Analysis of Accessibility to Family Health Centers in Antalya Using GIS

Family health centers in Turkey started to be implemented for the first time in Düzce in 2004 years within the scope of Law No. 5258. While determining the physical conditions of the places where family health centers are built, the first item in the regulation is that the building should be easily accessible. This situation shows the importance of the subject in terms of accessibility. While determining the features of the places where FHCs will be made, environmental characteristics are also taken into consideration. Environmental features are effective in determining the FHCslocation in different ways. These impacts are divided into two groups: the physical features that pavements, roads and parks can include, and the social, cultural and institutional features of neighborhoods that include local social ties and collective activities. From this point of view, the importance of the location of family health centers relative to roads and houses is understood. The aim of this study is to examine the accessibility of Family Health Centers in Konyaaltı, Antalya, on a neighborhood basis using Geographic Information Systems. Konyaaltı has 21 Family Health Centers. As a result of the analyses, it was determined that most of the neighborhoods had problems in terms of accessibility, while a very few of them did not experience problems in terms of accessibility. In terms of the total number of buildings, the ratio of buildings that are 500 meters walking distance from any family health center by using highways is 35.56%. With these rates, 3,634 of the 10,2018 buildings remain within the limits of the regulation. Finally; suggestions were made to increase accessibility to these areas.

PDF

___

Akbaş B, Morca AF, Coşkan S. 2021. Ankara, Eskişehir ve Konya İlleri Marul Üretim Alanlarında Görülen Viral Hastalık Etmenlerinin Tespiti. YYÜ TAR BİL DERG (YYU J AGR SCI) 31 (2): 387-395.
Bernal-Vicente A, Donaire L, Torre C, Gómez-Aix C, SánchezPina MA, Juarez M, Hernando Y, Aranda MA. 2018. Small RNA-Seq to Characterize Viruses Responsible of Lettuce Big Vein Disease in Spain. Frontiers in Microbiology 9, 3188, 1- 16.
Bora T, Karaca İ. 1970. Kültür bitkilerinde hastalığın ve zararın ölçülmesi. Yayın no: 167. Ege Üniv. Mat. Bornova, 44.
Candresse T, Lot H, German-Retana S, KrauseSakate R, Thomas J, Souche S, Delaunay T, Lanneau M, LeGall O. 2007.
Analysis of the serological variability of Lettuce mosaic virus using monoclonal antibodies and surface plasmon resonance technology. Journal of General Virology, 88: 2605-2610.
Colariccio A, Chaves AL, Eiras M, Chagas CM, Roggero P. 2005. Detection of Varicosavirus and Ophiovirus in lettuce associated with lettuce big-vein symptoms in Brazil. Fitopatologia Brasileira, 30(4), 416-419.
Döken MT, Açıkgöz S, Demirci E. 1993. Erzurum, Türkiye'de marulda görülen büyük damar virüsü hastalığı. Türk Fitopatoloji Dergisi, 22 (1), 41-43.
Duffus JE. 1971. Role of weeds in the incidence of virus disease. Annual Review of Phytopatology, 15:319-335.
Erkan S, Schlösser E. 1985. Virus diseases on lettuce in Turkey. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection, 92 (2), 127-131.
Erkan S, Gümüş M, Paylan İC, Duman İ, Ergün M. 2013. İzmir ili ve kullanılmış bazı kışlık sebzelerde viral etmenlerin saptanması. E.Ü. Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi, 50 (3), 311-322.
Ertunc F, Randa-Zelyut F. 2019. Virus diseases of lettuce in ankara province. International Journal of Agriculture, Forestry and Life Sciences, 3(2), 202-206.
FAO. 2021. Birleşmiş Milletler Gıda ve Tarım Örgütü. Bitkisel Üretim İstatistikleri. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC Erişim tarihi: 26 Kasım 2021.
Kamberoğlu M, Alan B. 2011. Occurrence of Tomato Spotted Wilt Virus in Lettuce in Çukurova Region of Turkey. Int. J. Agric. Biol., 13(3): 431-434.
Kurçman S. 1969. Türkiye kültür bitkilerinde virüs problemi ve çözümü üzerinde düşünceler (Basılmamış uzmanlık tezi) Moreno A, De Blas C, Biurrun R, Nebreda M, Palacios I, Duque M, Fereres A. 2004. The incidence and distribution of viruses infecting lettuce, cultivated Brassica and associated natural vegetation in Spain. Annl. Appl. Biol, 144: 339-346.
Moreno A, Fereres A. 2012. Virus diseases in lettuce in the Mediterranean basin. In (Eds.) Loebenstein G, Lecoq H, Advences in Virus Research, 577 p., First Edition, Elsevier Academic, 2012. pp.247-288.
Opatovsky I, Elbaz M, Dori I, Avraham L, Mordechai-Lebiush S, Dombrovsky A, Tsror (Lahkim) L. 2019. Control of lettuce bigvein disease by application of fungicides and crop covers. Plant Pathology,68, 790-795. https://doi.org/10.1111/ppa.12990 Özalp MO. 1964. İzmir'de sebzelerde görülen virüs hastalıkları. Yeni Desen Mat., Ankara. 22.
Özdemir S, Erilmez S. 2007. Denizli ilinde yetiştirilen biber, patlıcan ve marul üretim alanlarında bazı viral etmenlerin saptanması. Türkiye II.Bitki Koruma Kongresi Bildirileri. Isparta, s.114.
Pavan MA, Krause-Sakate R, da Silva N, Zerbini FM, Le Gall O. 2008. Virus diseases of lettuce in Brazil. Plant viruses, 2: 35- 41.
Rosello S, Diez MJ, Nuez F. 1996. Viral diseases causing the greatest economic losses to the tomato crop. I. The Tomato spotted wilt virus-a review. Scienta Horticulturae, 67: 117- 150.
Sağlam HN, Kamberoğlu MA. 2009. Identification and characterization of lettuce big vein disease (LBVD) in lettuce (Lactuca sativa) crops in Adana and Mersin provinces in Turkey. Mediterranean Agricultural Sciences, 32(3), 315- 321.
Salem N, Odeh S, Muslem MA, Tahzima R. 2020. Occurrence and partial genetic characterisation of Lettuce big-vein associated virus and Mirafiori lettuce big-vein virus infecting lettuce in Jordan. Annals Applied Biology, 177, 90-100.
Sertkaya G, Karaca F, Nurel F, Yokarıbaş H. 2009. Hatay ili marul alanlarında Marul mozaik virüsü ve Hıyar mozaik virüsünün biyolojik ve serolojik yöntemlerle araştırılması. III. Bitki Koruma Kongresi Bildirileri, 15-18 Temmuz 2009- Van.: 244.
Sertkaya G. 2015. Hatay ili marul ve ıspanak alanlarında bazı virüslerin araştırılması. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi. ISSN:1300-9362. 20(1), 7-12.
Tekinel N, Dolar MS, Sağsöz S, Salcan Y. 1969. Mersin bölgesinde ekonomik bakımdan önemli bazı sebzelerin virüsleri üzerinde araştırmalar. Bitki Koruma Bülteni, 9, 1, 37-49.
TÜİK. 2021. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. Tarım istatistikleri https://data.tuik.gov.tr/tr/ Erişim tarihi: 26 Kasım 2021. Uzunoğulları N, Beşirli G. 2011. Yedikule marul (Lactuca sativa L. var. longifolia) çeşidinde zarar yapan bazı viral etmenlerin tanılanması. Türkiye IV. Bitki Koruma Kongresi, Kahramanmaraş.
Yardımcı N, Kilic HC. 2009. Tomato spotted wilt virus in vegetable growing areas in the West mediterranean region of Turkey. African Journal of Biotechnology, 8(18), 4539-4541.
Yılmaz MA. 1981. Virus particles associated with diseases of tomato and lettuce in Turkey. Phytopathology Medit. 20: 79- 80.
Yılmaz MA, Baloğlu S, Özaslan M, Güldür ME. 1995. GAP Bölgesinde Kültür Bitkilerinde Belirlenen Virüsler. GAP Bitki Koruma Sorunları ve Çözüm Önerileri Sempozyumu, 27-29 Nisan-Şanlıurfa:241- 250
Zerbini FM, Koike ST, Gilbertson RL. 1995. Biological and molecular characterization of Lettuce mosaic potyvirus isolates from Salinas Valley of California. Phytopathology, 8: 746-752.