SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Biyolojik Çeşitlilik ve Koruma / 2026 / Volume: 19 Issue: 3

Burn severity, vegetation degradation, and carbon storage loss in the Belemedik forest fire: implications for protected area management and post-fire restoration

Belemedik orman yangınında yanık şiddeti, bitki örtüsü bozulması ve karbon depolama kaybı: koruma alanı yönetimi ve yangın sonrası iyileştirme açısından çıkarılabilecek sonuçlar

Nuriye Ebru Yıldız(NIGDE OMER HALISDEMIR UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE)0000-0002-3508-4895
Barış Kahveci(NIGDE OMER HALISDEMIR UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE)0000-0002-8508-1748
Tülay Ezer(NIGDE OMER HALISDEMIR UNIVERSITY, FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE)0000-0002-6485-5505
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-09-15
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Erosion control, restoration with pioneer and fire-adapted native species, and long-term remote sensing monitoring are recommended to support ecosystem recovery, restore habitat connectivity, and sustain ecosystem services.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose: This study evaluates the ecological impacts of the 9 September 2020 forest fire in the Kaleboynu area of Eskikonacık Neighborhood, Pozantı District, Adana Province, on the Çakıt Stream micro-watershed, which partially overlaps with Belemedik Nature Park.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Using an integrated remote sensing approach, it assesses fire-induced changes in burn severity, vegetation structure, and carbon storage capacity to support post-fire restoration planning in a protected Mediterranean ecosystem.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Erosion control, restoration with pioneer and fire-adapted native species, and long-term remote sensing monitoring are recommended to support ecosystem recovery, restore habitat connectivity, and sustain ecosystem services.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2020 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Belemedik wildfire · burn severity · NDVI

Abstract

Purpose: This study evaluates the ecological impacts of the 9 September 2020 forest fire in the Kaleboynu area of Eskikonacık Neighborhood, Pozantı District, Adana Province, on the Çakıt Stream micro-watershed, which partially overlaps with Belemedik Nature Park. Using an integrated remote sensing approach, it assesses fire-induced changes in burn severity, vegetation structure, and carbon storage capacity to support post-fire restoration planning in a protected Mediterranean ecosystem. Methods: The study was conducted within the 9,783.06-ha Çakıt Stream micro-watershed. Cloud-free Sentinel-2A MSI Level-2A imagery acquired before (05.09.2020) and after the fire (15.09.2020) was used to calculate the Normalized Burn Ratio (NBR), Differenced NBR (dNBR), and Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI). Carbon storage was estimated using a nonlinear regression model relating NDVI to pixel-level carbon content. Spatial analyses were performed in ArcGIS 10.8. Findings: dNBR analysis showed that 92.49% (9,049.16 ha) of the watershed remained unburned or unchanged, while 725.92 ha was affected to varying degrees. NDVI results revealed losses of 330.65 ha of tree cover and 96.09 ha of shrub/grassland vegetation, accompanied by a 426.74 ha increase in bare surfaces. Total carbon storage declined from 105,465.71 tC to 105,450.25 tC, representing a loss of 15.46 tC (56.69 t CO₂e), primarily concentrated on forested slopes surrounding the Çakıt Stream valley. Conclusions: Although the wildfire affected only a limited portion of the watershed, it caused substantial biomass losses, disrupted vegetation continuity, and reduced carbon sequestration capacity. The concentration of damage on steep slopes indicates increased risks of erosion and surface runoff. Erosion control, restoration with pioneer and fire-adapted native species, and long-term remote sensing monitoring are recommended to support ecosystem recovery, restore habitat connectivity, and sustain ecosystem services.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışma, 9 Eylül 2020 tarihinde Adana ili Pozantı ilçesi Eskikonacık Mahallesi Kaleboynu bölgesinde meydana gelen orman yangınının, kısmen Belemedik Doğa Parkı ile örtüşen Çakıt Deresi mikro havzası üzerindeki ekolojik etkilerini değerlendirmektedir. Bütüncül bir uzaktan algılama yaklaşımıyla yangının yanma şiddeti, bitki örtüsü yapısı ve karbon depolama kapasitesi üzerindeki etkileri incelenerek koruma altındaki bir Akdeniz ekosisteminde yangın sonrası restorasyon planlamasına bilimsel katkı sağlanması amaçlanmıştır. Yöntem: Çalışma, 9.783,06 ha büyüklüğündeki Çakıt Deresi mikro havzasında gerçekleştirilmiştir. Yangın öncesi (05.09.2020) ve sonrası (15.09.2020) dönemlere ait bulutsuz Sentinel-2A MSI Seviye-2A görüntüleri kullanılarak Normalleştirilmiş Yanma Oranı (NBR), Farklılaştırılmış NBR (dNBR) ve Normalleştirilmiş Fark Bitki Örtüsü Endeksi (NDVI) hesaplanmıştır. Karbon depolaması, NDVI ile piksel başına karbon içeriği arasındaki ilişkiye dayalı doğrusal olmayan regresyon modeliyle tahmin edilmiştir. Tüm uzamsal analizler ArcGIS 10.8 ortamında gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bulgular: dNBR analizi, havzanın %92,49’unun (9.049,16 ha) yanmamış veya değişmemiş kaldığını, 725,92 ha’lık alanın ise farklı şiddet düzeylerinde etkilendiğini göstermiştir. NDVI sonuçları, 330,65 ha ağaç örtüsü ve 96,09 ha çalı/otlak vejetasyonu kaybı ile birlikte çıplak yüzeylerde 426,74 ha’lık artış olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Toplam karbon depolama miktarı 105.465,71 tC’den 105.450,25 tC’ye düşmüş, bu durum 15,46 tC (56,69 t CO₂e) karbon kaybına karşılık gelmiştir. Sonuç: Yangın, havzanın sınırlı bir bölümünü etkilemiş olsa da önemli biyokütle kayıplarına neden olmuş, bitki örtüsünün sürekliliğini bozmuş ve karbon tutma kapasitesini azaltmıştır. Özellikle dik yamaçlardaki hasar, erozyon ve yüzey akışı riskini artırmaktadır. Ekosistem iyileşmesini desteklemek amacıyla erozyon kontrolü, yangına uyumlu yerli türlerle restorasyon ve uzun dönemli uzaktan algılama temelli izleme çalışmaları önerilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yıldız, N. E., Kahveci, B., Ezer, T. (2026). Burn severity, vegetation degradation, and carbon storage loss in the Belemedik forest fire: implications for protected area management and post-fire restoration. Biyolojik Çeşitlilik ve Koruma, Volume: 19 Issue: 3. https://doi.org/10.46309/biodicon.2026.2000016

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (25)

  1. Yılmaz, O. S., Oruç, M. S., Ateş, A. M., & Gülgen, F. (2021). Orman Yangın Şiddetinin Google Earth Engine ve Coğrafi Bilgi Sistemleri Kullanarak Analizi: Hatay-Belen Örneği. Journal of the Institute of Science and Technology, 11(2), 1519-1532. https://doi.org/10.21597/jist.817900
  2. Ibrahim, S., Köse, M., Adamu, B., & Jega, I. M. (2025). Remote sensing for assessing the impact of forest fire severity on ecological and socio-economic activities in Kozan District, Turkey. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 15, 342–354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-024-00951-z
  3. Mayer, M., Prescott, C. E., Abaker, W. E. A., Augusto, L., Cécillon, L., Ferreira, G. W. D., Vesterdal, L. (2020). Tamm review: Influence of forest management activities on soil organic carbon stocks: A knowledge synthesis. Forest Ecology and Management, 466, p. 118127, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2020.118127
  4. Veraverbeke, S., Gitas, I., Katagis, T., Polychronaki, A., Somers, B., Goossens, R. (2012). Assessing post-fire vegetation recovery using red-near infrared vegetation indices: Accounting for background and vegetation variability. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. 68, 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2011.12.007
  5. Bright, B. C., Hudak, A. T., Kennedy, R. E., Braaten, J., & Khalyani, A. H. (2019). Examining post-fire vegetation recovery with Landsat time series analysis in three western North American forest types. Fire Ecology, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-018-0021-9
  6. Stevens‐Rumann, C. S., & Morgan, P. (2019). Tree regeneration following wildfires in the western US: a review. Fire Ecology, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-019-0032-1
  7. Mantero, G., Morresi, D., Negri, S., Anselmetto, N., Lingua, E., Bonifacio, E., Garbarino, M., & Marzano, R. (2023). Short-term drivers of post-fire forest regeneration in the Western Alps. Fire Ecology, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42408-023-00182-7
  8. Lentile, L. B., Holden, Z. A., Smith, A. M. S., Falkowski, M. J., Hudak, A. T., Morgan, P., Lewis, S. A., Gessler, P. E., & Benson, N. (2006). Remote sensing techniques to assess active fire characteristics and post-fire effects. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 15(3), 319-345. https://doi.org/10.1071/wf05097
  9. Kavgacı, A., Örtel, E., Torres, I., & Safford, H. D. (2016). Early postfire vegetation recovery of Pinus brutia forests: effects offire severity, prefire stand age, and aspect. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 40, 723-736. https://doi.org/10.3906/tar-1601-21
  10. Türkmen, N., & Düzenlí, A. (2011). Early post-fire changes in Pinus brutia forests (Amanos Mountains, Turkey). Acta Botanica Croatica, 70(1), 9-21. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10184-010-0013-6
  11. Baykara, E., & Eşen, D. (2025). Post-fire natural regeneration and early growth of Turkish red pine (Pinus brutia) seedlings in Western Türkiye. Forestist, 75, 0033, https://doi.org/10.5152/forestist.2024.24033
  12. Yıldız, C., Çömert, R., Tanyaş, H., Yılmaz, A., Akbaş, A., Akay, S. S., Yetemen, Ö., & Görüm, T. (2023). The effect of post-wildfire management practices on vegetation recovery: Insights from the Sapadere fire, Antalya, Türkiye. Frontiers in Earth Science, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2023.1174155
  13. Sannigrahi, S., Pilla, F., Basu, B., Basu, A. S., Sarkar, K., Chakraborti, S., Joshi, P. K., Zhang, Q., Wang, Y., Bhatt, S., Bhatt, A., Jha, S., Keesstra, S., & Roy, P. S. (2020). Examining the effects of forest fire on terrestrial carbon emission and ecosystem production in India using remote sensing approaches. Science of the Total Environment, 725, 138331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138331
  14. Eçi, A., Avcı, H. Ö., Akay, D., & Ersoy Tonyaloğlu, E. (2026). Orman yangını kaynaklı peyzaj ve karbon depolama değişimlerinin değerlendirilmesi: Antalya Manavgat Akseki, Gündoğmuş ve İbradi örneği. Turkish Journal of Forest Science, 10(1), 1798708. https://doi.org/10.32328/turkjforsci.1798708
  15. Doğa Koruma ve Milli Parklar Genel Müdürlüğü. (2022). Belemedik Tabiat Parkı gelişme revizyon planı (Teknik Rapor No. 1-20). Adana: Tarım ve Orman Bakanlığı, Doğa Koruma ve Milli Parklar Genel Müdürlüğü.
  16. Karadaş, G., & Say, N. (2025). Belemedik Tabiat Parkı örneğinde korunan alanlarda biyotop haritalama. Turkish Journal of Forestry, 26(1), 97-104. https://doi.org/10.18182/tjf.1629378
  17. Akıncı, H., Başköse, İ., & Savran, A. (2018). The Flora of Akdağ (Pozantı-Adana/Turkey) and It’s Environments. Biological Diversity and Conservation, 11(1), 13-29
  18. Key, C. H., & Benson, N. C. (2006). Landscape assessment: Sampling and analysis methods. In D. C. Lutes, R. E. Keane, J. F. Caratti, C. H. Key, N. C. Benson, S. Sutherland, & L. J. Gangi (Eds.), FIREMON: Fire effects monitoring and inventory system (Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-164-CD, pp. LA-1–LA-55). Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station. https://research.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/24066
  19. ESRI. (2025). Band Arithmetic function. ArcGIS Pro Documentation. https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/3.4/help/analysis/raster-functions/band-arithmetic-function.htm
  20. GISGeography. (2023). Sentinel-2 bands and combinations. Retrieved August 2025, from https://gisgeography.com/sentinel-2-bands-combinations/
  21. Myeong, S., Nowak, D. J. & Duggin, M. J. (2006). A temporal analysis of urban forest carbon storage using remote sensing. Remote Sensing of Environment, 101(2), 277–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2005.12.001.
  22. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (Ed.). (2023). Agriculture, forestry and other land uses (AFOLU). In Climate change 2022: Mitigation of climate change: Working Group III contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (pp. 747–860). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  23. Rennert, K., Errickson, F., Prest, B., Rennels, L., Newell, R. G., Pizer, W. A., Kingdon, C., Wingenroth, J., Cooke, R., Parthum, B., Smith, D. J., Cromar, K., Diaz, D., Moore, F. C., Müller, U. K., Plevin, R. J., Raftery, A. E., Ševčíková, H., Sheets, H., … Anthoff, D. (2022). Comprehensive evidence implies a higher social cost of CO2. Nature, 610(7933), 687-692. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05224-9
  24. Thanos, C. A., & Doussi, M. A. (2000). Post-fire regeneration of Pinus brutia forests. In G. Ne'eman & L. Trabaud (Eds.), Ecology, biogeography and management of Pinus halepensis and P. brutia forest ecosystems in the Mediterranean Basin (pp. 291–301). Leiden: Backhuys Publishers.
  25. Sabuncu, R., Kavgacı, A., Alan, M., & Çalışkan, A. (2023). Orman yangınları sonrası restorasyon. In A. Kavgacı & M. A. Başaran (Eds.), Orman yangınları (pp. 424–442). Ankara: Türkiye Ormancılar Derneği Yayını No. 64.