DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Assessment of Degree of Naturalness of Vegetation on the Riverine Wetland

하천습지의 식생학적 자연도 평가

  • Received : 2010.09.14
  • Accepted : 2010.12.30
  • Published : 2011.02.28

Abstract

This study was carried out to suggest the baseline data necessary for vegetation restoration at riverine wetland within stream corridor. We used the prevalence index for wetland assessment by applying the method of weighted averages with index values based on five hydrophyte indicator status as defined by estimated probability occurred in wetland. We selected near nature and urbanized reach of Gap and Yanghwa streams as experimental site. Although two sites have some different disturbance and characteristics of watershed, they showed that similarity of vegetation community including three dominant species - Salix koreensis, Phragmites communis, Miscanthus sacchariflorus - was very high. But in case of Yanghwa stream, various kinds of emergent plants along wetted condition were distinctly occurred, resulted from difference of hydrological regime and substrate, etc. Degree of naturalness of vegetation at the sampled areas indicated that near nature area of Gap stream and all area of Yanghwa stream were fitted as riverine wetland, while urbanized area of Gap stream has changed into upland condition. In conclusion assessment system using prevalence index would be considered an effective method for evaluating of natural states of riverine wetland, but further integrated consideration of physical, hydrological, and biological factors of stream process, and also with considering the difference between those qualitative data of vegetation community.

Keywords

References

  1. 건설교통부, 2006, 자연친화적 하천정비를 위한 수변조사 및 모니터링 매뉴얼, 235pp.
  2. 국토해양부, 2009, 자연친화적 하천관리통합지침, 108pp.
  3. 전승훈, 2008, 경기도 성남시 도시지역 습지의 유형분포 및 습지식물의 특성 평가, 한국환경생태학회지, 22(2), 159-172.
  4. 한국수자원학회, 2009, 국토해양부 승인 하천설계 기준해설, 590pp.
  5. 한국건설기술연구원, 2005, 하천복원가이드라인.
  6. 환경부, 2010, 생태하천복원사업의 추진지침.
  7. Cowardin, L. M., Carter, V. Golet, F. C., and LaRoe, E. T., 1979, Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U. S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 131pp.
  8. Federal Interagency Committee on Characterization of Wetlands, 1995, Wetlands : Characteristics and Boundaries, National Academy Press. 306pp.
  9. Kent, M. and Coker, P., 1992, Vegetation Description and Analysis : A Practical Approach, John Wiley & Sons, 353pp.
  10. Tenna, R. Kaj, S. J., and Larsen, S. E., 2001, Plant distribution and abundance in relation to physical conditions and location within Danish stream systems. Hydrobiologia, 448, 217-228. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017580424029
  11. Tiner, R. W., 2006, Lists of Potential Hydrophytes for the United States : A Regional Review and Their Use in Wetland Identification, Wetlands, 26(2), 624-634. https://doi.org/10.1672/0277-5212(2006)26[624:LOPHFT]2.0.CO;2

Cited by

  1. 식생우세도 지수에 의한 하천습지의 자연도 평가 vol.13, pp.3, 2011, https://doi.org/10.17663/jwr.2011.13.3.535
  2. 남한강 비내늪의 공사전후 관속식물상과 생태적 특성 vol.15, pp.4, 2011, https://doi.org/10.13087/kosert.2012.15.4.061
  3. 경상남도 황강 수계의 식물상과 식생의 특성 vol.16, pp.1, 2013, https://doi.org/10.13087/kosert.2013.16.1.027