Flyway connectivity and exchange primarily driven by moult migration in geese

A. Kölzsch, G.J.D.M. Müskens, P. Szinai, S. Moonen, P. Glazov, H. Kruckenberg, M. Wikelski, B.A. Nolet

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background: For the conservation and management of migratory species that strongly decrease or increase due to anthropological impacts, a clear delineation of populations and quantification of possible mixing (migratory connectivity) is crucial. Usually, population exchange in migratory species is only studied in breeding or wintering sites, but we considered the whole annual cycle in order to determine important stages and sites for population mixing in an Arctic migrant. Methods: We used 91 high resolution GPS tracks of Western Palearctic greater white-fronted geese (Anser A. albifrons) from the North Sea and Pannonic populations to extract details of where and when populations overlapped and exchange was possible. Overlap areas were calculated as dynamic Brownian bridges of stopover, nest and moulting sites. Results: Utilisation areas of the two populations overlapped only somewhat during spring and autumn migration stopovers, but much during moult. During this stage, non-breeders and failed breeders of the North Sea population intermixed with geese from the Pannonic population in the Pyasina delta on Taimyr peninsula. The timing of use of overlap areas was highly consistent between populations, making exchange possible. Two of our tracked geese switched from the North Sea population flyway to the Pannonic flyway during moult on Taimyr peninsula or early during the subsequent autumn migration. Because we could follow one of them during the next year, where it stayed in the Pannonic flyway, we suggest that the exchange was long-term or permanent. Conclusions: We have identified long-distance moult migration of failed or non-breeders as a key phenomenon creating overlap between two flyway populations of geese. This supports the notion of previously suggested population exchange and migratory connectivity, but outside of classically suggested wintering or breeding sites. Our results call for consideration of moult migration and population exchange in conservation and management of our greater white-fronted geese as well as other waterfowl populations.

LanguageEnglish
Article number3
JournalMovement Ecology
Volume7
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 31 Jan 2019

Fingerprint

molt
geese
molting
connectivity
migratory species
stopover
waterfowl
breeding site
annual cycle
North Sea
nest
GPS
breeding
breeding sites
sea
Anser albifrons
autumn
Anser anser
Arctic region

Keywords

  • Dynamic Brownian bridges
  • GPS tracking
  • Greater white-fronted goose
  • Long-distance moult migration
  • Migratory connectivity
  • Population exchange
  • Population overlap
  • Taimyr peninsula

Cite this

Kölzsch, A., Müskens, G. J. D. M., Szinai, P., Moonen, S., Glazov, P., Kruckenberg, H., ... Nolet, B. A. (2019). Flyway connectivity and exchange primarily driven by moult migration in geese. Movement Ecology, 7(1), [3]. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40462-019-0148-6
Kölzsch, A. ; Müskens, G.J.D.M. ; Szinai, P. ; Moonen, S. ; Glazov, P. ; Kruckenberg, H. ; Wikelski, M. ; Nolet, B.A. / Flyway connectivity and exchange primarily driven by moult migration in geese. In: Movement Ecology. 2019 ; Vol. 7, No. 1.
@article{d590a2573c214724ac28e34ed3618da6,
title = "Flyway connectivity and exchange primarily driven by moult migration in geese",
abstract = "Background: For the conservation and management of migratory species that strongly decrease or increase due to anthropological impacts, a clear delineation of populations and quantification of possible mixing (migratory connectivity) is crucial. Usually, population exchange in migratory species is only studied in breeding or wintering sites, but we considered the whole annual cycle in order to determine important stages and sites for population mixing in an Arctic migrant. Methods: We used 91 high resolution GPS tracks of Western Palearctic greater white-fronted geese (Anser A. albifrons) from the North Sea and Pannonic populations to extract details of where and when populations overlapped and exchange was possible. Overlap areas were calculated as dynamic Brownian bridges of stopover, nest and moulting sites. Results: Utilisation areas of the two populations overlapped only somewhat during spring and autumn migration stopovers, but much during moult. During this stage, non-breeders and failed breeders of the North Sea population intermixed with geese from the Pannonic population in the Pyasina delta on Taimyr peninsula. The timing of use of overlap areas was highly consistent between populations, making exchange possible. Two of our tracked geese switched from the North Sea population flyway to the Pannonic flyway during moult on Taimyr peninsula or early during the subsequent autumn migration. Because we could follow one of them during the next year, where it stayed in the Pannonic flyway, we suggest that the exchange was long-term or permanent. Conclusions: We have identified long-distance moult migration of failed or non-breeders as a key phenomenon creating overlap between two flyway populations of geese. This supports the notion of previously suggested population exchange and migratory connectivity, but outside of classically suggested wintering or breeding sites. Our results call for consideration of moult migration and population exchange in conservation and management of our greater white-fronted geese as well as other waterfowl populations.",
keywords = "Dynamic Brownian bridges, GPS tracking, Greater white-fronted goose, Long-distance moult migration, Migratory connectivity, Population exchange, Population overlap, Taimyr peninsula",
author = "A. K{\"o}lzsch and G.J.D.M. M{\"u}skens and P. Szinai and S. Moonen and P. Glazov and H. Kruckenberg and M. Wikelski and B.A. Nolet",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "31",
doi = "10.1186/s40462-019-0148-6",
language = "English",
volume = "7",
journal = "Movement Ecology",
issn = "2051-3933",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "1",

}

Kölzsch, A, Müskens, GJDM, Szinai, P, Moonen, S, Glazov, P, Kruckenberg, H, Wikelski, M & Nolet, BA 2019, 'Flyway connectivity and exchange primarily driven by moult migration in geese', Movement Ecology, vol. 7, no. 1, 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40462-019-0148-6

Flyway connectivity and exchange primarily driven by moult migration in geese. / Kölzsch, A.; Müskens, G.J.D.M.; Szinai, P.; Moonen, S.; Glazov, P.; Kruckenberg, H.; Wikelski, M.; Nolet, B.A.

In: Movement Ecology, Vol. 7, No. 1, 3, 31.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Flyway connectivity and exchange primarily driven by moult migration in geese

AU - Kölzsch, A.

AU - Müskens, G.J.D.M.

AU - Szinai, P.

AU - Moonen, S.

AU - Glazov, P.

AU - Kruckenberg, H.

AU - Wikelski, M.

AU - Nolet, B.A.

PY - 2019/1/31

Y1 - 2019/1/31

N2 - Background: For the conservation and management of migratory species that strongly decrease or increase due to anthropological impacts, a clear delineation of populations and quantification of possible mixing (migratory connectivity) is crucial. Usually, population exchange in migratory species is only studied in breeding or wintering sites, but we considered the whole annual cycle in order to determine important stages and sites for population mixing in an Arctic migrant. Methods: We used 91 high resolution GPS tracks of Western Palearctic greater white-fronted geese (Anser A. albifrons) from the North Sea and Pannonic populations to extract details of where and when populations overlapped and exchange was possible. Overlap areas were calculated as dynamic Brownian bridges of stopover, nest and moulting sites. Results: Utilisation areas of the two populations overlapped only somewhat during spring and autumn migration stopovers, but much during moult. During this stage, non-breeders and failed breeders of the North Sea population intermixed with geese from the Pannonic population in the Pyasina delta on Taimyr peninsula. The timing of use of overlap areas was highly consistent between populations, making exchange possible. Two of our tracked geese switched from the North Sea population flyway to the Pannonic flyway during moult on Taimyr peninsula or early during the subsequent autumn migration. Because we could follow one of them during the next year, where it stayed in the Pannonic flyway, we suggest that the exchange was long-term or permanent. Conclusions: We have identified long-distance moult migration of failed or non-breeders as a key phenomenon creating overlap between two flyway populations of geese. This supports the notion of previously suggested population exchange and migratory connectivity, but outside of classically suggested wintering or breeding sites. Our results call for consideration of moult migration and population exchange in conservation and management of our greater white-fronted geese as well as other waterfowl populations.

AB - Background: For the conservation and management of migratory species that strongly decrease or increase due to anthropological impacts, a clear delineation of populations and quantification of possible mixing (migratory connectivity) is crucial. Usually, population exchange in migratory species is only studied in breeding or wintering sites, but we considered the whole annual cycle in order to determine important stages and sites for population mixing in an Arctic migrant. Methods: We used 91 high resolution GPS tracks of Western Palearctic greater white-fronted geese (Anser A. albifrons) from the North Sea and Pannonic populations to extract details of where and when populations overlapped and exchange was possible. Overlap areas were calculated as dynamic Brownian bridges of stopover, nest and moulting sites. Results: Utilisation areas of the two populations overlapped only somewhat during spring and autumn migration stopovers, but much during moult. During this stage, non-breeders and failed breeders of the North Sea population intermixed with geese from the Pannonic population in the Pyasina delta on Taimyr peninsula. The timing of use of overlap areas was highly consistent between populations, making exchange possible. Two of our tracked geese switched from the North Sea population flyway to the Pannonic flyway during moult on Taimyr peninsula or early during the subsequent autumn migration. Because we could follow one of them during the next year, where it stayed in the Pannonic flyway, we suggest that the exchange was long-term or permanent. Conclusions: We have identified long-distance moult migration of failed or non-breeders as a key phenomenon creating overlap between two flyway populations of geese. This supports the notion of previously suggested population exchange and migratory connectivity, but outside of classically suggested wintering or breeding sites. Our results call for consideration of moult migration and population exchange in conservation and management of our greater white-fronted geese as well as other waterfowl populations.

KW - Dynamic Brownian bridges

KW - GPS tracking

KW - Greater white-fronted goose

KW - Long-distance moult migration

KW - Migratory connectivity

KW - Population exchange

KW - Population overlap

KW - Taimyr peninsula

U2 - 10.1186/s40462-019-0148-6

DO - 10.1186/s40462-019-0148-6

M3 - Article

VL - 7

JO - Movement Ecology

T2 - Movement Ecology

JF - Movement Ecology

SN - 2051-3933

IS - 1

M1 - 3

ER -