Search

Populations of many species are genetically adapted to local historical climate conditions. Yet most forecasts of species' distributions under climate change have ignored local adaptation (LA), which may paint a false picture of how species will respond across their geographic ranges. We review recent studies that have incorporated intraspecific variation, a potential proxy for LA, into distribution forecasts, assess their strengths and weaknesses, and make recommendations for how to improve forecasts in the face of LA. The three methods used so far (species distribution models, response functions, and mechanistic models) reflect a trade‐off between data availability and the ability to rigorously demonstrate LA to climate. We identify key considerations for incorporating LA into distribution forecasts that are currently missing from many published studies, including testing the spatial scale and pattern of LA, the confounding effects of LA to nonclimatic or biotic drivers, and the need to incorporate empirically based dispersal or gene flow processes. We suggest approaches to better evaluate these aspects of LA and their effects on species‐level forecasts. In particular, we highlight demographic and dynamic evolutionary models as promising approaches to better integrate LA into forecasts, and emphasize the importance of independent model validation. Finally, we urge closer examination of how LA will alter the responses of central vs. marginal populations to allow stronger generalizations about changes in distribution and abundance in the face of LA. Although many populations are genetically adapted to their local climate, this has been ignored by most forecasts of species' distributions under climate change. Local climate adaptation can profoundly alter the responses of local populations and entire species to climate change, by interacting with the velocity of climate change, barriers to dispersal, and movement beyond historical range edges. We critically review studies that have incorporated local adaptation into species' distribution forecasts, evaluate strengths and weaknesses of current approaches, and identify the most promising paths forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is a Commentary on Patsiou et al. (2020), 228: 525–540. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Many predictions of how climate change will impact biodiversity have focused on range shifts using species‐wide climate tolerances, an approach that ignores the demographic mechanisms that enable species to attain broad geographic distributions. But these mechanisms matter, as responses to climate change could fundamentally differ depending on the contributions of life‐history plasticity vs. local adaptation to species‐wide climate tolerances. In particular, if local adaptation to climate is strong, populations across a species’ range—not only those at the trailing range edge—could decline sharply with global climate change. Indeed, faster rates of climate change in many high latitude regions could combine with local adaptation to generate sharper declines well away from trailing edges. Combining 15 years of demographic data from field populations across North America with growth chamber warming experiments, we show that growth and survival in a widespread tundra plant show compensatory responses to warming throughout the species’ latitudinal range, buffering overall performance across a range of temperatures. However, populations also differ in their temperature responses, consistent with adaptation to local climate, especially growing season temperature. In particular, warming begins to negatively impact plant growth at cooler temperatures for plants from colder, northern populations than for those from warmer, southern populations, both in the field and in growth chambers. Furthermore, the individuals and maternal families with the fastest growth also have the lowest water use efficiency at all temperatures, suggesting that a trade‐off between growth and water use efficiency could further constrain responses to forecasted warming and drying. Taken together, these results suggest that populations throughout species’ ranges could be at risk of decline with continued climate change, and that the focus on trailing edge populations risks overlooking the largest potential impacts of climate change on species’ abundance and distribution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]