Landscape Ecology

, Volume 25, Issue 10, pp 1561–1573

Using a stochastic model and cross-scale analysis to evaluate controls on historical low-severity fire regimes

Research Article

DOI: 10.1007/s10980-010-9527-5

Cite this article as:
Kennedy, M.C. & McKenzie, D. Landscape Ecol (2010) 25: 1561. doi:10.1007/s10980-010-9527-5


Fire-scarred trees provide a deep temporal record of historical fire activity, but identifying the mechanisms therein that controlled landscape fire patterns is not straightforward. We use a spatially correlated metric for fire co-occurrence between pairs of trees (the Sørensen distance variogram), with output from a neutral model for fire history, to infer the relative strength of top-down vs. bottom-up controls on historical fire regimes. An inverse modeling procedure finds combinations of neutral-model parameters that produce Sørensen distance variograms with statistical properties similar to those observed from two landscapes in eastern Washington, USA, with contrasting topography. We find the most parsimonious model structure that is able to replicate the observed patterns and the parameters of this model provide surrogates for the predominance of top-down vs. bottom-up controls. Simulations with relatively low spread probability produce irregular fire perimeters and variograms similar to those from the topographically complex landscape. With higher spread probabilities fires exhibit regular perimeters and variograms similar to those from the simpler landscape. We demonstrate that cross-scale properties of the fire-scar record, even without historical fuels and weather data, document how complex topography creates strong bottom-up controls on fire spread. This control is weaker in simpler topography, and may be compromised in a future climate with more severe weather events.


Fire history Sørensen distance Neutral model Top-down vs. bottom-up controls Scaling 

Supplementary material

10980_2010_9527_MOESM1_ESM.doc (180 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 179 kb)
10980_2010_9527_MOESM2_ESM.doc (15.3 mb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOC 15707 kb)
10980_2010_9527_MOESM3_ESM.doc (226 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOC 225 kb)
10980_2010_9527_MOESM4_ESM.doc (43 kb)
Supplementary material 4 (DOC 43 kb)

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Forest Resources, College of the EnvironmentUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA
  2. 2.Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences LabUS Forest ServiceSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations