从野火中学习:评估烧伤严重程度治疗效果的可扩展框架

IF 2.7 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ECOLOGY
Ecosphere Pub Date : 2024-12-02 DOI:10.1002/ecs2.70073
Caden P. Chamberlain, Garrett W. Meigs, Derek J. Churchill, Jonathan T. Kane, Astrid Sanna, James S. Begley, Susan J. Prichard, Maureen C. Kennedy, Craig Bienz, Ryan D. Haugo, Annie C. Smith, Van R. Kane, C. Alina Cansler
{"title":"从野火中学习:评估烧伤严重程度治疗效果的可扩展框架","authors":"Caden P. Chamberlain,&nbsp;Garrett W. Meigs,&nbsp;Derek J. Churchill,&nbsp;Jonathan T. Kane,&nbsp;Astrid Sanna,&nbsp;James S. Begley,&nbsp;Susan J. Prichard,&nbsp;Maureen C. Kennedy,&nbsp;Craig Bienz,&nbsp;Ryan D. Haugo,&nbsp;Annie C. Smith,&nbsp;Van R. Kane,&nbsp;C. Alina Cansler","doi":"10.1002/ecs2.70073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Interruption of frequent burning in dry forests across western North America and the continued impacts of anthropogenic climate change have resulted in increases in fire size and severity compared to historical fire regimes. Recent legislation, funding, and planning have emphasized increased implementation of mechanical thinning and prescribed burning treatments to decrease the risk of undesirable ecological and social outcomes due to fire. As wildfires and treatments continue to interact, managers require consistent approaches to evaluate treatment effectiveness at moderating burn severity. In this study, we present a repeatable, remote sensing–based, analytical framework for conducting fire-scale assessments of treatment effectiveness that informs local management while also supporting cross-fire comparisons. We demonstrate this framework on the 2021 Bootleg Fire in Oregon and the 2021 Schneider Springs Fire in Washington. Our framework used (1) machine learning to identify key bioclimatic, topographic, and fire weather drivers of burn severity in each fire, (2) standardized workflows to statistically sample untreated control units, and (3) spatial regression modeling to evaluate the effects of treatment type and time since treatment on burn severity. The application of our framework showed that, in both fires, recent prescribed burning treatments were the most effective at reducing burn severity relative to untreated controls. In contrast, thinning-only treatments only produced low/moderate-severity effects under the more moderate fire weather conditions in the Schneider Springs Fire. Our framework offers a robust approach for evaluating treatment effects on burn severity at the scale of individual fires, which can be scaled up to assess treatment effectiveness across multiple fires. As climate change brings increased uncertainty to dry forest ecosystems of western North America, our framework can support more strategic management actions to reduce wildfire risk and foster resilience.</p>","PeriodicalId":48930,"journal":{"name":"Ecosphere","volume":"15 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ecs2.70073","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Learning from wildfires: A scalable framework to evaluate treatment effects on burn severity\",\"authors\":\"Caden P. Chamberlain,&nbsp;Garrett W. Meigs,&nbsp;Derek J. Churchill,&nbsp;Jonathan T. Kane,&nbsp;Astrid Sanna,&nbsp;James S. Begley,&nbsp;Susan J. Prichard,&nbsp;Maureen C. Kennedy,&nbsp;Craig Bienz,&nbsp;Ryan D. Haugo,&nbsp;Annie C. Smith,&nbsp;Van R. Kane,&nbsp;C. Alina Cansler\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ecs2.70073\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Interruption of frequent burning in dry forests across western North America and the continued impacts of anthropogenic climate change have resulted in increases in fire size and severity compared to historical fire regimes. Recent legislation, funding, and planning have emphasized increased implementation of mechanical thinning and prescribed burning treatments to decrease the risk of undesirable ecological and social outcomes due to fire. As wildfires and treatments continue to interact, managers require consistent approaches to evaluate treatment effectiveness at moderating burn severity. In this study, we present a repeatable, remote sensing–based, analytical framework for conducting fire-scale assessments of treatment effectiveness that informs local management while also supporting cross-fire comparisons. We demonstrate this framework on the 2021 Bootleg Fire in Oregon and the 2021 Schneider Springs Fire in Washington. Our framework used (1) machine learning to identify key bioclimatic, topographic, and fire weather drivers of burn severity in each fire, (2) standardized workflows to statistically sample untreated control units, and (3) spatial regression modeling to evaluate the effects of treatment type and time since treatment on burn severity. The application of our framework showed that, in both fires, recent prescribed burning treatments were the most effective at reducing burn severity relative to untreated controls. In contrast, thinning-only treatments only produced low/moderate-severity effects under the more moderate fire weather conditions in the Schneider Springs Fire. Our framework offers a robust approach for evaluating treatment effects on burn severity at the scale of individual fires, which can be scaled up to assess treatment effectiveness across multiple fires. As climate change brings increased uncertainty to dry forest ecosystems of western North America, our framework can support more strategic management actions to reduce wildfire risk and foster resilience.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48930,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ecosphere\",\"volume\":\"15 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ecs2.70073\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ecosphere\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.70073\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosphere","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2.70073","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

北美西部干旱森林频繁燃烧的中断以及人为气候变化的持续影响,导致火灾规模和严重程度与历史火灾制度相比有所增加。最近的立法、资金和规划都强调增加机械减薄和规定燃烧处理的实施,以减少火灾造成的不良生态和社会后果的风险。随着野火和治疗持续相互作用,管理人员需要一致的方法来评估缓解烧伤严重程度的治疗效果。在这项研究中,我们提出了一个可重复的、基于遥感的分析框架,用于进行火灾规模的治疗效果评估,为当地管理提供信息,同时也支持交叉火灾比较。我们在俄勒冈州2021年的盗版火灾和华盛顿州2021年的施耐德斯普林斯火灾中展示了这个框架。我们的框架使用了(1)机器学习来识别每次火灾中烧伤严重程度的关键生物气候、地形和火灾天气驱动因素;(2)标准化工作流程来统计未经处理的控制单元样本;(3)空间回归模型来评估治疗类型和治疗后时间对烧伤严重程度的影响。我们的框架的应用表明,在这两起火灾中,相对于未经治疗的对照,最近规定的烧伤治疗在降低烧伤严重程度方面最有效。相比之下,在施耐德泉火灾中,仅疏林处理在较温和的火灾天气条件下仅产生低/中等严重程度的效果。我们的框架为评估单个火灾对烧伤严重程度的治疗效果提供了一种可靠的方法,该方法可以扩大规模,以评估多个火灾的治疗效果。随着气候变化给北美西部干旱森林生态系统带来越来越大的不确定性,我们的框架可以支持更多的战略管理行动,以减少野火风险,增强抵御能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Learning from wildfires: A scalable framework to evaluate treatment effects on burn severity

Learning from wildfires: A scalable framework to evaluate treatment effects on burn severity

Interruption of frequent burning in dry forests across western North America and the continued impacts of anthropogenic climate change have resulted in increases in fire size and severity compared to historical fire regimes. Recent legislation, funding, and planning have emphasized increased implementation of mechanical thinning and prescribed burning treatments to decrease the risk of undesirable ecological and social outcomes due to fire. As wildfires and treatments continue to interact, managers require consistent approaches to evaluate treatment effectiveness at moderating burn severity. In this study, we present a repeatable, remote sensing–based, analytical framework for conducting fire-scale assessments of treatment effectiveness that informs local management while also supporting cross-fire comparisons. We demonstrate this framework on the 2021 Bootleg Fire in Oregon and the 2021 Schneider Springs Fire in Washington. Our framework used (1) machine learning to identify key bioclimatic, topographic, and fire weather drivers of burn severity in each fire, (2) standardized workflows to statistically sample untreated control units, and (3) spatial regression modeling to evaluate the effects of treatment type and time since treatment on burn severity. The application of our framework showed that, in both fires, recent prescribed burning treatments were the most effective at reducing burn severity relative to untreated controls. In contrast, thinning-only treatments only produced low/moderate-severity effects under the more moderate fire weather conditions in the Schneider Springs Fire. Our framework offers a robust approach for evaluating treatment effects on burn severity at the scale of individual fires, which can be scaled up to assess treatment effectiveness across multiple fires. As climate change brings increased uncertainty to dry forest ecosystems of western North America, our framework can support more strategic management actions to reduce wildfire risk and foster resilience.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ecosphere
Ecosphere ECOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
378
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍: The scope of Ecosphere is as broad as the science of ecology itself. The journal welcomes submissions from all sub-disciplines of ecological science, as well as interdisciplinary studies relating to ecology. The journal''s goal is to provide a rapid-publication, online-only, open-access alternative to ESA''s other journals, while maintaining the rigorous standards of peer review for which ESA publications are renowned.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信