| Literature DB >> 25790309 |
Yundan Xiao1, Xiongqing Zhang2, Ping Ji1.
Abstract
Forest fires can cause catastrophic damage on natural resources. In the meantime, it can also bring serious economic and social impacts. Meteorological factors play a critical role in establishing conditions favorable for a forest fire. Effective prediction of forest fire occurrences could prevent or minimize losses. This paper uses count data models to analyze fire occurrence data which is likely to be dispersed and frequently contain an excess of zero counts (no fire occurrence). Such data have commonly been analyzed using count data models such as a Poisson model, negative binomial model (NB), zero-inflated models, and hurdle models. Data we used in this paper is collected from Qiannan autonomous prefecture of Guizhou province in China. Using the fire occurrence data from January to April (spring fire season) for the years 1996 through 2007, we introduced random effects to the count data models. In this study, the results indicated that the prediction achieved through NB model provided a more compelling and credible inferential basis for fitting actual forest fire occurrence, and mixed-effects model performed better than corresponding fixed-effects model in forest fire forecasting. Besides, among all meteorological factors, we found that relative humidity and wind speed is highly correlated with fire occurrence.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25790309 PMCID: PMC4366237 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0120621
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Histogram of forest fire occurrence data in the spring fire season from January to April between 1996 and 2007 in Qiannan autonomous prefecture of Guizhou province, China.
Fig 2Location of Qiannan autonomous prefecture in Guizhou province, China.
Meteorological variables during the spring fire season in Qiannan autonomous prefecture from 1996–2007.
| Meteorological Variables | Min | Max | Mean | SD. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maximum temperature per month (°C) | 10.9 | 23.5 | 24.51 | 4.91 |
| Mean temperature per month (°C) | 3.7 | 31.7 | 14.41 | 5.32 |
| Mean relative humidity per month (%) | 19 | 133.3 | 78.31 | 8.20 |
| Maximum wind speed per month (m.s-1) | 1 | 13.1 | 6.13 | 1.87 |
| Mean wind speed per month (m.s-1) | 0.1 | 3.9 | 1.56 | 0.63 |
| Precipitation per month (mm) | 0.1 | 130.8 | 35.64 | 23.18 |
| Evaporation per month (mm) | 17.1 | 147.1 | 64.71 | 25.83 |
Parameter estimations and fit statistics for twelve models.
| Parameter | Poisson-fixed | Poisson-mixed | NB-fixed | NB-mixed | ZIP-fixed | ZIP-mixed | ZINB-fixed | ZINB-mixed | HP-fixed | HP-mixed | HNB-fixed | HNB-mixed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Count model | ||||||||||||
| Intercept | 2.78 | 2.06 | 2.69 | 1.42 | 2.72 | 1.77 | 2.75 | 1.64 | 2.73 | 1.77 | 2.71 | 1.62 |
|
| -0.02 | -0.008 | -0.01 | - | -0.01 | - | -0.01 | - | -0.01 | - | -0.01 | - |
|
| 0.07 | 0.09 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.09 | 0.09 |
|
| -0.006 | -0.006 | -0.006 | -0.005 | -0.005 | -0.007 | -0.007 | -0.007 | -0.007 | -0.007 | -0.008 | -0.008 |
|
| - | 0.28 | - | 0.23 | - | 0.21 | - | 0.19 | - | 0.21 | - | 0.17 |
| Zero model | ||||||||||||
| Intercept | - | - | - | - | -0.94 | -0.88 | - | - | -0.96 | -0.91 | - | - |
|
| - | - | - | - | -0.01 | -0.01 | -0.04 | -0.05 | -0.009 | -0.01 | -0.02 | -0.02 |
|
| - | - | 1.03 | 0.99 | - | - | 0.80 | 0.76 | - | - | 0.86 | 0.84 |
|
| - | - | - | - | - | -0.008 | - | 0.02 | - | 0.007 | - | 0.008 |
| AIC | 3613.4 | 3502.1 | 2370.1 | 2368.9 | 3128.8 | 3081.6 | 2370.7 | 2369.8 | 3128.5 | 3081.7 | 2372.5 | 2371.7 |
| BIC | 3629.7 | 3504.5 | 2390.4 | 2371.3 | 3153.2 | 3085.0 | 2395.1 | 2373.2 | 3152.9 | 3085.1 | 2396.9 | 2375.1 |
Note: ** significant at 0.05 level,
* significant at 0.1 level.
Fig 3Diagnostic plots for the Poisson mixture fixed-effects models and mixed-effects models. dj is the difference between the predicted probability and the observed probability, as shown in Equation (7).
Fig 4Diagnostic plots for the NB mixture fixed-effects models and mixed-effects models. dj is the difference between the predicted probability and the observed probability, as shown in Equation (7).