ArticleLandscape ecology2026
Post-fire structural forest recovery associated with climate extremes in dry sub-boreal forests.
Article in Landscape ecology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Recent large and high-severity wildfires have burned vast areas of coniferous forests throughout Western North America. These burned landscapes are recovering amid increasingly frequent climate extremes, such as drought. We need to understand how post-fire climate extremes and other ecological drivers (such as fire impacts) influence patterns and trends of coniferous recovery. Objectives: We worked at a landscape scale (> 400,000 hectares) to investigate the association between distinct post-fire forest recovery and ecological drivers in dry sub-boreal forests. We created structural recovery groups distinct in patterns and trends of coniferous cover and density and then modeled their association with ecological drivers. Methods: We used Landsat time-series data to identify unique spectral recovery, which we grouped based on post-fire regrowth and stocking estimates. Remotely Piloted Aircraft light detection and ranging (lidar) provided structural estimates 5-21 years post-fire. We modeled the association between structural recovery groups and ecological drivers with random forests. For each category of drivers (site conditions, climate, climate anomalies, pre-fire composition, and fire impacts), we used individual models to identify important drivers. We then incorporated the most important drivers in a global model to highlight the drivers that were important across categories. Results: Initial spectral trends indicated longer-term differences in structural forest recovery. Climate anomalies (such as post-fire extremes in temperature and precipitation) and pre-fire basal area best predicted observed structural groupings-abnormally cold and dry summers after the fire were associated with slow conifer establishment. Comparatively, areas with a higher pre-fire basal area maintained a mixed canopy of deciduous and coniferous stems. Conclusions: At a landscape scale, post-fire climate conditions best predicted structural forest recovery, suggesting management plans should be adaptable to the conditions experienced post fire. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10980-025-02266-y.
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.