Cited by 1,513Ecosystem dynamics and resilienceEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFire effects on ecosystems

Changing disturbance regimes, ecological memory, and forest resilience

Open access
Johnstone, Jill F, Allen, Craig D, Franklin, Jerry F, Frelich, Lee E, Harvey, Brian J, Higuera, Philip E, Mack, Michelle C, Meentemeyer, Ross K +4 more·2016·Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment

Abstract

Ecological memory is central to how ecosystems respond to disturbance and is maintained by two types of legacies – information and material. Species life‐history traits represent an adaptive response to disturbance and are an information legacy; in contrast, the abiotic and biotic structures (such as seeds or nutrients) produced by single disturbance events are material legacies. Disturbance characteristics that support or maintain these legacies enhance ecological resilience and maintain a “safe operating space” for ecosystem recovery. However, legacies can be lost or diminished as disturbance regimes and environmental conditions change, generating a “resilience debt” that manifests only after the system is disturbed. Strong effects of ecological memory on post‐disturbance dynamics imply that contingencies (effects that cannot be predicted with certainty) of individual disturbances, interactions among disturbances, and climate variability combine to affect ecosystem resilience. We illustrate these concepts and introduce a novel ecosystem resilience framework with examples of forest disturbances, primarily from North America. Identifying legacies that support resilience in a particular ecosystem can help scientists and resource managers anticipate when disturbances may trigger abrupt shifts in forest ecosystems, and when forests are likely to be resilient.

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/fee.1311

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Post-fire vegetation successional trajectories depend on numerous factors, including fire size and effects, pre- and post-fire climate, recent fire history and plant life-history traits related to survival and recolonization.

    “Post-fire vegetation successional trajectories depend on numerous factors, including fire size and effects, pre-and post-fire climate, recent fire history and plant life-history traits related to survival and recolonization (Davis, Higuera, & Sala, 2018;Johnstone et al., 2016).”

    From Fire as a fundamental ecological process: Research advances and frontiers (2020) · cites this paper as Johnstone et al., 2016

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Frelich LE. 2002. Forest dynamics and disturbance regimes. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  2. Steffen W, Richardson K, Rockström J, et al. 2015. Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347; doi:10.1126/science.1259855. · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Johnstone, J. F., Allen, C. D., Franklin, J. F., Frelich, L. E., Harvey, B. J., Higuera, P. E., Mack, M. C., Meentemeyer, R. K., Metz, M. R., Perry, G. L., Schoennagel, T., & Turner, M. G.
Affiliations
  • University of Saskatchewan (CA)
  • United States Geological Survey (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
  • University of Montana (US)
  • Northern Arizona University (US)
  • North Carolina State University (US)
  • Lewis & Clark College (US)
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
Johnstone, Jill F
Venue
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-09
Volume
14
Issue
7
Pages
369-378
ISSN
  • 1540-9295 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-9309
OpenAlex
W2508512371
Cited by
1,513
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 190 · 2025: 181 · 2024: 156 · 2023: 149 · 2022: 164 · 2021: 205 · 2020: 181 · 2019: 130 · 2018: 90 · 2017: 52 · 2016: 10 · 2013: 1
FWCI
70.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Geological Survey
  • National Park Service
  • National Science Foundation (DEB‐EF‐0622770, IIA‐0966472, ARC‐1023669)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Ecosystem dynamics and resilience
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
Keywords
ecological memory, forest resilience, disturbance regimes, material legacies, safe operating space, life-history traits, climate variability, disturbance interactions, forest disturbance

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