Table 2 Coding criteria for the systematic map of the impact of agricultural on the ecological status of Irish waterbodies
Number | Coding variable | Details/Examples |
|---|---|---|
1 | Author(s) and affiliations | |
2 | Full reference | |
3 | Publication type | Book chapter, journal paper, report |
4 | Holding institution | Organisation holding access to the document |
5 | Document access issue | Open Access or subscription Only |
6 | Funding agency | |
7 | Study start and end date | Date(s) study was carried out |
8 | Study length | Duration of Study |
9 | Study description | Brief Overview of the Study |
10 | Study scale | Regional/Catchment/Farm/Field/Plot/Lab |
11 | Experimental design | |
12 | Waterbody type | Estuary/Lake/River/Groundwater. WFD Catergory, Coastal |
13 | Description of waterbody | Brief description of waterbody |
Status of waterbody | How impacted is the waterbody under investigation (Ecological, Chemical and Hydromorphology) | |
14 | Study location | Where within Ireland |
15 | Farming type | Dairy, livestock, sheep, arable, mixed |
16 | Soil description | Classification, Permeable/impermeable, soil fertility |
17 | Land use type (dominant and other land use) | Pasture, rough grazing, arable, commonage, mixed |
18 | Description of exposure | Description of what agriculture Pressure (e.g. farming type, intensity, derogation etc.) that the waterbody is being exposed to/ |
19 | Exposure time period | Length of time exposure has occurred |
20 | Mitigation description (if any) | Description of Mitigation of Exposure |
21 | Mitigation time period (if any) | Length of time Mitigation has been in Place |
22 | Comparator description | e.g. Brief Description of Spatial and/or temporal comparator |
23 | Comparator type | i.e. Spatial and/or temporal |
24 | Replication | Number and unit of replication |
25 | Methodological detail | The level of detail provided in the methods description Low/medium/High/No obvious detail missing |
26 | Outcome focus | Which aquatic variable are measured ( physico-chemical, ecology, hydrology, geomorphology |
27 | Dominant hydrological pathway of export | Overland flow, Drain flow, Interflow, Groundwater, Transition zone |
28 | Measured outcomes | All outcome terms detailed in Table 1 |
29 | Impact on biological status | Details of impact on macroinvertebrates, fish, macrophytes, algae etc. |
31 | Impact on chemical status | Details of impact on phosphorus, nitrogen, conductivity, biological oxygen demand etc. |
32 | Impact on hydro-morphological status | Details of impact on riverbed substrate, hydrology, riparian zone etc. |
33 | Evidence linking exposure/mitigation to outcome | Yes/No |
34 | Strength of evidence of impact | Low/Medium/High |
35 | Description of evidence linking exposure/mitigation to outcome | Brief Description |
36 | Scale at which dominant source area Identified | point location, Field, Farm, land use type, sub-catchment, catchment |
37 | Other compounding sources reported | Septic Tanks, WWTP, point sources, urban runoff |
38 | Other compounding stressors reported | Invasive species, lack of a species pool, hydromorphology |
39 | Policy Relevance | Water Framework Directive, Nitrates Directive, Phosphorus Regulations etc. |