13,000 years of fire activity in a temperate rainforest on the Central Coast of British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While wildfire is globally most common in the savanna-grassland ecotone, the flammability of coastal temperate rainforests is considered low and little is known regarding historic fire activity. Reconstructing historical fire activity typically requires dendrochronological records from fire-scarred trees and post-fire cohorts, but this type of information is rare in perhumid temperate rainforests, which are dominated by dense fuels with high year-round moisture content. I reconstructed historic fire activity using fire scars, tree rings, soil charcoal, and remote sensing techniques in a 2000 km2 island group located within the Hakai Lúxvbálís Conservancy on the coastal margin of central British Columbia. I broadly assessed 13,000 years of fire activity with charcoal deposited in soils, and reconstructed late Holocene fire events with a 700-year chronology built from living fire-scarred trees and stand establishment data. I used a weight of evidence approach to hypothesize the origins of fires and whether First Nations intentionally utilized fire for resource management. Low-severity fires occurred most frequently in forests surrounding former First Nations habitation sites, and lightning strikes do not occur often enough to explain the observed temporal or spatial patterns of fire activity in the study area. Low-severity fires occurred approximately every 39 years, and were 25 times more likely to occur than previously estimated. Fires influenced the composition and structure of vegetation by creating a mosaic of vegetation types in different stages of succession, and thus increased the abundance of culturally important food plants. Fire events have not occurred in the study area since 1893, which also coincides with the reduction of First Nations activities in their traditional territories. My data are consistent with the hypothesis that humans intentionally used fire to manage resources, though further research and ethnographic data collected elsewhere in the region is required to corroborate these findings. Ecological legacies of historic fires remain visible on the present day landscape, and by reconstructing the historic range of fire cycle variability we gain a better understanding of human-driven fire activity and the abrupt changes that occurred in the 20th century.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".