本研究自2006年3 月至2008年5月於嘉藥校園人工溼地系統（以下簡稱嘉藥系統）、港尾社區自然淨水系統（以下簡稱港尾系統）、蚵寮國中人工溼地系統（以下簡稱蚵寮系統）、二行社區人工溼地系統（以下簡稱二行系統）、安順排水淨化系統（以下簡稱安順系統）及鳥松溼地公園（以下簡稱鳥松溼地）進行水質測定分析及水棲昆蟲採樣，探討各個人工溼地系統處理水質情形、水棲昆蟲發生的狀況及建立生物指標評估人工溼地水質的可行性。
水質監測參數包括溫度、pH、導電度、溶氧(Dissolved Oxygen，DO)、生化需氧量(Biochemical Oxygen Demand, BOD5)、氨氮(Ammonia Nitrogen, NH4-N)及懸浮固體(Suspended Solid, SS)等，並計算個溼地系統之河川污染指標(River pollution index, RPI)。每次採集水棲昆蟲的同時記錄當日水溫並進行水質分析監測，所採集之水棲昆蟲進行物種鑑定及計算數量，並利用分析出之水質參數及物種數與生物量計算河川污染指標及生物指標，其中生物指標包含總個體數、科級生物指標(Family-level biotic index)、分類群豐度(Richness index)、夏農-威佛歧異度指標（Shannon-Weaver diversity index）、辛普森歧異度指標（Simpson’s diversity index）及均勻度指標（Evenness index），進而將水質參數及河川污染指標與生物指標進行相關性分析與理想方程式推估。
研究結果發現，六個人工溼地的採樣點，水質分析結果與水棲昆蟲相具顯著差異。比較四個進行常態採樣系統中計算河川污染指標之四個水質參數，發現港尾系統的DO值較高及NH4-N值較低，嘉藥系統的BOD5值及SS值較低，整體水質環境以港尾系統較佳。嘉藥系統水棲昆蟲採樣共記錄6目15科15種，取樣面積之採集量為5044隻/m2，港尾系統水棲昆蟲共紀錄7目18科19種，取樣面積之採集量為14998隻/m2，蚵寮系統水棲昆蟲共記錄6目8科8種，取樣面積之採集量為477隻/m2，安順系統水棲昆蟲共記錄5目9科9種，取樣面積之採集量為544隻/m2，鳥松溼地水棲昆蟲共記錄5目5科5種，取樣面積之採集量為111隻/m2。將水質參數及生物指標進行相關性分析後，均具顯著差異性，依各個人工溼地的特性，相關的因子也不盡相同。
河川污染指標代表河川水質污染程度。計算各溼地水質參數所得之河川污染指標，由小至大依序為港尾系統、嘉藥系統、蚵寮系統及二行系統。科級生物指標的值越小代表河川水質環境良好。計算各溼地之科級生物指標，判斷溼地水質優劣順序為港尾系統、嘉藥系統及蚵寮系統。夏農-威佛歧異度指標的值越高代表採樣站中物種越多樣及豐富，按高低順序排列為港尾系統、嘉藥系統及蚵寮系統。利用以上三種方式評估水質的結果相似度高，因此應可參考現行利用生物指標評估溪流水質的方法，建立以生物指標評估人工溼地水質的模式，可使用科級生物指標或夏農-威佛歧異度指標評估水質，輔助化學分析方法進行水質整體評估。
水質參數來推估生物指標，經逐步多元迴歸分析推估理想方程式，經計算平均誤差值，選擇平均誤差值小於30%之Gleason index、Evenness index及Simpson’s diversity index等三個理想方程式應用於水質評估，如此可減少水質參數分析項目，達到整體評估水體環境的目的。
分析河川污染指標（RPI）與水棲昆蟲各目發生數量之趨勢進行水質指標生物的建立，結果以蜻蛉目、半翅目、鞘翅目及蜉蝣目結果較接近實際發生情形。若要更精確預估，宜將水棲昆蟲分類至科級後再進行相關討論。
調查發現人工溼地系統會孳生家蚊及瘧蚊，蚊蟲除了傳播疾病外也會造成對溼地附近民眾的騷擾，宜加強人工溼地的管理，以避免形成公共衛生上的問題。

This study analysis the parameters of water quality and collected the aquatic insects in the Chna constructed wetland system, Gang-Wei constructed wetland system, Ke-Liao constructed wetland system, Er-Hang constructed wetland system, An-Shun constructed wetland system and Niao-Song wetland park since March 2006 to May 2008. We related aquatic insects sampling to water quality parameters in various constructed wetland system and investigated to establish the biotic index to assess constructed wetland water quality.
The aquatic insects were collected regularly, and the monitoring parameters of water quality were recorded at the same time. In this research, we analyze the monitoring parameters of water quality including temperature, pH, conductivity, DO, BOD5, NH4-N and SS, and to calculate the river pollution index of a constructed wetland system. We counted the number and identified the species of the collected aquatic insects. We utilize the numbers and the species of the collected aquatic insects to calculate the biotic index, including the number of individual, Family-level biotic index, Richness index, Shannon-Weaver diversity index, Simpson''s diversity index and Evenness index. We wish to establish an ideal formula for the biotic index to assess the constructed wetland water quality.
The results showed that the water quality and aquatic insects of the six constructed wetlands systems were significant difference. We compared the four water quality parameters that to calculate the river pollution index of the four regular sampling system, we found that the Gang-Wei system had high DO and low NH4-N value, Chna system had better BOD5 and SS value. The Gang-Wei system had the best environment quality overall. Chna system’s aquatic insects recorded six orders, 15 family and 15 species, the number of individual per sampling area was 5044 / m2. Gang-Wei system’s aquatic insects recorded seven orders, 18 family and 19 species, the number of individual per sampling area was 14,998 / m2. Ke-Liao system’s aquatic insects recorded six orders, 8 family and 8 species, the number of individual per sampling area was 477 / m2. An-Shun system’s aquatic insects recorded five orders, 9 family and 9 species, the number of individual per sampling area was 544 / m2. Niao-Song system’s aquatic insects recorded five orders, 5 family and 5 species, the number of individual per sampling area was 111 / m2. The correlation testing of the water quality parameters and the biotic index are significant difference, depending on the various characteristics of the constructed wetland system.
The river pollution index (RPI) was used to evaluate the river water pollution levels. The river pollution index (RPI) of Gang-Wei system, Chna system, Ke-Liao system and Er-Hang system were progressive increase. The Family-level biotic index was to evaluate the water quality, the Gang-Wei system is better than the Chna system, and the Ke-Liao system is the worse. The higher Shannon-Weaver diversity index value represented the more species diversity and abundance. The Shannon-Weaver diversity index value of Gang-Wei system, Chna system, and Ke-Liao system were reduce progressively. Applied these methods to evaluate water quality had the same results. We were able to refer the current use of the biotic index to assess stream water quality methods, and to establish the biotic index to assess constructed wetland water quality. The potential biotic indexes were Family-level biotic index and Shannon-Weaver diversity index. These methods could assist chemical analysis to assess the whole water quality.
The multiple gradually regression analysis was to establish an ideal formula for water quality parameters to estimate the Gleason index, Evenness index andSimpson’s diversity index. The results were the same as the utility of river pollution index. It could reduce water quality parameters analysis project, and assess the overall water environment.
Analyze the river pollution index (RPI) and the individuals of various orders correlation to establish the biological indicators. The result was that the Odonata, Hemiptera, Coleoptera and Ephemerida were the candidate of the biological indicators in the constructed wetland system. It needed more large sample size and more detail aquatic insect classification to establish the more representative biological indicators.
The constructed wetland was the breeding site of Culex and Anolheles. It has the potential to increase the local adult moxquito populations. These mosquitoes could be the vectors of pathogen or to disturb the neighbor of constructed wetland. It should improve the management of constructed wetland to reduce the public health problem.

中 文 摘 要I
AbstractIV
誌 謝VII
目 錄IX
表 目 錄XIII
圖 目 錄XVI
第一章 前言1
1-1 研究動機1
1-2 研究方向與目的2
第二章 文獻回顧4
2-1 人工溼地概述4
2-1-1 人工溼地的種類4
2-1-2 人工溼地發展沿革與應用8
2-2 溼地生態中昆蟲綱的生物階層9
2-2-1 水棲昆蟲分類方式9
2-2-2 水棲昆蟲生活史11
2-3 水棲昆蟲在生物指標的應用12
2-3-1 科級生物指標12
2-3-2 生物多樣性指標14
2-4 人工溼地存在的孑孓及造成的潛在影響17
第三章 研究設備與方法19
3-1 人工溼地系統介紹19
3-1-1 嘉藥校園人工溼地系統19
3-1-2 港尾社區自然淨水系統21
3-1-3 蚵寮國中人工溼地系統24
3-1-4 二行社區人工溼地系統26
3-1-5 安順排水淨化系統28
3-1-6 鳥松溼地公園29
3-2 水質採樣31
3-2-1 嘉藥校園人工溼地系統31
3-2-2 港尾社區自然淨水系統31
3-2-3 蚵寮國中溼地系統31
3-2-4 二行社區人工溼地系統31
3-2-5 安順排水淨化系統32
3-2-6 鳥松自然溼地公園32
3-3 水質分析方法33
3-3-1 儀器設備33
3-3-2 分析方法33
3-3-3 處理效能評估35
3-4 水質污染指標分析36
3-4-1 單一指標36
3-4-2 綜合水質指標36
3-5 水棲昆蟲採樣38
3-5-1 嘉藥校園人工溼地系統38
3-5-2 港尾社區自然淨水系統38
3-5-3 蚵寮國中人工溼地系統38
3-5-4 二行社區人工溼地系統38
3-5-5 安順排水淨化系統39
3-5-6 鳥松溼地公園39
3-6 水棲昆蟲分析及科級鑑定39
3-7 生物指標分析40
3-7-1 科級生物指標40
3-7-2 生物多樣性指標43
3-8 統計分析方法45
第四章 結果與討論46
4-1 人工溼地淨化系統處理效能46
4-1-1 各項水質參數分析46
4-1-2 人工溼地淨水系統處理效能56
4-2 人工溼地水棲昆蟲與環境因子之關係58
4-2-1 水棲昆蟲各採樣點水質比較58
4-2-2 水棲昆蟲調查結果97
4-2-2-1 嘉藥校園人工溼地97
4-2-2-2 港尾社區自然淨水系統103
4-2-2-3 蚵寮國中人工溼地系統113
4-2-2-4 二行社區人工溼地119
4-2-2-5 安順排水淨化系統122
4-2-2-6 鳥松溼地公園127
4-2-2-7 各採樣站之生物指標參數整理132
4-2-3 水質與生物指標之關係135
4-3 人工溼地水棲昆蟲生物指標建立141
4-3-1 利用水質參數推估生物指標141
4-3-2 水質指標生物的建立145
4-4 人工溼地的孑孓的存在對公共衛生的潛在影響152
第五章 結論157
第六章 參考文獻159
附錄一 人工濕地所採集之水棲昆蟲照片165

1.荊樹人，人工溼地之規劃設計理念及案例介紹，生態工法人才培訓講習會，2003。
2.行政院環境保護署，水質淨化現地處理網站，http://wqp.epa.gov.tw/ecological/Taiwan.aspx?Num=03）
3.謝明奇，2005，自然溼地與人工溼地系統底泥特性之探討，嘉南藥理科技大學環境工程與科學系，碩士論文。
4.International Water Association, 2000. Constructed Wetlands for Pollution Control. Processes, Performance, Design and Operation. UWA Publishing, London.
5.洪國鑫，2002，高水力負荷下溼地污染物模式分析，國立成奶j學環境工程學系，碩士論文。
6.何茂賢，2003，以人工溼地系統處理受汙染河水中營養鹽之探討，嘉南藥理科技大學環境工程衛生系，碩士論文。
7.Billore, S. K.; Singh, N.; Sharma, J. K.; Dass, P.; Nelson, R. M., 1999, “Horizontal subsurface flow gravel bed constructed wetland with Phragmites karka in Central India.” Wat. Sci. Tech., Vol.40, Iss.3, pp.163-171.
8.Kadlec, R. H., and R. L. Knight. 1996. Treatment Wetlands. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Cole, S. 1998. The emergence of the treatment wetlands. Environ. Sci. Technol. 32: 218A-223A.
9.USEPA, 2000, Equilibrium Partitioning Sediment Guidelines （ESGs） for the Protection of Benthic Organisms: PAH Mixtures. Off. Sci. Tech., US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
10.游程凱，2003，利用穩定塘連接人工溼地處理社區污水效能之探討，嘉南藥理科技大學環境工程與科學系，碩士論文。
11.Daly, H. V. 1996. General classification and key to the orders of aquatic and semiaquatic insects, In: An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America （3rd ed.）, R. W. Merritt, and K. W. Cummins, eds., Kendall/Hunt Publishing, Dubuque, IA. 722pp.
12.Ward, J. V. 1992. Aquatic insect ecology, PartⅠ, Biology and habitat. John Wiley and Sons, New York. 456pp.
13.Glazier, D. S. 1991. The fauna of North American temperate cold springs: patterns and hypotheses. Freshwater Biology 26: 527-542.
14.Leeper, D. A., and B. E. Taylor. 1998. Insect emergence from a South Carolina （USA） temporary wetland pond, with emphasis on the Chironomidae （Diptera） . J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 17: 54-72.
15.Schütz, C., M. Wallinger, R. Burger, and L. Fureder. 2001. Effects of snow cover on the benthic fauna in a glacier-fed stream. Freshwater Biology 46: 1691-1704.
16.Butcher, J. T., P. M. Stewart, and T. P. Simon. 2003. A Benthic Community Index for streams in the northern lakes and forests ecoregion. Ecol. Indicators 3: 181-193.
17.台灣生物多樣性資訊入口http://www.taibif.org.tw/taibnet/AjaxTree/Allkingdom_taibif.php
18.Cummins, K. W. 1973. Trophic relations of aquatic insects. Ann. Rev.of Entomol. 18: 183-206.
19.Cummins, K. W., and M. J. Klug. 1979. Feeding ecology of stream invertebrates. Ann. Rev. Ecol. and Syst. 10：147-172.
20.Merritt R. W., and K. W. Cummins, eds. 1984. An Introduction to the Aquatic Insects of North America. Kendall/Hunt Publ. Co. Dubuque. Iowa. pp.722.
21.Hawkins, C. P., and J. R. Sedell. 1981. Longitudinal and seasonal changes in functional organization of macroinvertebrate communities in four Oregon streams. Ecology 62：387-397.
22.Willis, L. D., and A. C. Hendricks. 1992. Life history, growth, survivorship, and production of Hydropsyche slossonae in Mill Creek, Virginia. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 11: 290-303.
23.Hopper, K. R., P. H. Crowley, and D. Kielman. 1996. Density dependence, hatching synchrony, and without-cohort cannibalism in young dragonfly larvae. Ecology 77: 191-200.
24.Marten, M., and P. Zwick. 1989. The temperature dependence of embryonic and larval development in Protonemura intricate （Plecoptera: Nemouridae）. Freshwater Biology 22: 1-14.
25.Zwick, P. 1996. Variable egg development of Dinocras spp. （Plecoptera: Perlidae） and the stonefly seed bank theory. Freshwater Biology 35: 81-100.
26.Plafkin, J. L., M. T. Barbour, K. D. Porter, S. K. Gross, and R. M. Hughes. 1989. Rapid bioassessment protocols for use in streams and rivers--Benthic macroinvertebrates and fish: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water, Washington, D.C., EPA-440/4-89-001, pp.190.
27.徐崇斌、楊平世，”應用水棲昆蟲生物指標評估基隆河水質之研究”，中華昆蟲 17 （3）：152-161，1997。
28.Hilsenhoff, W. L. 1982. Using a biotic index to evaluate water quality in streams. Tech. Bull. Wisconsin Dept. Nat. Resour. 132. pp.22.
29.Hilsenhoff, W. L. 1988. Rapid field assessment of organic pollution with a family-level biotic index. J. N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 7 （1）：65-68.
30.Hilsenhoff, W. L. 1987. An improved biotic index of organic stream pollution. The Great Lakes Entomol. 21：9-13.
31.Hilsenhoff, W. L. 1998. A modification of the biotic index of organic stream pollution to remedy problems and permit its use throughout the year. Great Lakes Entomol. 31: 1-12.
32.Edward, O. W. （2003）. Biodiversity in the information age. Issues in Science and Technology, 19（4）, 45-46.
33.林曜松，”整合跨學們的生物多樣性研究”，科學月刊，30（6）：452-458，1999。
34.林曜松，”生物多樣性之省思”，台灣陸域生物多樣性研習班研習手冊，54-60，1999。
35.錢湘蓉 ，2005，溼地生態之生物多樣性調查與戶外教學研究以社子島為例，國立臺北教育大學，碩士論文。
36.Wilson, E.O. （1992）.The diversity of life , Cambridge : Harvard University Press.
37.楊吉宗，”談生物多樣性”，自然保育季刊，22：60-61，1998。
38.金恆鏢，”生物多樣性的價值”，科學月刊，358：459-461，1999。
39.陳鎮東、王冰潔，”臺灣的湖泊與水庫”，國立編譯館出版，1997。
40.Stilling,P.（2002）.Ecology Theories and Applications.（Four Edition） Prentice Hall,273-288.
41.楊平世、黃國靖、謝森和，”北勢溪之水棲昆蟲資源及生態調查”， 中華昆蟲，10：pp209-224，1990。
42.郭美華、丘明智、謝易霖，”以水棲昆蟲監測雪壩國家公園武陵地區溪流水質”，台灣昆蟲，24：pp339-352，2004。
43.田志仁 吳承恩、黃顯宗、汪碧涵，”以水棲昆蟲為指標生物評估台北外雙溪水質”，自然保育季刊，45：pp.38-46，2004.3。
44.彭仁君、施希健、王健平，”南仁山古湖溼地內四節浮游Cloeon marginale Hagen（Ephemeroptera:Baetidae）之稚蟲分布與其密度消長”，中華昆蟲，19：pp.217-227，1999。
45.“Identifying Aquatic Insects From Your Pond” Penobscot County Soil & Water Conservation District Natural Resources Conservation Service.
46.陳錦生，”第三章：熱帶家蚊生態及防治”IN：李學進、王俊雄編「居家害蟲生態與防治技術」，國立中興大學農業推廣中心出版，pp.37-42，2000。
47.Diemont, S.A.W. 2006. Mosquito larvae density and pollutant removal in tropical wetland treatment systems in Honduras. Environment International 32: 332-341.
48.Walton, W. E. 2003. Managing mosquitoes In Surface-Flow Constructed Treatment Wetlands. University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Davis, CA. Publ. No. 8117. pp.11.
49.Russell, R. C. 1999. Constructed wetlands and mosquitoes: health hazards and management options--an Australian perspective. Ecological Engineering 12: 107-124.
50.陳易佐，2007，大型校園人工溼地實場操作模式探討，嘉南藥理科系大學環境工程與科學系，碩士論文。
51.生活污水自然淨化系統效益評估計畫，嘉南藥理科技大學 生態工程技術研發中心，2005。
52.羅怡砥B林怡潔、荊樹人、林瑩峰、李得元、施凱鐘，”二行社區人工溼地水棲昆蟲相調查”，中華民國環境工程學會 第三十屆廢水處理技術研討會，中壢，2005。
53.陳麗瑜，2005，都會溼地公園水質淨化弁鄐帠W劃策略之研究，國立中山大學海洋環境及工程學系，碩士論文。
54.川合禎次，日本產水生昆蟲檢索圖說，東海大學出版會，1985年5月。
55.連日清，台灣蚊種檢索，藝軒圖書出版社，2004年12月第一版。
56.ROBERT W. PENNAK, Ph.D. ,Fresh-Water Invertebrates of the United States THE RONALD PRESS COMPANY , pp.488-pp.666, NEW YORK. 1953
57.貢蔡唌A昆蟲學中冊，國立中興大學農學院叢書第二號，1975年9月6號 。
58.S. M. Mandaville （Professional Lake Manage.） Benthic Macroinvertebrates in Freshwaters-Taxa Tolerance Values, Metrics, and Protocols pp.A-15-A-43
59.K.P. Reddy and E.M. D’ Angelo, 1997. Biogeochemical indicators to evaluate pollutant removal efficiency in constructed wetlands. pp.1-10.
60.Jos T.A. Verhoeven, Arthur F.M. Meuleman, 1999.“Wetlands for wastewater treatment：Opportunitiesand limitations”, Ecological Engineering 12, pp.5-12.
61.Chovanec, A., and R. Raab. 1997. Dragonflies（Insecta: Odonata）and the ecological status of newly created wetlands-examples for long-term bioindication programmes. Limnologica 27:381-392.
62.Corbet, P. S. 1993. Are odonata useful as bioindiators？Libellula 12:91-102.
63.施孟亨，成大人工溼地維護管理之研究 國立成奶j學國立成奶j學，碩士論文，2003。