首页> 外文期刊>Agricultural and Forest Meteorology >How well do meteorological drought indices predict live fuel moisture content (LFMC)? An assessment for wildfire research and operations in Mediterranean ecosystems
【24h】

How well do meteorological drought indices predict live fuel moisture content (LFMC)? An assessment for wildfire research and operations in Mediterranean ecosystems

机译:气象干旱指数如何预测活燃料含量(LFMC)? 地中海生态系统的野火研究与运营评估

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Live Fuel Moisture Content (LFMC) is a critical variable affecting fire ignition, behavior and severity in many ecosystems. Although the use of meteorological drought indices as proxies for LFMC is a straightforward and widespread approach, it is largely unknown whether it can provide reliable estimates of LFMC, either for local or spatial applications. We address this issue by evaluating the capacity of drought indices to predict LFMC quantitative variations and critical values. LFMC observations used for reference were measured on six different Mediterranean shrub species for 15 years in 20 different sites in Southern France. Six drought indices were evaluated: the Duff Moisture Code (DMC) and Drought Code (DC) of the Canadian Forest Fire Weather Index System, the Keetch-Byram Drought Index (KBDI), the Nesterov Index (NI) and the Relative Water Content (RWC) of the soil derived from a forest water balance model for low (80 mm) and high (160 mm) field capacities. The species were classified in two groups according to their seasonal variability: high and low responding species. We found large differences in the capacity of drought indices to predict LFMC, with indices that simulate long-term drought dynamics (DC, RWC and KBDI) generally performing better than others (NI and DMC). Once calibrated at stand scale, drought indices showed a good potential for predicting LFMC of high responding species, although large variations between sites were observed. In contrast, spatial predictability was limited with a RMSE and 11 on the order of 20% and 0.3, respectively (for high responding species). Our results suggest that drought indices should therefore be used with caution for spatial applications in wildfire research and operational fire management. Because they can explicitly consider environmental (soil, climate) and biological (species traits related to dehydration) factors, mechanistic indices have a great potential to improve LFMC predictions.
机译:活燃料水分含量(LFMC)是影响许多生态系统中的火点火,行为和严重程度的临界变量。虽然使用气象干旱指数作为LFMC的代理是一种简单和广泛的方法,但它在很大程度上未知是否可以提供LFMC的可靠估计,用于本地或空间应用。我们通过评估干旱指数来预测LFMC定量变化和临界值的能力来解决这个问题。用于参考的LFMC观察在法国南部20种不同地点的六种不同的地中海灌木物种中测量了15年。评估六种干旱指数:加拿大森林防火天气指数系统的Duff水分码(DMC)和干旱码(DC),Keetch-Byram干旱指数(KBDI),Nesterov指数(NI)和相对含水量( rwc)从森林水平衡模型源于低(80毫米)和高(160 mm)场容量的土壤。根据其季节性变异性,这些物种分为两组:高低响应物种。我们发现干旱指数的容量差异预测LFMC,具有模拟长期干旱动态(DC,RWC和KBDI)的指标通常比其他人(NI和DMC)更好。一旦在待机状态下校准,干旱指数显示出良好的潜力,以预测高响应物种的LFMC,尽管观察到位点之间的大变化。相反,空间可预测性限制为90%和0.3的RMSE和11,分别为20%和0.3(用于高响应物种)。我们的研究结果表明,随着野火研究和运营火灾管理中的空间应用,应使用干旱指数。因为他们可以明确考虑环境(土壤,气候)和生物学(与脱水有关的物种特征)因素,机械指数具有巨大的潜力来改善LFMC预测。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号