4.7 Article

Land-Use Type as a Driver of Large Wildfire Occurrence in the US Great Plains

期刊

REMOTE SENSING
卷 12, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/rs12111869

关键词

ecoregions; exposure; grassland; natural disaster; regional planning; woody encroachment

资金

  1. USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) [M1903198]
  2. McIntire Stennis project [1008861]
  3. Nebraska Game & Parks Commission [W-125-R-1]
  4. National Science Foundation [OIA-1920938]
  5. University of Nebraska Agricultural Research Division

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wildfire activity has surged in North America's temperate grassland biome. Like many biomes, this system has undergone drastic land-use change over the last century; however, how various land-use types contribute to wildfire patterns in grassland systems is unclear. We determine if certain land-use types have a greater propensity for large wildfire in the U.S. Great Plains and how this changes given the percentage of land covered by a given land-use type. Almost 90% of the area burned in the Great Plains occurred in woody and grassland land-use types. Although grassland comprised the greatest area burned by large wildfires, woody vegetation burned disproportionately more than any other land-use type in the Great Plains. Wildfires were more likely to occur when woody vegetation composed greater than 20% of the landscape. Wildfires were unlikely to occur in croplands, pasture/hay fields, and developed areas. Although these patterns varied by region, wildfire was most likely to occur in woody vegetation and/or grassland in 13 of 14 ecoregions we assessed. Because woody vegetation is more conducive to extreme wildfire behaviour than other land-use types in the Great Plains, woody encroachment could pose a large risk for increasing wildfire exposure. Regional planning could leverage differential wildfire activity across land-uses to devise targeted approaches that decrease human exposure in a system prone to fire.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据