Identification, Images, & Information
For Insects, Spiders & Their Kin
For the United States & Canada
Clickable Guide
Moths Butterflies Flies Caterpillars Flies Dragonflies Flies Mantids Cockroaches Bees and Wasps Walkingsticks Earwigs Ants Termites Hoppers and Kin Hoppers and Kin Beetles True Bugs Fleas Grasshoppers and Kin Ticks Spiders Scorpions Centipedes Millipedes

Calendar
BugGuide Gathering
Smoky Mountains
University of Tennessee Biological Field Station
August 8-10, 2008
 
Photos from the gathering
 
Photos from the 2007 gathering in Minnesota

TaxonomyBrowseInfoImagesLinksBooksData
Photo#217213
Cicada ID please - Tibicen tibicen

Cicada ID please - Tibicen tibicen
Atlantic Beach, Duval County, Florida, USA
August 23, 2008
Size: 2.5 inches

Images of this individual: tag all
Cicada ID please - Tibicen tibicen Cicada ID please - Tibicen tibicen

Tibicen lyricen (virescens), Coastal Lyric Cicada
Tibicen lyricen (virescens), Coastal Lyric Cicada
Some may consider this "race" a separate species from T. lyricen, however, I believe most still consider it a subspecies or geographic form. This is a very common cicada in much of Central Florida. Although Tibicen tibicen (=chloromera) does occur in central Florida, it is considerably less common and somewhat different in appearance

 
Agreed
In W.T. Davis' 1935 paper he writes:

Pronotum of the fulvous areas have a greenish tinge. The collar is black. On the mesonotum, the obconical spots, a small spot each side, another at the base of each fore wing and a small area immediately anterior to the cruciform elevation, black. The remainder of the mesonotum is centrally green, fulvous or chestnut colored on the sides. The basal areas and the costal margin of the forewings, are often bright green, with the marginal areas clouded or smokey, much more so than in northern specimens.

I would agree that this is indeed T. lyricen var. virescens or just plain T. virescens. In a personal email from Dr. Alan Sanborn writes:

The last edition of the Code of Zoological Nomenclature eliminated varieties as taxonomic subunits. All varieties described before about 1960 automatically became subspecies and anything described since is invalid and reverts to the species. What this means is the variety virescens is now a subspecies.

So, should a page be made indicating Tibicen lyricen virescens or Tibicen virescens? I think the former rather than the latter.

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click 'Save settings' to activate your changes.