پديد آورندگان :
اوﻻدي، رﺿﺎ داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺗﻬﺮان - داﻧﺸﮑﺪه ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻃﺒﯿﻌﯽ - ﮔﺮوه ﻋﻠﻮم و ﺻﻨﺎﯾﻊ ﭼﻮب و ﮐﺎﻏﺬ , اﻣﯿﺪواري، ﺳﭙﯿﺪه داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺗﻬﺮان - داﻧﺸﮑﺪه ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻃﺒﯿﻌﯽ - ﮔﺮوه ﻋﻠﻮم و ﺻﻨﺎﯾﻊ ﭼﻮب و ﮐﺎﻏﺬ , ﭘﻮرﻃﻬﻤﺎﺳﯽ، ﮐﺎﻣﺒﯿﺰ داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺗﻬﺮان - داﻧﺸﮑﺪه ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻃﺒﯿﻌﯽ - ﮔﺮوه ﻋﻠﻮم و ﺻﻨﺎﯾﻊ ﭼﻮب و ﮐﺎﻏﺬ , اﻓﻬﺎﻣﯽ ﺳﯿﺴﯽ، داود داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺗﻬﺮان - داﻧﺸﮑﺪه ﻣﻨﺎﺑﻊ ﻃﺒﯿﻌﯽ - ﮔﺮوه ﻋﻠﻮم و ﺻﻨﺎﯾﻊ ﭼﻮب و ﮐﺎﻏﺬ
كليدواژه :
آناتومي چوب , شناسايي چوب , چوب روسي , مقاطع ميكروسكوپي , بازار چوب ايران
چكيده فارسي :
ﺳﺎﺑﻘﻪ و ﻫﺪف: ﭼﻮب ﻫﺎي ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮگ وارداﺗﯽ از ﮐﺸﻮرﻫﺎي ﺷﻤﺎﻟﯽ اﯾﺮان »ﭼﻮب روﺳﯽ« ﻧﺎﻣﯿﺪه ﺷﺪه و ﻋﻠﯽ رﻏﻢ اﯾﻦ ﮐﻪ ﻧﺎم ﻫﺎي ﻓﺎرﺳﯽ ﺑﺮاي ﺟﻨﺲ ﻫﺎي ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮن ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮگ ﻣﻮﺟﻮدﻧﺪ، اﻧﻮاع ﮔﻮﻧﺎﮔﻮن اﯾﻦ ﭼﻮب ﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎم ﻫﺎي روﺳﯽ ﭼﻮن »ﺳﺎﺳﻨﺎ )Сосна(«، »ﯾﻮﻟﮑﺎ )Ёлка(« و »ﻟﯿﺴﺖ وﯾﻨﯿﺘﺰا )Лиственница(« ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻣﯽ ﺷﻮﻧﺪ. ﮔﺮﭼﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺷﮑﻞ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﯽ، ﺑﺮﺧﯽ از ﻓﺮوﺷﻨﺪﮔﺎن، ﻧﺎم ﻫﺎي روﺳﯽ اﯾﻦ ﭼﻮب ﻫﺎ را ﺑﻪ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺧﺎﺻﯽ رﺑﻂ ﻣﯽ دﻫﻨﺪ وﻟﯽ ﺗﺎﮐﻨﻮن ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ ﺳﺎزﻣﺎن ﯾﺎﻓﺘﻪ و ﻋﻠﻤﯽ اي ﺑﺮاي ﺑﺮرﺳﯽ ﺻﺤﺖ اﯾﻦ ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻖ اﻧﺠﺎم ﻧﺸﺪه و ﺗﻬﯿﻪ درﺳﺖ ﯾﮏ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮگ، ﺑﻪ ﺳﺮدرﮔﻤﯽ ﺑﺰرﮔﯽ ﺑﺮاي ﻣﺼﺮف ﮐﻨﻨﺪﮔﺎن ﺗﺒﺪﯾﻞ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ. ﺑﺎ ﺗﻮﺟﻪ ﺑﻪ ﺗﻔﺎوت ﮐﺎراﯾﯽ و ﮐﺎرﺑﺮد ﻣﺘﻔﺎوت ﭼﻮب ﻫﺎ، ﻋﺪم ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺖ ﺟﻨﺲ ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮﮔﺎن ﺗﺠﺎري و ﮐﺎرﺑﺮد ﻧﺎدرﺳﺖ آن ﻫﺎ ﻣﺸﮑﻼﺗﯽ را ﺑﻪ وﺟﻮد ﻣﯽ آورد. ازاﯾﻦ رو، ﻫﺪف اﯾﻦ ﭘﮋوﻫﺶ، ﺑﺮرﺳﯽ ﺑﺎزار اﻟﻮار ﺗﺮاش ﺧﻮرده ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮگ در اﯾﺮان از ﻧﻈﺮ ﻓﺮاواﻧﯽ ﭼﻮب ﻫﺎي ﻣﻮﺟﻮد و ﺗﻄﺎﺑﻖ ﻧﺎم ﻫﺎي ﺗﺠﺎري آن ﻫﺎ ﺑﺎ ﺟﻨﺲ/ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻫﺎي ﺷﻨﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه اﺳﺖ.
ﻣﻮاد و روش ﻫﺎ: 25 ﻗﻄﻌﻪ ﭼﻮب ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮگ ﺑﻪ ﻫﻤﺮاه ﻓﻬﺮﺳﺘﯽ از ﻧﺎم ﻫﺎي ﺗﺠﺎري آنﻫﺎ از ﯾﺎرد اداره ﺑﻨﺪر و درﯾﺎﻧﻮردي اﺳﺘﺎن ﮔﯿﻼن و ده ﭼﻮب ﻓﺮوﺷﯽ در ﺗﻬﺮان و ﮐﺮج ﺗﻬﯿﻪ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ. از ﻓﺮوﺷﻨﺪﮔﺎﻧﯽ ﮐﻪ ﭼﻮب ﻫﺎي ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮگ وارداﺗﯽ را ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎم ﮐﻠﯽ »ﭼﻮب روﺳﯽ« اراﺋﻪ داده و ﺗﻤﺎﯾﺰي ﺑﯿﻦ اﻧﻮاع ﭼﻮب ﻫﺎ ﻗﺎﺋﻞ ﻧﻤﯽ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ، ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ اي ﮔﺮدآوري ﻧﺸﺪ. ﭼﻮب ﻫﺎ از ﻧﻈﺮ ﻣﺎﮐﺮوﺳﮑﻮﭘﯽ ﺑﺮرﺳﯽ و ﭘﺲ از ﺗﻬﯿﻪ اﺳﻼﯾﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﯿﮑﺮوﺳﮑﻮﭘﯽ و ﻋﮑﺲ ﺑﺮداري، وﯾﮋﮔﯽ ﻫﺎي آﻧﺎﺗﻮﻣﯽ ﭼﻮب ﻫﺮ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ، ﺑﺮاﺳﺎس ﻓﻬﺮﺳﺖ ﺑﯿﻦ اﻟﻤﻠﻠﯽ وﯾﮋﮔﯽ ﻫﺎي ﭼﻮب ﺑﺮاي ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﯾﯽ ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮﮔﺎن اﺳﺘﺨﺮاج ﺷﺪﻧﺪ. ﺳﭙﺲ، ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﯾﯽ ﭼﻮب ﺑﺎ ﺗﺮﮐﯿﺒﯽ از ﭼﻨﺪ ﺷﯿﻮه ي ﭘﯿﺸﻨﻬﺎدي اﻧﺠﺎم ﺷﺪ.
ﯾﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﻫﺎ: ﻓﺮاوان ﺗﺮﯾﻦ ﭼﻮب ﻫﺎي ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮگ در ﺑﺎزار اﯾﺮان ﺑﻪ ﺗﺮﺗﯿﺐ- ﯾﻮﻟﮑﺎ، ﺳﺎﺳﻨﺎ و ﻟﯿﺴﺖ وﯾﻨﯿﺘﺰا ﺑﻮده و ﭘﺲ از آن ﻫﺎ، ﻧﺮاد ﺑﺎ ﻓﺮاواﻧﯽ ﺑﻪ ﻣﺮاﺗﺐ ﮐﻢ ﺗﺮي وﺟﻮد داﺷﺖ. ﺑﻪ ﻏﯿﺮ از ﻧﺮاد، ﺑﻘﯿﻪ ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮﮔﺎن – ﺑﺎ ﻣﻼك ﻗﺮار دادن ﻣﻌﺎدل روﺳﯽ- ﻋﻤﺪﺗﺎً ﺑﺎ ﻧﺎم درﺳﺘﯽ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮوش ﻣﯽ رﺳﯿﺪﻧﺪ. ﻫﺸﺖ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ از ده ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ ﭼﻮب ﯾﻮﻟﮑﺎ، ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﻧﻮﺋﻞ ).Picea sp(؛ ﺷﺶ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﻪ از ﻫﻔﺖ ﻗﻄﻌﻪ ﭼﻮب ﺳﺎﺳﻨﺎ، ﮐﺎج ﺟﻨﮕﻠﯽ )Pinus sylvestris( و ﻫﺮ ﺳﻪ ﻗﻄﻌﻪ ﻟﯿﺴﺖ وﯾﻨﯿﺘﺰا، ﻣﻠﺰ ).Larix sp( ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﯾﯽ ﺷﺪﻧﺪ اﻣﺎ در ﻣﻮرد ﻧﺮاد ).Abies sp(، اﺷﺘﺒﺎﻫﺎت زﯾﺎدي دﯾﺪه ﺷﺪ. اﺻﻮﻻً در ﺑﺮﺧﯽ ﭼﻮب ﻓﺮوﺷﯽ ﻫﺎ، واژه »ﻧﺮاد« ﻣﻌﺎدل ﮐﻠﯿﺖ »ﭼﻮب روﺳﯽ« ﮔﺮﻓﺘﻪ ﺷﺪه و ﻧﻪ ﯾﮏ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ از ﺑﯿﻦ ﭼﻨﺪ ﮔﻮﻧﻪ ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮگ وارداﺗﯽ. از ﭼﻬﺎر ﻣﻨﺒﻌﯽ ﻧﯿﺰ ﮐﻪ ﻧﺮاد را ﺑﻪ ﻋﻨﻮان ﭼﻮﺑﯽ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﯾﺰ ﺑﻪ ﻓﺮوش ﻣﯽ رﺳﺎﻧﺪﻧﺪ، دو ﻣﻮرد ﮐﺎج ﺑﻮدﻧﺪ.
ﻧﺘﯿﺠﻪ ﮔﯿﺮي: وﯾﮋﮔﯽ ﻫﺎي ﻣﺎﮐﺮوﺳﮑﻮﭘﯽ ﭼﻮب ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮﮔﺎن ﭼﻮن رﻧﮓ، ﺑﺎﻓﺖ و ﺗﻸﻟﻮ ﭼﻮب، اﻧﺪازه و ﻓﺮاواﻧﯽ ﮐﺎﻧﺎل ﻫﺎي رزﯾﻨﯽ، ﻧﺤﻮه ﺗﻐﯿﯿﺮ ﭼﻮب آﻏﺎز ﺑﻪ ﭘﺎﯾﺎن و ﺣﻀﻮر ﮐﯿﺴﻪ ﻗﯿﺮي در ﺑﺮش ﻃﻮﻟﯽ، وﯾﮋﮔﯽ ﻫﺎي ﻗﺎﺑﻞ اﻋﺘﻤﺎدي ﺑﺮاي ﺷﻨﺎﺳﺎﯾﯽ ﻧﺒﻮده و ﺣﺘﻤﺎً ﻧﯿﺎز ﺑﻪ ﺑﺮرﺳﯽ ﻫﺎي ﻣﯿﮑﺮوﺳﮑﻮﭘﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺑﺎﺷﺪ. در ﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﺎﮐﺮوﺳﮑﻮﭘﯽ، ﺗﻨﻬﺎ وﯾﮋﮔﯽ ﻗﺎﻃﻊ، ﺣﻀﻮر ﯾﺎ ﻏﯿﺒﺖ ﮐﺎﻧﺎل رزﯾﻨﯽ در ﻣﻘﻄﻊ ﻋﺮﺿﯽ اﺳﺖ ﮐﻪ ﺑﻪ واﺳﻄﻪ آن ﺑﻪ راﺣﺘﯽ ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮان ﻧﺮاد را از دﯾﮕﺮ ﭼﻮب ﻫﺎي ﺑﺎزار، ﻣﺘﻤﺎﯾﺰ ﮐﺮد. در ﺑﻌﺪ ﻣﯿﮑﺮوﺳﮑﻮﭘﯽ، ﺑﺰرگ ﺑﻮدن ﻣﻨﺎﻓﺬ ﻣﯿﺪان ﺗﻼﻗﯽ ﮐﺎج، ﺗﻤﺎﯾﺰ آن را از دو ﭼﻮب دﯾﮕﺮِ داراي ﮐﺎﻧﺎل رزﯾﻨﯽ )ﻧﻮﺋﻞ و ﻣﻠﺰ( ﺳﻬﻮﻟﺖ ﺑﺨﺸﯿﺪه وﻟﯽ ﺗﻤﺎﯾﺰ دو ﭼﻮب ﻧﻮﺋﻞ و ﻣﻠﺰ ﻣﺸﮑﻞ و در ﺑﺮﺧﯽ ﻣﻮارد، ﻧﺎﻣﻤﮑﻦ اﺳﺖ. درﻣﺠﻤﻮع ﻣﯽ ﺗﻮان ﻧﺘﯿﺠﻪ ﮔﺮﻓﺖ ﮐﻪ ﮔﺮﭼﻪ در ﺑﺎزار ﭼﻮب اﯾﺮان، ﮐﺎرﺑﺮد ﻧﺎم ﻫﺎي روﺳﯽ ﺑﺮاي ﭼﻮب ﻫﺎي ﺳﻮزﻧﯽ ﺑﺮگ ﺗﺠﺎري ﺗﺎ ﺣﺪ زﯾﺎدي درﺳﺖ اﻧﺪ وﻟﯽ ﺑﻬﺘﺮ اﺳﺖ اﺳﺘﻔﺎده از ﻧﺎم ﻫﺎي ﻣﻌﺎدل ﻓﺎرﺳﯽ رواج ﯾﺎﻓﺘﻪ ﺗﺎ اﺷﺘﺒﺎﻫﺎت و ﺳﺮدرﮔﻤﯽ ﻫﺎ ﮐﺎﻫﺶ ﯾﺎﺑﻨﺪ.
چكيده لاتين :
Background and Objectives: All imported softwoods are called "Russian wood", in Iran. Despite the existence of domestic Persian terms for naming each individual conifer genius, they are known and traded by Russian names like "Sasna (Сосна)", "Yulka (Ёлка)", and "Leastvinitsa (Лиственница)" in the Iranian market. Although, practically, some wood sellers relate these Russian names to a specific genus or species but no systematic investigation has been done to verify it and there is huge confusion for consumers to obtain the right softwood. According to differences in applicability and end-use of different softwoods, not knowing the genus/species of purchased timber can be problematic. Hence, the aims of this research were to survey the sawn softwood market in Iran, in terms of abundance and identification of different woods.
Materials and Methods: 25 different softwood pieces were collected from the Ports and Maritime Organization of Guilan as well as 10 big lumberyards in Tehran and Karaj. Those wood sellers who did not discriminate between softwood types and sell all of them under the general name of "Russian wood" were excluded. The collected woods were investigated macroscopically and after preparing microscopic slides and picturing, the anatomical features of samples were extracted according to the IAWA list of microscopic features for softwood identification. Then, genus or species of wood was identified based on the combination of proposed methods.
Results: The most abundant softwoods in the Iran market were respectively, Yulka, Sasna, and Leastvinitsa while true fir was remarkably less common. Other than true fir, imported softwoods were in good accordance with the corresponding genus/species attributed to each Russian name. Eight out of ten Yulka samples were identified as Picea sp.; six out of seven Sasna samples were identified as Pinus sylvestris; and all of three Leastvinitsa pieces were of the species Larix sibirica. However, regarding true fir (Abies sp.), considerable discrepancies existed. Some wood sellers entitled all purchasable softwoods as "fir" and did not discriminate between them. Among four sources who acknowledged that fir is an exclusive type of wood, half of the samples were actually pine.
Conclusion: Macroscopic features of softwoods, e.g. color, texture, sheen or luster, size and frequency of resin canals, the transition from earlywood to latewood, and presence of pitch pockets in longitudinal planes are not reliable properties for wood identification and precise identification of these woods entitles a microscopic investigation. On a macroscopic scale, the only decisive feature is the presence/absence of the resin canals in the transverse plane, which can be used to easily isolate true fir from the rest of the softwoods in the Iran market. On a microscopic scale, Scots pine having big cross-field pitting can simply be separated from two other woods also bearing resin canals i.e. spruce and larch. However, two latter softwoods cannot readily be distinguished from each other. Overall, it can be concluded that although Russian names of softwoods in Iran are somewhat correctly applied to the corresponding sawn lumbers but popularizing equivalent long-lasting Persian terms is recommended to avoid confusion and discrepancies
