Cited by 262Evolution and Genetic DynamicsParasite Biology and Host InteractionsAnimal Behavior and Reproduction

A Meta‐Analysis of Factors Affecting Local Adaptation between Interacting Species

Hoeksema, Jason D., Forde, Samantha E.·2008·The American Naturalist

Abstract

Adaptive divergence among populations can result in local adaptation, whereby genotypes in native environments exhibit greater fitness than genotypes in novel environments. A body of theory has developed that predicts how different species traits, such as rates of gene flow and generation times, influence local adaptation in coevolutionary species interactions. We used a meta-analysis of local-adaptation studies across a broad range of host-parasite interactions to evaluate predictions about the effect of species traits on local adaptation. We also evaluated how experimental design influences the outcome of local adaptation experiments. In reciprocally designed experiments, the relative gene flow rate of hosts versus parasites was the strongest predictor of local adaptation, with significant parasite local adaptation only in the studies in which parasites had greater gene flow rates than their hosts. When nonreciprocal studies were included in analyses, species traits did not explain significant variation in local adaptation, although the overall level of local adaptation observed was lower in the nonreciprocal than in the reciprocal studies. This formal meta-analysis across a diversity of host-parasite systems lends insight into the role of both biology (species traits) and biologists (experimental design) in detecting local adaptation in coevolving species interactions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1086/527496

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hoeksema, J. D., & Forde, S. E.
Affiliations
  • National Evolutionary Synthesis Center (US)
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
Venue
The American Naturalist
Published
2008-03
Volume
171
Issue
3
Pages
275-290
ISSN
  • 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5323
OpenAlex
W2111976719
Cited by
262
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 19
FWCI
1.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The American Naturalist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Evolutionary Synthesis Center
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Parasite Biology and Host Interactions
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
Keywords
local adaptation, host-parasite interactions, coevolution, gene flow, generation time, reciprocal transplant, experimental design, adaptive divergence
MeSH terms
Animals, Biological Evolution, Host-Parasite Interactions, Models, Biological, Plants, Symbiosis, Plant Physiological Phenomena, Gene Flow

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