Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 204

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Contemporary patterns of fire extent and severity in forests of the Pacific Northwest, USA (1985–2010)

Open access
Reilly, Matthew J., Dunn, Christopher J., Meigs, Garrett W., Spies, Thomas A., Kennedy, Robert E., Bailey, John D., Briggs, Kevin·2017·Ecosphere

Abstract

Fire is an important disturbance in many forest landscapes, but there is heightened concern regarding recent wildfire activity in western North America. Several regional‐scale studies focus on high‐severity fire, but a comprehensive examination at all levels of burn severity (i.e., low, moderate, and high) is needed to inform our understanding of the ecological effects of contemporary fires and how they vary among vegetation zones at sub‐regional scales. We integrate Landsat time series data with field measurements of tree mortality to map burn severity in forests of the Pacific Northwest, USA, from 1985 to 2010. We then examine temporal trends in fire extent and spatial patterns of burn severity in relation to drought and annual fire extent. Finally, we compare results among vegetation zones and with expectations based on studies of historical landscape dynamics and fire regimes. Small increases in fire extent over time were associated with drought in all vegetation zones, but fire cumulatively affected <3% of wet vegetation zones, and most dry vegetation zones experienced less fire than expectations from fire history studies. Although the proportion of fire at any level of severity did not increase over time, temporal trends toward larger patches of high‐severity fire were related to drought and annual fire extent, depending on vegetation zone. In vegetation zones with historically high‐severity regimes, high‐severity fire accounted for a large proportion of recent fire extent (43–48%) and occurred primarily in patches ≥100 ha. In vegetation zones with historically low‐ and mixed‐severity regimes, low (45–54%)‐ and moderate‐severity (24–36%) fires were prevalent, but proportions of high‐severity fire (23–26%), almost half of which occurred in patches ≥100 ha, were much greater than expectations from most fire history studies. Our results support concerns about large patches of high‐severity fire in some dry forests but also suggest that spatial patterns of burn severity across much of the extent burned are generally consistent with current understanding of historical landscape dynamics in the region. This study highlights the importance of considering the ecological effects of fire at all levels of severity in management and policy initiatives intended to promote forest biodiversity and resilience to future fire activity.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ecs2.1695

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Cited by

See all 204

Metadata

Authors
Reilly, M. J., Dunn, C. J., Meigs, G. W., Spies, T. A., Kennedy, R. E., Bailey, J. D., & Briggs, K.
Venue
Ecosphere
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-03
Volume
8
Issue
3
ISSN
2150-8925 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2602172281
Cited by
204
References
16
FWCI
15.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Contemporary patterns of fire extent and severity in forests of the Pacific Northwest, USA (1985–2010). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/ecs2.1695
The paper
Reilly, M. J., Dunn, C. J., Meigs, G. W., Spies, T. A., Kennedy, R. E., Bailey, J. D., & Briggs, K. (2017). Contemporary patterns of fire extent and severity in forests of the Pacific Northwest, USA (1985–2010). Ecosphere. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.1695

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.