¶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.39, no.4, 2006³â, pp.462-470
±â¼ö Áö¿ªÀ» Æ÷ÇÔÇÑ ¿¬¼ÓÀûÀÎ °­ ±¸È¹ »ýÅÂ°è ³»¿¡¼­ÀÇ µ¿¹°ÇöûũſÀÇ ±ºÁý µ¿ÅÂ¿Í ¼·½ÄÀ²
( The Grazing Rates and Community Dynamics of Zooplankton in the Continuous River Stretch Ecosystem Include with Brackish Zone )
±èÇö¿ì; ¼øÃµ´ëÇб³ ȯ°æ±³À°°ú;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
¼¶Áø°­ ÇÏ·ù ¾à 40 km ±¸°£¿¡¼­ µ¿¹°Çöûũſ ±ºÁý µ¿Å ÆÄ¾Ç°ú µ¿¹°Çöûũſ ¼·½ÄÀ² ½ÇÇèÀ» ¼öÇàÇÏ¿´´Ù. °­ º»·ù ±¸°£ ³» 3ÁöÁ¡ (°­ Çϱ¸: RK0, ¼¶Áø±³: RK12, ±¸·Ê±³: RK36)¿¡¼­ 2005³â 1¿ù ºÎÅÍ 2006³â 6¿ù±îÁö 2ÁÖ °£°ÝÀ¸·Î µ¿¹°Çöûũſ ½Ã·á¸¦ äÁýÇÏ¿´´Ù. Á¶»ç±â°£ µ¿¾È 3ÁöÁ¡°£ ´ëºÎºÐÀÇ À°¼öÇÐÀû Ç׸ñÀÇ º¯È­´Â À¯»çÇÏ¿´À¸³ª, Àü±âÀüµµµµ´Â Á¶»ç ÁöÁ¡°£ º¯À̰¡ ³ô¾Ò´Ù. °­ Çϱ¸¿Í ¼¶Áø±³ ÁöÁ¡ÀÇ Àü±âÀüµµµµ ¿¬°£ º¯ÀÌ´Â ±¸·Ê±³ ÁöÁ¡ÀÇ Àü±âÀüµµµµ º¯À̺¸´Ù ¸Å¿ì ¿ªµ¿ÀûÀÎ º¯È­¸¦ ³ªÅ¸³»¾ú´Ù. µ¿¹°Çöûũſ ¹ÐµµÀÇ ÁöÁ¡º°, °èÀýº° Â÷ÀÌ´Â Åë°èÀûÀ¸·Î À¯ÀÇÇÏ¿´´Ù (ANOVA, P<0.01). °­ Çϱ¸¿Í ¼¶Áø±³ ÁöÁ¡ÀÇ ÁÖ¿ä µ¿¹°Çöûũſ ±ºÁý ÃÑ °³Ã¼¼ö´Â ±¸·Ê±³ ÁöÁ¡º¸´Ù ³ô¾Ò´Ù. ´ëÇüµ¿¹°Çöûũſ ±ºÁý Áß, Áö°¢·ù ¹Ðµµ´Â Á¶»ç±â°£ µ¿¾È ¸Å¿ì ³·¾Ò´Ù. ½Ä¹°Çöûũſ ¹× ¹ÚÅ׸®¾Æ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ µ¿¹°ÇöûũſÀÇ ±ºÁý ¼·½ÄÀ² º¯ÀÌ´Â °¢°¢ 0¿¡¼­ 50 mL $L^{-1};D^{-1}$±×¸®°í 0¿¡¼­ 45 mL $L^{-1};D^{-1}$¿´´Ù. ½Ä¹°Çöûũſ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ CFRÀÇ ÁöÁ¡º° º¯ÀÌ´Â Åë°èÀûÀ¸·Î À¯ÀÇÇÏ¿´´Ù (ANOVA, P<0.05). Àü Á¶»çÁöÁ¡ ³»¿¡¼­ ½Ä¹°Çöûũſ°ú ¹ÚÅ׸®¾Æ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¿ä°¢·ùÀÇ CFRÀº Áö°¢·ù¿¡ ºñÇØ ÇöÀúÈ÷ ³ô¾Ò´Ù. ¹ÚÅ׸®¾Æ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÃÑ µ¿¹°Çöûũſ ¼·½ÄÀ²Àº ½Ä¹°ÇöûũſÀÇ ¼·½ÄÀ²¿¡ ºñÇØ ´Ù¼Ò ³·¾Ò´Ù. ¹ÚÅ׸®¾Æ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¼ÒÇü µ¿¹°ÇöûũſÀÇ CFRÀº ´ëÇü µ¿¹°Çöûũſ¿¡ ºñÇØ ¸Å¿ì ³ô¾Ò´Ù. ÃÑ µ¿¹°Çöûũſ ±ºÁý Á¶¼ºÀ» °í·Á ÇØº¼ ¶§, ´ã¼öÁö¿ª¿¡¼­´Â ¹ÚÅ׸®¾Æ¿Í ½Ä¹°Çöûũſ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¼·½ÄÀ²ÀÌ ´ëÇü µ¿¹°Çöûũſ º¸´Ù´Â ¼ÒÇü µ¿¹°ÇöûũſÀÇ ¿ªÇÒÀÌ »ó´ëÀûÀ¸·Î Áß¿äÇϸç, ¹Ý¸é¿¡ ±â¼ö¿ª Áö¿ª¿¡¼­´Â ´ã¼öÁö¿ª¿¡ ºñÇØ »ó´ëÀûÀ¸·Î ½Ä¹°Çöûũſ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ¼ÒÇü µ¿¹°ÇöûũſÀÇ ¼·½ÄÀ² º¸´Ù´Â ¿ÀÈ÷·Á ´ëÇü µ¿¹°ÇöûũſÀÇ ¼·½Ä ±â¿©µµ°¡ ³ôÀº °ÍÀ¸·Î ÆÄ¾ÇµÇ¾ú´Ù.ure Curve¸¦ ¾ò°í ÀÌ Cure Curve¸¦ ºÐ¼®(ÝÂà°)ÇÏ¿© ¾òÀº kinetic data¸¦ ¾Õ¼­ ±¸ÇÑ data¿Í ºñ±³°ËÅä(ÝïÎòËþ÷Ð)ÇÏ¿´´Ù.2.8Á¡¿¡¼­ Ä·ÇÁ ÀÌÈÄ 35.1Á¡À¸·Î Áõ°¡ÇÏ¿´À¸³ª À¯ÀÇÇÑ Â÷ÀÌ´Â ¾ø¾ú´Ù. ÀÌ»óÀÇ ¿¬±¸ °á°ú¸¦ Á¾ÇÕÇÒ ¶§ ÃʵîÇб³ ºñ¸¸ ¾î¸°ÀÌÀÇ °æ¿ì Ä®½·, ¿±»ê, ºñŸ¹Î C, ºñŸ¹Î B$_{2}$ÀÇ ¿µ¾ç¼Ò¿¡¼­ Æò±Õ Çʿ䷮º¸´Ù ºÎÁ·ÇÏ°Ô ¼·ÃëÇϰí ÀÖ´Â ºñÀ²ÀÌ ³ô°Ô ³ªÅ¸³µÀ¸¸ç, ¿µ¾ç±³À° Àü°ú ºñ±³ÇÏ¿© º¼ ¶§ ¿µ¾çŵµ Á¡¼ö°¡ ±³À° ÈÄ À¯ÀÇÇÏ°Ô Áõ°¡ÇÏ¿´°í, À¯ÀÇÀûÀÌÁö´Â ¾ÊÀ¸³ª ¿µ¾çÁö½Ä°ú ÀھƸ¸Á·µµµµ Áõ°¡ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ ¼º°Ý À¯Çü °Ë»ç °á°ú ¾ÆÁ÷ ¶Ñ·ÇÇÏ°Ô ¼º°Ý À¯ÇüÀ» °áÁ¤ÇÏÁö ¸øÇÑ ¾î¸°À̵éÀÇ ºñÀ²ÀÌ ³ô°Ô ³ªÅ¸³ª ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ ¼º°Ý À¯ÇüÀÇ °áÁ¤ ¿©ºÎ ¹× °¢ À¯ÇüÀ» ÂüÁ¶ÇÏ¿© ½Ä»ýȰ¿¡¼­ ¿Ã¹Ù¸¥ ½Ä»ýȰ °ü¸® ´É·Â°ú ¹Ù¶÷Á÷ÇÑ ¿µ¾çŵµ ¹× Áö½ÄÀ» ½ÀµæÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖµµ·Ï ÇÏ´Â ¿µ¾ç±³À°ÀÇ Çʿ伺ÀÌ ³ôÀº °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù.MI, üÁö¹æ·®, ƯÈ÷ Ç㸮µÑ·¹, ¾ûµ¢ÀÌ µÑ·¹, Ç㸮-¾ûµ¢ÀÌ µÑ·¹ºñ¿Í À¯ÀǼºÀÖ´Â »ó°ü°ü°è¸¦ º¸ÀÎ ¹Ý¸é Ç÷û ÄÝ·¹½ºÅ׷Ѱú Áß¼ºÁö¹æ, HDL-ÄÝ·¹½ºÅ×·Ñ, LDL-ÄÝ·¹½ºÅ×·Ñ ³óµµ¿Í´Â »ó°ü°ü°è¸¦ ³ªÅ¸³»Áö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù. ÃÑ ÄÝ·¹½ºÅ×·ÑÀº Áß¼ºÁö¹æ, LDL-ÄÝ·¹½ºÅ׷Ѱú À¯ÀǼºÀÖ´Â »ó°ü°ü°è¸¦ º¸¿´À¸¸ç, Áß¼ºÁö¹æÀº LDL-ÄÝ·¹½ºÅ׷Ѱú ¾çÀÇ »ó°ü°ü°è¸¦, HDL-ÄÝ·¹½ºÅ׷Ѱú´Â À½ÀÇ »ó°ü°ü°è¸¦ º¸À̰í ÀÖ´Â °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. ±Ã±ØÀûÀ¸·Î ºñ¸¸ ¾Æµ¿À» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ÇÑ Çб³ ³» üÁß Á¶Àý ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ÀÌ ÀåÁ÷ÀûÀÎ È¿°ú¸¦ ¾ò±â À§Çؼ­´Â ù°, ¹«¾ùº¸´Ù ¾Æµ¿ÀÌ ¼ºÀå±âÀÓÀ» °í·ÁÇÏ¿© Áö¼ÓÀûÀÎ ¸ð´ÏÅ͸µ°ú ÇÔ²² ¾Æµ¿µéÀÇ ½ÄÀÌ, ¿îµ¿½À°ü ¹× ºñ¸¸°ú °ü·ÃµÈ ÇൿÀÇ º¯È­°¡ »ýȰ °¡¿îµ¥ ±Ùº»ÀûÀ¸·Î ÀϾ ¼ö ÀÖ¾î¾ß ÇÑ´Ù. µÑ°, üÁß Á¶Àý ÇÁ·Î±×·¥Àº ½ÄÀÌ ¹× ¿îµ¿ Áöµµ¿Í ¾Æ¿ï·¯ ±àÁ¤Àû °­È­(positive reinforcement)¿Í º¸»ó(reward)À» ÅëÇØ ÃæºÐÇÑ µ¿±â¸¦ ºÎ¿©Çϵµ·Ï Çϰí ÇÁ·Î±×·¥ ½Ç½Ã ÈÄ
The zooplankton community dynamics and grazing experiments was evaluated along a 40 km section of the lower Seomjin river system. Zooplankton was sampled twice a month from January 2005 to June 2006 at three sites (River mouth; RKO, Seomjin bridge: RK12 and Gurae bridge: RK36) in the main river channel. During the study period, the values of most limnological parameters in the three sites were fairly similar, except for conductivity. Annual variation of conductivity in River mouth and Seomjin bridge was more dramatic than which of the other site. There were statistically significant spatial and seasonal differences in zooplankton abundance (ANOVA, P<0.01). Total abundance of major zooplankton groups at both stations was much higher than in Gurae bridge. Among the macrozooplankton, cladocerans abundance was negligible in study sites during study periods. Community filtering rates (CFRs) for phytoplankton and bacteria varied from 0 to 50 mL $L^{-1};D^{-1}$ and from 0 to 45 mL $L^{-1};D^{-1}$, respectively. The spatial variation of CFRs for phytoplankton was significant (ANOVA, P<0.05). The CFRs of copepods for phytoplankton and bacteria was much higher than that of cladocerans at study sites. Total zooplankton filtering rates on bacteria were slightly lower than filtering rates on phytoplankton. The CFRs of microzooplankton (MICZ) for bacteria were much higher than for macrozooplankton (MACZ) at all sites. Considering the total zooplankton community, MICZ generally were more important than MACZ as grazers of bacteria and phytoplankton in freshwater zone, while MACZ were more important than MICZ as grazers of phytoplankton in brackish zone.
 
Ű¿öµå
rotifers;Seomjin River;community filtering rates;brackish;copepods;
 
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸÁö / v.39, no.4, 2006³â, pp.462-470
Çѱ¹ÇÏõȣ¼öÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1976-8087
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200618317187773)
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¿