The consensus - the images of this cicada are more congruent with canicularis.

Gerry states, "The extreme lack of greens and its dull colors rules out T. linnei, not to mention the lack of a black mask between the compound eyes which further rules it out from linnei and pruinosus."

At first review of these images, I was inclined to go with T. canicularis. Since then, these images have been reviewed by several parties. Both Gerry and Elias are very familiar with northern Tibicen species and their variations. I strongly value their diagnosis and since both seem to agree this cicada is in fact T. canicularis, I too agree.

I have to agree with Gerry. Having collected many hundreds over the years, Gerry is very familiar with this taxon, and I trust his judgment with this species.

In discussions concernig several of the more widely used diagnostics incl. wing angle, node position, wing margins straight or bowed, etc. there are fallacies. Due to a number of factors including character sets, tests, and morphological features, - experience with the fauna in a given region may also be necessary to make an accurate id.

Given the distribution of T. robinsonianus, it is NOT a hybrid In fact a huge portion of it's range including the locality for the type material lies outside the current known range for T. canicularis. Reports of T. canicularis in the SOuth are based on the audal records of T. davisi and initial specimens in collections of closely related taxa (NO T. canicularis down here, but lots of T. robinsonianus).

A male specimen - the tip of the abdomen is small. So you are right when you said it departed to sing (females do not sing).

That body length sounds right for T. canicularis. I spent several days keying out close to 50 canicularis specimens here. Overall length ranges from 42 mm being the largest down to 32 mm being the smallest.

I would agree. Would you have a ventral view? It looks to be female in the dorsal view.