Cited by 387Fire effects on ecosystemsSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 45 of the 45 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The role of fire in the boreal carbon budget

Open access

Abstract

Summary: To reconcile observations of decomposition rates, carbon inventories, and net primary production (NPP), we estimated long‐term averages for C exchange in boreal forests near Thompson, Manitoba. Soil drainage as defined by water table, moss cover, and permafrost dynamics, is the dominant control on direct fire emissions. In upland forests, an average of about 10–30% of annual NPP was likely consumed by fire over the past 6500 years since these landforms and ecosystems were established. This long‐term, average fire emission is much larger than has been accounted for in global C cycle models and may forecast an increase in fire activity for this region. While over decadal to century times these boreal forests may be acting as slight net sinks for C from the atmosphere to land, periods of drought and severe fire activity may result in net sources of C from these systems.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1365-2486.2000.06019.x

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 45 references

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Apps MJ, 1993, Carbon Cycling in Boreal Forests and Sub‐Arctic Ecosystems, 243
  2. Chapin Fs, 1993, Carbon Cycling in Boreal Forests and Sub‐Arctic Ecosystems, 9
  3. O'neill KP, 1997, The effect of fire on biogenic carbon emissions from soils of interior Alaska, EOS, Transactions of the American Geophysial Union, 77, 46
  4. 10.2307/1551820 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Harden, J. W., Trumbore, S. E., Stocks, B. J., Hirsch, A., Gower, S. T., O'neill, K. P., & Kasischke, E. S.
Affiliations
  • United States Geological Survey (US)
  • University of California, Irvine (US)
  • Natural Resources Canada (CA)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • Duke University (US)
  • Environmental Research Institute of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Harden, J. W.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2000-12
Volume
6
Issue
S1
Pages
174-184
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W2104940013
Cited by
387
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 22 · 2012: 19
FWCI
12.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Global Change Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Keywords
boreal forest, fire emissions, carbon balance, soil drainage, water table, permafrost dynamics, moss cover, net primary productivity, carbon exchange, carbon sinks and sources, drought, long-term carbon cycle

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