A comparison of rangeland monitoring techniques for modeling herbaceous fuels and forage in central Arizona, USA

Edward C. Rhodes, Douglas R Tolleson, Jay P. Angerer, John A. Kava, Judith Dyess, Tessa Nicolet

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

While fire and rangeland managers frequently have different land management roles and objectives, their data needs with regards to herbaceous biomass (fuel loads and forage) often overlap, and can be served with a single sampling protocol for both rangeland and fuels management. In this study, we examined how two herbaceous sampling methods compare in measuring species richness, ground cover, and standing herbaceous biomass for range and forestry management using the Phytomass Growth Simulator (Phygrow). Phygrow is an herbaceous vegetation growth model used to simulate rangeland plant production for herbivory, drought, and wildfire severity early warning systems. The Point-frequency protocol has been used for 10 years to collect plant community parameters for Phygrow. The Common Non-Forested Vegetation Sampling Protocol (CNVSP) is a commonly used rangeland assessment protocol in the southwestern United States. Data from both methods were used to parameterize the Phygrow model to examine their similarities and differences, and to see if data collected from the CNVSP methodology could be used to model herbaceous fuel loads. We determined that the data collected in the CNVSP protocol met the needs for Phygrow model validation of standing herbaceous fuels, but data was insufficient for modeling surface dead fuel loads.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)76-91
Number of pages16
JournalFire Ecology
Volume10
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

rangeland
rangelands
phytomass
forage
simulator
monitoring
vegetation
modeling
sampling
early warning systems
methodology
Southwestern United States
model validation
wildfires
land management
biofuels
growth models
plant communities
forestry
early warning system

Keywords

  • Fine fuels
  • Frequency
  • Fuel load
  • Grass
  • Modeling
  • Non-forested areas
  • Phygrow
  • Rangeland

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
  • Forestry

Cite this

A comparison of rangeland monitoring techniques for modeling herbaceous fuels and forage in central Arizona, USA. / Rhodes, Edward C.; Tolleson, Douglas R; Angerer, Jay P.; Kava, John A.; Dyess, Judith; Nicolet, Tessa.

In: Fire Ecology, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2014, p. 76-91.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Rhodes, Edward C. ; Tolleson, Douglas R ; Angerer, Jay P. ; Kava, John A. ; Dyess, Judith ; Nicolet, Tessa. / A comparison of rangeland monitoring techniques for modeling herbaceous fuels and forage in central Arizona, USA. In: Fire Ecology. 2014 ; Vol. 10, No. 2. pp. 76-91.
@article{279c0335d4234ceb92de858873444b32,
title = "A comparison of rangeland monitoring techniques for modeling herbaceous fuels and forage in central Arizona, USA",
abstract = "While fire and rangeland managers frequently have different land management roles and objectives, their data needs with regards to herbaceous biomass (fuel loads and forage) often overlap, and can be served with a single sampling protocol for both rangeland and fuels management. In this study, we examined how two herbaceous sampling methods compare in measuring species richness, ground cover, and standing herbaceous biomass for range and forestry management using the Phytomass Growth Simulator (Phygrow). Phygrow is an herbaceous vegetation growth model used to simulate rangeland plant production for herbivory, drought, and wildfire severity early warning systems. The Point-frequency protocol has been used for 10 years to collect plant community parameters for Phygrow. The Common Non-Forested Vegetation Sampling Protocol (CNVSP) is a commonly used rangeland assessment protocol in the southwestern United States. Data from both methods were used to parameterize the Phygrow model to examine their similarities and differences, and to see if data collected from the CNVSP methodology could be used to model herbaceous fuel loads. We determined that the data collected in the CNVSP protocol met the needs for Phygrow model validation of standing herbaceous fuels, but data was insufficient for modeling surface dead fuel loads.",
keywords = "Fine fuels, Frequency, Fuel load, Grass, Modeling, Non-forested areas, Phygrow, Rangeland",
author = "Rhodes, {Edward C.} and Tolleson, {Douglas R} and Angerer, {Jay P.} and Kava, {John A.} and Judith Dyess and Tessa Nicolet",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.4996/fireecology.1002076",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "10",
pages = "76--91",
journal = "Fire Ecology",
issn = "1933-9747",
publisher = "Association for Fire Ecology",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of rangeland monitoring techniques for modeling herbaceous fuels and forage in central Arizona, USA

AU - Rhodes, Edward C.

AU - Tolleson, Douglas R

AU - Angerer, Jay P.

AU - Kava, John A.

AU - Dyess, Judith

AU - Nicolet, Tessa

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - While fire and rangeland managers frequently have different land management roles and objectives, their data needs with regards to herbaceous biomass (fuel loads and forage) often overlap, and can be served with a single sampling protocol for both rangeland and fuels management. In this study, we examined how two herbaceous sampling methods compare in measuring species richness, ground cover, and standing herbaceous biomass for range and forestry management using the Phytomass Growth Simulator (Phygrow). Phygrow is an herbaceous vegetation growth model used to simulate rangeland plant production for herbivory, drought, and wildfire severity early warning systems. The Point-frequency protocol has been used for 10 years to collect plant community parameters for Phygrow. The Common Non-Forested Vegetation Sampling Protocol (CNVSP) is a commonly used rangeland assessment protocol in the southwestern United States. Data from both methods were used to parameterize the Phygrow model to examine their similarities and differences, and to see if data collected from the CNVSP methodology could be used to model herbaceous fuel loads. We determined that the data collected in the CNVSP protocol met the needs for Phygrow model validation of standing herbaceous fuels, but data was insufficient for modeling surface dead fuel loads.

AB - While fire and rangeland managers frequently have different land management roles and objectives, their data needs with regards to herbaceous biomass (fuel loads and forage) often overlap, and can be served with a single sampling protocol for both rangeland and fuels management. In this study, we examined how two herbaceous sampling methods compare in measuring species richness, ground cover, and standing herbaceous biomass for range and forestry management using the Phytomass Growth Simulator (Phygrow). Phygrow is an herbaceous vegetation growth model used to simulate rangeland plant production for herbivory, drought, and wildfire severity early warning systems. The Point-frequency protocol has been used for 10 years to collect plant community parameters for Phygrow. The Common Non-Forested Vegetation Sampling Protocol (CNVSP) is a commonly used rangeland assessment protocol in the southwestern United States. Data from both methods were used to parameterize the Phygrow model to examine their similarities and differences, and to see if data collected from the CNVSP methodology could be used to model herbaceous fuel loads. We determined that the data collected in the CNVSP protocol met the needs for Phygrow model validation of standing herbaceous fuels, but data was insufficient for modeling surface dead fuel loads.

KW - Fine fuels

KW - Frequency

KW - Fuel load

KW - Grass

KW - Modeling

KW - Non-forested areas

KW - Phygrow

KW - Rangeland

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84904423401&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84904423401&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4996/fireecology.1002076

DO - 10.4996/fireecology.1002076

M3 - Article

VL - 10

SP - 76

EP - 91

JO - Fire Ecology

JF - Fire Ecology

SN - 1933-9747

IS - 2

ER -