Modeling captures evapotranspiration dynamics in burned areas, indicating vital recovery phases.
The 2022 Chongqing wildfires, occurring during an unprecedented heatwave, severely degraded subtropical forest ecosystems and disrupted hydrological cycling. We developed an integrated artificial intelligence framework combining Long Short-Term Memory and Transformer architectures to simulate post-fire evapotranspiration (ET) dynamics using 37 months of field observations (2022–2025) across 24 plots with four burn severities. The Penman–Monteith–Leuning model provided physically based benchmarks. Results revealed three distinct recovery phases: destruction/stagnation (0–7 months, ET at 6%–10% of pre-fire levels), rapid recovery (8–19 months), and stabilization (20–37 months, reaching 100% ET recovery). The coupled LSTM–Transformer ensemble achieved superior performance (RMSE = 0.10 mm·day−1, NSE = 0.98), outperforming single models by 31% in uncertainty reduction. SHAP analysis identified phase-dependent factor shifts: soil water content dominated Stage I (42.5%), while leaf area index (LAI) controlled Stages II–III (>48%). A bimodal LAI time-lag effect emerged: 4–7 days (leaf water potential equilibrium, 27.7% contribution) and 8–14 days (root uptake compensation, 21.7%). Burn severity significantly extended time-lags (severe burns: 12/21 days vs. unburned: 5/12 days), indicating hydraulic system reconstruction requirements. Despite equivalent LAI recovery, severe burns maintained 12%–15% ET reduction, suggesting lasting hydraulic limitations. This study demonstrates that physics-constrained AI models effectively capture complex post-fire ecohydrological dynamics while providing mechanistic interpretability, advancing understanding of vegetation–water coupling reconstruction under increasing fire frequency.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhao et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: