Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Redefinition and elaboration of river ecosystem health: perspective for river management

  • Chapter
Living Rivers: Trends and Challenges in Science and Management

Part of the book series: Developments in Hydrobiology ((DIHY,volume 187))

Abstract

This paper critically reviews developments in the conceptualization and elaboration of the River Ecosystem Health (REH) concept. Analysis of literature shows there is still no consistent meaning of the central concept Ecosystem Health, resulting in models (i.e. elaborations) that have unclear and insufficient conceptual grounds. Furthermore, a diverse terminology is associated with describing REH, resulting in confusion with other concepts. However, if the concept is to have merit and longevity in the field of river research and management, unambiguous definition of the conceptual meaning and operational domain are required. Therefore a redefinition is proposed, based on identified characteristics of health and derived from considering semantic and conceptual definitions. Based on this definition, REH has merit in a broader context of river system health that considers societal functioning next to ecological functioning. Assessment of health needs integration of measures of multiple, complementary attributes and analysis in a synthesized way. An assessment framework is proposed that assesses REH top-down as well as bottom up by combining indicators of system stress responses (i.e. condition) with indicators identifying the causative stress (i.e. stressor). The scope of REH is covered by using indicators of system activity, metabolism (vigour), resilience, structure and interactions between system components (organization). The variety of stress effects that the system may endure are covered by using biotic, chemical as well as physical stressors. Besides having a unique meaning, the REH metaphor has added value to river management by being able to mobilize scientists, practitioners and publics and seeing relationships at the level of values. It places humans at the centre of the river ecosystem, while seeking to ensure the durability of the ecosystem of which they are an integral part. Optimization of the indicator set, development of aggregation and classification methodologies, and implementation of the concept within differing international frames are considered main aims for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Allesina, S. & R. E. Ulanowicz, 2004. Cycling in ecological networks: Finn’s index revisited. Computational Biology and Chemistry 28: 227–233.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • An, K.-G., S. S. Park & J.-Y. Shin, 2002. An evaluation of a river health using the index of biological integrity along with relations to chemical and habitat conditions. Environment International 28: 411–420.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, 1992. Australian Water Quality Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Waters, National Water Quality Management Strategy. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council, Canberra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bayne, B. L., 1987. The Effects of Stress and Pollution on Marine Animals. Praeger, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belaousoff, S. & P. G. Kevan, 2003. Are there ecological foundations for ecosystem health? The Environmentalist 23: 255–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J., 2002. Investing in river health. Water Science and Technology 45: 85–90.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bij de Vaate, A., K. Jazdzewski, H. A. M. Ketelaars, S. Gollasch & G. van der Velde, 2002. Geographical patterns in range extension of Ponto-Caspian macroinvertebrate species in Europe. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 59: 1159–1174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BKH, 1994. Chemische waterkwaliteitsindices: internationale inventarisatie van technieken en methodieken voor aggregatie en presentatie van chemische waterkwaliteitsgegevens. RO190101/5818L/R5. BKH Adviesbureau, Delft (in Dutch).

    Google Scholar 

  • Boon, P. J., 1998. River restoration in five dimensions. Aquatic conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 8: 257–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boon, P. J., 2000. The development of integrated methods for assessing river condition value. Hydrobiologia 422/423: 413–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boulton, A. J., 1999. An overview of river health assessment: philosophies, practice, problems and diagnosis. Freshwater Biology 41: 469–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer, R., S. Georgiou & R. K. Turner, 2003. Integrated assessment and sustainable water and wetland management. A review of concepts and methods. Integrated Assessment 4: 172–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. M., N. I. McClelland, R. A. Deininger & R. G. Tozer, 1970. A water quality index-do we dare? Water and Sewage Works 117: 339–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunn, S. E., P. M. Davies & T. D. Mosch, 1999. Ecosystem measures of river health and their response to riparian and catchment degradation. Freshwater Biology 41: 333–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callicot, J. B., J. B. Crowder & K. Mumford, 1999. Current normative concepts in conservation. Conservation Biology 13: 22–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calow, P., 1995. Ecosystem health-a critical analysis of concepts. In Rapport, D. J., C. Gaudet & P. Calow (eds), Evaluating and Monitoring the Health of Large-scale Ecosystems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 33–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R. & B. C. Patten, 1995. Defining and predicting sustainability. Ecological Economics 15: 193–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R. & M. Mageau, 1999. What is a healthy ecosystem? Aquatic Ecology 33: 105–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R., B. Norton & B. J. Haskell, (eds), 1992. Ecosystem Health-New Goals for Environmental Management. Island Press, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costanza, R., R. d’Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, R. V. O′Neill, J. Paruelo, R. G. Raskin, P. Sutton & M. van den Belt, 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253–260.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Couillard, D. & Y. Lefebvre, 1985. Analysis of water quality indices. Journal of EnvironmentalManagement 21: 161–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M. A. & L. B. Slobodkin, 2004. The science and values of restoration ecology. Restoration Ecology 12: 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission, 2000. Directive 2000/60/EC, Establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. European Commission PE-CONS 3639/1/100 Rev 1, Luxembourg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Environmental Protection Agency, 1998. Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment. U.S Environmental Protection Agency EPA/630/R-95/002F, Washington DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairweather, P. G., 1999. State of environment indicators of ‘river health’: exploring the metaphor. Freshwater Biology 41: 211–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forget, G. & J. Lebel, 2001. An ecosystem approach to human health. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health 7(Supplement): 3–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, B. T., B. Maher & I. Lawrence, 1999. New generation water quality guidelines for ecosystem protection. Freshwater Biology 41: 347–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, J., 2001. The natural economy. Nature 413: 463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hering, D., O. Moog, L. Sandin & P. F. M. Verdonschot, 2004. Overview and application of the AQEM assessment system. Hydrobiologia 516: 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, M. O., 1973. Diversity and eveness: a unifying notation and its consequences. Ecology 54: 427–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hohls, D. R., 1996. National Biomonitoring Programme for Riverine Ecosystems: Framework Document for the Programme. NBP Report Series No. 1, Institute for Water Quality Studies, Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Pretoria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holling, C. S., 1973. Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Reviews of Ecology and Systematics 4: 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling, C. S., 1987. Simplifying the complex: the paradigms of ecological function and structure. European Journal of Operational Restoration 30: 139–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holling, C. S., 2001. Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems 4: 390–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Innis, S. A., R. J. Naiman & S. R. Elliot, 2000. Indicators and assessment methods for measuring the ecological integrity of semi-aquatic terrestrial environments. Hydrobiologia 422/ 423: 111–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, S. E., 1995. Exergy and ecological buffer capacities as measures of ecosystem health. Ecosystem Health 1: 150–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Junk, W. J., P. B. Bailey & R. E. Sparks, 1989. The flood pulse concept in river floodplain systems. In Dodge, D. P. (ed.), Proceedings of the Internationals Large River Symposium (LARS). Canadian Special Publications of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 106: 110–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. R., 1991. Biological integrity: a long-neglected aspect of water resource management. Ecological Applications 1: 66–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karr, J. R., 1999. Defining and measuring river health. Freshwater Biology 41: 221–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klepper, O., J. Bakker, T. P. Traas & D. Van de Meent, 1998. Mapping the Potentially Affected Fraction (PAF) of species as a basis for comparison of ecotoxicological risks between substances and regions. Journal of Hazardous Materials 61: 337–344.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kuiper, J., 1998. Landscape quality based upon diversity, coherence and continuity. Landscape planning at different planning-levels in the River area of the Netherlands. Landscape and Urban Planning 43: 91–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lackey, R. T., 2001. Values, policy, and ecosystem health. BioScience 51: 437–443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenders, H. J. R., 2003. Environmental rehabilitation of the river landscape in the Netherlands. A blend of five dimensions. Ph.D.-thesis, University of Nijmegen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lenders, H. J. R. & L. Knippenberg, 2005. The temporal and social dimensions of river rehabilitation: towards a multidimensional research perspective. Archiv für Hydrobiologie (Large Rivers Supplement) 155/15: 119–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leuven, R. S. E. W. & I. Poudevigne, 2002. Riverine landscape dynamics and ecological risk assessment. Freshwater Biology 47: 845–865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leuven, R. S. E. W., J. L. M. Haans, A. J. Hendriks, R. A. C. Lock & S. E. Wendelaar Bonga, 1998. Assessing cumulative impacts of multiple stressors on river systems. In Nienhuis, P. H., R. S. E. W. Leuven & A. M. J. Ragas (eds), New Concepts for Sustainable Management of River Basins. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, 241–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leuven, R. S. E. W., A. J. M. Smits & P. H. Nienhuis, 2000. From integrated approaches to sustainable river basin management. In Smits, A. J. M., P. H. Nienhuis & R. S. E. W. Leuven (eds), New Approaches to River Management. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, 329–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maddock, I., 1999. The importance of physical habitat assessment for evaluating river health. Freshwater Biology 41: 373–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mageau, M. T., R. Costanza & R. E. Ulanowicz, 1998. Quantifying the trends expected in developing ecosystems. Ecological Modelling 112: 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maher, W., G. E. Batley & I. Lawrence, 1999. Assessing the health of sediment ecosystems: use of chemical measurements. Freshwater Biology 41: 361–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • May, R. M., 1977. Thresholds and breakpoints in ecosystems with a multiplicity of stable states. Nature 269: 471–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mekong River Commission, 2003. Annual Report. Mekong River Commission, Phnom Penh (available online http://www.mrcmekong.org).

  • Meyer, J. L., 1997. Stream health: incorporating the human dimension to advance stream ecology. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 16: 439–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miltner, R. J. & E. T. Rankin, 1998. Primary nutrients and the biotic integrity of rivers and streams. Freshwater Biology 40: 145–158.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Moog, O. & A. Chovanec, 2000. Assessing the ecological integrity of rivers: walking the line among ecological, political and administrative interests. Hydrobiologia 422/423: 99–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naveh, Z., 2001. Ten major premises for a holistic conception of multifunctional landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 57: 269–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nienhuis, P. H. & R. S. E. W. Leuven, 1998. Ecological concepts for the sustainable management of lowland river basins: a review. In Nienhuis, P. H., R. S. E. W. Leuven & A. M. J. Ragas (eds), New Concepts for Sustainable Management of River Basins. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden, 7–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norris, R. H. & M. C. Thoms, 1999. What is river health? Freshwater Biology 41: 197–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, R. H. & C. P. Hawkins, 2000. Monitoring river health. Hydrobiologia 435: 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oberdorff, T., D. Pont, B. Hugueny & J. P. Porcher, 2002. Development and validation of a fish-based index for the assessment of ―river health’ in France. Freshwater Biology 47: 1720–1734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Odum, E. P., 1969. The strategy of ecosystem development. Science 164: 262–270.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Odum, E. P., 1985. Trends expected in stressed ecosystems. Bioscience 35: 419–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickett, J. P. (ed.) 2000. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, (4th edn). Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickett, S. T. A. & L. Cadenasso, 2002. The ecosystem as a multidimensional concept: meaning, model, and metaphor. Ecosystems 5: 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pickett, S. T. A, W. R. Burch Jr, T. W. Foresman, J. M. Grove & R. Rowntree, 1997. A conceptual framework for the study of human ecosystems. Urban Ecosystems 1: 185–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pimm, S. L., 1984. The complexity and stability of ecosystems. Nature 307: 321–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poff, N. L. & J. D. Allan, 1995. Functional organization of stream fish assemblages in relation to hydrological variability. Ecology 76: 606–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, P. & M. Huxham, 1998. The European Water Framework Directive: a new era in the management of aquatic ecosystem health? Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 8: 773–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poudevigne, I., D. Alard, R. S. E. W. Leuven & P. H. Nienhuis, 2002. A system approach to river restoration: a case study in the lower Seine valley, France. River Research and Applications 18: 239–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rankin, E. T., 1989. The qualitative habitat evaluation index (QHEI): rationale, methods, and application. Division of Water Quality Planning & Assessment, Ecological Assessment Section, Columbus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapport, D. J., H. A. Regier & T. C. Hutchinson, 1985. Ecosystem behavior under stress. American Naturalist 125: 617–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapport, D. J., R. Costanza & A. J. McMichael, 1998a. Assessing ecosystem health: challenges at the interface of social, natural and health sciences. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 13: 397–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapport, D. J., C. Gaudet, J. R. Karr, J. S. Baron, C. Bohlen, W. Jackson, B. Jones, R. J. Naiman, B. Norton & M. M. Pollock, 1998b. Evaluating landscape health: interacting societal goals and biophysical process. Journal of Environmental Management 53: 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rapport, D. J., G. Böhm, D. Buckingham, J. Cairns Jr., R. Costanza, J. R. Karr, H. A. M. de Kruijf, R. Levins, A. J. McMichael, N. O. Nielsen & W. G. Whitford, 1999. Ecosystem health: the concept, the ISEH, and the important tasks ahead. Ecosystem Health 5: 82–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter, B. D., J. V. Baumgartner, J. Powell & D. P. Braun, 1996. A method for assessing hydrologic alteration within ecosystems. Conservation Biology 10: 1163–1174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richter, B. D., J. V. Baumgartner, R. Wigington & D. P. Braun, 1997. How much water does a river need? Freshwater Biology 37: 231–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ripl, W., J. Pokorný, M. Eiseltová & S. Ridgill, 1994. A holistic approach to the structure and function of wetlands and their degradation. International Waterfowl and Wetlands Research Bureau Publication 32: 16–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, K. & H. Biggs, 1999. Integrating indicators, endpoints and value systems in strategic management of the rivers of the Kruger National Park. Freshwater Biology 41: 439–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simberloff, D., 1998. Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: is single-species management passéin the landscape era? Biological Conservation 93: 247–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, E. H., 1949. Measurements of diversity. Nature 163: 688.

    Google Scholar 

  • Society for Ecological Restoration Science & Policy Working Group (SER), 2004. The SER Primer on Ecological Restoration (available online http://www.ser.org).

  • Tansley, A. G., 1935. The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology 16: 284–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tennant, D. L., 1976. Instream flow regimens for fish, wildlife, recreation and related environmental resources. Fisheries 1: 6–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tockner, K., F. Malard & J. V. Ward, 2000. An extension of the flood pulse concept. Hydrological Processes 14: 2861–2883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Townsend, C. R. & R. H. Riley, 1999. Assessment of river health: accounting for perturbation pathways in physical and ecological space. Freshwater Biology 41: 393–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Traas, T. P., D. Van de Meent, L. Posthuma, T. H. M. Hamers, B. J. Kater, D. De Zwart & T. Aldenberg, 2002. Potentially affected fraction as measure of toxic pressure on ecosystems. In Posthuma, L., G. W. Suter II, & T. P. Trass (eds), Species Sensitivity Distributions in Ecotoxicology. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, 315–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, M. G., R. Costanza & F. H. Sklar, 1989. Methods to compare spatial patterns for landscape modelling and analysis. Ecological Modelling 48: 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulanowicz, R. E., 1986. Growth and development: ecosystems phenomenology. Springer-Verlag, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van der Velde, G., R. S. E. W. Leuven & I. Nagelkerken, 2004. Types of river ecosystems. 2.7.2.4. In Dooge, J. C. I. (ed.), Fresh Surface Water, Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS). EOLSS Publishers, Oxford (available online http://www.eolss.net).

    Google Scholar 

  • Vannote, R. L., G. W. Minshall, K. W. Cummins, J. R. Sedell & C. E. Cushin, 1980. The river continuum concept. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 37: 130–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, J. V. & J. A. Stanford, 1995. The serial discontinuity concept: extending the model to floodplain rivers-regulated rivers. Research and Management 10: 159–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, J. V., C. T. Robinson & K. Tockner, 2002. Applicability of ecological theory to riverine ecosystems. Verhandlungen Internationale Vereinigung für Theoretische und Angewandte Limnologie 26: 443–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wells, P. G., 2003. Assessing health of the Bay of Fundy-concepts and framework. Marine Pollution Bulletin 46: 1059–1077.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wichert, G. A. & D. J. Rapport, 1998. Fish community structure as a measure of degradation and rehabilitation of riparian systems in an agricultural drainage basin. Environmental Management 22: 425–443.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987. Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, F.-L., S. E. Jørgensen & S. Tao, 1999. Ecological indicators for assessing freshwater ecosystem health. Ecological Modelling 116: 77–106.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, F.-L., S. Tao, R. W. Dawson, P.-G. Li & J. Cao, 2001. Lake ecosystem health assessment. Water Research 35: 3157–3167.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Young, R. G., C. R. Townsend & C. D. Matthaei, 2004. Functional indicators of river ecosystem health-an interim guide for use in New Zealand. Report 870, Cawthron Institute, Nelson.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Studies, Institute for Wetland and Water Research, Faculty of Science, Radboud University Nijmegen, P.O.Box 9010, 6500 GL, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    P. Vugteveen, R. S. E. W. Leuven, M. A. J. Huijbregts & H. J. R. Lenders

Authors
  1. P. Vugteveen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. S. E. W. Leuven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. A. J. Huijbregts
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. H. J. R. Lenders
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Science, Institute for Wetland and Water Research, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    R. S. E. W. Leuven  & A. M. J. Ragas  & 

  2. Centre for Water and Society, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    A. J. M. Smits

  3. Erasmus Centre for Sustainability and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    A. J. M. Smits

  4. Department of Animal Ecology and Ecophysiology, Institute for Wetland and Water Research, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    G. van der Velde

  5. Members of the Netherlands Centre for River Studies (NCR), Delft, The Netherlands

    R. S. E. W. Leuven , A. M. J. Ragas , A. J. M. Smits  & G. van der Velde , ,  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer2006

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Vugteveen, P., Leuven, R.S.E.W., Huijbregts, M.A.J., Lenders, H.J.R. (2006). Redefinition and elaboration of river ecosystem health: perspective for river management. In: Leuven, R.S.E.W., Ragas, A.M.J., Smits, A.J.M., van der Velde, G. (eds) Living Rivers: Trends and Challenges in Science and Management. Developments in Hydrobiology, vol 187. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-5367-3_19

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation