Abstract:1. Studies at local to national extent have documented a recovery in macroinvertebrate taxonomic richness following improvements in water quality. The study by Haase et al. (2023) published in Nature claimed that the overall recovery came to a halt across Europe by 2010. However, the lack of monitoring design, the varying lengths in time series and heterogeneous taxonomic resolution (species, genus and families), along with insufficient information on data handling prior to statistical analyses are raising questions about the reliability of the findings. 2. Here I use the open access raw data of the original study to calculate the proportion of taxa identified to the targeted taxonomic resolution (species, genus or family), which revealed a lack of taxonomic consistency within some of the time-series. I then devised a simple taxonomic correction to remove potential biases in the richness trend estimates through the modelling procedures using linear models. 3. In order to make the data more comparable across studies and over time, I calculated an anomaly in taxonomic richness relative to a five-year reference period within 1990-2020, so all time series (greater than or equal to 15 years long, greater than or equal to 8 samples) overlapped. The concept is borrowed from the familiar temperature anomaly in climate research to track deviations from a norm. I ran non-linear trend analyses to reveal changes in the anomaly in taxonomic richness during the period 1990-2020. 4. European taxonomic richness using 1816 sites in 47 studies (full dataset) increased linearly by about 0.29 +/- 0.09 taxa per year when using all taxonomic ranks (species, genus, family), compared to the average 0.20 taxa per year in the original study, but dropped to 0.15 +/- 0.04 taxa per year at family level. The same results were produced after geographical thinning to 687 sites separated by at least 20 km from each other's. Further data analyses revealed the extent of discrepancies in taxonomic resolution (proportion of taxa identified to species or genus level) within time-series and its impact on trend estimates. 5. The linear increase in abundance over time was marginal (1 individual / year or 0.12% of average abundance) in the full dataset and not significant within 1990-2020 period, contrary to published findings (1.17%) due to a calculation error in the original study. 6. The linear analyses of species richness were run on centred years and did not allow the study of the temporal dynamics in taxonomic richness. Non-linear analyses using the anomaly in taxonomic richness for the period 1990-2020 revealed no change in taxonomic richness apart from a post millennium small and short rise using all taxonomic ranks (1120 sites, 27 studies), possibly due to a concurrent increase in sampling effort (abundance) across sites. 7. Coarsening the taxonomic resolution to family level did not alter the dynamic of the anomaly in taxonomic richness over time, possibly a result from poor sample sampling effort. The average 'species' richness (762 sites) was about 30 taxa per sample, barely higher than family richness (20 taxa per sample) and very small compared to studies with more intensive sampling efforts. Independently of the effect of anthropogenic impacts, I question the adequacy of the current biomonitoring design and sample sampling effort to study river macroinvertebrate biodiversity. 8. Implications of new findings. Linear trend estimates in taxonomic richness (independently of the time period) were dependent on taxonomic resolution, higher at 'species' than family level. Neither the abundance nor the anomaly in taxonomic richness showed signs of recovery during the period 1990-2020. Current sampling efforts for rapid bioindicators, such as those developed for the European Water Framework Directive, are inadequate to address the needs of the EU 2030 Biodiversity Strategy. Macroinvertebrates would be right to demand more from us.

The recovery of European freshwater biodiversity has come to a halt

Multi-decadal improvements in the ecological quality of European rivers are not consistently reflected in biodiversity metrics

Emerging threats and persistent conservation challenges for freshwater biodiversity

European freshwater macroinvertebrate richness and abundance: alternative analyses and new findings

Bending the Curve of Global Freshwater Biodiversity Loss: An Emergency Recovery Plan

Freshwater biodiversity conservation: recent progress and future challenges

Drivers of recovery and degradation of riverine benthic macroinvertebrate communities: A nationwide analysis of time series

Bending the curve of global freshwater biodiversity loss: what are the prospects?

Fall of giants: European diversity resistance to waterscape degradation and its potential continental drivers

Time series of freshwater macroinvertebrate abundances and site characteristics of European streams and rivers

Three major steps toward the conservation of freshwater and riparian biodiversity

Significant improvement in freshwater invertebrate biodiversity in all types of English rivers over the past 30 years

People need freshwater biodiversity

100 years of anthropogenic impact causes changes in freshwater functional biodiversity

Habitat recovery and restoration in aquatic ecosystems: current progress and future challenges

Four decades of region- and species-specific trends in lowland stream Ephemeroptera abundance

The relationships between biotic uniqueness and abiotic uniqueness are context dependent across drainage basins worldwide

Unravelling large-scale patterns and drivers of biodiversity in dry rivers

Protecting and restoring habitats to benefit freshwater biodiversity

Predicting nature recovery for river restoration planning and ecological assessment: A case study from England, 1991–2042