Journal of Wetlands Research (한국습지학회지)

Korean Wetlands Society (한국습지학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Flow response and habitat region of aquatic plants in urban streams

도심하천 수생식물의 흐름에 대한 대응 분석 및 식재영역 결정

  • Kim, Seonghwan (Department of Water Resources, Dongbu Engineering Co., Ltd.) ;
  • Cho, Gyewoon (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Incheon National University) ;
  • Kim, Jin-Hong (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Chung-Ang University)
  • 김성환 (동부엔지니어링 수자원부) ;
  • 최계운 (인천대학교 토목환경공학과) ;
  • 김진홍 (중앙대학교 건설환경공학과)
  • Received : 2017.10.24
  • Accepted : 2018.01.05
  • Published : 2018.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study presents the flow response and habitat region of the aquatic plants in the urban streams. Phragmites japonica, Phragmites communis, Miscanthus sacchariflorus, Persicaria blumei and Persicaria thunbergii were selected as for typical plants. Flow response and habitat region were determined by flow velocity/depth and vegetation growth. Stages for flow response of the aquatic plants were classified into stable, recovered, damaged and swept away. Criteria between the recovered and damaged stage was determined by the bending angle of $30{\sim}50^{\circ}$. Capability against flow was high in the order of Phragmites japonica, Phragmites communis, Miscanthus sacchariflorus, Persicaria blumei and Persicaria thunbergi. Phragmites japonica and Phragmites communis were capable of coping with flow depth 0.9 m, flow velocity 1.5 m/s and with flow depth 1.0 m, flow velocity 0.9 m/s, respectively. Miscanthus sacchariflorus was capable within the region of flow depth 1.0 m and flow velocity 0.6 m/s. Persicaria blumei and Persicaria thunbergii were less capable than the other aquatic plants and were vulnerable exceeding the water depth of 1.0 m. Habitat regions by the flow response of each plants were suggested.

본 연구에서는 도심구간 하천의 수생식물을 대상으로 흐름에 대한 대응양상 판단 및 식재영역 결정을 목표로 하였다. 수생식물로서 달뿌리풀, 갈대, 물억새, 개여뀌 및 고마리를 선정하고 흐름의 유속과 수심 및 식생의 성장도에 대하여 대응 분석하여 상기 수생식물의 식재영역을 결정하였다. 수생식물의 대응은 일반적으로 흐름에 대하여 안정, 회복, 훼손 및 유실로 구분되었다. 현지 조사 결과 수생식물의 회복과 훼손 정도는 식생의 휘어짐 각도를 기준으로 대략 $30^{\circ}{\sim}50^{\circ}$의 범위에서 구분되었다. 식생은 달뿌리풀, 갈대, 물억새, 개여뀌 순으로 흐름에 대한 대응력이 컸다. 달뿌리풀은 뿌리의 강한 고착력으로 수심이 0.9 m에서 유속 1.5 m/s까지 대응력이 강했다. 갈대는 수심 1.0 m와 유속 0.9 m/s 범위 내에서 흐름에 대응 가능하였다. 물억새는 대체적으로 수심 1.0 m와 유속 0.6 m/s 이하가 식재 가능 영역으로 제한된 식재 범위를 나타내었다. 개여뀌나 고마리는 흐름에 대한 대응력이 보다 약하며, 수심이 1.0 m를 넘는 경우 유속이 조금만 커져도 생존이 어려웠다. 상기 결과를 이용하여 수생식물 각 수종별 식재영역을 제시하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Capon, SJ (2005). Flood variability and spatial variation in plant community composition and structure on large arid flood plain. J. of Arid Environment, 60(2), 283-302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaridenv.2004.04.004
  2. Giller, PS and Malmqvisit, B (1998). The Biology of streams and rivers. Oxford University, Oxford.
  3. Kim, JH and Choi, IG (2013), Vegetation behavior and its habitat region against flood flow in urban streams, J. of Engineering Science and Technology, 8(3), pp. 307-318.
  4. Korea Meteorological Administration (2012). http://www.kma.go.kr.
  5. Lenssen, JM, Dolle, GE and Blom, CW (1998). The effect of flooding on the recruitment of reed marsh and tall forb plant species. Plant Ecology 139(1), 13-23. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009754505028
  6. Ministry of Construction and Transportation (2002). Design Manual of Nature- Friendly River Management. [Korean Literature]
  7. Nagata, A, Yanani, S and Nagasaka, Y (2006). Differences in up and downstream inhabitant opinions responding to the alteration of watershed environment. Ecology and Civil Engineering, 9(1), 73-84. https://doi.org/10.3825/ece.9.73
  8. Naiman, RJ, Decamps, H and Pollock, M (1993). The role of riparian corridors in maintaining regional biodiversity. Ecological Applications, 3(2), 209-212. https://doi.org/10.2307/1941822
  9. Nilsson, C (1987). Distribution of stream-edge vegetation along a gradient of current. J. of Ecology, 75(2), 513-522. https://doi.org/10.2307/2260430
  10. Park, YS, Chon, TS, Kwak IS and Lek, S (2004). Hierarchical community classification and assessment of aquatic ecosystems using artificial neural networks. Science of the Total Environment, 327,15-122.
  11. Riley, AL (1998). Restoring Streams in Circuit. Island Press. Washington, D.C.
  12. Wilson, SD and Keddy, PA (1988). Species richness, survivorship, and biomass accumulation along an environmental gradient. Oikos, 53, 375-380. https://doi.org/10.2307/3565538
  13. Woo, HS, Kim, W and Ji, W (2015). River Hydraulics, Cheongmun Publisher. [Korean Literature]
  14. Yalin, MS (1972). Mechanics of sediment transport. Pergamon Press. Oxford.
  15. Yoon, SE, Choi, SW and Kim, JH (2008). Hydraulic Design Criteria by Riparian Vegetations, Urban Flood Disaster Management Research Center. [Korean Literature]