Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42436158›Full record

ArticleNature communications2026

Previous prescribed burns saved thousands of ancient sequoias during historically unprecedented wildfires.

Dan J Dixon, Adrian J Das, Xiaoli Dong, Andrew M Latimer, David N Soderberg, Nathan L Stephenson, Anthony C Caprio, Yufang Jin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 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

8 authors.

Dan J DixonDepartment of Land, Air and Water Resources, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA. 1dandixon@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8172-4531
Adrian J DasU.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, Sequoia and Kings Canyon Field Station, Three Rivers, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3937-2616
Xiaoli DongDepartment of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA.
Andrew M LatimerDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8098-0448
David N SoderbergU.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, Sequoia and Kings Canyon Field Station, Three Rivers, CA, USA.
Nathan L StephensonU.S. Geological Survey, Western Ecological Research Center, Sequoia and Kings Canyon Field Station, Three Rivers, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0208-7229
Anthony C CaprioDivision of Resources Management and Science, Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks, Three Rivers, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0104-3841
Yufang JinDepartment of Land, Air and Water Resources, University of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9049-9807

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wildfires in California's Sierra Nevada during 2020-2021 killed giant sequoias (Sequoiadendron giganteum) at rates unseen for millennia, underscoring the vulnerability of highly fire-adapted trees to ongoing environmental change. Following a century of fire exclusion and fuel accumulation, the effectiveness of prescribed burns in reducing giant sequoia mortality from wildfire remained poorly quantified. Here we estimate mortality outcomes for 26,403 giant sequoias across 19 groves in Sequoia and Kings Canyon national parks following the Castle (2020) and KNP Complex (2021) wildfires using a Bayesian framework. We map tree mortality using a deep learning classifier integrating 3 m PlanetScope imagery, airborne lidar, and field observations. From an estimated 7,974 sequoia deaths (95% Bayesian credible interval (CI): 7,555-8,430), corresponding to 30.2% mortality (CI: 28.6-31.9%), we find previous prescribed burns (≤10 years prior) reduced mortality odds by 77% (CI: 69-83%), making treated trees nearly four times more likely to survive. Counterfactual simulations suggest that prescribed burns prevented at least 1,888 (CI: 1,487-2,302) deaths, and universal treatment would have saved an additional 3,888 (CI: 3,236-4,580) giant sequoias. These results show that prescribed burns substantially improve survival during extreme wildfires, offering guidance for conserving long-lived, fire-adapted forests under intensifying fire regimes.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesSequoiaWildfiresBayes TheoremCaliforniaTrees

Identifiers

PMID42436158
PMCPMC13483421

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.