¶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.23, no.3, 2009³â, pp.258-271
¼­¿ï½Ã ¼Ò³ª¹«¸²ÀÇ »ýÅÂÀû Ư¼º¿¡ µû¸¥ °ü¸®¹æ¾È ¿¬±¸
( Management Plan to Consider Ecological Characteristic of Pinus densiflora Community in Seoul )
À̼öµ¿;À̰æÀç;ÃÖÁø¿ì; ÁøÁÖ»ê¾÷´ëÇб³ Á¶°æÇаú;¼­¿ï½Ã¸³´ëÇб³ µµ½Ã°úÇдëÇÐ;(ÁÖ)±â¼ú»ç»ç¹«¼Ò L.E.T ºÎ¼³ ¿¡ÄÚÇ÷£¿¬±¸¼¾ÅÍ;
 
ÃÊ ·Ï
¿ÜºÎȯ°æ º¯È­¿Í õÀÌÀÇ ¿µÇâÀ¸·Î ¼èÅðÇö»óÀÌ ³ªÅ¸³ª°í ÀÖ´Â ¼­¿ï½Ã ¼Ò³ª¹«¸²ÀÇ ½Ä»ýȯ°æÀ» °³¼±ÇϰíÀÚ ±³¸ñÃþ ¿ìÁ¡Á¾ÀÇ °æÀï°ü°è, ÇÏÃþ½Ä»ý³» °æÀïÁ¾ ÃâÇö À¯¹«, °ü¸®Á¤µµ µî¿¡ ±Ù°ÅÇÏ¿© À¯ÇüÀ» ±¸ºÐÇÏ°í »ýÅÂÀû °ü¸®¹æ¾ÈÀ» Á¦¾ÈÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¼­¿ï½Ã ¼Ò³ª¹«¸²À» »ýÅÂÀû Ư¼º¿¡ µû¶ó ºÐ·ùÇÏ¸é ¼Ò³ª¹«¼ø¸²¿¡ ¼ÓÇÏ´Â ÅäÁö±Ø»ó¸²(26.1%)°ú ¼Ò³ª¹«¼ø¸²(21.5%), ¼Ò³ª¹«¿Í Ÿ ¼öÁ¾ÀÌ °æÀïÇÏ´Â ¼Ò³ª¹«-½Å°¥³ª¹«¸²(28.0%), ¼Ò³ª¹«-¸®±â´Ù¼Ò³ª¹«¸²(13.1%), ¼Ò³ª¹«-»ó¼ö¸®³ª¹«¸²(4.2%)µîÀ¸·Î ±¸ºÐµÇ¾ú´Ù. À̵é À¯Çü¿¡ ´ëÇÑ Á¤¹ÐÇÑ ½Ä»ýÁ¶»ç °á°ú, ÅäÁö±Ø»ó, ´ä¾ÐÇÇÇØ, ½Ä»ý°ü¸®·Î ÀÎÇØ ±³¸ñÃþ°ú ÇÏÃþ¿¡ °æÀïÁ¾ÀÌ ÃâÇöÇÏÁö ¾Ê¾Æ ¼Ò³ª¹«¸² À¯Áö°¡ °¡´ÉÇÑ 4°³ ±ºÁýÀº ÇÏÃþ½Ä»ý º¸¿Ï µî ¼Ò±ØÀûÀÎ °ü¸®°¡ ÇÊ¿äÇÏ¿´´Ù. ¹Ý¸é ±³¸ñÃþ°ú ÇÏÃþ¿¡ ¼Ò³ª¹«¿Í °æÀï¼öÁ¾ÀÎ ³«¿±¼º Âü³ª¹«·ù¿Í ¿Ü·¡Á¾ÀÌ ÃâÇöÇÏ´Â 4°³ ±ºÁýÀº »ýÅÂÀû ÁöÀ§°¡ µ¿ÀÏÇÑ °æÀïÁ¾°ü¸®, ÇÏÃþ½Ä»ý µµÀÔ µî Àû±ØÀûÀÎ °ü¸®±â¹ýÀ» Àû¿ëÇØ¾ß ¼Ò³ª¹«±ºÁýÀ» À¯ÁöÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖÀ» °ÍÀÌ´Ù.
Various environmental parameters change and ecological succession often lead to decline of Pinus densiflora forest in Seoul. Due to decline of it, we proposed the ecological management for conserving and improving from decrease of its dominant area on there. We analysed the P. densiflora forest's classification and suggested its ecological management that based on relation to competition between dominant species in the upper tree layer, the presence of competitive species in shrub layer and vegetation management standard. The Pinus densiflora forest types has been classified 6 types by ecological characteristics. The results from categorized its types are following as; 1) Pinus densiflora pure forest type; edaphic climax Pinus densiflora forest(26.1%), Pinus densiflora pure forest(21.5%). 2) the forest of Pinus densiflora and other species that compete with each other type; Pinus densiflora-Quercus mongolica forest(28.0%), Pinus densiflora-Pinus rigida forest(13.1%), Pinus densiflora-Quercus acutissima(4.2%). We conclude that the results in these kind of 4 types; Pinus densiflora pure forest type where possible to maintain the forest by edaphic climax, human trampling damage, vegetation management(e.x. remove the competition species, shrub layers management etc.) are mainly need to negative management. Whereas, the others 4 types; Pinus densiflora and other species(Quercus variabilis, foreign species, naturalized species etc.) that compete with each other types are need to positive management such as manage the same niche competition species, shrub layers management, remove the foreign species, naturalized species etc.. In these kinds of ecological management are very necessary to maintain Pinus densiflora forest.
 
Ű¿öµå
»ýÅÂÀû °ü¸®;¼èÅðÇö»ó;õÀÌ;»ýÅÂÁöÀ§;½Ä»ý°æÀï;Ecological Management;Decline Phenomenon;Succession;Ecological Niche;Vegetation Competition;
 
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸÁö / v.23, no.3, 2009³â, pp.258-271
Çѱ¹È¯°æ»ýÅÂÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1229-3857
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200924733173515)
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¿