Cited by 57Fire effects on ecosystemsForest Insect Ecology and ManagementForest Management and Policy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 52 of the 52 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Wildfire’s resistance to control in mountain pine beetle-attacked lodgepole pine forests

Open access

Abstract

Concerns about the impacts of mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins)-caused tree mortality on wildfire potential in lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta Dougl. var. latifolia Engelm.) forests have to date largely focused on the potential for extreme fire behaviour, including the development and spread of crown fires. Given that the wildland fire environment in which fire managers and firefighters work is composed of many interacting physical and human factors, viewing crown fire behaviour as the only or even the most important outcome of the tree mortality associated with a mountain pine beetle outbreak is questionable. Proper assessment of wildfire potential entails a broader approach, which requires expanding the concept of wildfire resistance to control to include an analysis of all relevant factors and their interactions. In this paper we describe a holistic concept of analyzing the impacts of mountain pine beetle-caused tree mortality on wildfire potential in lodgepole pine forests on the basis of fire behaviour characteristics, fire suppression operations, and firefighter safety considerations within the framework of three recognizable stages of the approximate time since the initiation of an outbreak (i.e., “red” ∼1 to 5 years, “gray” ∼5 to 15 years, and post-epidemic ∼15+ years).

Overview

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 · 10.5558/tfc2013-141

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. Alexander M.E., 2013, Wildfire, 22, 12
  2. Alexander, M.E. and M.G. Cruz. 2013. Chapter 9: Crown fire dynamics in conifer forests. In Synthesis of Knowledge of Extreme Fire Behavior: Volume 2 for Fire Behavior Specialists, Researchers and Meteorologists. USDA For. Serv., Pac. Northwest Res. Stn., Portland, OR. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-[In press].
  3. Barrows J.S., 1974, West. Wildlands, 1, 3
  4. Beaufait W.R., 1961, Pap. Mich. Acad. Sci. Arts Letters, 251
  5. Brown, A.A. and K.P. Davis. 1973. Forest fire: Control and use. 2 nd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York. 686 p.
  6. Cheney N.P., 1994, Instit. For. Aust. – The Forester, 35, 22
  7. Gleason P., 1991, Fire Manage. Notes, 52, 9
  8. Gray R.W., 2013, Fire Manage. Today, 72, 25
  9. Jackson S., 1948, Fire Control Notes., 9, 1
  10. Lotan J.E., 1976, Proc. Tall Timber Fire Ecol. Conf., 14, 267
  11. Manning, T., P. Taudin-Chabot, M. Bunleavey, D. Rowe and N. Densmore. 2000. Dangerous tree assessment – British Columbia’s wildland fire safety module. In B.W. Butler and K. Shannon (eds.). Proceedings of the 2000 International Wildfire Safety Summit. pp. 137–142. (CD-ROM) Int. Assoc. Wildland Fire, Montana City, MT.
  12. Merrill, D.F. and M.E. Alexander (eds.). 1987. Glossary of forest fire management terms. 4 th ed. Natl. Res. Counc. Can., Can. Comm. For. Fire Manage., Ottawa, ON. Publ. NRCC 26516. 91 p.
  13. Page W.G., 2007, For. Sci., 53, 507
  14. Quintilio D., 1988, Fire Manage. Notes, 49, 24
  15. Quintilio, D., T.A. Van Nest, P.J. Murphy and P.M. Woodard. 1990. Determining production rates of initial attack crews. In M.E. Alexander and G.F. Bisgrove (tech. cords.). The Art and Science of Fire Management. pp. 105–113. For. Can., North. For. Cent., Edmonton, AB. Inf. Rep. NOR-X-309.
  16. Stiger, E.M. and C.R. Infanger. 2011. Fire behavior observations in beetle killed trees in Lewis & Clark, Jefferson, Broadwater, and the southwest portion of Cascade County. In R.L. Fox (ed.). Proceedings of 11th International Wildland Fire Safety Summit. (CD-ROM) Int. Assoc. Wildland Fire, Missoula, MT. 3 p.
  17. Van Wagner C.E., 1977, Can. For. Serv. Bi-mon. Res. Notes, 33, 7

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Page, W. G., Alexander, M. E., & Jenkins, M. J.
Affiliations
Utah State University (US)
Venue
The Forestry Chronicle
Published
2013-12
Volume
89
Issue
06
Pages
783-794
ISSN
  • 0015-7546 (ISSN-L)
  • 1499-9315
OpenAlex
W2068033101
Cited by
57
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1
FWCI
3.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Forestry Chronicle (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons - USU (Utah State University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Joint Fire Science Program
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Forest Insect Ecology and Management
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Forest Management and Policy
Keywords
mountain pine beetle, lodgepole pine, Pinus contorta var. latifolia, tree mortality, fire behavior, crown fire, firefighter safety, wildfire management

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