Synonyms and other taxonomic changes
Mistakenly referred to by several authors as Carolus Linnaeus' Cicada tibicen. First described as a new species in 1907 by John B. Smith and John A. Grossbeck, as Cicada linnei
Explanation of Names
Named after
Carolus Linnaeus- Linné is the Swedish version of his name. Several authors had mistaken this species for one described by Linnaeus until Smith and Grossbeck set the record straight. It thus, ironically, became known as Linné's Cicada because it was shown
not to be his cicada at all, but a new species.
Identification
Usually characterized by the following (this taxon may be subject to considerable variation across its range):
1) uninterupted black face mask
2) strongly bowed costal margin
3) ventral black stripe on abdomen
4) females appear to lack the well developed pruinose spots at the base of the abdomen and may on occasion have slight indications at best
5) males usually have elongated and slightly pointed opercula (Usu. not evenly rounded as in pruinosus)
6) The song seems "fairly consistent" across most of the range (Davis describes the call as a rapid Zeger-Zeger-Zeger....). Others have decscribed it as a rapid "whirring rattle" (~like gravel being swirled in a tin can).
Most similar in appearance and often confused with T. pruinosus, T. winnemana, and T. canicularis
Range
Eastern US and adj. s. Canada
Southeast: Most of the southeast (areas east of the Mississippi River)
Confirmed reports from the following locations: n. AL, e. AL, TN, GA, n. FL, c. FL, SC, NC, & VA
Questionable reports from MS, LA, & AR - ???
(NOTE: In central Florida, typical T. linnei is replaced by a strange variant endemic to the forests surrounding lime sinks and spring rivers along the highland ridge - needs taxonomic scrutiny to better understand its placement and taxonomic status.)
Southeast (Common)
Mid-Atlantic & Northeast (Common to Locally Common)
New England (rare in extreme s. New England)
Mid-West & Great Lakes regions (Common to Locally Common)
Upper Plains States incl. Iowa & s. Wisconsin (Common to Locally Common)
Eastern Plains States (less common - KS & NE)
Habitat
Deciduous forests
Some populations in the up[per mid-South/central TN seem to prefer Junipers
Season
June-October, Most places
September-November, central Florida
Remarks
"The TROUBLE with linnei"
T. linnei VS. T. pruinosus/winnemana
Diagnostics such as the "line bisection test" & "wing node position" used to separate T. linnei from T. pruinosus in the Midwest - seems to be challenged when applied to "T. pruinosus/winnemana" (+ other taxa) in the Southeast. I have noticed that while the point of bisection varies in T. winnemana in the east and T. pruinosus from the upper mid-South, it nearly always bisects the designated wing cell somewhere across the last half or third. This point of bisection is often very near, on the point of coalescence, and in some cases even anterior to the point of coalescence between the C (costal vein) & SC (subcostal) - a characteristic predicted for T. linnei. Midwestern conventions and use of this test suggest little if any bisection of the designated wing cell in members of the pruinosus group.
In support of the test, the point of bisection is "relatively consistent" in most T. linnei and crosses the halfway point nearly everytime either on the point of coalescence (in females) or anterior to the point of coalescence (usu. males).
NOTE: Some variation exists between males and females of T. linnei and among populations of T. linnei. The "line bisection test" is not an ABSOLUTE. Even for T. linnei, there have been populations and isolated specimens which DO NOT conform nor meet the expected test results!
Although this test has some support and validity in the upper Midwest, it is of little use if you wish to separate female specimens of T. winnemana, T. pruinosus and T. linnei collected below the Mason-Dixon Line. Using this character and test, as a stand alone deciding factor, may result in erroneous identification.
I have had this discussion on numerous occasions with several leading cicada specialists and few of them weigh heavily on the costal margin diagnosis for identification of linnei or separation of it from similar related types.
Bowing in the costae and use of the "line bisection test" for species determination can fail. There is significant overlap in this trait and strong bowing in the costae can be seen in any of the following taxa: T. linnei, T. pruinosus, T. winnemana and T. canicularis (to a lesser extent T. robinsonianus). Due to overlap, it is not possible to separate the species based on this character alone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Costal Margin used in id ... continued!
Please refer to the following paper for discussion on the idenification of T. linnei and separation of this species from other related species.
According to Beamer and supported in other manuscripts, the shape of the opercula of the males in T. linnei vs. T. pruinosus is the ONLY true deciding factor, not the wing shape.
NOTE: Opercula shape may also vary in some populations of T. linnei.
The males' calls may be the only SINGLE useful character for species identification and separation (between pruinosus/winnemana & linnei)! In parts of the range where linnei is sympatric with related taxa (esp. pruinosus/winnemana), separation using traditional morphological characters may be moot (per. comm. & per. observ.).
Though not formally documented, hybridization appears to be common and widespread among several taxa. This species is part of a taxonomic mess involving T. pruinosus, T. winnemana, and T. canicularis.... T. linnei often lies at the core, "common denominator". As mentioned earlier, pruinosus/winnemana and linnei likely hybridize creating identification issues. Morphological and audal analysis seem to support crossing between and among several taxa incl. the aforementioned.
HYPOTHETICAL: T. linnei may belong to a complex involving more than one species (?)
See Also
"Green Tibicen Species"
Collectively, yet informally, referred to as the "Green Tibicen species" (per. comm.), the following cicadas are often difficult to differentiate and all appear to be very closely related. Genitalic analysis of the males suggest these species are very closely related and morphological differences between and among the species are slight. It is also thought (based on observations) that several of these may be involved in complex hybrid zones; however, more work is needed to substantiate and better understand these observations.
Tibicen pruinosus pruinosus var. fulvus Beamer 1924 [syn. T. pruinosa var. fulva], "Pale Scissor(s) Grinder Cicada"
"Southern Dog-day Cicadas"
Loosely & informally referred to as the "Southern Dog-day Cicadas" (suggested - Reynolds 2010), the following taxa are mostly "southern" in distribution and appear to be closely related. These cicadas share several traits, incl. elongated opercula in the males, rapid trill and/or clicking calls, and unusually wide heads relative to body dimension (head widths usu. exceed thoracic widths).
(*appears to be the most divergent member within this group - ??)
