10. Nõges, P. & T. Nõges, 2006. Indicators and criteria to assess ecological status of the large shallow temperate polymictic lakes Peipsi (Estonia/Russia) and Võrtsjäv (Estonia). Boreal Environment Research 11(1): 67–80Google Scholar
  11. Nürnberg, G. K. & M. Shaw, 1999. Productivity of clear and humic lakes: nutrients, phytoplankton, bacteria. Hydrobiologia 382: 97–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. OECD, 1982. Eutrophication of Waters: Monitoring, Assessment and Control. OECD, Paris, 154 pp.Google Scholar
  13. Oglesby, R. T., 1977. Phytoplankton summer standing crop and annual productivity as functions of phosphorus loading and various physical factors. Journal of Fishery Research Board Canada 34: 2255–2270.Google Scholar
  14. Otsuki, A. & R. G. Wetzel, 1972. Coprecipitation of phosphate with carbonates in a marl lake. Limnology and Oceanography 17: 763–767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Reynoldson, T. B., R. H. Norris, V. H. Resh, K. E. Day & D. M. Rosenberg, 1997. The reference condition: a comparation of multimetric and multivariate approaches to assess water-quality impairment using benthic invertebrates. Journal of North American Benthological Society 16: 833–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rawson, D. S., 1952. Morphometry as a dominant factor in the productivity of large lakes. Verhangen International Verein Limnology 12: 164–175.Google Scholar
  17. Ryder, R. A., S. R. Kerr, K. H. Loftus & H. A. Regier, 1974. The Morphoedaphic Index, a fish yield estimator – review and evaluation. Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 31: 663–688.Google Scholar
  18. Søndegaard, M., J. P. Jensen & E. Jeppesen, 2003. Role of the sediment and internal loading of phosphorus in shallow lakes. Hydrobiologia, 506–509: 135–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Søndergaard, M., E. Jeppesen J. P. Jensen & S. L. Amsinck, 2005. Water Framework Directive: ecological classification of Danish lakes. Journal of Applied Ecology, 42: 616–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ter Braak, C. J. F. & S. Juggins, 1993. Weighted averaging partial least squares regression (WA-PLS): an improved method for reconstructing environmental variables from spaecies assemblages. Hydrobiologia 269–270: 485–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. US Environment Protection Agency, 2000. Nutrient Criteria Technical Guidance Manual. Lakes and reservoirs. EPA, Office of Water and Technology, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  22. Van de Bund, W., A. C.Cardoso, A. -S. Heiskanen & P. Nõges, 2004. Overview of Common Intercalibration Types. Electronic document. Publicly available at: Scholar
  23. Vighi, M. & G. Chiauani, 1985. A simple method to estimate lake phosphorus concentrations resulting from natural, background, loadings. Water Research 19: 987–991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. C. Cardoso
    • 1
  • A. Solimini
    • 1
  • G. Premazzi
    • 1
  • L. Carvalho
    • 2
  • A. Lyche
    • 3
  • S. Rekolainen
    • 4
  1. 1.European Commission – DG Joint Research CentreInstitute for Environment and SustainabilityIspraItaly
  2. 2.Centre for Ecology and HydrologyEdinburghUK
  3. 3.Norwegian Institute for Water ResearchOsloNorway
  4. 4.Finnish Environment InstituteHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations