¶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.1, 2005³â, pp.161-168
µÕ±Ù¸¶(Dioscorea opposita Thunb.)ÀÇ ±«°æºñ´ë ¹× ¼ººÐƯ¼º
( Tuber Enlargement and Chemical Components of Yams (Dioscorea opposita Thunb.) )
¹Úº´Àç;¹ÚÁÖÇö;±è¼±¸²;¹Úöȣ;À層Áø; °­¿ø´ëÇб³ ³ó¾÷»ý¸í°úÇдëÇÐ;µ¿¾ç¹°»ê Áß¾Ó±â¼ú¿¬±¸¼Ò;³óÃÌÁøÈïû ÀÛ¹°°úÇпø;°­¿ø´ëÇб³ ³ó¾÷»ý¸í°úÇдëÇÐ;Çѱ¹³ó¾÷Àü¹®Çб³;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
µÕ±Ù¸¶(Dioscorea opposita L.) °èÅë Áß Ç°ÁúÀÌ ¿ì¼öÇϰí ÀÌ¿ë °¡Ä¡°¡ ±â´ëµÇ´Â ´ÜÆÄ¸¶¸¦ ¿ì¸®³ª¶ó¿¡¼­ Àç¹è½Ã ±× °¡´É¼º°ú Á¦ ±â°üÀÇ »ýÀ°Æ¯¼ºÀ» ¹àÈ÷±â À§ÇÏ¿© ½Ç½ÃÇÏ¿´´Ù. µÎ D. oppositaÀÇ ±«°æÀÇ ¼ö·®¼º ¹× ¼ººÐƯ¼ºÀ» ºñ±³ÇÏ¿© Àç¹è °¡´É¼ºÀ» ½ÃÇèÇÏ¿´´Ù. µÕ±Ù¸¶ÀÇ ±«°æÇü¼ºÀº Á¤½Ä 60ÀÏ Á¤µµ¿¡¼­ ÀϾ, ±× ÈÄ Áö¼ÓÀûÀ¸·Î ºñ´ë »ýÀåÀÌ ÀϾ 160ÀϱîÁö ºñ´ëÇÑ ÈÄ µî¼÷ÇÏ¿´´Ù. 200Àϰ ´Ü¸¶ÀÇ ±«°æÁßÀÌ 512gÀ¸·Î µÕ±Ù¸¶ 498gº¸´Ù ¾à°£ ³ô¾ÒÀ¸³ª °Ç¹°ÁßÀº 108/127gÀ¸·Î µÕ±Ù¸¶°¡ ³ô¾Æ ¸ð¾ç°ú °Ç¹°ÁßÀÌ ¿ì¼öÇÏ¿´´Ù. µÕ±Ù¸¶ÀÇ ÀϹݼººÐÀ» ÃøÁ¤ÇÑ °á°ú ´Ü¹éÁú ÇÔ·®¿¡¼­ ´Ü¸¶$(2.10%)$º¸´Ù $3.62%$·Î ³ô¾ÒÀ¸¸ç ¼¶À¯, Áö¹æÀÇ ÇÔ·®ÀÌ ³·¾Ò´Ù. ¼öºÐÇÔ·®Àº $ 64.53%·Î ´Ü¸¶$(79.38%)$º¸´Ù °Ç¹°·®ÀÌ ³ô¾Ò´Ù. µÕ±Ù¸¶ÀÇ °æµµ¸¦ º¸¸é 2787.6·Î ´Ü¸¶ÀÇ 4946.9 º¸´Ù ¾à 2¹èÁ¤µµ ³·°í, »öµµ Áß ¸íµµ(L)´Â µÕ±Ù¸¶°¡ 77.37À¸·Î ´Ü¸¶º¸´Ù ³ô¾Ò´Ù. µÕ±Ù¸¶ÀÇ ±«°æÀ¸·ÎºÎÅÍ ÃßÃâÇÑ ¹°ÁúÀº diosgeninÀÇ Ç¥Áع°Áú°ú ÀÏÄ¡ÇÏ´Â ÇÇÅ©¸¦ ¾ò¾úÀ¸¸ç, retention timeÀº ¾à 5.9¿¡¼­ ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. µÕ±Ù¸¶ÀÇ ±«°æ¿¡¼­ diosgeninÀº $3.32%$ÀÇ ÇÔ·®À» ³ªÅ¸³½ ¹Ý¸é ´Ü¸¶¿¡¼­´Â $2.61%$·Î ³·Àº ÇÔ·®Ä¡¸¦ ³ªÅ¸³Â´Ù.
Tuber yield and content of general component and diosgenin which is a main bioactive property were investigated in order to determine the growth characteristics of round typed yam(Dioscorea opposita L.) and the potential of artificial culture at Suwon, Korea. Tubers of round yam were initiated to form at 60 days after planting and then enlargement of tubers lasted by 160 days after planting. Compared to short typed yam(108g), tuber weight of round yam was higher(127g) on the basis of dry weight at 200 days after planting. In comparison of general component between round yam and short yam, protein of round yam$(3.62%)$ was higher than short yam$(2.10%)$. Water content in round yam$(64.5%)$ was lower in short yam$(79.4%)$, indicating a higher dry weight ratio of round yam. Hardness of round yam was 2787.6 while short yam showed about two times higher hardness(4946.9). Lightness was higher in round yam(77.4). In tuber extracts analysis, diosgenin content was respectively $3.32%$ in round yam and $2.61%$ in short yam.
 
Ű¿öµå
Dioscorea opposita;round typed yam(Dungeun-ma);Dan-ma(short typed yam);diosgenin;enlargement of tubers;
 
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸÁö / v.18, no.1, 2005³â, pp.161-168
Çѱ¹ÀÚ¿ø½Ä¹°ÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1226-3591
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200502612642561)
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¿