Advertisement

Regional Environmental Change

, Volume 17, Issue 1, pp 49–64 | Cite as

Accurate modeling of harvesting is key for projecting future forest dynamics: a case study in the Slovenian mountains

  • Marco Mina
  • Harald Bugmann
  • Matija Klopcic
  • Maxime Cailleret
Original Article

Abstract

Maintaining the provision of multiple forest ecosystem services requires to take into consideration forest sensitivity and adaptability to a changing environment. In this context, dynamic models are indispensable to assess the combined effects of management and climate change on forest dynamics. We evaluated the importance of implementing different approaches for simulating forest management in the climate-sensitive gap model ForClim and compared its outputs with forest inventory data at multiple sites across the European Alps. The model was then used to study forest dynamics in representative silver fir–European beech stands in the Dinaric Mountains (Slovenia) under current management and different climate scenarios. On average, ForClim accurately predicted the development of basal area and stem numbers, but the type of harvesting algorithm used and the information for stand initialization are key elements that must be defined carefully. Empirical harvesting functions that rigorously impose the number and size of stems to remove fail to reproduce stand dynamics when growth is just slightly under- or overestimated, and thus should be substituted by analytical thinning algorithms that are based on stochastic distribution functions. Long-term simulations revealed that both management and climate change negatively impact conifer growth and regeneration. Under current climate, most of the simulated stands were dominated by European beech at the end of the simulation (i.e., 2150 AD), due to the decline of silver fir and Norway spruce caused mainly by harvesting. This trend was amplified under climate change as growth of European beech was favored by higher temperatures, in contrast to drought-induced growth reductions in both conifers. This forest development scenario is highly undesired by local managers who aim at preserving conifers with high economic value. Overall, our results suggest that maintaining a considerable share of conifers in these forests may not be feasible under climate change, especially at lower elevations where foresters should consider alternative management strategies.

Keywords

Mountain forests Climate change Gap model ForClim Business-As-Usual management Forest inventory data 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the ARANGE project within the European Commission’s 7th Framework Program (Grant Agreement No. 289437). The authors would like to thank all members of the Forest Ecology group at ETH Zürich, especially Ché Elkin for valuable suggestions, Dominic Michel for the help with programming the management submodel, and Nicolas Bircher for useful discussions on the ForClim model. We are grateful to local foresters in the Snežnik area who made the data available and to Andrej Boncina, the leader of the Slovenian team within the ARANGE consortium, for making this study possible. We are thankful to two anonymous reviewers and to the guest editor Manfred J. Lexer who helped to improve the quality of the paper.

Supplementary material

10113_2015_902_MOESM1_ESM.docx (2.4 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 2487 kb)
10113_2015_902_MOESM2_ESM.docx (156 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 155 kb)
10113_2015_902_MOESM3_ESM.docx (1.6 mb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOCX 1644 kb)

References

  1. Arii K, Caspersen JP, Jones TA, Thomas SC (2008) A selection harvesting algorithm for use in spatially explicit individual-based forest simulation models. Ecol Model 211:251–266. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2007.09.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bircher N, Cailleret M, Bugmann H (2015) The agony of choice: different empirical mortality models lead to sharply different future forest dynamics. Ecol Appl 25:1303–1318. doi: 10.1890/14-1462.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Boncina A (2011) History, current status and future prospects of uneven-aged forest management in the Dinaric region: an overview. Forestry 84:467–478. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cpr023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bravo F, LeMay V, Jandl R, Gadow K (2008) Managing forest ecosystems: the challenge of climate change. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bugmann H (1994) On the ecology of mountainous forests in a changing climate: a simulation study. Ph.D. thesis 10638, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH)Google Scholar
  6. Bugmann HKM (1996) A simplified forest model to study species composition along climate gradients. Ecology 77:2055–2074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bugmann H (2001) A review of forest gap models. Clim Change 51:259–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bugmann H (2014) Forests in a greenhouse atmosphere: predicting the unpredictable? In: Coomes DA, Burslem DFRP, Simonson WD (eds) Forests and global Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 359–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bugmann HKM, Solomon AM (2000) Explaining forest composition and biomass across multiple biogeographical regions. Ecol Appl 10:95–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cailleret M, Davi H (2011) Effects of climate on diameter growth of co-occurring Fagus sylvatica and Abies alba along an altitudinal gradient. Trees Struct Funct 25:265–276. doi: 10.1007/s00468-010-0503-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cailleret M, Heurich M, Bugmann H (2014) Reduction in browsing intensity may not compensate climate change effects on tree species composition in the Bavarian Forest National Park. For Ecol Manag 328:179–192. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2014.05.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carnicer J, Coll M, Ninyerola M, Pons X, Sanchez G, Penuelas J (2011) Widespread crown condition decline, food web disruption, and amplified tree mortality with increased climate change-type drought. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108:1474–1478. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1010070108 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Christensen JH, B. Hewitson, A. Busuioc, A. Chen, X. Gao, I. Held, R. Jones, R.K. Kolli, W.-T. Kwon, R. Laprise, V. Magaña Rueda, L. Mearns, C.G. Menéndez, J. Räisänen, A. Rinke, Sarr. A (2007) Regional climate projections. In: Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  14. Diaci J, Rozenbergar D, Boncina A (2010) Stand dynamics of Dinaric old-growth forest in Slovenia: are indirect human influences relevant? Plant Biosyst Int J Deal Aspects Plant Biol 144:194–201. doi: 10.1080/11263500903560785 Google Scholar
  15. Diaci J, Rozenbergar D, Anic I, Mikac S, Saniga M, Kucbel S, Visnjic C, Ballian D (2011) Structural dynamics and synchronous silver fir decline in mixed old-growth mountain forests in Eastern and Southeastern Europe. Forestry 84:479–491. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cpr030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Didion M, Kupferschmid AD, Bugmann H (2009a) Long-term effects of ungulate browsing on forest composition and structure. For Ecol Manag 258(Supplement):S44–S55. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.06.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Didion M, Kupferschmid AD, Zingg A, Fahse L, Bugmann H (2009b) Gaining local accuracy while not losing generality—extending the range of gap model applications. Can J Forest Res 39:1092–1107. doi: 10.1139/X09-041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ditzer T, Glauner R, Forster M, Kohler P, Huth A (2000) The process-based stand growth model Formix 3-Q applied in a GIS environment for growth and yield analysis in a tropical rain forest. Tree Physiol 20:367–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. EEA (2010) Europe’s ecological backbone: recognising the true value of our mountains vol technical report no 6/2010. Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  20. Elkin C, Gutierrez AG, Leuzinger S, Manusch C, Temperli C, Rasche L, Bugmann H (2013) A 2 degrees C warmer world is not safe for ecosystem services in the European Alps. Global Change Biol 19:1827–1840. doi: 10.1111/Gcb.12156 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Elkin C, Giuggiola A, Rigling A, Bugmann H (2015) Short- and long-term efficacy of forest thinning to mitigate drought impacts in mountain forests in the European Alps. Ecol Appl 25:1083–1098. doi: 10.1890/14-0690.1.sm CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Elling W, Dittmar C, Pfaffelmoser K, Rötzer T (2009) Dendroecological assessment of the complex causes of decline and recovery of the growth of silver fir (Abies alba Mill.) in Southern Germany. For Ecol Manag 257:1175–1187. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.10.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fichtner A, Sturm K, Rickert C, von Oheimb G, Hardtle W (2013) Crown size-growth relationships of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) are driven by the interplay of disturbance intensity and inter-specific competition. For Ecol Manag 302:178–184. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.03.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ficko A, Poljanec A, Boncina A (2011) Do changes in spatial distribution, structure and abundance of silver fir (Abies alba Mill.) indicate its decline? For Ecol Manag 261:844–854. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.12.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Fontes L, Bontemps JD, Bugmann H, Van Oijen M, Gracia C, Kramer K, Lindner M, Rotzer T, Skovsgaard JP (2010) Models for supporting forest management in a changing environment. For Syst 19:8–29Google Scholar
  26. Garman SL, Hansen AJ, Urban DL, Lee PF (1992) Alternative silvicultural practices and diversity of animal habitat in Western Oregon - a computer-simulation approach. In: Luker P (ed) Proceedings of the 1992 summer computer simulation conference: twenty-fourth annual summer computer simulation conference. Proceedings of the summer computer simulation conference, pp 777–781Google Scholar
  27. Guillemot J, Delpierre N, Vallet P, Francois C, Martin-Stpaul NK, Soudani K, Nicolas M, Badeau V, Dufrene E (2014) Assessing the effects of management on forest growth across France: insights from a new functional-structural model. Ann Bot. doi: 10.1093/aob/mcu059 Google Scholar
  28. Hahn K, Fanta J (2001) Contemporary beech forest management in Europe: working report 1 vol deliverable 4 of the Nat-Man Project Produced under Work-Package 11 2001. University of CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  29. Heuze P, Schnitzler A, Klein F (2005) Is browsing the major factor of silver fir decline in the Vosges Mountains of France? For Ecol Manag 217:219–228. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2005.06.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Holm JA, Shugart HH, Van Bloem SJ, Larocque GR (2012) Gap model development, validation, and application to succession of secondary subtropical dry forests of Puerto Rico. Ecol Model 233:70–82. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.03.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jiang J, Peng CH, Apps MJ, Zhang YL, Woodard PM, Wang ZM (1999) Modelling the net primary productivity of temperate forest ecosystems in China with a GAP model. Ecol Model 122:225–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Keane RE, Austin M, Field C, Huth A, Lexer MJ, Peters D, Solomon A, Wyckoff P (2001) Tree mortality in gap models: application to climate change. Clim Change 51:509–540. doi: 10.1023/A:1012539409854 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kimmins JP, Welham C, Seely B, Meitner M, Rempe R, Sullivan T (2005) Science in forestry: why does it sometimes disappoint or even fail us? Forest Chron 81:723–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Klopcic M, Boncina A (2011) Stand dynamics of silver fir (Abies alba Mill.)-European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) forests during the past century: a decline of silver fir? Forestry 84:259–271. doi: 10.1093/forestry/cpr011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Klopcic M, Jerina K, Boncina A (2010) Long-term changes of structure and tree species composition in Dinaric uneven-aged forests: are red deer an important factor? Eur J For Res 129:277–288. doi: 10.1007/s10342-009-0325-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Knoke T, Ammer C, Stimm B, Mosandl R (2008) Admixing broadleaved to coniferous tree species: a review on yield, ecological stability and economics. Eur J For Res 127:89–101. doi: 10.1007/s10342-007-0186-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kunstler G, Allen RB, Coomes DA, Canham CD, Wright EF (2013) Sustainable management, earthquake disturbances, and transient dynamics: modelling timber harvesting impacts in mixed-species forests. Ann For Sci 70:287–298. doi: 10.1007/s13595-012-0256-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lasch P, Badeck FW, Suckow F, Lindner M, Mohr P (2005) Model-based analysis of management alternatives at stand and regional level in Brandenburg (Germany). For Ecol Manag 207:59–74. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ligot G, Balandier P, Courbaud B, Claessens H (2014) Forest radiative transfer models: which approach for which application? Can J For Res 44:391–403. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2013-0494 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lin CJ, Paro K (2011) A shifting algorithm to simulate thinnings from below and above. Comput Electron Agric 75:71–74. doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2010.09.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lindner M (2000) Developing adaptive forest management strategies to cope with climate change. Tree Physiol 20:299–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Lindner M, Lasch P, Erhard M (2000) Alternative forest management strategies under climatic change—prospects for gap model applications in risk analyses. Silva Fenn 34:101–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lindner M, Maroschek M, Netherer S, Kremer A, Barbati A, Garcia-Gonzalo J, Seidl R, Delzon S, Corona P, Kolstrom M, Lexer MJ, Marchetti M (2010) Climate change impacts, adaptive capacity, and vulnerability of European forest ecosystems. For Ecol Manag 259:698–709. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.09.023 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mäkelä A, Landsberg J, Ek AR, Burk TE, Ter-Mikaelian M, Agren GI, Oliver CD, Puttonen P (2000) Process-based models for forest ecosystem management: current state of the art and challenges for practical implementation. Tree Physiol 20:289–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Monserud RA (2003) Evaluating Forest Models in a Sustainable Forest Management Context. Forest Biometry 1:35–47Google Scholar
  46. Moore AD (1989) On the maximum growth equation used in forest gap simulation-models. Ecol Model 45:63–67. doi: 10.1016/0304-3800(89)90100-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Morin X, Fahse L, Scherer-Lorenzen M, Bugmann H (2011) Tree species richness promotes productivity in temperate forests through strong complementarity between species. Ecol Lett 14:1211–1219. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2011.01691.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Neuner S, Albrecht A, Cullmann D, Engels F, Griess VC, Hahn WA, Hanewinkel M, Härtl F, Kölling C, Staupendahl K, Knoke T (2015) Survival of Norway spruce remains higher in mixed stands under a dryer and warmer climate. Global Change Biol 21:935–946. doi: 10.1111/gcb.12751 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Nicotra AB, Atkin OK, Bonser SP, Davidson AM, Finnegan EJ, Mathesius U, Poot P, Purugganan MD, Richards CL, Valladares F, van Kleunen M (2010) Plant phenotypic plasticity in a changing climate. Trends Plant Sci 15:684–692. doi: 10.1016/j.tplants.2010.09.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Nykanen M-L, Peltola H, Quine C, Kellomaki S, Broadgate M (1997) Factors affecting snow damage of trees with particular reference to European conditions. Silva Fenn 31:193–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Oliva J, Colinas C (2007) Decline of silver fir (Abies alba Mill.) stands in the Spanish Pyrenees: role of management, historic dynamics and pathogens. For Ecol Manag 252:84–97. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2007.06.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Pabst RJ, Goslin MN, Garman SL, Spies TA (2008) Calibrating and testing a gap model for simulating forest management in the Oregon Coast Range. For Ecol Manag 256:958–972. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.05.046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Peng CH (2000) Growth and yield models for uneven-aged stands: past, present and future. For Ecol Manag 132:259–279. doi: 10.1016/S0378-1127(99)00229-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Poljanec A, Ficko A, Boncina A (2010) Spatiotemporal dynamic of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) in Slovenia, 1970–2005. For Ecol Manag 259:2183–2190. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2009.09.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Powers MD, Kolka RK, Bradford JB, Palik BJ, Fraver S, Jurgensen MF (2012) Carbon stocks across a chronosequence of thinned and unmanaged red pine (Pinus resinosa) stands. Ecol Appl 22:1297–1307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pretzsch H, Grote R, Reineking B, Rotzer T, Seifert S (2008) Models for forest ecosystem management: A European perspective. Ann Bot 101:1065–1087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pretzsch H, Biber P, Schütze G, Bielak K (2014a) Changes of forest stand dynamics in Europe. Facts from long-term observational plots and their relevance for forest ecology and management. For Ecol Manag 316:65–77. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2013.07.050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Pretzsch H, Biber P, Schütze G, Uhl E, Rötzer T (2014b) Forest stand growth dynamics in Central Europe have accelerated since 1870. Nat Commun. doi: 10.1038/ncomms5967 Google Scholar
  59. Price D, Zimmermann N, van der Meer P, Lexer M, Leadley P, Jorritsma IM, Schaber J, Clark D, Lasch P, McNulty S, Wu J, Smith B (2001) Regeneration in gap models: priority issues for studying forest responses to climate change. Clim Change 51:475–508. doi: 10.1023/a:1012579107129 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Rasche L, Fahse L, Zingg A, Bugmann H (2011) Getting a virtual forester fit for the challenge of climatic change. J Appl Ecol 48:1174–1186. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02014.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rasche L, Fahse L, Zingg A, Bugmann H (2012) Enhancing gap model accuracy by modeling dynamic height growth and dynamic maximum tree height. Ecol Model 232:133–143. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2012.03.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Rasche L, Fahse L, Bugmann H (2013) Key factors affecting the future provision of tree-based forest ecosystem goods and services. Clim Change 118:579–593. doi: 10.1007/s10584-012-0664-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Rebetez M, Reinhard M (2008) Monthly air temperature trends in Switzerland 1901–2000 and 1975–2004. Theor Appl Climatol 91:27–34. doi: 10.1007/s00704-007-0296-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Ruosch M, Spahni R, Joos F, Henne PD, van der Knaap P, Tinner W (2015) Past and future evolution of Abies alba forests in Europe—comparison of a dynamic vegetation model with palaeo data and observations. Global Change Biol. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13075 Google Scholar
  65. Seidl R, Lexer MJ, Jager D, Honninger K (2005) Evaluating the accuracy and generality of a hybrid patch model. Tree Physiol 25:939–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Seidl R, Rammer W, Jäger D, Lexer MJ (2008) Impact of bark beetle (Ips typographus L.) disturbance on timber production and carbon sequestration in different management strategies under climate change. For Ecol Manag 256:209–220. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.04.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Seidl R, Schelhaas M-J, Rammer W, Verkerk PJ (2014) Increasing forest disturbances in Europe and their impact on carbon storage. Nat Clim Change 4:806–810. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2318 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Shao G, Reynolds KM (eds) (2006) Computer applications in sustainable forest management: including perspectives on collaboration and integration. In: Managing forest ecosystems, vol 11. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  69. Shugart HH (ed) (1984) A theory of forest dynamics. The ecological implications of forest succession models. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  70. Soderbergh I, Ledermann T (2003) Algorithms for simulating thinning and harvesting in five European individual-tree growth simulators: a review. Comput Electron Agric 39:115–140. doi: 10.1016/S0168-1699(03)00022-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Spathelf P, van der Maaten E, van der Maaten-Theunissen M, Campioli M, Dobrowolska D (2014) Climate change impacts in European forests: the expert views of local observers. Ann For Sci 71:131–137. doi: 10.1007/s13595-013-0280-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Stancioiu PT, O’Hara K (2006) Regeneration growth in different light environments of mixed species, multiaged, mountainous forests of Romania. Eur J For Res 125:151–162. doi: 10.1007/s10342-005-0069-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Taylor AR, Wang JR, Kurz WA (2008) Effects of harvesting intensity on carbon stocks in eastern Canadian red spruce (Picea rubens) forests: an exploratory analysis using the CBM-CFS3 simulation model. For Ecol Manag 255:3632–3641. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2008.02.052 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Tegel W, Seim A, Hakelberg D, Hoffmann S, Panev M, Westphal T, Buntgen U (2014) A recent growth increase of European beech (Fagus sylvatica L.) at its Mediterranean distribution limit contradicts drought stress. Eur J For Res 133:61–71. doi: 10.1007/s10342-013-0737-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Temperli C, Zell J, Bugmann H, Elkin C (2013) Sensitivity of ecosystem goods and services projections of a forest landscape model to initialization data. Landscape Ecol 28:1337–1352. doi: 10.1007/s10980-013-9882-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Tinner W, Colombaroli D, Heiri O, Henne PD, Steinacher M, Untenecker J, Vescovi E, Allen JRM, Carraro G, Conedera M, Joos F, Lotter AF, Luterbacher J, Samartin S, Valsecchi V (2013) The past ecology of Abies alba provides new perspectives on future responses of silver fir forests to global warming. Ecol Monogr 83:419–439. doi: 10.1890/12-2231.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Vuletic D, Kauzlaric Z, Balenovic I, Ostoic SK (2014) Assessment of forest damage in Croatia caused by natural hazards in 2014. Seefor 5:65–79Google Scholar
  78. Wagner S, Collet C, Madsen P, Nakashizuka T, Nyland RD, Sagheb-Talebi K (2010) Beech regeneration research: from ecological to silvicultural aspects. For Ecol Manag 259:2172–2182. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2010.02.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Wehrli A, Zingg A, Bugmann H, Huth A (2005) Using a forest patch model to predict the dynamics of stand structure in Swiss mountain forests. For Ecol Manag 205:149–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Wehrli A, Weisberg P, Schönenberger W, Brang P, Bugmann H (2007) Improving the establishment submodel of a forest patch model to assess the long-term protective effect of mountain forests. Eur J For Res 126:131–145. doi: 10.1007/s10342-006-0142-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marco Mina
    • 1
  • Harald Bugmann
    • 1
  • Matija Klopcic
    • 2
  • Maxime Cailleret
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Environmental Sciences, Forest EcologySwiss Federal Institute of Technology, ETH ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Forestry and Renewable Forest Resources, Biotechnical FacultyUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations