Resource partitioning in sympatric arctic‐breeding geese: summer habitat use, spatial and dietary overlap of Barnacle and Pink‐footed Geese in Svalbard

• Published in: Ibis
• Main Authors: FOX, TONY (A. D.), EIDE, NINA E., BERGERSEN, ESPEN, MADSEN, JESPER
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Wiley 2008
• Subjects: Animal Science and Zoology; Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics; Arctic; Svalbard; Sassendalen; Anser brachyrhynchus; Branta leucopsis
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919x.2008.00892.x; https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1111%2Fj.1474-919X.2008.00892.x; https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2008.00892.x

The spatial, habitat and dietary overlap of two breeding goose species was studied in Sassendalen, Svalbard, in summer 2003 based on abundance within 500 × 500‐m grid squares and faecal diet analyses during pre‐breeding, nesting and post‐hatching periods. More than half of all Pink‐footed Geese Anser brachyrhynchus occurred in the absence of Barnacle Geese Branta leucopsis during nesting and post‐hatching periods compared to c. 20% when concentrated by pre‐breeding snow cover. In contrast, only 5% of Barnacle Geese were observed in the absence of Pink‐footed Geese pre‐breeding, 15% during nesting, and 35% post‐hatching. Among six defined habitat types, Barnacle Geese resorted more to ‘upland’ habitats during pre‐breeding and nesting and to lowland lakes post‐hatching when compared to Pink‐footed Geese. Although Pink‐footed Geese showed less change in seasonal habitat preference, many shifted to the river valley bottom post‐hatching, giving access to open water (predator avoidance) and lush green vegetation (foraging for goslings). The smallest extent of distributional overlap between the two species occurred post‐hatching, but each species was also highly restricted by snow cover during pre‐nesting. The greatest extent of overlap in distribution and diet occurred during incubation, when large dietary variation between different breeding valleys reflected local food availability around nests (probably a result of nest‐site preference rather than food selection per se ). Whether this means that increased interactions within and between the two goose species with future increases in local density are most likely to be manifest at this stage of the summer is impossible to determine without knowledge of available food resources and manipulative experiments. More detailed investigations of the effects of foraging by both species on plant structure, quality and community composition are necessary to predict likely outcomes of future changes in population densities of both species.