Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
Research Article

A multitaxa assessment of the effectiveness of agri-environmental schemes for biodiversity management

View ORCID ProfileFabian A. Boetzl, View ORCID ProfileJochen Krauss, View ORCID ProfileJonathan Heinze, View ORCID ProfileHannes Hoffmann, Jan Juffa, View ORCID ProfileSebastian König, Elena Krimmer, Maren Prante, View ORCID ProfileEmily A. Martin, View ORCID ProfileAndrea Holzschuh, and View ORCID ProfileIngolf Steffan-Dewenter
  1. aDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;
  2. bDepartment of Landscape Ecology, Institute for Natural Resource Conservation, University of Kiel, 24118 Kiel, Germany;
  3. cZoological Biodiversity, Institute of Geobotany, Leibniz University of Hannover, 30167 Hannover, Germany

See allHide authors and affiliations

PNAS March 9, 2021 118 (10) e2016038118; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2016038118
Fabian A. Boetzl
aDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Fabian A. Boetzl
  • For correspondence: fabian.boetzl@uni-wuerzburg.de
Jochen Krauss
aDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jochen Krauss
Jonathan Heinze
aDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jonathan Heinze
Hannes Hoffmann
bDepartment of Landscape Ecology, Institute for Natural Resource Conservation, University of Kiel, 24118 Kiel, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Hannes Hoffmann
Jan Juffa
aDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sebastian König
aDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Sebastian König
Elena Krimmer
aDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Maren Prante
aDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Emily A. Martin
aDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;
cZoological Biodiversity, Institute of Geobotany, Leibniz University of Hannover, 30167 Hannover, Germany
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Emily A. Martin
Andrea Holzschuh
aDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Andrea Holzschuh
Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter
aDepartment of Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany;
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter
  1. Edited by Robert John Scholes, University of the Witwatersrand, Wits, South Africa, and approved January 18, 2021 (received for review July 30, 2020)

This article has been updated
  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Significance

The loss of biodiversity challenges agriculture as crop yields depend on biodiversity-mediated ecosystem services. Targeted agri-environmental schemes (AES), like sown flowering fields, provide additional food resources and shelter for wild plants and animals. Such AES have been implemented to restore biodiversity in agricultural landscapes and ensure ecosystem services provision. However, little is known about the comparative benefits of different AES for functional biodiversity and whether temporal continuity, covered area, or perennial source habitats in the surrounding landscape limit the success of an AES. Here, we systematically evaluate within one study design how temporal continuity, size, and seminatural habitat cover in the surrounding landscape affect multitaxa diversity in different AES types and assess their potential for biodiversity conservation in agricultural landscapes.

Abstract

Agri-environmental schemes (AES) aim to restore biodiversity and biodiversity-mediated ecosystem services in landscapes impoverished by modern agriculture. However, a systematic, empirical evaluation of different AES types across multiple taxa and functional groups is missing. Within one orthogonal design, we studied sown flowering AES types with different temporal continuity, size, and landscape context and used calcareous grasslands as seminatural reference habitat. We measured species richness of 12 taxonomic groups (vascular plants, cicadas, orthopterans, bees, butterflies, moths, hoverflies, flower visiting beetles, parasitoid wasps, carabid beetles, staphylinid beetles, and birds) representing 5 trophic levels. A total of 54,955 specimens were identified using traditional taxonomic methods, and bulk arthropod samples were identified through DNA metabarcoding, resulting in a total of 1,077 and 2,110 taxa, respectively. Species richness of most taxonomic groups, as well as multidiversity and richness of pollinators, increased with temporal continuity of AES types. Some groups responded to size and landscape context, but multidiversity and richness of pollinators and natural enemies were not affected. AES flowering fields supported different species assemblages than calcareous grasslands, but assemblages became more similar to those in seminatural grasslands with increasing temporal continuity. Our results indicate that AES flowering fields and seminatural grasslands function synergistically. Flowering fields support biodiversity even when they are relatively small and in landscapes with few remaining seminatural habitats. We therefore recommend a network of smaller, temporally continuous AES flowering fields of different ages, combined with permanent seminatural grasslands, to maximize benefits for biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service delivery in agricultural landscapes.

  • agriculture
  • conservation
  • DNA-metabarcoding
  • ecosystem services
  • flower fields

Footnotes

  • ↵1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: fabian.boetzl{at}uni-wuerzburg.de.
  • Author contributions: F.A.B., J.K., E.K., E.A.M., A.H., and I.S.-D. designed research; F.A.B., J.H., H.H., J.J., S.K., E.K., and M.P. performed research; F.A.B. analyzed data; and F.A.B., J.K., E.A.M., A.H., and I.S.-D. wrote the paper.

  • The authors declare no competing interest.

  • This article is a PNAS Direct Submission.

  • This article contains supporting information online at https://www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.2016038118/-/DCSupplemental.

Data Accessibility

All data associated with this manuscript is available via the Dryad Digital Repository https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.hdr7sqvh1 (44).

Change History

March 5, 2021: The figure callouts have been updated.

Published under the PNAS license.

View Full Text

References

  1. ↵
    1. W. Steffen et al
    ., Sustainability. Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347, 1259855 (2015).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. S. Seibold et al
    ., Arthropod decline in grasslands and forests is associated with landscape-level drivers. Nature 574, 671–674 (2019).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. M. Dainese et al
    ., A global synthesis reveals biodiversity-mediated benefits for crop production. Sci. Adv. 5, eaax0121 (2019).
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. C. Haaland,
    2. R. E. Naisbit,
    3. L.-F. Bersier
    , Sown wildflower strips for insect conservation: A review. Insect Conserv. Divers. 4, 60–80 (2011).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  5. ↵
    1. A. M. Bartual et al
    ., The potential of different semi-natural habitats to sustain pollinators and natural enemies in European agricultural landscapes. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 279, 43–52 (2019).
    OpenUrl
  6. ↵
    1. G. Pe’er et al
    ., Adding some green to the greening: Improving the EU’s ecological focus areas for biodiversity and farmers. Conserv. Lett. 10, 517–530 (2017).
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. J. Ekroos,
    2. O. Olsson,
    3. M. Rundlöf,
    4. F. Wätzold,
    5. H. G. Smith
    , Optimizing agri-environment schemes for biodiversity, ecosystem services or both? Biol. Conserv. 172, 65–71 (2014).
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. P. Batáry et al
    ., Biologia futura: Landscape perspectives on farmland biodiversity conservation. Biologia Futura 71, 9–18 (2020).
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. G. Pe’er et al
    ., A greener path for the EU Common Agricultural Policy. Science 365, 449–451 (2019).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. D. Kleijn et al
    ., Ecological intensification: Bridging the gap between science and practice. Trends Ecol. Evol. 34, 154–166 (2019).
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. D. Kleijn,
    2. M. Rundlöf,
    3. J. Scheper,
    4. H. G. Smith,
    5. T. Tscharntke
    , Does conservation on farmland contribute to halting the biodiversity decline? Trends Ecol. Evol. 26, 474–481 (2011).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. J. Scheper et al
    ., Environmental factors driving the effectiveness of European agri-environmental measures in mitigating pollinator loss—A meta-analysis. Ecol. Lett. 16, 912–920 (2013).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. F. A. Boetzl,
    2. E. Krimmer,
    3. J. Krauss,
    4. I. Steffan-Dewenter
    , Agri-environmental schemes promote ground-dwelling predators in adjacent oilseed rape fields: Diversity, species traits and distance-decay functions. J. Appl. Ecol. 56, 10–20 (2019).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  14. ↵
    1. M. Albrecht et al
    ., Global synthesis of the effectiveness of flower strips and hedgerows on pest control, pollination services and crop yield. Ecol. Lett. 23, 1488–1498 (2020).
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    1. Ö. Fritz,
    2. L. Gustafsson,
    3. K. Larsson
    , Does forest continuity matter in conservation? A study of epiphytic lichens and bryophytes in beech forests of southern Sweden. Biol. Conserv. 141, 655–668 (2008).
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. T. Aavik,
    2. Ü. Jõgar,
    3. J. Liira,
    4. I. Tulva,
    5. M. Zobel
    , Plant diversity in a calcareous wooded meadow—The significance of management continuity. J. Veg. Sci. 19, 475–484 (2008).
    OpenUrl
  17. ↵
    1. E. Krimmer,
    2. E. A. Martin,
    3. J. Krauss,
    4. A. Holzschuh,
    5. I. Steffan-Dewenter
    , Size, age and surrounding semi-natural habitats modulate the effectiveness of flower-rich agri-environment schemes to promote pollinator visitation in crop fields. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 284, 106590 (2019).
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. J. Dengler,
    2. M. Janisova,
    3. P. Torok,
    4. C. Wellstein
    , Biodiversity of palaearctic grasslands: A synthesis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 182, 1–14 (2014).
    OpenUrl
  19. ↵
    1. R. D. Holt,
    2. J. H. Lawton,
    3. G. A. Polis,
    4. N. D. Martinez
    , Trophic rank and the species-area relationship. Ecology 80, 1495–1504 (1999).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. ↵
    1. W. R. Turner,
    2. E. Tjørve
    , Scale-dependence in species-area relationships. Ecography 28, 721–730 (2005).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  21. ↵
    1. E. F. Connor,
    2. A. C. Courtney,
    3. J. M. Yoder
    , Individuals-area relationships: The relationship between animal population density and area. Ecology 81, 734–748 (2000).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  22. ↵
    1. I. Grass et al
    ., Land-sharing/-sparing connectivity landscapes for ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation. People and Nature 1, 262–272 (2019).
    OpenUrl
  23. ↵
    1. V. Rösch,
    2. T. Tscharntke,
    3. C. Scherber,
    4. P. Batáry
    , Biodiversity conservation across taxa and landscapes requires many small as well as single large habitat fragments. Oecologia 179, 209–222 (2015).
    OpenUrl
  24. ↵
    1. K. N. Suding
    , Toward an era of restoration in ecology: Successes, failures, and opportunities ahead. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 42, 465–487 (2011).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  25. ↵
    1. C. Sirami et al
    ., Increasing crop heterogeneity enhances multitrophic diversity across agricultural regions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 116, 16442–16447 (2019).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. ↵
    1. E. A. Martin et al
    ., The interplay of landscape composition and configuration: New pathways to manage functional biodiversity and agroecosystem services across Europe. Ecol. Lett. 22, 1083–1094 (2019).
    OpenUrl
  27. ↵
    1. M. F. WallisDeVries,
    2. P. Poschlod,
    3. J. H. Willems
    , Challenges for the conservation of calcareous grasslands in northwestern Europe: Integrating the requirements of flora and fauna. Biol. Conserv. 104, 265–273 (2002).
    OpenUrl
  28. ↵
    1. E. Allan et al
    ., Interannual variation in land-use intensity enhances grassland multidiversity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, 308–313 (2014).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. ↵
    1. D. Kleijn et al
    ., Mixed biodiversity benefits of agri-environment schemes in five European countries. Ecol. Lett. 9, 243–254, discussion 254–257 (2006).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. F. A. Boetzl,
    2. M. Schuele,
    3. J. Krauss,
    4. I. Steffan‐Dewenter
    , Pest control potential of adjacent agri‐environment schemes varies with crop type and is shaped by landscape context and within‐field position. J. Appl. Ecol. 57, 1482–1493 (2020).
    OpenUrl
  31. ↵
    1. A. E. Martin et al
    ., Effects of farmland heterogeneity on biodiversity are similar to—or even larger than—the effects of farming practices. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 288, 13 (2020).
    OpenUrl
  32. ↵
    1. T. Tscharntke,
    2. P. Batáry,
    3. C. F. Dormann
    , Set-aside management: How do succession, sowing patterns and landscape context affect biodiversity? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 143, 37–44 (2011).
    OpenUrl
  33. ↵
    1. P. Li et al
    ., The relative importance of green infrastructure as refuge habitat for pollinators increases with local land‐use intensity. J. Appl. Ecol. 57, 1494–1503 (2020).
    OpenUrl
  34. ↵
    1. P. Batáry,
    2. A. Báldi,
    3. D. Kleijn,
    4. T. Tscharntke
    , Landscape-moderated biodiversity effects of agri-environmental management: A meta-analysis. Proc. Biol. Sci. 278, 1894–1902 (2011).
    OpenUrlPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. J. M. Holland et al
    ., Structure, function and management of semi-natural habitats for conservation biological control: A review of European studies. Pest Manag. Sci. 72, 1638–1651 (2016).
    OpenUrl
  36. ↵
    1. L. J. Cole et al
    ., A critical analysis of the potential for EU Common Agricultural Policy measures to support wild pollinators on farmland. J. Appl. Ecol. 57, 681–694 (2020).
    OpenUrl
  37. ↵
    1. R Development Core Team
    , R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Version 3.6.3R (Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2019).
  38. ↵
    1. E. Allan et al
    ., Land use intensification alters ecosystem multifunctionality via loss of biodiversity and changes to functional composition. Ecol. Lett. 18, 834–843 (2015).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. ↵
    1. D. Bates,
    2. M. Machler,
    3. B. M. Bolker,
    4. S. C. Walker
    , Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67, 1–48 (2015).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. J. Oksanen et al
    ., vegan: Community Ecology Package (2019). R package version 2.5-6. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan. Accessed 12 February 2021.
  41. ↵
    1. J. Fox,
    2. S. Weisberg
    , An R Companion to Applied Regression (Sage, Thousand Oaks CA, ed. 3, 2019).
  42. ↵
    1. A. Kuznetsova,
    2. P. B. Brockhoff,
    3. R. H. B. Christensen
    , lmerTest package: Tests in linear mixed effects models. J. Stat. Softw. 82, 1–26 (2017).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. ↵
    1. T. Hothorn,
    2. F. Bretz,
    3. P. Westfall
    , Simultaneous inference in general parametric models. Biom. J. 50, 346–363 (2008).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. ↵
    1. F. Boetzl et al
    ., Data from: A multi-taxa assessment of the effectiveness of agri-environmental schemes for biodiversity management. Dryad, Dataset. https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.hdr7sqvh1. Deposited on 27 January 2021.

Log in using your username and password

Forgot your user name or password?

Log in through your institution

You may be able to gain access using your login credentials for your institution. Contact your library if you do not have a username and password.
If your organization uses OpenAthens, you can log in using your OpenAthens username and password. To check if your institution is supported, please see this list. Contact your library for more details.

Purchase access

You may purchase access to this article. This will require you to create an account if you don't already have one.

Subscribers, for more details, please visit our Subscriptions FAQ.

Please click here to log into the PNAS submission website.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A multitaxa assessment of the effectiveness of agri-environmental schemes for biodiversity management
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
A multitaxa assessment of the effectiveness of agri-environmental schemes for biodiversity management
Fabian A. Boetzl, Jochen Krauss, Jonathan Heinze, Hannes Hoffmann, Jan Juffa, Sebastian König, Elena Krimmer, Maren Prante, Emily A. Martin, Andrea Holzschuh, Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Mar 2021, 118 (10) e2016038118; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2016038118

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
A multitaxa assessment of the effectiveness of agri-environmental schemes for biodiversity management
Fabian A. Boetzl, Jochen Krauss, Jonathan Heinze, Hannes Hoffmann, Jan Juffa, Sebastian König, Elena Krimmer, Maren Prante, Emily A. Martin, Andrea Holzschuh, Ingolf Steffan-Dewenter
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Mar 2021, 118 (10) e2016038118; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2016038118
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley

Article Classifications

  • Biological Sciences
  • Agricultural Sciences
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 118 (10)
Table of Contents

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Methods
    • Data Accessibility
    • Change History
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Water from a faucet fills a glass.
News Feature: How “forever chemicals” might impair the immune system
Researchers are exploring whether these ubiquitous fluorinated molecules might worsen infections or hamper vaccine effectiveness.
Image credit: Shutterstock/Dmitry Naumov.
Reflection of clouds in the still waters of Mono Lake in California.
Inner Workings: Making headway with the mysteries of life’s origins
Recent experiments and simulations are starting to answer some fundamental questions about how life came to be.
Image credit: Shutterstock/Radoslaw Lecyk.
Cave in coastal Kenya with tree growing in the middle.
Journal Club: Small, sharp blades mark shift from Middle to Later Stone Age in coastal Kenya
Archaeologists have long tried to define the transition between the two time periods.
Image credit: Ceri Shipton.
Mouse fibroblast cells. Electron bifurcation reactions keep mammalian cells alive.
Exploring electron bifurcation
Jonathon Yuly, David Beratan, and Peng Zhang investigate how electron bifurcation reactions work.
Listen
Past PodcastsSubscribe
Panda bear hanging in a tree
How horse manure helps giant pandas tolerate cold
A study finds that giant pandas roll in horse manure to increase their cold tolerance.
Image credit: Fuwen Wei.

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Special Feature Articles – Most Recent
  • List of Issues

PNAS Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science
  • Teaching Resources

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Subscribers
  • Librarians
  • Press
  • Cozzarelli Prize
  • Site Map
  • PNAS Updates
  • FAQs
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Rights & Permissions
  • About
  • Contact

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490