Next Article in Journal
An Emergency Response Framework Design and Performance Analysis for Ship Fire Incidents in Waterway Tunnels
Previous Article in Journal
Impacts of COVID-19-Induced Human Mobility Changes on Global Wildfire Activity
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Effects of Burning Intensity on the Soil C-Related Properties and Mineralogy of Two Contrasting Forest Soils from Chilean National Parks

by
Karla Erazo
1,2,3,
Clara Martí-Dalmau
4,
David Badía-Villas
4,*,
Silvia Quintana-Esteras
4,
Blanca Bauluz
5 and
Carolina Merino
2
1
Programa de Doctorado en Ciencias de Recursos Naturales, Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias, Universidad de La Frontera, Av. Francisco Salazar 01145, Temuco 4811230, Chile
2
Laboratorio de Geomicrobiología, Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias, Departamento de Ciencias Químicas y Recursos Naturales, Universidad de La Frontera, Av. Francisco Salazar 01145, Temuco 4811230, Chile
3
Centro de Investigaciones y Proyectos Aplicados a las Ciencias de la Tierra (CIPAT), Campus Gustavo Galindo, Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral (ESPOL), Guayaquil ECO90211, Ecuador
4
Department of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Environment, Technological College, Geoforest-IUCA, Crtra. Cuarte s/n, 22071 Huesca, Spain
5
Department of Earth Sciences, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Zaragoza, Aragosaurus-IUCA, C/Pedro Cerbuna 12, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Fire 2025, 8(7), 277; https://doi.org/10.3390/fire8070277
Submission received: 4 June 2025 / Revised: 29 June 2025 / Accepted: 8 July 2025 / Published: 12 July 2025

Abstract

Forest fires alter multiple soil properties, from those related to the carbon cycle to mineralogy; however, the responses of various soils to thermal impact remain unclear. This study examined the impact of fire-induced heating (300, 600, and 900 °C) on the properties of two contrasted soils (Andisol and Inceptisol) with regard to soil organic carbon (SOC), total organic carbon (TOC), dissolved organic carbon (DOC), recalcitrant organic carbon (ROC), soil pH, electrical conductivity (EC), soil water repellency (SWR), soil aggregate stability (SAS), and mineralogy using X-ray diffraction (XRD). SOC and TOC decreased as temperatures increased, with a more pronounced decrease in Andisol (90% loss) than in Inceptisol (80% loss). DOC and SWR peaked at 300 °C but disappeared above 600 °C. Further, ROC increased at 300 °C in both soils, but behaved differently at higher temperatures, remaining stable in Inceptisol and being eliminated in Andisol. Soil pH increased at 600 and 900 °C; meanwhile, EC increased progressively in Andisol but peaked at 300 °C in Inceptisol. SAS remained high in both soils (between 85 and 95%) despite heating. The mineralogical analysis demonstrated how heating induced transformations in iron minerals into more oxidized forms (as hematite and maghemite) in the Andisol, while clay minerals and gibbsite decreased feldspar and quartz accumulation promotion in the Inceptisol. In summary, the initial properties of each soil influenced their respective responses to fire.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Fire is a frequent phenomenon impacting ecosystems globally, with 300 to 400 million hectares of land affected each year [1,2]. It represents one of the most widespread natural disturbances, playing a key role in many forest ecosystems, including the temperate rainforests of southern Chile, where it regulates carbon dynamics [3]. The soils in these landscapes are mainly of volcanic origin, and they exhibit high phosphorus retention and contain substantial organic matter complexed with metals, which enhances their ability to sequester carbon [4,5]. Forest fire regimes are being modified by human activities and climate change, and the frequency and severity of wildfires are expected to increase, raising concerns about the survival of existing mature forest ecosystems [4,5]. Fires alter soil properties, particularly in the topsoil horizon, where organic matter and microbial activity are concentrated. These effects depend on the intensity and duration of the fire, the environmental conditions in which it occurs, and the initial characteristics of the soil [6,7,8,9].
The first-order or direct effects of fire on the soil are brought about by an input of extreme heat into the surface horizons of the soil [10,11,12], commonly leading to the loss and transformation of soil organic matter (SOM), shifts in hydrophobicity, and structural changes in soil aggregation, typically in the form of aggregate destabilization. However, in specific cases, high temperatures may promote reaggregation through the recrystallization of Fe and Al oxides, particularly in soils rich in these components [13,14,15]. In general, total organic matter content tends to decline progressively with increased heating. In addition, surface clay can also undergo dehydration and collapse during fire events, losing key physicochemical properties [16,17,18]. Mineral transformations may occur at high temperatures (above 350 °C), although some changes are triggered at lower thresholds depending on heating duration and mineral composition [16,19,20]. The partial combustion of organic material promotes the formation of hydrophobic layers that reduce water infiltration and enhance runoff [21,22]. These physicochemical changes can ultimately compromise soil structural integrity, increase erosion susceptibility and hinder post-fire vegetation recovery, especially in sloped or fragile ecosystems [23,24,25].
One method of detecting the effects of fire on the aforementioned soil properties is to use soil heating in the laboratory, applying a wide range of both maximum temperatures (100–900 °C), application times (from minutes to two hours), or both to sieved soil samples and to undisturbed soil monoliths [23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30]. This study aims to evaluate how heating (at 300, 600, and 900 °C, for 20 min) two contrasting soils from Chilean temperate forests affects their properties. For this purpose, the temperatures have been chosen (300, 600 and 900 °C applied for 20 min) to mirror those found at the soil/litter interface of the most severe wildfires and pile burns [26,27]. This approach allows us to isolate thermal effects under controlled conditions across contrasted soil types and forest ecosystems. We hypothesize that Andisol, which contains abundant amorphous mineral phases, will experience greater carbon losses and intensified formation of iron–aluminum oxides at high temperatures. In contrast, Inceptisol, dominated by crystalline minerals, is expected to undergo less severe organic decomposition and more gradual mineral reorganization. These divergent responses are anticipated to yield distinct outcomes for water repellency, structural stability, and soil reaction, ultimately shaping the soil’s carbon stabilization potential, which plays a critical role in maintaining ecosystem functions and supporting post-fire resilience. Understanding these differences is essential for developing soil-specific fire management strategies.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Sampling Sites

We selected two soil types from national parks in central Chile that were developed on different parent materials and in different temperate rainforests (Table 1).
We sampled an Andic Dystrudept, belonging to the order Inceptisol (hereafter referred to as Inceptisol) [28,29]. This was in Nahuelbuta National Park, under a forest canopy of Araucaria araucana and Nothofagus pumilio, on granodiorites. We sampled a Typic Hapludand, of the order Andisol (hereafter referred to as Andisol), in Puyehue National Park, under a forest canopy of Nothofagus dombeyi [2], both in central Chile (Figure 1).
In general, the soils of the Andes are classified into four main groups: Andisols, Inceptisols, Ultisols, and Oxisols [30]. Inceptisols are one of the largest soil orders, covering nearly 15% of the global ice-free land area and supporting approximately 20% of the world’s population [31]. Although Andisols represent a smaller fraction of global soil coverage (<1%), they are highly productive and support unique ecosystems across various parts of the world [5]. In Chile, both soil types are representative of the southern regions [32]. Soils derived from volcanic materials are especially important, as they account for 50–60% of the country’s arable land, sustaining much of the cereal, livestock, and forestry production [33,34].
In each experimental site, a composite sample of four subsamples from the top of the Ah-horizon (0–20 cm) were taken after removing litter and duff (O-horizon). The samples were air-dried and sieved through a 2 mm mesh for soil heating treatment.

2.2. Heating Experiment

To simulate the effects of severe burning on the soils, soil subsamples (2.5 cm thick layer) were placed in porcelain containers and heated in a muffle furnace at 300 °C, 600 °C, and 900 °C for 20 min with a ramp rate of approximately 10 °C min−1. Triplicate soil samples were used for each heating treatment (300, 600, and 900 °C), as well as for the unheated control. The selection of these specific temperatures and the duration of heating were based on previous studies that examined the surface soil temperatures reached during severe forest fires [12,35,36,37,38]. This approach was taken in consideration of findings suggesting that a longer exposure to moderate or high temperatures does not replicate the impact of a very high peak temperature sustained for a shorter duration on soil properties, as discussed by Thomaz and Fachin [39].

2.3. Chemical and Physical Soil Analyses

Soil organic carbon (SOC), expressed as a percentage of dry soil, was measured by wet oxidation [40], and total organic carbon (TOC) was obtained by dry combustion [41]. Dissolved organic carbon (DOC), expressed as a percentage of dry soil, was extracted with a soil–water suspension (1:5 w/v) at 80 °C, measured also via the wet oxidation method [42]. Recalcitrant organic carbon (ROC) was determined using the acid hydrolysis (HCl 6N) procedure [43]. Moreover, the soil reaction (pH) and electric conductivity (EC) were measured in 1:2.5 and 1:5 (w/v) soil–water suspensions, respectively.
The persistence of soil water repellency (SWR) was assessed through the water drop penetration time test (WDPT), which consists of applying droplets of distilled water on the soil surface and measuring the time until its complete infiltration. The analysis was conducted under laboratory conditions at controlled temperatures (20–25 °C). Drops of distilled water (~0.05 mL/drop) were applied to the 2 mm sieved soil samples, and the complete penetration time into the soil was measured. Given the wide array of values obtained via the WDPT, the SWR was categorized into five classes, defined by Bisdom et al. [44] as follows: wettable (<5 s), slightly water-repellent (5–60 s), strongly water-repellent (60–600 s), severely water-repellent (600–3600 s), and extremely water-repellent (>3600 s).
Soil aggregate stability (SAS) was determined using the wet sieving method detailed by Kemper and Koch [45] and revised by Schinner et al. [46]. This treatment emulates the forces exerted on the soil by runoff or immersion. Each soil sample (4 g) was placed in triplicate on 38 mm diameter sieves with a 0.25 mm mesh size, and then submerged and subjected to sieving action for 5 min. Subsequently, the remaining aggregates were carefully removed from the sieves, oven-dried at 105 °C, and weighed to obtain the weight of the stable aggregates and large-sized sand (>0.25 mm). Each sample was then submerged in 50 mL of 0.1 M sodium pyrophosphate decahydrate (Na4P2O7 ·10H2O) for 2 h to disperse the stable aggregates. Finally, the samples were washed with distilled water, oven-dried at 105 °C, and weighed to obtain the weight of the sand. SAS could not be measured in the <0.25 mm sieve fraction because we used a sieve with 0.25 mm apertures. The SAS values obtained for the 1–2 mm aggregates were considered representative of the whole soil, as suggested by the method.

2.4. Mineralogical Analyses

Mineralogic changes were determined by X-ray diffraction (XRD) using a Philips PW 1710 diffractometer Eindhoven, The Netherlands) and scanned using Cu-Ka radiation, with an automatic divergence slit and diffracted-beam graphite monochromator. The soils were then finely ground using an agate mortar and sieved to obtain a particle size < 53 µm [47]. The XRD data were stored as computer files with XPowder software [48]. For their interpretation, Brindley and Brown [49] and Joint Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards [50] were used.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

A two-factorial ANOVA was run to assess significant variance in soil response and the interactions among the two factors (temperature × soil), using experimental replicates (i.e., triplicates of the composite sample per treatment). It is important to note that true biological replication was not available, as each treatment originated from a single composite sample per soil type. As such, statistical tests were applied in an exploratory framework, and the results should be interpreted with caution. A pairwise comparison (p < 0.05) was also used to evaluate the statistical significance of the differences in the response variables. When assumptions of normality and homoscedasticity were met, ANOVA was applied, followed by post hoc comparisons using Tukey’s test (p < 0.05). To satisfy the assumptions of the statistical tests, the data were subjected to normality and homoscedasticity tests and were transformed whenever necessary. In cases where even after transformation, the prerequisites were not met, the Kruskal–Wallis test was used. In addition, a principal component analysis (PCA) was performed to identify the main associations within the measured data. Prior to analysis, the data were standardized to account for differences in scale among variables. All statistical analyses were conducted using InfoStat version 2020.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Organic Carbon Fractions

The experimental burning of the Andisol and the Inceptisol at different temperatures (300, 600, and 900 °C) induced significant changes in soil organic carbon fractions, highlighting the impact of fire intensity on soil carbon dynamics. The response of TOC, SOC, DOC, and ROC fractions varied depending on the applied temperature and the soil type, revealing their distinct thermal decomposition patterns (Figure 2).
In both soils, TOC and SOC exhibited a marked decline with increasing temperature (p < 0.0001 from ANOVA), consistent with Santín and Doerr [51], who reported that SOC degradation begins around 300 °C. However, at 300 °C, SOC significantly decreased in Andisol, with losses of 38%, whereas Inceptisol did not show significant changes compared to the control. This suggests that Andisol, despite its high organic matter retention capacity, is more susceptible to thermal degradation at moderate fire intensities, leading to its decomposition at higher temperatures. In contrast, the lack of significant SOC changes in Inceptisol at 300 °C suggests a higher resistance to moderate fire intensity, possibly due to its different stabilization mechanisms. However, at 600 and 900 °C, both soils experienced a sharp decline in SOC, indicating extensive oxidation of organic compounds, aligning with previous studies on high-intensity fires [10,52,53]. Other authors found reductions in total organic matter and its fractions due to controlled burning, which in turn correlated with decreases in the microbial activity and biological functioning of the soil [54,55], or with soil erodibility increases [53].
Regarding DOC, both soils showed a significant increase at 300 °C compared to the control; 86% for the Andisol and 128% for the Inceptisol, indicating that moderate fire intensity enhanced the solubilization of organic compounds, increasing the lability of the initial organic carbon. This response is likely due to the thermal breakdown of organic macromolecules into smaller, water-soluble compounds, a mechanism previously reported by Dou et al. [56] and Ludwig et al. [57], who observed a post-fire increase in DOC with burn severity. However, at 600 and 900 °C, DOC drastically decreased in both soils, suggesting the progressive oxidation and mineralization of labile organic compounds [58]. The significant interaction between soil type and temperature indicates that DOC dynamics are influenced by both factors, with the Inceptisol showing a stronger DOC increase at 300 °C compared to the Andisol. Also, Bravo-Escobar et al. [59] found that DOC increased in a burned (4 months ago) soil (0–5 cm) of a native jarrah forest (Eucalyptus marginata), but decreased in an exotic pine plantation (Pinus radiata) in SW Australia, suggesting that the interaction between forest type and fire varies the behavior of DOC.
Other studies found high DOC levels in soils heated to 250 °C or below when compared to unheated controls, but drastic decreases at 500 °C [60,61]. In short, these findings highlight the dynamic response of DOC to fire intensity, with a transient increase at moderate temperatures followed by depletion under extreme burning conditions, emphasizing the importance of temperature thresholds in post-fire carbon cycling. According to Gui et al. [62], SOC and DOC significantly decreased in temperate forests after fire, and this limitation of carbon supplements could be a major driver for the observed responses of soil respiration (SR) and heterotrophic respiration (HR) to fire.
ROC exhibited a distinct trend compared to other fractions in the Andisol from Kruskal–Wallis (p = 0.0227) and in the Inceptisol from ANOVA (p = 0.0106). At 300 °C, ROC increased significantly in Andisol (by about 120%), indicating the partial transformation of SOM into more recalcitrant forms. This is due to moderate fire intensity promoting the formation of thermally stabilized organic compounds. However, at 600 °C, ROC continued to increase in Inceptisol, suggesting that this soil type retained a greater proportion of fire-resistant organic compounds at this temperature. At 900 °C, ROC significantly decreased in both soils, indicating the extensive combustion of recalcitrant carbon. These results align with studies reporting that fire can enhance the formation of pyrogenic organic matter at intermediate temperatures [58], but excessive heat exposure at 900 °C leads to its destruction. The significant interaction effect between soil and temperature further highlights that the persistence of ROC varies between soils, with the Inceptisol being more resistant to high-temperature transformations. The divergent behavior of ROC between the two soil types suggests that their recovery after fire may vary between them [63].

3.2. pH and Electrical Conductivity

The results indicate that soil pH did not show significant changes at lower burning temperatures (300 °C) (Figure 3A) in the Andisol, via Kruskal–Wallis (p = 0.0216), or in the Inceptisol, via ANOVA (p < 0.0001). These findings align with previous studies’ suggestions that when ashes are not incorporated into the mineral soil, pH changes remain limited [11,59,64]. However, at 600 °C and 900 °C, a significant increase in pH was observed, especially in the Andisol, indicating that high temperatures induce chemical transformations that create a more alkaline environment. On the other hand, electrical conductivity (EC) showed significant variations from ANOVA (p < 0.0001) (Figure 3B). In the Inceptisol, EC drastically increased at 300 °C, suggesting a rapid release of soluble salts due to organic matter combustion and clay decomposition [11,16]. However, at 600 °C and 900 °C, EC decreased, likely due to the volatilization of salts. Conversely, in the Andisol, EC progressively increased with temperature, reaching its highest value at 900 °C, reflecting a more gradual release of ions in the soil solution. This behavior has been observed in other studies, where the greater availability of soluble ions after fire is associated with organic matter combustion and oxide formation [64]. These results suggest that the mineralogical composition of the soil influences its response to fire, with the Andisol exhibiting greater chemical stability than the Inceptisol.

3.3. Soil Aggregate Stability and Soil Water Repellency

In unburned samples, the SAS was very high in both soils (>85%), and a slight but significant increase at 300 °C was observed only in the Inceptisol by ANOVA (p < 0.0001). At higher temperatures, the SAS remained high in both soils (Figure 4A). These findings are consistent with previous studies suggesting that soil aggregation can increase after fires when soil temperatures stay below 220 °C [65]. Although there is a reduction in SOC content, which may be attributed to mineralogical changes, Jiménez-Pinilla et al. [38] observed increased aggregation after heating at 300 °C, associated with the compaction of structural units. Similarly, Giovannini et al. [66] reported that soil gel dehydration at temperatures above 170 °C promotes aggregation. The reduction in organic matter is often accompanied by mineral transformations, such as the formation of iron and aluminum oxides or the collapse of clay minerals, which can modify surface reactivity. Despite the loss of SOC, transient increases in aggregation may occur due to the formation of inorganic cementing agents, such as iron and aluminum oxides, or due to structural compaction and gel dehydration [16]. However, Giovannini and Lucchesi [65] also noted that aggregation may remain stable after SOM combustion at 150 °C due to the transformation of cementing iron oxides. In contrast, Badía and Martí [67] observed a decrease in SAS in two semiarid soils burned at 150, 250, and 500 °C, mainly related to SOM loss.
SWR was significantly influenced by fire temperature from Kruskal–Wallis (p = 0.0138), with a clear transition observed between hydrophobic and hydrophilic states (Figure 4B). In both Andisol and Inceptisol, unburned (Control) soils exhibited severely hydrophobic properties, confirming that natural SWR is common in many soils [11,68,69]. This behavior may be related to the dominant native vegetation in these areas [68]. These hydrophobic substances can be transferred to the soil through litterfall, root exudates, or decomposition products, contributing to the development of natural water repellency even in the absence of fire disturbance. However, at 300 °C, SWR intensified to an extremely hydrophobic state, indicating the formation of hydrophobic compounds from organic matter combustion [70]. Fire can induce soil water repellency by promoting the thermal volatilization and subsequent downward migration of hydrophobic organic compounds from the upper layers of litter and SOM into deeper mineral horizons [70]. As the soil cools, these compounds condense and coat mineral particles, forming hydrophobic layers that reduce water infiltration and increase runoff potential. This behavior aligns with previous studies where low- to moderate-intensity fires promoted SWR due to the partial combustion of SOM and the accumulation of hydrophobic substances [71]. At higher temperatures (600 and 900 °C), both soils became hydrophilic, indicating the destruction of hydrophobic compounds through complete SOM combustion [52]. This pattern suggests that fire intensity plays a key role in determining post-fire SWR, with intermediate temperatures enhancing repellency and extreme temperatures eliminating it. The findings are consistent with studies reporting that high-severity fires lead to the loss of SWR due to organic matter volatilization [70]. The differences between Andisol and Inceptisol suggest that vegetation type, mineralogical composition, and organic matter content modulate SWR dynamics, reinforcing the link between SOC content and post-fire hydrophobicity.
Overall, fire intensity, rather than soil type, was the dominant factor influencing hydrophobicity and soil aggregation, with moderate burns tending to enhance both properties, while extreme burns led to the complete loss of water repellency [70]. These post-fire changes in physical properties are critical because increased soil water repellency and altered aggregation can reduce infiltration, promote surface runoff, and significantly elevate soil erosion risks, especially on sloped terrains [21,22,72]. Moreover, these alterations may hinder vegetation regrowth by limiting water availability and destabilizing the seedbed, thus slowing ecosystem recovery [73].
The mean values for all measured soil properties across fire intensity treatments (control, 300, 600, and 900 °C) for both Andisol and Inceptisol were compiled and are shown in Supplementary Table S1.

3.4. Mineralogical Modifications

The heating of Andisol and Inceptisol revealed transformations in their mineralogy, with notable differences in the stability of certain minerals (Figure 5).
In Andisol, smectite, a clay mineral with high cation exchange capacity, completely disappeared at 600 °C, after a very light initial reduction at 300 °C, indicating a rapid thermal transformation [74]. Similarly, goethite decreased about 7% at 300 °C and then vanished at 600 °C, consistent with previous studies indicating its conversion to hematite in this temperature range [75]. The increase in feldspar content from 31% to 54% at 600 °C, and up to 63% at 900 °C, suggests the partial melting and crystallization of stable aluminosilicate phases [76]. The formation of hematite and magnetite–maghemite at 900 °C confirms the oxidation of iron minerals, driven by the decomposition of goethite at high temperatures [77]. In contrast, the Inceptisol showed a transformation in clay minerals and a greater accumulation of quartz, indicating more severe structural degradation. Gibbsite, initially present at 2.5% in the control, completely disappeared at 600 °C, consistent with its dehydration in this temperature range [78]. The Inceptisol developed γ-alumina, reflecting aluminum mineral transformations linked to gibbsite breakdown [37]. The loss of muscovite and chlorite marked the instability of secondary minerals, promoting the accumulation of feldspar and quartz. By 900 °C, quartz content increased from 64% to 76%, suggesting the recrystallization of amorphous silica and the loss of less stable phases. Additionally, the presence of anatase at high temperatures indicates that titanium oxides are highly resistant to combustion and may contribute to soil thermal stabilization [79].
These results suggest that the thermal resistance of the Inceptisol is primarily due to its high quartz and feldspar content, whereas the Andisol undergoes fewer structural changes in crystalline minerals but could suffer greater loss of amorphous minerals, as described in previous studies on volcanic soils [80]. Despite the thermal transformation of goethite and smectite in the Andisol, the stability of hematite and feldspar indicates that this soil retains part of its mineral structure at high temperatures. In contrast, Inceptisol, losing its key clay minerals while increasing in quartz, appears more structurally fragile under heating, potentially reducing its carbon stabilization capacity. The loss of secondary and non-crystalline minerals, such as goethite and gibbsite, will reduce both soil surface reactivity and the protective microsites and absorbent surfaces that promote microbial colonization and the stabilization of organic compounds [81,82]. Conversely, the relative enrichment in thermally stable phases such as quartz, feldspar, hematite, and γ-alumina reflects a mineralogical assemblage that is less chemically active and less conducive to microbial growth [16,37].

3.5. Spearman Correlations Among Soil Properties

The correlation coefficients between various physicochemical properties in the two studied soils were assessed by Spearman correlation (Figure 6), along with their significance values (p-values).
In the Inceptisol, a strong positive correlation exists between TOC and DOC (r = 0.77, p < 0.001). This relationship suggests that soils with elevated organic carbon content have a greater potential to release dissolved carbon, likely due to enhanced decomposition processes and the mobilization of organic compounds. SWR and DOC showed an extremely strong correlation (r = 0.88, p < 0.001), suggesting that increased DOC could be related to higher water repellency. The labile fraction of SOM includes soluble compounds such as lipids, waxes, fatty acids, and other aliphatic materials. These compounds, which are part of the non-humified or only partially transformed organic matter, are more readily mobilized and can contribute to water repellency in soils [83]. pH has significant negative correlations with DOC (−0.92), TOC (−0.77), and SWR (−0.93), indicating that as pH increases, these parameters decrease. SOC and SWR are positively correlated (r = 0.75, p < 0.001), suggesting that the accumulation of organic carbon contributes to the formation of hydrophobic coatings on soil particles, reducing the soil’s ability to retain water [84].
In the Andisol, DOC and ROC had a strong positive correlation (r = 0.85, p < 0.001), indicating that increased dissolved carbon was also associated with an increase in the recalcitrant fraction. Andisols are known for their high capacity to adsorb and retain organic matter, mainly due to the presence of minerals such as allophane, imogolite, and iron and aluminum complexes. These organo-mineral associations promote the stabilization of organic carbon and lead to the accumulation of durable fractions [85]. However, when exposed to elevated temperatures, such as those occurring during a fire, part of this stabilized organic matter may be thermally altered or released, contributing to an increase in dissolved carbon [86,87]. pH presented significant negative correlations with SWR (−0.91) and DOC (−0.8). EC and TOC had a strong negative correlation (r = −0.96, p < 0.001), suggesting that higher EC corresponds to lower organic carbon content. Since organic matter often contributes to cation retention, it reflects the effect of fire-induced heating. In the Andisol, rising temperatures promote the degradation and volatilization of organic matter, resulting in a marked decrease in TOC. Simultaneously, this thermal decomposition leads to the release of previously complexed or adsorbed cations, increasing their concentration in the soil solution and thus raising EC [26]. This mineralization-induced release of soluble ions explains the inverse relationship observed between TOM and EC in burned soils.

3.6. Principal Component Analysis

In the Andisol, the primary sources of variation were changes in SOC, TOC, DOC, and SWR along one axis, and pH and EC along the other (Figure 7). The distribution of variables suggested that higher temperatures (600 °C and 900 °C) were associated with an increase in pH and EC, while lower temperatures (Control and 300 °C) were linked to SOC and TOC. Notably, 300 °C was positioned relatively close to the control, indicating that moderate fire intensity did not drastically alter soil properties, likely due to the stabilizing effect of amorphous minerals, such as allophane and imogolite, which can buffer against heat-induced changes at moderate temperatures [17]. However, ROC and SWR increased at 300 °C, suggesting early-stage organic matter transformation and increasing hydrophobicity (see Figure 4B) [13,25].
In the Inceptisol, the control and 300 °C treatments were positioned farther apart in the principal component analysis (PCA) compared to the Andisol, suggesting that the Inceptisol exhibited a stronger multivariate response to moderate heating. However, this does not necessarily imply lower thermal resistance in terms of organic carbon stability, as the Andisol showed greater absolute losses of SOC and TOC at 300 °C. According to dos Santos et al. [88], interactions between clay minerals such as gibbsite and humic fractions like fulvic acid (FA) can form organo-mineral complexes that are relatively resistant to degradation compared to free SOM. Nevertheless, their protective effect decreases at higher temperatures, as observed in this study, where gibbsite was absent at 600 °C (Figure 5B). Therefore, the apparent greater persistence of ROC in the Inceptisol at elevated temperatures may be more closely related to pyrogenic inputs from vegetation or site-specific factors rather than to mineral protection alone. Also, in the Inceptisol the PCA showed that 300 °C was more closely associated with increased SWR and DOC, suggesting an early-stage breakdown of organic matter and enhanced soil hydrophobicity (Figure 4B). The variables pH and EC shifted significantly at higher temperatures (600 °C and 900 °C), reflecting mineral transformations and increasing the solubility of ions [68]. These results indicated that the Inceptisol experienced a more pronounced alteration at moderate fire intensities, while the Andisol displayed a more gradual transition.
Therefore, PCA biplots (Figure 7) illustrated these divergent trajectories, confirming that moderate heating caused increases in DOC and SWR, whereas higher temperatures induced elevated pH and EC and reduced organic fractions [88].
These findings underscore the importance of soil mineralogy and organic fraction type in evaluating the impact of fire on carbon storage and soil properties. The capacity for post-fire soil recovery depends on both the extent of organic matter preservation and the stability of the mineral phases. Future work could extend these observations to natural burn conditions, where heat distribution, moisture, and vegetation composition add variability. Understanding these mechanisms will inform fire management and guide soil restoration in temperate forested regions with contrasting soil orders.

4. Conclusions

The temperature exerted a dominant influence on soil organic carbon fractions and mineralogy in the two studied soils (Andisol and Inceptisol) under temperate rainforests. Both TOC and SOC decrease progressively with heating increase but do so differently in both soils. Andisol exhibited greater carbon losses as temperature increased. At 300 °C, DOC, ROC, and SWR increased, but decreased with higher temperatures; in contrast, the highest (600 and 900 °C) temperatures increased pH and ions in solution (EC). The disappearance of minerals such as smectite and goethite, together with the formation of hematite and magnetite at higher temperatures, indicated more intense mineral transformation and iron oxidation processes in the Andisol. In contrast, Inceptisol, although it showed abrupt changes at 300 °C in other evaluated properties, experienced lower total SOC and TOC losses and retained structurally stable crystalline phases such as quartz and feldspar at higher temperatures. However, it also lost clay-associated minerals such as gibbsite. The relative persistence of ROC in the Inceptisol at 600 °C suggests that carbon stabilization in this soil may be more closely related to pyrogenic organic inputs derived from vegetation, rather than progressive mineral reorganization. Overall, the findings largely support the proposed hypothesis. Nevertheless, future research should incorporate analytical techniques capable of identifying amorphous minerals to directly confirm their thermal transformation. This is essential to better understand the mechanisms of carbon protection or release under fire conditions, particularly in volcanic soils rich in non-crystalline phases.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/fire8070277/s1, Table S1: Changes in the properties of the two soils subjected to different temperatures: control or unheated, 300, 600 and 900 °C (mean values ± standard deviation).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.E.; methodology, K.E., B.B., C.M.-D. and D.B.-V.; software, K.E., B.B. and C.M.-D.; validation, K.E., B.B., C.M.-D. and D.B.-V.; formal analysis, K.E.; investigation, K.E., B.B., C.M.-D. and S.Q.-E.; resources, C.M.-D. and D.B.-V.; data curation, K.E.; writing—original draft preparation, K.E. and D.B.-V.; writing—review and editing, K.E., C.M.-D., D.B.-V. and S.Q.-E.; visualization, K.E., C.M.-D. and D.B.-V.; supervision, C.M. and D.B.-V.; project administration, C.M.; funding acquisition, C.M. and D.B.-V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research work has been conducted at the University of Zaragoza (Spain) for which Karla Erazo received a stay grant financed by the National Agency by the National Agency for Research and Development of Chile (ANID)/Scholarship Program/National Doctorate/2023-21231535, and the ANID-FONDECYT Regular Project No. 1220716. Additionally, this research was partially funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (Grant number Ref. PID2021-123127OB-I00). This project also had the support of the GEOFOREST research group (ref. S51_23R) of the University of Zaragoza, recognized by the Government of Aragon (Spain).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful for the support received from the technicians of both the Mineralogy and Crystallography Unit and the Technological College of Huesca, centers belonging to the University of Zaragoza (Spain), where this research work was carried out.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

  1. FAO, ITPS, GSBI, CBD and EC. State of Knowledge of Soil Biodiversity: Status, Challenges and Potentialities; Report 2020; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Randerson, J.T.; Chen, Y.; Van Der Werf, G.R.; Rogers, B.M.; Morton, D.C. Global Burned Area and Biomass Burning Emissions from Small Fires. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 2012, 117, 4012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. González, M.E.; Muñoz, A.A.; González-Reyes, Á.; Christie, D.A.; Sibold, J. Fire History in Andean Araucaria–Nothofagus Forests: Coupled Influences of Past Human Land-Use and Climate on Fire Regimes in North-West Patagonia. Int. J. Wildland Fire 2020, 29, 649–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Beinroth, F.; Luzio, W.L.; Maldonado, F.P.; Esvaran, H. Taxonomy and Management of Andisols. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Soil Classification Workshop, Chile and Ecuador. Part II: Tour guide for Chile, Santiago, Chile, 9–20 January 1984; Sociedad Chilena de la Ciencia del Suelo: Santiago, Chile, 1985. [Google Scholar]
  5. Soil Survey Staff. Keys to Soil Taxonomy, 13th ed.; USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service: Washington, DC, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  6. Certini, G. Effects of Fire on Properties of Forest Soils: A Review. Oecologia 2005, 143, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Fultz, L.M.; Moore-Kucera, J.; Dathe, J.; Davinic, M.; Perry, G.; Wester, D.; Schwilk, D.W.; Rideout-Hanzak, S. Forest Wildfire and Grassland Prescribed Fire Effects on Soil Biogeochemical Processes and Microbial Communities: Two Case Studies in the Semi-Arid Southwest. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2016, 99, 118–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Keeley, J.E. Fire Intensity, Fire Severity and Burn Severity: A Brief Review and Suggested Usage. Int. J. Wildland Fire 2009, 18, 116–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Pereira, P.; Martínez-Murillo, J.F.; Francos, M. Environments Affected by Fire. In Advances in Chemical Pollution, Environmental Management and Protection; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; Volume 4, pp. 119–155. [Google Scholar]
  10. Badía-Villas, D.; González-Pérez, J.A.; Aznar, J.M.; Arjona-Gracia, B.; Martí-Dalmau, C. Changes in Water Repellency, Aggregation and Organic Matter of a Mollic Horizon Burned in Laboratory: Soil Depth Affected by Fire. Geoderma 2014, 213, 400–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Badía-Villas, D.; López-García, S.; Martí, C.; Ortíz-Perpiñá, O.; Girona-García, A.; Casanova-Gascón, J. Burn Effects on Soil Properties Associated to Heat Transfer under Contrasting Moisture Content. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 601–602, 1119–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Neary, D.G.; Klopatek, C.C.; DeBano, L.F.; Ffolliott, P.F. Fire Effects on Belowground Sustainability: A Review and Synthesis. For. Ecol. Manag. 1999, 122, 51–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Mataix-Solera, J.; Cerdà, A.; Arcenegui, V.; Jordán, A.; Zavala, L.M. Fire Effects on Soil Aggregation: A Review. Earth Sci. Rev. 2011, 109, 44–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Araya, S.N.; Meding, M.; Berhe, A.A. Thermal Alteration of Soil Physico-Chemical Properties: A Systematic Study to Infer Response of Sierra Nevada Climosequence Soils to Forest Fires. SOIL 2016, 2, 351–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. González-Pérez, J.A.; González-Vila, F.J.; Almendros, G.; Knicker, H. The Effect of Fire on Soil Organic Matter—A Review. Environ. Int. 2004, 30, 855–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ngole-Jeme, V.M. Fire-Induced Changes in Soil and Implications on Soil Sorption Capacity and Remediation Methods. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Reynard-Callanan, J.; Pope, G.; Gorring, M.; Feng, H. Effects of High-Intensity Forest Fires on Soil Clay Mineralogy. Phys. Geogr. 2010, 31, 407–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Rivas, Y.; Matus, F.; Rumpel, C.; Knicker, H.; Garrido, E. Black Carbon Contribution in Volcanic Soils Affected by Wildfire or Stubble Burning. Org. Geochem. 2012, 47, 41–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Yusiharni, E.; Robert, J.G. Soil Minerals Recover after They Are Damaged by Bushfires. In Proceedings of the 19th World Congress of Soil Science, Soil Solutions for a Changing World, Brisbane, Australia, 1–6 August 2010; International Union of Soil Sciences: Vienna, Austria, 2010; pp. 104–107. [Google Scholar]
  20. Zihms, S.G.; Switzer, C.; Karstunen, M.; Tarantino, A. Understanding the Effects of High Temperature Processes on the Engineering Properties of Soils. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Paris, France, 2–6 September 2013; pp. 3427–3430. [Google Scholar]
  21. Inbar, A.; Lado, M.; Sternberg, M.; Tenau, H.; Ben-Hur, M. Forest Fire Effects on Soil Chemical and Physicochemical Properties, Infiltration, Runoff, and Erosion in a Semiarid Mediterranean Region. Geoderma 2014, 221–222, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ebel, B.A.; Moody, J.A.; Martin, D.A. Hydrologic Conditions Controlling Runoff Generation Immediately after Wildfire. Water Resour. Res. 2012, 48, 3529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Shakesby, R.A.; Doerr, S.H.; Walsh, R.P.D. The Erosional Impact of Soil Hydrophobicity: Current Problems and Future Research Directions. J. Hydrol. 2000, 231–232, 178–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Neris, J.; Santamarta, J.C.; Doerr, S.H.; Prieto, F.; Agulló-Pérez, J.; García-Villegas, P. Post-Fire Soil Hydrology, Water Erosion and Restoration Strategies in Andosols: A Review of Evidence from the Canary Islands (Spain). IForest 2016, 9, 583–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Doerr, S.H.; Shakesby, R.A.; MacDonald, L.H. Soil Water Repellency: A Key Factor in Post-Fire Erosion. In Fire Effects on Soils and Restoration Strategies; Cerdà, A., Robichaud., P.R., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Ratón, FL, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  26. Agbeshie, A.A.; Abugre, S.; Atta-Darkwa, T.; Awuah, R. A Review of the Effects of Forest Fire on Soil Properties. J. For. Res. 2022, 33, 1419–1441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Fowler, J.A.; Nelson, A.R.; Bechtold, E.K.; Paul, R.; Wettengel, A.M.; McNorvell, M.A.; Stevens-Rumann, C.S.; Fegel, T.S.; Anderson, E.; Rhoades, C.C.; et al. Pile Burns as a Proxy for High Severity Wildfire Impacts on Soil Microbiomes. Geoderma 2024, 448, 116982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Bernhard, N.; Moskwa, L.M.; Schmidt, K.; Oeser, R.A.; Aburto, F.; Bader, M.Y.; Baumann, K.; von Blanckenburg, F.; Boy, J.; van den Brink, L.; et al. Pedogenic and Microbial Interrelations to Regional Climate and Local Topography: New Insights from a Climate Gradient (Arid to Humid) along the Coastal Cordillera of Chile. Catena 2018, 170, 335–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Reyes, J.; Thiers, O.; Gerding, V.; Donoso, P. Effect of Scarification on Soil Change and Establishment of and Artificial Forest Regeneration under Nothofagus Spp. in Southern Chile. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2014, 14, 115–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Buol, S.W.; Southard, R.J.; Graham, R.C.; McDaniel, P.A. Soil Genesis and Classification, 6th ed.; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Sharma, K.L.; Sharma, S.C.; Bawa, S.S.; Singh, S.; Chandrika, D.S.; Grace, J.K.; Rao, C.S.; Sankar, G.R.M.; Ravindrachary, G.; Munnalal; et al. Effects of Conjunctive Nutrient Management on Soil Fertility and Overall Soil Quality Index in Submountainous Inceptisol Soils under Rainfed Maize (Zea mays L.)–Wheat (Triticum Aestivum) System. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2015, 46, 47–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Matus, F.; Salazar, O.; Aburto, F.; Zamorano, D.; Nájera, F.; Jovanović, R.; Guerra, C.; Reyes-Rojas, L.; Seguel, O.; Pfeiffer, M.; et al. Perspective of Soil Carbon Sequestration in Chilean Volcanic Soils. npj Mater. Sustain. 2024, 2, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bertrand, S.; Fagel, N. Nature, Origin, Transport and Deposition of Andosol Parent Material in South-Central Chile (36–42° S). Catena 2008, 73, 10–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Valle, S.R.; Carrasco, J. Soil Quality Indicator Selection in Chilean Volcanic Soils Formed under Temperate and Humid Conditions. Catena 2018, 162, 386–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Balfour, V.N.; Woods, S.W. The Hydrological Properties and the Effects of Hydration on Vegetative Ash from the Northern Rockies, USA. Catena 2013, 111, 9–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Blank, R.R.; Allen, F.L.; Young, J.A. Influence of Simulated Burning of Soil-Litter From Low Sagebrush, Squirreltail, Cheatgrass, and Medusahead on Water-Soluble Anions and Cations. Int. J. Wildland Fire 1996, 6, 137–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Guerin, K.; Murphy, D.; Löhr, S.C.; Nothdurft, L. Experimental Constraints on the Role of Temperature and Pyrogenic Mineral Assemblage in Wildfire-Induced Major and Trace Element Mobilisation. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 2024, 386, 18–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Jiménez-Pinilla, P.; Mataix-Solera, J.; Arcenegui, V.; Delgado, R.; Martín-García, J.M.; Lozano, E.; Martínez-Zavala, L.; Jordán, A. Advances in the Knowledge of How Heating Can Affect Aggregate Stability in Mediterranean Soils: A XDR and SEM-EDX Approach. Catena 2016, 147, 315–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Thomaz, E.L.; Fachin, P.A. Effects of Heating on Soil Physical Properties by Using Realistic Peak Temperature Gradients. Geoderma 2014, 230–231, 243–249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Nelson, D.W.; Sommers, L.E. Total Carbon, Organic Carbon, and Organic Matter. In Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 3: Chemical Methods; Soil Science Society of America and American Society of Agronomy: Madison, WI, USA, 1996; pp. 961–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Heiri, O.; Lotter, A.F.; Lemcke, G. Loss on Ignition as a Method for Estimating Organic and Carbonate Content in Sediments: Reproducibility and Comparability of Results. J. Paleolimnol. 2001, 25, 101–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Ghani, A.; Dexter, M.; Perrott, K.W. Hot-Water Extractable Carbon in Soils: A Sensitive Measurement for Determining Impacts of Fertilisation, Grazing and Cultivation. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2003, 35, 1231–1243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Rovira, P.; Ramón Vallejo, V. Labile, Recalcitrant, and Inert Organic Matter in Mediterranean Forest Soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2007, 39, 202–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Bisdom, E.B.A.; Dekker, L.W.; Schoute, J.F.T. Water Repellency of Sieve Fractions from Sandy Soils and Relationships with Organic Material and Soil Structure. In Soil Structure/Soil Biota Interrelationships; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1993; pp. 105–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kemper, W.D.; Koch, E.J. Aggregate Stability of Soils from Western United States and Canada: Measurement Procedure, Correlations with Soil Constituents; Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 1966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Schinner, F.; Öhlinger, R.; Kandeler, E.; Margesin, R. Methods in Soil Biology; Springer V: New York, NY, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  47. Środoń, J.; Drits, V.A.; McCarty, D.K.; Hsieh, J.C.C.; Eberl, D.D. Quantitative X-Ray Diffraction Analysis of Clay-Bearing Rocks from Random Preparations. Clays Clay Miner. 2001, 49, 514–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Martín-Ramos, J.D. Using XPowder: A Software Package for Powder X-Ray Diffraction Analysis. D.L. GR-1001/04. Open J. Geol. 2020, 10. [Google Scholar]
  49. Brindley, G.W.; Brown, G. Crystal Structures of Clay Minerals and Their X-Ray Identification; Brindley, G.W., Brown, G., Eds.; Mineralogical Society of Great Britain and Ireland: Twickenham, UK, 1980; ISBN 9780903056373. [Google Scholar]
  50. Joint Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards, A.S. for T. and M. Selected Powder Diffraction Data for Minerals, 1st ed.; Joint Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards: Swarthmore, PA, USA, 1974. [Google Scholar]
  51. Santín, C.; Doerr, S.H. Fire Effects on Soils: The Human Dimension. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2016, 371, 20150171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Aznar, J.M.; González-Pérez, J.A.; Badía, D.; Martí, C. At What Depth Are The Properties of a Gypseous Forest Topsoil Affected By Burning? Land Degrad. Dev. 2016, 27, 1344–1353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Sapkota, D.; Rawal, J.; Pudasaini, K.; Hu, L. A Laboratory Study of the Effects of Wildfire Severity on Grain Size Distribution and Erosion in Burned Soils. Fire 2025, 8, 46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Pereira, J.S.; Badía-Villas, D.; Martí-Dalmau, C.; Mora, J.L.; Donzeli, V.P. Fire Effects on Biochemical Properties of a Semiarid Pine Forest Topsoil at Cm-Scale. Pedobiologia 2023, 96, 150860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. De La Cruz Domínguez, J.C.; Reyna, A.; Aguirre Gutiérrez, T.; Moreno, R.; De La Cruz Domínguez, J.C.; Alfaro Reyna, T.; Aguirre Gutiérrez, C.A.; Manuel, V.; Delgado Balbuena, J. Effects of Prescribed Burns on Soil Respiration in Semi-Arid Grasslands. Fire 2024, 7, 450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Dou, X.; Köster, K.; Sun, A.; Li, G.; Yue, Y.; Sun, L.; Ding, Y. Temporal Dynamics of Soil Dissolved Organic Carbon in Temperate Forest Managed by Prescribed Burning in Northeast China. Environ. Res. 2023, 237, 117065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Ludwig, S.M.; Alexander, H.D.; Kielland, K.; Mann, P.J.; Natali, S.M.; Ruess, R.W. Fire Severity Effects on Soil Carbon and Nutrients and Microbial Processes in a Siberian Larch Forest. Glob. Change Biol. 2018, 24, 5841–5852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Salgado, L.; Alvarez, M.G.; Díaz, A.M.; Gallego, J.R.; Forján, R. Impact of Wildfire Recurrence on Soil Properties and Organic Carbon Fractions. J. Environ. Manag. 2024, 354, 120293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Bravo-Escobar, A.V.; O’Donnell, A.J.; Middleton, J.A.; Grierson, P.F. Differences in Dissolved Organic Matter (DOM) Composition of Soils from Native Eucalypt Forests and Exotic Pine Plantations Impacted by Wildfire in Southwest Australia. Geoderma Reg. 2024, 37, e00793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Wang, J.J.; Dahlgren, R.A.; Chow, A.T. Controlled Burning of Forest Detritus Altering Spectroscopic Characteristics and Chlorine Reactivity of Dissolved Organic Matter: Effects of Temperature and Oxygen Availability. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 14019–14027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Zhang, Q.; Wang, Y.; Guan, P.; Zhang, P.; Mo, X.; Yin, G.; Qu, B.; Xu, S.; He, C.; Shi, Q.; et al. Temperature Thresholds of Pyrogenic Dissolved Organic Matter in Heating Experiments Simulating Forest Fires. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2023, 57, 17291–17301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Gui, H.; Wang, J.; Hu, M.; Zhou, Z.; Wan, S. Impacts of Fire on Soil Respiration and Its Components: A Global Meta-Analysis. Agric. For. Meteorol. 2023, 336, 109496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zhang, H.; Zhou, Z. Recalcitrant Carbon Controls the Magnitude of Soil Organic Matter Mineralization in Temperate Forests of Northern China. For. Ecosyst. 2018, 5, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Hrenović, J.; Kisić, I.; Delač, D.; Durn, G.; Bogunović, I.; Mikulec, M.; Pereira, P. Short-Term Effects of Experimental Fire on Physicochemical and Microbial Properties of a Mediterranean Cambisol. Fire 2023, 6, 155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Giovannini, G.; Lucchesi, S. Modifications Induced in Soil Physico-Chemical Parameters by Experimental Fires at Different Intensities. Soil Sci. 1997, 162, 479–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Giovannini, G.; Lucchesi, S.; Giachetti, M. Beneficial and Detrimental Effects of Heating on Soil Quality. In Fire in Ecosystem Dynamics; SPB Academic Publishing, The Hague: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1990; pp. 95–102. [Google Scholar]
  67. Badía-Villas, D.; Martí-Dalmau, C. Effect of Simulated Fire on Organic Matter and Selected Microbiological Properties of Two Contrasting Soils. Arid. Land Res. Manag. 2003, 17, 55–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Alfaro-Leránoz, A.; Badía-Villas, D.; Martí-Dalmau, C.; Escuer-Arregui, M.; Quintana-Esteras, S. The Effects of Fire Intensity on the Biochemical Properties of a Soil Under Scrub in the Pyrenean Subalpine Stage. Fire 2024, 7, 452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Carvalho, M.L.; Maciel, V.F.; Bordonal, R.D.O.; Carvalho, J.L.N.; Ferreira, T.O.; Cerri, C.E.P.; Cherubin, M.R. Stabilization of Organic Matter in Soils: Drivers, Mechanisms, and Analytical Tools—A Literature Review. Rev. Bras. Cienc. Solo 2023, 47, e0230130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Girona-García, A.; Ortiz-Perpiñá, O.; Badía-Villas, D.; Martí-Dalmau, C. Effects of Prescribed Burning on Soil Organic C, Aggregate Stability and Water Repellency in a Subalpine Shrubland: Variations among Sieve Fractions and Depths. Catena 2018, 166, 68–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Knicker, H. How Does Fire Affect the Nature and Stability of Soil Organic Nitrogen and Carbon? A Review. Biogeochemistry 2007, 85, 91–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Neris, J.; Tejedor, M.; Fuentes, J.; Jiménez, C. Infiltration, Runoff and Soil Loss in Andisols Affected by Forest Fire (Canary Islands, Spain). Hydrol. Process. 2013, 27, 2814–2824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Cowan, A.D.; Smith, J.E.; Fitzgerald, S.A. Recovering Lost Ground: Effects of Soil Burn Intensity on Nutrients and Ectomycorrhiza Communities of Ponderosa Pine Seedlings. For. Ecol. Manag. 2016, 378, 160–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Derkowski, A.; Kuligiewicz, A. Thermal Analysis and Thermal Reactions of Smectites: A Review of Methodology, Mechanisms, and Kinetics. Clays Clay Miner. 2022, 70, 946–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Cornell, R.; Schwertmann, U. The Iron Oxides: Structure, Properties, Reactions, Occurrences and Uses; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, Germany, 2003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Guggenheim, S.; van Groos Koster, A.F. Baseline Studies of the Clay Minerals Society Source Clays: Thermal Analysis. Clays Clay Miner. 2001, 49, 433–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Negri, S.; Giannetta, B.; Till, J.; Oliveira de Souza, D.; Said-Pullicino, D.; Bonifacio, E. Fire Simulation Effects on the Transformation of Iron Minerals in Alpine Soils. Geoderma 2024, 444, 116858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Zhu, B.; Fang, B.; Li, X. Dehydration Reactions and Kinetic Parameters of Gibbsite. Ceram. Int. 2010, 36, 2493–2498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Allen, N.S.; Mahdjoub, N.; Vishnyakov, V.; Kelly, P.J.; Kriek, R.J. The Effect of Crystalline Phase (Anatase, Brookite and Rutile) and Size on the Photocatalytic Activity of Calcined Polymorphic Titanium Dioxide (TiO2). Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2018, 150, 31–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Parfitt, R.L. Allophane and Imogolite: Role in Soil Biogeochemical Processes. Clay Miner. 2009, 44, 135–155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Fomina, M.; Skorochod, I. Microbial Interaction with Clay Minerals and Its Environmental and Biotechnological Implications. Minerals 2020, 10, 861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Heckman, K.; Welty-Bernard, A.; Vazquez-Ortega, A.; Schwartz, E.; Chorover, J.; Rasmussen, C. The Influence of Goethite and Gibbsite on Soluble Nutrient Dynamics and Microbial Community Composition. Biogeochemistry 2013, 112, 179–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Kolář, L.; Kužel, S.; Horáček, J.; Čechová, V.; Borová-Batt, J.; Peterka, J. Labile Fractions of Soil Organic Matter, Their Quantity and Quality. Plant Soil Environ. 2009, 55, 245–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Fu, Z.; Hu, W.; Beare, M.H.; Müller, K.; Wallace, D.; Wai Chau, H. Contributions of Soil Organic Carbon to Soil Water Repellency Persistence: Characterization and Modelling. Geoderma 2021, 401, 115312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Matus, F.J.; Paz-Pellat, F.; Covaleda, S.; Etchevers, J.D.; Hidalgo, C.; Báez, A. Upper Limit of Mineral-Associated Organic Carbon in Temperate and Sub-Tropical Soils: How Far Is It? Geoderma Reg. 2024, 37, e00811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Armas-Herrera, C.M.; Mora-Hernández, J.L.; Arbelo-Rodríguez, C.D.; Rodríguez-Rodríguez, A. Labile Carbon Pools and Biological Activity in Volcanic Soils of the Canary Islands. Span. J. Soil Sci. 2013, 3, 7–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Knicker, H. Pyrogenic Organic Matter in Soil: Its Origin and Occurrence, Its Chemistry and Survival in Soil Environments. Quat. Int. 2011, 243, 251–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. dos Santos, S.R.; da Costa, L.M.; Souza, C.M.M.; Leal, G.P.; de Mello, D.C.; da Silva, W.T.L.; Camêlo, D.d.L.; Schaefer, C.E.G.R. Thermodegradation of Organic Matter in Soils of Different Mineral Composition in Brazil. Geoderma Reg. 2024, 37, e00798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Situation of Chilean national parks where soil sampling took place.
Figure 1. Situation of Chilean national parks where soil sampling took place.
Fire 08 00277 g001
Figure 2. The effects of burning on soil organic matter (SOM) fractions. (A) The response of total organic carbon (TOC), (B) soil organic carbon (SOC), (C) dissolved organic carbon (DOC), (D) and recalcitrant organic carbon (ROC). Lowercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences between treatments, while asterisks indicate significant differences between soils (p < 0.05). Uppercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences within all samples when the interaction between treatment and soil was significant. In each bar, the mean (n = 3) and the standard deviation are represented.
Figure 2. The effects of burning on soil organic matter (SOM) fractions. (A) The response of total organic carbon (TOC), (B) soil organic carbon (SOC), (C) dissolved organic carbon (DOC), (D) and recalcitrant organic carbon (ROC). Lowercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences between treatments, while asterisks indicate significant differences between soils (p < 0.05). Uppercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences within all samples when the interaction between treatment and soil was significant. In each bar, the mean (n = 3) and the standard deviation are represented.
Fire 08 00277 g002
Figure 3. Burning’s effects on (A) soil pH and (B) soil electric conductivity (EC). Lowercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences between treatments, while asterisks indicate significant differences between soils (p < 0.05). Uppercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences within all samples when the interaction between treatment and soil was significant. In each bar, the mean (n = 3) and the standard deviation are represented.
Figure 3. Burning’s effects on (A) soil pH and (B) soil electric conductivity (EC). Lowercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences between treatments, while asterisks indicate significant differences between soils (p < 0.05). Uppercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences within all samples when the interaction between treatment and soil was significant. In each bar, the mean (n = 3) and the standard deviation are represented.
Fire 08 00277 g003
Figure 4. (A) Soil aggregate stability (SAS) and (B) soil water repellency (SWR) according to the water drop penetration time (WDPT) test for the unburned (control) and burned (300, 600, 900 °C) samples. Lowercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences between treatments, while asterisks indicate significant differences between soils (p < 0.05). Uppercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences within all samples when the interaction between treatment and soil was significant. In each bar, the mean (n = 3) and the standard deviation are represented.
Figure 4. (A) Soil aggregate stability (SAS) and (B) soil water repellency (SWR) according to the water drop penetration time (WDPT) test for the unburned (control) and burned (300, 600, 900 °C) samples. Lowercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences between treatments, while asterisks indicate significant differences between soils (p < 0.05). Uppercase letters on top of the bars indicate significant differences within all samples when the interaction between treatment and soil was significant. In each bar, the mean (n = 3) and the standard deviation are represented.
Fire 08 00277 g004
Figure 5. X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of the control (unheated) and heating temperature treatments (300, 600, and 900 °C) of two soils: (A) Andisol and (B) Inceptisol. Abbreviations: Cris: cristobalite; Feld: feldspar; Mgn-Magh: magnetite–maghemite.
Figure 5. X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of the control (unheated) and heating temperature treatments (300, 600, and 900 °C) of two soils: (A) Andisol and (B) Inceptisol. Abbreviations: Cris: cristobalite; Feld: feldspar; Mgn-Magh: magnetite–maghemite.
Fire 08 00277 g005
Figure 6. Spearman correlation matrices for two soil orders: (A) Andisol and (B) Inceptisol. The scale ranges from −1 (blue) to +1 (red). The variables include recalcitrant organic carbon (ROC), soil organic carbon (SOC), dissolved organic carbon (DOC), total organic carbon (TOC), aggregate stability (AS), soil water repellency (SWR), pH, and electrical conductivity (EC). Asterisks denote correlation values: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, and *** p < 0.001.
Figure 6. Spearman correlation matrices for two soil orders: (A) Andisol and (B) Inceptisol. The scale ranges from −1 (blue) to +1 (red). The variables include recalcitrant organic carbon (ROC), soil organic carbon (SOC), dissolved organic carbon (DOC), total organic carbon (TOC), aggregate stability (AS), soil water repellency (SWR), pH, and electrical conductivity (EC). Asterisks denote correlation values: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, and *** p < 0.001.
Fire 08 00277 g006
Figure 7. Principal component analysis (PCA) of Andisol (A) and Inceptisol (B). The first two components (CP1 and CP2) explain most of the total variance. Each soil sample was displayed at four heating levels: control, 300 °C, 600 °C, and 900 °C. The vectors represent aggregate stability (AS), soil water repellency (SWR), recalcitrant organic carbon (ROC), dissolved organic carbon (DOC), total organic carbon (TOC), soil organic carbon (SOC), pH, and electrical conductivity (EC). The red arrows indicate how each soil shifts in response to increasing temperatures.
Figure 7. Principal component analysis (PCA) of Andisol (A) and Inceptisol (B). The first two components (CP1 and CP2) explain most of the total variance. Each soil sample was displayed at four heating levels: control, 300 °C, 600 °C, and 900 °C. The vectors represent aggregate stability (AS), soil water repellency (SWR), recalcitrant organic carbon (ROC), dissolved organic carbon (DOC), total organic carbon (TOC), soil organic carbon (SOC), pH, and electrical conductivity (EC). The red arrows indicate how each soil shifts in response to increasing temperatures.
Fire 08 00277 g007
Table 1. Some characteristics of the experimental soils used (Ah horizon, 0–20 cm).
Table 1. Some characteristics of the experimental soils used (Ah horizon, 0–20 cm).
Experimental Soil
OrderInceptisolAndisol
Soil subgroup ([5])Andic DystrudeptTypic Hapludand
LocationNahuelbuta National ParkPuyehue National Park
Parent materialGranodioriteBasaltic-Andesitic-scoria
Main clay typeKaoliniteAllophane
Textural class (USDA)LoamSandy clay loam
pH (1:2.5)4.8 ± 0.14.8 ± 0.2
Total Organic Matter (%)27.3 ± 0.421.1 ± 1.1
Plant canopyAraucaria araucana,
Nothofagus pumilio
Nothofagus dombeyi
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Erazo, K.; Martí-Dalmau, C.; Badía-Villas, D.; Quintana-Esteras, S.; Bauluz, B.; Merino, C. The Effects of Burning Intensity on the Soil C-Related Properties and Mineralogy of Two Contrasting Forest Soils from Chilean National Parks. Fire 2025, 8, 277. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire8070277

AMA Style

Erazo K, Martí-Dalmau C, Badía-Villas D, Quintana-Esteras S, Bauluz B, Merino C. The Effects of Burning Intensity on the Soil C-Related Properties and Mineralogy of Two Contrasting Forest Soils from Chilean National Parks. Fire. 2025; 8(7):277. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire8070277

Chicago/Turabian Style

Erazo, Karla, Clara Martí-Dalmau, David Badía-Villas, Silvia Quintana-Esteras, Blanca Bauluz, and Carolina Merino. 2025. "The Effects of Burning Intensity on the Soil C-Related Properties and Mineralogy of Two Contrasting Forest Soils from Chilean National Parks" Fire 8, no. 7: 277. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire8070277

APA Style

Erazo, K., Martí-Dalmau, C., Badía-Villas, D., Quintana-Esteras, S., Bauluz, B., & Merino, C. (2025). The Effects of Burning Intensity on the Soil C-Related Properties and Mineralogy of Two Contrasting Forest Soils from Chilean National Parks. Fire, 8(7), 277. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire8070277

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop