¶óÆæÆ®¦¢Ä«Æä¦¢ºí·Î±×¦¢´õº¸±â
¾ÆÄ«µ¥¹Ì Ȩ ¸í»çƯ°­ ´ëÇבּ¸½Ç޹æ Á¶°æ½Ç¹« µ¿¿µ»ó°­ÀÇ Çѱ¹ÀÇ ÀüÅëÁ¤¿ø ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®
ÇÐȸº° ³í¹®

Çѱ¹°Ç¼³°ü¸®ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹°ÇÃà½Ã°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹µµ·ÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹»ýÅÂÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹¼öÀÚ¿øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹½Ç³»µðÀÚÀÎÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÀܵðÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Á¶°æÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹Áö¹Ý°øÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ý¹°ÇÐȸ
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸ

Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ / v.18, no.2, 2005³â, pp.337-342
¿Ì³ª¹« ¿ìÁ×ÀÇ ¼öÇÇ»ý»ê·® ºÐ¼®
( Bark Production Analysis on Top Branch of Rhus verniciflua )
¼Ûº´¹Î;ÀÌ¸í¼±; »óÁö´ëÇб³ »ê¸²°úÇаú;»óÁö´ëÇб³ ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°Çаú;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
º» ¿¬±¸´Â ¿ÌÀ» äÃëÇÑ ¿Ì³ª¹«¿¡¼­ ¼öÇÇ»ý»ê·®À» ÆÄ¾ÇÇϱâ À§ÇÏ¿© ¿Ì³ª¹«ÀÇ Á÷°æ¿¡ µû¸¥ Áß·®°úÀÇ °ü°è¿Í ¿ìÁ×ÀÇ Áß·®¿¡ µû¸¥ ¼öÇÇ¿Í °ÇÇÇ·®À» Á¶»çÇÑ °á°ú ¿Ì³ª¹«Áß·®¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¿ìÁ×Áß·®ÀÇ ºñÀ²Àº Æò±Õ $48%$¿´´Âµ¥, Áß·®ÀÌ Å« ³ª¹«µéÀÌ ¿ìÁ׺ñÀ²ÀÌ ³ô°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸¸ç, ¿Ì³ª¹« Á÷°æÀÌ ÃÖ¼ÒÇÑ 8cmÁ¤µµ´Â µÇ¾î¾ß ¿ìÁ׿¡¼­ 1kgÀÌ»óÀÇ °ÇÇǸ¦ »ý»êÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ºÐ¼®µÇ¾ú´Ù. ¿Ì³ª¹« ¿ìÁ×ÀÇ ¼öÇǸ¦ ÃøÁ¤ÇÑ °á°ú »ýÇǹ«°Ô´Â $1.1{sim}l.5kg$¿¡ ÇØ´çÇÏ´Â ¿Ì³ª¹«°¡ $43.3%$·Î °¡Àå ¸¹¾Ò°í, ´ÙÀ½Àº $0.5{sim}1.0kg$ÀÌ $37.5%$·Î Á¶»çµÇ¾î Àüü ¿ìÁ×ÀÇ $80%$ÀÌ»óÀÌ 1.5kgÀÌÇÏÀÎ °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ »ýÇǸ¦ ¸»¸° °ÇÇÇÀÇ ¹«°Ô´Â $0.6{sim}1.0kg$¿¡ ÇØ´çÇÏ´Â ³ª¹«µéÀÌ $50.8%$·Î °¡Àå ¸¹¾ÒÀ¸¸ç, ´ÙÀ½ÀÌ $0.1{sim}0.5kg$À¸·Î $25%$·Î ³ªÅ¸³ª Àüü ¿Ì³ª¹«ÀÇ $75%$Á¤µµ°¡ 1.0kgÀÌÇÏÀÎ °ÍÀ¸·Î Á¶»çµÇ¾ú´Ù. ±×¸®°í ¿ìÁ×Áß·®¿¡ ´ëÇØ »ýÇÇÁß·®ÀÌ Â÷ÁöÇÏ´Â Æò±ÕºñÀ²Àº $27%$¿´À¸¸ç, ¿ìÁ×Áß·®¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °ÇÇÇÁß·®ÀÇ Æò±ÕºñÀ²Àº $16%$·Î ÃøÁ¤µÇ¾ú´Âµ¥, »ýÇǸ¦ °ÇÁ¶½ÃÄ×À» ¶§ Æò±Õ°ÇÇÇÁß·®Àº »ýÇÇÀÇ $61%$·Î ³ªÅ¸³ª »ýÇÇÀÇ ¼öºÐÇÔÀ¯À²ÀÌ Æò±Õ $39%$·Î¼­ °ÇÇÇ 1kgÀ» »ý»êÇϱâ À§Çؼ­´Â ¿ìÁ× 6.25kgÀÌ ¼Ò¿äµÇ´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ºÐ¼®µÇ¾ú´Ù.
This study was conducted to investigate the bark production from a top branch(Woojuk) of lacquer tree(Rhus verniciflua) that collected Rhus lacquer in summer, analyzing a relationship between several factors - diameter, tree weight, weight of Woojuk and bark. The weight of Woojuk averaged was made up $48%$ of the tree on average. As the weight of the tree increased, however, the Woojuk showed the rising trend. It was turned out that the tree size for making 1kg of dry bark must be at least DBB 8cm. The result on Woojuk's bark was that $43.3%$ of total trees produced a green bark of 1.1kg to 1.5kg, and most of them put out 1.5kg and less. Also the rate of trees to make 0.6kg to 1.0kg of dry bark was highest in $50.8%$, but its production in most trees was 1.0kg and below. As the moisture content of a green bark averaged $39%$, it is estimated that the production of 1kg in dry bark requires at least 6kg of top branch in lacquer tree.
 
Ű¿öµå
Rhus verniciflua;Rhus lacquer;lacquer tree;green bark;dry bark;
 
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸÁö / v.18, no.2, 2005³â, pp.337-342
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1226-3591
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200504704040654)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î
³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø
¸ñ·Ïº¸±â
ȸ»ç¼Ò°³ ±¤°í¾È³» ÀÌ¿ë¾à°ü °³ÀÎÁ¤º¸Ãë±Þ¹æÄ§ Ã¥ÀÓÀÇ ÇѰè¿Í ¹ýÀû°íÁö À̸ÞÀÏÁÖ¼Ò ¹«´Ü¼öÁý °ÅºÎ °í°´¼¾ÅÍ
   

ÇÏÀ§¹è³ÊÀ̵¿