Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 450

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The importance of low atmospheric CO2 and fire in promoting the spread of grasslands and savannas

BOND, W. J., MIDGLEY, G. F., WOODWARD, F. I.·2003·Global Change Biology

Abstract

The distribution and abundance of trees can be strongly affected by disturbance such as fire. In mixed tree/grass ecosystems, recurrent grass‐fuelled fires can strongly suppress tree saplings and therefore control tree dominance. We propose that changes in atmospheric [CO 2] could influence tree cover in such metastable ecosystems by altering their postburn recovery rates relative to flammable herbaceous growth forms such as grasses. Slow sapling recovery rates at low [CO 2] would favour the spread of grasses and a reduction of tree cover. To test the possible importance of [CO 2]/fire interactions, we first used a Dynamic Global Vegetation Model (DGVM) to simulate biomass in grassy ecosystems in South Africa with and without fire. The results indicate that fire has a major effect under higher rainfall conditions suggesting an important role for fire/[CO 2] interactions. We then used a demographic model of the effects of fire on mesic savanna trees to test the importance of grass/tree differences in postburn recovery rates. We adjusted grass and tree growth in the model according to the DGVM output of net primary production at different [CO 2] relative to current conditions. The simulations predicted elimination of trees at [CO 2] typical of the last glacial period (180 ppm) because tree growth rate is too slow (15 years) to grow to a fire‐proof size of ca. 3 m. Simulated grass growth would produce an adequate fuel load for a burn in only 2 years. Simulations of preindustrial [CO 2] (270 ppm) predict occurrence of trees but at low densities. The greatest increase in trees occurs from preindustrial to current [CO 2] (360 ppm). The simulations are consistent with palaeo‐records which indicate that trees disappeared from sites that are currently savannas in South Africa in the last glacial. Savanna trees reappeared in the Holocene. There has also been a large increase in trees over the last 50–100 years. We suggest that slow tree recovery after fire, rather than differential photosynthetic efficiencies in C 3 and C 4 plants, might have been the significant factor in the Late Tertiary spread of flammable grasslands under low [CO 2] because open, high light environments would have been a prerequisite for the spread of C 4 grasses. Our simulations suggest further that low [CO 2] could have been a significant factor in the reduction of trees during glacial times, because of their slower regrowth after disturbance, with fire favouring the spread of grasses.

Overview

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 · 10.1046/j.1365-2486.2003.00577.x

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
BOND, W. J., MIDGLEY, G. F., & WOODWARD, F. I.
Venue
Global Change Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-06-25
Volume
9
Issue
7
Pages
973-982
ISSN
  • 1354-1013 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2486
OpenAlex
W1980247197
Cited by
450
References
0
FWCI
15.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.