@article{DagistanliPossamaiTurneretal.2018,
  author    = {Dagistanli, Selda and Possamai, Adam and Turner, Bryan S. and Voyce, Malcolm and Roose, Joshua},
  title     = {The limits of multiculturalism in Australia?},
  series = {The Sociological Review},
  volume    = {66},
  journal   = {The Sociological Review},
  number    = {6},
  publisher = {Sage Publ.},
  address   = {London},
  issn      = {0038-0261},
  doi       = {10.1177/0038026118768133},
  pages     = {1258 -- 1275},
  year      = {2018},
  abstract  = {This article focuses on the marginal extremities - the limits - of Shari'a practices in Australia, through the example of a criminal case in which four Sydney-based Muslim men whipped a Muslim convert to punish him for his excessive consumption of drugs and alcohol. The men claimed they acted in line with the doctrines of Shari'a practice to 'purify' or absolve the victim of his sins. While the case was tried before a magistrate in a lower court, it is argued in this article that its social and political significance was wider, reaching into contemporary debates around multiculturalism and immigration from non-western, non-liberal and mainly Muslim nations. Mainstream media and political narratives viewed the whipping as an example of the moral dangers of accommodating Shari'a norms, eliding the differences between peaceable Shari'a and its violent extremities, while situating the case at the limits of multicultural accommodation. This article interrogates the objectionable margins of some cultural practices through this limit case. At the same time it questions the limits or limitations of a multiculturalism that homogeneously views the practices of entire ethnic or religious groups as violent and incommensurable with dominant norms, while using these understandings as a justification for marginalising these groups.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{RomeroMujalliRochowKahletal.2021,
  author    = {Romero-Mujalli, Daniel and Rochow, Markus and Kahl, Sandra M. and Paraskevopoulou, Sofia and Folkertsma, Remco and Jeltsch, Florian and Tiedemann, Ralph},
  title     = {Adaptive and nonadaptive plasticity in changing environments: Implications for sexual species with different life history strategies},
  series = {Ecology and Evolution},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Ecology and Evolution},
  number    = {11},
  publisher = {John Wiley \& Sons, Inc.},
  address   = {New Jersey},
  issn      = {2045-7758},
  pages     = {17},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Populations adapt to novel environmental conditions by genetic changes or phenotypic plasticity. Plastic responses are generally faster and can buffer fitness losses under variable conditions. Plasticity is typically modeled as random noise and linear reaction norms that assume simple one-to- one genotype-phenotype maps and no limits to the phenotypic response. Most studies on plasticity have focused on its effect on population viability. However, it is not clear, whether the advantage of plasticity depends solely on environmental fluctuations or also on the genetic and demographic properties (life histories) of populations. Here we present an individual-based model and study the relative importance of adaptive and nonadaptive plasticity for populations of sexual species with different life histories experiencing directional stochastic climate change. Environmental fluctuations were simulated using differentially autocorrelated climatic stochasticity or noise color, and scenarios of directiona climate change. Nonadaptive plasticity was simulated as a random environmental effect on trait development, while adaptive plasticity as a linear, saturating, or sinusoidal reaction norm. The last two imposed limits to the plastic response and emphasized flexible interactions of the genotype with the environment. Interestingly, this assumption led to (a) smaller phenotypic than genotypic variance in the population (many-to- one genotype-phenotype map) and the coexistence of polymorphisms, and (b) the maintenance of higher genetic variation—compared to linear reaction norms and genetic determinism—even when the population was exposed to a constant environment for several generations. Limits to plasticity led to genetic accommodation, when costs were negligible, and to the appearance of cryptic variation when limits were exceeded. We found that adaptive plasticity promoted population persistence under red environmental noise and was particularly important for life histories with low fecundity. Populations produing more offspring could cope with environmental fluctuations solely by genetic changes or random plasticity, unless environmental change was too fast.},
  language  = {en}
}
@misc{RomeroMujalliRochowKahletal.2021,
  author    = {Romero-Mujalli, Daniel and Rochow, Markus and Kahl, Sandra M. and Paraskevopoulou, Sofia and Folkertsma, Remco and Jeltsch, Florian and Tiedemann, Ralph},
  title     = {Adaptive and nonadaptive plasticity in changing environments: Implications for sexual species with different life history strategies},
  series = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  journal   = {Postprints der Universit{\"a}t Potsdam : Mathematisch-Naturwissenschaftliche Reihe},
  number    = {1170},
  issn      = {1866-8372},
  doi       = {10.25932/publishup-52320},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-523201},
  pages     = {19},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Populations adapt to novel environmental conditions by genetic changes or phenotypic plasticity. Plastic responses are generally faster and can buffer fitness losses under variable conditions. Plasticity is typically modeled as random noise and linear reaction norms that assume simple one-to- one genotype-phenotype maps and no limits to the phenotypic response. Most studies on plasticity have focused on its effect on population viability. However, it is not clear, whether the advantage of plasticity depends solely on environmental fluctuations or also on the genetic and demographic properties (life histories) of populations. Here we present an individual-based model and study the relative importance of adaptive and nonadaptive plasticity for populations of sexual species with different life histories experiencing directional stochastic climate change. Environmental fluctuations were simulated using differentially autocorrelated climatic stochasticity or noise color, and scenarios of directiona climate change. Nonadaptive plasticity was simulated as a random environmental effect on trait development, while adaptive plasticity as a linear, saturating, or sinusoidal reaction norm. The last two imposed limits to the plastic response and emphasized flexible interactions of the genotype with the environment. Interestingly, this assumption led to (a) smaller phenotypic than genotypic variance in the population (many-to- one genotype-phenotype map) and the coexistence of polymorphisms, and (b) the maintenance of higher genetic variation—compared to linear reaction norms and genetic determinism—even when the population was exposed to a constant environment for several generations. Limits to plasticity led to genetic accommodation, when costs were negligible, and to the appearance of cryptic variation when limits were exceeded. We found that adaptive plasticity promoted population persistence under red environmental noise and was particularly important for life histories with low fecundity. Populations produing more offspring could cope with environmental fluctuations solely by genetic changes or random plasticity, unless environmental change was too fast.},
  language  = {en}
}