2015
DOI: 10.13087/kosert.2015.18.2.33
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Site Selection of Narrow-mouth Frog(Kaloula borealis) Habitat Restoration Using Habitat Suitability Index

Abstract: 서식처 적합성 지수(HSI)를 활용한 맹꽁이 서식처 복원 위치 선정*

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A comparison of CHU values of a proposed project through the HEP technique was conducted to quantitatively calculate the loss/increase of habitat suitable for water deer. This information can be applied to the existing environmental impact assessment framework to effectively improve the process through a quantitative assessment of environmental impacts from construction [29,30,31,32,33,34]. This study also showed that eco-corridor #4 can have a maximum net increase of 69.5 in terms of CHU value, thus indicating the most effective point to build the eco-corridor based on considerations of the CHU.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…A comparison of CHU values of a proposed project through the HEP technique was conducted to quantitatively calculate the loss/increase of habitat suitable for water deer. This information can be applied to the existing environmental impact assessment framework to effectively improve the process through a quantitative assessment of environmental impacts from construction [29,30,31,32,33,34]. This study also showed that eco-corridor #4 can have a maximum net increase of 69.5 in terms of CHU value, thus indicating the most effective point to build the eco-corridor based on considerations of the CHU.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…The wider distribution and higher abundance of amphibians could explain these observations. Distributions of functional groups seemed to mostly reflect the habitat preference of the group's members (Data File 1), for detailed examples, A1 -favoring forests, grasslands, and streams; A2 -avoiding large river habitats 32,36 ; A3 -favoring lowland areas rather than highland areas in northern regions 32,37 ; and A5 (Karsenia koreana and Onychodactylus koreanus) -favoring mountainous areas (northeastern and middle regions) 33 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%