## 2 Materials and Methods
### Experimental Design  
The catchment selected in the studied area was subject to a wildfire and treated with the two hillslope stabilization treatments, consisting of log erosion barriers (\"LEB\") and contour-felled log debris (\"CFD\") (Figure 3). LEBs were built by felling burned trees that are laid on the ground along the slope contour [46]. Each log was anchored in-place and the space between the log and soil surface was filled with soil to create a storage basin upstream of the LEB, where the water and sediment flows are trapped. Earthen berms were sometimes installed to reduce the share of water circumventing the log sides. In the studied catchment, the stabilization treatment was operated at a mean density of 30 LEBs per hectare with a mean length of 10 m (for a linear density of 300 m of logs per ha). These  
Figure 3: Photos of the construction of contour-felled log debris (**a**) and log erosion barriers (**b**) in Sierra de los Donceles forest (Castilla La Mancha, Spain). Figure 2: Plot location and distribution of soil conditions in the catchment (**a,b**) and hillslope (**c,d**) areas in Sierra de los Donceles forest (Castilla La Mancha, Spain). Log erosion barriers (“LEB”), contour-felled log debris (“CFD”), burned and no action (“BNA”), unburned (“UB”). densities were limited by the scarce availability of wood material, due to the unsuitable type of vegetation in the area (small-diameter and low-density trees). The CFD treatment consisted of branch and small-felling burned trees, which were laid on the ground along the slope contour, as for LEB. In this case, logs were not anchored. The mean treatment density was 17 CFD per ha with a mean length of 50 m (corresponding to 850 m per ha), given the lower compaction and concentration of the material for building the CFD. Moreover, a burned area was left without any treatment (henceforth \"burned and no action\", BNA) (Figure 2). Another area that was located very close to the burned forest and not affected by fire was considered (\"unburned\", UB); the vegetation and soil of this area was extremely similar as those of the burned zone and it was therefore representative of the actual pre-fire conditions. Table 1 reports the vegetation cover in the plots under four land conditions at the two spatial scales. The vegetation cover was characterized in all plots under the four soil conditions. More specifically, in the UB plots, the vegetation cover is mainly characterized by woody and herbaceous species (specifically, _Pinus halepensis, Rosmarinus officinalis, Brachypodium retusum_ and _Cistus albidus_). _Pinus halepensis, Cistus albidus_ and _Rosmarinus officinalis_ can largely be disseminated; their seeds, after fire, are stimulated to germinate. Conversely, _Brachypodium retusum_ is a herbaceous species (hemicryptophyte), which is a facultative disseminator, with the ability to reproduce both from sprouts and seed and to adapt to frequent fires. In the BNA plots, _Brachypodium retusum_, _Cistus albidus, Halimium halimifolium, Quercus coccifera, Klasea fuscesus_ subsp _cichoncaa fflubnesses_ ssp. _Ieucanta_ and _Pinus halepensis_ are the main species identified after the wildfire. _Quercus coccifera_ is a woody phanerophytic species with vegetative propagation. Most of the area in the CFD plots was covered after the wildfire by species with different strategies of fire response, mainly seeding trees (_Cistus albidus, Fumana ericoides, Pinus halepensis_), but also sprouting (_Rhamnus lycoides, Pistacia lentiscus_) and facultative sprouting (_Anthillys cvisoides_) trees as well as facultative sprouting herbaceous species (_Brachypodium retusum_). Finally, also in LEB plots, we surveyed, after the wildfire, a variety of species with different response strategies to the fire.