We have gathered information on all known recaptures and resightings of marked Dunlin throughout the East-Asian Australasian flyway, as well as opportunistically at other locations. The objectives of this study were to (1) identify regional connectivity patterns within and among subspecies of Dunlin migrating and wintering along the EAAF, (2) examine the regional connectivity patterns of Dunlin of unknown subspecies captured and marked at sites on the nonbreeding grounds, (3) examine recovery patterns of arcticola Dunlin initially captured on the NW and NE portions of their Alaska breeding range, (4) examine recovery patterns of arcticola males and females, (5) examine recovery patterns of arcticola Dunlin of different age classes, and (6) assess the propensity for individuals of the arcticola subspecies to exhibit nonbreeding site fidelity.
A portion of these data (as indicated by field ‘Lagasse.2020’) were used to determine migration along the East Asian–Australasian Flyway (EAAF). General methods are available in Lagassé et al. 2020. Dunlin subspecies exhibit regional segregation and high site fidelity along the East Asian–Australasian Flyway. The Condor: Ornithological Applications 122. https://doi.org/10.1093/condor/duaa054. For this analysis data were restricted to resightings within the EAAF that occurred before 30 Jun 2017. Resightings that occurred at original banding locations, of nonbreeding individuals banded in Russia, or with incomplete or ambiguous resighting information were also excluded. For data used in Lagassé et al. 2020, dataset hosted by Dryad (Lagassé, Benjamin et al. (2020), Dunlin subspecies exhibit regional segregation and high site fidelity along the East Asian−Australasian Flyway, Dryad, Dataset, https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.18931zcv1)
This dataset, however, includes all resightings available. Note, however, that resightings not included in Lagassé et al. 2020 have not been thoroughly proofed or checked for accuracy.
The data providers have invested considerable effort in QA/QC, but it is possible that undetected errors remain. It is strongly recommended that careful attention be paid to the contents of the metadata file associated with these data to evaluate data set limitations, restrictions, or intended use. The originators of this dataset shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of the data described and/or contained herein.
Potential users of these data should first contact the data authors listed below, as potential biases may occur within the data depending on the intended use. For example, the recovery of marked birds depends on observer effort and reporting mechanisms and so recovery patterns are likely biased by variability in regional recovery and reporting probabilities. Indeed, recovery and reporting probabilities are likely higher for Dunlin at certain coastal sites where multi-year efforts have been made to locate, resight, and capture Dunlin. Therefore, potential users should contact the data authors to discuss intended use and how these data may or may not be applicable.
Points of contact for each country: China: China National Bird Banding Center, Chi-Yeung (Jimmy) Choi (choimo@yahoo.com); Japan: Yamashina Institute for Ornithology; Russia: Bird Ringing Center of Russia, Pavel Tomkovich (pst52@mail.ru); South Korea and Taiwan: Taiwan Wader Study Group, Chung-Yu Chiang (dec.chiang@gmail.com); USA: USGS Bird Banding Laboratory, Rick Lanctot (richard_lanctot@fws.gov).
