All species are locked in a continual struggle to adapt to local ecological conditions. In cases where species fail to locally adapt, they face reduced population growth rates, or even local extinction. Traditional explanations for limited local adaptation focus on maladaptive gene flow or homogeneous environmental conditions. These classical explanations have, however, failed to explain variation in the magnitude of local adaptation observed across taxa. Here we show that variable levels of local adaptation are better explained by trait dimensionality. First, we develop and analyse mathematical models that predict levels of local adaptation will increase with the number of traits experiencing spatially variable selection. Next, we test this prediction by estimating the relationship between dimensionality and local adaptation using data from 35 published reciprocal transplant studies. This analysis reveals a strong correlation between dimensionality and degree of local adaptation, and thus provides empirical support for the predictions of our model.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2015.
All research outputs
#18,739,926
of 28,028,653 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#10,094
of 11,247 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,207
of 276,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
#140
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,028,653 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,247 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.0. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,979 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
