Cited by 1,942Fire effects on ecosystemsPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

The global distribution of ecosystems in a world without fire

Bond, W. J., Woodward, F. I., Midgley, G. F.·2005·New Phytologist

Abstract

This paper is the first global study of the extent to which fire determines global vegetation patterns by preventing ecosystems from achieving the potential height, biomass and dominant functional types expected under the ambient climate (climate potential). To determine climate potential, we simulated vegetation without fire using a dynamic global-vegetation model. Model results were tested against fire exclusion studies from different parts of the world. Simulated dominant growth forms and tree cover were compared with satellite-derived land- and tree-cover maps. Simulations were generally consistent with results of fire exclusion studies in southern Africa and elsewhere. Comparison of global 'fire off' simulations with landcover and treecover maps show that vast areas of humid C(4) grasslands and savannas, especially in South America and Africa, have the climate potential to form forests. These are the most frequently burnt ecosystems in the world. Without fire, closed forests would double from 27% to 56% of vegetated grid cells, mostly at the expense of C(4) plants but also of C(3) shrubs and grasses in cooler climates. C(4) grasses began spreading 6-8 Ma, long before human influence on fire regimes. Our results suggest that fire was a major factor in their spread into forested regions, splitting biotas into fire tolerant and intolerant taxa.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1469-8137.2004.01252.x

Cites

117 of 117 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Wildfires are essential to ecosystem function across the globe and influence a wide spectrum of ecosystem components and natural processes, including the hydrological cycle.

    “Wildfires are essential to ecosystem function across the globe [1], influencing a wide spectrum of ecosystem components and natural processes [2], among which is the hydrological cycle.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 118 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bond, W. J., Woodward, F. I., & Midgley, G. F.
Affiliations
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • Conservation International (US)
Venue
New Phytologist
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-11-12
Volume
165
Issue
2
Pages
525-538
ISSN
  • 0028-646X (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8137
OpenAlex
W2110659496
Cited by
1,942
References
118
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 94 · 2024: 82 · 2023: 101 · 2022: 107 · 2021: 121 · 2020: 92 · 2019: 115 · 2018: 114 · 2017: 112 · 2016: 112 · 2015: 119 · 2014: 110 · 2013: 118 · 2012: 95
FWCI
32.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • New Phytologist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
  • National Research Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Plant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Keywords
fire, fire suppression, dynamic global vegetation models, tree cover, C4 grasslands, savanna, forest expansion, fire tolerance
MeSH terms
Biological Evolution, Fires, Models, Biological, Population Dynamics, Ecosystem, Plant Physiological Phenomena, Biomass

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