ArticleEnvironmental research. Water2026
Post-wildfire water quality and aquatic ecosystem response in the U.S. Pacific Northwest: science and monitoring gaps.
Article in Environmental research. Water, 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
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
An increase in the occurrence of large, high severity wildfires in the western Pacific Northwest (PNW), USA, has created an urgent need for science to better inform forest management and policy decisions to maintain source water quality in the region. The western PNW faces similar challenges to other regions with shifting wildfire regimes and large population centers reliant on surface water from forested catchments. However, the uniquely wet and highly seasonal climate of the western PNW suggests that findings from other, more frequently burned regions may not be directly applicable. To identify science, monitoring, and management gaps and opportunities in the western PNW, this review was collaboratively undertaken by academics, non-government and industry representatives, and local, state, and federal government entities who have been working together since the 2020 Labor Day fires in Oregon. Focusing on Oregon and Washington, we found that monitoring networks for continuous water quantity and quality cover much of the state with greater representation in western U.S. ecoregions, but few studies have analyzed and published these data to capture and communicate the post-wildfire response. Approximately half of the streamgages in Oregon and Washington record major water quality parameters, and hundreds of sites in the area have discrete sampling for a wide range of water quality constituents. Still, numerous gaps exist in understanding the short- and long-term impacts of wildfire on hydrology, water chemistry, including pH and dissolved oxygen, mobilization of metals, aquatic ecosystems, and downstream drinking water treatment. Collective action to further collect, analyze, interpret, and publish the key data could help improve our understanding of post-wildfire water quality impacts in this and other increasingly wildfire-affected regions.
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.