Data from: A quantitative survey of local adaptation and fitness trade-offs

The long history of reciprocal transplant studies testing the hypothesis
of local adaptation has shown that populations are often adapted to their
local environments. Yet many studies have not demonstrated local
adaptation, suggesting that sometimes native populations are no better
adapted than are genotypes from foreign environments. Local adaptation may
also lead to trade-offs, in which adaptation to one environment comes at a
cost of adaptation to another environment. I conducted a survey of
published studies of local adaptation to quantify its frequency and
magnitude and the costs associated with local adaptation. I also
quantified the relationship between local adaptation and environmental
differences and the relationship between local adaptation and phenotypic
divergence. The overall frequency of local adaptation was 0.71, and the
magnitude of the native population advantage in relative fitness was 45%.
Divergence between home site environments was positively associated with
the magnitude of local adaptation, but phenotypic divergence was not. I
found a small negative correlation between a population's relative
fitness in its native environment and its fitness in a foreign
environment, indicating weak trade-offs associated with local adaptation.
These results suggest that populations are often locally adapted but
stochastic processes such as genetic drift may limit the efficacy of
divergent selection.