Fire ecology has a long history of empirical investigation in rangelands. However, the science is inconclusive and incomplete, sparking increasing interest on how to advance the discipline. Here, we introduce a new framework for qualitatively and quantitatively understanding the ranges of variability in fire regimes typical of experimental investigations in rangeland fire science compared with the range of conditions that actually occurred during contemporary social-ecological times. We implement this framework for one of rangelands’ most pyrogenic systems—the Great Plains of North America. We identify four social-ecological fire eras that have epitomized people’s relationship with wildland fire in the Great Plains since the last glacial maxima. These cultural fire eras include the now-extinct coexistence era (indigenous fire use), the suppression era (extermination of wildland fire occurrence), the shadow era (localized prescribed burning groups), and the emerging wildfire era (resulting from wildland fire management failures, continued decoupling of human-fire ignitions, and global change). Our synthesis demonstrates that experimental fire conditions have not explored the types and ranges of variation in fire regime components responsible for shaping rangeland vegetation—now, in the past, or into the future. Instead, scientific investigations have focused largely on controlling and minimizing sources of uncertainty and experimental variation, essentially eliminating ranges of variation that underpin the functioning of fire in modern social-ecological systems. Yet a series of scientific investigations exist that targeted a wider range of variability in fire regime components, leading to major advancements and the rejection of a number of long-standing rules of thumb in rangeland science and management. These include 1) the manipulation of fire return interval, 2) the pyric herbivory experiments, and 3) the extreme fire trials. We discuss the general philosophy shared among these studies, introduce scientific standards needed to avoid common pitfalls, and highlight opportunities to better understand how rangeland pattern and process correspond to critical ranges of variation in the human-fire relationship.

火灾生态学在牧场进行历史研究的历史悠久。但是，科学是不确定的和不完整的，激发了人们对如何推进该学科的兴趣。在这里，我们引入了一个新的框架，用于定性和定量地了解牧场火灾科学中典型的实验研究中火灾状况的变化范围，并将其与当代社会生态时期实际发生的情况范围进行比较。我们为牧场的最热源系统之一-北美大平原实施此框架。我们确定了四个社会生态火灾时代，这是自上次冰川最大值以来人们与大平原荒野火灾的关系的缩影。这些文化大火时代包括现已绝迹的共存时代（土着火使用），抑制时代（灭绝野火的发生），影子时代（局部规定的燃烧组）和新兴的野火时代（由于野火管理失败，人火点火的持续脱钩和全球变化而导致）。我们的综合表明，实验性火灾条件并未探讨造成牧场植被塑造的火灾状况成分的变化类型和范围（无论是现在还是过去或将来）。取而代之的是，科学研究主要集中在控制和最大程度地减少不确定性和实验变异的来源，从根本上消除了支撑现代社会生态系统中火灾功能的变异范围。然而，存在一系列针对火灾状况组成部分的更大范围可变性的科学研究，这导致了重大进步，并拒绝了牧场科学和管理领域的许多长期经验法则。这些措施包括：1）操纵回火间隔； 2）进行草食性实验； 3）进行极端火试验。我们讨论了这些研究中共有的一般哲学，介绍了避免常见陷阱所需的科学标准，并着重介绍了机会，以更好地了解牧场格局和过程如何对应于人与火之间关系的关键变化范围。2）火草食草试验，以及3）极端火试验。我们讨论了这些研究中共有的一般哲学，介绍了避免常见陷阱所需的科学标准，并着重介绍了机会，以更好地了解牧场格局和过程如何对应于人与火之间关系的关键变化范围。2）火草食草试验，以及3）极端火试验。我们讨论了这些研究中共有的一般哲学，介绍了避免常见陷阱所需的科学标准，并着重介绍了机会，以更好地了解牧场格局和过程如何对应于人与火之间关系的关键变化范围。