Quality assurance of diatom counts in Europe: towards harmonized datasets

Maria Kahlert, E. Ács, Salome F P Almeida, Saúl Blanco, Mirko Dreßler, Luc Ector, Satu Maaria Karjalainen, Antonia Liess, Adrienne Mertens, Jako van der Wal, Sirje Vilbaste, Petra Werner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Investigations on organism ecology, biodiversity and biogeography often use large compiled datasets to extract information on species ecological preferences, which then can be used in environmental assessment. Freshwater benthic diatoms are commonly used in this context. However, it is important that the taxonomic information of the separate diatom datasets is compatible. At present, inconsistencies between diatom datasets, mainly due to differences and uncertainties in diatom identification, may misinform diatom taxon-specific ecological preferences, geographical distribution and water quality assessment. It is our opinion that these inconsistencies in diatom datasets can be reduced with quality assurance (QA), such as identification exercises. However, the results of these exercises must be well documented and well communicated; otherwise, gained knowledge may not spread inter-regionally or internationally. As a first step to reach greater consistency in QA/harmonization studies, this article (1) presents and compares information of existing diatom identification and counting QA from published and grey (non-peer reviewed) European literature to identify advantages and drawbacks of each approach; (2) summarizes taxa that can easily be misidentified according to European identification exercises; and (3) suggests a consistent design of identification exercises for diatom dataset QA.

Original languageEnglish
JournalHydrobiologia
Volume772
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2016

Fingerprint

Bacillariophyceae
quality control
diatom
exercise
quality assurance
Europe
environmental assessment
biogeography
geographical distribution
uncertainty
water quality
biodiversity
ecology
organisms

Keywords

  • Bioindicator
  • European Water Framework Directive
  • Identification exercise
  • Inter-laboratory comparison
  • Intercalibration
  • Ring test

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Aquatic Science

Cite this

Kahlert, M., Ács, E., Almeida, S. F. P., Blanco, S., Dreßler, M., Ector, L., ... Werner, P. (2016). Quality assurance of diatom counts in Europe: towards harmonized datasets. Hydrobiologia, 772(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-016-2651-8

Quality assurance of diatom counts in Europe : towards harmonized datasets. / Kahlert, Maria; Ács, E.; Almeida, Salome F P; Blanco, Saúl; Dreßler, Mirko; Ector, Luc; Karjalainen, Satu Maaria; Liess, Antonia; Mertens, Adrienne; van der Wal, Jako; Vilbaste, Sirje; Werner, Petra.

In: Hydrobiologia, Vol. 772, No. 1, 01.06.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kahlert, M, Ács, E, Almeida, SFP, Blanco, S, Dreßler, M, Ector, L, Karjalainen, SM, Liess, A, Mertens, A, van der Wal, J, Vilbaste, S & Werner, P 2016, 'Quality assurance of diatom counts in Europe: towards harmonized datasets', Hydrobiologia, vol. 772, no. 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10750-016-2651-8
Kahlert, Maria ; Ács, E. ; Almeida, Salome F P ; Blanco, Saúl ; Dreßler, Mirko ; Ector, Luc ; Karjalainen, Satu Maaria ; Liess, Antonia ; Mertens, Adrienne ; van der Wal, Jako ; Vilbaste, Sirje ; Werner, Petra. / Quality assurance of diatom counts in Europe : towards harmonized datasets. In: Hydrobiologia. 2016 ; Vol. 772, No. 1.
@article{fbb7f73b05ea4d058ace47a5d7bbb28c,
title = "Quality assurance of diatom counts in Europe: towards harmonized datasets",
abstract = "Investigations on organism ecology, biodiversity and biogeography often use large compiled datasets to extract information on species ecological preferences, which then can be used in environmental assessment. Freshwater benthic diatoms are commonly used in this context. However, it is important that the taxonomic information of the separate diatom datasets is compatible. At present, inconsistencies between diatom datasets, mainly due to differences and uncertainties in diatom identification, may misinform diatom taxon-specific ecological preferences, geographical distribution and water quality assessment. It is our opinion that these inconsistencies in diatom datasets can be reduced with quality assurance (QA), such as identification exercises. However, the results of these exercises must be well documented and well communicated; otherwise, gained knowledge may not spread inter-regionally or internationally. As a first step to reach greater consistency in QA/harmonization studies, this article (1) presents and compares information of existing diatom identification and counting QA from published and grey (non-peer reviewed) European literature to identify advantages and drawbacks of each approach; (2) summarizes taxa that can easily be misidentified according to European identification exercises; and (3) suggests a consistent design of identification exercises for diatom dataset QA.",
keywords = "Bioindicator, European Water Framework Directive, Identification exercise, Inter-laboratory comparison, Intercalibration, Ring test",
author = "Maria Kahlert and E. {\'A}cs and Almeida, {Salome F P} and Sa{\'u}l Blanco and Mirko Dre{\ss}ler and Luc Ector and Karjalainen, {Satu Maaria} and Antonia Liess and Adrienne Mertens and {van der Wal}, Jako and Sirje Vilbaste and Petra Werner",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10750-016-2651-8",
language = "English",
volume = "772",
journal = "Hydrobiologia",
issn = "0018-8158",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quality assurance of diatom counts in Europe

T2 - towards harmonized datasets

AU - Kahlert, Maria

AU - Ács, E.

AU - Almeida, Salome F P

AU - Blanco, Saúl

AU - Dreßler, Mirko

AU - Ector, Luc

AU - Karjalainen, Satu Maaria

AU - Liess, Antonia

AU - Mertens, Adrienne

AU - van der Wal, Jako

AU - Vilbaste, Sirje

AU - Werner, Petra

PY - 2016/6/1

Y1 - 2016/6/1

N2 - Investigations on organism ecology, biodiversity and biogeography often use large compiled datasets to extract information on species ecological preferences, which then can be used in environmental assessment. Freshwater benthic diatoms are commonly used in this context. However, it is important that the taxonomic information of the separate diatom datasets is compatible. At present, inconsistencies between diatom datasets, mainly due to differences and uncertainties in diatom identification, may misinform diatom taxon-specific ecological preferences, geographical distribution and water quality assessment. It is our opinion that these inconsistencies in diatom datasets can be reduced with quality assurance (QA), such as identification exercises. However, the results of these exercises must be well documented and well communicated; otherwise, gained knowledge may not spread inter-regionally or internationally. As a first step to reach greater consistency in QA/harmonization studies, this article (1) presents and compares information of existing diatom identification and counting QA from published and grey (non-peer reviewed) European literature to identify advantages and drawbacks of each approach; (2) summarizes taxa that can easily be misidentified according to European identification exercises; and (3) suggests a consistent design of identification exercises for diatom dataset QA.

AB - Investigations on organism ecology, biodiversity and biogeography often use large compiled datasets to extract information on species ecological preferences, which then can be used in environmental assessment. Freshwater benthic diatoms are commonly used in this context. However, it is important that the taxonomic information of the separate diatom datasets is compatible. At present, inconsistencies between diatom datasets, mainly due to differences and uncertainties in diatom identification, may misinform diatom taxon-specific ecological preferences, geographical distribution and water quality assessment. It is our opinion that these inconsistencies in diatom datasets can be reduced with quality assurance (QA), such as identification exercises. However, the results of these exercises must be well documented and well communicated; otherwise, gained knowledge may not spread inter-regionally or internationally. As a first step to reach greater consistency in QA/harmonization studies, this article (1) presents and compares information of existing diatom identification and counting QA from published and grey (non-peer reviewed) European literature to identify advantages and drawbacks of each approach; (2) summarizes taxa that can easily be misidentified according to European identification exercises; and (3) suggests a consistent design of identification exercises for diatom dataset QA.

KW - Bioindicator

KW - European Water Framework Directive

KW - Identification exercise

KW - Inter-laboratory comparison

KW - Intercalibration

KW - Ring test

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84964296724&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84964296724&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10750-016-2651-8

DO - 10.1007/s10750-016-2651-8

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84964296724

VL - 772

JO - Hydrobiologia

JF - Hydrobiologia

SN - 0018-8158

IS - 1

ER -