Scaling Laws and Complexity in Fire Regimes

Chapter
Part of the Ecological Studies book series (ECOLSTUD)

Abstract

Use of scaling terminology and concepts in ecology evolved rapidly from rare occurrences in the early 1980s to a central idea by the early 1990s (Allen and Hoekstra 1992; Levin 1992; Peterson and Parker 1998). In landscape ecology, use of “scale” frequently connotes explicitly spatial considerations (Dungan et al. 2002), notably grain and extent. More generally though, scaling refers to the systematic change of some biological variable with time, space, mass, or energy. Schneider (2001) further specifies ecological scaling sensu Calder (1983) and Peters (1983) as “the use of power laws that scale a variable (e.g., respiration) to body size, usually according to a nonintegral exponent” while noting that this is one of many equally common technical definitions. He further notes that “the concept of scale is evolving from verbal expression to quantitative expression” (p. 545), and will continue to do so as mathematical theory matures along with quantitative methods for extrapolating across scales.

Keywords

Fire Regime Neutral Model Fire Spread Fire Occurrence Fire Size 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adamic, L.A., and B.A. Huberman. 2000. The nature of markets in the World Wide Web. Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce 1: 512.Google Scholar
  2. Agee, J.K. 1993. Fire ecology of Pacific Northwest forests. Washington: Island Press.Google Scholar
  3. Allen, T.F.H., and T.W. Hoekstra. 1992. Toward a unified ecology. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bak, P., C. Tang, and K. Wiesenfeld. 1988. Self-organized criticality. Physical Review A 38: 364–374.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bak, P.C., K. Chen, and C. Tang. 1990. A forest-fire model and some thoughts on turbulence. Physics Letters A 147: 297–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown, J.H., V.K. Gupta, B.L. Li, B.T. Milne, C. Restrepo, and G.B. West. 2002. The fractal nature of nature: power laws, ecological complexity, and biodiversity. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 357: 619–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Calder, W.A. 1983. Ecological scaling: mammals and birds. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 14: 213–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlson, J.M., and J. Doyle. 2002. Complexity and robustness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99: 2538–2545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cello, G., and B.D. Malamud. eds. 2006. Fractal analysis for natural hazards. Special publication 261. London: Geological Society.Google Scholar
  10. Clauset, A., C.R. Shalizi, and M.E.J. Newman. 2007. Power law distributions in empirical data. (http://arXiv:0706.1062v1).Google Scholar
  11. Cohen, J.D., and J.E. Deeming. 1985. The national fire danger rating system: basic equations. General Technical Report PSW-82. Berkeley: Forest Service.Google Scholar
  12. Collins, B.M., J.D. Miller, A.E. Thode, M. Kelly, J.W. van Wagtendonk, and S.L. Stephens. 2009. Interactions among wildland fires in a long-established Sierra Nevada natural fire area. Ecosystems 12: 114–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cumming, S.G. 2001. A parametric model of the fire-size distribution. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 31: 1297–1303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Diggle, P.J. 2003. Statistical analysis of spatial point patterns, 2nd ed. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  15. Doyle, J., and J.M. Carlson. 2000. Power laws, HOT, and generalized source coding. Physics Review Letters 84: 5656–5659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dungan, J.L., J.N. Perry, M.R.T. Dale, P. Legendre, S. Citron-Pousty, M.-J. Fortin, A. Jakomulska, M. Miriti, and M.S. Rosenberg. 2002. A balanced view of scale in spatial statistical analysis. Ecography 25: 626–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Evans, M., N. Hastings, and B. Peacock. 2000. Statistical distributions, 3rd ed. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  18. Everett, R.L., R. Schelhaas, D. Keenum, D. Spubeck, and P. Ohlson. 2000. Fire history in the ponderosa pine/Douglas-fir forests on the east slope of the Washington Cascades. Forest Ecology and Management 129: 207–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Falk, D.A. 2004. Scale dependence of probability models for fire intervals in a ponderosa pine ecosystem. Ph.D. dissertation. Tucson: University of Arizona.Google Scholar
  20. Falk, D.A., C. Miller, D. McKenzie, and A.E. Black. 2007. Cross-scale analysis of fire regimes. Ecosystems 10: 809–823.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gardner, R.H., and D.L. Urban. 2007. Neutral models for testing landscape hypotheses. Landscape Ecology 22: 15–29.Google Scholar
  22. Gwozdz, R., and D. McKenzie. (unpublished data) Effects of topography, humidity, and model parameters on the spatial structure of simulated fine-fuel moisture. Seattle: Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences Lab, U.S. Forest Service (manuscript on file with: Don McKenzie).Google Scholar
  23. Habeeb, R.L., J. Trebilco, S. Witherspoon, and C.R. Johnson. 2005. Determining natural scales of ecological systems. Ecological Monographs 75: 467–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hessburg, P.F., and J.K. Agee. 2005. Dry forests and wildland fires of the inland Northwest USA: contrasting the landscape ecology of the pre–settlement and modern eras. Forest Ecology and Management 211: 117–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hessl, A.E., D. McKenzie, and R. Schellhaas. 2004. Drought and Pacific decadal oscillation linked to fire occurrence in the inland Pacific Northwest. Ecological Applications 14: 425–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hessl, A.E., J. Miller, J. Kernan, and D. McKenzie. 2007. Mapping wildfire boundaries from binary point data: comparing approaches. Professional Geographer 59: 87–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Isaaks, E.H., and R.M. Srivastava. 1989. An introduction to applied geostatistics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Johnson, E.A., and S.L. Gutsell. 1994. Fire frequency models, methods, and interpretations. Advances in Ecological Research 25: 239–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kellogg, L.-K.B., D. McKenzie, D.L. Peterson, and A.E. Hessl. 2008. Spatial models for inferring topographic controls on low-severity fire in the eastern Cascade Range of Washington, USA. Landscape Ecology 23: 227–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kennedy, M.C., and D. McKenzie. 2010. Using a stochastic model and cross-scale analysis to evaluate controls on historical low-severity fire regimes. Landscape Ecology. doi: 10.1007/s10980-010-9527-5.Google Scholar
  31. Legendre, P., and L. Legendre. 1998. Numerical ecology, 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science B.V.Google Scholar
  32. Levin, S.A. 1992. The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology 73: 1943–1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Levin, S.A. 2005. Self-organization and the emergence of complexity in ecological systems. Bioscience 55: 1075–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Littell, J.S., D. McKenzie, D.L. Peterson, and A.L. Westerling. 2009. Climate and wildfire area burned in western U.S. ecoprovinces, 1916–2003. Ecological Applications 19: 1003–1021.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Loehle, C. 2004. Applying landscape principles to fire hazard reduction. Forest Ecology and Management 198: 261–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Malamud, B.D., G. Morein, and D.L. Turcotte. 1998. Forest fires: an example of self-organized critical behavior. Science 281: 1840–1842.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Malamud, B.D., Millington, J.D.A., and G.L.W. Perry. 2005. Characterizing wildfire regimes in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 102:4694–4699.Google Scholar
  38. McKenzie, D. [N.d.]. Unpublished data. Seattle: Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences Lab (On file with: Don McKenzie).Google Scholar
  39. McKenzie, D., D.L. Peterson, and E. Alvarado. 1996. Extrapolation problems in modeling fire effects at large spatial scales: a review. International Journal of Wildland Fire 6: 65–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. McKenzie, D., D.L. Peterson, and J.K. Agee. 2000. Fire frequency in the Columbia River Basin: building regional models from fire history data. Ecological Applications 10: 1497–1516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. McKenzie, D., A.E. Hessl, and Lara-Karena B. Kellogg. 2006a. Using neutral models to identify constraints on low-severity fire regimes. Landscape Ecology 21: 139–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. McKenzie, D., L-K.B. Kellogg, D.A. Falk, C. Miller, and A.E. Black. 2006b. Scaling laws and ­fire-size distributions in historical low-severity fire regimes. Geophysical Research Abstracts, 8: 1607–7962/gra/EGU06–A–01436.Google Scholar
  43. Miller, J.R., M.G. Turner, E.A.H. Smithwick, C.L. Dent, and E.H. Stanley. 2004. Spatial extrapolation: the science of predicting ecological patterns and processes. Bioscience 54: 310–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Millington, J.D.A., G.L.W. Perry, and B.D. Malamud. 2006. Models, data, and mechanisms: quantifying wildfire regimes. In Fractal analysis for natural hazards, eds. G. Cello, and B.D. Malamud, 155–167. Special Publication 261. London: Geological Society.Google Scholar
  45. Milne, B.T. 1998. Motivation and benefits of complex systems approaches in ecology. Ecosystems 1: 449–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Minnich, R.A. 1983. Fire mosaics in southern California and northern Baja California. Science 219: 1287–1294.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Moritz, M.A. 2003. Spatio-temporal analysis of controls of shrubland fire regimes: age dependency and fire hazard. Ecology 84: 351–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Moritz, M.A., M.E. Morais, L.A. Summerell, J.M. Carlson, and J. Doyle. 2005. Wildfires, complexity, and highly optimized tolerance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 102: 17912–17917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. National Geophysical Data Center. 2010. NGDC: natural hazards databases at NGDC. http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/hazard/hazards.shtml. Accessed 25 Jan 2010.
  50. NOAA. 2010. International multiproxy paleofire database. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/impd/paleofire.html. Accessed 25 Jan 2010.
  51. Newman, M.E.J. 2005. Power laws, Pareto distributions, and Zipf’s law. Contemporary Physics 46: 323–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. O’Neill, R.V., D.L. deAngelis, J.B. Waide, and T.F.H. Allen. 1986. A hierarchical concept of ecosystems. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Parody, J.M., and B.T. Milne. 2004. Implications of rescaling rules for multi-scaled habitat models. Landscape Ecology 19: 691–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Pascual, M., and F. Guichard. 2005. Criticality and disturbance in spatial ecological systems. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20: 88–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Peters, R.H. 1983. The ecological implications of body size. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Peterson, G.D. 2002. Contagious disturbance, ecological memory, and the emergence of landscape pattern. Ecosystems 5: 329–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Peterson, D.L., and V.T. Parker, eds. 1998. Ecological scale: theory and applications. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  58. R Foundation. 2003. The R Project for statistical computing. http://www.r-project.org. Accessed 25 Jan 2010.
  59. Rastetter, E.B., A.W. King, B.J. Cosby, G.M. Hornberger, R.V. O’Neill, and J.E. Hobbie. 1992. Aggregating finescale ecological knowledge to model coarser scale attributes of ecosystems. Ecological Applications 2: 55–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Redner, S. 1998. How popular is your paper? An empirical study of the citation distribution. The European Physical Journal B 4: 131–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Reed, W.J. 2001. The Pareto, Zipf, and other power laws. Economics Letters 74: 15–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Reed, W.J. 2006. A note on fire frequency concepts and definitions. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 36: 1884–1888.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Reed, W.J., and E.A. Johnson. 2004. Statistical methods for estimating historical fire frequency from multiple fire-scar data. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 34: 2306–2313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Reed, W.J., and K.S. McKelvey. 2002. Power-law behaviour and parametric models for the size distribution of forest fires. Ecological Modelling 150: 239–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Ricotta, C. 2003. Fractal size distributions of wildfires in hierarchical landscapes: Natura facit saltus? Comments on Theoretical Biology 8: 93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Roberts, D.C., and D.L. Turcotte. 1998. Fractality and self-organized criticality of wars. Fractals 6: 351–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rossi, R.E., D.J. Mulla, A.G. Journel, and E.H. Franz. 1992. Geostatistical tools for modeling and interpreting spatial dependence. Ecological Monographs 62: 277–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Scanlon, T.M., K.K. Caylor, S.A. Levin, and I. Rodriguez-Iturbe. 2007. Positive feedbacks promote power-law clustering of Kalahari vegetation. Nature 449: 209–213.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Schneider, D.C. 2001. The rise of the concept of scale in ecology. Bioscience 51: 545–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Simard, A.J. 1991. Fire severity, changing scales, and how things hang together. International Journal of Wildland Fire 1: 23–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Sole, R. 2007. Scaling laws in the drier. Nature 447: 151–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Solow, A.R. 2005. Power laws without complexity. Ecology Letters 8: 361–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Song, W., F. Weicheng, W. Binghong, and Z. Jianjun. 2001. Self-organized criticality of forest fire in China. Ecological Modelling 145: 61–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Stauffer, D., and A. Aharony. 1994. Introduction to percolation theory, 2nd ed. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  75. Turcotte, D.L., B.D. Malamud, F. Guzzetti, and P. Reichenbach. 2002. Self-organization, the cascade model, and natural hazards. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99: 2530–2537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Turner, M.G., and W.H. Romme. 1994. Landscape dynamics in crown fire ecosystems. Landscape Ecology 9: 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. West, G.B., J.H. Brown, and B.J. Enquist. 1997. A general model for the origin of allometric scaling laws in biology. Science 276: 122–126.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. West, G.B., J.H. Brown, and B.J. Enquist. 1999. A general model for the structure of plant vascular systems. Nature 400: 664–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. West, G.B., W.H. Woodruff, and J.H. Brown. 2002. Allometric scaling of metabolic rate from molecules and mitochondria to cells and mammals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99: 2473–2478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. White, E.P., B.J. Enquist, and J.L. Green. 2008. On estimating the exponent of power-law frequency distributions. Ecology 89: 905–912.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Wu, J. 1999. Hierarchy and scaling: extrapolating information along a scaling ladder. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 25: 367–380.Google Scholar
  82. Zipf, G.K. 1949. Human behavior and the principle of least effort: an introduction to human ecology. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences LaboratoryPacific Northwest Research Station, U.S. Forest ServiceSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations