These data are the input values for the modelling paper relating carbon losses to prescribed fire and wildfire currently being submitted: Title of paper : Prescribed-burning versus wildfire: management implications for carbon emissions of Calluna-dominated vegetation Authors: Victor M. Santana,Josu G. Alday, HyoHyeMi Lee, Katherine A. Allen & Rob H. Marrs The data are have all been collected using a space for time substitution approach using the following methods at four sites spread across Great Britain: Dorset, Howden in the Peak District, Moor House in the North Pennines and Kerloch in north-east Scotland. Data for the dominant species Calluna vulgaris and Litter are presented as per the paper. The data are all measured biomass (units = g/m2)and represent harvested and sorted vegetation form 0.25m2 quadrats covverted to m2; the data file is a .csv file containing 11 columns as follows: Column1: Years.Howden: years since the last fire when data were collected at Howden Column2: Calluna.Howden: biomass data for Calluna vulgaris collected at Howden Column3: Litter.Howden: biomass data for the litter collected at Howden Column4Years.Moor: years since the last fire when data were collected at Moor House Column5: Calluna.Moor: biomass data for Calluna vulgaris collected at Moor House Column6: Litter.Moor: biomass data for the litter collected at Moor House Column7: Years.Dorset: years since the last fire when data were collected at the Dorset Column8: Calluna.Dorset: biomass data for Calluna vulgaris collected at Dorset Column9: Litter.Dorset: biomass data for the litter collected at Dorset Column10: Years.Kerloch: years since the last fire when data were collected at the Kerloch Column11: Calluna.Kerloch: biomass data for Calluna vulgaris collected at Kerloch For any given site the biomass in the Calluna or Litter column reflect the amount at the corresponding time (Years column): i.e. for the Howden study the biomass values of 580.9 g/m2 (Col 2, row 1) and 718.1 g/m2 (Col 3, row 1) reflect a measured biomass at 9 years (Col 1) at Howden. Where years are duplicated these reflect replicated samples. 1. Methods Kerloch biomass was obtained from Miller [1979] where a space-for-time substitution study allowed a reconstruction of biomass accumulation over a 41 year period since burning. Six stands within a 1 km of each other were selected to form a series of increasing age since burning (2, 8, 14, 18, 24 and 36 years). Every stand was sampled annually for a period of six years. Additionally, two stands were specifically burnt and sampled to assess in during the early stages of post-fire recovery. For our study, we took the mean values for each stand as presented graphically in Miller [1979] using the online tool provided by the German Astrophysical Virtual Observatory (http://dc.zah.uni-heidelberg.de/sdexter [accessed 16 January 2014]. Data for Moor House was described in Alday et al. [2015]. The experiment was set up in 1954/5 with four replicate permanent blocks. All blocks were completely burned in 1954/5. Within each block, there were two main-plots to which two grazing treatments (sheep grazing and no sheep grazing) were allocated randomly. Then, within each main-plot, three burning-rotation treatments were also allocated randomly to sub-plots, these were: (i) short-rotation burning (ca. every 10 years), (ii) long-rotation burning (ca. every 20 years), (iii) Not burnt since 1954/5. In addition, each block had an associated unburned reference plot, deemed to have remained unburned for at least ca. 90 years. The Moor House site was sampled in 2011, and the experimental design allowed us to reconstruct biomass accumulation at 5, 16, 56 and 90 years after fire. No effect of grazing in biomass accumulation patterns was observed mainly by the low sheep pressure; therefore, we assumed no effect for calculations made in this paper. Biomass accumulation at Howden was described in Allen et al. [2013]. Here, a range of stands, previously subjected to prescribed burning, were selected using an age-stratified, random-sampling procedure. The patches were cross-referenced with management maps, providing 22 stands of known ages between 2 and 50 years. Finally, biomass accumulation data for Dorset was obtained from Chapman et al. [1975]. Here, site selection allowed a reconstruction of above-ground biomass over 42 years. Five stands of known age (6, 12, 18, 22 and 36 years) were sampled at two-yearly intervals over a period of six years. Additionally, one stand was specially burnt for this study and was sampled annually for subsequent six years. Here, the mean values per stand as presented graphically in Chapman et al. [1975] were extracted using the procedure outlined above for Kerloch. The biomass sampling method was similar in all studies. Biomass was harvested from between 3 and 10 quadrats (50 × 50 cm) distributed within the vegetation patches. All vegetation rooted inside the quadrat was cut at ground level with secateurs. Plant biomass was then sorted into various fractions, usually Calluna, other dwarf shrubs, graminoids and bryophytes. In three studies, (Dorset, Howden and Moor House) litter was also collected from the soil surface within the quadrats. Fractions were oven-dried (80oC) to estimate the total dry weight per stand. Calluna was the dominant species in the vegetation sampled at all sites (80-99%); therefore, for simplicity we only considered the biomass of this species in our analyses and modelling. Bryophytes were a significant part of the biomass at Kerloch (but data not provided) and Moor House (ca. 20 % of total biomass), whereas the bryophytes amounts at Howden (<1%) and Dorset (data not provided) were negligible. Because it is expected that bryophytes consumption in fires would be insignificant, this biomass was also not considered in our modelling [Lee et al., 2013]. Litter values were not sampled at Kerloch but were estimated here using the linear relationship between litter and Calluna biomass derived from the values from the other three sites (y=0.83x+136.26, P<0.001, r2=0.809, n=330). References for each data set: Howden: published in Allen et al. (2013) Journal of Applied Ecology, 50: 614-624. Moor House: published in Alday et al. (2015) Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, DOI: 10.1016/j.ppees.2015.06.007. Dorset: published in Chapman et al. (1975) Journal of Ecology 63: 259-271. Kerloch: published in Miller (1979) Journal of Ecology 67: 109-129.