DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Development of Vegetation Indicator for Assessment of Naturalness in Stream Environment

하천환경의 자연성 평가를 위한 식생지표의 개발

  • Received : 2016.10.26
  • Accepted : 2016.11.23
  • Published : 2016.12.31

Abstract

The vegetation assessment indicator has been developed recently as a biological part of the integrated assessment system for river environment to improve the efficiency of river restoration projects. This study carried out to test the vegetation assessment indicator and to reset its grade criteria on experimental streams. We classified and mapped vegetation communities at the level of physiognomic-floristic composition by each assessment unit. A total of 204 sampling quadrats were set up on the 68 assessment units at 5 experimental streams. By analyzing the vegetation data collected, we examined the appropriate numbers of sampling quadrats, the criteria of vegetation index score, classification of vegetation community, and grade criteria for vegetation assessment. The developed vegetation assessment indicator composed with the vegetation complexity index (VCI), the vegetation diversity index (VDI), and the vegetation naturalness index (VNI) was proved to reflect the current conditions of the streams sufficiently. The contribution of vegetation naturalness index to grading by vegetation assessment indicator was larger, but three indexes were closely correlated to each other. Also there was more clearer discrimination of grading with the application of adjusted criteria of vegetation assessment indicator and the standardized classification of vegetation community, but the stream segment type did not influence the vegetation assessment grade significantly.

본 연구는 하천환경평가체계 구축의 일환으로서 식생 평가 지표 및 평가 기준의 검증을 목적으로 수행하였다. 본 연구를 위해 5개 시험하천을 대상으로 68개의 평가단위에서 총 204개의 식생 표본조사구를 설정하였으며, 표본조사구별 상관-종조성 수준에서 식생군집의 분류 및 현존식생도를 작성하였다. 현존식생도를 기준으로 식생자료의 분석을 통해 표본조사의 적정 규모, 식생 지수의 점수 기준, 식생 군집분류의 표준화, 그리고 식생평가지표의 등급화를 위한 종합 점수기준을 검토하였다. 하천 식생 평가를 위해 개발된 식생 다양도 지수와 식생 복잡도, 그리고 식생자연도 지수로 이루어진 식생평가지표의 종합점수 산정 및 등급화는 타당한 것으로 판단되었다. 식생평가지표의 등급화에 대한 식생지수의 기여도를 분석한 결과 식생자연도 지수가 다른 지수에 비해 보다 큰 역할을 하는 것으로 판단되었으나 세부 식생지수 사이의 상호보완적인 관계가 성립되어 있음을 확인할 수 있었다. 또한, 선행 연구에서의 기준의 재검토 및 식생군집 분류의 표준화 작업 등을 통해 개정된 기준을 적용한 결과 식생평가등급 간 변별력이 크게 확보되었음을 확인 할 수 있었으나, 하천구간의 유형에 따른 식생 지수 및 식생평가지표의 등급화는 큰 차이가 없는 것으로 나타났다.

Keywords

References

  1. Chun SH. 2016. Some problems and improvement of domestic system for river environment assessment. Journal of Korean Society of Hazard Mitigation. 16: 305-317. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.9798/KOSHAM.2016.16.1.305
  2. Chun SH, Kim WR, Kim C, Chae SK. 2015. A study on vegetational indicator and criteria for assessment of stream condition. Journal of Korean Society of Hazard Mitigation. 15: 301-312. [Korean Literature]
  3. Chun SH, Park SG, Chae SK. 2014. Review of Some Advanced Stream Environmental Assessment Systems. Journal of Korean Society of Hazard Mitigation. 14: 355-362. [Korean Literature] https://doi.org/10.9798/KOSHAM.2014.14.2.355
  4. EC. 2000 Directive 2000/60/EC establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities. L327. 1-71.
  5. Forman RTT. 1995. Land Mosaics. The Ecology of Landscape and Regions. Newyork, Cambridge University Press.
  6. Kamp U, Binder W, Holzl K. 2007. River habitat monitoring and assessment in Germany. Environ Monit Assess. 127: 209-226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-006-9274-x
  7. Maria RF, Francisca CA, Maria TF. 2010. Assessing Riparian Vegetation Structure and The influence of Land Use Using Landscape Metrics and Geostatistical Tools. Landscape and Urban Planning. 99: 166-177.
  8. Martin K, Paddy C. 1992. Vegetation Description and Analysis. John Wiley&Sons.
  9. Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG. 2000. The value of Wetlands: Importance of Scale and Landscape Setting. Ecological Economics. 35: 25-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00165-8
  10. Verdonschot PFM. 2000. Integrated Ecological Assessment Methods as A basis for Sustainable Catchment Management. Hydrobiologia. 422/423: 389-412. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017094905369
  11. Water Resources Management Information System (WAMIS). 2002 http://wamis.go.kr/