Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Fire and Insect Interactions in North American Forests

  • Fire Science and Management (ME Alexander, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Forestry Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Fire and insects are major disturbances in North American forests. We reviewed literature on the effects of fire on bark beetles, defoliators, and pollinators, as well as on the effects of bark beetle and defoliator epidemics on fuels and wildfires.

Recent Findings

Fire has direct and indirect effects on insects, but our understanding of these effects is confounded by several factors identified in this review. Direct effects are expressed through insect mortality due to exposure to fire, with few studies published on this topic. Indirect effects are expressed through changes in insect hosts and forest conditions, with bark beetle responses to fire-injured trees following prescribed fires and low-severity wildfires being the most studied. Although fire effects on pollinators are an emerging field of research, it is clear that fire can benefit pollinators by creating more open forest conditions, which, in turn, enhance floral resource availability. Bark beetle and defoliator epidemics can exert large effects on fuels, but their effects on wildfires are mixed. Differences in the severity, extent, and timing of epidemics, fire regimes, fire weather, topography, and the metrics and models used to assess wildfires, among other factors, confound our understanding of the effects of bark beetle and defoliator epidemics on wildfires.

Summary

Fire has both positive and negative effects on insects. Bark beetle and defoliator epidemics have positive and negative effects on wildfires. Additional study of these relationships is warranted given the effects of climate change on forests and forest disturbances, recent declines in some pollinator species in North America, and interests in restoring fire-adapted forest ecosystems.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently (2017–present), have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Guyette RP, Stambaugh MC, Dey DC, Muzika R-M. Predicting fire frequency with chemistry and climate. Ecosystems. 2021;15:322–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. • Vose JM, Peterson DL, et al. Fire and forests in the 21st century: managing resilience under changing climates and fire regimes in USA Forests. In: Greenberg CH, Collins B, editors., et al., Fire ecology and management: past, present, and future of US forested ecosystems. Switzerland: Springer Nature; 2021. Reviews effects of wildfires on forests and interactions with other stressors and disturbances.

  3. Stambaugh MC, Guyette RP, Marschall JM. Longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) fire scars reveal new details of a frequent fire regime. J Veg Sci. 2011;22:1094–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Swetnam TW, Betancourt JL. Mesoscale disturbance and ecological response to decadal climatic variability in the American southwest. J Clim. 1998;11:3128–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Allen CD, Savage M, Falk DA, et al. Ecological restoration of southwestern ponderosa pine ecosystems: a broad perspective. Ecol Appl. 2002;12:1418–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Collins BM, Everett RG, Stephens SL. Impacts of fire exclusion and recent managed fire on forest structure in old growth Sierra Nevada mixed-conifer forests. Ecosphere. 2011;2(4):art51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Haugo RD, Kellogg BS, et al. The missing fire: quantifying human exclusion of wildfire in Pacific Northwest forests, USA. Ecosphere. 2019;10(4):e02702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Morris JL, DeRose RJ, Brunelle AR. Long-term landscape changes in a subalpine spruce-fir forest in central Utah, USA. For Ecosyst. 2015;2:35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. USDA Forest Service. Fire regimes of the conterminous United States. 2021. https://www.fs.fed.us/database/feis/fire_regime_table/PNVG_fire_regime_table.html#Northeast. Accessed 24 March 2022.

  10. Dennison PE, Brewer SC, Arnold JD, Moritz MA. Large wildfire trends in the western United States, 1984–2011. Geophys Res Lett. 2014;41:2928–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Abatzoglou JT, Williams AP. Impact of anthropogenic climate change on wildfire across western US forests. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2016;113:11770–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Littell JS, McKenzie D, Wan HY, Cushman SA. Climate change and future wildfire in the western United States: an ecological approach to nonstationarity. Earth’s Future. 2018;6:1097–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Holden ZA, Swanson A, et al. Decreasing fire season precipitation increased recent western US wildfire activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2018;36:E8349–57.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Parks SA, Abatzoglou JT. Warmer and drier fire seasons contribute to increases in area burned at high severity in western US forests from 1985 to 2017. Geophys Res Lett. 2020, 47 https://doi.org/10.1029/2020GL08985

  15. Kirchmeier-Young MC, Gillett NP, Zwiers FW, Cannon AJ, Anslow FS. Attribution of the influence of human-induced climate change on an extreme fire season. Earth’s Future. 2019;7:2–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Gaur A, Bénichou N, Armstrong M, Hill F. Potential future changes in wildfire weather and behavior around 11 Canadian cities. Urban Clim. 2021;35:100735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Iglesias V, Balch JK, Travis WR. U.S. fires became larger, more frequent, and more widespread in the 2000s. Sci Adv. 2022;8: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abc0020

  18. Ryan KC, Knapp EE, Varner JM. Prescribed fire in North American forests and woodlands: history, current practice, and challenges. Front Ecol Environ. 2013;11:e15–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mitchell RJ, Liu Y, O’Brien JJ. Future climate and fire interactions in the southeastern region of the United States. For Ecol Manage. 2014;327:316–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kupfer JA, Terando AJ, Gao P, et al. Climate change projected to reduce prescribed burning opportunities in the southeastern United States. Int J Wildland Fire. 2020;29:764–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. National Interagency Coordination Center. Wildland fire summary and statistics annual report-2021. 2022. https://www.predictiveservices.nifc.gov/intelligence/2021_statssumm/intro_summary21.pdf. Accessed 15 March 2022.

  22. National Forestry Database. Forest area burned and number of forest fires. 2022. http://nfdp.ccfm.org/en/data/fires.php. Accessed 15 March 2022.

  23. Agee JK, Skinner CN. Basic principles of forest fuel reduction treatments. For Ecol Manage. 2005;211:83–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Stephens SL, McIver JD, et al. Effects of forest fuel-reduction treatments in the United States. Bioscience. 2012;62:549–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. McIver J, Stephens S, et al. Ecological effects of alternative fuel reduction treatments: highlights of the national Fire and Fire Surrogate study (FFS). Intl J Wild Fire. 2013;22:63–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fernandes PM. Empirical support for the use of prescribed burning as a fuel treatment. Curr Forestry Rep. 2015;1:118–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Stephens SL, Moghaddas JJ, et al. Fire treatment effects on vegetation structure, fuels, and potential fire severity in western U.S. forests. Ecol Appl. 2009;19:305–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ritchie MW, Skinner CN, Hamilton TA. Probability of tree survival after wildfire in an interior pine forest of northern California: effects of thinning and prescribed fire. For Ecol Manage. 2007;247:200–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Melvin MA. 2020 National prescribed fire use report. Technical Bulletin 04–20. Coalition of Prescribed Fire Councils, Inc. 2020. https://www.nwfirescience.org/sites/default/files/publications/2020-Prescribed-Fire-Use-Report-1.pdf. Accessed 15 March 2022.

  30. • USDA Forest Service. Confronting the wildfire crisis-a strategy for protecting communities and improving resilience in America’s forests. 2022. https://www.fs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/Confronting-Wildfire-Crisis.pdf. Accessed 20 March 2022. Describes a 10-year strategy for responding to wildfire in the U.S.

  31. Canadian Council of Forest Ministers. Canadian wildland fire strategy-A 10-year review and renewed call to action. 1999. https://cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/pubwarehouse/pdfs/37108.pdf. Accessed 22 March 2022.

  32. Boisramé G, Thompson S, et al. Managed wildfire effects on forest resilience and water in the Sierra Nevada. Ecosystems. 2017;20:717–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hesseln H. Wildland fire prevention: a review. Curr Forestry Rep. 2018;4:178–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. McDaniel VL, Keyser TL, De Jong GL, Guldin JM. Managed wildfire, drought, and overstory survival: a case study in the Ouachita Mountains of Arkansas. Nat Areas J. 2020;40:326–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mattson WJ Jr. The role of arthropods in forest ecosystems. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1977.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  36. Niquidet K, Tang J, Peter B. Economic analysis of forest insect pests in Canada. Can Entomol. 2016;148:S357–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Fettig CJ, Progar RA, Paschke J, Sapio FJ. Forest insects. In: Robertson G, Barrett T, editors. Disturbance and sustainability in forests of the western United States. PNW-GTR-992. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station; 2021.

  38. •• Canelles Q, Aquilué N, James P, Lawler J, Brotons L. Global review on interactions between insect pests and other forest disturbances. Landsc Ecol. 2021;36:945–72 Reviews interactions among insects and other stressors and disturbances based on global assessment.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Fettig CJ, Audley JP. Conifer bark beetles. Curr Bio. 2021;31:R419–20.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Fettig CJ, Hilszczański J. Management strategies for bark beetles in conifer forests. In: Vega FE, Hofstetter RW, editors. Bark beetles: biology and ecology of native and invasive species. Netherlands: Elsevier Academic Press; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Safranyik L, Linton DA, Shore TL, Hawkes BC. The effects of prescribed burning on mountain pine beetle in lodgepole pine. Information Report BC-X-391. Victoria, BC: Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Pacific Forestry Centre; 2001.

  42. Burnside RE, Holsten EH et al. The northern spruce engraver, Ips perturbatus. FIDL 180. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Health Protection; 2011.

  43. • Hood S, Varner M, van Mantgem P, Cansler CA. Fire and tree death: understanding and improving modeling of fire-induced tree mortality. Environ Res Lett. 2018;13:113004 Reviews factors influencing tree mortality following fire.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Westlind DJ, Kelsey RG. Predicting post-fire attack of red turpentine or western pine beetle on ponderosa pine and its impact on mortality probability in Pacific Northwest forests. For Ecol Manage. 2019;434:181–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Fettig CJ, McKelvey SR. Resiliency of an interior ponderosa pine forest to bark beetle infestations following fuel-reduction and forest-restoration treatments. Forests. 2014;5:153–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Hood S, Baker S, Sala A. Fortifying the forest: thinning and burning increase resistance to a bark beetle outbreak and promote forest resilience. Ecol Appl. 2016;26:1984–2000.

  47. Roccaforte JP, Sánchez MA, Waltz AEM, Gaylord ML, Stoddard MT, Huffman DW. Delayed tree mortality, bark beetle activity, and regeneration dynamics five years following the Wallow Fire, Arizona, USA: assessing trajectories towards resiliency. For Ecol Manage. 2018;428:20–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Westlind DJ, Kerns BK. Repeated fall prescribed fire in previously thinned Pinus ponderosa increases growth and resistance to other disturbances. For Ecol Manage. 2021;480:18645.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Hood SM, Bentz B. Predicting post-fire Douglas-fir beetle attacks and tree mortality in the Northern Rocky Mountains. Can J For Res. 2007;37:1058–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Lerch AP, Pfammatter JA, Bentz BJ, Raffa KF. Mountain pine beetle dynamics and reproductive success in post-fire lodgepole and ponderosa pine forests in northeastern Utah. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0164738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Powell EN, Townsend PA, Raffa KF. Wildfire provides refuge from local extinction but is an unlikely driver of epidemics by mountain pine beetle. Ecol Monog. 2012;82:69–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Fettig CJ, McKelvey SR, Cluck DL, Smith SL, Otrosina WJ. Effects of prescribed fire and season of burn on direct and indirect levels of tree mortality in ponderosa and Jeffrey pine forests in California, USA. For Ecol Manage. 2010;260:207–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Knapp EE, Estes BL, Skinner CN. Ecological effects of prescribed fire season: a literature review and synthesis for managers. PSW-GTR-224. Albany, CA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station; 2009.

  54. McHugh CW, Kolb TE, Wilson JL. Bark beetle attacks on ponderosa pine following fire in northern Arizona. Environ Entomol. 2003;32:510–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Schwilk DW, Knapp EE, Ferrenberg SM, Keeley JE, Caprio AC. Tree mortality from fire and bark beetles following early and late season prescribed fires in a Sierra Nevada mixed-conifer forest. For Ecol Manage. 2006;232:36–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Six DL, Skov K. Response of bark beetles and their natural enemies to fire and fire surrogate treatments in mixed-conifer forests in western Montana. For Ecol Manage. 2009;258:761–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Davis RS, Hood S, Bentz BJ. Fire-injured ponderosa pine provide a pulsed resource for bark beetles. Can J For Res. 2012;42:2022–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Tabacaru CA, Park J, Erbilgin N. Prescribed fire does not promote epidemics of a primary bark beetle at low-density populations. J Appl Ecol. 2016;53:222–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Sullivan BT, Fettig CJ, Otrosina WJ, Dalusky MJ, Berisford CW. Association between the severity of prescribed burns and subsequent activity of conifer-infesting beetles in stands of longleaf pine. For Ecol Manage. 2003;185:327–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Hood S, Sala A, Heyerdahl EK, Boutin M. Low-severity fire increases tree defense against bark beetle attacks. Ecol. 2015;96:1846–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. •• Fettig CJ, Hood SM, Runyon JB, Stalling CM. Bark beetle and fire interactions in western coniferous forests: research findings. Fire Manage Today. 2021;79:14–23 Reviews bark beetle and fire interactions.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Thistle HW, Peterson H, et al. Surrogate pheromone plumes in three forest trunk spaces: composite statistics and case studies. For Sci. 2004;50:610–25.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Fettig CJ, Klepzig KD, et al. The effectiveness of vegetation management practices for prevention and control of bark beetle infestations in coniferous forests of the western and southern United States. For Ecol Manage. 2007;238:24–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Nowak JT, Meeker JR, Coyle DR, Steiner CA, Brownie C. Southern pine beetle infestations in relation to forest stand conditions, previous thinning, and prescribed burning: evaluation of the southern pine beetle prevention program. J For. 2015;113:454–62.

    Google Scholar 

  65. McNichol BH, Montes CR, Barnes BF, Nowak JT, Villari C, Gandhi KJK. Interactions between southern Ips bark beetle outbreaks, prescribed fire, and loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) mortality. For Ecol Manage. 2019;446:164–74.

  66. Fowler JF, Sieg CH, Wadleigh LL. Effectiveness of litter removal to prevent cambial kill-caused mortality in northern Arizona ponderosa pine. For Sci. 2010;56:166–71.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Hood SM. Mitigating old tree mortality in long-unburned, fire-dependent forests: a synthesis. RMRS-GTR-238. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station; 2010.

  68. Fettig CJ, Grosman DM, Munson AS. Advances in insecticide tools and tactics for protecting conifers from bark beetle attack in the western United States. In: Trdan S, editor. Insecticides - development of safer and more effective technologies. Rijecka, Croatia: InTech; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Seybold SJ, Bentz BJ, Fettig CJ, Lundquist JE, Progar RA, Gillette NE. Management of western North American bark beetles with semiochemicals. Annu Rev Entomol. 2018;63:407–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Jentsch PC, Bauch CT, Anand M. Fire mitigates bark beetle epidemics in serotinous forests. Theor Ecol. 2021;14:611–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Mata SA, Schmid JM, Olsen WK. Growth of lodgepole pine stands and its relation to mountain pine beetle susceptibility. RMRS-RP-42. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station; 2003.

  72. Amman GD, Ryan KV. Insect infestation of fire-injured trees in Greater Yellowstone Area. INT-RN-398. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station; 1991.

  73. Ryan KC, Amman GD. Bark beetle activity and delayed tree mortality in the Greater Yellowstone Area following the 1988 fires. In: Keane RE, Ryan KC, Running SW, editors. Ecological implications of fire in Greater Yellowstone Proceedings. Fairland, WA: International Association of Wildland Fire; 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Rasmussen LA, Amman GD, Vandygriff JC, Oakes RD, Munson AS, Gibson KE. Bark beetle and wood borer infestation in the Greater Yellowstone Area during four postfire years. INT-RP-487. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station; 1996.

  75. Jenkins MJ, Runyon JB, Fettig CJ, Page WG, Bentz BJ. Interactions among the mountain pine beetle, fires, and fuels. For Sci. 2014;60:489–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Gerson EA, Kelsey RG. Attraction and direct mortality of pandora moths, Coloradia pandora (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae), by nocturnal fire. For Ecol Manage. 1997;98:71–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Blankenship B, Arthur MA. Soil nutrient and microbial response to prescribed fire in an oak–pine ecosystem in eastern Kentucky. In: Stringer JW, Loftis DL, editors. Proceedings of the 12th central hardwood forest conference, February 28–March 2, 1999. SRS-GTR-24. Asheville, NC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southern Research Station; 1999.

  78. Rieske LK, Housman HH, Arthur MA. Effects of prescribed fire on canopy foliar chemistry and suitability for an insect herbivore. For Ecol Manage. 2002;160:177–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Bergeron Y, Leduc A. Relationships between change in fire frequency and mortality due to spruce budworm outbreak in the southeastern Canadian boreal forest. J Veg Sci. 1998;9:492–500.

  80. McCullough DG, Werner RA, Neumann D. Fire and insects in northern and boreal forest ecosystems of North America. Annu Rev Entomol. 1998;43:107–27.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Hummel S, Agee JK. Western spruce budworm defoliation effects on forest structure and potential fire behavior. Northwest Sci. 2003;77:159–69.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Coleman TW, Jones MI, et al. Impact of the first recorded outbreak of the Douglas-fir tussock moth, Orgyia pseudotsugata, in southern California and the extent of its distribution in the Pacific Southwest Region. For Ecol Manage. 2014;329:295–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Cameron SA, Lozier JD, et al. Patterns of widespread decline in North American bumble bees. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:662–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Goulson D, Nichols E, Botias C, Rotheray EL. Bee declines driven by combined stress from parasites, pesticides, and lack of flowers. Science. 2015;347:https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1255957

  85. Wepprich T, Adrion JR, Ries L, Wiedmann J, Haddad NM. Butterfly abundance declines over 20 years of systematic monitoring in Ohio, USA. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0216270.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. Hanula JL, Ulyshen MD, Horn S. Conserving pollinators in North American forests: a review. Nat Areas J. 2016;36:427–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Moretti MB, Wermelinger B, Gossner MM, Obrist MK. Wiederbesiedlung der Waldbrandfläche von Leuk durch Gliederfüsser. Schweizerische Zeitschrift fur Forstwesen. 2018;169:290–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Moylett H, Youngsteadt E, Sorenson C. The impact of prescribed burning on native bee communities (Hymenoptera: Apoidea: Anthophila) in longleaf pine savannas in the North Carolina Sandhills. Environ Entomol. 2019;49:211–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. •• Carbone LM, Tavella J, Pausas JG, Aguilar R. A global synthesis of fire effects on pollinators. Glob Ecol Biogeogr. 2019;28:1487–98 Reviews effects of fire on pollinators based on global assessment.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. He T, Lamont BB, Pausas JG. Fire as a key driver of Earth’s biodiversity. Biol Rev. 2019;94:1983–2010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Cane JH, Neff JL. Predicted fates of ground-nesting bees in soil heated by wildfire: thermal tolerances of life stages and a survey of nesting depths. Bio Conserv. 2011;144:2631–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  92. Love BG, Cane JH. Limited direct effects of a massive wildfire on its sagebrush steppe bee community. Ecol Entomol. 2016;41:317–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Danforth BN, Minckley RL, Neff JL, Fawcett F. The solitary bees: biology, evolution, conservation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2019.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  94. Williams NM, Crone EE, Roulston TH, Minkley RL, Packer L, Potts SG. Ecological and life-history traits predict bee species responses to environmental disturbances. Biol Conserv. 2010;143:2280–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Galbraith SM, Cane JH, Moldenke AR, Rivers JW. Wild bee diversity increases with local fire severity in a fire-prone landscape. Ecosphere. 2019;10:e02668.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Ulyshen MD, Lucky DA, Work TT. Effects of prescribed fire and social insects on saproxylic beetles in a subtropical forest. Sci Rep. 2020;10:9630.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. • Ulyshen MD, Hiers JK, Pokswinksi SM, Fair C. Pyrodiversity promotes pollinator diversity in a fire-adapted landscape. Front Ecol Environ. 2022;20:78–83 Demonstrates the effects of pyrodiversity on pollinators in a forested landscape.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Campbell JW, Hanula JL, Waldrop TA. Effects of prescribed fire and fire surrogates on floral visiting insects of the Blue Ridge Province in North Carolina. Biol Conserv. 2007;134:393–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Lettow MC, Brudvig LA, Bahlai CA, Gibbs J, Jean RP, Landis DA. Bee community responses to a gradient of oak savanna restoration practices. Rest Ecol. 2018;26:882–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Galbraith SM, Cane JH, Rivers JW. Wildfire severity influences offspring sex ratio in a native solitary bee. Oecologia. 2021;195:65–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. •• Glenny WR, Runyon JB, Burkle LA.A review of management actions on insect pollinators on public lands in the United States. Biodivers Conserv. 2022; https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-022-02399-5. Reviews the effects of forest management on pollinators.

  102. Ulyshen MD, Wilson AC, Ohlson GC, Pokswinksi SM, Hiers JK. Frequent prescribed fires favour ground-nesting bees in southeastern US forests. Insect Conserv Divers. 2021;14:527–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Mason DS, Lashley MA. Spatial scale in prescribed fire regimes: an understudied aspect in conservation with examples from the southeastern United States. Fire Ecol. 2021;17:3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Ulyshen MD, Horn S, Barnes B, Gandhi KJK. Impacts of prescribed fire on saproxylic beetles in loblolly pine logs. Insect Conserv Divers. 2010;3:247–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  105. Gathmann A, Tscharntke T. Foraging ranges of solitary bees. J Animal Ecol. 2002;71:757–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  106. Zurbuchen A, Landert L, Klaiber J, Müller A, Hein S, Dorn S. Maximum foraging ranges in solitary bees: only few individuals have the capability to cover long foraging distances. Biol Conserv. 2010;143:669–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Hiers JK, Wyatt R, Mitchell RJ. The effects of fire regime on legume reproduction in longleaf pine savannas: is a season selective? Oecologia. 2000;125:521–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Decker BL, Harmon-Threatt AN. Growing or dormant season burns: the effects of burn season on bee and plant communities. Biodivers Conserv. 2019;28:3621–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Martin RE, Sapsis DB. Fires as agents of biodiversity: pyrodiversity promotes biodiversity. In: Kerner HM, editor. Proceedings of the symposium on biodiversity in northwestern California, 1991. Berkeley, CA: Wildland Resources Centre, University of California; 1992.

  110. Kelly LT, Giljohann KM, et al. Fire and biodiversity in the Anthropocene. Science. 2020;370:eabb0355. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb0355.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. Ponisio L, Wilkin CK, et al. Pyrodiversity begets plant-pollinator community diversity. Glob Chang Biol. 2016;22:1794–808.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Shuey JA. Dancing with fire: ecosystem dynamics, management, and the Karner blue (Lycaeides melissa samuelis Nabokov) (Lycaenidae). J Lepid Soc. 1997;51:263–8.

    Google Scholar 

  113. Kwilosz JR, Knutson RL. Prescribed fire management of Karner blue butterfly habitat at Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. Nat Areas J. 1999;19:98–108.

    Google Scholar 

  114. Hicke JA, Meddens AJ, Kolden CA. Recent tree mortality in the western United States from bark beetles and forest fires. For Sci. 2016;62:141–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  115. Bentz B, Logan J, et al. Bark beetle outbreaks in western North America: causes and consequences. Bark Beetle Symposium; Snowbird, Utah; November, 2005. Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press; 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  116. Jenkins MJ, Page WG, Hebertson EG, Alexander ME. Fuels and fire behavior dynamics in bark beetle-attacked forests in Western North America and implications for fire management. For Ecol Manage. 2012;275:23–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Fettig CJ, Mortenson LA, Bulaon BM, Foulk PB. Tree mortality following drought in the central and southern Sierra Nevada, California, U.S. For Ecol Manage. 2019;432:164–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Audley JP, Fettig CJ, et al. Impacts of mountain pine beetle epidemics on lodgepole pine forests in the Intermountain West, U.S., 2004–2019. For Ecol Manage. 2020;475:118403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Audley JP, Fettig CJ, et al. Dynamics of beetle-killed snags following mountain pine beetle epidemics in lodgepole pine forests. For Ecol Manage. 2021;482:118870.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  120. Cullingham CI, Cooke JE, Dang S, Davis CS, Cooke BJ, Coltman DW. Mountain pine beetle host-range expansion threatens the boreal forest. Mol Ecol. 2011;20:2157–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  121. Wang X, Thompson DK, Marshall GA, Tymstra C, Carr R, Flannigan MD. Increasing frequency of extreme fire weather in Canada with climate change. Clim Change. 2015;130:573–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  122. Fettig CJ. Native bark beetles and wood borers in Mediterranean forests of California. In: Lieutier F, Paine TD, editors. Insects and diseases of Mediterranean forest systems. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  123. Qin H, Brenkert-Smith H, Sanders C, Vickery J, Bass M. Explaining changes in perceived wildfire risk related to the mountain pine beetle outbreak in north central Colorado. Ecol Indic. 2021;130:108080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  124. Harvey BJ, Donato DC, Turner MG. Recent mountain pine beetle epidemics, wildfire severity, and postfire tree regeneration in the US Northern Rockies. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:15120–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  125. Andrus RA, Veblen TT, Harvey BJ, Hart SJ. Fire severity unaffected by spruce beetle outbreak in spruce-fir forests in southwestern Colorado. Ecol Appl. 2016;26:700–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  126. Hart SJ, Schoennagel T, Veblen TT, Chapman TB. Area burned in the western United States is unaffected by recent mountain pine beetle epidemics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2015;112:4375–80.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  127. Millar CI, Delany DL. Interaction between mountain pine beetle-caused tree mortality and fire behavior in subalpine whitebark pine forests, eastern Sierra Nevada CA; Retrospective observations. For Ecol Manage. 2019;447:195–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  128. Talucci AC, Krawchuk MA. Dead forests burning: the influence of beetle epidemics on fire severity and legacy structure in sub-boreal forests. Ecosphere. 2019;10:e02744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  129. Page WG, Jenkins MJ, Runyon JB. Mountain pine beetle attack alters the chemistry and flammability of lodgepole pine foliage. Can J Forest Res. 2012;42:1631–47.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  130. Page WG, Jenkins MJ, Runyon JB. Spruce beetle-induced changes to Engelmann spruce foliage flammability. For Sci. 2014;60:691–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  131. Jolly WM, Parsons RA, et al. Relationships between moisture, chemistry, and ignition of Pinus contorta needles during the early stages of mountain pine beetle attack. For Ecol Manage. 2012;269:52–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  132. • Moriarty K, Cheng AS, Hoffman CM, Cottrell SP, Alexander ME. Firefighter observations of “surprising” fire behavior in mountain pine beetle-attacked lodgepole pine forests. Fire. 2019;2:34 Interviews of firefighters that worked in mountain pine beetle-altered forests.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  133. Xie H, Fawcett JE, Wang GG. Fuel dynamics and its implication to fire behavior in loblolly pine-dominated stands after southern pine beetle outbreak. For Ecol Manage. 2020;466:118130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  134. Jenkins MJ, Hebertson E, Page W, Jorgensen CA. Bark beetles, fuels, fires and implications for forest management in the Intermountain West. For Ecol Manage. 2008;254:16–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  135. Hicke JA, Johnson MC, Hayes JL, Preisler HK. Effects of bark beetle-caused tree mortality on wildfire. For Ecol Manage. 2012;271:81–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  136. Gray CA, Toone C, Jenkins MJ, Null SE, Yocom LL. Spatial and temporal fuels changes in whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) from mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae). For Ecol Manage. 2021;482:118789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  137. Giunta AD, Runyon JB, Jenkins MJ, Teich M. Volatile and within-needle terpene changes to Douglas-fir trees associated with Douglas-fir beetle (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) attack. Environ Entomol. 2016;45:920–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  138. Perrakis DD, Lanoville RA, Taylor SW, Hicks D. Modeling wildfire spread in mountain pine beetle-affected forest stands, British Columbia, Canada.  Fire Ecol. 2014;10:10–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  139. Page WG, Jenkins MJ, Alexander ME. Crown fire potential in lodgepole pine forests during the red stage of mountain pine beetle attack. Forestry: An Int J For Res. 2014;87:347–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  140. • Hart SJ, Preston DL. Fire weather drives daily area burned and observations of fire behavior in mountain pine beetle affected landscapes. Environ Res Lett. 2020;15:054007 Demonstrates the overriding influence of fire weather in beetle-altered forests.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  141. Hoffman C, Morgan P, Mell W, Parsons R, Strand EK, Cook S. Numerical simulation of crown fire hazard immediately after bark beetle-caused mortality in lodgepole pine forests. For Sci. 2012;58:178–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  142. Simard M, Romme WH, Griffin JM, Turner MG. Do mountain pine beetle epidemics change the probability of active crown fire in lodgepole pine forests? Ecol Monog. 2011;81:3–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  143. Schoennagel T, Veblen TT, Negron JF, Smith JM. Effects of mountain pine beetle on fuels and expected fire behavior in lodgepole pine forests, Colorado, USA. PLoS One. 2012;7:e30002.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  144. Ganey JL, Iniguez JM, Vojta SC, Iniguez AR. Twenty years of drought-mediated change in snag populations in mixed-conifer and ponderosa pine forests in Northern Arizona. For Ecosyst. 2021;8:20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  145. • Stephens SL, Collins BM, et al. Drought, tree mortality, and wildfire in forests adapted to frequent fire. BioScience. 2018;68:77–88 Demonstrates and reviews effects of high levels of large-tree mortality on fuels and wildfires, including mass fires.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  146. Harvey BJ, Donato DC, Romme WH, Turner MG. Influence of recent bark beetle outbreak on fire severity and postfire tree regeneration in montane Douglas-fir forests. Ecol. 2013;94:2475–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  147. Meigs GW, Campbell JL, Zald HS, Bailey JD, Shaw DC, Kennedy RE. Does wildfire likelihood increase following insect epidemics in conifer forests? Ecosphere. 2015;6:1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  148. Mietkiewicz N, Kulakowski D. Relative importance of climate and mountain pine beetle epidemics on the occurrence of large wildfires in the western USA. Ecol Appl. 2016;26:2525–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  149. Lynch HJ, Renkin RA, Crabtree RL, Moorcroft PR. The influence of previous mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) activity on the 1988 Yellowstone fires. Ecosystems. 2006;9:1318–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  150. • Ren J, Hanan E, et al. Bark beetle effects on fire regimes depend on underlying fuel modifications in semiarid systems. J Adv Model Earth Syst. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1002/essoar.10510802.1Discusses the influences of fire regimes on wildfire responses in beetle-altered forests.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  151. Keeley JE. Fire intensity, fire severity and burn severity: a brief review and suggested usage. Int J Wildland Fire. 2009;18:116–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  152. Page WG, Alexander ME, Jenkins MJ. Wildfire’s resistance to control in mountain pine beetle-attacked lodgepole pine forests. For Chron. 2013;89:783–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  153. Agne MC, Woolley T, Fitzgerald S. Fire severity and cumulative disturbance effects in the post-mountain pine beetle lodgepole pine forests of the Pole Creek Fire. For Ecol Manage. 2016;366:73–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  154. Nelson MF, Ciochina M, Bone C. Assessing spatiotemporal relationships between wildfire and mountain pine beetle disturbances across multiple time lags. Ecosphere. 2016;7:e01482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  155. • Wayman RB, Safford HD. Recent bark beetle epidemics influence wildfire severity in mixed-conifer forests of the Sierra Nevada, California, USA. Ecol Appl. 2021;31:e02287 Demonstrates increases in wildfire severity following epidemics but also emphases importance of fire weather.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  156. McCarley TR, Kolden CA, Vaillant NM, Hudak AT, Smith AM, Kreitler J. Landscape-scale quantification of fire-induced change in canopy cover following mountain pine beetle outbreak and timber harvest. For Ecol Manage. 2017;391:164–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  157. Sieg CH, Linn RR, et al. Fires following bark beetles: factors controlling severity and disturbance interactions in ponderosa pine. Fire Ecol. 2017;13:1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  158. Cruz MG, Alexander ME. Assessing crown fire potential in coniferous forests of western North America: a critique of current approaches and recent simulation studies. Int J Wildland Fire. 2010;19:377–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  159. Jolly WM, Parsons R, Varner JM, Butler BW, Ryan KC, Gucker CL. Do mountain pine beetle epidemics change the probability of active crown fire in lodgepole pine forests? Ecol. 2012;93:941–6.

    Google Scholar 

  160. Wang X, Swystun T, Oliver J, Flannigan MD. One extreme fire weather event determines the extent and frequency of wildland fires. Environ Res Lett. 2021;16:114031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  161. Peters DP, Pielke RA, Bestelmeyer BT, Allen CD, Munson-McGee S, Havstad KM. Cross-scale interactions, nonlinearities, and forecasting catastrophic events. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2004;101:15130–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  162. Graham SA. The dying balsam fir and spruce in Minnesota. Special Bull. 68. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota, Agricultural Extension Division; 1923.

  163. Graham SA, Orr LW. The spruce budworm in Minnesota. Tech. Bull. 142. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota, Agricultural Experiment Station; 1940.

  164. Prebble M. The battle of the budworm. Pulp Paper Can. 1950;51:145–8.

    Google Scholar 

  165. Stocks BJ. Fire potential in the spruce budworm-damaged forests of Ontario. For Chron. 1987;63:8–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  166. Stocks BJ. Forest fire behavior in spruce budworm-killed balsam fir. In: Recent advances in spruce budworms research. Proc. CANUSA spruce budworms research symposium. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Forest Service; 1985.

  167. Watt GA, Fleming RA, Smith SM, Fortin MJ. Spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana Clem.) defoliation promotes vertical fuel continuity in Ontario's boreal mixedwood forest. Forests. 2018;9: https://doi.org/10.3390/f9050256

  168. Watt GA, Stocks BJ, Fleming RA, Smith SM. Stand breakdown and surface fuel accumulation due to spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana) defoliation in the boreal mixedwood forest of central Canada. Can J For Res. 2020;50:533–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  169. Forestry Canada Fire Danger Group (Van Wagner CE, Stocks BJ, Lawson BD, Alexander ME, Lynham TJ, McAlpine RS). Development and structure of the Canadian Forest Fire Behavior Prediction System. Info. Rep. ST-X-3. Ottawa, ON: Forestry Canada, Science and Sustainable Development Directorate; 1992.

  170. Fleming RA, Candau J-N, McAlpine RS. Landscape-scale analysis of interactions between insect defoliation and forest fire in central Canada. Clim Change. 2002;55:251–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  171. • James PMA, Robert L-E, Wotton BM, Martell DL, Fleming RA. Lagged cumulative spruce budworm defoliation affects the risk of fire ignition in Ontario, Canada. Ecol Appl. 2017;27:532–44 (Demonstrates effects of defoliation on fire ignition probabilities in a boreal forest).

  172. Péch G. Fire hazard in budworm-killed balsam fir stands on Cape Breton Highlands. For Chron. 1993;69:178–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  173. Candau JN, Fleming RA, Wang X. Ecoregional patterns of spruce budworm-wildfire interactions in central Canada's forests. Forests. 2018;9: https://doi.org/10.3390/f9030137

  174. Meigs GW, Zald HSJ, Campbell JL, Keeton WS, Kennedy RE. Do insect epidemics reduce the severity of subsequent forest fires? Environ Res Lett. 2016;11:045008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  175. Lynch HJ, Moorcroft PR. A spatiotemporal Ripley’s K-function to analyze interactions between spruce budworm and fire in British Columbia, Canada. Can J For Res. 2008;38:3112–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  176. Flower A, Gavin DG, Heyerdahl EK, Parsons RA, Cohn GM. Drought-triggered western spruce budworm epidemics in the interior Pacific Northwest: a multi-century dendrochronological record. For Ecol Manage. 2014;324:16–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  177. Harvey JE, Axelson JN, Smith DJ. Disturbance-climate relationships between wildfire and western spruce budworm in interior British Columbia. Ecosphere. 2018;9:e02126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  178. Gauthier S, Bergeron Y, Simon J-P. Effects of fire regime on the serotiny level of jack pine. J Ecol. 1996;84:539–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  179. James PMA, Fortin MJ, Sturtevant BR, Fall A, Kneeshaw D. Modelling spatial interactions among fire, spruce budworm, and logging in the boreal forest. Ecosystems. 2011;14:60–75.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  180. Sturtevant BR, Miranda BR, Shinneman DJ, Gustafson EJ, Wolter PT. Comparing modern and presettlement forest dynamics of a subboreal wilderness: does spruce budworm enhance fire risk? Ecol Appl. 2012;22:1278–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  181. Cohn GM, Parsons RA, Heyerdahl EK, Gavin DG, Flower A. Simulated western spruce budworm defoliation reduces torching and crowning potential: a sensitivity analysis using a physics-based fire model. Int J Wildland Fire. 2014;23:709–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  182. Vane E, Waring K, Polinko A. The influence of western spruce budworm on fire in spruce-fir forests. Fire Ecol. 2017;13:16–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  183. Bentz BJ, Régnière J, et al. Climate change and bark beetles of the western United States and Canada: direct and indirect effects. Bioscience. 2010;60:602–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  184. Pureswaran DS, Roques A, Battisti A. Forest insects and climate change. Curr Forestry Rep. 2018;4:35–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank Marty Alexander (Section Editor, Fire Science and Management) for his invitation to contribute to Current Forestry Reports and Shakeeb Hamud (USDA Forest Service) and an anonymous reviewer for their critiques of earlier drafts. This research was supported in part by the USDA Forest Service. The findings and conclusions in this publication are those of the authors and should not be construed to represent any official USDA or U.S. Government determination or policy.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pacific Southwest Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 1731 Research Park Drive, Davis, CA, 95618, USA

    Christopher J. Fettig

  2. Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 1648 South 7th Avenue, Bozeman, MT, 59717, USA

    Justin B. Runyon

  3. Department of Entomology and Nematology, University of California, 1 Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, 95616, USA

    Crystal S. Homicz

  4. Institute of Forestry and Conservation, University of Toronto, 33 Willcocks Street, Toronto, ON, M5S 3E8, Canada

    Patrick M. A. James

  5. Southern Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 320 Green Street, Athens, GA, 30602, USA

    Michael D. Ulyshen

Authors
  1. Christopher J. Fettig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Justin B. Runyon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Crystal S. Homicz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Patrick M. A. James
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael D. Ulyshen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher J. Fettig.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Fire Science and Management

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fettig, C.J., Runyon, J.B., Homicz, C.S. et al. Fire and Insect Interactions in North American Forests. Curr Forestry Rep 8, 301–316 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-022-00170-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-022-00170-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation