Auxiliary material for
Unrecognized tundra fire events on the North Slope of Alaska
Benjamin M. Jones1*, Amy L. Breen2, Benjamin V. Gaglioti1,3, Daniel H. Mann4, Adrian
V. Rocha5, Guido Grosse6, Christopher D. Arp3, Michael L. Kunz7and Donald A.
Walker8
1
Alaska Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Anchorage, AK, USA
International Arctic Research Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK,
USA
3
Water and Environmental Research Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks,
AK, USA
4
Geography Program, School of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences, University
of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA
5
Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, USA
6
Geophysical Institute, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA
7
Bureau of Land Management, Arctic Field Office, Fairbanks, AK, USA
8
Institute of Arctic Biology, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Fairbanks, AK, USA
2
Journal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences
Introduction
The auxiliary material accompanying Jones et al. – Unrecognized tundra fires –
consists of one table and two figures. Ts01 provides the raw data table showing
species grouped by functional type (down) and listing transects and their localities
sampled on the North Slope (across). Full floristic surveys were conducted using the
point intercept sampling method recommended by the Alaska Interagency Fire Effects
Task Group (2007). Plant species and height were recorded every 1-m along three
(burned sites) and two (unburned sites) 30-m transects. All taxa that touched the
sampling pin were recorded as ‘hits’. Percent cover was calculated by dividing the
number of hits for each taxa by the total number of points along each transect. The
transects from the two unburned sites were pooled for a total of four transects in
undisturbed moist tussock tundra. Nomenclature follows the Panarctic Species List (v.
1.0) developed for the Arctic Vegetation Archive (Walker & Raynolds 2011; Walker et
al., 2013). Plant species were grouped into broad functional types (SOM Table 1; shrub,
forb, grass, sedge, rush, bryophyte, lichen or other) and a chi-square test was used to
determine if functional types were randomly distributed across sites or more predominant
at some sites compared to others. Fs01 shows a portion of the estimated burn
permeter from late-1940s aerial photography for the Meade and Ketik River fires.
This imagery was utilized to rule out the possibility that these fire events occurred
post-1950. Fs02 shows a high-resolution satellite image and ground photo for a
likely pre-1950 fire site near the Chandler River. Detailed field surveys were not
conducted at this site.
1. ts01.txt Raw data table showing species grouped by functional type (down)
and listing transects and their localities sampled on the North Slope (across).
Data are cover abundance (percentage). Species occurring on the transect
that were not hit are indicated by an 'r' denoting these were rare species
(cover << 1%). These data were used to compile Figure 7.
1.1 Column “taxa”, plant species grouped by broad functional types (shrubs,
forbs, grasses, sedges, rushes, bryophytes, lichens, other)
1.2 Column “Unburned, East, 1”, transect 1 from unburned eastern survey site
1.3 Column “Unburned, East, 2”, transect 2 from unburned eastern survey site
1.4 Column “Unburned, West, 1”, transect 1 from unburned western survey site
1.5 Column “Unburned, West, 2”, transect 2 from unburned western survey site
1.6 Column “Historically Burned, Anaktuvuk River (2007), 5” transect 1 from
Anaktuvuk River fire survey site
1.7 Column “Historically Burned, Anaktuvuk River (2007), 6” transect 2 from
Anaktuvuk River fire survey site
1.8 Column “Historically Burned, Anaktuvuk River (2007), 7” transect 3 from
Anaktuvuk River fire survey site
1.9 Column “Historically Burned, DCKN (1993), 8” transect 1 from DCKN fire
survey site
1.10
Column “Historically Burned, DCKN (1993), 9” transect 2 from DCKN
fire survey site
1.11
Column “Historically Burned, DCKN (1993), 10” transect 3 from DCKN
fire survey site
1.12
Column “Historically Burned, Kokolik River (1977), 11” transect 1
from Kokolik River fire survey site
1.13
Column “Historically Burned, Kokolik River (1977), 12” transect 2
from Kokolik River fire survey site
1.14
Column “Historically Burned, Kokolik River (1977), 13” transect 3
from Kokolik River fire survey site
1.15
Column “Recently Discovered Burned, Meade River, 14” transect 1
from Meade River fire survey site
1.16
Column “Recently Discovered Burned, Meade River, 15” transect 2
from Meade River fire survey site
1.17
Column “Recently Discovered Burned, Meade River, 16” transect 3
from Meade River fire survey site
1.18
Column “Recently Discovered Burned, Ketik River, 17” transect 1 from
Ketik River fire survey site
1.19
Column “Recently Discovered Burned, Ketik River, 18” transect 2 from
Ketik River fire survey site
1.20
Column “Recently Discovered Burned, Ketik River, 19” transect 3 from
Ketik River fire survey site
2. fs01.png Late-1940s historic aerial photography of the Meade River and Ketik
River sites showing that the increase is landscape texture was already apparent
when the imagery was acquired. These images were used to rule out the
possibility that these two events occurred after AD 1950.
3. fs02.png Likely tundra fire site near the Chandler River exhibiting the
increase in texture in high resolution satellite imagery and a shrubdominated vegetation community atypical of the upland tussock tundra
community that lies outside the delineated perimeter (black polygon). Note
standard pink flamingo lawn ornament for scale which measures 50 cm from
head to tail. This site is shown in Figure 1 as the question mark.
References
Alaska Interagency Fire Effects Task Group (2007), Fire Effects Monitoring Protocol
(version
1.0),
Editors:
Allen,
J.,
K.
Murphy,
and
R.
Jandt
http://depts.washington.edu/nwfire/publication/AK_Fire_Effects_Monitoring_Protocol_2
007.pdf
Walker, D. A., and M. K. Raynolds (2011), An International Arctic Vegetation Database:
A foundation for panarctic biodiversity studies CAFF Strategy Series Report nr
5, Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, Akureyri, Iceland, 29 pp.
Walker, D. A., I. G. Alsos, C. Bay, N. Boulanger-Lapointe, A. L. Breen, H. Bültmann, T.
Christiansen, C. Damgaard, F. J. A. Daniëls, S. Hennekens, M. K. Reynolds, P. C. Le
Roux, M. Luoto, L. Pellisier, R. K. Peet, N.-M. Schmidt, L. Stewart, R. Virtanen, N. G.
Yoccoz, and M. S. Wisz (2013), Rescuing valuable Arctic vegetation data for
biodiversity models, ecosystem models and a Panarctic vegetation classification, Arctic,
InfoNorth, 66, 133-137.