The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Differences in spawning date between populations of common frog reveal local adaptation
Open accessAbstract
Phenotypic differences between populations often correlate with climate variables, resulting from a combination of environment-induced plasticity and local adaptation. Species comprising populations that are genetically adapted to local climatic conditions should be more vulnerable to climate change than those comprising phenotypically plastic populations. Assessment of local adaptation generally requires logistically challenging experiments. Here, using a unique approach and a large dataset (>50,000 observations from across Britain), we compare the covariation in temperature and first spawning dates of the common frog ( Rana temporaria ) across space with that across time. We show that although all populations exhibit a plastic response to temperature, spawning earlier in warmer years, between-population differences in first spawning dates are dominated by local adaptation. Given climate change projections for Britain in 2050–2070, we project that for populations to remain as locally adapted as contemporary populations will require first spawning date to advance by ∼21–39 days but that plasticity alone will only enable an advance of ∼5–9 days. Populations may thus face a microevolutionary and gene flow challenge to advance first spawning date by a further ∼16–30 days over the next 50 years.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mayr, E. (1963) · doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674865327 · Cited by 10,175
Ecological responses to recent climate change.
Walther, G.-R., Post, E., Convey, P., Menzel, A., Parmesan, C., Beebee, T. J. C., Fromentin, J.-M., Hoegh-Guldberg, O., & Bairlein, F. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/416389a · Cited by 9,975
Impacts of climate warming on terrestrial ectotherms across latitude
Deutsch, C. A., Tewksbury, J. J., Huey, R. B., Sheldon, K. S., Ghalambor, C. K., Haak, D. C., & Martin, P. R. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0709472105 · Cited by 3,840
Amphibian breeding and climate
Beebee, T. J. C. (1995) · Nature · doi:10.1038/374219a0 · Cited by 474
Cited by
Climate change, adaptation, and phenotypic plasticity: the problem and the evidence
Merilä, J., & Hendry, A. P. (2014) · Evolutionary Applications · doi:10.1111/eva.12137 · Cited by 1,369
Phenological sensitivity to climate across taxa and trophic levels
Thackeray, S. J., Henrys, P. A., Hemming, D., Bell, J. R., Botham, M. S., Burthe, S., Helaouet, P., Johns, D. G., Jones, I. D., Leech, D. I., et al. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature18608 · Cited by 1,020
Metadata
- Authors
- Phillimore, A. B., Hadfield, J. D., Jones, O. R., & Smithers, R. J.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2010-04-19
- Volume
- 107
- Issue
- 18
- Pages
- 8292-8297
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2062719843
- Cited by
- 230
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 13.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Differences in spawning date between populations of common frog reveal local adaptation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0913792107
- The paper
- Phillimore, A. B., Hadfield, J. D., Jones, O. R., & Smithers, R. J. (2010). Differences in spawning date between populations of common frog reveal local adaptation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0913792107
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.