Cited by 180Fire effects on ecosystemsFire dynamics and safety researchAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols

Boreal forest fires burn less intensely in Russia than in North America

Wooster, M. J., Zhang, Y. H.·2004·Geophysical Research Letters

Abstract

Around 5–20 million hectares of boreal forest burns annually, mainly in Russia and North America. However, there are reports of significant differences in predominant fire type between these regions, which may have major implications for overall emissions of carbon, gases and aerosols. We examine boreal forest fire intensities via MODIS observations of fire radiative energy release rate. Results support the contention of a consistent difference in fire intensity and mean fuel consumption in Russia and North America, due to differences in dominant fire type. North American fires have higher mean intensities, increasing in proportion to percentage tree cover, characteristics indicating likely crown fire dominance. Russian fires have lower mean intensities, independent of percentage tree cover, characteristics more indicative of surface fire activity. Per unit area burnt, the results suggest Russian fires may burn less fuel and emit fewer products to the atmosphere than do those in North America.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1029/2004gl020805

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The circumpolar boreal forest biome extends through North America and Russia, but fire regimes on the two continents differ: one is characterized by crown fires, and the other by surface fires.

    “The circumpolar boreal forest biome extends through North America and Russia, but fire regimes on the two continents differ: one is characterized by crown fires, and the other by surface fires (23).”

    From Defining pyromes and global syndromes of fire regimes (2013) · cites this paper as [23]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Wooster, M. J., & Zhang, Y. H.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Venue
Geophysical Research Letters
Published
2004-10
Volume
31
Issue
20
ISSN
  • 0094-8276 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-8007
OpenAlex
W2100220720
Cited by
180
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 10
FWCI
6.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Geophysical Research Letters (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Fire dynamics and safety research
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Atmospheric Science › Atmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Keywords
boreal forest fires, fire intensity, MODIS, crown fire, surface fire, fuel consumption, tree cover, CO2 emissions, aerosol emissions, Russia, North America

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