Cited by 455Fire effects on ecosystemsRangeland and Wildlife ManagementEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

Patch Mosaic Burning for Biodiversity Conservation: a Critique of the Pyrodiversity Paradigm

PARR, CATHERINE L., ANDERSEN, ALAN N.·2006·Conservation Biology

Abstract

Abstract: Fire management is increasingly focusing on introducing heterogeneity in burning patterns under the assumption that “pyrodiversity begets biodiversity.” This concept has been formalized as patch mosaic burning (PMB), in which fire is manipulated to create a mosaic of patches representative of a range of fire histories to generate heterogeneity across space and time. Although PMB is an intuitively appealing concept, it has received little critical analysis. Thus we examined ecosystems where PMB has received the most attention and has been the most extensively implemented: tropical and subtropical savannas of Australia and Africa. We identified serious shortcomings of PMB: the ecological significance of different burning patterns remains unknown and details of desired fire mosaics remain unspecified. This has led to fire‐management plans based on pyrodiversity rhetoric that lacks substance in terms of operational guidelines and capacity for meaningful evaluation. We also suggest that not all fire patterns are ecologically meaningful: this seems particularly true for the highly fire‐prone savannas of Australia and South Africa. We argue that biodiversity‐needs‐pyrodiversity advocacy needs to be replaced with a more critical consideration of the levels of pyrodiversity needed for biodiversity and greater attention to operational guidelines for its implementation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00492.x

Cites

3 of 3 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?

  • Spatial and temporal heterogeneity of fire regimes can either increase or decrease biodiversity, but existing examples are ecosystem-dependent.

    “Third, the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of fire regimes can either increase or decrease biodiversity, but existing examples are ecosystem-dependent (Martin & Sapsis, 1992;Parr & Andersen, 2006)”

    From Fire as a fundamental ecological process: Research advances and frontiers (2020) · cites this paper as Parr & Andersen, 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
PARR, C. L., & ANDERSEN, A. N.
Affiliations
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (AU)
Corresponding author
PARR, CATHERINE L.
Venue
Conservation Biology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006-07-19
Volume
20
Issue
6
Pages
1610-1619
ISSN
  • 0888-8892 (ISSN-L)
  • 1523-1739
OpenAlex
W2121352324
Cited by
455
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 30
FWCI
10.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Conservation Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Rangeland and Wildlife Management
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Keywords
pyrodiversity, fire management, savanna fire regimes, fire history, biodiversity conservation, fire management planning, operational guidelines, Australia, Africa
MeSH terms
Animals, Conservation of Natural Resources, Environmental Monitoring, Fires, Humans, Population Density, Population Dynamics, Ecosystem, Biodiversity

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