12,683 research outputs found
Marriage record of Robles, Jefferson L. and Stephens, Cora M.
No full textMarriage license for Jefferson L. Robles and Cora M. Stephens. L.G. Lesley was the Notary Public
Marriage record of Whitehurst, Robert E. and Robles, Francis L.
No full textMarriage license for Robert E. Whitehurst and Francis L. Robles. F.W. Penney was the officiant
Debate on Bruce Bimber´s Book Information and American Democracy. Cambridge University Press, 2003
No full textPresentation
José Manuel Robles
Abstract of Information and American Democracy. Cambridge University Press, 2003
Bruce Bimber
From Regimes to Ecologies: Globalizing Bruce Bimber’s Model of Information and Politics
Steven Livingston
Internet, new forms of power and democracy
José Luís Garcia
Internet: A Technological Tool and Changes in Political Power
Liu Gang
Information and American Democracy in the era of web 2.0
Lorenzo Mosca
What Comes Next?: Bimber’s Information Revolutions and Institutional Disruptions
David Karpf
Online Political Information and Online Political Participation
José Manuel Robles
Digital Media and Political Change: A Response to Garcia, Karpf, Livingston, Liu, Mosca, and Robles
Bruce BimberPresentation
José Manuel Robles
Abstract of Information and American Democracy. Cambridge University Press, 2003
Bruce Bimber
From Regimes to Ecologies: Globalizing Bruce Bimber’s Model of Information and Politics
Steven Livingston
Internet, new forms of power and democracy
José Luís Garcia
Internet: A Technological Tool and Changes in Political Power
Liu Gang
Information and American Democracy in the era of web 2.0
Lorenzo Mosca
What Comes Next?: Bimber’s Information Revolutions and Institutional Disruptions
David Karpf
Online Political Information and Online Political Participation
José Manuel Robles
Digital Media and Political Change: A Response to Garcia, Karpf, Livingston, Liu, Mosca, and Robles
Bruce Bimbe
Ignatii Lasarte et Molina ... Additamenta in suo Tractatu de decima venditionis & permutationis, quae Alcauala nuncupatur ...
No full textSign.: [ ]\p2\s, A-L\p8\s, M\p6\sPort. con esc. xil. rea
Lepidophthalmus natesi Felder & Robles, 2015, sp. nov.
No full textLepidophthalmus natesi sp. nov. Figures 1 a – g; 2 a–k; 3 a – j “ Lepidophthalmus nov. sp.”—Felder et al. 2003: table 1; fig. 3 A, B; fig. 7. Type material. Pacific coast of Colombia. Holotype: male, cl 16.7 mm (USNM 1275006), = ULLZ 6057 tissue/ sequence voucher, Tumaco, Colombia (01° 46.64 'N, 78 ° 46.30 'W), bottom of partially drained commercial shrimp culture ponds, clayey to silty mud, 18 November 1995, S. F. Nates. Paratypes: 2 males, cl 11.0, 5.9 mm (USNM 1275007), 1 female (ovigerous), cl 15.5 mm (USNM 1275008), 39 males, cl 3.3 – 16.1 mm, 44 females (6 ovigerous), cl 3.9 – 16.6 mm (ULLZ 6051), Tumaco, Colombia, Pacific coast (01° 46.64 'N, 78 ° 46.30 'W), bottom of partially drained commercial shrimp culture ponds, clayey to silty mud, 18 November 1995, S. F. Nates. Pacific coast of Nicaragua. Paratypes: 1 male, cl 15.5 mm, 1 female, cl 12.7 mm, photographic vouchers (ULLZ 4509), 1 male, cl 12.4 mm (ULLZ 5174), 1 male, cl 13.2 mm, 1 pleon unsexed (ULLZ 11809), 4 males, cl 9.7 – 14.3 mm, 4 females, cl 10.1 – 13.6 mm (UNAM / CNCR 30003), Estero de Las Peñitas (12 ° 21.66 'N, 87 °01.25'W), intertidal sand flats and clayey mudflats beside and among mangroves, 27 September 2000, D. L. Felder and R. Robles; 1 male, cl 19.2 mm (ULLZ 5772), ephemeral opening of lower Estero Ciego (12 ° 39.47 'N, 87 ° 22.53 'W), muddy intertidal sand flats, 29 September 2000, D. L. Felder and R. Robles; 1 female, cl 12.0 mm (ULLZ 4632), 1 female, cl 13.2 mm (ULLZ 4633), 1 male, cl 15.6 mm (ULLZ 4638), 1 male, cl 12.4 mm, 1 female, cl 10.0 mm (ULLZ 10872) Estero de Las Peñitas (12 ° 21.66 'N, 87 °01.25'W), sand flats and clayey mudflats among mangroves, some found with alpheid symbiont, 14 August 2001, D. L. Felder and R. Robles; 1 male, cl 16.6 mm, photographic voucher (ULLZ 10838), 1 male, cl 10.6 mm, photographic voucher (ULLZ 13970), 1 female, cl 17.1 mm (ULLZ 10839), ephemeral opening of lower Estero Ciego (12 ° 39.47 'N, 87 ° 22.53 'W), muddy intertidal sand flats, 15 August 2001, D. L. Felder and R. Robles; 1 male, cl 14.9 mm, 1 female (ovigerous), cl 14.3 mm (USNM 1275009), 1 female, cl 13.8 mm, parental for larval hatch (ULLZ 11828), beach near Paso de Caballos (12 ° 31.51 'N, 87 ° 12.63 'W), muddy sand ephemeral back-beach tidal pond, 30 September 2000, D. L. Felder and R. Robles; 1 male, cl 14.2 mm (ULLZ 4634), 1 male, cl 16.4 mm (ULLZ 4635), 2 males, cl 13.8, 14.7 mm, 4 females, cl 13.2 – 14.2 mm (ULLZ 10884), beach near Paso de Caballos (12 ° 31.51 'N, 87 ° 12.63 'W), muddy sand ephemeral back-beach tidal pond, 16 August 2001, D. L. Felder and R. Robles; 2 females (1 ovigerous), cl 12.9, 13.3 mm (USNM 1275010), Estero Aserradores, Nicaragua, Pacific coast (12 ° 37.35 'N, 87 ° 20.54 'W) muddy sand with areas of exposed rock, 29 September 2000, D. L. Felder and R. Robles. Diagnosis. Rostrum acute, spiniform, inclined or sloped dorsally as weak arch, flanked by rounded shoulders centered lateral to eyestalks. Flattened mesial margins of subtrapezoidal eyestalks closely opposed proximally, weakly divergent near tips, tips acute to subacute. Antennule with dorsal ramus of flagellum shorter than third article of peduncle. Antenna with third article of peduncle very sparsely setose laterally. Inferior margin of male cheliped merus dominated by strong single multidentate keel, weak evidence of parallel carina, proximal hook spatulate, terminating in multiple spines or teeth. Superior margin of merus lacking proximal notch. Propodus of male major chela with distal inferior corner forming origin of round-edged carina extending short distance vertically onto external face as subdistal margin of article. Dactyl of male major chela prehensile margin with small obliquely transverse basal molar tooth set close to weakly bilobed heavy coniform median tooth in proximal half, separated by broad deep notch from elongate narrow distal tooth, distal tooth with dentate prehensile margin declining in elevation distally. First pleonal tergite with dorsal sclerite broadening to medially centered truncate lobe posteriorly, lacking isolated posterolateral sclerotized plate in membrane to each side. Most of second pleomere ventrally leathery, lacking sclerotized medial plate. Male first pleopod terminal article slightly compressed, strongly bifurcate, deep incision between blades, subdistal blade well-developed, overreached by arching distal blade. Appendix of male second pleopod well-developed, reaching beyond narrowed distal end of endopod in mature. Second through fifth pleopods lacking acute distolateral spine on anterior of basis. Telson posterior margin distinctly trilobate. Uropodal endopod narrow, elongate subtrapezoidal, broadest distal to midlength, length more than twice breadth. GenBank accession numbers for 16 S and 12 S mt sequences of type materials are reported by Robles & Felder (2015: table 2). Description. Frontal margin of carapace with acute, narrow rostral spine flanked laterally by rounded shoulders centered lateral to eyestalks (Fig. 1 a; Fig. 4 a, c, d); rostral spine variably inclined dorsally, usually somewhat arched above eyestalks in mature specimens, extending 2 / 3 to full length of eyestalks in dorsal view, proximal half or less of rostral spine undercut ventrally, proximal ventral surface fully covered by fine, dense elongate setae extending above and between eyestalks. Carapace postorbital region with several paired short tufts of setae, usually 2 – 3 aligned immediately to each side of midline; dorsal oval well-defined, smooth, pair of widely separated setal punctae bearing 1 – 2 setae each well anterior to midlength; marginal suture of oval diminished at postrostral midline, strong at posterior end with sclerotized suture to bulbous cardiac region on posterior midline. Eyestalks elongate subtrapezoidal in dorsal view, reaching at least 3 / 4 length of basal antennular article (Fig. 1 a); anterolateral margin forming rounded corner of varied acuity and prominence, distal margin obliquely sloped mesially toward protruding distal tip; dorsomesial margin forming slightly elevated ridge in distal 1 / 3, ridge extending from acute or subacute tip of eyestalk to elevated, rounded tubercle positioned distal to mesial margin of cornea; well-defined, distinctly faceted cornea centered on dorsal surface. Antennular peduncle longer and heavier than antennal peduncle (Fig. 1 a); basal article dorsally invaginated to form statocyst occluded by setae, overlain by eyestalk; second and third articles with dense ventromesial and ventrolateral rows of long, distoventrally directed setae. Antennular flagellum ventral ramus similar in length and setation to third article of peduncle, setae much longer, denser than on dorsal ramus; dorsal ramus shorter than third article of peduncle, becoming heavier distally where subterminal articles broader than those of adjacent ventral ramus, there fringed with slightly elongate, dense ventral setae. Antennal peduncle reaching at least to midlength of antennular peduncle third article; basal article dorsolateral carina arched to form lip above excretory pore, ventrally with setose rounded weak distal protuberance; second article with distal field of long setae on vertically oriented lateral boss; fourth article about equal to combined lengths of first two, slightly shorter than fifth, lateral setae sparse, limited to short oblique line of 3–5 in proximal third, small tuft in distal 1 / 4; fifth article narrower than others, setation limited to few long subterminal setae in single punctum. Antennal flagellum about 3.5 times length of antennular flagellum, longest of sparse setae slightly exceeding 2 flagellum articles in length. Mandibular palp (Fig. 1 b) large, setose, 3 -segmented, third article robust, arched, elongate subovoid; gnathal lobe of mandible subquadrate, rounded corner forming angular distolateral shoulder, incisor process with welldefined corneous teeth on cutting margin, concave internal face with strong lip giving rise to molar process bearing weakly bilobed corneous tooth proximal and internal to incisor teeth; thin, rounded paragnath set against proximal convex face of molar process. First maxilla (Fig. 1 c) endopodal palp narrow, terminal article deflected at poorly defined articulation; proximal endite with dense, close-set setation lining sinuous mesial margin, setae spiniform distally; distal endite elongate, terminally broadened with dense long setae, some rows strongly spiniform; exopodite low, rounded. Second maxilla (Fig. 1 d) margins setose, endopod constricted to narrow terminus, first and second endites each longitudinally subdivided, exopod forming large, broad scaphognathite. First maxilliped (Fig. 1 e) margins setose, endopod rudimentary, overlain by distal endite; blunt terminus of proximal endite setose; distal endite ovoid, narrowed distally, proximal 2 / 3 of external face with densely setose longitudinal elevation; exopod incompletely divided by oblique suture on external face, transverse suture obsolete on most of internal face, obvious proximolaterally near margin before intersection of lateral incision; margin lined by long setae, more arched distal than proximal to incision, rounded at distal extreme, mesial margin with comb of close-set very long setae, external face with dense field of feathery distomesially directed setae on and distal to oblique suture; epipod large, broad, anterior end strongly tapered. Second maxilliped (Fig. 1 f) margins of both rami heavily setose, endopodal merus and propodus arcuate, flexor margin of merus with parallel long internal and more feathery external combs of long setae, internal face produced distally to form rounded lobe onto which continues internal row of close-set, very long, marginal setae, lobe extending well over internal proximal margin of short carpus; merus length about 4 times width; propodus length exceeding 2 / 3 merus length, longest setae originating on extensor margin, patches on distal half of external face; dactylus digitiform, length more than 2 times breadth, rounded terminally, distal half bearing short stiff cornified setae; exopod broad, bladelike, narrowing distally, distinctly overreaching endopodal merus, arcuate, terminally rounded; bilobed epipod with short, broad basal lobe, elongate narrowly tapered distal lobe. Third maxilliped (Fig. 1 g) with very small, terminally subacute, rudimentary exopod; endopod large, setose; endopodal ischium subrectangular, maximum diagonal length at least twice width at midlength, internal face with rudimentary unarmed to finely tuberculate arched longitudinal carina on proximal 2 / 3; merus short, subrhomboidal, broader than long, mesial margin distinctly arcuate; carpus subrectangular, longer than broad, internal small fields of stiff setae becoming dense transverse field in distal third; propodus large, subovoid, longer than broad, internal dense field of stiff setae on proximal third, superior margin lined by long close-set setae, dense patch of more feathery setae at distal end, externally with low, setose, angular lobe on inferior margin immediately below articulation of dactylus, demarcated from margin by offset extending from marginal incision onto external face; dactylus narrow, arcuate proximally, long setae of extensor and distal margins including a few long stiff bristles at terminus. Branchial formula as reported for congeners (Felder & Staton 2000); endopods and epipods as previously described (Felder & Rodrigues 1993). Major cheliped located on either right or left side, shape and dentition sexually dimorphic. Major cheliped of male (Fig. 2 a–c; 4 c, d, e) massive, fingers heavily armed; ischium elongate, superior margin sinuous, inferior (flexor) marginal carina armed by very small denticles on proximal 2 / 3 to 3 / 4, becoming coarser distally on elevated carina, sometimes compounded or forming one or more larger teeth at distal end of elevated carina; merus superior margin weakly depressed proximally, lacking distinct notch in proximal ¼; inferior margin forming strong single keel, arcuate over distal 2 / 3, proximally merging into spatulate armed proximal hook at external base of keel; weak evidence (variable) of parallel secondary carina external to keel; broad distal margin of hook terminating in typically 3 (commonly 2–6) spines or teeth (most proximal of which may be lobiform or compound); external face of article distal to hook weakly tuberculate or eroded proximally (in mature); keel denticles (typically 4–8, fewer in immature) strong in distal ¾, largest on most strongly arched midsection of article (weak in immature); carpus broad, subquadrate, superior and inferior margins keeled, divergent distally, superior and inferior margins terminated distally in acutely angular comers, inferior corner origin of weak, rounded extending short distance vertically onto external face of article; propodus broad, heavy, fixed finger length exceeding 1 / 2 palm length (in mature); internal face of palm proximally smooth, weakly eroded (sometimes with low tubercles) in concave inferodistal region extending onto fixed finger, finely tuberculate in depression proximal to gape; broadly rounded carina extending proximally from internal prehensile margin of fixed finger below tuberculate depression behind gape and above weakly eroded inferodistal concavity of article; external face with very weak to obsolescent oblique carina or furrow defining proximal limit of slight depression extending proximally from gape, depression very weakly but densely tuberculate (or eroded); superior propodal margin distinctly keeled on proximal 3 / 4, inferior marginal keel distinct full length of palm, becoming broad and obscure on fixed finger where broken by large setose punctae; fixed finger originating below subtriangular, slightly upturned, heavy tooth at proximal end of gape, separated by broad U-shaped notch from strong, distally inclining, triangular tooth originating from external prehensile margin and centered at 1 / 3 to 2 / 5 length of fixed finger; fixed finger with well-defined separation of smooth internal from armed and elevated external prehensile margin, internal margin unarmed, but forming thick rounded carina extending slightly onto palm; dactylus with hooked tip, proximal end of superior marginal carina (in mature) forming erect coniform tubercle (sometimes compound) or short, strong, longitudinally oriented elevated crest, decreasing in elevation distally, carina distally broken by large setal punctae giving dentate appearance, internal dactylar face with long, strong rounded proximal carina bearing multiple smaller setal punctae, lower internal dactylus with broadly rounded carina forming unarmed internal prehensile margin of gape; dactylus external prehensile margin (in mature) typically with 3 major heavy prehensile teeth, proximal the smallest, obliquely transverse in major axis, terminally armed with rounded microtubercles, evident with dactylus fully extended, middle tooth heavy, coniform, weakly bilobed transversely, closely shouldered to proximal tooth, sparsely tuberculate on cusps, centered near 1 / 3 length of finger, middle tooth separated by subquadrate to U-shaped notch from narrower elongate, ridge-like distal tooth originating near midlength of dactyl, elevated proximal prominence thickest, distally sloping prehensile edge subdivided into series of strong denticles (sometimes compound) extending almost to terminal hook. Major cheliped of female (Fig. 2 d, Fig. 4 a) less massive, less armed and sculpted, carpus and propodus relatively lower and more elongate than in male, opposed tips of fingers forming very symmetrical pincer and gape; merus inferior margin with proximal tooth typically terminated in 2 (variably 1–3) teeth or spines and a small proximal lobe, teeth of keel usually restricted to distal half of margin; prehensile margins on fixed finger and most of dactylus evenly armed by serration of low rounded denticles; dactylus narrow, relatively less massive proximally than fixed finger, prehensile margin sinuous; fixed finger basally broader than in males, notch at base of fixed finger a narrow U-shaped or V-shaped incision proximal to serration of prehensile margin, lacking distinct development of prehensile tooth, concave between internal and external prehensile margins; superior and inferior margins of propodus convergent distally, laterally compressed to ventral keel; tip of dactylus usually overreaching tip of fixed finger when fingers crossed, flexed fingers filling gape fully including incisional notch at base of fixed finger. Minor cheliped of male (Fig. 2 e; Fig. 4 c, d) weakly armed; ischium flexor margin serrate by minute denticles becoming more widely separated distally; merus mostly unarmed, inferior margin with 1 small low tubercle proximally (in mature); carpus with acute distal comers, rounded carina extending vertically short distance from corner, forming subterminal blunt edge of lower external face; fixed finger slightly narrower than dactyl, broad prehensile surface unarmed but with dense field of setal punctae over full length, distal bearing short setae, sloping proximal 2 / 5 with punctae bearing elongate setae producing field filling about half of gape length, punctae and tufts extending somewhat onto internal face; dactylus prehensile surface with dense cover of setal punctae bearing short setae, weak evidence of subterminal tooth as broad swelling, each finger terminating in acute to subacute cornified tip. Minor cheliped of female (Fig. 2 f) with setation on proximal prehensile face of fixed finger shorter, less dense, less elongate than in male, external prehensile margins with fine, uniform, rounded microdentition; gape between fingers narrower than in male. Second pereopod (Fig. 2 g) chelate, flexor margins of merus and carpus lined with evenly spaced long setae, inferior margin of propodus with long setae proximally, grading distally to dense field of shorter, variably hooked bristles; middle 1 / 3 of fixed finger with patch of short stiff bristles immediately external to prehensile margin; superior margin of dactylus with transverse lines and fields of proximally long setae grading to short stiff hooked bristles distally. Third pereopod (Fig. 2 h) merus length about 3 times width; propodus with inferodistal margin variably trilobate, middle lobe smallest, sometimes no more than small cusp of weakly lobate margin between major distal and proximal lobes, setal tufts giving margins of lobes weakly scalloped appearance, lobes demarcated by furrows on internal face, lobe distal margins with dense fringe of tufted setae concealing shorter corneous bristles, distal lobe with at least one heavier, weakly hooked, distally directed corneous tooth arising from margin, longest setae on and above proximo-inferior margin of proximal lobe, patterned tufts of lighter setae on external face of article; dactylus tear-shaped, superior margin concealed by short transverse rows of long dense setae on external face, becoming thick patch of short bristles on distal superior margin, margin internally evident as distinctly sinuous, article terminating in short, narrow, ventrolaterally directed corneous tooth, external face with fields of setae and shorter stiff bristles lining inferior margin, grading to fields and poorly defined rows of much finer setae above; mature female gonopore less than 1 / 3 coxa length (Fig. 2 i). Fourth pereopod (Fig. 2 j) weakly subchelate, inferodistal process of propodus (= fixed finger) forming subacute angular lobe, tip weakly cornified, extending distally about 1 / 3 length of dactylus, inferior margin of lobe with 1 or more (2 in holotype) very heavy, weakly hooked, subterminal corneous spines, margin proximally with additional lighter short bristles, obscured by dense brush of setae, setae originating from inferior margin and lower internal face strongly serrate; dactylus bearing dense cover of long setae, slightly elongate, tear-shape, superior margin arched, terminating in short ventrolaterally directed corneous tooth. Fifth pereopod (Fig. 2 k) minutely chelate, opposable faces of fingers spooned, terminally rounded with corneous, pectinate opposing margins; propodus with dense field of long, closeset setae on internal face, fixed finger slightly deflected; dactylus terminally narrower than fixed finger, hooked form of beak-like chela obscured by dense setation on distal 2 / 3 of propodus and superior face of dactylus. Pleomeres dorsally smooth. First pleonal tergite (Fig. 4 a, c, d, f) with slightly thickened, translucent, middorsal sclerite connected anterolaterally to narrowing, posteroventrally directed anterolateral sclerites, broadening posteriorly to truncate margin, lacking both isolated posterolateral sclerotized plate and small sclerites in membranous area to each side; second tergite posterolateral lobe below suture sclerotized like remainder of tergite, lobe crossed by well-defined anterior transverse line of very fine setae, 2 shorter less defined oblique lines in posterior half; ventrolateral lobe of tergite centered near or anterior to midlength of tergite. Third to fifth tergites each encompassing a finely setose, lateral, membranous suboval area below a weak posterolateral suture, those of third and fourth tergite more posteriorly positioned than on fifth, that of fifth tergite smallest, almost circular. Sixth tergite with 2 transverse posterolateral lines of short setae anterior to posterolateral groove from which transverse and posterior sutures originate, longest line adjacent, subparallel to transverse suture; transverse suture ill-defined across most of sixth tergite (Fig. 3 j), lacking connection to short longitudinal posterior suture; poste
Liolaemus pacha Heredia, Robles & Halloy, 2013, sp. nov.
No full text<i>Liolaemus pacha</i> sp. nov. <p>(Figs. 2 to 4).</p> <p> 1843. <i>Liolaemus darwinii</i>, Bell, T., Smith, Elder & Co., London, pp. 1–55.</p> <p> 1993. <i>Liolaemus quilmes,</i> Etheridge, R., Boll. Mus. Reg. di Sc. Naturali, Torino, 11: 137–199.</p> <p> 1993. <i>Liolaemus darwinii</i> (<i>partim</i>), Cei, J. M., Mus. Reg. di Sc. Naturali, Torino, Monografie XIV, 949 pp.</p> <p> 1996. <i>Liolaemus quilmes,</i> Halloy, M., Bull. of the Maryland Herp. Soc., 32: 43–57.</p> <p> 1998. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Halloy, M., Etheridge, R. and Burghardt, G., Herpetological Monographs, 12: 1–37.</p> <p> 2002. <i>Liolaemus quilmes,</i> Halloy, M. and Robles, C., Bull. of the Maryland Herp. Soc., 38: 118–129.</p> <p> 2003. <i>Liolaemus quilmes,</i> Halloy, M. and Robles, C., Cuad. Herp., 17: 67–73.</p> <p> 2004. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Halloy, M., Acta Zool. Lilloana, 48 (1–2): 103–121.</p> <p> 2004. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Martins E. P., Labra, A., Halloy, M. and Tolman Thompson J., Animal Behaviour, 68 (3): 453–463.</p> <p> 2005. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i> (<i>partim</i>), Abdala, C. S., Rev. Esp. de Herp., 19: 5–17.</p> <p> 2006. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i> (<i>partim</i>), Abdala, C. S. and Lobo, F., Cuad. Herp., 19 (2): 3–18.</p> <p> 2006. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i> (<i>partim</i>), Abdala, C. S. and Díaz Gómez, J., Zootaxa, 1317: 21–33.</p> <p> 2006. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i> (<i>partim</i>), Avila, L. J., Morando, M. and Sites, J. W. Jr., Biol. Journal of the Linnean Society, 89: 241– 275.</p> <p> 2006. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Halloy, M., Herp. Review, 37: 88–89.</p> <p> 2006. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Halloy, M. and Castillo, M., Herp. Nat. History, 9 (2): 127–133.</p> <p> 2006. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Halloy, M., Robles, C. and Cuezzo, F., Rev. Esp. Herp., 20: 47–56.</p> <p> 2007. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i> (<i>partim</i>), Abdala, C. S., Zootaxa, 1538: 1–84.</p> <p> 2007. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Halloy, M., Guerra, C. and Robles, C., Bull. of the Maryland Herp. Soc., 43: 110–118.</p> <p> 2008. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Robles, C. and Halloy, M., Cuad. de Herpetología, 22: 73–79.</p> <p> 2009. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Robles, C. and Halloy, M., South Am. Journal of Herp., 4: 253–258.</p> <p> 2009 a. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Salica, M. J. and Halloy, M., Acta Zool. Lilloana, 53: 89–96.</p> <p> 2009 b. <i>Liolaemus quilmes,</i> Salica, M. J. and Halloy, M., Rev. Esp. Herp., 23: 141–149.</p> <p> 2010. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Halloy, M., Robles, C. and Salica, M. J. Anales de la Academia Nac. Ciencias, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 44: 3–16.</p> <p> 2010. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Robles, C. and Halloy, M., Herpetological Journal, 20: 243–248.</p> <p> 2011. <i>Liolaemus quilmes,</i> Salica, M. J. and Halloy, M., Herp. Review, 42 (4): 606.</p> <p> 2012. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Halloy, M., Herpetological Journal, 22 (4): 267–270.</p> <p> 2012. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Robles, C. and Halloy, M., Salamandra, 48 (2): 115–121.</p> <p> 2013. <i>Liolaemus quilmes</i>, Halloy, M., Robles, C., Salica, M. J., Semhan, R., Juárez Heredia, V. and Vicente, N., Cuadernos de Herpetología, 27 (1): 15–26.</p> <p> <b>Holotype.</b> Fundación Miguel Lillo (FML) 02448/1. Km 98, Ruta Provincial 307 (Los Cardones), Tafí del Valle Department, Tucumán Province, 26°40’1.5” S 65°49’5.1” W, datum: WGS84, 2725 m, collector, O. Pagaburo, 21/ 04/1999.</p> <p> <b>Paratypes.</b> FML 2448/3–4/6–9 Km 98, Ruta Provincial 307, Amaicha del Valle, Tafí del Valle Department, Tucumán Province. O. Pagaburo, Col. 21/04/1999.</p> <p> <b>Etymology.</b> Pacha comes from the Aimara and Quechua indigenous languages from northwestern Argentina. It means “earth” and by extension “world” or “cosmos”. In this part of the country, social gatherings called Pachamama are celebrated every year in the autumn to thank and bless the earth and its products.</p> <p> <b>Diagnosis.</b> <i>Liolaemus pacha</i> <b>sp. nov.</b>, belongs to the <i>L. boulengeri</i> group because it has a patch of enlarged scales on the posterior region of the thigh (Etheridge 1995; Abdala <i>et al.</i> 2006). Within this group, it belongs to the <i>L. laurenti</i> group (Abdala 2007) because its posterior teeth have straight edged crowns and sexual dichromatism is evident. Within the <i>L. laurenti</i> group, <i>Liolaemus pacha</i> sp nov. is a member of the <i>L. darwinii</i> group (Abdala 2007) or the <i>darwinii</i> complex (Etheridge 1993) because it has a black line which crosses the eye vertically (except <i>L. chacoensis</i>) and pre-scapular spots in both males and females (Abdala 2007). Within the <i>L. darwinii</i> group (Abdala 2007), <i>L. pacha</i> differs from the members of the <i>L. ornatus</i> group (<i>L. albiceps, L. calchaqui, L. crepuscularis, L. irregularis, L. lavillai</i>, and <i>L. ornatus</i>) because it has an oviparous reproductive mode. It also differs from <i>L. albiceps</i> and <i>L. irregularis</i> because it is smaller (max SVL 67.9 mm vs 82.5 and 86.1 mm, respectively). <i>Liolaemus pacha</i> differs from <i>L. abaucan</i> and <i>L. uspallatensis</i> in having imbricate and keeled dorsal scales, whereas in those two species the dorsal scales are smooth or weakly keeled. <i>Liolaemus chacoensis</i> exhibits keeled temporal scales and mucronate dorsal scales, absent in <i>L. pacha</i>. The presence of a large prescapular spot distinguishes <i>L. pacha</i> from <i>L. abaucan</i>, <i>L. darwinii</i> and <i>L. koslowskyi</i>, which have large and evident postscapular spots. It differs from <i>L.</i></p> <p> <i>cinereus</i> in having a black stripe in the lateral field and in lacking melanism on the throat. <i>Liolaemus darwinii</i>, <i>L. grosseorum, L. laurenti, L. montanezi</i> and <i>L. olongasta</i> have a black antehumeral arch, absent in <i>L. pacha</i>.</p> <p> <i>Liolaemus pacha</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> differs from <i>L. quilmes</i> mainly because of its size (see below). It has a larger prescapular spot (Fig. 5, left) than <i>L. quilmes</i> (Fig. 6, left) and numerous light blue scales on the sides of the body and tail (Fig. 2). It has a Y-shaped mark on the snout (Fig. 7), reduced in <i>L. quilmes</i> (Table 1). In <i>L. pacha</i>, scales on dorsum are uniformly colored (Fig. 8) whereas in <i>L. quilmes</i> scales on dorsum are irregularly variegated with diffuse spots (Fig. 9). Both species present alternating light and dark spots on supra and infralabials, more diffuse on infralabials in <i>L. pacha</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> (Fig. 10, top), well marked in <i>L. quilmes</i> (Fig. 10, bottom). Anterior limbs with lightly visible bands and posterior limbs without these (Fig. 2 and 5, left), whereas in <i>L. quilmes</i> both anterior and posterior limbs with visible bands (Fig. 6, left). The new species presents yellow dorsolateral spotted bands (Fig. 2), different from <i>L. quilmes</i> which are continuous. <i>Liolaemus pacha</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> has ventrally scattered spots in the jaw area, light yellow on the throat and thigh areas (Fig. 3 and 5, right), in <i>L. quilmes</i> throat with spots that reach to the neck, ventral area white (Fig. 6, right, Table 1).</p> <p> Moreover, among its distinctive characteristics, <i>L. pacha</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> differs significantly from 3 populations of <i>L. quilmes</i> in 10 characters (Table 2, P <0.05, shown with asterisk): greater snout-vent-lengths in both males and females; higher, wider and longer head in males; larger and wider male torso; longer hand; more scales on average around the body; more gular scales. The new species differs in four other characters (Table 2, P <0.05, shown without asterisk) from one or two of these populations: in two cases, it differed from El Tio y Las Ruinas de Quilmes but not from Animaná (ventral scales, length of female torso); in one case, it differed from Animaná and El Tio but not from Ruinas de Quilmes (length of humerus); and lastly, it differed from Animaná but not from El Tío and Ruinas de Quilmes (head width of females).</p> <p> <b>Description of the holotype.</b> Adult male. SVL 63.1 mm. Trunk length 33.8 mm. Head longer (15.1 mm) than wide (11.5 mm). Head height 7.8 mm. Eye diameter 3.8 mm. Interorbital distance 8.6 mm. Orbit–auditory meatus distance 5.8 mm. Auditory meatus 2.5 mm high, 1.3 mm wide. Orbit–commissure of mouth distance 3.3 mm. Internares distance 2.6 mm. Subocular scale length 3.1 mm. Femur length 13.5 mm, tibia 10.4 mm, and foot 17.3 mm. Humerus length 9.4 mm. Forearm length 7.6 and hand 9.1 mm. Tail length 95.5 mm. Length of the pigal region 6.4 mm and cloaca width 8.5 mm.</p> <p>Dorsal surface of the head smooth, with 17 scales. Rostral wider than long, bordered by six scales. Mental larger than rostral, trapezoidal, bordered by four scales. Nasal not in contact with rostral. Nasal surrounded by six scales, separated from canthal by one scale. Five scales between frontal and supercilliaries. Five scales between frontal and rostral. Frontal not divided. Two postrostrals. Interparietal smaller than parietals, in contact with eight scales. Orbital semicircles complete. Preocular separated from lorilabial row by one scale. Three scales in anterior margin of auditory meatus. Fifteen smooth temporals. Four lorilabials in contact with subocular. Seven supralabials, none in contact with subocular. Seven supraoculars. Eight lorilabials. Six infralabials, second ventrally in contact with two scales. Seventy scales around midbody. Seventy-five round, slightly imbricated, slightly keeled dorsals from occiput to hind limbs. Twenty-four rows of scales in dorsum. Scales of flank same size and shape as dorsals. Ninety-three ventrals same size as dorsals, flat, imbricate. Thirty smooth, weakly imbricated gulars. Four precloacal pores. Antehumeral scales flat, larger than or equal in size to dorsals. Postauricular, rectal, and longitudinal folds present. Scales on the longitudinal fold granular and smooth. Fourth finger with 17 subdigital lamellae; fourth toe with 25. Infracarpals flat, imbricate, trifid; infratarsals flat, imbricate, trifid. Without gular fold. With 36 scales on the neck, from the posterior border of the ear to the shoulder, through the longitudinal fold. With femoral parch. Dorsal scales of the tail without mucro and with keel, ventrals smooth.</p> <p> <b>Color in alcohol.</b> Dorsum and sides of the head brown colored with numerous scales and small spots dark brown. Subocular light brown colored with dark spots. Lorilabials and supralabials alternate between light and dark color, infralabials with alternating diffuse spots (Fig. 10 top). Snout with diffuse inverted Y shaped mark (Fig. 7). Body dorsally with 8 series of paravertebral spots, subquadrangular shaped, with white-colored, spotted, dorsolateral bands. Paravertebral spots with white posterior elongated spots. Dorsum and sides of the body grey colored to light brown, scattered irregularly with numerous white colored scales (Fig. 5 left). Scales on dorsum, uniformly colored (Fig. 8). With white-colored spotted vertebral line. Presence of prescapular spot. With many scattered light blue spots on the sides of the body (Fig. 2). Anterior and posterior limbs light brown colored, with white spots distributed irregularly. Femur with obvious light blue spots. Tail grey to brown-colored, with elongated spots and numerous light blue spots, mainly distributed at the base. Ventrally the mandibular region is white colored with diffuse spots from infralabials (Fig. 3 and 5, right). Ventrum, anterior and posterior limbs, cloaca and tail completely white.</p> <p> <b>Color in life (Table 1).</b> Dorsum and sides of the head light chestnut brown, with dark and/or black chestnut brown scales and spots. Supralabials with alternating dark and light chestnut brown spots, infralabials with light and dark spots diffuse. Chestnut-brown inverted Y-mark, on the tip of the snout (Fig. 7). Body with 8 pairs of paravertebral spots of subquadrangular shape, black colored, with elongated posterior white spot (Fig. 5, left). With prescapular black spot. Lateral region of the body beige reddish with numerous white and light blue spots (Fig. 2). With vertebral line and dorsolateral bands discontinuous yellow colored. With diffuse subquadrandular dorsolateral spots. Neck with yellow band from above the ear to the anterior limb. Scales on the dorsum with a homogeneous colored pattern. Limbs and tail chestnut-brown colored, scattered with white, yellow light blue and dark brown scales. Arm and forearm with two diffuse rings (Figs. 2 and 5, left). Posterior members without rings. Tail with numerous light blue scales. Ventrally, the mandibular area, anterior limbs, ventrum, cloaca and tail are white (Fig. 3 and 5, right). In the mandibular region, with disseminated spots from the infralabials to the anterior region of the neck (Fig. 3 and 5, right). Gular region, sides and femur with diffuse yellow spots (Fig. 3). Obvious orange-colored precloacal pores.</p> <p> <b>Variation (Table 2).</b> Based on 25 specimens (15 males, 10 females) (Appendix 1). Head longer (10.9–15.1 mm; mean = 13.3 mm) than wide (9.1–13.4 mm; mean = 11.4 mm). Head height 6.4–9.9 mm (mean = 7.9 mm). Neck narrower than head. SVL 53.6–67.9 mm (mean = 61.2 mm), averaging 1.7 times longer than trunk. Tail length 63.9–103.8 mm (mean = 85.1 mm). Humerus length 5.9–9.7 mm (mean = 8.1 mm). Dorsal surface of head smooth, with 12–20 scales. One row of lorilabials, same size as supralabials. Seven to ten lorilabials. Five to eight supralabials. Frontal not divided. Interparietal always smaller than parietals, surrounded by 5–7 scales. Nasal surrounded by 6–9 scales. Four to seven infralabials. Mental in contact with four scales. Ten to 13 smooth round temporals. Longitudinal, postauricular, and antehumeral folds present. Horizontal fold Y-shaped between shoulder and auditory meatus. Scales around midbody 46–64 (mean = 58.5). Gulars 26–44 (mean = 31.7). Dorsal scales between occiput and hind limbs 62–77 (mean = 69.0). Ventrals 79–97 (mean = 90.2). Males with 4–7 (mean = 5.5) precloacal pores. Females with 1–2 (mean = 1.7) precloacal pores. Dorsals flat, slightly imbricate, slightly keeled. Twelve to 20 infradigital lamellae on fourth finger and 21–28 on fourth toe.</p> <p> CHARACTER / SPECIES <i>L. pacha</i> <b>sp. nov.</b> Animaná El Tio Ruinas P <b>Variation in color pattern.</b> With clear sexual dichromatism. Background color of the head may vary, from grey to light chestnut-brown to dark. Dorsum of the head presents occasionally a greater number of irregular black spots. Laterally the head may present conspicuous yellow spots. On the sides of the head, alternating clear and dark spots, diffuse on the infralabials and well marked on the supralabials (Fig. 10, top), stand out. The inverted Yshaped mark on the snout diffuse or absent (Fig. 7). The color of the body may vary between brownish and reddish tones. Without a black antehumeral arc. With discontinuous or absent vertebral line. Paravertebral spots shaped as horseshoe with posterior outline or subquadrangulars, black colored, with posterior white spot elongated or circular shaped. Dorsal body scales with a homogeneous pattern (Fig. 8). With diffuse dorsolateral subquadrangular spots, smaller than paravertebrals and sometimes absent. White line discontinuous on the sides of the body. Conspicuous black colored prescapular spot present. Limbs vary from grey to brown. Arm and forearm with two diffuse or absent rings (Fig. 5, left). The tail is lighter colored than the dorsal region of the body, with numerous light blue scales. With discontinuous spots.</p> <p>Ventrally white colored occasionally the mandibular, gular and femur regions, light yellow colored. Jaw with diffuse or absent spots. Precloacal pores conspicuous orange color. Head and body of females varying from grey to dark brown. Inverted Y-spot on snout diffuse. Paravertebral lines light ochre which unite on the tail. Paravertebral and subquadrandular dorsolateral spots black with thin posterior white spot, occasionally very diffuse. Lateral white line diffuse. Laterally body with white and light blue rare or absent spots. Anterior limbs with diffuse or absent rings. Posterior limbs without rings. Laterally the neck varying between yellow to intense orange. Ventrally white colored. Precloacal pores rare, barely visible.</p> <p> <b>Distribution.</b> The new species is known from the type locality Km 98, Ruta Provincial 307 (Los Cardones), Tafí del Valle Department, Tucumán Province (26°40’1.5” S 65°49’5.1” W, datum: WGS84; 2725 m).</p> <p> <b>Natural history.</b> <i>Liolaemus pacha</i> is found on rocky to sandy subtrates. The type locality is characterized by firm substrate, large rocks, scattered shrubs and tall cacti (<i>Thrichocereus pasacana</i>, Cactaceae). It corresponds to the Monte and Prepuna ecoregions (Cabrera & Willink 1980 <b>)</b>. They are mainly insectivorous occasionally eating small plant parts depending on the season and availability (Halloy <i>et al</i>. 2006). It is an oviparous species (Ramirez Pinilla 1992). Males defend territories which generally overlap with two to three females (Halloy 1996; Halloy & Robles 2002; Robles & Halloy 2009; Robles 2010). Both males and females use visual displays, such as headbobs, forelimb waves, and tail movement, during encounters as well as during courtship (Halloy 1996; Martins <i>et al.</i> 2004; Halloy & Castillo 2006; Halloy 2012).</p> <p> It is a dimorphic species (Etheridge 1993; Halloy 1996; this study), males being slightly larger and more colorful than females. Females present during the reproductive season nuptial coloration on the side of the neck, going from yellowish to intense orange (Halloy <i>et al.</i> 2007; Salica 2008; Salica & Halloy 2009b). Males emerge from hibernation in September whereas females emerge one to two months later (Halloy & Robles 2003). Matings occur end of October, beginning of November. Neonates are observed by the end of December and in January (Ramírez Pinilla 1992; pers. obs.). Males and females remain active through March and April when they return to hibernation.</p>Published as part of <i>Heredia, Viviana Juárez, Robles, Cecilia & Halloy, Monique, 2013, A new species of Liolaemus from the darwinii group (Iguania: Liolaemidae), Tucumán province, Argentina, pp. 524-538 in Zootaxa 3681 (5)</i> on pages 526-533, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.3681.5.2, <a href="http://zenodo.org/record/217441">http://zenodo.org/record/217441</a>
Aportaciones de Christine Niederberger a la arqueología guerrerense. 1 Año 1 (2014) enero-marzo. Rutas de Campo. Estudiosos de Guerrero: Semblanzas
No full textReyna Robles, Rosa María, “Economía y rutas de intercambio”, ponencia presentada en el Seminario sobre la Región Norte de Guerrero, México, CNAN-INAH, 18 de junio de 2013.Reyna Robles, Rosa María, “Christine Niederberger Betton. In memoriam”, Arqueología, segunda época, núm. 25, enero-junio de 2001, pp. 141-144
José Alessio Robles y otro militar, retrato
No full textEscrito en la guarda: "Casasola Alessio Robles José" Es el que aparece de lado izquierdo. Nota biográfica: José Alessio Robles militar mexicano de filiación Federal y villista que participó en la Revolución mexicana. Nació en Saltillo, Coahuila y estudió en el Colegio Militar. Llegó a ser Jefe del Escuadrón de Gendarmería del Ejército Federal. Luchó contra el maderismo y contra el constitucionalismo; fue derrotado por las fuerzas de Pablo González Garza y Francisco L. Urquizo en Candela, Coahuila, el 8 de julio de 1913. Al triunfo de la Revolución se exilió en los Estados Unidos. Regresó al país al terminar la lucha como villista y se retiró a la vida privada. Fue asesinado en céntrica esquina de la Capital del país por Jacinto B. Treviño el 9 de agosto de 1921. Le apodaban "el Apache" por sus grandes dotes de caballista, sus hermanos Vito Alessio Robles y Miguel Alessio Robles también fueron activistas revolucionarios
Tutela multilivello dell'ambiente ed economia circolare nell'industria alimentare
No full textLa raccolta di contributi dal titolo “Tutela dell’ambiente ed economia circolare nell’industria alimentare” a cura di F.E. Celentano, R. De Meo, M. Robles, si inserisce nelle attività del progetto “Valorizzazione dei sottoprodotti dell’industria alimentare ai fini dell’innovazione dei processi produttivi di mangimi tra benessere animale e sviluppo sostenibile” (Codice identificativo S18 - CUP: H99J21017650006) finanziato dall’Unione europea.
L’«ambiente», lungi dal designare etimologicamente un asettico spazio circostante nel quale si trova una persona o un oggetto, diviene situazione «giuridica», poiché (antropica) «proiezione» della «persona», ove la «qualità» del primo rappresenta un infungibile attributo «esistenziale» inerente al «diritto alla qualità di vita» di quest’ultima. Ripensare, così, sub specie juris l’«ecologicamente impattante» comporta farsi carico anzitutto dell’inquadramento del fenomeno nell’attuale quadro costituzionale, riconoscendo che l’attore socialmente «eco-responsabile» da “contadino” dissodatore ma, per ciò stesso, sfruttatore «esclusivo» è chiamato a divenire “imprenditore” attento ad orientare lo sviluppo, in funzione del benessere collettivo.
Di qui, l’opportunità di suddividere i contributi raggruppandoli in due sottoinsiemi.
Il primo si focalizza sulle fonti di approvvigionamento alimentare, con la riscoperta – si direbbe «fisiocratica» à la Cantillon – del “valore-terra”, che impone un netto passo in avanti dal “dominicale” «diritto soggettivo» di
natura ad una “adespota” «soggettività giuridica» della natura per via degli esseri che ne formano la biodiversità, come tale tutelabile secondo le sue plurime manifestazioni (purché) nei limiti di quanto «utilmente gestibile».
Il secondo affronta la questione “valoriale”, posta con forza, e da ultimo, dall’Agenda O.N.U. 2030 per lo Sviluppo Sostenibile – i cui obiettivi strategici sono stati ampiamente ripresi dalle istituzioni euro-unitarie – nell’indicare la
direzione di perseguire sempre più un consumo «critico», al fine precipuo di creare un mercato economicamente (e fiscalmente) «razionale» nella misura in cui sia, al contempo, promozionalmente «equo e solidale»
Francisco de Robles, Cervantes, and the Spanish Book Trade
No full textThat we remember Francisco de Robles is due in large part to the fact that he published most of the works of Cervantes, and thus it is due to the repute of that great author that Robles also enjoys some historical stature. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, however, Cervantes was but one of a number of more or less successful authors, while Robles was the most successful and powerful bookseller in Madrid, and probably in all of Spain. The relationship between Cervantes and the Robles family was a longstanding one that dated back at least to the 1580s, and it was a connection that was of far greater benefit to the writer than to Robles. Though Robles made money publishing Cervantes, especially the first part of Don Quixote, such income was essentially inconsequential when compared to his other sources of revenue. On the other hand, Cervantes, though he may have complained of how little he was paid for his works, could have had no better publisher. Much has been written about Cervantes, and what little has been set down about Robles has centered on his being the former\u27s publisher. Here, I intend first to concentrate on Robles\u27 place in the book trade and then to consider his relationship with Cervantes from that larger perspective
- …
