126,635 research outputs found
Liaghinella andina Forero, 2007, sp. nov.
No full textLiaghinella andina sp. nov. Diagnosis. L. andina differs from L. farri by the color pattern of antenna and fore leg, and in the structure of head and anteroventral series of profemur. In L. farri the scapus is fuscous, lighter at base with a submedian pale yellow annulus, whereas in L. andina it is completely yellowish and apically darkened. In L. farri the protibia has basal and submedian pale yellow annulus, and the protarsus is yellowish at base; L. andina has a large basal pale yellow annulus on the protibia, nearly half the length of the segment, and the protarsus is completely brownish. Another difference between the males of the two species is that the meso- and metafemora in L. farri have well defined pale annuli, whereas in L. andina these femora only have irregular pale markings. The head has a pair of prominent tubercles behind the transverse sulcus in L. farri, but such tubercles are absent in both sexes of L. andina, which have instead numerous setiferous tubercles. The structure of the anteroventral series of the profemur is quite different in the two species, as stated below in the description and in the key. The seventh abdominal tergite in the males of L. farri is abruptly pointed upwards apically, whereas in L. andina it is flattened and less pointed. The male genitalia are different in the two species: In L. farri the phallosoma is globular without any sclerotized parts, whereas in L. andina it is more cylindrical and with at least the apical half sclerotized. From all other Emesinae, L. andina is distinguished by its one-segmented protarsus, large process of profemur inserted on its base, particular color pattern, apterous condition, anteroventral series setae of profemur composed only of spiniform setae inserted on small tubercles, and body covered with numerous setiferous tubercles. Description. Apterous male: MEASUREMENTS (Holotype): Total length: 8.95. Head length: 1.40, width: 0.93, height: 0.70; interocular space 0.56; length of labial segments II: 0.43, III: 0.33, IV: 0.80; scapus: 2.56, pedicellus: 1.40, basiflagellomere: 0.20, distiflagellomere: 0.93. Thorax, pronotum length: 1.26, width: 0.96; mesonotum length: 0.83, width: 1.16; metanotum length: 0.40, width: 1.30. Legs, procoxa length: 1.66, width: 0.33; profemur length: 2.53, width: 0.48; protibia length: 1.20; protarsus length: 1.23; mesofemur length: 2.80, width: 0.20; mesotibia length: 3.36; length of mesotarsal segments I: 0.15, II: 0.07, III: 0.13; metafemur length: 4.13, width: 0.20; metatibia length: 4.86; length of mesotarsal segments I: 0.13, II: 0.08; III: 0.12. Abdomen, length: 5.06; maximum width: 1.46. COLORATION: Overall color dark brown, dull, antennae and tibiae yellowish brown (figs. 1 A, C). Head: Dark; clypeus apically light brown; anteocular region light brown, postocular region dark with a tenuous longitudinal yellowish line; labium yellowishbrown, somewhat darker at base of third (second visible) segment; antennae yellowish, scapus and pedicellus apically dark, basiflagellomere dark, distiflagellomere basally and apically dark. Thorax: Pronotum with blurred longitudinal narrow pale line; meso- and metanota with a yellowish longitudinal line, and paired lateral yellowish lines. Legs: Procoxa dorsally somewhat yellowish; profemur dark brown, dorsally yellowish brown with an irregular pattern of dark markings, three irregular pale spots laterally between the dark and yellowish areas (fig. 1 C); spiniferous processes of posteroventral series of profemur, including large basal one, yellowish with dark apices; meso- and metafemora dark brown with irregular and scattered pale markings; protibia yellowish, with base, apex, and ventral surface dark brown; meso- and metatibiae yellowish, darkened at base and apex, with sub-basal dark ring; protarsus light brown; meso- and metatarsi dark brown. Abdomen: Tergite I dark brown with pale longitudinal line, tergites II–V light brown, VI and VII darker; tubercles on each dorsal laterotergite segment pale; sternites dark brown. SURFACE AND VESTITURE: Body covered with numerous setiferous tubercles and scattered small whitish setae; setae on tubercles hooklike, strongly curved (fig. 5 E). STRUCTURE: Head: Clypeus acute, with whitish setae on surface (fig. 2 B); scapus basally curved, remaining segments straight (fig. 1 A), pedicellus with an apical trichobothrium surrounded by small dense setae; anteocular region approximately twice as long as postocular, the latter gently constricted towards neck (fig. 1 A); interocular sulcus running before eyes, curved posteriorly, strongly impressed (fig. 2 A); eyes rounded, small, not reaching upper or bottom edge of head in lateral view (fig. 2 B); gula with numerous very short dense golden setae, area next to gula glabrous; labial segment II wide, slightly curved; III as wide as II at base, tapering apically; IV nearly straight, slightly curved at apex, narrow, reaching stridulatory sulcus (fig. 2 B). Thorax: Pronotum cylindrical, declivent, ovoid in dorsal view, about as long as meso- and metanota combined, anterolateral angles blunt, slightly excavated medially before posterior margin; meso- and metanota bell-shaped, with slightly impressed median longitudinal carina, and paired lateral rows of setiferous tubercles; mesonotum constricted anteriorly (fig. 2 A, arrow); stridulatory sulcus triangular, slightly surpassing procoxal cavities, lateral margins strongly projected as flap-like processes; prosternum with posterior margin emarginated; meso- and metasterna with strongly elevated median longitudinal carina. Legs: Procoxa cylindrical, about half length of profemur; meso- and metacoxae globose, laterally with numerous whitish setae; trochanters on all legs elongate ovoid; profemur wider than procoxa, narrow basally and apically, barely longer than protibia and protarsus combined; posteroventral series not interrupted at base, composed of apically blunt, small and medium-sized spiniform processes intermixed with setae, basal process larger than any of series (fig. 2 C, arrow), setae longer than processes (fig. 2 C); anteroventral series not interrupted at base (fig. 2 D, arrow), composed of spiniform setae arising from short bases (fig. 2 D), apex of series with medium-sized spiniform tubercle; accessory series composed of very short spiniform tubercles; meso- and metafemora long, slender, about half width of procoxa; mesofemur straight; metafemur curved basally in dorsal view (fig. 1 A); protibia subequal in length to protarsus, ventroapically with dense patch of long setae, and with one row of triangular tubercles on ventral surface (fig. 5 A); meso- and metatibiae straight; protarsus long, heavily sclerotized, ventrally with two rows of small, relatively long, heavily sclerotized adpressed spiniform processes (fig. 5 B); meso- and metatarsi three-segmented; fore claws unequal in size, lateral shorter than the medial one, former with inconspicuous, latter with conspicuous ventral, medially incised lamella (fig. 5 C); mid and hind claws larger than fore claws, medial and lateral claws symmetrical, with a distinct ventral lamella, incised more basally than fore claws (fig. 5 D). Abdomen: Broadly joined with metanotum, and with scattered whitish setae on entire ventral surface; tergite I triangular, with a median longitudinal carina; tergites II–VI each with irregular fine transverse lines, and with a medial tubercle on posterior margin, somewhat elevated in tergites V–VI; tergite VII elevated laterally and somewhat excavated medially in proximal half, covering pygophore on its distal half (fig. 3 A), apically triangular, flat, blunt (fig. 3 C), with transverse lines and a few whitish setae; dorsal laterotergites slightly wider than ventral laterotergites, with relatively more whitish small setae than tergites, each segment with a small blunt tubercle directed posteriad; each sternite partially covering the respective ventral laterotergite; sternites II–VII with a medial longitudinal carina; sternite VIII completely visible with spiracles located on sclerites projecting posteriad, posterior margin broadly cleft medially (fig. 2 F). Genitalia: Pygophore relatively large, with scattered whitish setae; medial process on posterior margin of pygophore rectangular, slightly directed backwards (fig. 3 B), gently constricted before apex, with two blunt processes projecting laterad (fig. 3 E); parameres externally visible, long, with numerous setae, L-shaped in lateral view, hook-shaped apically, strongly produced (fig. 3 G); aedeagus symmetrical, cylindrical; articulatory apparatus strongly curved in lateral view; dorsal phallothecal sclerite heavily sclerotized on distal half, dorsoapically with a drop-like notch; phallotheca with ventral sclerotization noticeable in lateral view; basal plate struts apparently not joining phallotheca, hardly visible in lateral view; endosoma with small and medium sized dark sclerotized spiniform processes; apical endosomal process protruding from apex of phallotheca in uninflated condition, rounded apically in dorsal view, with several dorsally denticulate, sawlike processes in lateral view (fig. 3 H). Apterous female: Similar to male but slightly larger and wider. MEASUREMENTS (one paratype): Total length: 9.45. Head length: 1.43, width: 0.96, height: 0.73; interocular space 0.60; length of labial segments II: 0.50, III: 0.36, IV: 0.83; scapus: 2.60, pedicellus: 1.43, basiflagellomere: 0.16, distiflagellomere: 1.00. Thorax, pronotum length: 1.33, width: 1.03; mesonotum length: 0.83, width: 1.50; metanotum length: 0.46, width: 1.30. Legs, procoxa length: 1.73, width: 0.33; profemur length: 2.86, width: 0.56; protibia length: 1.27; protarsus length: 1.33; mesofemur length: 2.80, width: 0.20; mesotibia length: 3.40; lengths of mesotarsal segments I: 0.16, II: 0.12, III: 0.15; metafemur length: 3.93, width: 0.20; metatibia length: 4.73; lengths of metatarsal segments I: 0.20, II: 0.12; III: 0.16. Abdomen length: 5.40; maximum width: 1.90. COLORA- TION: Very similar to male’s (figs. 1 B, D), except as follows. Thorax: Legs: Procoxa dorsally yellowish; meso- and metafemora yellowish, mesofemur with two irregular subapical dark rings, metafemur with one subapical ring. Abdomen: Dorsally dark brown; each dorsal laterotergite segment with an anterolateral yellowish spot. STRUCTURE: Thorax: Anteroventral series of profemur with spiniform tubercle at apex of series larger than in male. Abdomen: Dorsal laterotergites with tubercles strongly projecting posteriorly, in particular segment VII; sternum VII preapically concave (figs. 1 D, 4 A). Genitalia: Tergite VIII transverse, not clearly separated from tergite IX, spiracles located on a lateral rounded sclerite, posterior margin with elevated ridge, medial longitudinal carina, and paired ovoid protuberances; tergite IX elongate, subrectangular, with tenuous transverse ridges, medially prominent transverse carina elevated longitudinally, carina reaching posterior margin, with paired lateral prominent elongate protuberances, posterior margin broadly emarginate; first gonocoxa broadly rounded in lateral view, with minute transverse ridges; first gonapophysis usually not protruding (figs. 4 A, B); opening of the anus with numerous setae. Egg: Subcylindrical, somewhat ovoid at base, shiny black; chorion without noticeable microsculpturation; operculum reticulated, with its center elevated; corona with 12 long slender prolongations (fig. 4 D); adherent substance present at base, light brown, sometimes almost imperceptible. Late instar: COLORATION: Overall color light brown. Head: Area between eyes somewhat paler than the rest; setiferous tubercles with pale bases; eyes red; antennae brown, scapus yellowish at the base, distiflagellomere mostly yellowish, slightly darkened at base. Thorax: Pronotum somewhat dark anteriorly, with a central pale area; sterna dark brown. Legs: Profemur with two lateral and three medial yellowish spots; processes of posteroventral series yellowish, with dark apices; protibia with inconspicuous median pale ring; protarsus brownish, yellowish basally; middle and hind legs yellowish, with an irregular dark and pale pattern. Abdomen: Dorsally yellowish, ventrally dark brown. STRUCTURE: Head: Nearly oval; postocular region with numerous large setiferous tubercles, smaller tubercles on vertex; clypeus with small apical tubercle; eyes circular in lateral view, neither reaching superior nor inferior margins of head; postocular sulcus deeply impressed; labium enlarged; scapus basally curved, longer than remaining segments, basiflagellomere the shortest, distiflagellomere slightly longer than pedicellus, somewhat expanded apically. Thorax: Pronotum wider on anterior margin than posterior one, with numerous setiferous tubercles, anterolateral angles blunt, convex in lateral view, more convex posteriorly; mesonotum constricted anteriorly but wide, with lateral carina bearing setiferous tubercles; coxal cavities and part of coxae visible from above; meso- and metapleura with setiferous tubercles; prosternum flat with a few setiferous tubercles. Legs: Procoxa cylindrical, protrochanter without spines, profemur somewhat cylindrical, narrow basally and apically; anteroventral series of profemur not interrupted at base, composed of small spiniform setae inserted on wart-like bases, apex of series with small tubercle; posteroventral series composed of five medium-sized processes, several small ones, and a basal process twice as large as other tubercles of series, all intermixed with long setae; protibia expanded apically, with hook-shaped processes on ventral surface and a tuft of setae ventroapically; protarsus not segmented; mid and hind legs with curved, hook-like setae on femora and tibiae; meso- and metacoxae globose; meso- and metatrochanters subequal in size to respective coxa; meso- and metafemora cylindrical, straight, slightly expanded apically, metafemur slightly curved in dorsal view; meso- and metatibiae straight, slender than respective femur; meso- and metatarsi two-segmented, setose ventrally, segment I shorter than II. Abdomen: Broadly jointed with metanotum, narrowing posteriorly, with lateral margins subparallel; tergites flat; each dorsal laterotergite posteriorly with a small protuberance preceded of small, scattered setiferous tubercles; sternites convex, with numerous curved setae. Type material: Male holotype: COLOMBIA. Cundinamarca. Bogotá D.C., Quebrada La Vieja (04º 38 ’N 74 º02’W), 2850 m, 29 jul 2001, D. Forero, leg. / Liaghinella andina Forero / HOLOTYPE (red label) [UNCB]. Paratypes: [same data as holotype], 2 jun 2001 / Liaghinella andina Forero / PARATYPE (green label), 1;f [UNCB]; [same data as holotype], 5 may 2001 / Liaghinella andina Forero / PARATYPE (green label), 1;f [UNCB]; [same data as holotype], 26 ago 2001 / Liaghinella andina Forero / PARATYPE (green label), 1;f [MUJ]; [same data as holotype], 27 oct 2001 / Liaghinella andina Forero / PARATYPE (green label), 2;f;f [AMNH]. Other material examined: One nymph: COLOMBIA. Boyacá. Villa de Leyva (05º 38 ’N 73 º 31 ’W), ~ 2300m, “bosque Murciélagos”. 5 nov 1998. D.Forero, leg. (Colectado en trampa Winkler) / Liaghinella andina Forero [IAVH, in alcohol]. Etymology. The name refers to the localities in which the specimens were collected, at Bogotá and Villa de Leyva, both situated high on the eastern Colombian Andes.Published as part of Forero, Dimitri, 2007, Description of a new species of Liaghinella (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Reduviidae: Emesinae) from the Colombian Andes, with notes on its feeding habits and conservation status, pp. 55-68 in Zootaxa 1502 on pages 56-61, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17711
Liaghinella tuberculata Castro-Huertas & Forero 2017, sp. nov.
No full textLiaghinella tuberculata sp. nov. Forero & Castro-Huertas (Figs. 3‒6, 7) Holotype: Male: COLOMBIA: Cundinamarca, Reserva Chicaque, refugio, 4°36,892´N 74°18,677´W, 2,221 m, 8‒12 abr 2013, D. Forero leg. / cerca al refugio bajo Ficus, en hojarasca, noche [near to refuge, under Ficus, in forest litter, at night] / Liaghinella tuberculata sp. nov. Forero & Castro-Huertas 2017 / MPUJ _ ENT 0 0 10584 (MPUJ). Paratypes: 3 Females. Same locality data / MPUJ_ENT 0 0 10771 / MPUJ_ENT 0 0 29637 / MPUJ_ENT 0 0 46844 (MPUJ); 2 Males. Same locality data / MPUJ_ENT 0 0 29636 / MPUJ_ENT 0 0 29638 (MPUJ); 1 Male. Same locality data / MPUJ_ENT 0 0 29639 (AMNH); 1 Male. Same locality data / MPUJ_ENT 0 0 29635 (NMNH). Other specimens examined: Last instar nymph: Same locality data. Liaghinella andina Forero, 2007: Male: COLOMBIA: Cundinamarca, Reserva Chicaque, robledal, 0 4.6172500 °N 74.3139500 °W, 2,250m, 23 ene 2015, E. Tulande / colecta manual, bajo hojarasca de Quercus sp. y Clusia sp., colecta nocturna [manual collecting, under forest litter of Quercus spp. and Clusia sp., night collect], 23h. / MPUJ _ ENT 0 0 47555 (MPUJ). Diagnosis. Recognized by a pair of medial tubercles on the posterior margin of the pronotum (Figs. 3 C‒E; 4C‒E), meso- and metanotum with three longitudinal carinae and posterior margin of the meso- and metanotum with paired short tubercles on lateral carinae (Figs. 3 A, 5B), clypeus with a short spine (Fig. 3 F, 5F), posterolateral angles of dorsal laterotergites produced as a short tubercle (Figs. 3 B, 5B). Description. Apterous male (total length, holotype 11.6 mm; head length, 1.5 mm; prothorax length, 1.9 mm; meso- and metathorax length, 2.2 mm; abdomen length, 5.9 mm). Color. Head: Ventrally dark brown, dorsally with several pale brown spots (Fig. 3 F). Clypeus spine dark brown, first and second segments of the labium basally dark brown and distally whitish, third segment of the labium dark brown. Scapus pale brown and distally dark brown, flagellomeres dark brown. Thorax: Ventrally dark brown, dorsally pale brown, laterally with several whitish spots (Figs. 3 C‒D); procoxal cavity pale brown, meso- and metacoxal cavities dark brown with a whitish fine line on the posterior margin; proleg dark brown with several whitish portions, procoxae ventrally dark brown and dorsally pale brown, protrochanter dark brown, profemur ventrally dark brown and dorsally pale brown with some spots whitish laterally; protibia dark brown, medial and basally whitish; protarsus dark brown basally yellow; meso- and meta coxae and trochanter dark brown, meso- and metafemur dark brown with a several dispersal spots whitish, meso- and meta tibiae pale brown with several dark brown dispersal spots, meso-and metatarsi dark brown. Abdomen: Pale brown with several whitish spots; pygophore pale brown (Fig. 3 A). Vestiture: Body covered with numerous setiferous tubercles. Head: Dorsally with setiferous tubercles, ventrally with dense setae; antennal scapus with numerous, short setae; labium glabrous. Structure. Head: Elongated, interocular sulcus deep, clypeus with a short spine; eyes globose in dorsal view, elongate ovoid in lateral view (Fig. 3 F); antenna slender, scapus longer than others segments; first flagellomere shortest segment; first visible labial segment short, second visible labial segment swollen, about as long as second segment, third visible segment slender, about twice the length of the fourth segment. Thorax: Pronotum longer than wide, about as long as meso- and metanotum together; lateral angles of the anterior margin with rounded tubercles (Figs. 3 C‒E), posterior margin with a pair of conspicuous medial tubercles directed dorsad; meso- and metanotum with three longitudinal carinae, posterior margin of meso- and metanotum with paired short tubercles each on lateral carinae; stridulitrum narrow. Legs: Proleg distinctly wider and shorter than meso- and metaleg; procoxa elongate, profemur about as long as three times the protibiae and wider; profemur with posteroventral series composed by spiniform process and setae, and located near to the base of article (Fig. 3 D), profemur with anteroventral series compose by a row of setae; protibia ventrally with a row of triangular denticles; protibial comb present; protarsus one segmented about as long as protibia and with two claws; meso- and metalegs larger and slender. Abdomen: elongate, abdominal tergites I‒VI with a short median tubercle on the posterior margin; dorsal laterotergites with projections on lateroposterior margin produced dorsad (Fig. 3 B), distal margin of tergite VII acute. Male genitalia: Pygophore elongated and ventrally produced (Figs. 4 C‒E); posterior margin of the pygophore with a medial process (mpp), dorsal margin concave (Fig. 4 E), process nearly vertical with a broad basal caudad protuberance (Fig. 4 C); genital opening (go) and anterior opening (ao) separated by a wide transverse bridge (br) (Fig. 4 D); area surrounding paramere socket (ps) with long, delicate setae (Fig. 4 E). Paramere elongated and curved in their apical portion; body of the paramere with uniform diameter; apical curved portion cylindrical and apex acute, lateroventrally with long setae on distal region (Fig. 4 G). Arms of articulatory apparatus (apt) strongly curved in lateral view (Fig. 4 G); dorsal phallothecal sclerite elongated; dorsoapically with a drop-like notch. Aedeagus symmetrical, cylindrical; endosoma with numerous tubercle-shaped sclerites (tss) (Figs. 4 F‒G). Apterous female (Figs. 5 A‒F) (total length, 12.3 mm; head length, 2.8 mm; prothorax length, 3.5 mm; meso- and metathorax length, 2.2 mm; abdomen length, 6.5 mm). Similar to male, slightly larger and wider. Color. Very similar to male’s except as follows. Thorax: Dark brown, dorsally with several whitish spots (Fig. 5 E). Abdomen: Dark brown with several spots whitish, abdominal tergite IX pale brown. Structure. Abdomen: laterotergites with posterolateral dorsad projections larger than on the male (Figs. 5 A‒B). Female genitalia: Tergite 8 (T8) oval, with the caudal margin (mpm8) rounded, medially with a longitudinal carina; tergite 9 (T9) nearly rectangular with the distal margin (mpm9) emarginated (Fig. 6 C); gonocoxa 8 (gcx8) nearly quadrangular, short and wide, with the lateral anterior area produced into a prolongation (lap) sinuous apically (Fig. 6 D); gonapophysis 8 (gap8) nearly triangular with some sparse setae medially; gonocoxa 9 (gcx9) elongated; gonapophysis 9 (gap9) small and elongated; gonoplac (gpl) rounded, fused medially, with a subapical ventral projection and longer setae on the apical margin (Fig. 6 A); bursa copulatrix (bc) elongate, ventral medial surface of bursa copulatrix transversely striated; with ring gland (gr) present, situated transverse across to the bursa (Fig. 6 A). Etymology. The specific name tuberculata is taken from the Latin “tuberculum” (protuberance, tubercle) because of the conspicuous paired tubercles of the posterior margin of the pronotum of this species. Biology. The specimens were founded under forest litter and in very humid conditions. The specimens were collected when active, exclusively at night, similar to what was found for L. andina (Forero 2007). Distribution. Specimens of L. tuberculata were recently collected in one of the few relicts of high Andean forest near to urban areas (Fig. 7). “Parque Natural Chicaque” is a private reserve with 300 hectares of the wet montane forest with an altitudinal gradient between 2,000 to 2,700 meters (Jardin Botánico de Bogotá 1998). Discussion. This new species is very similar to L. heldamariae sp. nov., but can be separated from the characters stated in the key above. It is also related to L. andina and L. farri, but several differences, particularly in the structure of head, structure of the thorax, and male and female genitalia, as stated above, allow distinguishing this species. The male and female genitalia in Liaghinella have valuable taxonomic information to separate species. The medial process of the pygophore is spiniform in L. farri (Wygodzinsky 1966), rectangular with a straight apex in L. andina (Forero 2007) and rectangular with the apex concave in L. tuberculata sp. nov. The apex of the paramere is strongly curved in L. andina and L. farri. The anterior and posterior opening of the pygophore are narrow in L. andina and wider in L. tuberculata. The particular sclerotizations of the endosoma are different between the known males: in L. farri are small and more homogeneous, whereas in L. andina and L. tuberculata sp. nov. are more strongly sclerotized and less homogenous. In the female genitalia, the structure of the tergites 8 and 9 are characteristic at least in L. andina, L. heldamariae sp. nov., and L. tuberculata sp. nov. All these attributes found in the Colombian species point to a marked difference between L. farri and the Colombian species. The holotype of L. farri is not well preserved (D.Forero, pers. obs), thus a reexamination of it will not be very helpful, in particular with regard to the male genitalia. Only further collecting for additional specimens and sexes, coupled with a phylogenetic analysis of all related taxa will clarify the relationships among species and will help to decide if the species from Colombia are really congeneric with the species from Jamaica. Small range distributions of Liaghinella in the high Andes. Biogeographic hypotheses of Heteroptera have focused on the groups with medical and economic importance. Within the Cimicomorpha, Triatominae among Reduviidae have been the focus of studies about distributional patterns (Ferrari et al. 2015). However, the distribution of the Heteroptera fauna in the Neotropics is still poorly known, particularly on the high Andes in Colombia. This lack of information hinders the ability to identify and prioritize critical areas for conservation efforts and to understand the evolution of these areas in the Andes. Species of Liaghinella found Colombia have small range distributions on the eastern Colombian Andes. Harvey (2002) proposed that less than 10.000 km 2 can qualify as a short-range endemic group, as is apparently the case with the Andean Liaghinella species. Liaghinella andina is found in two localities less than 50 kilometers apart, L. heldamariae is found again in two localities set apart by about 130 kilometers, and L. tuberculata is found only in its type locality (Fig. 7). At least two species of Liaghinella are always in the same or very close localities for most of its range. This might be considered as sympatric, but in fact L. tuberculata and L. andina are not found at the same altitude in Chicaque, with L. andina always higher than L. tuberculata. It is not clear if this difference is due to an association to particular habitats, but at least with the data at hand it might not be the case. Liaghinella andina was described from a high Andean forest, and the habitat of the specimen from Chicaque is an Oak forest (Quercus humboldtii). Similarly, L. heldamariae is found in paramo in Monserrate at about 3,000 meters, whereas L. andina is found nearby but at a lower altitude in a high Andean forest. Therefore, we argue that although all these species are found in relatively nearby localities, they are separated by the altitude in which they are found. In Colombia, only a broad-shouldered water strider heteropteran (Veliidae: Rhagovelia, Padilla & Moreira 2013) has been documented with respect to altitudinal ranges. Studies with carabid beetles indicate that the high rates of microendemism in the high Andes of Ecuador are associated with climate, humid areas, volcanism, and others variables, resulting in conditions for the diversification of a highly specialized montane fauna (Moret 2005, 2009). This could be also the case for some groups in Heteroptera, highlighting the importance of Andean forests in diversification processes of Colombian Heteroptera. If further collecting show that the high Andean species of Liaghinella have in fact small distribution ranges, this will affect negatively the extinction probabilities of their populations because they will be more susceptible to climate change (Prather et al. 2013) and anthropogenic transformations of the landscape affecting the Andes.Published as part of Castro-Huertas, Valentina & Forero, Dimitri, 2017, Small range distributions in the high Andes: two new species of Liaghinella (Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Reduviidae: Emesinae) from Colombia, pp. 399-412 in Zootaxa 4277 (3) on pages 404-411, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4277.3.5, http://zenodo.org/record/81072
Lirismo material. Expresividad técnica en la arquitectura de Laureano Forero
No full textilustraciones, diagramas, planos, tablasMirando con detenimiento las obras de Laureano Forero, en especial aquellas realizadas entre las décadas de 1.970 y 1.980, en compañía de Luz Helena Ceballos Abad y firmadas por L y L.H. Forero Arquitectura, que serían precursoras de su pensamiento en torno al proyecto arquitectónico; surge como hilo conductor entre ellas una manifiesta voluntad técnica que parece regir todas sus búsquedas, las cuales podemos asociar a distintos aspectos como el lugar, las actividades humanas, y a la expresión formal y espacial de su arquitectura. Este grupo de obras a su vez evidenciarían de una manera nítida, los rasgos particulares de esa búsqueda expresiva a partir de la técnica. Nos interesa develar cómo en esa obra primera, Laureano Forero pone en juego un aprendizaje técnico, que permearía toda su obra, siendo el origen de una experimentación que a nivel plástico y espacial se convertirán en valores primordiales de su arquitectura, y que se va a mantener a lo largo de su extenso ejercicio profesional caracterizado por la indagación con diversos materiales, siendo el concreto el que otorga singularidad a los proyectos de la década entre 1970 y 1980. Dicho aprendizaje el cual presumimos sería adquirido desde distintos campos formativos, comprende aspectos asociados a la tradición y el lugar, así como a los conocimientos académicos producto de su instrucción, práctica profesional y a los viajes de estudio que emprendió el arquitecto. (Texto tomado de la fuente)MaestríaMagíster en ArquitecturaÁrea Curricular de Arquitectura y Urbanism
Grupo de 10 personas entre ellas: 1. Pedro Antonio L. 2. Rafael García, 3. Marina Forero, 4. Rodrígo
No full textGrupo de personas entre ellas: 1. Pedro Antonio L. 2. Rafael García, 3. Marina Forero, 4. Rodrígo, 5. Ana de Pérez, 6. Pacho García,7. Matilde García, 8. Luís García, 9. Sofía, 10. Carmen García, 11. Chela, 14. Jorge y Henrique Zurek
The assassins of D. Ramon Forero
No full textLa imagen presenta una noticia acerca de:" Todavía recuerdan los habitantes de Bogotá el horrible crimen que es la persona de D. Ramon Forero se perpetro el Viernes Santo de 1890, y que llego de indignación esta cristiana cuidad. Aquel tremendo drama ha permanecido hasta hoy envuelto en las sombras del misterio, a pesar de las activas pesquisas que la policía ha hecho, sin embargo , el Sábado pasado circulo la voz de que en la cuidad de L. Mesa se habían descubierto los autores de ese delito ". Publicado en el Diario El Correo Nacional No.1274, 8 de Abril-1895The image presents a news about:" Still remember the inhabitants of Bogota the horrible crime that is the person of D. Ramon Forero was perpetrated on Good Friday of 1890, and that came of indignation this Christian city. That tremendous drama has remained until today wrapped in the shadows of the mystery, despite the active investigations that the police have done, however, last Saturday the voice circled that in the city of L. Mesa had been discovered the perpetrators of that crime ". Published in El Correo Nacional No.1274, April 8-189
Fundación Gutiérrez Forero, Servicios juveniles y complementos pedagógicos para una educación de calidad.
No full textEn La Fundación Gutiérrez Forero se propone la elección de un Modelo Pedagógico que contribuye a formar al estudiante desde su Proyecto Educativo Institucional (PEI) siendo este lo que la sociedad requiere y espera. Fundamentando su Modelo Pedagógico en la relación entre el docente, el saber y los estudiantes, estando así determinado por variables sociales, políticas y culturales que se presentan en los diferentes contextos, por la concepción que se tiene de sociedad, sujeto, aprendizaje y conocimiento, de igual manera las relaciones entre las diferentes teorías educativas basadas en los campos del saber epistemológico, pedagógico y psicológico.
La importancia de fomentar y prestar servicios de apoyo pedagógico a instituciones educativas ya sean de carácter público o privado a través de talleres y salidas de complemento pedagógico por medio de servicios de acompañamiento; una constante innovación pedagógica para estar a la vanguardia, promover el desarrollo integral por medio de la construcción de un proyecto de vida, el desarrollo humano, formación en valores y principios.The Gutiérrez Forero Foundation proposes the choice of a Pedagogical Model that contributes to educating the student from their Institutional Educational Project (PEI), this being what society requires and expects. Basing its Pedagogical Model on the relationship between the teacher, knowledge and students, thus being determined by social, political and cultural variables that occur in different contexts, by the conception of society, subject, learning and knowledge, in the same way the relationships between the different educational theories based on the fields of epistemological, pedagogical and psychological knowledge.
The importance of promoting and providing pedagogical support services to educational institutions, whether public or private, through workshops and educational outings through accompanying services; a constant pedagogical innovation to be at the forefront, promote comprehensive development through the construction of a life project, human development, training in values and principles.1. Introducción. -- 2. Descripción de la idea de negocio. -- 3. Justificación. -- 4. Plan de trabajo. -- 5. Cronograma de trabajo. -- 6. Carácter situacional. -- 7. Planteamiento problema. -- 8. Objetivo plan de negocio. -- 9. Objetivos específicos. -- 10. Marco teórico. -- 11. Marco conceptual. -- 12. Conceptos claves. -- 13. Propuesta plan de negocio. -- 14. Nombre de la empresa. -- 15. Objetivo general fundación Gutiérrez Forero. -- 16. Misión. -- 17. Visión. -- 18. Valores que se viven en la Fundación Gutiérrez Forero. -- 19. Logo. -- 20. Eslogan. -- 21. Marco legal del sector. -- 22. Clasificación de actividad económica. -- 23. Factores normativos y legales. -- 24. Normatividad. -- 25. Documentación y formularios. -- 26. Estrategias de comunicación y promoción. -- 27. Estudio del mercado. -- 28. Instrumentos. -- 29. Ubicación, proyección y ejecución. -- 30. Ventajas competitivas y propuestas de valor. -- 31. Análisis de riesgo. -- 32. Portafolio de servicios. -- 33. Referencias. -- 34. Tabla 1. Plan de trabajo. -- 35. Tabla 2. Cronograma de trabajo. -- 36. Tabla 3. FODA. -- 37. Tabla 4. Normatividad. -- 38. Tabla 5 Gastos únicos. -- 39. Tabla 6 Gastos fijos. -- 40. Tabla 7 Valor del portafolio. -- 41. Tabla 8 Descripción. -- 42. Tabla 9 Gastos variables - Opción 1. -- 43. Tabla 10 Gastos variables - Opción 2. -- 44. Tabla 11 Horarios de trabajo. -- 45. Tabla 12. Portafolio de servicios. -- 46. Imagen 1. Organigrama. -- 47. Imagen 2. [email protected]@campusucc.edu.c
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Square Dancing with the Stars to Enhance Dynamic Hirschman Linkages?
No full textIn this Presidential Address, the author takes the reader on a reconnaissance of his life and time as a regional scientist. He points out scenery he found scintillating along the way, hoping that some may pick up the banner and chew on a few of the ideas for a while. He suggests a revisit to Albert O. Hirschman’s notion of key sectors and more empirical analysis related to Marcus Berliant’s and Masahisa Fujita’s notion of knowledge creation and transfer.Presidential Address, San Antonio, Texas, March 29, 2014 (53rd Meetings of the Southern Regional Science Association
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
No full textWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Bactrodes spinulosus Stal 1862
No full textBactrodes spinulosus Stål, 1862 This species is clearly identified by its “spinous” body, which shows numerous tubercles and strong setation (Coscarón & Melo 2003). This species have been recorded from Mexico, Guatemala, Panama, Puerto Rico, Venezuela, and Colombia (Champion 1898; Maldonado 1990; Coscarón & Melo 2003). The specimens listed below are new locality records from Colombia. In addition, several new localities from Mexico and a new locality from Guatemala are given. It is noteworthy to mention as well the most northern locality for this Neotropical species, “Big Bend National Park” in Texas (USA), adjacent to the state of Chihuahua in Mexico. Material examined: COLOMBIA, 1 Ψ, Antioquia, Tiribití (en maleza) [6 º 54 'N 76 º 11 'W], 1550 m, VI 1972, A. Madrigal [MEFLG]; 1 Ψ, Cundinamarca, Carmen de Carupa [05º 21 ’N 73 º 54 ’W], 2200 m, 4 XI 1995, Charry [UNAB]; 1 Ψ, Cundinamarca, Reserva Natural Chicaque, 04º 36 ’N 74 º17.3’W, ± 2200 m, 2 II 2002, D. Forero [MUJ]; 1 Ψ, Cundinamarca, camino a la laguna de Pedro Palo, ± 1800 m, 8 V 2002, D. Forero [UNCB]; 1 nymph, Boyacá, Villa de Leyva, camino a Chíquiza, 05º 38 'N 73 º 31 'W, 2250 m, 30 VIII 1998, D. Forero [IAVH]. GUATEMALA, 1 ɗ, Zacapa, Santa Clara, in interior valley of Sierra de Las Minas (N. of Cabañas) / jul: 31: 1948, elev. 5500 ft. / CNHM Guatemala Zool. Exped. (1948) R.D. Mitchell, leg. Lot. No. / in corn field [FMNH]. MEXICO, 1 ɗ, 1 Ψ, D[uran]go, 24 mi. W. La Ciudad, Dgo. 7000 ’, 20 VI 1964, L.A. Keton [CNC]; 2 ΨΨ, 2 ɗɗ, D[uran]go, 10 mi. W. El Salto, 9000 ’, 7 VII 1964, L.A. Kelton [CNC]; 1 Ψ, N[uevo] L[eón],Chipinque Mesa, 5400 ’ nr. Monterrey, 8 VII 1963, H.&A. Howden [CNC]; 1 Ψ, N[uevo] L[eón], 5mi. S. Monterrey, 7 VII 1963, H.&A. Howden [CNC]. USA, 1 ɗ, Texas. Big Bend N.P. Pulliam Canyon, 456500 ’ V 121959, W.P.M. Manson [CNC].Published as part of Forero, Dimitri, 2006, New records of Reduviidae (Hemiptera: Heteroptera) from Colombia and other Neotropical countries, pp. 1-47 in Zootaxa 1107 on page 3, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17145
- …
