Journals / Alınteri Zirai Bilimler Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 2

Identification and Mapping of Wetland Plants in Erzurum

Pages
73–84
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It is thought that the study results can be used in both landscape design and landscape planning studies.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The study aimed to determine the wetlands and the flora of the wetlands within the provincial borders of Erzurum.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study was conducted mainly in the running water (river, stream) in addition to the temporary wetlands, marshy lakes, and high-water table areas in the Erzurum province placed in the A8, A9, B8, B9 squares according to Davis.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It is thought that the study results can be used in both landscape design and landscape planning studies.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:287 samples
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

The study aimed to determine the wetlands and the flora of the wetlands within the provincial borders of Erzurum. The study was conducted mainly in the running water (river, stream) in addition to the temporary wetlands, marshy lakes, and high-water table areas in the Erzurum province placed in the A8, A9, B8, B9 squares according to Davis. The wetlands plants were identified after collecting 287 samples in the 6 main locations, and herbariums of 110 plants were formed. As a result of the evaluations, 96 species belonging to 41 families were identified. Among these plants, 29 families were identified in Karasu location, 25 families in Serçeme location, 22 families in the Aras location, 19 families in Oltu location, 28 families in Tortum location and 23 families in Çoruh location. It was determined in the field studies that climate and altitude constitute significant limiting factors for the species diversity. The aquatic plants were observed in the still waters or slowly flowing waters, no plant was observed in the fast-flowing water and irrigation ponds. It was also observed in this study that wetlands are an important habitat not only for flora but also for fauna. It is thought that the study results can be used in both landscape design and landscape planning studies.

🔖

Cite This Article

TURGUT, H., YILMAZ, S. (2020). Identification and Mapping of Wetland Plants in Erzurum. Alınteri Zirai Bilimler Dergisi, Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 2, 73–84. https://ajindex.com/articles/356636

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Akaya, H., 1996. Aksu (Antalya) Havzası Su Kanalları ve Çevresi Bitkileri. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, (Unpublished) Ankara.
  2. Altınayar, G., 1988.
  3. Su Yabancı Otları, Bayındırlık ve İskân Bakanlığı Yayınları, Ankara. Anonymous, 2005. Çayır ve Mera Bitkileri Klavuzu. Tarım ve Köyişleri Bakanlığı. Anonymous, 2007. Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. www.ramsar.org Anonymous, 2020a. https://webdosya.csb.gov.tr/db/ced/icerikler/erzuru m_-cdr2018-20190906171600.pdf Anonymous, 2020b. https://www.mgm.gov.tr/veridegerlendirme/il-veilceler-istatistik.aspx?m=ERZURUM Anonymous, 2020c. http://www.turkiyesulakalanlari.com/wp-content/uploads/sulak-alanlar-kitab%C4%B1- bask%C4%B1-onay%C4%B1-i%C3%A7in.pdf Behçet, L., 1994.
  4. Erçek, Turna ve Bostaniçi (Van) Göllerinin Vejetasyonu, Doğa Türk Botanik Dergisi, 18, (4), 305- 312. Behçet, L., Altan, Y., 1994.
  5. Van, Erçek, Turna ve Bostaniçi Gölleri’nin Sucul Florası, Doğa Türk Botanik Dergisi, 18, 91-98.
  6. Behçet, L.& Özgökçe, F., 1996. Doğu Anadolu Bölgesinin Bazı Göllerindeki Sulak Alanların Florası, Ot Sistematik Botanik Dergisi,3(2),3-14.
  7. Behçet, L.& Özgökçe, F., 1998. The Vegetation of Some Lakes in East Anatolia (Turkey). Bulletin of Pure and Applied Science Vol. 117 B (No. 1),1-15.
  8. Cook, D. K., 1996. Aquatic Plant Book. SPB Academic Publishing, Amsterdam, New York. Davis, P.H., 1982. Flora of Turkey and the East Aegean Islands, vol-IX, University Press,
  9. Edinburg. Ekim, T., Koyuncu, M., Vural, M., Duman, H., Aytaç, Z. and Adıgüzel, M. (2000). Türkiye Bitkileri Kırmızı Kitabı (Eğrelti ve Tohumlu Bitkiler), Türkiye Tabiatını Koruma Derneği, Van 100.Yıl Üniversitesi.
  10. Barışcan Ofset. Ankara.
  11. Güçlü, K.&Yılmaz, H., 1989. Doğu Anadolu'da Doğal Olarak Yetişen Huşların (Betula pendula L.) Üretilmesi ve Peyzaj Mimarlığında Kullanılma Olanakları. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 21 (2), 101–110.
  12. Hozhina, E.I., Khramov, A.A., Gerasimov, P.A. and Kumarkov, A.A. 2001. Uptake of heavy metals, arsenic, and antimony by aquatic plants in the vicinity of ore mining and processing industries. Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 74,153-162.
  13. Keskinkan O., Goksu M.Z.L., Yüceer, A., Basibuyuk, M. and Forster, C.F. 2003. Heavy metal adsorption characteristics of a submerged aquatic plant (Myriophyllum spicatum) Process Biochem, 39,179-183.
  14. Kıroğlu, E., 2007. Erzurum kenti ve yakın çevresindeki bazı rekreasyon alanlarının göresel peyzaj kalite yönünden değerlendirilmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Atatürk Üniversitesi