The DOI matches its Crossref record; 90 of the 91 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 1 are not checked yet; none of the 52 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications
Open accessAbstract
The mobilisation of potentially harmful chemical constituents in wildfire ash can be a major consequence of wildfires, posing widespread societal risks. Knowledge of wildfire ash chemical composition is crucial to anticipate and mitigate these risks. Here we present a comprehensive dataset on the chemical characteristics of a wide range of wildfire ashes (42 types and a total of 148 samples) from wildfires across the globe and examine their potential societal and environmental implications. An extensive review of studies analysing chemical composition in ash was also performed to complement and compare our ash dataset. Most ashes in our dataset had an alkaline reaction (mean pH 8.8, ranging between 6 – 11.2). Important constituents of wildfire ash were organic carbon (mean: 204 g kg-1), calcium, aluminium, and iron (mean: 47.9, 17.9 and 17.1 g kg-1). Mean nitrogen and phosphorus ranged between 1 - 25 g kg-1, and between 0.2 to 9.9 g kg-1, respectively. The largest concentrations of metals of concern for human and ecosystem health were observed for manganese (mean: 1488 mg kg-1; three ecosystems > 1000 mg kg-1), zinc (mean: 181 mg kg-1; two ecosystems > 500 mg kg-1) and lead (mean: 66.9 mg kg-1; two ecosystems > 200 mg kg-1). Burn severity and sampling timing were key factors influencing ash chemical characteristics like pH, carbon and nitrogen concentrations. The highest readily dissolvable fractions (as a % of ash dry weight) in water were observed for sodium (18%) and magnesium (11.4%). Although concentrations of elements of concern were very close to, or exceeded international contamination standards in some ashes, the actual effect of ash will depend on factors like ash loads and the dilution into environmental matrices such as water, soil and sediment. Our approach can serve as an initial methodological standardisation of wildfire ash sampling and chemical analysis protocols.
Checked 2026-10-06 · 1 reference not checked yet
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This study compiles and analyzes chemical characteristics of 42 wildfire ash types (148 samples) from 29 sites across 8 countries and 11 ecosystems, comparing them with prior ash studies and international contamination guidelines. It finds highly variable, generally alkaline ash rich in organic carbon and calcium, with burn severity and rainfall/sampling timing as key controls, and some ashes approaching or exceeding contaminant thresholds.
Key findings
- Ash was generally alkaline: mean pH 8.8 (range 6–11.2), mean EC 1,330 µS cm⁻¹ (32.5–13,700). Major constituents included organic carbon (mean 204 g kg⁻¹; range 37–450), Ca (47.9 g kg⁻¹; 1.3–215), Al (17.9 g kg⁻¹; 0.6–69.3), and Fe (17.1 g kg⁻¹; 0.6–77.2); mean N was 7.8 g kg⁻¹ (1–25) and mean P 2.5 g kg⁻¹ (0.2–9.9).
- Metals of concern had mean concentrations of Mn 1,488 mg kg⁻¹ (34.5–15,350), Zn 181 mg kg⁻¹ (25.5–1,016), and Pb 66.9 mg kg⁻¹ (1–782). The highest readily dissolvable fractions in water were Na (18%) and Mg (11.4%), followed by Ca (4.6%) and P (1.7%); Mn, Al, and Fe dissolved least (0.02–0.3%).
- Burn severity and rainfall/sampling timing influenced ash chemistry. High vs low severity ash had higher pH (8.9 vs 8.6), Ca (53.6 vs 37.5 g kg⁻¹), Al (22.3 vs 9.9 g kg⁻¹), and Fe (20.1 vs 11.7 g kg⁻¹), but lower OC (119 vs 362 g kg⁻¹) and N (6.2 vs 10.7 g kg⁻¹). Cluster analysis separated most pre-rainfall ashes from post-rainfall ashes, with post-rainfall ashes showing lower pH/EC and lower soluble base cations, and higher relative Al and Fe.
- Some ashes approached or exceeded guidelines: NETHER peatland Pb (782 mg kg⁻¹) exceeded all cited international guidelines for fertilising products, soils, and sediments; Ni in SPAMA (54.0), MUSA-H (64.0), and UKSWANP (61.3 mg kg⁻¹) was slightly above EU organic fertiliser (50) and Australian sediment (52) levels; NETHER Zn (1,016 mg kg⁻¹) exceeded guidelines except EU inorganic fertiliser (1,500 mg kg⁻¹); NETHER Cu (99 mg kg⁻¹) was close to the Canadian sediment maximum (110 mg kg⁻¹). The paper states average P and Mn slightly exceeded Canadian threshold levels for contaminated sediments.
Methods
- Dataset: 42 ash types from 148 samples collected at 29 sites in 8 countries (Australia, Austria, Canada, South Africa, Spain, The Netherlands, United Kingdom, USA), spanning 11 ecosystems. Sampling used transects or composite sampling; 15 ash types were collected within 7 days and 27 between 1 week and 3 months after burning; 20 of 42 ash types received rain before sampling.
- Chemical analyses: pH and EC in water (1:20 ash-to-water); total C and N by Leco TruSpec CHN; major nutrients, metals, and metalloids by microwave-assisted acid digestion (EPA 3051A) and ICP-OES; carbonates by calcimeter; water-extractable elements by leaching test (1:20, 5 min shake, 0.45 µm filtration); selected samples by XRD and FE-SEM. An extensive review of 16 previous ash-composition studies complemented the dataset.
- Statistics: median per ash type, then mean of medians; Spearman correlations; coefficient of variation; hierarchical clustering (Ward’s method) followed by k-means (n = 3); logistic regression with cross-validation; linear mixed models controlling for rainfall and ecosystem; ANOVA with Tukey post-hoc tests. Cluster 3 was excluded from some analyses due to extreme values.
Limitations
- The paper states no standard procedure exists for sampling wildfire ash; the methods used are a first approach to standardisation, and an interlaboratory comparison is recommended. It also notes dissolved-fraction estimates are conservative because of the high water:sample ratio (1:20) and short shaking time (5 min), with actual effects depending on dilution into environmental matrices.
- The paper states it did not examine other potentially hazardous ash constituents such as PAHs, cyanide, chloride, sulphate, and environmentally persistent free radicals; lithology and geogenic concentrations were not considered; and ash loads, fire-affected area, fuel type/structure/loads, and post-fire climatic/hydrological controls need further research.
- Evident from the text: sampling before vs after rainfall is confounded with ash age/time-since-fire; cluster 3 ashes (NETHER, AUSTRIA, UKSWANP) were excluded from some analyses due to extreme values; and comparisons of burn severity across ecosystems should be made cautiously because fire behaviour and combustion dynamics differ.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
62 Own result · 32 Not checked yet · 21 Own interpretation · 11 No basis given · 6 Own method
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The highest readily dissolvable fractions (as a % of ash dry weight) in water were observed for sodium (18 %) and magnesium (11.4 %).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Similarly, for the study sites from the sub-tropical savanna in South Africa (SAPB1, SAPB3 and SAMB), we observed total C contents in the ash an order of magnitude higher than in the pre-and post-burn soils (Sánchez-García et al., 2021).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.1. Major nutrients
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sánchez-García et al., 2021 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mean Mg and P in the ash were 5.4 and 2.5 g kg -1 ash (Table 3), respectively, and were similar to those reported in the literature (e.g., Brito et al., 2017;Ulery et al., 1993; Table 1).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.1. Major nutrients
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Important constituents of wildfire ash were organic carbon (mean: 204 g kg -1 ), calcium, aluminium, and iron (mean: 47.9, 17.9 and 17.1 g kg -1 ).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The sum of OC and IC in our field samples (215 g kg -1 ash; Table 3) is within the overall ranges observed for total C in previous studies (50 -460 g kg -1 ; Table 1; e.g., Alshehri et al., 2002;Costa et al., 2014;Pereira et al., 2012;Ulery et al., 1993).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.1. Major nutrients
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The sum of OC and IC in our field samples (215 g kg -1 ash; Table 3) is within the overall ranges observed for total C in previous studies (50 -460 g kg -1 ; Table 1; e.g., Alshehri et al., 2002;Costa et al., 2014;Pereira et al., 2012;Ulery et al., 1993).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.1. Major nutrients
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although concentrations of elements of concern were very close to, or exceeded international contamination standards in some ashes, the actual effect of ash will depend on factors like ash loads and the dilution into environmental matrices such as water, soil and sediment.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: International contamination standards are appropriate benchmarks for assessing potential effects of ash.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Important constituents of wildfire ash were organic carbon (mean: 204 g kg -1 ), calcium, aluminium, and iron (mean: 47.9, 17.9 and 17.1 g kg -1 ).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mean nitrogen and phosphorus ranged between 1 and 25 g kg -1 , and between 0.2 and 9.9 g kg -1 , respectively.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Important constituents of wildfire ash were organic carbon (mean: 204 g kg -1 ), calcium, aluminium, and iron (mean: 47.9, 17.9 and 17.1 g kg -1 ).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 41
- Probably not a substantial claim. 14
- The quote only partly states this claim. 7
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After C, Ca was the most abundant analysed component in the ash (average concentration 47.9 g kg -1 ash; ranging between 5.9 and 209 g kg -1 in ash from peatland and temperate mixed forest; Table 3 and 5).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.1. Major nutrients
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The largest concentrations of metals of concern for human and ecosystem health were observed for manganese (mean: 1488 mg kg -1 ; three ecosystems > 1000 mg kg -1 ), zinc (mean: 181 mg kg -1 ; two ecosystems > 500 mg kg -1 ) and lead (mean: 66.9 mg kg -1 ; two ecosystems > 200 mg kg -1 ).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mean N content in the ash was 7.8 g kg -1 ash (0.78 %), ranging from 3 g kg -1 (0.30 %), in temperate shrubland, to 17.5 g kg -1 (1.75 %) in upland grassland (Table 3 and 5).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.1. Major nutrients
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The largest concentrations of metals of concern for human and ecosystem health were observed for manganese (mean: 1488 mg kg -1 ; three ecosystems > 1000 mg kg -1 ), zinc (mean: 181 mg kg -1 ; two ecosystems > 500 mg kg -1 ) and lead (mean: 66.9 mg kg -1 ; two ecosystems > 200 mg kg -1 ).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Mean Mg and P in the ash were 5.4 and 2.5 g kg -1 ash (Table 3), respectively, and were similar to those reported in the literature (e.g., Brito et al., 2017;Ulery et al., 1993; Table 1).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.1. Major nutrients
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most ashes in our dataset had an alkaline reaction (mean pH 8.8, ranging between 6 and 11.2).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of the chemical elements analysed, carbon was the main ash component, with a 96 % of this C being in organic form (OC; mean: 204 g kg -1 ash; Table 3).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.1. Major nutrients
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The highest readily dissolvable fractions (as a % of ash dry weight) in water were observed for sodium (18 %) and magnesium (11.4 %).”
plain- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The largest concentrations of metals of concern for human and ecosystem health were observed for manganese (mean: 1488 mg kg -1 ; three ecosystems > 1000 mg kg -1 ), zinc (mean: 181 mg kg -1 ; two ecosystems > 500 mg kg -1 ) and lead (mean: 66.9 mg kg -1 ; two ecosystems > 200 mg kg -1 ).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Microcline, muscovite and albite are also frequently observed, with hornblende, andesine or biotite being rare.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.4. Mineralogy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Al and Fe were the third and fourth most abundant analysed elements in the ash, after C and Ca, with similar mean values (Al: 17.9 g kg -1 ash; Fe: 17.1 g kg -1 ash; Table 3), which were closer to the upper values of the overall ranges reported in previous studies (Al: 2.30 -19.0 g kg -1 , Fe: 0.10 -12.3 g kg -1 ; e.g., Brito et al., 2017;Ulery et al., 1993; Table 1).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.2. Metals and metalloids
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“pH in ash from temperate eucalypt forest range from 6 to 11.1 (Table 5), with the lowest pH values having been collected after rainfall (Table S1).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.2.2. Ash age and post-rainfall sampling
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Copper in the NETHER ash (99.0 mg kg -1 ) was close to the Canadian maximum level for sediments (110 mg kg -1 ), and Zn in the same ash exceeded international guidelines (1,016 mg kg -1 ), except for the EU regulation on inorganic fertilisers (1,500 mg kg -1 ).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 4.1. Ash chemical composition in relation to international contamination guidelines
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: There are no existing guidelines for potentially hazardous ash.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“for SPAMA (Mediterranean conifer forest), and MUSA-H and UKSWANP ash (both temperate conifer forests) Ni concentrations (54.0, 64.0 and 61.3 mg kg -1 , respectively) were slightly above the European guidelines for organic fertilisers and the Australian's maximum sediment contamination levels (50.0 and 52.0 mg kg -1 , respectively).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 4.1. Ash chemical composition in relation to international contamination guidelines
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: There are no existing guidelines for potentially hazardous ash.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among ecosystems, the lowest pH and EC values were observed in ash from peatland (pH: 7.1, EC: 237 μS cm -1 ; Table 5) and the highest in sub-tropical savanna (pH:10.1,EC: 6,943 μS cm -1 ; Table 5).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.3. pH, EC and dissolved elements
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“sampling before rainfall seemed, a priori, a determining factor of whether the ash types were classified in cluster 1 or 2, with 12 out of 14 ash types in cluster 1 having been collected before any rainfall, and 17 out of 25 ash types in cluster 2 collected post-rainfall (Table 2).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.2.2. Ash age and post-rainfall sampling
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In general, the mean concentration of elements observed in the wildfire ash fall below the international maximum levels for fertilisers, soil and sediments presented in Table 7. Exceptions are P and Mn, with average concentrations slightly exceeding the Canadian's threshold levels for contaminated sediments.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 4.1. Ash chemical composition in relation to international contamination guidelines
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: There are no existing guidelines for potentially hazardous ash.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Al and Fe were also higher in the high severity ash (Al: from 9.90 to 22.3 g kg -1 , Fe: from 11.7 to 20.1 g kg -1 in low and high burn severity ash, respectively; Table 3).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.2. Main sources of variability in chemical characteristics among ash types 3.2.1. Burn severity
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“in general, the ranges reported in the aforementioned studies are in the lower end of the ranges reported here.An exception is the study by Pereira et al. (2012) whose dissolved concentration values from Mediterranean conifer forest are closer to the upper ranges reported in this study.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.3. pH, EC and dissolved elements
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Pereira et al., 2012 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“where Na and Mg were dissolved the most (18 and 11.4 %, respectively), followed by Ca (4.6 %) and P (1.7 %).Mn, Al and Fe were dissolved the least with fractions ranging from 0.02 to 0.3 % (Table 4).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.3. pH, EC and dissolved elements
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Quartz is present in all samples although in variable proportions (9-84 %; Table 6).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.4. Mineralogy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For most samples ash pH was alkaline, with a mean value of 8.8, and overall values ranging from 6 to 11.2 (Table 4).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.3. pH, EC and dissolved elements
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Regarding EC, an average of 1,330 μS cm -1 in the deionized-water leachates was found, with values ranging from 32.5 to 13,700 μS cm -1 (Table 4).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.3. pH, EC and dissolved elements
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No significant differences were observed between ash from low and high burn severity for the remaining metals (Mn, Ni, Cu, Zn, Pb and Hg; Table 3), nor for most of the dissolved components (Table 4, S6).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.2. Main sources of variability in chemical characteristics among ash types 3.2.1. Burn severity
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Lower concentrations (<100 mg kg -1 ) were obtained for the remaining metals analysed (i.e., Pb, Cu, Hg, Ni, Cr, and Cd) similar to the concentrations reported in previous studies (e.g., Brito et al., 2017;Campos et al., 2016;Santos et al., 2023; Table 1).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Follow-up analysis on the AUSTRIA ash showed an absence of dissolved Hg in the water (Sigmund, 2022, pers. comm.)”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.2.3. High concentration of metals in some ash
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Sigmund, 2022, pers. comm.
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cluster 2 exhibits significantly lower pH, EC and lower concentrations of P, Ca, Mg, Na, Zn, dPO 4 , dMg, and dNa, and significantly higher concentrations of Al and Fe than cluster 1 (Fig. S4 and S5).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.2.2. Ash age and post-rainfall sampling
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Pb | 66.9 | 120 | 120 | 220 | 250 | 530 | 82/2.6* |”
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
“| | (1-782) | | | | | | |”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5. Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Ni | 22.1 | 50 | 100 | 52 | 75 | 210 | 15,000 |”
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
“| | (1.7-99) | | | | | | |”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5. Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Important constituents of wildfire ash include OC (mean value 204 g kg -1 ; ranging between 37 and 450 g kg -1 ), Ca (47.9 g kg -1 ; 1.3 -215 g kg -1 ), Al (17.9 g kg -1 ; 0.6 -69.3 g kg -1 ), and Fe (17.1 g kg -1 ; 0.6 -77.2 g kg -1 ).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5. Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Cd | 0.3 | 1.5 | 3-60 | 10 | 10 | 12 | 2100 |”
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
“| | (0.08-1.1) | | | | | | |”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5. Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Average concentrations of chemical species of concern for environmental and human health in wildfire ash were below international contamination standards for several environmental matrices and products, except in a few ash types (NETHER, AUSTRIA, and UKS-WANP) in which the concentrations were very close or exceeded contamination thresholds.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5. Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: There are no existing guidelines for potentially hazardous ash.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Cr | 34 | ns | ns | 370 | 110 | 380 | ns |”
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
“| | (10-71.6) | | | | | | |”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5. Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| P | 2500 | ns | ns | ns | 2000 | ns | ns |”
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
“| | (200-9900) | | | | | | |”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5. Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Zn | 181 | 800 | 1500 | 410 | 820 | 720 | ns |”
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
“| | (25.5-1016) | | | | | | |”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5. Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“| Mn | 1488 | ns | ns | ns | 1100 | ns | ns |”
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
“| | (34.5-15350) | | | | | | |”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5. Conclusion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § 5. Conclusion · plain
In the paper
“For example, for the NAUS site (temperate eucalypt forest, Table 2), Santín et al. (2015b) reported 4 and 3.8 % (40.0 and 38.1 g kg -1 of total C) for unburnt and burnt soil, respectively, while 24.7 % (247 g kg -1 of total C) was observed in the ash from the same fire.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.1. Major nutrients
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Santín et al., 2015b
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This is because the main contributor to ash is usually vegetation and highlights the important role of ash in mobilizing and redistributing C in the landscape after fire (Bodí et al., 2014;Santín et al., 2012).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.1. Major nutrients
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We address this knowledge gap here by analysing and evaluating the chemical characteristics of wildfire ash produced in a wide range of scenarios and following a standard analysis approach to facilitate comparison across study sites.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 1. Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our approach can serve as an initial methodological standardisation of wildfire ash sampling and chemical analysis protocols.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“When deposited and incorporated into the soil, the typically alkaline and nutrient-rich ash can induce changes in soil pH and represents a nutrient flux to soils (the so-called 'fertilizing effect') (Bodí et al., 2014;Maass, 1995).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bodí et al., 2014 source
- Not checked yetcites Maass, 1995
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The effects of wildfire ash are wide-ranging, and its mobilization can also pose a risk to human health.These include, for example, respiratory problems through ash inhalation by firefighters or post-fire restoration teams, and to the public nearby or downwind of active fires and recently burnt areas (e.g., Alexakis, 2020;Wan et al., 2021).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For several decades, and despite its ubiquitous presence and potential importance, wildfire ash was largely overlooked as a topic of research.This is partly due to its high mobility, and hence rapid redistribution after fire, which makes wildfire ash more challenging to collect than other components of the post-fire environment, such as fireaffected soils or the eroded sediment (Bodí et al., 2014)”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bodí et al., 2014 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This previous research indicated that ash chemical composition is highly heterogeneous even for ash from the same or similar ecosystems (Table 1).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 1. Introduction
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All variables were transformed (square root or log) to satisfy assumptions of normality, and all fitted models met the assumptions concerning normally distributed residuals, homoscedasticity, and linearity.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 2.2. Statistical analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The differences in ash characteristics among ecosystems are also very notable when comparing values among studies (Table 1), however, the different sampling and laboratory techniques used across the studies makes a straightforward comparison difficult and highlights the need for standardized approaches.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 1. Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The nutrients, metals, and metalloids analyzed in this study represent the most common but not the only constituents of wildfire ash.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 4.2. Further research needs
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this study sampling before or after rainfall is also an indication of the age of the ash (i.e., the time elapsed since the fire to collection), with ash collected post-rainfall coinciding with the later post-fire sampling times (Table S1).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.2.2. Ash age and post-rainfall sampling
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“lithology and geogenic concentrations, although not considered in this study, might be an important driver of ash composition and reactivity and contribute towards higher geochemical heterogeneity in ash.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 4.2. Further research needs
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A comparison of burn severities among ecosystems needs to be made with caution as the fire behaviour and combustion dynamics that result in a particular burn severity may differ (e.g., smoulderingdominated combustion in peatland fuels vs. flaming-dominated combustion in other fuels).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 2.2. Statistical analysis
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore with “aging”, ash pH may decrease as well as the concentration of some elements.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.2.2. Ash age and post-rainfall sampling
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These observations highlight the importance of considering both rainfall and sampling timing (i.e., time-sincefire) when examining chemical properties and the potential contamination risk in older ash.Failure to do so might lead to inaccurate estimations of the input of chemical component in soil and water and the potential toxicity of ash both airborne and in solution.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.2.2. Ash age and post-rainfall sampling
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“indicating that not only minerals in plants, but also some of the mineral fraction from soil becomes part of the ash layer, sometimes in substantial quantities.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.4. Mineralogy
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“while higher concentrations of OC, N and P are typically found in ash from low burn severity, the higher ash loads produced in high severity fires might result in a larger nutrient delivery to aquatic ecosystems (Santín et al., 2015b).”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 4.2. Further research needs
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Santín et al., 2015b
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the higher pH and larger amount of some toxic metals and metalloids typically observed in high severity ash might be associated with a higher contamination risk.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 4.2. Further research needs
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“pH, which controls the solubility of most elements, was higher in ash from high burn severity, and this could have a direct influence on the contamination potential of wildfire ash when in contact with water.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5. Conclusion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“other aspects like the ash collection method (e.g., brush vs. vacuum) will affect key determining factors of ash chemical composition such as the amount of mineral soil that is collected within the ash.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 4.2. Further research needs
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: No standard procedure currently exists for sampling wildfire ash.
The paper relies on this without support.
A large fraction of the chemical components mobilised during a fire are associated with the ash.
“Although most research and public attention regarding contaminants and fire are focused on the mobilization of elements through smoke (Burke et al., 2021;Cascio, 2018;Chen et al., 2021;Xu et al., 2020), a large fraction of the chemical components mobilised during a fire are associated with the ash.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The 42 ash types and 148 samples are representative of wildfire ash across the globe.
“Here we present a comprehensive dataset on the chemical characteristics of a wide range of wildfire ashes (42 types and a total of 148 samples) from wildfires across the globe and examine their potential societal and environmental implications.”
The paper relies on this without support.
International contamination standards are appropriate benchmarks for assessing potential effects of ash.
“Although concentrations of elements of concern were very close to, or exceeded international contamination standards in some ashes, the actual effect of ash will depend on factors like ash loads and the dilution into environmental matrices such as water, soil and sediment.”
The paper relies on this without support.
No standard procedure currently exists for sampling wildfire ash.
“It is important to highlight that no standard procedure currently exists for sampling wildfire ash.”
The paper relies on this without support.
No single standard procedure currently exists for the analysis of readily dissolvable elements in ash.
“Given that no single standard procedure currently exists for the analysis of readily dissolvable elements in ash”
The paper relies on this without support.
There are no existing guidelines for potentially hazardous ash.
“Since there are no existing guidelines for potentially hazardous ash”
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?
In the citing paper
“The resulting ash was black, characteristic of incomplete combustion in low-intensity fires, which retain a higher proportion of organic compounds than ash from high-intensity wildfires, in which greater volatilization of organic elements occurs [47,48].”
From Wildfire Ash Alters Freshwater Crustacean Behavior: Disentangling the Contributions of Suspended Macroparticles and Ash‐Induced Alkalinization (2026) · cites this paper as [48]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
“OC (g kg -1 ash) 204 (143) 75 362 (397) 34 119 (99.4) (37-450) (92-450) (37-312)”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.2. Metals and metalloids
Reported 204 · recomputed 207.902439
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 4.1. Ash chemical composition in relation to international contamination guidelines
“In general, the mean concentration of elements observed in the wildfire ash fall below the international maximum levels for fertilisers, soil and sediments presented in Table 7. Exceptions are P and Mn, with average concentrations slightly exceeding the Canadian's threshold levels for contaminated sediments.”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5. Conclusion
“| As | 3.5 | 40 | 40 | 70 | 33 | 55 | 0.7 |”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5
“Al (g kg -1 ash) 1.2 (0.6-2.4) 34.2 (32.8-35.6)16.6 (13.6-226)”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 3.1.2. Metals and metalloids
“Al (g kg -1 ash) 17.9 (15.8) 80 9.9 (9.5) 84 22.3 (20.0) (0.6-69.3)”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5
“temperate mixed forest ash (Pb: 453 mg kg -1 ; Table 5)”
§ Chemical characteristics of wildfire ash across the globe and their environmental and socio-economic implications > 5
“Pb (mg kg -1 ash) 7.5 (1-24) 34.5 (10-59) 35.6 (10-58.7)782 10 44.1 (10-115) 17 (10-35) 92.8 (27.5-216) 435 69.6 118 (112-125)”
Citations
Cites
Aquatic chemistry: chemical equilibria and rates in natural waters
(1996) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-6312 · Cited by 6,448
Global fire emissions estimates during 1997–2016
(2017) · doi:10.5194/essd-9-697-2017 · Cited by 2,493
Fire intensity, fire severity and burn severity: a brief review and suggested usage
Keeley, J. E. (2009) · International Journal of Wildland Fire · doi:10.1071/wf07049 · Cited by 2,387
Global and Regional Trends and Drivers of Fire Under Climate Change
Jones, M. W., Abatzoglou, J. T., Veraverbeke, S., Andela, N., Lasslop, G., Forkel, M., Smith, A. J. P., Burton, C., Betts, R. A., van der Werf, G. R., et al. (2022) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1029/2020rg000726 · Cited by 1,332
Self-citationThe changing risk and burden of wildfire in the United States
Burke, M., Driscoll, A., Heft‐Neal, S., Xue, J., Burney, J. A., & Wara, M. W. (2021) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2011048118 · Cited by 754
Wildfire effects on water quality in forest catchments: A review with implications for water supply
Smith, H. G., Sheridan, G. J., Lane, P. N. J., Nyman, P., & Haydon, S. (2011) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2010.10.043 · Cited by 752
Self-citationWildland fire ash: Production, composition and eco-hydro-geomorphic effects
Bodí, M. B., Martin, D. A., Balfour, V. N., Santín, C., Doerr, S. H., Pereira, P., Cerdà, A., & Mataix-Solera, J. (2014) · Earth-Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2013.12.007 · Cited by 714
Self-citationGlobal trends in wildfire and its impacts: perceptions versus realities in a changing world
Doerr, S. H., & Santín, C. (2016) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0345 · Cited by 705
Self-citationWildland fire smoke and human health
Cascio, W. E. (2018) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.12.086 · Cited by 642
Wildfires, global climate change, and human health
Xu, R., Yu, P., Abramson, M. J., Johnston, F. H., Samet, J. M., Bell, M. L., Haines, A., Ebi, K. L., Li, S., & Guo, Y. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsr2028985 · Cited by 616
Factors controlling the acidity of natural rainwater
Charlson, R. J., & Rodhe, H. (1982) · Nature · doi:10.1038/295683a0 · Cited by 606
Wildfires as an ecosystem service
Pausas, J. G., & Keeley, J. E. (2019) · Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment · doi:10.1002/fee.2044 · Cited by 465
Field guide for mapping post-fire soil burn severity
Parsons, A., Robichaud, P. R., Lewis, S. A., Napper, C. O., & Clark, J. T. (2010) · doi:10.2737/rmrs-gtr-243 · Cited by 393
Self-citationSeasonally Dry Tropical Forests.
Whitmore, T. C., Bullock, S. H., Mooney, H. A., & Medina, E. M. (1996) · Journal of Ecology · doi:10.2307/2261211 · Cited by 385
Wood-ash composition and soil ph following intense burning
ULERY, A. L., GRAHAM, R. C., & AMRHEIN, C. (1993) · Soil Science · doi:10.1097/00010694-199311000-00008 · Cited by 372
Wildfire and the Future of Water Supply
Bladon, K. D., Emelko, M. B., Silins, U., & Stone, M. (2014) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es500130g · Cited by 354
Pyrogenic organic matter production from wildfires: a missing sink in the global carbon cycle
Santín, C., Doerr, S. H., Preston, C. M., & González‐Rodríguez, G. (2014) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.12800 · Cited by 317
Self-citationCardiovascular health impacts of wildfire smoke exposure
Chen, H., Samet, J. M., Bromberg, P. A., & Tong, H. (2021) · Particle and Fibre Toxicology · doi:10.1186/s12989-020-00394-8 · Cited by 285
Widespread phytoplankton blooms triggered by 2019–2020 Australian wildfires
Tang, W., Llort, J., Weis, J., Perron, M. M. G., Basart, S., Li, Z., Sathyendranath, S., Jackson, T., Rodríguez, E. S., Proemse, B. C., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03805-8 · Cited by 264
Paul, M. J., LeDuc, S. D., Lassiter, M. G., Moorhead, L. C., Noyes, P. D., & Leibowitz, S. G. (2022) · Water Resources Research · doi:10.1029/2021wr030699 · Cited by 241
Wildfires Alter Forest Watersheds and Threaten Drinking Water Quality
Hohner, A. K., Rhoades, C. C., Wilkerson, P., & Rosario-Ortiz, F. L. (2019) · Accounts of Chemical Research · doi:10.1021/acs.accounts.8b00670 · Cited by 237
Self-citationFire severity effects on ash chemical composition and water-extractable elements
Pereira, P., Úbeda, X., & Martin, D. A. (2012) · Geoderma · doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.02.005 · Cited by 215
Fire and amphibians in North America
Pilliod, D. S., Bury, R. B., Hyde, E. J., Pearl, C. A., & Corn, P. S. (2003) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(03)00060-4 · Cited by 212
Wildfire effects on stream food webs and nutrient dynamics in Glacier National Park, USA
Spencer, C. N., Gabel, K. O., & Hauer, F. R. (2003) · Forest Ecology and Management · doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(03)00058-6 · Cited by 205
Manual for soil and water analysis
Loveland, P. J. (1997) · CATENA · doi:10.1016/s0341-8162(97)00024-6 · Cited by 195
Assessing contaminated sediments in the context of multiple stressors
Burton, G. A., & Johnston, E. (2010) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.332 · Cited by 176
Conversion of tropical dry forest to pasture and agriculture
Maass, J. M. (1995) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511753398.017 · Cited by 166
Risk of post-fire metal mobilization into surface water resources: A review
Abraham, J., Dowling, K., & Florentine, S. (2017) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.05.096 · Cited by 156
Campos, I., Abrantes, N., Keizer, J. J., Vale, C., & Pereira, P. (2016) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.01.190 · Cited by 152
Scientists' warning on extreme wildfire risks to water supply
Robinne, F., Hallema, D. W., Bladon, K. D., Flannigan, M. D., Boisramé, G., Bréthaut, C. M., Doerr, S. H., Di Baldassarre, G., Gallagher, L. A., Hohner, A. K., et al. (2021) · Hydrological Processes · doi:10.1002/hyp.14086 · Cited by 149
Self-citationGoforth, B. R., Graham, R. C., Hubbert, K. R., Zanner, C. W., & Minnich, R. A. (2005) · International Journal of Wildland Fire · doi:10.1071/wf05038 · Cited by 146
Wildfire Altering Terrestrial Precursors of Disinfection Byproducts in Forest Detritus
Wang, J.-J., Dahlgren, R. A., Erşan, M. S., Karanfil, T., & Chow, A. T. (2015) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es505836m · Cited by 134
Jensen, M., Michelsen, A., & Gashaw, M. (2001) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/s004420000627 · Cited by 119
Santín, C., Doerr, S. H., Otero, X. L., & Chafer, C. J. (2015) · Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2015.06.041 · Cited by 119
Self-citationBurton, C. A., Hoefen, T. M., Plumlee, G. S., Baumberger, K. L., Backlin, A. R., Gallegos, E., & Fisher, R. N. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0153372 · Cited by 119
Fire and rain: A systematic review of the impacts of wildfire and associated runoff on aquatic fauna
Isaza, D. F. G., Cramp, R. L., & Franklin, C. E. (2022) · Global Change Biology · doi:10.1111/gcb.16088 · Cited by 118
Physical and biological controls on fine sediment transport and storage in rivers
Wilkes, M., Gittins, J. R., Mathers, K. L., Mason, R. J., Casas‐Mulet, R., Vanzo, D., Mckenzie, M., Murray‐Bligh, J., England, J., Gurnell, A. M., et al. (2018) · Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Water · doi:10.1002/wat2.1331 · Cited by 116
Fire Severity, Ash Deposition, and Clipping Effects on Soil Nutrients in Chaparral
Marion, G. M., Moreno, J. M., & Oechel, W. C. (1991) · Soil Science Society of America Journal · doi:10.2136/sssaj1991.03615995005500010040x · Cited by 114
Harper, A. R., Santin, C., Doerr, S. H., Froyd, C. A., Albini, D., Otero, X. L., Viñas, L., & Pérez-Fernández, B. (2019) · International Journal of Wildland Fire · doi:10.1071/wf18200 · Cited by 108
Self-citationFire, Flood, and Drought: Extreme Climate Events Alter Flow Paths and Stream Chemistry
Murphy, S. F., McCleskey, R. B., Martin, D. A., Writer, J. H., & Ebel, B. A. (2018) · Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences · doi:10.1029/2017jg004349 · Cited by 101
Self-citationAssessment of the toxicity of ash-loaded runoff from a recently burnt eucalypt plantation
Campos, I., Abrantes, N., Vidal, T., Bastos, A. C., Gonçalves, F., & Keizer, J. J. (2012) · European Journal of Forest Research · doi:10.1007/s10342-012-0640-7 · Cited by 101
Toxicity assessment of aqueous extracts of ash from forest fires
Silva, V., Pereira, J. L., Campos, I., Keizer, J. J., Gonçalves, F., & Abrantes, N. (2015) · CATENA · doi:10.1016/j.catena.2014.06.021 · Cited by 101
Nunes, J. P., Doerr, S. H., Sheridan, G., Neris, J., Santín, C., Emelko, M. B., Silins, U., Robichaud, P. R., Elliot, W. J., & Keizer, J. (2018) · Hydrological Processes · doi:10.1002/hyp.11434 · Cited by 97
Self-citationPre- and post-fire pollutant loads in an urban fringe watershed in Southern California
Burke, M. P., Hogue, T. S., Kinoshita, A. M., Barco, J., Wessel, C., & Stein, E. D. (2013) · Environmental Monitoring and Assessment · doi:10.1007/s10661-013-3318-9 · Cited by 89
Stormwater contaminant loading following southern California wildfires
Stein, E. D., Brown, J. S., Hogue, T. S., Burke, M. P., & Kinoshita, A. (2012) · Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry · doi:10.1002/etc.1994 · Cited by 81
Hageman, P. L. (2007) · Techniques and methods · doi:10.3133/tm5d3 · Cited by 81
Effects of wildfire on mercury mobilisation in eucalypt and pine forests
Campos, I., Vale, C., Abrantes, N., Keizer, J. J., & Pereira, P. (2015) · CATENA · doi:10.1016/j.catena.2015.02.024 · Cited by 81
Sigmund, G., Santín, C., Pignitter, M., Tepe, N., Doerr, S. H., & Hofmann, T. (2021) · Communications Earth & Environment · doi:10.1038/s43247-021-00138-2 · Cited by 78
Self-citationDas, P. C., Ayyappan, S., & Jena, J. K. (2006) · Aquaculture · doi:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2006.02.019 · Cited by 78
Santín, C., Otero, X. L., Doerr, S. H., & Chafer, C. J. (2018) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.10.116 · Cited by 76
Self-citationCosta, M. R., Calvão, A. R., & Aranha, J. (2014) · Applied Geochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.apgeochem.2013.09.009 · Cited by 75
Temporal patterns of solute loss following wildfires in Central Portugal
Ferreira, A. J. D., Coelho, C. O. A., Boulet, A. K., & Lopes, F. P. (2005) · International Journal of Wildland Fire · doi:10.1071/wf05043 · Cited by 75
Wolf, R. E., Morman, S. A., Hageman, P. L., Hoefen, T. M., & Plumlee, G. S. (2011) · Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry · doi:10.1007/s00216-011-5275-x · Cited by 71
Gustine, R. N., Hanan, E. J., Robichaud, P. R., & Elliot, W. J. (2021) · Biogeochemistry · doi:10.1007/s10533-021-00861-0 · Cited by 69
Self-citationOliveira-Filho, E. C., Brito, D. Q., Dias, Z. M. B., Guarieiro, M. S., Carvalho, E. L., Fascineli, M. L., Niva, C. C., & Grisolia, C. K. (2018) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.11.051 · Cited by 67
Balfour, V. N., & Woods, S. W. (2013) · CATENA · doi:10.1016/j.catena.2013.06.014 · Cited by 65
Wildfire-driven changes in hydrology mobilize arsenic and metals from legacy mine waste
Murphy, S. F., McCleskey, R. B., Martin, D. A., Holloway, J. M., & Writer, J. H. (2020) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140635 · Cited by 65
Self-citationWildfire aerosol deposition likely amplified a summertime Arctic phytoplankton bloom
Ardyna, M., Hamilton, D. S., Harmel, T., Lacour, L., Bernstein, D. N., Laliberté, J., Horvat, C., Laxenaire, R., Mills, M. M., A, G. L. V. D., et al. (2022) · Communications Earth & Environment · doi:10.1038/s43247-022-00511-9 · Cited by 62
Santín, C., Doerr, S. H., Shakesby, R. A., Bryant, R., Sheridan, G. J., Lane, P. N. J., Smith, H. G., & Bell, T. L. (2012) · European Journal of Forest Research · doi:10.1007/s10342-012-0595-8 · Cited by 60
Self-citationAquatic ecotoxicity of ashes from Brazilian savanna wildfires
Brito, D. Q., Passos, C. J. S., Muniz, D. H. F., & Oliveira-Filho, E. C. (2017) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-017-9578-0 · Cited by 57
Alexakis, D. E. (2020) · Environmental Research · doi:10.1016/j.envres.2020.109153 · Cited by 54
Short-term effects of experimental burning on soil nutrients in the Cantabrian heathlands
Marcos, E., Villalón, C., Calvo, L., & Luis‐Calabuig, E. (2009) · Ecological Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.ecoleng.2008.12.011 · Cited by 49
Wildfires and water chemistry: effect of metals associated with wood ash
Cerrato, J. M., Blake, J. M., Hirani, C., Clark, A. L., Ali, A.-M. S., Artyushkova, K., Peterson, E. J., & Bixby, R. J. (2016) · Environmental Science Processes & Impacts · doi:10.1039/c6em00123h · Cited by 48
Origin, Reactivity, and Bioavailability of Mercury in Wildfire Ash
Ku, P., Tsui, M. T., Nie, X., Chen, H., Hoang, T. C., Blum, J. D., Dahlgren, R. A., & Chow, A. T.-S. (2018) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.8b03729 · Cited by 47
Wildland-urban interface fire ashes as a major source of incidental nanomaterials
Alshehri, T., Wang, J., Singerling, S. A., Gigault, J., Webster, J. P., Matiasek, S. J., Alpers, C. N., & Baalousha, M. (2022) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2022.130311 · Cited by 47
The Environmental and Medical Geochemistry of Potentially Hazardous Materials Produced by Disasters
Plumlee, G. S., Morman, S. A., Meeker, G. P., Hoefen, T. M., Hageman, P. L., & Wolf, R. E. (2013) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-095975-7.00907-4 · Cited by 42
Gonino, G. M. R., Branco, P., Benedito, E., Ferreira, M. T., & Santos, J. M. (2019) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.02.108 · Cited by 41
Potentially Toxic Substances and Associated Risks in Soils Affected by Wildfires: A Review
Marcos, M. L. F. (2022) · Toxics · doi:10.3390/toxics10010031 · Cited by 41
Quigley, K. M., Wildt, R. E., Sturtevant, B. R., Kolka, R. K., Dickinson, M. B., Kern, C. C., Donner, D. M., & Miesel, J. (2019) · Fire Ecology · doi:10.1186/s42408-018-0015-7 · Cited by 37
Simon, E., Choi, S., & Park, M. (2016) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.06.030 · Cited by 37
Chen, H., Wang, J., Ku, P., Tsui, M. T., Abney, R., Berhe, A. A., Zhang, Q., Burton, S., Dahlgren, R. A., & Chow, A. T.-S. (2022) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.2c00426 · Cited by 37
Neris, J., Santín, C., Lew, R., Robichaud, P. R., Elliot, W. J., Lewis, S. A., Sheridan, G., Rohlfs, A., Ollivier, Q. R., Oliveira, L., et al. (2021) · Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management · doi:10.1002/ieam.4406 · Cited by 36
Self-citationWan, X., Li, C., & Parikh, S. J. (2021) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111570 · Cited by 35
Remobilisation of industrial lead depositions in ash during Australian wildfires
Wu, L., Taylor, M. P., & Handley, H. (2017) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.05.044 · Cited by 33
Limited Retention of Wildfire‐Derived PAHs and Trace Elements in Indoor Environments
Kohl, L., Meng, M., Vera, J. D., Bergquist, B. A., Cooke, C. A., Hustins, S., Jackson, B., Chow, C., & Chan, A. W. H. (2018) · Geophysical Research Letters · doi:10.1029/2018gl080473 · Cited by 33
Short‐Term Effects of Wildfire Ash on Water Quality Parameters: A Laboratory Approach
de Brito, D. Q., Santos, L. H. G., Passos, C. J. S., & Oliveira-Filho, E. C. (2021) · Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology · doi:10.1007/s00128-021-03220-9 · Cited by 32
Tsai, K.-P., Uzun, H., Karanfil, T., & Chow, A. T. (2017) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.7b01541 · Cited by 30
Can ash from smoldering fires increase peatland soil pH?
Marcotte, A. L., Limpens, J., Stoof, C. R., & Stoorvogel, J. J. (2022) · International Journal of Wildland Fire · doi:10.1071/wf21150 · Cited by 28
Self-citationEvaluating the Persistence of Post-Wildfire Ash: A Multi-Platform Spatiotemporal Analysis
Lewis, S. A., Robichaud, P. R., Hudak, A. T., Strand, E. K., Eitel, J. U. H., & Brown, R. E. (2021) · Fire · doi:10.3390/fire4040068 · Cited by 27
Self-citationSantos, D., Abrantes, N., Campos, I., Domingues, I., & Lopes, I. (2023) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158746 · Cited by 23
Audry, S., Akerman, A., Riotte, J., Oliva, P., Maréchal, J.-C., Fraysse, F., Pokrovsky, O. S., & Braun, J.-J. (2014) · Chemical Geology · doi:10.1016/j.chemgeo.2014.02.016 · Cited by 22
Zhang, Y., Pelletier, R., Noernberg, T., Donner, M. W., Grant‐Weaver, I., Martin, J. W., & Shotyk, W. (2021) · Environment International · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2021.106910 · Cited by 22
Bodí, M. B., Martin, D. A., Balfour, V. N., Santín, C., Doerr, S. H., Pereira, P., Cerdà, A., & Mataix-Solera, J. (2014) · Earth-Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2014.07.005 · Cited by 22
Self-citationHuman risk assessment of ash soil after 2020 wildfires in Pantanal biome (Brazil)
Caumo, S., Lázaro, W. L., Sobreira Oliveira, E., Beringui, K., Gioda, A., Massone, C. G., Carreira, R., de Freitas, D. S., Ignacio, A. R. A., & Hacon, S. (2022) · Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health · doi:10.1007/s11869-022-01248-2 · Cited by 21
Cytotoxic effects of wildfire ashes: In-vitro responses of skin cells
Ré, A., Rocha, A. T., Campos, I., Keizer, J. J., Gonçalves, F. J. M., Oliveira, H., Pereira, J. L., & Abrantes, N. (2021) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2021.117279 · Cited by 20
Wildland fire ash enhances short-term CO2 flux from soil in a Southern African savannah
Sánchez-García, C., Santín, C., Doerr, S. H., Strydom, T., & Urbanek, E. (2021) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108334 · Cited by 20
Self-citationPhosphorus Release from Ash and Remaining Tissues of Two Wetland Species after a Prescribed Fire
Liu, G. D., Gu, B., Miao, S. L., Li, Y. C., Migliaccio, K. W., & Qian, Y. (2010) · Journal of Environmental Quality · doi:10.2134/jeq2009.0461 · Cited by 11
Hageman, P. L., Plumlee, G. S., Martin, D. A., Hoefen, T. M., Meeker, G. P., Adams, M. G., Lamothe, P. J., & Anthony, M. W. (2008) · Antarctica A Keystone in a Changing World · doi:10.3133/ofr20081139 · Cited by 10
Eroded Soils of the Lower Swansea Valley
BRIDGES, E. M. (1969) · Journal of Soil Science · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2389.1969.tb01570.x · Cited by 7
Hageman, P. L., Plumlee, G. S., Martin, D. A., Hoefen, T. M., Adams, M. G., Lamothe, P. J., Todorov, T. I., & Anthony, M. W. (2008) · Antarctica A Keystone in a Changing World · doi:10.3133/ofr20081170 · Cited by 7
Effects of wildfire ash on the growth and biochemical profiles of the aquatic macrophyte Lemna minor
Mesquita, A. F., Abrantes, N., Campos, I., Nunes, C., Coimbra, M. A., Gonçalves, F. J. M., Marques, J. C., & Gonçalves, A. M. M. (2022) · Aquatic Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.aquatox.2022.106245 · Cited by 7
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Jones, M. W., Kelley, D. I., Burton, C., Giuseppe, F. D., Barbosa, M. L. F., Brambleby, E., Hartley, A. J., Lombardi, A., Mataveli, G., McNorton, J., et al. (2024) · Earth system science data · doi:10.5194/essd-16-3601-2024 · Cited by 339
Self-citationMolecular insights and impacts of wildfire-induced soil chemical changes
Lopez, A. M., Avila, C. C. E., VanderRoest, J. P., Roth, H. K., Fendorf, S. E., & Borch, T. (2024) · Nature Reviews Earth & Environment · doi:10.1038/s43017-024-00548-8 · Cited by 106
Impact of wildfire recurrence on soil properties and organic carbon fractions
Salgado, L. G., Álvarez, M. G., Díaz, A. M., Gallego, J. R., & Forján, R. (2024) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2024.120293 · Cited by 31
Maji, K. J., Li, Z., Vaidyanathan, A., Hu, Y., Stowell, J., Milando, C. W., Wellenius, G. A., Kinney, P. L., Russell, A. G., & Odman, M. T. (2024) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.4c00890 · Cited by 26
Luong, H. A., Rohlfs, A., Facey, J. A., Colville, A., & Mitrovic, S. M. (2024) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2024.121547 · Cited by 21
Metadata
- Authors
- Sánchez-García, C., Santín, C., Neris, J., Sigmund, G., Otero, X. L., Manley, J., González-Rodríguez, G., Belcher, C. M., Cerdà, A., Marcotte, A. L., Murphy, S. F., Rhoades, C. C., Sheridan, G., Strydom, T., Robichaud, P. R., & Doerr, S. H.
- Affiliations
- Swansea University (GB)
- Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
- Universidad de La Laguna (ES)
- University of Vienna (AT)
- Universidade de Santiago de Compostela (ES)
- University of Exeter (GB)
- Universitat de València (ES)
- Wageningen University & Research (NL)
- United States Geological Survey (US)
- US Forest Service (US)
- The University of Melbourne (AU)
- South African National Parks (ZA)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Environment International
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-08
- Volume
- 178
- Pages
- 108065
- ISSN
- 0160-4120 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4381948677
- Cited by
- 107
- References
- 90
- Citations by year
- 2026: 37 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 27
- FWCI
- 11.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Environment International (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Repository of Digital Objects for Teaching Research and Culture (University of Valencia) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- Cronfa (Swansea University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Hispana (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (101003890, 860787)
- Natural Environment Research Council (NE/R011125/1, NE/T003553/1)
- Leverhulme Trust (RPG-2014-095)
- European Commission
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
- Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Geochemistry and Petrology › Coal and Its By-products
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Toxic Organic Pollutants Impact
- Keywords
- wildfire ash, ash composition, heavy metals, manganese, zinc, lead, burn severity, organic carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus, water-soluble fraction, environmental contamination
- MeSH terms
- Wildfires, Carbon, Humans, Magnesium, Nitrogen, Socioeconomic Factors, Water, Ecosystem
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
