Cited by 259Fire effects on ecosystemsDisaster Management and ResilienceRangeland and Wildlife Management

Characterizing wildfire regimes in the United States

Open access
Malamud, Bruce D., Millington, James D. A., Perry, George L. W.·2005·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Wildfires statistics for the conterminous United States (U.S.) are examined in a spatially and temporally explicit manner. We use a high-resolution data set consisting of 88,916 U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service wildfires over the time period 1970-2000 and consider wildfire occurrence as a function of ecoregion (land units classified by climate, vegetation, and topography), ignition source (anthropogenic vs. lightning), and decade. For the conterminous U.S., we ( i ) find that wildfires exhibit robust frequency-area power-law behavior in 18 different ecoregions; ( ii ) use normalized power-law exponents to compare the scaling of wildfire-burned areas between ecoregions, finding a systematic change from east to west; ( iii ) find that wildfires in the eastern third of the U.S. have higher power-law exponents for anthropogenic vs. lightning ignition sources; and ( iv ) calculate recurrence intervals for wildfires of a given burned area or larger for each ecoregion, allowing for the classification of wildfire regimes for probabilistic hazard estimation in the same vein as is now used for earthquakes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0500880102

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Several studies indicate that people are important in redistributing ignition sources, especially where lightning is rare or not concurrent with dry conditions.

    “However, several studies suggest that humans play an important role in redistributing ignitions (20–22), particularly where lightning rarely occurs or where lightning is not concurrent with dry conditions (23).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Malamud, B. D., Millington, J. D. A., & Perry, G. L. W.
Affiliations
University of Auckland (NZ)
Corresponding author
Malamud, Bruce D.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2005-03-21
Volume
102
Issue
13
Pages
4694-4699
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2125408438
Cited by
259
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 14
FWCI
13.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Durham Research Online (Durham University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
Keywords
wildfire regimes, flow index, ecoregions, anthropogenic ignition, lightning ignition, return periods, burned area, contiguous United States

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