Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Survival of Svalbard Pink-Footed Geese Anser brachyrhynchus in Relation to Winter Climate, Density and Land-Use

Marc Kéry, Jesper Madsen and Jean-Dominique Lebreton
Journal of Animal Ecology
Vol. 75, No. 5 (Sep., 2006), pp. 1172-1181
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3838410
Page Count: 10
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($18.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Survival of Svalbard Pink-Footed Geese Anser brachyrhynchus in Relation to Winter Climate, Density and Land-Use
Preview not available

Abstract

1. Global change may strongly affect population dynamics, but mechanisms remain elusive. Several Arctic goose species have increased considerably during the last decades. Climate, and land-use changes outside the breeding area have been invoked as causes but have not been tested. We analysed the relationships between conditions on wintering and migration staging areas, and survival in Svalbard pink-footed geese Anser brachyrhynchus. Using mark-recapture data from 14 winters (1989-2002) we estimated survival rates and tested for time trends, and effects of climate, goose density and land-use. 2. Resighting rates differed for males and females, were higher for birds recorded during the previous winter and changed smoothly over time. Survival rates did not differ between sexes, varied over time with a nonsignificant negative trend, and were higher for the first interval after marking (0.88-0.97) than afterwards (0.74-0.93). Average survival estimates were 0.967 (SE 0.026) for the first and 0.861 (SE 0.023) for all later survival intervals. 3. We combined 16 winter and spring climate covariates into two principal components axes. F1 was related to warm/wet winters and an early spring on the Norwegian staging areas and F2 to dry/cold winters. We expected that F1 would be positively related to survival and F2 negatively. F1 explained 23% of survival variation ($F_{1,10} = 3.24$; one-sided P = 0.051) when alone in a model and 28% ($F_{1,9} = 4.50$; one-sided $P = 0.031$) in a model that assumed a trend for survival. In contrast, neither F2 nor density, land-use, or scaring practices on important Norwegian spring staging areas had discernible effects on survival. 4. Climate change may thus affect goose population dynamics, with warmer winters and earlier springs enhancing survival and fecundity. A possible mechanism is increased food availability on Danish wintering and Norwegian staging areas. As geese are among the main herbivores in Arctic ecosystems, climate change, by increasing goose populations, may have important indirect effects on Arctic vegetation. Our study also highlights the importance of events outside the breeding area for the population dynamics of migrant species.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[1172]
    [1172]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1173
    1173
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1174
    1174
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1175
    1175
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1176
    1176
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1177
    1177
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1178
    1178
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1179
    1179
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1180
    1180
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1181
    1181