TWELVE-SPOTTED ASPARAGUS BEETLE IN CONNECTICUT

1903 ◽  
Vol 35 (7) ◽  
pp. 188-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. E. Britton

Crioceris12-punctata, Linn, is an introduced species, and has been working northward from Maryland, according to Professor J.B. Smith, who some time ago informed me that it was present in New Jersey, and would in time reach Connecticut. The first speciment recorded from the State was taken by a student assistant June, 16th, 1902, who collected a single speciment on asparagus upon the Station grounds in New Haven. On May 23rd, 1903, I took male and female specimens from the same locality. We may now expect this species to become thoroughly established here as a pest of asparagus, beetle, C. asparagi, Linn.

Author(s):  
Douglas A. Gaffney ◽  
Edward S. Gorleski ◽  
Genevieve Boehm Clifton

Zootaxa ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 523 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
SERGIO IBÁÑEZ-BERNAL

Only three species of Trichomyia Haliday have been recorded in Mexico. Trichomyia cirrata Coquillett, 1902, is recognized by its female characteristics, T. fairchildi Vargas and D az-N jera, 1953, was described based only on the wing and must be considered as species inquirenda, and T. maldonadoi (Vargas, 1953), which was described based on one female specimen. Specimens of Trichomyia collected in the states of Campeche, Yucatan, and Oaxaca, Mexico, allowed this female to be associated with the male of T. brevitarsa (Rapp, 1945), thus providing a first report of this species in Mexico. Consequently, T. maldonadoi is proposed as a synonym of T. brevitarsa. Additionally, a new species of Trichomyia from the state of Veracruz, Mexico, is described and illustrated based on the male and female characteristics.


1984 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 93-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack Berman

AbstractIn Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp., the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that a state of the art defense is unavailable in cases brought under a theory of strict liability for failure to warn. The court indicated that asbestos producers may be held liable for their products' harms even if the health hazards of asbestos were unknown and not discoverable when the products were marketed. In a subsequent case, the New Jersey court held that state of the art evidence is relevant to whether a product is defective. This Case Comment examines these different uses of knowledge evidence in the disposition of products liability cases. It contends that manufacturers should not be held liable for unknowable risks. The Comment concludes that the state of the art defense establishes a logical limit on strict liability and promotes efficient resolution of products liability claims.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document