Data from: Fitness costs in spatially structured environments

The clustering of individuals that results from limited dispersal is a
double-edged sword: while it allows for local interactions to be mostly
among related individuals, it also results in increased local competition.
Here I show that, because they mitigate local competition, fitness costs
such as reduced fecundity or reduced survival are less costly in spatially
structured environments than in non spatial settings. I first present a
simple demographic example to illustrate how spatial structure weakens
selection against fitness costs. Then, I illustrate the importance of
disentangling the evolution of a trait from the evolution of potential
associated costs, using an example taken from a recent study investigating
the effect of spatial structure on the evolution of host defense. In this
example indeed, the differences between spatial and non-spatial selection
gradients are due to differences in the fitness costs, thereby undermining
interpretations of the results made in terms of the trait only. This
illustrates the need to consider fitness costs as proper traits in both
theoretical and empirical studies.