Shrubland fire regime scenarios in the Swartberg Mountain Range, South Africa: implications for fire management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last seven decades, the Mediterranean-type shrublands of the Swartberg Mountain Range (170 856 ha), South Africa, have been subject to divergent fire management policies. Management objectives sequentially focused on grazing, fire control, water and biodiversity conservation during successive fire management periods. The aim of the present study was to explore the factors that determined the prevailing fire regime patterns during these fire management periods. This was considered particularly relevant in view of the ongoing debate on the relative role of fuel characteristics versus weather and ignition rates in shaping fire regime patterns. The extent of burning followed climatic cycles of alternating periods of relatively high temperatures and summer rainfall with cooler periods and increased winter rainfall. Accordingly, fires occurred more extensively during the former and were largely unaffected by the absence or presence of fire control measures. Fire return intervals were strongly inversely related to productivity of the vegetation. Long-term means between 30 and 55 years were found to apply in low-altitude xeric shrubland types. Corresponding fire return intervals were generally shorter in mesic shrublands at mid to high altitudes (15–30 years). Proteoid shrublands younger than 6 years were practically non-flammable. Two basic fire regime scenarios were identified. Fire regime patterns in xeric shrublands at lower altitudes were largely controlled by the rate of fuel accumulation, whereas climatically controlled ignition frequencies and fire climate constituted the dominant controls in proteoid shrublands at mid to high altitudes. The spatiotemporal distribution of fire regime parameters (fire frequencies, season, size and intensity) as recorded in the present study for the Swartberg Mountain Range under natural fire zone management (predominance of lightning fires since 1980), appeared to be conducive to the maintenance of biodiversity according to our current understanding of the fire–vegetation system.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".