Cited by 1,176Fire effects on ecosystemsRangeland and Wildlife ManagementPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics

Fire as an evolutionary pressure shaping plant traits

Keeley, Jon E., Pausas, Juli G., Rundel, Philip W., Bond, William J., Bradstock, Ross A.·2011·Trends in Plant Science

Abstract

Traits, such as resprouting, serotiny and germination by heat and smoke, are adaptive in fire-prone environments. However, plants are not adapted to fire per se but to fire regimes. Species can be threatened when humans alter the regime, often by increasing or decreasing fire frequency. Fire-adaptive traits are potentially the result of different evolutionary pathways. Distinguishing between traits that are adaptations originating in response to fire or exaptations originating in response to other factors might not always be possible. However, fire has been a factor throughout the history of land-plant evolution and is not strictly a Neogene phenomenon. Mesozoic fossils show evidence of fire-adaptive traits and, in some lineages, these might have persisted to the present as fire adaptations.

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 · 10.1016/j.tplants.2011.04.002

Cites

34 of 34 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

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keeley, J. E., Pausas, J. G., Rundel, P. W., Bond, W. J., & Bradstock, R. A.
Affiliations
  • United States Geological Survey (US)
  • Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
  • University of Wollongong (AU)
Corresponding author
Keeley, Jon E.
Venue
Trends in Plant Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-08
Volume
16
Issue
8
Pages
406-411
ISSN
1360-1385 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1989849167
Cited by
1,176
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 93 · 2025: 108 · 2024: 79 · 2023: 121 · 2022: 97 · 2021: 91 · 2020: 87 · 2019: 73 · 2018: 73 · 2017: 67 · 2016: 74 · 2015: 68 · 2014: 50 · 2013: 43 · 2012: 31
FWCI
4.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Trends in Plant Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Keywords
fire adaptation, fire regimes, plant evolution, resprouting, serotiny, exaptation, Mesozoic fossils, fire frequency, land plant evolution
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Physiological, Biological Evolution, Fires, Hot Temperature, Plants, Seeds, Ecosystem, Plant Physiological Phenomena, Germination, Plant Development

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