¶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

Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ / v.33, no.3, 2000³â, pp.197-205
½ºÇÁ¸® °­ (µ¶ÀÏ) ³»ÀÇ È£¼ö¿Í °­ ±¸È¹¿¡¼­ÀÇ µ¿¹°Çöûũſ ¼ºÀåÀÇ Â÷ÀÌ
( Differences of Zooplankton Development Along a Lake and a River Stretch of the River Spree (Germany) )
ÁÖ±âÀç;;±èÇö¿ì; ºÎ»ê´ëÇб³ »ý¹°Çаú;;;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
µ¿¹°ÇöûũſÀÇ ¼ºÀå·ü°ú ¹ÐÁ¢ÇÑ »ó°ü °ü°è¸¦ °¡Áö´Â ¿äÀε鿡 ´ëÇØ ½ºÇÁ¸® °­ Áß·ùÀÇ È£¼ö ¹× °­ ±¸È¹ (È£¼ö À¯ÀԺΠ(S1), È£¼ö À¯ÃâºÎ (S2), È£¼ö À¯ÃâºÎ ÁöÁ¡¿¡¼­ 21 km ÇÏ·ùÁöÁ¡ (S3))¿¡¼­ 1999³â 3¿ùºÎÅÍ 11¿ù±îÁö Á¶»çÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÃÑ µ¿¹°Çöûũſ »ýü·®Àº S2ÁöÁ¡¿¡¼­ Å©°Ô Áõ°¡ÇÏ¿´°í S3¿¡¼­ ±Þ°ÝÇÏ°Ô °¨¼ÒÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¸ðµç Á¶»çÁöÁ¡¿¡¼­ ¼ÒÇüµ¿¹°Çöûũſ(À±Ãæ·ù¿Í À¯»ý)ÀÇ °³Ã¼¼ö´Â ´ëÇüµ¿¹°Çöûũſ(Áö°¢·ù¿Í ¿ä°¢·ù)ÀÇ °³Ã¼¼ö º¸´Ù ¸Å¿ì ³ô¾Ò´Ù. ±×·¯³ª, ´ëÇüµ¿¹°ÇöûũſÀÇ »ýü·®Àº ¼ÒÇüµ¿¹°Çöûũſ »ýü·®°ú À¯»çÇϰųª ³ô¾Ò´Ù. ´ëÇü Áö°¢·ù (Daphnia cucullata)´Â Á¶»çÁöÁ¡ S2¿¡¼­ ¿ìÁ¡ÇÑ ¹Ý¸é, Á¶»çÁöÁ¡ S1°ú S3¿¡¼­´Â ¼ÒÇü Áö°¢·ù (Bosmina longirostris)°¡ ¿ìÁ¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÁÖ¿ä µ¿¹°Çöûũſ ±ºÁýÀÇ ¼ºÀå·ü ($r_t;in;d^{-1}$)Àº Á¶»çÁöÁ¡ S1 °ú S2»çÀÌ (È£¼ö±¸È¹)¿Í S2¿Í S3»çÀÌ (°­ ±¸È¹)¿¡¼­ ¸Å¿ì ´Þ¶ú´Ù. È£¼ö ±¸È¹ ³»¿¡¼­ÀÇ ¼ºÀå·üÀº ¾ç¼ºÀûÀÎ À¯ÇüÀ» ³ªÅ¸³½ ¹Ý¸é °­ ±¸È¹ ³»ÀÇ ¼ºÀå·üÀº À½¼ºÀûÀÎ ¾ç»óÀ» ³ªÅ¸³»¾ú´Ù. ¿©·¯ ȯ°æ ¿äÀÎ Áß, ½ºÇÁ¸®°­ Áß·ùÁöÁ¡¿¡¼­´Â ¼öüÀÇ ÀÜ·ù½Ã°£(partial retention time: PRT, $d^{-1}$) ÀÌ µ¿¹°Çöûũſ ±ºÁý±¸Á¶ÀÇ Æ¯¼ºÀ» °áÁ¤Áþ´Â °¡Àå Áß¿äÇÑ ¿äÀÎÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù.
Factors most strongly related to zooplankton growth rates were studied along a lake and a river stretch in the middle part of the lowland River Spree. The study was conducted at the lake inflow (S1), the lake outflow (S2), and at the end of a 21 km stretch of the outflow (S3) from March to November of 1999. Total zooplankton biomass increased significantly at S2 and then sharply decreased at S3. The abundance of microzooplankton (rotifers and nauplii) was strongly higher than macrozooplankton (cladocerans and copepodids) at all station. However, macrozooplankton biomass (${mu}$g dw 1$^{-1}$) was similar or much higher than microzooplankton biomass. Large-bodied cladocerans (Daphnia cucullata) dominated at S2 while small-bodied cladocerans (Bosmina longirostris) dominated at S1 and S3. Patterns in growth rates (r$_{t}$ in d$^{-1}$ of the major zooplankton community were greatly different between S1 and S2 (lake stretch) and between S2 and S3 (river stretch). In the lake, growth rates generally were positive, while values of growth rates were negative in the river stretch. Among the environmental variables considered, partial retention time (PRT, d$^{-1}$) seemed to play the most important role in determining characteristics of the zooplankton community structure in the middle part of River Spree.
 
Ű¿öµå
Growth rates;Partial retention times;Lowland river;Cladocerans;rotifers;
 
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸÁö / v.33, no.3, 2000³â, pp.197-205
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1976-8087
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200018317175943)
¾ð¾î : ¿µ¾î
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¿