Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42040848›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2026

Do Giant Sequoias Regenerate in Large Crown Fire Patches?

Chad T Hanson, Tonja Y Chi, Maya Khosla, Craig Swolgaard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Chad T HansonEarth Island Institute Berkeley California USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3544-511X
Tonja Y ChiWildlife Ecologist South Lake Tahoe California USA.
Maya KhoslaWildlife Ecologist Rohnert Park California USA.
Craig SwolgaardWildlife Ecologist Georgetown California USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research indicates that the giant sequoia, a serotinous conifer and the world's most massive tree species, is positively associated with high-severity fire for effective reproduction. However, land managers hypothesize that portions of giant sequoia groves could be lost in large crown fire areas due to a lack of regeneration, extensive montane chaparral cover, and long distances to the nearest surviving sequoia seed trees. Based on these hypotheses, rollbacks of environmental laws to facilitate intensive logging and tree plantation establishment are now proposed in giant sequoia groves on national forests and national parks, in the name of wildfire management and reforestation. Yet existing research is sparse, particularly regarding postfire sequoia regeneration that reaches the size of small trees (≥ 140 cm tall), which are most likely to survive to maturity. We investigated this issue in 62 field plots within the largest high-severity fire patches in Redwood Mountain Grove, Sequoia, and Kings Canyon National Parks, four years post-fire. These patches are dominated by crown fire but also include areas of high-intensity surface fire. At four years post-fire, we found sequoia regeneration density (mean = 19,478/ha) that was more than 21 times higher than initial modeling projected. Within the high-severity fire category, we found no correlation between fire severity or percent montane chaparral cover and giant sequoia small tree density, but found the percentage of all sequoia regeneration comprised by small trees is significantly higher in crown fire areas. The mean distance to the nearest live sequoia is now significantly shorter than reported at one year post-fire, suggesting that some live sequoias were not recognized as still living in initial evaluations. Our findings indicate that giant sequoia regeneration is thriving in large high-severity fire areas dominated by crown fire.

Indexed as

forestsgiant sequoiahigh severitySierra Nevadawildfire

Identifiers

PMID42040848
PMCPMC13107274

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.