Assessment of Macrophyte Biological Index for Rivers, and evaluation of physicochemical parameters in the Sakarya River Basin of Turkey


In this study, the Macrophyte Biological Index for Rivers (IBMR) method and physicochemical measurements were used to assess the trophic status of the Sakarya River Basin in Turkey. The most abundant macrophytes were Phragmites australis, Thypa latifolia, Juncus sp., and Paspalum distichum. The IBMR values varied between 6.00 and 13.00 in spring, and between 6.714 and 14.40 in the fall season. The sampling stations, which are under the influence of agricultural runoffs, domestic effluents, and industrial discharges, had hypoxia accompanied by eutrophic and/or hypertrophic conditions at least in one season. The individual trophy levels of the sampling sites in the basin have been assessed as mesotrophic to eutrophic. However, considering the average IBMR value of all stations, the general trophy level of the basin was close to eutrophic. The results indicate that the physicochemical parameters are affected by various effluents discharged to the basin as observed during field studies, and the obtained data would be useful to apply conservation measures.


ecological quality, eutrophication, IBMR, macrophyte, Sakarya River Basin


Download data is not yet available.


AFNOR. 2003. Qualité de l’eau: Détermination de l’indice biologique macrophytique en rivière (IBMR). NF T90–395.

Akin, B. S., Atıcı, T., Katircioglu, H., and Keskin, F. 2011. Investigation of water quality on Gökçekaya Dam Lake using multivariate statistical analysis, in Eskişehir, Turkey. Environmental Earth Sciences 63(6):1251–1261.

Akkoyunlu, A. and Akiner, M. E. 2012. Pollution evaluation in streams using water quality indices: A case study from Turkey's Sapanca Lake Basin. Ecological Indicators 18:501–511.

Amann, T., Weiss, A., and Hartmann, J. 2014. Silica fluxes in the inner Elbe Estuary, Germany. Biogeochemistry 118:389–412.

Bonnano, G. and Lo Giudice, R. 2010. Heavy metal bioaccumulation by the organs of Phragmites australis (common reed) and their potential use as contamination indicators. Ecological Indicators 10(3):639–645.

Burnak, S. L. and Beklioğlu, M. 2000. Macrophyte-dominated clearwater state of Lake Mogan. Turkish Journal of Zoology 24:305–313.

Ceschin, S., Zuccarello, V., and Caneva, G. 2010. Role of macrophyte communities as bioindicators of water quality: Application on the Tiber River basin (Italy). Plant Biosystems 144(3):528–536.

Chirkova, T. and Yemelyanov, V. 2018. The study of plant adaptation to oxygen deficiency in Saint Petersburg University. Biological Communications 63(1):17–31.

Chislock, M. F., Doster, E., Zitomer, R. A., and Wilson, A. E. 2013. Eutrophication: causes, consequences, and controls in aquatic ecosystems. Nature Education Knowledge 4(4):10.

Coffin, M. R. S., Courtenay, S. C., Pater, C. C., and van den Heuvel, M. R. 2018. An empirical model using dissolved oxygen as an indicator for eutrophication at a regional scale. Marine Pollution Bulletin 133:261–270.

Cook, C. D. K., Gut, B. J., Rix, E. M., and Schneller, J. 1974. Water plants of the World: A manual for the identification of the genera of freshwater macrophytes, Dr. W. Junk b.v., Publishers, The Hague.

Dauvin, J. C., Ruellet, T., Desroy, N., and Janson, A. L. 2007. The ecological quality status of the Bay of Seine and the Seine estuary: Use of biotic indices. Marine Pollution Bulletin 55:241–257.

Davis, P. H. 1985. Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands, vol. IX, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.

Dawson, F. H., Newman. J. R., and Gravelle, M. J. 1996. Mean trophic rank macrophyte survey. An assessment of the trophic status of rivers using macrophytes. Research & Development, Interim Report 694/NW/01. Environment Agency, Bristol, 29 pp.

DSİ (General Directorate of Water Management, Republic of Turkey Ministry of Food Agriculture and Livestock). 2016. Effect of climate change on water resources project final report, Appendix 14.

Elo, M., Alahuhta, J., Kanninen, A., Meissner, K. K., Seppälä, K., and Mönkkönen, M. 2018. Environmental characteristics and anthropogenic impact jointly modify aquatic macrophyte species diversity. Frontiers in Plant Science 9:1001.

European Council. 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal, L 327, 22/12/2000 P. 0001–0073.

Gecheva, G., Yurukova, L., and Cheshmedjiev, S. 2013. Patterns of aquatic macrophyte species composition and distribution in Bulgarian rivers. Turkish Journal of Botany 37:99–110.

Haury, J., Peltre, M-C., Trémolières, M., Barbe, J., Thiébaut, G., Bernez, I., Daniel, H., Chatenet, P., Haan-Archipof, G., Muller, S., Dutartre, A., Laplace-Treyture, C., Cazaubon, A., and Lambert-Servien, E. 2006. A new method to assess water trophy and organic pollution — the Macrophyte Biological Index for Rivers (IBMR): its application to different types of river and pollution. Hydrobiologia 570:153–158.

Karakoç, G., Erkoç, F. Ü., and Katırcıoğlu, H. 2003. Water quality and impacts of pollution sources for Eymir and Mogan Lakes (Turkey). Environment International 29(1):21–27.

Khadija, S-A., Francis, R., and Bernard, T. 2015. Trend analysis in ecological status and macrophytic characterization of watercourses: Case of the Semois-Chiers Basin, Belgium Wallonia. Journal of Water Resource and Protection 7(13):59391.

Khatri, N., and Tyagi, S. 2015. Influences of natural and anthropogenic factors on surface and groundwater quality in rural and urban areas. Frontiers in Life Science 8(1):23–29.

Klink, A., Macioł, A., Wisłocka, M., and Krawczyk, J. 2013. Metal accumulation and distribution in the organs of Typha latifolia L. (cattail) and their potential use in bioindication. Limnologica 43(3):164–168.

Lopes A., Parolin P., and Piedade, M. T. F. 2016. Morphological and physiological traits of aquatic macrophytes respond to water chemistry in the Amazon Basin: an example of the genus Montrichardia Crueg (Araceae). Hydrobiologia 766:1–15.

Manera, M., Frattaroli, A. R., Nicolai, S., Di Sabatino, A., and Giansante, C. 2014. Macrophyte Biological Index for Rivers estimation in the waters of Pescara Springs by means of SCUBA dive and orthophotos interpretation. Ecohydrology & Hydrobiology 14:296–303.

Marzin, A., Archaimbault, V., Belliard, J., Chauvin, C., Delmas, F., and Pont, D. 2012. Ecological assessment of running waters: Do macrophytes, macroinvertebrates, diatoms and fish show similar responses to human pressures? Ecological Indicators 23:56–65.

Mihu-Pintilie, A., Romanescu, G., and Stoleriu, C. 2014. The seasonal changes of the temperature, pH and dissolved oxygen in the Cuejdel Lake, Romania. Carpathian Journal of Earth and Environmental Sciences 9(2):113–123.

Morrison, G., Fatoki, O. S., Persson, L., and Ekberg, A. 2001. Assessment of the impact of point source pollution from the Keiskammahoek Sewage Treatment Plant on the Keiskamma River — pH, electrical conductivity, oxygen- demanding substance (COD) and nutrients. Water SA 27:475–480.

Muhammetoglu, A., Muhammetoglu, H., Oktas, S., Ozgokcen, L., and Soyupak, S. 2005. Impact assessment of different management scenarios on water quality of Porsuk River and Dam system — Turkey. Water Resources Management 19(2):199–210.

Özbay, H., Yaprak, A. E., and Turan, N. 2019. Assessing water quality in the Ceyhan River basin (Turkey) with the use of aquatic macrophytes. Chemistry and Ecology 35(10):891–902.

Özen, F., Acemi, A., Pelin, E. G., and Ergül, H. A. 2017. Assessment of macrophyte plant distribution and pah contamination in selected aquatic habitats from an industrialized city Kocaeli, Turkey. Biomonitoring 4:27–33.

Palagushkina, O., Nazarova, L., and Frolova, L. 2019. Trends in development of diatom flora from sub-recent lake sediments of the Lake Bolshoy Kharbey (Bolshezemelskaya tundra, Russia). Biological Communications 64(4):244–251.

Reitsema, R. E., Meire, P., and Schoelynck, J. 2018. The future of freshwater macrophytes in a changing world: dissolved organic carbon quantity and quality and its interactions with macrophytes. Frontiers in Plant Science 9:629.

Rydin, E., Kumblad, L., Wulff, F., and Larsson, P. 2017. Remediation of a eutrophic bay in the Baltic Sea. Environmental Science & Technology 51(8):4559–4566.

Schneider, S. and Melzer, A. 2003. The trophic index of macrophytes (TIM) — A new tool for indicating the trophic state of running waters. International Review of Hydrobiology 88(1):49–67.

Schneider, S. C, Trajanovska, S., Biberdžić, V., Marković, A., Talevska, M., Imeri, A., Veljanoska-Sarafiloska, E., Đurašković, P., Jovanović, K., and Cara, M. 2020. The Balkan Macrophyte Index (BMI) for assessment of eutrophication in lakes. Acta Zoologica Bulgarica 72(3):439–454.

Solak, C. N., Peszek, Ł., Yilmaz, E., Ergül, H. A., Kayal, M., Ekmekçi, F., Várbíró, G., Yüce, A. M., Canli, O., Binici, M. S., and Ács, É. 2020. Use of diatoms in monitoring the Sakarya River Basin, Turkey. Water 12:703.

Solimini, A. G., Cardoso, A. C., Carstensen, J., Free, G., Heiskanen, A-S., Jepsen, N., Nõges, P., Poikane, S., and van de Bund, W. 2008. The monitoring of ecological status of European freshwaters. In: The Water Framework Directive Ecological and Chemical Status Monitoring.

Szoszkiewicz, K., Zbierska, J., Staniszewski, R., and Jusik, S. 2009. The variability of macrophyte metrics used in river monitoring. Oceanological and Hydrobiological Studies 38(4):117–126.

Wiederkehr, J., Grac, C., Fabrègue, M., Fontan, B., Labat, F., Le Ber, F., and Trémolières, M. 2015. Experimental study of uncertainties on the macrophyte index (IBMR) based on species identification and cover. Ecological Indicators 50:242–250.

Yang, X-E., Wu, X., Hao, H-L., and He, Z-L. 2008. Mechanisms and assessment of water eutrophication. Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE B 9(3):197–209.

How to Cite
Acemi, A., Ergül, H. A., Kayal, M., Ekmekçi, F., & Özen, F. (2021). Assessment of Macrophyte Biological Index for Rivers, and evaluation of physicochemical parameters in the Sakarya River Basin of Turkey. Biological Communications, 66(2), 151–159.
Full communications