Exploring phosphate effects on leaf flammability using a physical chemistry model

Scarff, Fiona R.; Gray, B.F.; Westoby, Mark

doi:10.1071/wf09065

Cited by 21 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results concur with the conclusion of Scarff et al . (), that effects of P on flammability are likely to be modest relative to those of leaf moisture content. They are also consistent with findings in southern Australian woodlands, that soil fertility could weakly influence fuel accumulation and flammability, but that rainfall was the dominant influence on fire regimes (Gibson et al ., ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does inherent flammability of grass and litter fuels contribute to continental patterns of landscape fire activity?

Prior

Murphy

Williamson

et al. 2016

Journal of Biogeography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To (1) identify the trade‐offs among flammability attributes within grass and litter fuel types; (2) determine how flammability attributes of grass and litter fuels vary across macro‐ecological gradients; and (3) test our hypothesis that inherent flammability attributes of grass and litter fuels scale to satellite‐derived proxies for fire frequency and intensity. Location Continent of Australia. Methods Samples of litter and grass fuels collected from 133 sites across Australia were oven dried, then burnt under controlled conditions. Measurements of ignitability, combustibility and sustainability were made. Estimates of fire frequency and fire radiative power (a proxy for intensity) were derived from satellite imagery. Multivariate analyses were used to identify inter‐relationships among variables and trends across macro‐ecological gradients. Results Flammability was best described by two axes: high rate of combustion versus long duration of burning, and fast rate of spread versus high maximum temperature. As expected, our study confirmed that grass and litter fuel types have inherently differently flammability attributes whereby grass samples burn more quickly, with a higher rate of spread, than litter samples. However, there were also smaller differences in flammability attributes within fuel types, which scaled to rainfall, temperature and soil phosphorus concentrations. In keeping with our hypothesis, we found correlations between inherent fuel flammability attributes and landscape fire activity across the Australian continent. Fire frequency and rate of combustion of grass fuels were both highest in the tropics, and fire intensity and maximum temperature during combustion of litter fuels were highest in temperate areas. Main conclusions At a continental scale, we found landscape fire activity was correlated with inherent flammability of grass and litter fuels. This inherent flammability contributes to observed pyrogeographical patterns that are shaped by climate through its known effects on plant productivity, the abundance of cured grass biomass and fire weather.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our measurements therefore represent the maximum potential flammability of litter and grass fuels at each site. It has also been suggested that soil nutrients, especially phosphorus, could influence flammability through their effects on plant growth, as well as phosphate being a fire retardant (Scarff et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does inherent flammability of grass and litter fuels contribute to continental patterns of landscape fire activity?

Prior

Murphy

Williamson

et al. 2016

Journal of Biogeography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…; Plucinski et al . ; Scarff, Gray & Westoby ). However, the role of interspecific variation in leaf traits in the different phases of a fire deserves more attention (Schwilk & Caprio ; de Magalhães & Schwilk ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In litterbeds, leaf size is a dominant driver of different flammability parameters by influencing the packing (Scarff & Westoby 2006; van Altena et al 2012;Engber & Varner 2012; de Magalhães & Schwilk 2012), while leaf traits such as thickness, moisture content, phosphorus content and secondary chemistry (lignin, terpenoids) are deemed to play important roles as well (Montgomery & Cheo 1971;Ormeño et al 2009;Plucinski et al 2010;Scarff, Gray & Westoby 2012). However, the role of interspecific variation in leaf traits in the different phases of a fire deserves more attention (Schwilk & Caprio 2011;de Magalhães & Schwilk 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Burn or rot: leaf traits explain why flammability and decomposability are decoupled across species

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary In fireprone ecosystems, two important alternative fates for leaves are burning in a wildfire (when alive or as litter) or they get consumed (as litter) by decomposers. The influence of leaf traits on litter decomposition rate is reasonably well understood. In contrast, less is known about the influence of leaf traits on leaf and litter flammability. The aim of this study was twofold: (i) to determine which morphological and chemical leaf traits drive flammability and (ii) to determine whether different (combinations of) morphological and chemical leaf traits drive interspecific variation in decomposition and litter flammability and, in turn, help us understand the relationship between decomposability and flammability. To explore the relationships between leaf traits and flammability of individual leaves, we used 32 evergreen perennial plant species from eastern Australia in standardized experimental burns on three types of leaf material (i.e. fresh, dried and senesced). Next, we compared these trait–flammability relationships to trait–decomposability relationships as obtained from a previous decomposition experiment (focusing on senesced leaves only). Within the three parameters of leaf flammability that we measured, interspecific variation in time to ignition was mainly explained by specific leaf area and moisture content. Flame duration and smoulder duration were mostly explained by leaf dry mass and to a lesser degree by leaf chemistry, namely, nitrogen, phosphorus and tannin concentrations. The variation in the decomposition constant across species was unrelated to our measures of flammability. Moreover, different combinations of morphological and chemical leaf properties underpinned the interspecific variation in decomposability and flammability. In contrast to litter flammability, decomposability was driven by lignin and phosphorus concentrations. The decoupling of flammability and decomposability leads to three possible scenarios for species’ influence on litter fates: (i) fast‐decomposing species for which flammability is irrelevant because there will not be enough litter to support a fire; (ii) species with slow‐decomposing leaves and a high flammability; and (iii) species with slow‐decomposing leaves and a low flammability. We see potential for making use of the decoupled trait–decomposition–flammability relationships when modelling carbon and nutrient fluxes. Including information on leaf traits in models can improve the prediction of fire behaviour. We note that herbivory is another key fate for leaves, but this study was focused on fire and decomposition.

show abstract

“…Soil P availability may directly influence leaf flammability by allowing plants to increase the uptake and retention of P into their foliar tissues (Tissue and Lewis 2010). Foliar P acts as a flame retardant to reduce flammability (Scarff and Westoby 2008;Scarff et al 2012) and increases litter decomposition rates (Vitousek 1998;Wardle et al 2002). In grasslands throughout the world, it is common for soil P availability to constrain aboveground biomass production (Elser et al 2007;Craine and Jackson 2010), therefore influencing fuel load accumulation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leaf flammability and fuel load increase under elevated CO2 levels in a model grassland

Manea

Grootemaat

Leishman

2015

Int. J. Wildland Fire

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fire is a common process that shapes the structure of grasslands globally. Rising atmospheric CO 2 concentration may have a profound influence on grassland fire regimes. In this study, we asked (1) does CO 2 and soil P availability alter leaf flammability (ignitibility and fire sustainability); (2) are leaf tissue chemistry traits drivers of leaf flammability, and are they modified by CO 2 and soil P availability?; (3) does CO 2 and soil P availability alter fuel load accumulation in grasslands; and (4) does CO 2 and soil P availability alter the resprouting ability of grassland species? We found that leaf flammability increased under elevated CO 2 levels owing to decreased leaf moisture content and foliar N, whereas fuel load accumulation increased owing to decreased foliar N (slower decomposition rates) and increased aboveground biomass production. These plant responses to elevated CO 2 levels were not modified by soil P availability. The increase in leaf flammability and fuel load accumulation under elevated CO 2 levels may alter grassland fire regimes by facilitating fire ignition as well as shorter fire intervals. However, the increased root biomass of grasses under elevated CO 2 levels may enhance their resprouting capacity relative to woody plants, resulting in a shift in the vegetation structure of grasslands.

show abstract

Exploring phosphate effects on leaf flammability using a physical chemistry model

Cited by 21 publications

References 44 publications

Does inherent flammability of grass and litter fuels contribute to continental patterns of landscape fire activity?

Does inherent flammability of grass and litter fuels contribute to continental patterns of landscape fire activity?

Burn or rot: leaf traits explain why flammability and decomposability are decoupled across species

Leaf flammability and fuel load increase under elevated CO2 levels in a model grassland

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About