DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

무주-금산간 도로건설에 따른 적벽강의 어류 종 조성 분석 및 생태건강도 사전환경성평가

Preliminary Environmental Impact Assessments on Fish Compositions and the Ecological Health of Jeokbyeok River on the Road Construction of Muju-Geumsan Region

  • 이상재 (충남대학교 생명시스템과학대학 생물과학과) ;
  • 박희성 (충남대학교 생명시스템과학대학 생물과학과) ;
  • 안광국 (충남대학교 생명시스템과학대학 생물과학과)
  • Lee, Sang-Jae (Department of Biological Science, College of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Chungnam National University) ;
  • Park, Hee-Sung (Department of Biological Science, College of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Chungnam National University) ;
  • An, Kwang-Guk (Department of Biological Science, College of Biological Sciences and Biotechnology, Chungnam National University)
  • 투고 : 2016.07.28
  • 심사 : 2017.01.20
  • 발행 : 2017.02.28

초록

본 연구는 금강 상류에 위치한 적벽강에서 지역간 주민불편 해소를 위하여 도로 연결노선 건설 및 기반시설확충에 따른 환경영향성을 검토를 위해 2015년 수생태계의 어류 종조성 평가, 멸종위기종 특성, 군집평가 및 일반 수질특성을 분석하였다. 본 사업 구간에서 어류는 총 28종 1186개체가 출현하였고, 법적보호종은 멸종위기 1급인 감돌고기 (Pseudopungtungia nigra) 79개체, II급인 돌상어(Gobiobotia brevibarba)와 꾸구리(Gobiobotia macrocephala)가 각각 5개체, 2개체가 출현하여 종 보존이 필요한 것으로 나타났다. 한편 국내 하천 및 호수에 널리 분포하는 큰입배스(Micropterus salmoides)와 파랑볼우럭(Lepomis macrochirus)의 생태계교란어류는 출현하지 않아 외래어종에 의한 생태계교란 현상은 나타나지 않아 생태계가 잘 보존된 지역으로 분석되었다. 어류군집 평가에 따르면, 전반적으로 종다양도 지수는 모든 지점에서 높게 나타났으며 (범위: 0.788 - 1.030), 우점도 지수는 아주 낮은 것 (범위: 0.097 - 0.183)으로 나타나 특정 종에 의해 우점하지 않고, 군집이 잘 유지되는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 어류의 내성도 및 트로픽 길드 분석 결과 내성종에 비해 민감종의 비율이 상대적으로 높고 잡식종에 비해 충식종의 비율이 상대적으로 높아 어류에 대한 오염도 측면 및 섭식구조에서도 생태계가 잘 유지됨을 나타냈다. 이런 특성은 다변수어류평가모델 (Multi-metric fish model)을 이용한 생태건강도 분석에서 잘 반영되었다. 즉, 어류평가지수 (FAI 모델값)는 82.4으로서, 생태건강도 등급은 "양호상태 (B등급)"로 평가되어 전반적으로 건강한 하천 생태계 특성을 보였다. 또한, 용존산소량(DO)과 수소이온농도(pH)가 각 각 $10mg\;L^{-1}$, pH8 전후로 나타났으며 그 외 일반 이화학적 수질특성에서도 양호하게 나타났으며, 물리적 서식지도 여울과 풀 (Pool)이 잘 조화되는 것으로 나타났다. 이런 지역간 연결도로 건설은 수체내의 토사유입을 가져올 수 있고 이는 서식지 특성 및 어류먹이 연쇄에 직 간접적인 영향 줄 수 있어, 건설 시 토사유출에 대한 대책마련이 필요할 것으로 사료되었다.

The objectives of the study were to evaluate fish compositions, endangered species, community structure, physical habitat, and general water quality for a preliminary environmental impact assessment of Jeokbyeok River on the road construction between two regions. Total number of species and total number of individuals, based on CPUE, were 23 and 1186, respectively. The endangered species (I, II) as the legal protection species were Pseudopungtungia nigra (79 samples) Gobiobotia brevibarba) (5) Gobiobotia macrocephala (2), indicating a requiring of endangered species conservation. In the meantime, exotic species and ecological disturbing species such as Micropterus salmoides and Lepomis macrochirus, were not present, indicating a well conserved area. According to fish community analysis, values of species diversity index were high (range: 0.788 - 1.030), and the dominance index were low (range: 0.097 - 0.183), indicating that the fish community in this area was maintained well without high dominacne by specific species. Also, fish analysis on tolerance guilds and trophic guilds showed that the proportions of sensitive species were largely exceeded the proportions of the tolerant species, while the proportions of insectivore species were largely exceeded the proportions of the omnivore species. This outcome suggests that the ecosystem was well maintained in terms of tolerance and trophic compositions (food chain). Ecological health, based on the multi-metric fish model of Fish Assessment Integrity (FAI), reflected those fish conditions. In other words, values of FAI model averaged 82.4, which means a "good condition" in the criteria of ecological health by the Minstry of Environment, Korea. In addition, general water quality and physical habitat analyses showed that the system was in good condition. Under these conditions, if the road constructions between the two regions happen in the future, inorganic suspended solids may increase in the waterbody, and this may result in indirect or direct influences on the physical habitats and food chain as well as fish compositions, so the ecological protections and prevention strategy from the soil erosion are required in the system.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. An KG, Jung SH, Choi SS. 2001. An Evaluation on Health Conditions of Pyong-Chang River using the Index of Biological Integrity(IBI) and Qualitative Habitat Evaluation Index(QHEI). Korean Journal of Limnology. 34(3): 153-165. [Korean Literature]
  2. An KG, Lee JY, Bae DY, Kim JH, Hwang SJ, Won DH, Lee JK, Kim CS. 2006. Ecological Assessments of Aquatic Environment using Multi-metric Model in Major Nationwide Stream Watersheds. Journal of Korean Society on Water Quality. 22(5): 796-804. [Korean Literature]
  3. An KG, Lee JY, Jang HN. 2005. Ecological Health Assessments and Water Quality Patterns in Youdeung Stream. Korean Journal of Limnology. 38(3): 341-351. [Korean Literature]
  4. Bae DY, An KG. 2006. Stream Ecosystem Assessments, based on a Biological Multimetric Parameter Model and Water Chemistry Analysis. Korean Journal of Limnology. 39(2): 198-208. [Korean Literature]
  5. Barbour MT, Gerritsen J, Snyder BD, Stribling JB. 1999. Rapid Bioassessment Protocols For Use in Streams and Wadeable Rivers: Periphyton, Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Fish, 2nd Edition. EPA 841-B-99-002, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington DC.
  6. Choi JK, Byeon HK, Seok HK. 2000. Studies on the Dynamics of Fish Community in Wonju Stream. Korean Journal of Limnology. 33(3): 274-281. [Korean Literature]
  7. Han JH, Park CS, An Jw, An KG, Paek WK. 2015. Identification guide to freshwater fishes of Korea. Econature. Publishing. [Korean Literature]
  8. Hugueny B, Camara S, Samoura S, Magassouba M. 1996. Applying an index of biotic integrity based on communities in a west african river. Hydrobiologia. 331: 71-78. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00025409
  9. Hur JW, In DS, Jang MH, Kang HS, Kang KH. 2011. Assessment of Inhabitation and Species Diversity of Fish to Substrate Size in the Geum River Basin. Journal of Environmental Impact Assessment. 20(6): 845-856. [Korean Literature]
  10. Judy R.D. Seeley PNJr, Murray TM, Svirsky SC, Whitworth MR, Ischinger LS. 1984. National Fisheries Survey. Vol. 1. Technical report: initial findings. United States Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-84/06.
  11. Karr JR, Dudlry DR. 1981. Ecological perspectives on water quality goals. Environmental Management. 5: 55-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01866609
  12. Karr JR, Fausch KD, Angermeier PL, Yant PR, Schlosser IJ. 1986. Assessing biological integrity in running water: A method and its rationale. pp. 28, Illinois National History Survey, Special Publication 5, Champaign, IL.
  13. Kim IS, Park JY. 2002. Freshwater Fishes of Korea. Kyohak Publishing. [Korean Literature]
  14. Ko MH, Moon SJ, Hong YK, Lee GY, Bang IC. 2013. Distribution Status and Habitat Characteristics of the Endangered Species, Lethenteron reissneri(Petromyzontiformes: Petromyzontidae) in Korea. Ichthyological society of Korea. 25(4): 189-199. [Korean Literature]
  15. Kwon HH, Han JH, Woon JH, An KG. 2013. Influence of Fish Compositions and Trophic/Tolerance Guilds on the Fishkills in Geum-River Watershed(Backje Weir). Korean Journal of Environmental Biology. 31(4): 393-401. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.11626/KJEB.2013.31.4.393
  16. Kwon YS, An KG. 2006. Biological Stream Health and Physico-chemical Characteristics in the Keum-Ho River Watershed. Korean Journal of Limnology. 39(2): 145-156. [Korean Literature]
  17. Margalef R. 1958. Information theory in ecology. Generation System. 3: 36-71.
  18. Ministry of Environment, Korea. 2007. Researches for integrative assessment methodology of aquatic environments(III): development of aquatic ecosystem health assessment and evaluation system. National Institute of Environmental Research(NIER), Incheon.
  19. Ministry of Environment, Korea. 2008. The Survey and Evaluation of Aquatic Ecosystem Health in Korea. The Ministry of Environment/National Institute of Environmental Research(NIER). Incheon.
  20. Nelson JS. 1994. Fisheries of the world(3rd edition). John Wiley & Sons. New York. p.600.
  21. Oberdorrff T, Hughes RM. 1992. Modification of an index of biotic integrity based on fish assemblages to characterize rivers of the Seine Basin, France. Hydrobiologia. 228: 117-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00006200
  22. Ohio EPA. 1989. Biological criteria for the protection of aquatic life. Vol.III. Users manual for biological field assessment of Ohio surface water. Division of Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment, Surface Water Section, Columbus. OH.
  23. Pielou EC. 1975. Ecological diversity. Wiley. New York. p.165.
  24. Sanders RE, Milter RJ, Yondr CO, Rankin ET. 1999. The Use of external deformities, erosion, lesions, and tumors in fish assemblages for characterizing aquatic resources. Simon TP.(Eds), CRC Press. pp. 225-245.
  25. Shannon CE, Weaver W. 1949. The mathematical theory of communication. University of Illinois Press, Urbana.
  26. Simpson EH. 1949. Measurement of diversity. Nature 163: p.688. https://doi.org/10.1038/163688a0
  27. Son YM, Song HB. 2006. Freshwater Fishes of Geum River, Korea. Jisungsa Publishing. [Korean Literature]
  28. Strahler AN. 1957. Quantitative analysis of watershed geomorphology. American Geophysical Union Transactions. 38: 913-920. https://doi.org/10.1029/TR038i006p00913
  29. U.S. EPA, 1991. Environmental Indicators: Politics, Programs, and Success Stories, Workshop Proceedings Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, Washington, DC.
  30. U.S. EPA. 1993. Fish field and laboratory methods for evaluating the biological integrity of surface waters. EPA 600-R-92-111. Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
  31. Yeom DH, An KG, Hong YP, Lee SK. 2000. Assessment of an Index of Biological Integrity(IBI) using Fish Assemblages in Keum-Ho River, Korea. Korean Journal of Environmental Biology. 18: 215-226. [Korean Literature]

피인용 문헌

  1. 하천차수에 따른 피라미와 참갈겨니 개체군의 생태지표 특성 비교 vol.50, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.11614/ksl.2017.50.4.403
  2. 만경강 본류의 어류 트로픽 길드, 오염 내성도 및 다변수 생태건강도에 대한 화학적 수질영향 vol.37, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.11626/kjeb.2019.37.1.008
  3. 어도 개보수에 따른 어류 자원량 및 경제적 가치 평가: 삼척오십천 사례 vol.38, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.11626/kjeb.2020.38.1.030