|
|
|
Çѱ¹»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸ / v.11, no.2, 2002³â, pp.81-87
|
°í¿Â±â ±Ù±Ç³Ã¹æ¹æ½Ä¿¡ µû¸¥ ³Ã¹æÈ¿°ú¿Í Å丶Åä »ýÀ°
( Cooling Efficiency and Growth of Tomato as Affected by Root Zone Cooling Methods in Summer Season ) |
| ÀÌÀçÇÑ;±ÇÁر¹;±Ç¿À±Ù;ÃÖ¿µÇÏ;¹Úµ¿±Ý; ºÎ»ê¿ø¿¹½ÃÇèÀå;ºÎ»ê¿ø¿¹½ÃÇèÀå;¿ø¿¹¿¬±¸¼Ò;ºÎ»ê¿ø¿¹½ÃÇèÀå;ºÎ»ê¿ø¿¹½ÃÇèÀå;
|
|
|
 |
|
| |
| ÃÊ ·Ï |
| ±Ù±Ç³Ã¹æ ¹æ½Ä¿¡ µû¸¥ ³Ã¹æ È¿À²°ú Å丶Åä »ýÀ° Ư¼ºÀ» °ËÅäÇϰíÀÚ XL³Ã¼ö¼øÈ¯, ¶óµð¿¡ÀÌŸ ³Ãdz, ÆÐµå³Ãdz ¹× ´ëÁ¶±¸¸¦ ó¸®ÇÑ °á°ú´Â ´ÙÀ½°ú °°´Ù. ±Ù±ÇºÎ ³Ã¹æ¿Âµµ´Â °ø±Þ¼ö¿ÂÀÌ 17.8$^{circ}C$ÀÏ ¶§ XL ³Ã¼ö¼øÈ¯±¸´Â 18.$0^{circ}C$ ¶óµð¿¡ÀÌŸ ³Ãdz±¸´Â 27.2$^{circ}C$, ÆÐµå ³Ãdz±¸´Â 20.3$^{circ}C$¿´´Ù. ¹èÁö ±íÀÌ¿Í ½Ã°£´ëº° Æò±Õ¿Âµµ´Â XL³Ã¼ö¼øÈ¯±¸ 22.8~24.7$^{circ}C$. ¶óµð¿¡ÀÌŸ ³Ãdz±¸ 22.7~24.2$^{circ}C$, ÆÐµå ³Ãdz±¸ 20.5~23.2$^{circ}C$, ´ëÁ¶±¸ 25.9~29.6$^{circ}C$¸¦ ³ªÅ¸³»¾î ³Ã¹æÃ³¸®±¸°¡ ´ëÁ¶±¸¿¡ ºñÇØ 5~6$^{circ}C$´õ ³·¾Ò´Ù. Å丶ÅäÀÇ »ýÀ°¿¡ ÀÖ¾î ¿±Àå. ¿±ÆøÀº ´ëÁ¶±¸¿¡ ºñÇØ ÄÇÀ¸¸ç, »ýüÁß ¹× °Ç¹°ÁßÀÇ °æ¿ì¿¡¼µµ ºñ½ÁÇÑ °æÇâÀ̾ú´Ù ±ÙȰ·Â¿¡ ÀÖ¾î ´ëÁ¶±¸´Â 45.0ug/g¿¡ ºñÇØ ±Ù±Ç³Ã¹æ 󸮱¸´Â 58.5-62.8 ug/gÀ¸·Î ³ô¾ÒÀ¸³ª. ±Ù±Ç³Ã¹æ 󸮱¸°£¿¡´Â Å« Â÷À̰¡ ¾ø¾ú´Ù. |
|
| This study was conducted to investigate the cooling efficiency and growth of tomatoes by root zone cooling device using a pad-box and cultivated system. The structure of the root zone cooling system using a pad-box was four piece of pads bonded an the side and a fan set at the bottom. Cool wind was generated by the outside air which was punched at intervals of 10 cm along three rows. Cold wind flowed to the root zone in the culture medium. The root zone cooling efficiency of cold wind generation by using a pad-box flowing through a wet-pad was determined. Major characteristic of this cuttural system consist of bed filled with a perlite medium and a ventilation pipe using PVC. The cold wind generation by a pad box (CWP) was compared to that of cold wind generation by a radiator (CWR), cold water circulation using a XL-pipe (CWX) and the control (non-cooling). When the temperature of water supplied was 16.2-18.4$^{circ}C$, temperatures in the medium were 20.5~23.2$^{circ}C$ for CWP 22.7~24.2$^{circ}C$ for CWR, 22.8~24.27$^{circ}C$ for CWX and 23.1~-29.6$^{circ}C$ for the control. The results show that the cold wind temperature using the pad-box was lower by 1~2$^{circ}C$ than that of cold water circulation in the XL-pipe and lower by 5~6$^{circ}C$ than that of the control. Growth such as leaf length, leaf width, fresh weight and dry weight, was greater in three root zone cooling methods than in the control. Root activity was higher in the rat zone cooling methods than in the control. However, there was no significant difference among root zone cooling methods. |
| |
| Ű¿öµå |
| ±Ù±Ç³Ã¹æ;XLÆÄÀÌÇÁ;ÆÐµå;³Ãdz;root zone cooling;XL-pipe;pad;cold wind; |
| |
|
|
 |
|
»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸÁö / v.11, no.2, 2002³â, pp.81-87
Çѱ¹»ý¹°È¯°æÁ¶ÀýÇÐȸ
ISSN : 1229-4675
UCI : G100:I100-KOI(KISTI1.1003/JNL.JAKO200211921033399)
¾ð¾î : Çѱ¹¾î |
|
| ³í¹® Á¦°ø : KISTI Çѱ¹°úÇбâ¼úÁ¤º¸¿¬±¸¿ø |
|
|
|
|
|
|