Akarçay Havzası’nda Su Çerçeve Direktifine Göre İlk Biyolojik İzleme: Fitoplankton ve Fitobentoz

Year 2017, Volume: 1 Issue: 1, 90 - 107, 31.01.2017

Nilsun Demir , Tolga Çetin , Caner Gök Müge Şanal

https://doi.org/10.31807/tjwsm.297212

Cited By: 6

Abstract

First Biological Monitoring in the Akarçay Basin According to the Water Framework Directive: Phytoplankton and Phytobenthos

Abstract

In this study, it was aimed to
investigate of phytoplankton and phytobenthos in 19 rivers and Lake Eber
for the assessment of ecological quality in the Akarçay basin. A total
of 63 phytoplankton species were identified. Phytoplankton was evaluated
according to sensitive species and pollution indicators in rivers. Lake
Eber was determined as eutrophic and sensitive area according to
phytoplankton functional groups and Q Index. The presence of phytobenthic macroalgae
was detected only some sampling points in rivers. Therefore diatoms were used
as phytobenthos quality element. A total of 64 diatom species were
identified and diatom indices were calculated. Concerning the phytobenthos
assessment, IDP index ranged between 2 and 4, and ecological status
changed between medium and very bad.

Keywords

Water Framework Directive, ecological quality, phytoplankton, phytobenthos, diatom

References

• Anonymous, (2000). Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and the council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities, L327, 1-72.
• Anonymous, (2002). Star Project sampling Protocol and audit benthic diatoms.
• Anonymous, (2003a). Common implementation strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Guidance document no: 2. Identification of water bodies. Luxembourg, Office for official publications of the European Communities.
• Anonymous, (2003b). Common implementation strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Guidance document no: 10. River and lakes – Typology, reference conditions and classification systems. Luxembourg, Office for official publications of the European Communities.
• Anonymous, (2004). EN 13946. European Committee for Standardization. Water quality – Guidance standard for the routine sampling and pretreatment of benthic diatoms from rivers.
• Anonymous, (2006). EN 15204. European Committee for Standardization. Water quality – Guidance standard on the enumeration of phytoplankton using inverted microscopy (Uter möhl technique).
• Anonymous, (2010). EN 15708. European Committee for Standardization. Water quality - Guidance standard for the surveying, sampling and laboratory analysis of phytobenthos in shallow running water.
• Anonymous, (2013a). Havza koruma eylem planlarının hazırlanması projesi Akarçay Havzası. Proje nihai raporu. Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu, Marmara Araştırma Merkezi. Gebze/Kocaeli.
• Anonymous, (2013b). Yukarı Havza Sel Kontrolü Eylem Planı. Orman ve Su İşleri Bakanlığı. Ankara.
• Anonymous, (2013c). Ergene, Akarçay, Gediz, Susurluk ve Sakarya Havzalarında Su Çerçeve Direktifi Kapsamında Su Kalitesi İzleme Projesi. ALKA OSBSYGM Final Rapor No: R-AKRÇY-2013-R05, 458 s.
• Anonymous, (2014a). Türkiye’de havza bazında hassas alanların ve su kalitesi hedeflerinin belirlenmesi projesi. 5. İlerleme raporu Cilt I. Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu, Marmara Araştırma Merkezi. Gebze/Kocaeli.
• Anonymous, (2014b). European Commission (Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and Sustainability) Hoyos, C., Catalan, J., Dörflinger, G., Ferreira, J., Kemitzoglou, D., Laplace-Treyture, C., Lopez, J. P., Marchetto, A., Mihail, O., Morabito, G., Polykarpou, P., Romao, F., & Tsiaoussi, V. Water Framework Directive intercalibration technical report, Mediterranean lake phytoplankton ecological assessment methods, Italy. EUR 26517 EN.
• Anonymous, (2014c). UKTAG river assessment method. Macrophytes and phytobenthos. Phytobenthos – Diatoms for assessing river and lake ecological quality (River DAR LEQ2). Water Framework Directive - United Kingdom Technical Advisory Group.
• Anonymous, (2015). (21.12.2015) Water bodies in Europe: Integrative systems to assess ecological status and recovery. http://www.wiser.eu/results/method-database/
• Burgan, H. İ., İçağa, Y., Bosyanoğlu, Y. & Kilit, M. (2013). Akarçay Akarsuyu 2006-2011 dönemi su kalite eğimi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 19(3), 127-132.
• Cox, E. J. (1996). Identification of freshwater diatoms from live material. Chapman & Hall, 158 p., London.
• Çelekli, A. & Öztürk, B. (2014). Determination of ecological status and ecological preferences of phytoplankton using multivariate approach in a Mediterranean reservoir. Hydrobiologia, 740, 115-135.
• Çelik, K., & Ongun, T. (2008). Spatial and temporal dynamics of the steady-state phytoplankton assemblages in a temperate shallow hypertrophic lake (Lake Manyas, Turkey). Limnology, 9, 115–123.
• Çevik, F., Whitton, B.A. & Öztürk, O. (2007). A New Genus Record for the Freshwater Algal Flora of Turkey. Turkish Journal of Botany, 31, 149-152.
• Dell’Uomo, A. (2004). L’indice diatomico di eutrofizzazione/polluzione (EPI-D) nel monitoraggio delle azque correnti, line guida. Dipartimento di Botanica ed Ecologia, Universita di Camerino.
• Demir, A. N., Fakıoğlu, Ö. & Dural, B. (2014). Phytoplankton functional groups provide a quality assessment method by the Q assemblage index in Lake Mogan (Turkey). Turkish Journal of Botany, 38, 169-179.
• Elmacı, A. & Obalı, O. (1998). Akşehir Gölü kıyı bölgesi alg florası. Turkish Journal of Biology, 22, 81-98.
• Gomez, N. & Licursi, M. (2001). The Pampean Diatom Index (IDP) for assessment of rivers and streams in Argentina. Aquatic Ecology, 35, 173-181.
• Hillebrand, H., Dürselen, C.D., Kirschtel, D., Pollingher U. & Zohary T. (1999). Biovolume calculation for pelagic and benthic microalgae. J Phycol 35: 403–424.
• John, D.M., Whitton, B.A. & Brook, A.J. (2002). The freshwater algal flora of the British Isles.Cambridge, Cambridge University.
• Kalyoncu, H., Çiçek, N.L., Akköz, C. & Yorulmaz, B. (2009). Comperative performance of diatom indices in aquatic pollution assessment. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 10, 1032-1040.
• Kargıoğlu, M., Serteser, A., Kıvrak, E., İçağa, Y. & Konuk, M. (2012). Relationships between epipelic diatoms, aquatic macrophytes, and water quality in Akarçay Stream, Afyonkarahisar, Turkey. Oceanological and Hydrobiological Studies, 41(1), 74-84.
• Kelly, M.G. (1998). Use of trophic diatom index to monitor eutrophication in rivers. Wat. Res., 32 (1): 236-242.
• Kıvrak, E. & Uygun, A. (2012). The structure and diversity of the epipelic diatom community in a heavily polluted stream (the Akarçay, Turkey) and their relationship with environmental variables, Journal of Freshwater Ecology, 27(3), 443-457.
• Kıvrak, E., Uygun, A. & Kalyoncu, H. (2012). Akarçay’ın (Afyonkarahisar, Türkiye) su kalitesini değerlendirmek için diyatome indekslerinin kullanılması. AKÜ FEBİD 12, 27-38.
• King, L., Clarke, G., Bennion, H., Kelly, M. & Yallop, M. (2006). Recommendations for sampling littoral diatoms in lakes for ecological status assessments. Journal of Applied Phycology, 18, 15-25.
• Komarek, J., & Anagnostidis, K. (1999). Cyanoprokaryota 1. Teil: Chroococcales. In: H. Ettl, G. Gartner, H. Heynig, D. Mollenhauer. (Eds), Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa, Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, 548 p., Heidelberg.
• Komarek, J. & Anagnostidis, K. (2005). Cyanoprokaryota 2. Teil: Oscillatoriales. In: B. Büdel, G. Gartner, L. Krienitz, M. Schagerl (Eds), Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa, Spektrum Akademischer Verlag, Heidelberg, 759 p.
• Komarek, J. & Fott, B. (1983). Chlorococcales, 7. Teil. 1Halfte. In: J. Elster and W. Ohle (Eds), Das phytoplankton des süsswassers, E. Schweizerbart’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1043 p., Stuttgart.
• Krammer, K. & Lange-Bertalot, H. (1985). Naviculaceae. Bibliotheca Diatomologia, Band 9. J. Cramer, 230 p., Berlin-Stuttgart.
• Krammer, K. & Lange-Bertalot, H. (1986). Bacillariophyceae. 1. Teil: Naviculaceae. Ed: Ettl, H., Gerloff, J., Heynig, H. and Mollenhauer, D. Süsswasser flora von Mitteleuropa, Band 2/1. Gustav Fischer Verlag, 876 p., Stuttgart.
• Krammer, K. & Lange-Bertalot, H. (1988). Bacillariophyceae. 2. Teil: Bacillariaceae, Epithemiaceae, Surirellaceae. Ed: Ettl, H., Gerloff, J., Heynig, H. and Mollenhauer, D. Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa, Band 2/2. VEB Gustav Fischer Verlag, 596 p, Jena.
• Krammer, K. & Lange-Bertalot, H. (1991a). Bacillariophyceae. 3. Teil: Centrales, Fragilariaceae, Eunotiaceae. Ed: Ettl, H., Gerloff, J., Heynig, H. and Mollenhauer, D. Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa, Band 2/3. Gustav Fischer Verlag, 576 p., Stuttgart, Jena.
• Krammer, K. & Lange-Bertalot, H. (1991b). Bacillariophyceae. 4. Teil: Achnanthaceae, Kritische Ergänzungen zu Navicula (Lineolatae) und Gomphonema, Gesamtliteraturverze ichnis Teil 1-4. Ed: Ettl, H., Gärtner, G., Gerloff, J., Heynig, H. And Mollenhauer, D. Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa, Band 2/4. Gustav Fischer Verlag, 437 p., Stuttgart, Jena.
• Lange-Bertalot, H. (2013). Diatomeen im Süßwasser - Benthos von Mitteleuropa. Koeltz Sci. Books. Germany.
• Lecointe, C., Coste, M., & Prygiel, J. (1993). “Omnidia”: software for taxonomy, calculation of diatom indices and inventories management. Hydrobiologia, 269/270, 509-513.
• Lind, M. E., & Brook, A. J. (1980). A key to the Commoner Desmids of the English Lake District. Freshwater Biol. Assoc. Publ, 123, Cumbria.
• Mischke, U., Carvalho, L., McDonald, C., Skjelberd, B., Solheim, A. L., Philips, G., Hoyos, C., Borics, G., Moe, J., & Pahissa, J. (2011). WISER Deliverable D3.1-2: Report on phyto plankton bloom metric.
• Padisak, J., Borics, G., Grigorszky, I., & Soroczki-Pinter, E. (2006). Use of phytoplankton assemblages for monitoring ecological status of lakes within the Water Framework Directive: the assemblage index. Hydrobiologia, 553, 1-14.
• Philips, G., Morabito, G., Carvalho, L., Solheim, A. L., Skjelbred, B., Moe, J., Andersen, T., Mischke, U., Hoyos, C., & Borics, G. (2011). WISER Deliverable D3.1-1: Report on lake phytoplankton composition metrics, including a common metric approach for use in intercalibration by all GIGs. Annex Draft sensitive species.
• Popovski, J. & Pfiester, L. A. (1990). Dinophyceae (Dinoflagellida), Band 6. In: H. Ettl, J. Gerloff, H. Heynig, D. Mollenhauer, (Eds). Süsswasserflora von Mitteleuropa Gustav Fisher Verlag, 243, Jena.
• Prescott, G. W. (1973). Algae of the Western Great Lakes Area, 5th edition. WM. C. Brown Co. Publ, 977, Dubuque.
• Reynolds, C. S., Huszar, V., Kruk, K., Naselli-Flores, L. & Melo, S. (2002). Towards classification of the freshwater phytoplankton. Journal of Plankton Research, 24, 417-428.
• Rott, E., (1981). Some results from phytoplankton counting intercalibrations. Schweiz. Z. Hydrol., 43, 34-59.
• Rott, E., Cantonati M., Füreder L. & Pfister P. (2006). Benthic algae in high altitude stream of Alps – neglected component of aquatic biota. Hydrobiologia, 562, 195-216.
• Solak, C.N., (2011). The application of diatom indices in the upper Porsuk Creek Kütahya Turkey. Turkish Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 11, 31-36.
• Sondergaard, M., Jeppesen, E., Jensen, J.P. & Amsinck, S.L. (2005). Water Framework Directive: Ecological Classification of Danish Lakes. Journal of App. Ecology, 42, 616-629.