¶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

Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸ / v.15, no.4, 2002³â, pp.361-368
ÇÔ¹é»êÁö¿ª °è°îºÎÀÇ »ç¸é¹æÇâ°ú ÇØ¹ß°í¿¡ µû¸¥ »ê¸²±¸Á¶
( Forest Structure in Relation to Slope Aspect and Altitude in valley Forests at Hambaeksan Area )
¹ÚÀÎÇù;ÃÖÀ±È£;À̼®¸é;ÃÖ¿µÃ¶;À¯¼®ºÀ; ¼øÃµ´ëÇб³ ³ó¾÷»ý¸í°úÇдëÇÐ;¼øÃµ´ëÇб³ ³ó¾÷»ý¸í°úÇдëÇÐ;Àü¶ó³²µµ »ê¸²È¯°æ¿¬±¸¼Ò;±¹¸³¼ö¸ñ¿ø;Àü¶ó³²µµ »ê¸²È¯°æ¿¬±¸¼Ò;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
³²ºÏÀ¸·Î »¸¾î Àִ Źé»ê¸ÆÀÇ ÇÔ¹é»êÁö¿ª »ç°Å¸®Àç(ÇØ¹ß 1,275m)¸¦ Áß½ÉÀ¸·Î µ¿Çâ»ç¸éÀÎ ¼¼°î°è°î°ú ¼­Çâ»ç¸éÀÎ Á¤¾Ï»ç°è°îÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î »ç¸é¹æÇâ°ú ÇØ¹ß°í¿¡ µû¸¥ »ê¸²±¸Á¶¸¦ Á¶»çºÐ¼®ÇÏ¿´´Ù. »óÃþÀÓ°üÀ» ÀÌ·ç´Â ±³¸ñÃþÀÇ ¹Ðµµ, Æò±ÕÈä°íÁ÷°æ, Èä°í´Ü¸éÀûÀº µ¿Çâ»ç¸é°ú ¼­Çâ»ç¸é°£¿¡ º° Â÷À̰¡ ¾ø¾ú´Ù. ¼­Çâ»ç¸éÀº µ¿Çâ»ç¸é¿¡ ºñÇÏ¿© Çdzª¹«, °ÅÁ¦¼ö³ª¹« µîÀÇ »ó´ëÁß¿äÄ¡´Â ³ôÀº ¹Ý¸é, ½Å°¥³ª¹«, ¹°Çª·¹³ª¹« µîÀÇ »ó´ëÁß¿äÄ¡°¡ ³·¾Ò´Ù. ½Ä»ýÃþ ÀüüÀÇ Á¾´Ù¾çµµ´Â ¼­Çâ»ç¸éÀÌ 1.415·Î¼­ µ¿Çâ»ç¸éÀÇ 1.328º¸´Ù ³ô¾ÒÀ¸¸ç, À̰ÍÀº ¼­Çâ»ç¸éÀÎ Á¤¾Ï»ç°è°îÀÇ °æ¿ì õ¿¬±â³ä¹°ÀÎ ¿­¸ñ¾î ¼­½ÄÁö·Î¼­ ºñ±³Àû º¸Á¸ÀÌ Àß µÇ¾ú±â ¶§¹®À̶ó°í ÆÇ´ÜµÇ¾ú´Ù. ÇØ¹ß°í¿¡ µû¸¥ ºÐ¼® °á°ú ÇØ¹ß°í°¡ ³ô¾ÆÁü¿¡ µû¶ó µ¿, ¼­Çâ»ç¸é ¸ðµÎ ±³¸ñÃþÀÇ Èä°í´Ü¸éÀû°ú Æò±Õ¼ö°í°¡ °¨¼ÒÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ½Ä»ýÃþ ÀüüÀÇ Á¾¼ö, Á¾´Ù¾çµµ, ±ÕÀçµµ°¡ °¨¼ÒÇÏ´Â °æ ÇâÀ̾ú´Ù. ÇØ¹ß°í°¡ ³ô¾ÆÁü¿¡ µû¶ó »ó´ëÁß¿äÄ¡°¡ Áõ°¡ÇÏ´Â ¼öÁ¾Àº ½Å°¥³ª¹«À̾úÀ¸¸ç, °¨¼ÒÇÏ´Â ¼öÁ¾Àº °ÅÁ¦¼ö³ª¹«, ´Ù¸¨³ª¹« µîÀ̾ú´Ù. ClusterºÐ¼® °á°ú ¼­Çâ»ç¸é Àüü¿Í µ¿Çâ»ç¸é Áß, ÇϺÎÀÇ È°¿±¼öȥȿ¸²±ºÁý, µ¿Çâ»ç¸é »óºÎÀÇ ½Å°¥³ª¹«±ºÁýÀ¸·Î ±¸ºÐµÇ¾úÀ¸¸ç, Ȱ¿±¼öȥȿ¸²±ºÁýÀÇ °æ¿ì µ¿Çâ»ç¸é Áß, ÇÏºÎ¿Í ¼­Çâ»ç¸é »óºÎÀÇ ½Å°¥³ª¹«°¡ ÁØ¿ìÁ¡Á¾ÀΠȰ¿±¼öȥȿ¸²±ºÁý, ¼­Çâ»ç¸é Áß ÇϺÎÀÇ ½Å°¥³ª¹«°¡ °ÅÀÇ ÃâÇöÇÏÁö ¾Ê´Â Ȱ¿±¼öȥȿ¸²±ºÁýÀ¸·Î À籸ºÐµÇ¾ú´Ù. ½Å°¥³ª¹«´Â ³ë¸°À糪¹«, ½Ã´Ú³ª¹«, ¹°Âü´ë¿Í À¯ÀÇÀûÀÎ Á¤ÀÇ »ó°üÀÌ ÀÖ¾úÀ¸¸ç Ȱ¿±¼öȥȿ¸²±ºÁýÀÇ ÁÖ¿ä ¿ìÁ¡Á¾ÀÎ °ÅÁ¦¼ö³ª¹«´Â ½Å°¥³ª¹« ´ç´Üdz°ú À¯ÀÇÀûÀÎ ºÎÀÇ »ó°üÀÌ ÀÖ¾ú´Ù.ÀûÀÌ¸ç ½Å¼ÓÇϰí À¯¿¬ÇÑ ÇÁ·Î¼¼½º´Â ±âÁ¸ÀÇ ½Ã½ºÅÛÀû ¾îÇÁ·ÎÄ¡, °èȹ¼º ¸¶ÄÉÆÃÀÇ ÅëÁ¦ÀûÀÎ °úÁ¤À» ±Øº¹ÇÏ´Â ´ë¾ÈÀû ÇÁ·Î¼¼½ºÀÇ °¡´É¼ºÀ» °¡Áö°í ÀÖ´Ù. ³Ý°, À¯¼Ò³â³îÀ̹®È­ÀÇ ¹ö³»Å¥·¯ µðÀÚÀλ깰Àº °ú°Å ¼ø¼öÇüÅ¿¡¼­ Å×Å©³ë º¯Çü ³îÀ̻깰 ¹®È­·Î º¯ÇüµÇ¾î¿Ô´Âµ¥, ÀÌ´Â ±â¼ºÀû µðÀÚÀÎÀÌ °®Áö ¸øÇÑ ´Ù¾çÇÔÀ» º¸¿ÏÇÏ´Â ´ë¾ÈÀû »ê¹°À̸ç, µ¶¸³Àû ¹®È­·Î¼­ Áö¼Ó¼ºÀ» °¡Á®¾ß ÇÏ´Â µðÀÚÀι®È­ÀÌ´Ù.¼ºÀû : ´ë»óȯÀÚ 142¸íÁß ÀÓ»óÀû È¿°úÆÇÁ¤À» Æò°¡ÇÒ ¼ö Àִ ȯÀÚ´Â 138¸íÀ̾úÀ¸¸ç, ÀÌÁß 116¿¹(84.1%)¿¡¼­ ȯġ, 8¿¹(5.8%)¿¡¼­ È¿Çè, 14¿¹(10.1%)¿¡¼­ ½ÇÆÐ¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù. ¾à¸®Àû ºÎÀÛ¿ë ÃÑ 14¿¹Áß °£È¿¼ÒÄ¡°¡ 6¿¹ ¹ß»ýÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç, ÇǺιßÁø 4¿¹, ¾îÁö·¯¿òÁõ 3¿¹, ¿ÀÇÑ 1¿¹°¡ ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. °á·Ð : º» ´Ù±â°ü ¿¬±¸¿¡¼­, teicoplaninÀº ÁÖ¿ä ±×¶÷ ¾ç¼º±¸±Õ¿¡ ´ëÇØ ±¤¹üÀ§ÇÑ Ç×±Õ·ÂÀ» °®°í ÀÖÀ¸¸ç ƯÈ÷ methicillin¿¡ ³»¼ºÀ» °¡Áø Æ÷µµ»ó±¸±Õ¿¡ ´ëÇÏ¿© vancomycin ´ÙÀ½À¸·Î ¿ì¼öÇÑ Ç×±Õ·ÂÀ» º¸¿© ±× ÀÓ»óÀû È¿¿ë¼º ¹× ¾ÈÀü¼ºÀÌ ³ôÀº °ÍÀ¸·Î ³ªÅ¸³µ´Ù. ¶ÇÇÑ, vancomycin¿¡ ºñÇÏ¿© ºÎÀÛ¿ëÀÌ °æ¹ÌÇÏ¿© ÀÓ»óÀǰ¡ Ç×±ÕÁ¦¸¦ ¼±ÅÃÇϴµ¥ ¸¹Àº µµ¿òÀÌ µÉ °ÍÀ¸·Î »ç·áµÈ´Ù. EV, HEV, etc.) can be considered as ¡Çclean¡Ç. Another basic approach is considering as ¡Çclean¡Ç all vehicles satisfying a stringent omission regulation like EURO IV or EEV. Such approaches
The valley forests located at the east-facing slope and the west facing slope in Hambaeksan area were studied to investigate forest structure in relation to aspect and altitude of the slope. There was little difference in density. mean DBH and basal area of the tree layer between east-facing slope and west-facing slope. The importance percentages of Tilia amurensis and Betula costata in west-facing slope were higher than those in east-facing slope. However, the importance percentages of Quercus mongilica and Fraxinus rhynchophylla in the west facing slope were lower than those in east-facing slope. Species diversity of the west-facing slope was 1.415 and that of the east-facing slope was 1.328. Elevation trends were also found for forest structure. As elevation Increased basal area and mean height of the tree layer decreased in both of east-facing slope and west-facing slope. There was a tendency that number of species, species diversity and evenness decreased with increasing elevation. The importance percentage of Quercus mongolica increased with increasing elevation while those of Betula costata and Maackia amurensis decreased. The result of cluster analysis for the tree and subtree layer indicated that the studied forests were classified into the mixed forest community of broad-leaved tree species at west-facing slope and the low and middle elevation belts of east-facing slope and Quercus mongolica community at the high elevation belt of east-facing slope. Quercus mongolica was significantly and positively correlated with Symplocos chinensis for. pilosa, Acer tschonoskii var. rubripes and deutzia glabrata. Betula costata was significantly and negatively correlated with Quercus mongolica and Acer pseudo-sieboldianum.
 
Ű¿öµå
»ó´ëÁß¿äÄ¡;Á¾´Ù¾ç¼º;CLUSTER ºÐ¼®;Á¾»ó°ü;IMPORTANCE PERCENTAGE;SPECIES DIVERSITY;CLUSTER ANALYSIS;SPECIES CORRELATION;
 
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸÁö / v.15, no.4, 2002³â, pp.361-368
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1229-3857
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200211921060577)
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¿