Background: Few studies have examined post-fire vegetation recovery in temperate forest ecosystems with Landsat time series analysis. We analyzed time series of Normalized Burn Ratio (NBR) derived from LandTrendr spectral-temporal segmentation fitting to examine post-fire NBR recovery for several wildfires that occurred in three different coniferous forest types in western North America during the years 2000 to 2007. We summarized NBR recovery trends, and investigated the influence of burn severity, post-fire climate, and topography on post-fire vegetation recovery via random forest (RF) analysis. Results: NBR recovery across forest types averaged 30 to 44% five years post fire, 47 to 72% ten years post fire, and 54 to 77% 13 years post fire, and varied by time since fire, severity, and forest type. Recovery rates were generally greatest for several years following fire. Recovery in terms of percent NBR was often greater for higher-severity patches. Recovery rates varied between forest types, with conifer−oak−chaparral showing the greatest NBR recovery rates, mixed conifer showing intermediate rates, and ponderosa pine showing slowest rates. Between 1 and 28% of patches had recovered to pre-fire NBR levels 9 to 16 years after fire, with greater percentages of low-severity patches showing full NBR recovery. Precipitation decreased and temperatures generally remained the same or increased post fire. Pre-fire NBR and burn severity were important predictors of NBR recovery for all forest types, and explained 2 to 6% of the variation in post-fire NBR recovery. Post-fire climate anomalies were also important predictors of NBR recovery and explained an additional 30 to 41% of the variation in post-fire NBR recovery. Conclusions: Landsat time series analysis was a useful means of describing and analyzing post-fire vegetation recovery across mixed-severity wildfire extents. We demonstrated that a relationship exists between post-fire vegetation recovery and climate in temperate ecosystems of western North America. Our methods could be applied to other burned landscapes for which spatially explicit measurements of post-fire vegetation recovery are needed.
The potential ecological and economic effects of climate change for tropical islands were studied using output from 12 statistically downscaled general circulation models (GCMs) taking Puerto Rico as a test case. Two model selection/model averaging strategies were used: the average of all available GCMs and the average of the models that are able to reproduce the observed large-scale dynamics that control precipitation over the Caribbean. Five island-wide and multidecadal averages of daily precipitation and temperature were estimated by way of a climatology-informed interpolation of the site-specific downscaled climate model output. Annual cooling degree-days (CDD) were calculated as a proxy index for air-conditioning energy demand, and two measures of annual no-rainfall days were used as drought indices. Holdridge life zone classification was used to map the possible ecological effects of climate change. Precipitation is predicted to decline in both model ensembles, but the decrease was more severe in the “regionally consistent” models. The precipitation declines cause gradual and linear increases in drought intensity and extremes. The warming from the 1960–90 period to the 2071–99 period was 4.6°–9°C depending on the global emission scenarios and location. This warming may cause increases in CDD, and consequently increasing energy demands. Life zones may shift from wetter to drier zones with the possibility of losing most, if not all, of the subtropical rain forests and extinction risks to rain forest specialists or obligates.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.