the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Multidecadal satellite-derived Portuguese Burn Severity Atlas (1984–2022)
Abstract. Long-term burn severity assessment can support better pre- and post-fire management plans. In this study, Portuguese Burn Severity Atlas was created containing historical fires in Portugal from 1984 to 2022. As prerequisites, fire data were gathered and delimited for all years. Due to the availability of satellite images, for different years, different imagery from Landsat sensors (30 m) were applied. Exploratory analysis showed that burn severity estimates are significantly affected by the time lag between the satellite imagery acquisition and the fire date. We explicitly incorporated the effect of time lag in the degradation of burn severity estimates in the selection of the most suitable pre- and post-fire satellite images for each fire. Using Google Earth Engine, burn severity estimates were calculated for fires equal to or larger than 500 ha between 1984 and 2000 and larger than 100 ha for fires from 2001 to 2022 with known start and end dates (valid fires). Different indices were calculated, such as the differenced Normalized Burn Ratio (dNBR), relative dNBR (RdNBR), Relativized Burn Ratio (RBR), and a burn severity index that combines dNBR with enhanced vegetation index (dNBR-EVI). Overall, in Portugal, 4.92 M ha burned over the 38-year period (1984–2022), from which 3.19 million ha were caused by valid fires (64.8 %). Among these, a total area of 3.11 million ha had burn severity estimates via the applied indices (97 % of valid and 63 % of all fires). Results show that Portugal has experienced, on average, “high” burn severity throughout this period, with large percentages of dNBR pixels between 0.419 and 0.66 (29 %) and > 0.66 (20 %). Estimates from different burn severity indices provided a more complete representation of the burn severity impacts. Via the analysis of only three fires throughout the study period, the dNBR-EVI showed potential in differentiating the “unburned” and “regrowth” burn severity while RBR was more prone to signal saturation, i.e., inability to show “high” and “very high” burn severity. However, more in-depth research is needed to fully confirm these properties. This atlas can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12773611 (Jahanianfard et al., 2024) and be used by researchers to have a better understanding of historical fires, their corresponding impacts on vegetation cover, air, soil, and water quality, and identification of the most influential environmental and climatical drivers of burn severity.
- Preprint
(2786 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on essd-2024-305', Anonymous Referee #1, 07 Oct 2024
The present study is concerned with the multidecadal satellite-derived Portuguese Burn Severity Atlas. The authors offer valuable insights into the topic. The authors present the following observations for consideration.
(1) It is my contention that the role of small fires in the context of wildfire management is a significant yet understudied area. In contrast, the current study has a narrow focus on large fires (>100 ha).
(2) It is anticipated that the fire atlas will have an identical resolution, resulting in comparable outcomes at either 30 or 500 meters. It is recommended that the ALI sensor be used for the 2012 data set.
(3) It is my contention that a burn severity mapping system based solely on these indices with a fixed threshold will not yield optimal results. The resulting burn severity map is an inaccurate representation of the landscape due to the influence of environmental conditions, the diversity of objects, and the impact of climate.
(4) It is anticipated that the reliability of the atlas dataset will be enhanced by the incorporation of a more robust validation dataset.
(5) It would be beneficial to examine the influence of seasonality and the climate dataset on the severity map.
(6) It would be advantageous to include the severity of different objects and trees during the fire period.
Minor comments:
(1) It is recommended that all figures be enhanced in terms of quality.
(2) It would be helpful to include a map indicating the frequency of burn for different areas.
(3) It would be beneficial to analyze the impact of the threshold value for different sensors on the same fire.Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-305-RC1 - AC1: 'Responses to RC1 and RC2', Dina Jahanianfard, 15 Jan 2025
-
RC2: 'Comment on essd-2024-305', Anonymous Referee #2, 24 Oct 2024
The data article provides a new dataset to potentially evaluate fire severity in Portugal in the period 1984-2022. This new dateset is a contribution to the analysis of fire severity in Portugal in the last decades. However, there are a series of limitations in the dataset that must be addressed prior to its publication:
The authors select fires larger than 500 ha for the period 1984-2000 to assess fire severity and fires larger than 100 ha for the remaining period, until 2022. The authors must justify the selection of these fire sizes and express in the methodoly the percentage that these fires represent for Portugal in terms of number of fires as compared to the total number of fires in the country, and in terms of burnt area, as compared to the total burnt area in the country for all the years of the analysis. Fires larger than 100 ha are probably below 1% of the total number of fires, although they may have a larger contribution in terms of burnt area, maybe about 30-40%? These basic statistics are needed to know how representative the fire severity dataset is for Portugal.
On the basis of the above and the availability of satellite imagery from Landsat sensors, the authors must justify the selection of the 500 ha and 100 ha thresholds. In principle, and given that the imagery is at 30 m spatial resolution, there is no obvious justification for the selection of these thresholds. Please, explain also why MODIS was used for 2012, which was a critical year of wildfires in Portugal and the potential inter-calibration (comparability) of the fire severity series for the rest of the years with the data obtained for 2012.
The statement on the use of the DNBR-EVI regarding the potentila use of this index based on the analysis of 3 fires, only, should be excluded from the article as the representativity of this analysis is not acceptable by any scientific standards. The authors are encouraged to continue the testing of this index with a sufficiently large/representative dataset.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-2024-305-RC2 - AC1: 'Responses to RC1 and RC2', Dina Jahanianfard, 15 Jan 2025
Data sets
Multidecadal satellite-derived Portuguese Burn Severity Atlas (1984–2022) Dina Jahanianfard et al. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12773611
Model code and software
Portuguese-Burn-Severity-Atlas-V2 D. Jahanianfard https://github.com/DinaJahanianfard/Portuguese-Burn-Severity-Atlas_v2/commit/7aee76ea5b3df0db8cd047a4b8cf6624bf965d50
Portuguese Burn Severity Atlas-GEE code D. Jahanianfard https://code.earthengine.google.com/b23081d3643bc46585d73f893b9efdab?noload=true
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
495 | 112 | 122 | 729 | 11 | 11 |
- HTML: 495
- PDF: 112
- XML: 122
- Total: 729
- BibTeX: 11
- EndNote: 11
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1