Cited by 49Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyFish Ecology and Management StudiesFire effects on ecosystems

Consecutive wildfires affect stream biota in cold- and warmwater dryland river networks

Open access
Whitney, James E., Gido, Keith B., Pilger, Tyler J., Propst, David L., Turner, Thomas F.·2015·Freshwater Science

Abstract

Climate change and fire suppression have altered fire regimes globally, leading to larger, more frequent, and more severe wildfires. Responses of coldwater stream biota to single wildfires are well studied, but measured responses to consecutive wildfires in warmwater systems that often include mixed assemblages of native and nonnative taxa are lacking. We quantified changes in physical habitat, resource availability, and biomass of cold- and warmwater oligochaetes, insects, crayfish, fishes, and tadpoles following consecutive megafires (covering >100 km2) in the upper Gila River, New Mexico, USA. We were particularly interested in comparing responses of native and nonnative fishes that might have evolved under different disturbance regimes. Changes in habitat and resource availability were related to cumulative fire effects, fire size, and postfire precipitation. The 2nd of 2 consecutive wildfires in the basin was larger and, coupled with moderate postfire discharge, resulted in increased siltation and decreased algal biomass. Several insect taxa responded to these fires with reduced biomass, whereas oligochaete biomass was unaffected. Biomass of 6 of 7 native fish species decreased after the fires, and decreases were associated with site proximity to fire. Nonnative fish decreases after fire were most pronounced for coldwater salmonids, and warmwater nonnative fishes exhibited limited responses. All crayfish and tadpoles collected were nonnative and were unresponsive to fire disturbance. More pronounced responses of native insects and fishes to fires indicate that increasing fire size and frequency threatens the persistence of native fauna and suggests that management activities promoting ecosystem resilience might help ameliorate wildfire effects.

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 · 10.1086/683391

Cites

79 of 79 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

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?

  • Wildfires in New Mexico and southern California led to initial declines in stream algal biomass, up to an order of magnitude lower than pre-fire levels.

    “Wildfires in New Mexico and southern California led to initial declines in stream algal biomass, up to an order of magnitude lower than pre-fire levels (Klose et al., 2015; Whitney et al., 2015).”

    From Wildfire Induces Changes in Receiving Waters: A Review With Considerations for Water Quality Management (2022) · cites this paper as Whitney et al., 2015

    The Abstract places this study in New Mexico, and Resource availability reports that chlorophyll a, a measure of algal biomass, averaged 77% below prefire levels after the second fire. It was unchanged on average after the first fire, and the reported decline is not an order of magnitude. This paper does not study southern California; the sentence also cites a separate source for that location. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In the second study in New Mexico, invertebrate biomass declined almost 82% after more severe fires and some declines lasted for nearly 2 yr.

    “In the second study in New Mexico, invertebrate biomass declined almost 82% after more severe fires and some declines lasted for nearly 2 yr (Whitney et al., 2015).”

    From Wildfire Induces Changes in Receiving Waters: A Review With Considerations for Water Quality Management (2022) · cites this paper as Whitney et al., 2015

    The Benthic macroinvertebrates section (page unavailable) reports an 82% decline in insect biomass after the second fire, but it does not report that decline for invertebrate biomass as a whole; oligochaete biomass was unaffected. The sampling design and insect-family results show declines after the first fire and again after the second, nearly two years later, but do not establish an uninterrupted decline caused by a single fire. The Wildfire characteristics section describes both fires as severe and the second as larger, not more severe. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Brown, J. K. 1990. Effects of fire on streams. Pages 106-110 in F. Richardson and R. H. Hamre (editors). Wild Trout IV: Proceedings of the Symposium. Trout Unlimited, Arlington, Virginia.
  2. Covington, W. W., R. L. Everett, R. Steele, L. L. Irwin, T. A. Daer, and A. N. D. Auclair. 1994. Historical and anticipated changes in forest ecosystems of the Inland West of the United States. Pages 13-63 in R. N. Sampson and D. L. Adams (editors). Assessing forest ecosystem health in the Inland West. The Haworth Press, New York.
  3. Hall, J. D., and R. L. Lantz. 1969. Effects of logging on the habi- tat of coho salmon and cutthroat trout in coastal streams. Pages 335-375 in T. G. Northcote (editor). Symposium on Salmon and Trout in streams. MacMillan Lectures in Fisher- ies, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
  4. Lyons, J., L. Wang, and T. D. Simson. 1996. Development and validation of an index of biotic integrity for coldwater streams in Wisconsin. North American Journal of Fisheries Manage- ment 16:241-256.
  5. Minckley, W. L., and J. E. Deacon. 1991. Battle against extinction: native fish management in the American west. University of Arizona Press, Tucson, Arizona.
  6. Rieman, B. E., and J. Clayton. 1997. Wildfire and native fish: issues of forest health and conservation of sensitive species. Fisheries 22(11):6-15.
  7. Rieman, B., R. Gresswell, and J. Rinne. 2012. Fire and fish: a synthesis of observation and experience. Pages 159-175 in C. Luce, P. Morgan, K. Dwire, D. Isaak, Z. Holden, and B. Rieman (editors). Climate change, forests, fire, water, and fish: building resilient landscapes, streams, and managers. General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-290. Rocky Mountain Research Station, US Department of Agriculture Forest Ser- vice, Fort Collins, Colorado.
  8. Rieman, B., D. Lee, G. Chandler, and D. Myers. 1995. Does wildfire threaten extinction for salmonids? Responses of red- band trout and bull trout following recent large fires on the Boise National Forest. Pages 47-57 in Proceedings-Fire Ef- fects on Rare and Endangered Species and Habitats Con- ference. International Association of Wildland Fire, Coeur d' Alene, Idaho.
  9. Smale, M. A., and C. F. Rabeni. 1995. Hypoxia and hyperthermia tolerances of headwater stream fishes. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 124:698-710.
  10. Swetnam, T. W. 1990. Fire history and climate in the southwestern United States. Pages 6-17 in J. S. Krames (editor). Proceedings of Symposium on Effects of Fire in Management of Southwest- ern US Natural Resources. US Forest Service, Tucson, Arizona.
  11. Thorp, J. H., and A. P. Covich (editors). 2001. Ecology and classification of North American freshwater invertebrates. Aca- demic Press, San Diego, California.
  12. Young, M. K. 2012. Aquatic species invasions in the context of fire and climate change. Pages 195-207 in C. Luce, P. Morgan, K. Dwire, D. Isaak, Z. Holden, and B. Rieman (editors). Cli- mate change, forests, fire, water, and fish: building resilient landscapes, streams, and managers. General Technical Re- port RMRS-GTR-290. Rocky Mountain Research Station, US Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Whitney, J. E., Gido, K. B., Pilger, T. J., Propst, D. L., & Turner, T. F.
Affiliations
  • Kansas State University (US)
  • University of New Mexico (US)
Corresponding author
  • Whitney, James E.
  • Gido, Keith B.
  • Pilger, Tyler J.
  • Propst, David L.
  • Turner, Thomas F.
Venue
Freshwater Science
Published
2015-12-01
Volume
34
Issue
4
Pages
1510-1526
ISSN
  • 2161-9549 (ISSN-L)
  • 2161-9565
OpenAlex
W2291316915
Cited by
49
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
FWCI
2.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Freshwater Science (publishedVersion)
  • K-State Research Exchange (Kansas State University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • New Mexico Department of Game and Fish
  • Nature Conservancy
  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
  • Bureau of Reclamation
  • U.S. Forest Service
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
Keywords
megafires, stream biota, cold streams, warmwater streams, native fish, nonnative fish, salmonids, crayfish, tadpoles, insects, Oligochaeta, siltation, algal biomass, fire size, ecosystem resilience

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