ArticleEnvironmental management2025
Impacts of Fire-fighting Chemicals on Native Fauna and Ecosystems in Australia: Identification of Key Knowledge Gaps and Research Priorities.
Article in Environmental management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Integration of Fire Ecology and Freshwater Ecosystems in North America: Knowledge Gaps and Research Needs.Global change biology · 2026Review
- Ecotoxicity of Fire Retardants to Zebrafish (Journal of xenobiotics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Increasing global wildfire frequency and intensity due to climate change has led to increasing use of fire-fighting chemicals (FFCs). While there is information relating to the environmental impacts of these FFCs in some regions, to date, there is little information on the impacts of FFCs on native fauna species and ecosystems in an extremely fire-prone country, Australia. We elicited input from a national-level interdisciplinary cohort of experts in fire research and management to identify fundamental gaps in knowledge and research priorities in the use and ecological impacts of FFCs in Australia. We used an anonymized online survey consisting of 21 close-ended, Likert-style and open-ended questions to collect expert opinion on the impacts and management of fire in Australia, focusing on the key knowledge gaps and research priorities relating to FFC use. Knowledge gaps and research priorities were identified in the areas of (1) the different types of FFCs recommended for use in Australia, (2) short and long-term effects of FFCs on fauna species and ecosystems, particularly in aquatic systems, and (3) interactions between FFCs and other environmental stressors. Addressing these knowledge gaps and research priorities will provide scientific-based evidence and recommendations for FFC use to inform future fire management practice and policy in Australia and can guide similar approaches in other countries requiring extensive FFC use for wildfire management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.