Present situation on data request to Member States
Present situation on data request to Member States Carola Gómez-Rodríguez & Isabel Pardo Reference Conditions Working Group, Edinburgh February, 8 -9 th 2010
REFERENCE SITES
Reference Sites 1. Member States´ contribution 2. Distribution of reference sites 3. Characteristics of the working data a. Data completeness b. Data heterogeneity c. Temporal variability
REF SITES 1. Member State´s contribution Ø Contributing countries = 13 (12 EU + NO) ** *Under review: Excluded from analyses ** Additional sites will be received in February 8 th, 2010
REF SITES 1. Member State´s contribution Ø Contributing countries = 13 (12 EU + NO) Ø Pending countries = 15 Belgium (Flanders & Wallonia) Denmark Greece Ireland Latvia Malta Poland Slovakia Bulgaria Germany Hungary Italy Luxemburg The Netherlands Romania
REF SITES 2. Distribution of reference sites
REF SITES 2. Distribution of reference sites �Distribution across GIGs
REF SITES 2. Distribution of reference sites �Distribution across BQEs
REF SITES 2. Distribution of reference sites �Distribution across GIGs and BQEs GIGs & BQEs
REF SITES 2. Distribution of reference sites INVERTEBRATES
REF SITES 2. Distribution of reference sites DIATOMS
3. Characteristics of the working data 1 register (row) 1 reference sample REF SITES In some cases: 1 reference site Several reference samples
3. Characteristics of the working data REF SITES A. Data completeness �Parameters related to river/stream typology 50% 30%
3. Characteristics of the working data REF SITES A. Data completeness �Water chemistry parameters 50% 30%
3. Characteristics of the working data REF SITES A. Data completeness �Drivers/Pressures 50% 30%
3. Characteristics of the working data REF SITES A. Data completeness: Parameters with low data completeness (Exclusion from analyses) Data completeness < 30% n = 10 Data completeness < 50% n=8
3. Characteristics of the working data REF SITES A. Data completeness: Parameters with “acceptable” data completeness (suitable for analyses) Parameters related to river/stream typology = 3 out of 6 Water chemistry parameters = 3 out of 6 Drivers/Pressures = 4 out of 16 Environmental data is poor Data for all sites/samples is needed to draw robust conclusions
3. Characteristics of the working data B. Data heterogeneity: Water chemistry REF SITES parameters Mean Median 90 percentil 75 percentil Spot value Ø Few countries fulfilled all fields (FR, LT for all samples) (CY for some samples)
3. Characteristics of the working data B. Data heterogeneity: Water chemistry REF SITES parameters �Central tendency values vs. spot measurements SPOT > MEAN > MEDIAN > 90% > 70%
3. Characteristics of the working data B. Data heterogeneity: Water chemistry REF SITES parameters �Central tendency values vs. spot measurements BOD 5 SPOT > MEAN > MEDIAN > 90% > 70%
3. Characteristics of the working data B. Data heterogeneity: Water chemistry REF SITES parameters �Central tendency values vs. spot measurements O 2 SPOT > MEAN > MEDIAN > 90% > 70%
3. Characteristics of the working data B. Data heterogeneity: Water chemistry REF SITES parameters �Central tendency values vs. spot measurements N-NH 4 SPOT > MEAN > MEDIAN > 90% > 70%
3. Characteristics of the working data B. Data heterogeneity: Water chemistry REF SITES parameters �Central tendency values vs. spot measurements N-NO 3 SPOT > MEAN > MEDIAN > 90% > 70%
3. Characteristics of the working data B. Data heterogeneity: Water chemistry REF SITES parameters �Central tendency values vs. spot measurements P-PO 4 SPOT > MEAN > MEDIAN > 90% > 70%
3. Characteristics of the working data B. Data heterogeneity: Water chemistry REF SITES parameters �Central tendency values vs. spot measurements TP SPOT > MEAN > MEDIAN > 90% > 70%
3. Characteristics of the working data B. Data heterogeneity: Water chemistry REF SITES parameters �Central tendency values vs. spot measurements Are central tendency values and spot measurements comparable? Can we merge all fields corresponding to a given water chemistry parameter? USE ONLY SPOT VALUES?
3. Characteristics of the working data REF SITES C. Temporal variability 1 Reference site Several samples collected in different years/seasons Invertebrates 4 sites 4 samples (ES, LT) 4 sites 3 samples (CZ, ES, LT) 26 sites 2 samples (AT, CY, CZ, ES) A given site Different EQRs over time Diatoms 1 sites 4 samples (AT) 3 sites 3 samples (AT) 10 sites 2 samples (AT, ES)
3. Characteristics of the working data REF SITES C. Temporal variability A given site Different EQRs over time Example #1: Miño [ES] (43. 13º N; 7. 61 ºW) Artificial land use 0. 3 % Example #2: Zeimena below Pabrade [LT] (54. 96º N; 25. 71 ºE) Artificial land use 1. 7 %
3. Characteristics of the working data REF SITES C. Temporal variability A given site Different EQRs over time Different values of EQR can be related to a given environmental value Example #2: Zeimena below Pabrade [LT] (54. 96º N; 25. 71 ºE) Artificial land use 1. 7 %
Reference Sites: General comments REF SITES Ø Only 13 MSs sent data (Pending countries = 15) Ø Low data completeness of many parameters (n = 18) Many parameters will be excluded from further analyses Ø Large data type heterogeneity (i. e. central tendency vs. spot measurement) in water chemistry Shall we merge? Request only spot values? Ø Temporal replication of data for some reference sites Different values of EQR can be related to a single environmental value Sites with large variability in EQR over time Data weakness in statistical
REFERENCE + NON REFERENCE SITES (pressure data)
REF + NON REF SIT 1. Member State´s contribution Ø Contributing countries (n = 3) CY = 25 samples / 13 sites ES = 1637 samples / 693 sites* (UK: Under review) Ø “Promised” data from 2 countries: FI FR *More data available in February 8 th, 2010
REF + NON REF SIT 1. Member State´s contribution Ø Received data: Lacks on ICM values [Pressure template version 1] Ø At present time: Open call for pressure data including ICM values [Pressure template version 2, sent January 15 th 2010]
THANKS FOR LISTENING! We need your feedback on: - Low data completeness/missing data: MS should provide important pressures data that is missing right now (i. e. population density) - Heterogeneity in water chemistry data: Spot measurements? - Large temporal variability in EQRs values from a given site: Should sites be removed (i. e. EQR classes varying from high to bad or high to moderate)?
- Slides: 34