biota
Type of resources
Available actions
Topics
Keywords
Contact for the resource
Provided by
Years
Formats
Representation types
Update frequencies
status
-
This report attempts to review the abundance, status and distribution of natural wild goose populations in the northern hemisphere. The report comprises three parts that 1) summarise key findings from the study and the methodology and analysis applied; 2) contain the individual accounts for each of the 68 populations included in this report; and 3) provide the datasets compiled for this study which will be made accessible on the Arctic Biodiversity Data Service.
-
Trends in Arctic terrestrial bird population abundance for four taxonomic groupings in four global flyways. Data are presented as total number of taxa (species, subspecies). Modified from Smith et al. 2020. These broad patterns were generally consistent across flyways, with some exceptions. Fewer waterfowl populations increased in the Central Asian and East Asian–Australasian Flyways. The largest proportion of declining species was among the waders in all but the Central Asian Flyway where the trends of a large majority of waders are unknown. Although declines were more prevalent among waders than other taxonomic groups in both the African–Eurasian and Americas Flyways, the former had a substantially larger number of stable and increasing species than the latter (Figure 3-23). STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 55 - Figure 3.23
-
Number of non-native plant taxa that have become naturalised across the Arctic. No naturalised non-native taxa are recorded from Wrangel Island, Ellesmere Land – northern Greenland, Anabar-Olenyok and Frans Josef Land. Modified from Wasowicz et al. 2020 STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 32 - Figure 3.4
-
Change in plant phenology over time based on published studies, ranging from 9 to 21 years of duration. The bars show the proportion of observations where timing of phenological events advanced (earlier) was stable or were delayed (later) over time. The darker portions of each bar represent visible decrease, stable state, or increase results, and lighter portions represent marginally significant change. The numbers above each bar indicate the number of observations in that group. Figure from Bjorkman et al. 2020. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 31- Figure 3.3
-
There is a great variation and heterogeneity among terrestrial Arctic ecosystems. This is further described as biogeographical areas in the Annotated Checklist of the Pan-Arctic Flora (Elven et al. 2020), as vegetation zones (Walker et al. 2005, Raynolds et al 2019) or as ecoregions recognised by Terrestrial Ecoregions of the World (Olson et al. 2001). The START focuses on high and low Arctic regions consistent with the CAVM’s subzones A to E, as shown in Figure 1-2 and Figure 2-1 STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 2 - Page 19 - Figure 2.1
-
Population estimates and trends for Rangifer populations of the migratory tundra, Arctic island, mountain, and forest ecotypes where their circumpolar distribution intersects the CAFF boundary. Population trends (Increasing, Stable, Decreasing, or Unknown) are indicated by shading. Data sources for each population are indicated as footnotes. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 70 - Table 3.4
-
There are few true Arctic specialist birds that remain in the Arctic throughout their annual cycle. They include the willow and rock ptarmigan (Lagopus lagopus and L. muta), gyrfalcon (Falco rusticolus), snowy owl (Bubo scandiacus), Arctic redpoll (Carduelis hornemanni) and northern raven (Corvus corax)—a cosmopolitan species with resident populations in the Arctic. All other terrestrial Arctic-breeding bird species migrate to warmer regions during the northern winter, connecting the Arctic to all corners of the globe. Hence, their distributions are influenced by the routes they follow. These distinct migration routes are referred to as flyways and are defined by a combination of ecological and political boundaries and differ in spatial scale. The CBMP refers to the traditional four north–south flyways, in addition to a circumpolar flyway representing the few species that remain largely within the Arctic year-round (Figure 3-20). STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 48- Figure 3.20
-
Arctic foxes are currently monitored at 34 sites throughout the North, with most monitoring efforts concentrated in Fennoscandia (Figure 3-32). The duration of monitoring across all sites is variable at between 2 and 56 years and was ongoing at 27 of the 34 sites (79%) as of 2015. Monitoring projects cover almost equally the four climate zones of the species’ distribution—high Arctic, low Arctic, sub-Arctic, and montane/alpine. STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 82 - Figure 3.32
-
Several smaller populations of caribou inhabit sub-Arctic portions of Alaska, including five populations along the Aleutian Archipelago and west coast. These populations are considered part of the migratory tundra ecotype based on genetics, although in some instances their ecology and habitat are similar to the mountain caribou ecotype found in western Canada. Population dynamics and trends for these populations are variable (Figure 3-29). They are managed by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game through hunting quotas STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 72- Figure 3.29
-
Many population counts of gregarious migrant species, such as waders and geese, take place along the flyways and at wintering grounds outside the Arctic which stresses the importance of continued development of movement ecology studies. Monitoring of FEC attributes related to breeding success and links to environmental drivers within the Arctic takes place in a wide network of research sites across the Arctic, although with low coverage of the high Arctic zone (Figure 3-25) STATE OF THE ARCTIC TERRESTRIAL BIODIVERSITY REPORT - Chapter 3 - Page 58 - Figure 3.25