|
|
|
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ / v.37, no.3, 2004³â, pp.319-331
|
¿©°ú ¼·½Ä¼º ÆÐ·ù°¡ µ¿ ${cdot}$ ½Ä¹°Çöûũſ ±ºÁý¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâ
( Effect of Filter-feeding Bivalve (Corbiculidae) on Phyto- and Zooplankton Community ) |
| ±èÈ£¼·;°øµ¿¼ö;Ȳ¼øÁø; ±¹¸³È¯°æ¿¬±¸¿ø ¼öÁú¿À¿°ÃÑ·®°ú;±¹¸³È¯°æ¿¬±¸¿ø ¼öÁú¿À¿°ÃÑ·®°ú;°Ç±¹´ëÇб³ ȯ°æ°úÇаú;
|
|
|
 |
|
| |
| ÃÊ ·Ï |
| º» ¿¬±¸´Â ½ÇÇèÀûÀ¸·Î Á¶¼ºµÈ Àΰø¿¬¸ø(2 m ${ imes}$ 2 m ${ imes}$ 2 m)¿¡¼ ÆÐ·ùÀÇ ¿©°ú ¼·½ÄÀÌ ¼öü ³» ¹°Áú¼øÈ¯°ú Çöûũſ ±ºÁý¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâÀ» Æò°¡Çϱâ À§ÇØ ÀÌ·ç¾îÁ³´Ù. ½ÇÇèÀÇ Ãʱ⿡´Â 󸮱¸¿Í ´ëÁ¶±¸ enclosure ¸ðµÎ¿¡¼ ³²Á¶·ùÀÎ Microcystis viridis¿Í M. aeruginosa µîÀÌ ¿ìÁ¡ÇÏ¿´°í, ¼¼Æ÷¹Ðµµ¿Í »ý¹°·®ÀÇ Å« Â÷ÀÌ´Â ¾ø¾ú´Ù. ÆÐ·ù 100°³Ã¼ ÅõÀÔ ÀÌÈÄ¿¡ 󸮱¸¿¡¼ ¼¼Æ÷¹ÐµµÀÇ °¨¼Ò¿Í ¼öÁß ³» N/PÀÇ Áõ°¡¿Í ´õºÒ¾î ¿ìÁ¡Á¾Àº Microcystis¿¡¼ Scenedesmus·Î ¹Ù²î¾ú´Ù. ¹Ý¸é¿¡, ´ëÁ¶±¸¿¡¼ÀÇ ¼¼Æ÷¹Ðµµ´Â Áõ°¡¿Í ´õºÒ¾î Oscillatoria spp.°¡ ¿ìÁ¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÆÐ·ù 600°³Ã¼ ÅõÀÔ ÀÌÈÄ¿¡´Â 󸮱¸¿Í ´ëÁ¶±¸ ¸ðµÎ¿¡¼ Selenastrum spp.¿Í Cryptomonas sp.°¡ ¿ìÁ¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ½ÇÇè Ãʱ⠴ëÁ¶±¸¿¡¼ÀÇ µ¿¹°Çöûũſ ¹Ðµµ´Â 󸮱¸¿¡ ºñÇØ ³ô¾ÒÀ¸³ª 100°³Ã¼ ÅõÀÔ ÀÌÈÄ¿¡´Â 󸮱¸¿¡¼ ³ô¾Ò´Ù. ÆÐ·ù 600°³Ã¼ ÅõÀÔ ÀÌÈÄ¿¡´Â 󸮱¸¿¡¼ Å©±â°¡ ÀÛÀº À±Ãæ·ù¿Í ¿ä°¢·ù À¯»ýµéÀÇ ¹Ðµµ°¡ °¨¼ÒÇÏ¿´À¸³ª, Bosmina longirostris, Diacyclops thomasi¿Í °°Àº Å©±â°¡ Å« µ¿¹°ÇöûũſÀÇ ¹Ðµµ¿Í »ý¹°·®Àº ´ëÁ¶±¸¿¡ ºñÇØ ³ô¾Ò´Ù. ½ÇÇè±â°£ µ¿¾È ¿±·Ï¼Ò a³óµµÀÇ Áõ°¡´Â 󸮱¸¿¡¼ ¼öü ³» DIP³óµµ°¡, ´ëÁ¶±¸¿¡¼´Â ¾Ï¸ð´Ï¾Æ³óµµ°¡ »ó½ÂÇÑ Á÷ÈÄ¿¡ ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. 󸮱¸¿¡¼ 600°³Ã¼ ÅõÀÔ ÀüÈÄ ½Ã±âµ¿¾È ´ëÁ¶±¸¿¡¼´Â TSI (Chl. a-TN)°ú TSI (Chl. a-TP)°¡ ¸ðµÎ Áõ°¡ÇÏ¿´À¸³ª 󸮱¸¿¡¼´Â ¾Ï¸ð´Ï¾Æ ³óµµÀÇ Áõ°¡·Î ÀÎÇÏ¿© Áú¼Ò Á¦ÇÑ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ º¯È°¡ ³ªÅ¸³ªÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù. ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ °á°úµéÀº ÆÐ·ùÀÇ ¿©°ú¼·½ÄÀÌ ¼öü³» ¿µ¾ç¿° ÀÌ¿ëÀ²À» º¯È½Ã۰í, µ¿¹°Çöûũſ°úÀÇ µ¿ÀÏÇÑ ¸ÔÀÌ¿ø¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °æÀï ȤÀº Á÷Á¢ÀûÀÎ ¼·½ÄÀ» ÅëÇØ ¼öȯ°æ¿¡¼ ¹°Áú ¼øÈ¯°ú Çöûũſ ±ºÁý º¯È¿¡ Áß¿äÇÑ ¿µÇâÀ» ¹ÌÄ¥ ¼ö ÀÖÀ½À» ÀǹÌÇÑ´Ù.¿¡ »õ·Î¿î ¼½ÄÁö¿¡ ¼º°øÀûÀ¸·Î Á¤ÂøÇÑ´Ù¸é ºÎ¿µ¾ç È£¼öÀÇ ¼öÁúÀ» È¿°úÀûÀ¸·Î °³¼±ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â ¹æ¹ýÀÌ µÉ ¼ö ÀÖÀ½À» ½Ã»çÇÑ´Ù.À» ±â´ëÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀ¸·Î »ý°¢Çϸç, ´ëÀå±Õ°ú ¿¬¸ø ³»¿¡ Á¸ÀçÇÏ´Â »ý¹°µé »çÀÌÀÇ »óÈ£ÀÛ¿ëÀ» Á¤È®È÷ ÀÌÇØÇÏ¿© ÀûÀýÇÑ °ü¸®´ëÃ¥À» ¸¶·Ã ÇÒ °æ¿ì ¾ÈÁ¤ÀûÀÎ ¹æ·ù¼ö ³óµµ¸¦ È®º¸ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀ¸·Î ÆÇ´ÜµÈ´Ù. ÀÚ¿¬Á¤È·Î¼ Çϼö󸮼ö¸¦ °íµµ ó¸®ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ´Â Àΰø½ÀÁö¿Í ¿¬¸ø½Ã½ºÅÛÀ» ¿¬°èó¸® ÇÏ¸é ³ôÀº ¹Ì»ý¹° ¼Òµ¶È¿À²À» ³ªÅ¸³»¾î º¸°Ç ${cdot}$ À§»ý»óÀÇ ¹®Á¦¸¦ Å©°Ô ÁÙÀÏ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀ¸·Î ±â´ëµÈ´Ù. Àΰø½ÀÁö¿Í ¿¬°èÇÑ ¿¬¸ø½Ã½ºÅÛÀÇ Çϼö󸮹æ½ÄÀº °£´ÜÇÑ ±¸Á¶, Å« ¿ÏÃæ´É·Â, ÀûÀº ½½·¯Áö ¹ß»ý, °£¼ÒÇÑ À¯Áö ${cdot}$ °ü¸®ÀÇ ÀåÁ¡À» °¡Áö°í ÀÖ¾î¼, ¼Ò±Ô¸ðÇϼöó¸®¿Í ³ó¾÷¿ë¼ö ÀçÀÌ¿ë ±â¼ú·Î¼ Àû¿ë°¡´É¼ºÀÌ Å¬°ÍÀ¸·Î ÆÇ´ÜµÈ´Ù. sp.°¡ 10,480 cells ${cdot};mL^{-1}$,8¿ù°ú 9¿ù¿¡´Â ³²Á¶·ùÀÎ Microcystis sp.°¡ °¢°¢ 3,492¿Í 296 cells ${cdot};mL^{-1}$·Î ¿ìÁ¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù. 10¿ù¿¡´Â ³ìÁ¶·ùÀÎ Coelastrum microporumÀÌ 133 cells ${cdot};mL^{-1}$, 11¿ù¿¡´Â ±ÔÁ¶·ùÀÎ Asterionella formosa°¡ 2,654 cells ${cdot};mL^{-1}$, 12¿ù¿¡´Â ±ÔÁ¶·ùÀÎ .Aulacoseira granulata°¡ 29 cells ${cdot};mL^{-1}$¿ìÁ¡Á¾ÀÌ¿´´Ù. ƯÈ÷ 2000³â ¿©¸§Ã¶¿¡ ¿ìÁ¡Á¾ÀÌ¿´´ø ³²Á¶·ù°¡ 2001³â¿¡´Â ÃâÇöÇÏÁö ¾Ê¾ÒÀ¸¸ç Á¾ ´Ù¾ç¼º (diversity)Áö¼ö´Â 2000³â 7¿ù¿¡ 2.22·Î °¡Àå ³ô¾ÒÀ¸¸ç, »ý¹°·®µµ Á¶»ç±â°£Áß 36,640 cells ${cdot};mL^{-1}$·Î °¡Àå ¸¹¾Ò´Ù.ÀÇ Èı⿡ ±¤(ÎÃ)À» Á¶»ç(ðÎÞÒ)Çϸé |
|
| This study was conducted to evaluate the ecological impact of freshwater bivalve (Corbiculidae) on plankton communities in experimental enclosure systems (2 m ${ imes}$ 2 m ${ imes}$ 2 m). During the acclamation period of one month, cyanobacteria, including Microcystis viridis and Microcystis aeruginosa, dominated in both control and treatment enclosures with no noticeable density difference. After the addition of 100 mussels, dominant species of phytoplankton shifted from Microcystis to Scenedesmus in concert with slight decrease in the cell density and the increase of N/P ratio. However, cell density in the control quickly increased, accompanied with changes of dominant species to Oscillatoria spp. With the introduction of additional 500 musseles in the treatment enclosure, dominant phytoplankton species in both enclosures were replaced with Selenastrum spp. and Cryptomonas sp. In the initial stage, the total zooplankton abundance in the control was higher than that of treatment, but it was reversed after the addition 100 mussels. After mussel density increased up to 600 indivisuals, zooplankton density in the treatment decreased with dominance of small taxa, such as rotifers and nauplius. However, abundance and carbon biomass of large zooplankton, such as Bosmina longirostris and Diacyclops thomasi were maintained in a high level compared with those of control. During the study period, Chl. a concentration in mussel treatment and control increased with DIP and $NH_3-N$, respectively. Due to the increase of $NH_3-N$, especially after the introduction of additional 500 mussels, nitrogen limitation did not occur in the treatment enclosure in contrast with strong nutrient limitation occurred in the control. These results indicate that filter-feeding Corbicula could exert important impact on nutrient recycling and plankton community structure in a freshwater ecosystem, through direct feeding and competition for the same food resource as zooplankton on one hand, and through alteration of nutrient availability on the other. |
| |
| Ű¿öµå |
| freshwater bivalve;plankton communities;nutrient recycling;enclosure systems;N/P ratio; |
| |
|
|
 |
|
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸÁö / v.37, no.3, 2004³â, pp.319-331
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1976-8087
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200418317183150)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î |
|
| ³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø |
|
|
|
|
|
|