Cited by 37Hydrology and Watershed Management StudiesPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFire effects on ecosystems

Key landscape and biotic indicators of watersheds sensitivity to forest disturbance identified using remote sensing and historical hydrography data

Open access
Buma, Brian, Livneh, Ben·2017·Environmental Research Letters

Abstract

Water is one of the most critical resources derived from natural systems.While it has long been recognized that forest disturbances like fire influence watershed streamflow characteristics, individual studies have reported conflicting results with some showing streamflow increases postdisturbance and others decreases, while other watersheds are insensitive to even large disturbance events.Characterizing the differences between sensitive (e.g.where streamflow does change postdisturbance) and insensitive watersheds is crucial to anticipating response to future disturbance events.Here, we report on an analysis of a national-scale, gaged watershed database together with high-resolution forest mortality imagery.A simple watershed response model was developed based on the runoff ratio for watersheds (n ¼ 73) prior to a major disturbance, detrended for variation in precipitation inputs.Post-disturbance deviations from the expected water yield and streamflow timing from expected (based on observed precipitation) were then analyzed relative to the abiotic and biotic characteristics of the individual watershed and observed extent of forest mortality.The extent of the disturbance was significantly related to change in post-disturbance water yield (p < 0.05), and there were several distinctive differences between watersheds exhibiting post-disturbance increases, decreases, and those showing no change in water yield.Highly disturbed, arid watersheds with low soil: water contact time are the most likely to see increases, with the magnitude positively correlated with the extent of disturbance.Watersheds dominated by deciduous forest with low bulk density soils typically show reduced yield post-disturbance.Postdisturbance streamflow timing change was associated with climate, forest type, and soil.Snowy coniferous watersheds were generally insensitive to disturbance, whereas finely textured soils with rapid runoff were sensitive.This is the first national scale investigation of streamflow postdisturbance using fused gage and remotely sensed data at high resolution, and gives important insights that can be used to anticipate changes in streamflow resulting from future disturbances.

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 · 10.1088/1748-9326/aa7091

Cites

65 of 65 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?

  • Our results corroborate recent evidence of significant increases in river flow following wildland fires in arid watersheds such as New Mexico and Colorado.

    “Our results corroborate with recent evidence of significant increases in river flow following wildland fires in arid watersheds, such as New Mexico and Colorado9,16,22.”

    From Burned forests impact water supplies (2018) · cites this paper as [22]

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Buma, B., & Livneh, B.
Affiliations
  • University of Alaska Southeast (US)
  • Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (US)
Corresponding author
Buma, Brian
Venue
Environmental Research Letters
Published
2017-07-01
Volume
12
Issue
7
Pages
074028
ISSN
1748-9326 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2610386429
Cited by
37
References
65
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environmental Research Letters (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • NOAA Institutional Repository (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • CU Scholar (University of Colorado Boulder) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • ScholarWorks - UA (University of Alaska System) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (OIA-1208927)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Hydrology and Watershed Management Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
Keywords
forest disturbance, streamflow response, forest mortality, water yield, runoff coefficient, soil bulk density, deciduous forest, snowmelt, soil texture, landscape indicators, biotic indicators, historical hydrography, forest fires

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