the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Holocene fire regimes around the Altai-Sayan Mountains and adjacent plains: interaction with climate and vegetation types
Abstract. The Altai-Sayan Mountains and adjacent plains have experienced accelerated warming in recent decades, heightening concerns about escalating fire risks. However, critical knowledge gaps persist regarding paleofire dynamics in western Mongolia and comprehensive regional syntheses of biomass burning patterns across the Altai-Sayan ecoregion. Addressing these gaps is essential for understanding vegetation resilience under projected environmental changes and disturbance regimes. This study reconstructs the Holocene fire sequence in the steppe region of western Mongolia and systematically elucidates the spatiotemporal variations in biomass burning across different vegetation zones of the Altai-Sayan Mountains and adjacent plains, as well as their coupling relationships with forest community structure. The results demonstrate that the declining biomass burning since the Holocene has been primarily controlled by temperature-mediated variations in woody biomass above the forest limit in the central Altai Mountains, while in the western Sayan and northern Altai Mountains, it stems from significant reductions in combustible components (Larix, Abies and Picea). Notably, a marked resurgence of biomass burning has been observed since ~4 cal. kyr BP in multiple regions associated with archaeological cultural complexes. This intensification of fire activity during the late Holocene predominantly occurred in two types of previously low-fire-risk areas: 1) regions where excessive moisture and cold climate inhibited sufficient fuel accumulation (e.g., the West Siberian Plain and mountain taiga zones of the Altai Mountains), and 2) arid environments where steppe/desert-steppe vegetation failed to maintain continuous combustible substrates. Since ~2 cal kyr BP, intensified anthropogenic disturbances including agricultural expansion and pastoral activities have significantly increased surface fire frequency in the southeastern/western and northern Altai Mountains, West Siberian Plain, and forest zones of the central Altai Mountains. In contrast, the dramatic decline in biomass burning observed in the Khangai Mountains may be closely linked to vegetation fragmentation induced by overgrazing. This research clarifies the long-term feedback mechanisms between biomass burning processes and forest community structure across different vegetation zones. The findings hold significant scientific value for understanding human-fire-ecosystem interactions in the arid Central Asia, while offering historical references for regional sustainable ecological management.
- Preprint
(2339 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(5506 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-1991', Anonymous Referee #1, 08 Aug 2025
This paper presents a new microcharcoal record from Mongolia, along with 23 published charcoal records, to provide a regional synthesis of biomass burning in the Altai-Sayan Mountains, Siberia. These published records originate from relatively recent publications; I assume macro-charcoal records and may have reasonable chronological control. Given the rarity of records in Siberia, such new pieces of evidence will undoubtedly advance our understanding of regional patterns and drivers of biomass burning. However, upon close inspection, the paper appears to be of poor quality in the sense that it relies heavily on bold statements rather than providing a typical scientific explanation of the findings and suffers from insufficient information in the methods section.
It therefore requires a truly major makeover before publication. A detailed, but not exhaustive, list of comments is provided below.
- 25-26” …vegetation zones of the Altai-Sayan Mountains and adjacent plains…” which adjacent plains? This information should be provided already in the abstract
- 27, since when in the Holocene? Such statements are common throughout the manuscript
- 30 What is a “combustible component”?
- 120-126. The aim to include 23 records comes abruptly, without providing a regional context for where these records originate. Upon further examination of the manuscript, it presents a synthesis of a large part of western and central Siberia, Asia; however, the introduction of these sites into a broader spatial context is not provided.
l.139-147, these lines belong to results, not methods?
L 150-151 “A 2100-year reservoir correction was primary forest coverplied to all radiocarbon ages prior to calibration (Sun et al., 2013)”
???? This sentence does not make sense. Please extend the explanation of why a 2100-year reservoir was applied.
L156 24 or 23 sites as an introduction?
l.210 such method was applied for all records? Please provide the type of charcoal used in other records (micro and macrocharcoal). Please separate more clearly what has been done at the new site from what has been done at all sites.
L 220 This part describes what GAM is, but not what is being achieved with GAM in this study. Which are the dependent variables? Was the percentage of pollen used? Which species are included in the primary forest?
3.3. Data processing for comparison. This part is extremely poorly written. What is meat synthesized? What is the average method?
Results and discussions. Generally, the chapters are very general and imprecisely described. They are made of many bold sentences rather than explanations of potential drivers of biomass burning. Particularly, the link with the amount and type of biomass available is very superficially discussed. Furthermore, the jumps from single to cumulative charcoal record (Z-score) make the story difficult to follow. Why not focus on the trend in cumulative charcoal record, thus regional biomass burning and the potential drivers, followed by sites that show exceptions from the regional trends and explanations? I picked a few major inconsistencies, but the whole chapter should be rewritten.
(p=0.00)?
It contains a mix of charcoal and biomass burning, as they will represent different things. Ideally, use the same terminology.
l 251, which multi-proxy records? Only charcoal was used here.
l271 How can microcharcoal morphology signify anthropogenic fire?
The 297 Rybanya site does show the dominance of Larix in the original pollen record, nor are the increases in fire at 4 ka linked to megadroughts; instead, they are associated with dry peatland conditions (l 299).
l.301-304. I am puzzled by the superficiality of these statements: “ The GAMs analysis reveal the divergent fire-vegetation relationships: (1) Negative correlation at Rybnaya/Plotnikovo (canopy >75%): Reduced understory fuels and microclimatic humidity limit fire spread; (2) Positive correlation at Shchuchye Lake (canopy <65%):Open structure promotes flammable grass undergrowth.”
L 436-438 could you provide an approximate location of timber and treeline limit, consequently, the amount of biomass available
L 440 ff, do you imply here that the steppe provided more biomass than the forest? Sometimes this study suggests that a low forest cover resulted in reduced biomass burning, while at others, it indicates that a steppe contributed to an increase. Could you provide a finer interpretation of biomass amount and the fuel type?
L493 and elsewhere, where you talk about human impact. Through what type of activities can humans increase their burning activity?
L 505. These sentences do not make sense: “Specifically, the increase in Siberian pine and European larch since the Holocene has led to a significant decline in fir, birch, larch, and spruce components, resulting in a notable decrease in combustible materials at the three sites” and
505 ff does not make sense: "Although Holocene biomass burning in the Khangai Mountains exhibits an overall gradual decline, it can be categorized into two distinct phases: an increase over the past 2,000 years, followed by a gradual decline post-2000 year (Unkelbach et al., 2021; Barhoumi et al., 2024)"
L540 Wrong, please see above.
Fig. 1: How was this regionalization produced? It is nowhere described the basis for grouping the sites into these regions. Was it the site's proximity? Similarity in climate or vegetation cover?
Fig. 3, and the results of the paper. The new record is located in the steppe region. Why was only the tree composition presented and discussed in the manuscript, when the herbaceous composition and diversity provided the most biomass to burn? Are these trees long-distance transported?
Fig 4. The records in panel c seem to stop at 8-9 ka, but why does the average value extend to 12 ka?
Region C seems to average sites stretching along an elevation gradient, thus lots of climatic conditions and vegetation composition
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2025-1991-RC1 - AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Dongliang Zhang, 08 Sep 2025
-
RC2: 'Comment on egusphere-2025-1991', Anonymous Referee #2, 17 Aug 2025
I have attached my comments in a PDF file.
- AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Dongliang Zhang, 08 Sep 2025
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
421 | 50 | 21 | 492 | 37 | 16 | 28 |
- HTML: 421
- PDF: 50
- XML: 21
- Total: 492
- Supplement: 37
- BibTeX: 16
- EndNote: 28
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1