ECOLOGICAL WATER QUALITY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35433/naturaljournal.2.2023.45-56Keywords:
water, ecological quality, properties.Abstract
Water quality – is a description of water’s chemical and biological composition and physical properties, which characterize it as an abiotic component of aquatic ecosystem and determine its suitability for specific consumption purposes. Ecological water quality (environmental water quality) – refers to the ecological well-being of an aquatic ecosystem, with the main focus on protection of the aquatic environment and human life and health. It comprises a complex of physical, chemical, biological and other parameters reflecting specific features of abiotic and biotic components of aquatic ecosystems. The requirements for physical, chemical and biological properties of water are set in the water quality standards, which may be developed by particular countries or introduced by international organizations. Ecological water quality depends upon natural and human factors. Natural factors are in their turn divided into abiotic (for example, geological, meteorological, hydrological) and biotic (for example, the ratio of primary production and organic matter destruction). The main human factors affecting water quality include artificial modification of aquatic ecosystems’ hydrological conditions and their pollution with diverse chemical compounds. There are a lot of approaches to ecological water quality assessment according to both abiotic (physical and chemical) and biological parameters. Physical and chemical methods take into account such parameters as water transparency, suspended particulate matter concentration (turbidity), ion composition, water hardness, total dissolved salts content, nutrients and organic matter content, dissolved gases concentration, pH. Biological methods are based upon assessing the living organisms’ (biological indicators’) response to mineral and organic substances, present in water. Various living organisms can be used as biological indicators: algae, in particular – diatoms, higher aquatic plants, different species of aquatic invertebrates and fishes. While physical and chemical methods characterize water quality at the moment of sampling, biological methods provide an integral picture of water quality for a certain time period. Besides, biological methods are more informative, because they reflect the aquatic ecosystem’s response to pollution. On the whole, the most reliable data on ecological water quality can be obtained by combining physical, chemical and biological methods.
References
Bartram J., Ballance R. (eds) World Health Organization and United Nations Environment Programme. Water quality monitoring: a practical guide to the design and implementation of freshwater quality studies and monitoring programs. E & FN Spon, London. 1996. 383 p.
EFI+ Manual. Manual for the application of the New European Fish Index. 2009. Available from: http://efi-plus.boku.ac.at/software/ doc/EFI+Manual.pdf
Eloranta P., Soininen J. Ecological status of some Finnish rivers evaluated using benthic diatoms communities. J Appl Phycol. 2002. 14:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015275723489
Gomez N., Licursi M. The Pampean Diatom Index (IDP) for assessment of rivers and stream in Argentina. Aquat Ecol. 2001. 35:173–181 Guidelines for drinking-water quality, fourth edition. World Health Organization. Available from: http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/2011/dwq_guidelines/en/
Hill B.H., Stevenson R.J., Pan Y., Herlihy A.T., Kaufmann Ph.R., Johnson C.B. Comparison of correlations between environmental characteristics and stream diatom assemblages characterized at genus and species levels. J N Am Benthol Soc. 2001. 20 (2): 299–310. https://doi.org/10.2307/1468324
Hill B., Herlihy A., Kaufmann R. et al. Assessment of streams of the eastern United States using a periphyton index of biotic integrity. Ecological Indicators. 2003. 2:325– 338. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-160X(02)00062-6
Kelly M.G., Whitton B.A. The trophic Diatom Index: a new index for monitoring eutrophication in rivers. J Appl Phycol. 1995. 7:433–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00003802
Klimaszyk P., Trawiñski A. Assessment of rivers based on benthic macroinvertebrates – Indeks BMWP-PL –Poznañ, 2007, 2-6 (in Polish)
Lange-Bertalot H. Pollution tolerance of diatoms as a criterion for water quality estimation. Nowa Hedwigia. 1979. 64:285–304
Martin G., Fernandez M.R. Diatoms as Indicators of Water Quality and Ecological Status: Sampling, Analysis and Some Ecological Remarks, Ecological Water Quality – Water Treatment and Reuse. 2012. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/300804909_Diatoms_as_Indicators_of_Water _Quality_and_Ecological_Status_Sampling_Analysis_and_Some_Ecological_Remarks
Melzer A. Aquatic macrophytes as tools for lake management. Hydrobiologia. 1999. 395:181–190. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3282-6_17
Nurlimann J., Niederhauser P. Methoden zur Untersuchung und Beurteilung der Fliessgewasser: Kieselalgen Stufe F (flachendeckend) Bundesamt fur Umwelt. BAFU, Bern. 2006. 130 p. (in German)
Pantle R., Buck H. Die biologische Überwachung der Gewässer und die Darstellung der Ergebnisse. Gas Wasserfach Wasser Abwasser. 1955. 96:609–620
Parameters of water quality: interpretation and standards. Environmental Protection Agency, 2001 Available from: https://www.epa.ie/pubs/advice/water/quality/Water_Quality.pdf
Плигин Ю.В., Щербак В.И., Арсан О.М., Михайленко Л.Е., Матчинская С.Ф., Майстрова Н.В. Влияние поверхностного стока на биоту Каневского водохранилища в черте г. Киева и рекомендации по его очистке. Материалы международной научно- практической конференции «Экология городов и рекреационных территорий», Издательство «Астрология», Одесса. 1998. 272-277
Prygiel J., Coste M. Guide méthodologique pour la mise en oeuvre de l’Indice Biologique Diatomées. NF T. 2000. 90-354. Étude Agences de l’Eau – Cemagref Bordeaux
Романенко В.Д. Основи гідроекології. Київ: Обереги. 2001. 728 с.
Shcherbak V.I., Maistrova N.V., Semenuyk N.Ye. Structural and Functional Organization of Phytoplankton and Phytomicroepiphyton of the Rivers of the "Pripyat − Stokhod" National Natural Park. Hydrobiological Journal. 2012. 48(6):3–27
Shcherbak V.I., Semenuyk N.Ye. Use of Phytoperiphyton for the Assessment of the Ecological State of Anthropically Changed Aquatic Ecosystems. Hydrobiological Journal. 2011. 47(4):24–40. https://doi.org/10.1615/HydrobJ.v47.i4.20
Sládeček V. The future of the saprobity system. Hydrobiologia. 1965. 25:518–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00838511
Sládeček V. System of water quality from the biological point of view. Archiv für Hydrobiologie Ergebnisse Limnol. 1973. 7:1–218
Szczepocka E., Szulc B., Szulc K. et al. Diatom indices in the biological assessment of the water quality based on the example of a small lowland river. Oceanological and Hydrobiological Studies. 2014. 43(3): 265–273. https://doi.org/0.2478/s13545-014- 0141-z
Szczerbiñska N., Gałczyñska M. Biological methods used to assess surface water quality. Arch Pol Fish 24:185–196. https://doi.org/10.1515/aopf-2015-0021
Van Dam H., Mertens A., Sinkeldam J. A coded checklist and ecological indicator values of freshwater diatoms from the Nertherlands. Nether Jour of Aquatic Ecol. 1994. 28(1):117–133
Wu J.T. A generic index of diatom assemblages as bioindicator of pollution in the Keelung River of Taiwan. Hydrobiologia. 1999. 397:79–87. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003694414751
Yakushin V.M., Shcherbak V.I., Semenyuk N.Ye., Linchuk M.I. Hydrochemical characteristics of the Kiev Reservoir at the present time. Hydrobiological Journal. 2017. 53 (6): 96–109. https://doi.org/10.1615/HydrobJ.v53.i6.100
Zelinka M., Marvan P. Zur Präzisierung der biologischen Klassifi kation der Reinheit fl iessender Gewässer. Arch Hydrobiol. 1961. 57:389–407
