4.5 Article

Eutrophication Assessment in Basque Estuaries: Comparing a North American and a European Method

Journal

ESTUARIES AND COASTS
Volume 35, Issue 4, Pages 991-1006

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12237-012-9489-8

Keywords

Eutrophication; DPSIR; ASSETS; European Water Framework Directive; Estuaries; Northeast Atlantic region

Funding

  1. Basque Water Agency (Uragentzia) of the Basque Government
  2. Basque Government (Department of Education, Universities and Investigation)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Eutrophication in marine ecosystems is an important problem that requires an accurate assessment. Although Basque estuaries (northern Spain) have historically been under high anthropogenic pressure, no specific eutrophication assessment method had been applied in these waters. In this study, a method employed in the Basque Country (BC) to assess the risk of failing to achieve good ecological status under the requirements of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) was adapted to exclusively assess the risk of eutrophication. This method is based on the driver-pressure-state-impact-response approach. The results from this method (called WFD-BC method) were compared to the results from Assessment of Estuarine Trophic Status (ASSETS; a specific method developed in the US to assess estuarine trophic status in a pressure-state-response approach). The nutrient pressure was better characterized with the WFD-BC method due to the local hydrographic conditions (i.e., small and river-influenced estuaries) that were not well accommodated by the ASSETS method. In contrast, the WFD-BC results for assessment of state generally reflected worse conditions than the results from the ASSETS method due to the different indicators employed and the way these are integrated in the WFD-BC method. Overall, the WFD-BC method showed a good potential to assess eutrophication. However, to improve it, a lower weight for the benthos and macroalgae is recommended for evaluating state.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available