Cited by 148Fire effects on ecosystemsEcosystem dynamics and resilienceRangeland and Wildlife Management

A conceptual framework for predicting temperate ecosystem sensitivity to human impacts on fire regimes

Open access
McWethy, D. B., Higuera, P. E., Whitlock, C., Veblen, T. T., Bowman, D. M. J. S., Cary, G. J., Haberle, S. G., Keane, R. E. +6 more·2013·Global Ecology and Biogeography

Abstract

Aim: The increased incidence of large fires around much of the world in recent decades raises questions about human and non‐human drivers of fire and the likelihood of increased fire activity in the future. The purpose of this paper is to outline a conceptual framework for examining where human‐set fires and feedbacks are likely to be most pronounced in temperate forests world‐wide and to establish and test a methodology for evaluating this framework using palaeoecological records. Location: T asmania, north‐western USA, southern S outh A merica and N ew Z ealand. Methods: We outline a conceptual framework for predicting the sensitivity of ecosystems to human impacts on fire regimes and then use a circum‐P acific comparison of existing historical reconstructions of fire, climate, human settlement and vegetation to evaluate this approach. Results: Previous research investigating important controls on fire activity shows that the sensitivity of temperate ecosystems to human‐set fires is modulated by the frequency of natural fire occurrence, fuel moisture and fuel type and availability. Palaeoecological data from four temperate regions suggest that the effects of anthropogenic burning are greatest where fire is naturally rare, vegetation is poorly adapted to fire and fuel biomass is abundant and contiguous. Alternatively, where fire activity is naturally high and vegetation is well adapted to fire, evidence of human influence on fire and vegetation is less obvious. Main conclusions: Palaeofire records suggest that the most dynamic and persistent ecosystem transitions occur where human activities increase landscape flammability through fire–vegetation feedbacks. Rapid forest transitions in biomass‐rich ecosystems such as N ew Z ealand and areas of Tasmania and southern South America illustrate how landscapes experiencing few fires can shift past tipping points to become fire‐prone landscapes with new alternative stable state communities. Comparisons of palaeoecological data from different regions with similar biophysical gradients but different human settlement histories can provide new opportunities for understanding ecosystem vulnerability to fire–climate–human interactions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/geb.12038

Cites

8 of 8 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?

  • The mechanisms by which humans alter fire regimes include changing the frequency, timing and spatial distribution of ignition sources; changing fuel structure, composition and loading through land use and land cover change; suppressing fire; and contributing greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

    “The mechanisms by which humans alter fire regimes include: (a) changing the frequency, timing and spatial distribution of ignition sources, (b) changing fuel structure, composition and loading through land use and land cover change, (c) suppressing fire and (d) contributing greenhouse gases to”

    From Fire as a fundamental ecological process: Research advances and frontiers (2020) · cites this paper as McWethy et al., 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
McWethy, D. B., Higuera, P. E., Whitlock, C., Veblen, T. T., Bowman, D. M. J. S., Cary, G. J., Haberle, S. G., Keane, R. E., Maxwell, B. D., McGlone, M. S., Perry, G. L. W., Wilmshurst, J. M., Holz, A., & Tepley, A. J.
Affiliations
  • Montana State University (US)
  • University of Idaho (US)
  • University of Colorado Boulder (US)
  • University of Tasmania (AU)
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • US Forest Service (US)
  • Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research (NZ)
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
Corresponding author
McWethy, D. B.
Venue
Global Ecology and Biogeography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-01-29
Volume
22
Issue
8
Pages
900-912
ISSN
  • 1466-822X (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-8238
OpenAlex
W2099289056
Cited by
148
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 4
FWCI
12.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Global Ecology and Biogeography (publishedVersion)
  • eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Ecosystem dynamics and resilience
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
Keywords
fire regimes, anthropogenic burning, temperate forests, fire-vegetation feedbacks, ecological sensitivity, fuel moisture content, fuel availability, fire-adapted vegetation, alternative stable states, tipping points, fire-prone landscapes, fire-climate interactions, settlement history, ecosystem vulnerability

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