Christian K. Feld

The European Water Framework Directive at the age of 10: A critical review of the achievements with recommendations for the future.

The European Water Framework Directive (WFD), which was adopted in 2000, changed water management in all member states of the European Union fundamentally, putting aquatic ecology at the base of management decisions. Here we review the successes and problems encountered with implementation of the WFD over the past 10years and provide recommendations to further improve the implementation process. We particularly address three fields: (i) the development of assessment methods (including reference conditions, typologies and intercalibration); (ii) the implementation of assessment systems in monitoring programmes; and (iii) the consequences for river basin management plans (such as the design, monitoring and success of restoration measures). The development of assessment methods has been a transparent process and has resulted in improved and more standardised tools for assessing water bodies across Europe. The process has been more time consuming, and methods are more complex, than originally expected. Future challenges still remain, including the estimation of uncertainty of assessment results and a revision of rules in combining the results obtained with different Biological Quality Elements. A huge amount of monitoring data is now being generated for WFD purposes. Monitoring data are not centrally stored and thus poorly accessible for purposes beyond the WFD. Future challenges include enhanced data accessibility and the establishment of a Europe-wide central monitoring network of reference sites. The WFD river basin management plans base management decisions on the response of aquatic organisms to environmental stress. In contrast to the effects of degradation, the biotic response to restoration is less well-known and poorly predictable. The timescale of the WFD (obtaining good ecological status in all surface waters by 2027) is over-ambitious. Future challenges include long-term monitoring of restoration measures to understand the requirements for ecosystems to recover and prioritisation of measures according to re-colonisation potential.

Towards an assessment of multiple ecosystem processes and services via functional traits

Managing ecosystems to ensure the provision of multiple ecosystem services is a key challenge for applied ecology. Functional traits are receiving increasing attention as the main ecological attributes by which different organisms and biological communities influence ecosystem services through their effects on underlying ecosystem processes. Here we synthesize concepts and empirical evidence on linkages between functional traits and ecosystem services across different trophic levels. Most of the 247 studies reviewed considered plants and soil invertebrates, but quantitative trait–service associations have been documented for a range of organisms and ecosystems, illustrating the wide applicability of the trait approach. Within each trophic level, specific processes are affected by a combination of traits while particular key traits are simultaneously involved in the control of multiple processes. These multiple associations between traits and ecosystem processes can help to identify predictable trait–service clusters that depend on several trophic levels, such as clusters of traits of plants and soil organisms that underlie nutrient cycling, herbivory, and fodder and fibre production. We propose that the assessment of trait–service clusters will represent a crucial step in ecosystem service monitoring and in balancing the delivery of multiple, and sometimes conflicting, services in ecosystem management.

Cook book for the development of a Multimetric Index for biological condition of aquatic ecosystems: experiences from the European AQEM and STAR projects and related initiatives

The requirements of the European Water Framework Directive (WFD), aimed at an integrative assessment methodology for evaluating the ecological status of water bodies are frequently being achieved through multimetric techniques, i.e. by combining several indices, which address different stressors or different components of the biocoenosis. This document suggests a normative methodology for the development and application of Multimetric Indices as a tool with which to evaluate the ecological status of running waters. The methodology has been derived from and tested on a European scale within the framework of the AQEM and STAR research projects, and projects on the implementation of the WFD in Austria and Germany. We suggest a procedure for the development of Multimetric Indices, which is composed of the following steps: (1) selection of the most suitable form of a Multimetric Index; (2) metric selection, broken down into metric calculation, exclusion of numerically unsuitable metrics, definition of a stressor gradient, correlation of stressor gradients and metrics, selection of candidate metrics, selection of core metrics, distribution of metrics within the metric types, definition of upper and lower anchors and scaling; (3) generation of a Multimetric Index (general or stressor-specific approach); (4) setting class boundaries; (5) interpretation of results. Each step is described by examples.

Functional traits as indicators of biodiversity response to land use changes across ecosystems and organisms.

Rigorous and widely applicable indicators of biodiversity are needed to monitor the responses of ecosystems to global change and design effective conservation schemes. Among the potential indicators of biodiversity, those based on the functional traits of species and communities are interesting because they can be generalized to similar habitats and can be assessed by relatively rapid field assessment across eco-regions. Functional traits, however, have as yet been rarely considered in current common monitoring schemes. Moreover, standardized procedures of trait measurement and analyses have almost exclusively been developed for plants but different approaches have been used for different groups of organisms. Here we review approaches using functional traits as biodiversity indicators focussing not on plants as usual but particularly on animal groups that are commonly considered in different biodiversity monitoring schemes (benthic invertebrates, collembolans, above ground insects and birds). Further, we introduce a new framework based on functional traits indices and illustrate it using case studies where the traits of these organisms can help monitoring the response of biodiversity to different land use change drivers. We propose and test standard procedures to integrate different components of functional traits into biodiversity monitoring schemes across trophic levels and disciplines. We suggest that the development of indicators using functional traits could complement, rather than replace, the existent biodiversity monitoring. In this way, the comparison of the effect of land use changes on biodiversity is facilitated and is expected to positively influence conservation management practices.

Quantifying the Contribution of Organisms to the Provision of Ecosystem Services

Research on ecosystem services has grown rapidly over the last decade. Two conceptual frameworks have been published to guide ecological assessments of organisms that deliver services—the concepts of service-providing units (SPUs) and ecosystem service providers (ESPs). Here, we unite these frameworks and present an SPU-ESP continuum that offers a coherent conceptual approach for synthesizing the latest developments in ecosystem service research, and can direct future studies at all levels of organization. In particular, we show how the service-provider concept can be applied at the population, functional group, and community levels. We strongly emphasize the need to identify and quantify the organisms and their characteristics (e.g., functional traits) that provide services, and to assess service provision relative to the demands of human beneficiaries. We use key examples from the literature to illustrate the new approach and to highlight gaps in knowledge, particularly in relation to the impact of species interactions and ecosystem dynamics on service provision.

A New Method for Assessing the Impact of Hydromorphological Degradation on the Macroinvertebrate Fauna of Five German Stream Types

We developed a new Multimetric Index for stream assessment, which is mainly focussed on the impact of hydromorphological degradation on the macroinvertebrate fauna. The index was developed for five German stream types, three of which are located in the lowlands of Northern Germany and two in the lower mountainous areas. For each stream type sites representing different stages of hydromorphological degradation were investigated; the macroinvertebrate fauna of each site was sampled two or three times in 2000 (83 sites and 174 samples altogether). In addition, more than 200 parameters describing the hydromorphology of the sites have been recorded.

From Natural to Degraded Rivers and Back Again: A Test of Restoration Ecology Theory and Practice

Extensive degradation of ecosystems, combined with the increasing demands placed on the goods and services they provide, is a major driver of biodiversity loss on a global scale. In particular, the severe degradation of large rivers, their catchments, floodplains and lower estuarine reaches has been ongoing for many centuries, and the consequences are evident across Europe. River restoration is a relatively recent tool that has been brought to bear in attempts to reverse the effects of habitat simplification and ecosystem degradation, with a surge of projects undertaken in the 1990s in Europe and elsewhere, mainly North America. Here, we focus on restoration of the physical properties (e.g. substrate composition, bank and bed structure) of river ecosystems to ascertain what has, and what has not, been learned over the last 20 years. First, we focus on three common types of restoration measures—riparian buffer management, instream mesohabitat enhancement and the removal of weirs and small dams—to provide a structured overview of the literature. We distinguish between abiotic effects of restoration (e.g. increasing habitat diversity) and biological recovery (e.g. responses of algae, macrophytes, macroinvertebrates and fishes). We then addressed four major questions: (i) Which organisms show clear recovery after restoration? (ii) Is there evidence for qualitative linkages between restoration and recovery? (iii) What is the timescale of recovery? and (iv) What are the reasons, if restoration fails? Overall, riparian buffer zones reduced fine sediment entry, and nutrient and pesticide inflows, and positive effects on stream organisms were evident. Buffer width and length were key: 5–30 m width and > 1 km length were most effective. The introduction of large woody debris, boulders and gravel were the most commonly used restoration measures, but the potential positive effects of such local habitat enhancement schemes were often likely to be swamped by larger-scale geomorphological and physico-chemical effects. Studies demonstrating long-term biological recovery due to habitat enhancement were notable by their absence. In contrast, weir removal can have clear beneficial effects, although biological recovery might lag behind for several years, as huge amounts of fine sediment may have accumulated upstream of the former barrier. Three Danish restoration schemes are provided as focal case studies to supplement the literature review and largely supported our findings. While the large-scale re-meandering and re-establishment of water levels at River Skjern resulted in significant recovery of riverine biota, habitat enhancement schemes at smaller-scales in other rivers were largely ineffective and failed to show long-term recovery. The general lack of knowledge derived from integrated, well-designed and long-term restoration schemes is striking, and we present a conceptual framework to help address this problem. The framework was applied to the three restoration types included in our study and highlights recurrent cause–effect chains, that is, commonly observed relationships of restoration measures (cause) and their effects on abiotic and biotic conditions (effect). Such conceptual models can provide useful new tools for devising more effective river restoration, and for identifying avenues for future research in restoration ecology in general.

Identifying and prioritising services in European terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems

Ecosystems are multifunctional and provide humanity with a broad array of vital services. Effective management of services requires an improved evidence base, identifying the role of ecosystems in delivering multiple services, which can assist policy-makers in maintaining them. Here, information from the literature and scientific experts was used to systematically document the importance of services and identify trends in their use and status over time for the main terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems in Europe. The results from this review show that intensively managed ecosystems contribute mostly to vital provisioning services (e.g. agro-ecosystems provide food via crops and livestock, and forests provide wood), while semi-natural ecosystems (e.g. grasslands and mountains) are key contributors of genetic resources and cultural services (e.g. aesthetic values and sense of place). The most recent European trends in human use of services show increases in demand for crops from agro-ecosystems, timber from forests, water flow regulation from rivers, wetlands and mountains, and recreation and ecotourism in most ecosystems, but decreases in livestock production, freshwater capture fisheries, wild foods and virtually all services associated with ecosystems which have considerably decreased in area (e.g. semi-natural grasslands). The condition of the majority of services show either a degraded or mixed status across Europe with the exception of recent enhancements in timber production in forests and mountains, freshwater provision, water/erosion/natural hazard regulation and recreation/ecotourism in mountains, and climate regulation in forests. Key gaps in knowledge were evident for certain services across all ecosystems, including the provision of biochemicals and natural medicines, genetic resources and the regulating services of seed dispersal, pest/disease regulation and invasion resistance.

Ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation: concepts and a glossary.

The RUBICODE project draws on expertise from a range of disciplines to develop and integrate frameworks for assessing the impacts of environmental change on ecosystem service provision, and for rationalising biodiversity conservation in that light. With such diverse expertise and concepts involved, interested parties will not be familiar with all the key terminology. This paper defines the terms as used within the project and, where useful, discusses some reasoning behind the definitions. Terms are grouped by concept rather than being listed alphabetically.

Assessing streams in Germany with benthic invertebrates: selection of candidate metrics.

Abstract The process of selecting invertebrate-based candidate metrics for the German stream assessment system is described. The aim was to identify metrics indicating degradation types other than organic pollution and acidification (“general degradation”). For 18 out of 24 German stream types a data base of roughly 2,000 benthic invertebrate samples was generated; for each sample 79 metrics were calculated. Data on land use in the catchment were compiled for all sampling sites, together with data on hydromorphology for many sampling sites. Hydromorphological and land use parameters, which describe a clear gradient in the data sets were identified by Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling (NMS). Correlation analyses between land use/hydromorphological parameters and metric results were calculated separately for the individual stream types. Among those metrics best indicating catchment- and hydromorphological degradation in the majority of stream types are: proportion of Ephemeroptera, Plecoptera and Trichoptera; proportion of Plecoptera (mainly suited for mountain streams); number of Plecoptera taxa; proportion of xenosaprobic taxa; proportion of epirhithral preferring taxa. Differences of metric correlations between stream types and between degradation types are discussed, leading to a list of candidate metrics for assessing German streams.