Talk:Cicada/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Cicada. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

To say USA eats these bugs isn't true. Probably they come from Mexican cuisine and might be on the menu around border towns, but to say the whole USA eats these for culinary use is not true at all. I'd like some proof of this! Fadedroots (talk) 00:11, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm American and I've never heard of this either. --Evice (talk) 00:06, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Just Google fried cicada. I grew up in Kentucky; this was quite common. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.49.221.194 (talk) 18:38, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

No it isn't and you're not from Kentucky. You're most likely from Norfolk, England. They'll eat anything if it's deep fried. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.32.20.210 (talk) 21:01, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

This article should cover cicadas in general. Currently, it deals mainly with the Magicicada, which is covered in depth in its own article. Lupo 08:24, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

The article mentions cicadas in all continents but fails to mention the existence of any species in South America. It doesn't even mention South America. Helder

"100 in the Palaearctic and exactly one species in England, the New Forest Cicada (Melampsalta montana), which is widely distributed throughout Europe, where about 2000 species are known (some 600 in Germany alone"

I'm Dutch, and it's probably me, but how can there be 100 sp in the Palaearctic and 1000 in Europe? Or is it 100 genera?

The eastern states of the US have several broods of periodical cicadas (Magicicada spp). [1]. After reading that statement i assumed their botanical name is "Magicicada spp" Apparently not, so what does the name mean?

"spp" is just an abbreviation for "species" (plural), just like "pp"" is an abbreviation for "pages" (plural). The abbreviations for the singular would be "sp" and "p", respectively. Lupo 11:41, 28 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Does anyone know if the term "heat bugs" used in New England also refers to the annual "dog-day" cicadas?

Do cicadas eat once they become adults? I know they only live for a short time, and I'm curious about their sound energy output compared to their calorific intake (if any). The ones here in Japan are extremely loud, and so I wonder where the energy comes from. Thanks.

Cicadas sip resin of particular species of trees, not every tree. I can't tell what species are. They live on the ground only 6-7 days, but they spend 6 years underground as far as talk for cicadas in Japan. Very much unlike Magicicada, Japanese all species of cicadas come up in every year. Only resin may gives suffice energy only for 6-7 days life. I am writing this comment by listening their (Graptopsaltria nigrofuscata) sound, by the way. In my long life experience, came down on ground, number of cicadas in every year seems change minus 30-50% max. if climate is very unusual cool in some year. So far number of them seems not affected by Global warming. Cryptotympana facialis (ja:クマゼミ) likes warm climate, and propagate/invade to Kantō region from west of Honshū, this fact is considered due to Global warming. --Namazu-tron (talk) 03:48, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The assertion that all cicada species in New Zealand are endemic seems incorrect. It contradicts the page Graptopsaltria_nigrofuscata as well as [2] Cmcqueen1975 (talk) 04:52, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I live in Brisbane, Australia and was wondering if anyone could tell me if the following description sounds like a type of Cicada. In Brisbane as its a sub tropical climate we in certain months get periods of frequent rain. After generally large amounts of rain there is a type of insect that seems to come out after this rain and lives in the grass or near plants. The insect makes a long continous sound that sounds like a bit like a clicking but at a very fast rate. I believe they must be miniscule and in many case are impossible to see. They also seem to only start up at night or cooler times of the day. More annoyingly however they are very hard to get rid of or kill because even if you can follow the sound and crush the area they are, most times they seem to start right back up in a few minutes. So can anyone answer the following

• Can someone tell me what they are?
  
• What sets them off (i.e. why the rain specifically)
  
• What to do to get rid of them
  
  

--Lummie 11:47, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

I had a recent vacation in Southern China. Cicadas there were quite large, actually (perhaps the size of your forefinger). However, that's now much help to you, ;) Kareeser 01:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

No Not really. Lummie 02:33, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Some public domain cicada photos are at the USDA [3] Ydorb 18:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

These photos of the cicada exit tunnels - are they necessary? Crappy pictures of holes in the ground, and four of them, no less... puh-lease. I have excellent pictures of identified cicadas I'll donate and post to the commons, but the photos on this page need to be upgraded. Say the word.Nickrz 20:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Yea I think we could lose at least two of the hole pics. We definitely don't need three. --DanielCD 23:27, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Something I was curious to learn about the cicada life cycle was what they eat as adults. If anyone has knowlege on that subject it would be a good addition to the article. Enneagon 14:43, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Adult Cicadas are sap suckers, like the other true bugs. If you look on their underside you'll see the piercing proboscis they use to reach sap.

Yes, more information on what they eat as both nymphs and adults is needed, as well as what eats them. Particularly, it would be interesting to see how each species differs in diet, as I image every species would have evolved to take advantage of very particular food sources. Richard001 00:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

So do the only eat sap wen there full grown or mite they also eat smaller bugs, plants or some more tree roots thx the artical could use some of this information.--Sivad4991 17:01, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

They strictly eat sap. I made a small edit to acknowledge the fact that cicadas are actually known to use the proboscis to pierce people when left alone on ones body long enough. I used to collect these critters as a child and remember being "stung" one time, it sat on my hand for maybe 5 minutes before the sting and I distinctly remember it, I simply flicked it off and it flew away, no lasting damage, but it did hurt for a quick minute! I have read many accounts of others who had the same thing happen to them, only to have other "experts" claim it is impossible. So this is unlikely to happen, but is still something they have been known to do on rare occasion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Indyrl (talk • contribs) 08:21, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

An anonymous user, User:75.117.87.140 (talk contribs) has removed a number of links from the article (diff) anyone who's more knowledgeable on the topic, please review the edit and revert what's relevant. -- intgr 07:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

All these classical references need to be summarized and moved off to an article of their own. The copyright violations have to go ASAP. (For instance, much of the Asterios stuff is copied verbatim (or only minimally rephrased) from [4]. Lupo 10:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The "Australian" section appears to have been taken and slightly rephrased from [5]. Lupo 09:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Someone keeps changing the order in the taxobox to Homoptera. I thought I'd mention it here, but it looks to me like we are using the Hemiptera division and the other is just a proposed division of this into two alternate orders. I'm no expert though. Just FYI cause I could be wrong. --DanielCD 18:29, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, isn't it strange? The specific cicada pages (such as Dogday harvestfly) say Hemiptera but the primary cicada page (this one) says Homoptera. In truth, the Homoptera page redirects to Hemiptera. I've changed this one back to Hemiptera, hopefully I don't cause an edit war... Regards. [|Retro00064 | (talk/contribs) |] 07:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

According to most texts I have referenced on the subject (and taking a class on this right now with admittedly 20 yr old texts), these belong in Homoptera, while Hemiptera are the "true bugs". Homoptera indicates "whole-winged" while Hemiptera indicates "half-winged". Some Links on the subject:

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/arthropoda/uniramia/hemiptera.html

http://bugguide.net/node/view/63

http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/course/ent425/compendium/homopt~1.html

http://www.uwsp.edu/biology/zoolab/insecta/Insecta.htm

http://www.cirrusimage.com/homoptera.htm

Considering the number of references which indicate that Homoptera should be a "suborder" of Hemiptera according to some people, there should be mention of the transitional state of the taxa. --scorch999 (talk) 04:28, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Homóptera is a Hemipteroid order, as are Zoráptera, Psocóptera, Mallóphaga, Anoplúra, and Thysanóptera. If there were a grouping of orders containing only Hemíptera and Homóptera, then Hemíptera would be a "super-order" with true bugs (currently called Hemíptera) then being called Heteróptera, with Homóptera being its other order. Mouthparts in Homóptera are exclusively at the rear of the head, while they are at the front of the head in Hemíptera. In Hemíptera, the basal part of the front wings is thickened, but the texture of the wings in Homóptera is uniform. Twenty-year-old (and older) textbooks still have valid information unbiased by the need for taxonomists to continually revalidate the need for their existence (sly tongue-in cheek look, with due respect to taxonomists). I have added the reference that explains the differences and similarities.--pechaney (talk) 16:20, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

The taxon Homoptera went out of usage around 1995 (see http://ag.udel.edu/delpha/1158.pdf and Gullan, PJ (1999). "Why the taxon Homoptera does not exist" (PDF). Entomologica. 33: 101–104.) - and this has been the consensus since. Shyamal (talk) 04:21, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

The article claims cicadas are not considered pests. However, they are certainly capable of causing a noise nuisance, something that should be mentioned, even if only briefly. A specific case for an example would be good. M0ffx 23:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the context is the impact on crops. Yes, I agree though, they can be annoying, 24.21.10.30 (talk) 19:46, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed this info:

The 'green grocers' (along with the 'yellow monday' and the 'double drummer') can generate an intense resonance in excess of 120 dB.

dB means nothing without a reference. e.g. 1 m away (and then you should technically use dB(SPL) or something similar). See page at decibel. It also needs a reference too, BTW. -203.171.67.232 13:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Is the correct form of the plural cicadas, cicadae, or simply cicada? All three are used in this article, which ought to be made internally consistent. YorkBW 17:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the double revert, I meant to hit current revision and hit rollback instead. My mistake. --Whstchy 03:45, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

In the Description, it says that only the female has the tymbals, then that only the male makes the sound. Which is it? Though I've read that it's the male, I'm not an expert and don't have a credible source.

I'm confused too. The "Description" and the "Cicada song" sections differ on this; the latter indicates that both the male and female have tymbals, but that the male has an larger chamber for resonance. This link, present in the Cicada Mania article linked by the article, pretty clearly states that only the males have the tymbals in the case of the Magicicada. Wdfarmer 20:58, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Originally the article had metric units. User:64.243.89.212 removed these leaving only feet, inches & Fahrenheit. I have undone this vandalism. Jɪmp 06:04, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah, excellent. I wondered why it had only imperial units, but didn't want to change the article - there have been great many measurement wars, for example, see Wikipedia:Measurements Debate. However, a new project, WikiProject Measurement was recently started, hopefully they can come up with at least semi-standard/recommended guidelines that are better then MOS:Units of measurements. DLX 06:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Is that what they're doing? Either way, I think the MOS section you mention does need a rewrite. Jɪmp 17:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Well, one of their goals is "Create guidelines for articles about systems and units of measurement.", so we can hope. DLX 18:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Can someone please add what the diet of cicadas consists of?

--Spidermanfan94

I'm trying to remember an important date, and the only thing I can remember is seeing a news report about cicada's dropping out of the trees around then. Since I've seen that this happens once only 17 years or so, I thought this might help to pinpoint the date, or at least the date of the newscast, actually only the newscast is the important date, not the actual date of the event.

Does anybody remember seeing a newscast of cicada's falling out of trees, I believe on Krem-2 news Spokane/coeur d'alene(sp?) on channel six around here (Alberta), Shaw standard cable. I just need a circa-date, within a month or so, like "september 2004" for example, to help remember a certain date, which is a little personal to reveal, but very important. Thanks so much! I'm not signed in right now, but here's a sig nonetheless.-70.74.122.87 20:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm afraid your question is a bit difficult to answer. If you happen to be referring to Brood X (10), it was probably August or September 2004 just like you already said. Brood X is the largest the 17-year 'broods' of cicadas. 71.64.134.125 04:46, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Here i found this information on [6]

i thought some 1 might wont to add this to the artical. thx --Sivad4991 17:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

are thereany pictures of the many different kinds of cicadas?Daeson 04:28, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I took a series of photos of a Cicada shedding its skin. I could put them together in photoshop into a multi frame single image or could post them straight up. Would this be of interest? Let me put them together and then I'll post them into this discussion. I think they came out quite nice, You can see its wings expanding which is really neat. As sort of a side note, you can pluck one off of a tree as its walking up to complete its metamorphosis and bring it inside and watch it. It doesn't seem to care about being inside with lots of light. If one has kids this might be a fun activity. I might post something to the Wikiversity about that one.
Mundhenk 21:40, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I might try and go out this week and see if I can get some better 'in the wild photos'. I took these on a whim. I have several more. If these don't make the cut, that's cool, I took these just for fun.

Most of the links have ads, but seem to generally be about cicadas. http://www.cicadas-pictures.com/ makes me wonder a little. I believe http://www.chat11.com/Cicada_Life_Cycle was well beyond the line. Almost all advertising and no interesting/useful content, really. Matthew K 04:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Yah, the links should be relevant and/or helpful information above what is provided. To get the best quality the list should not be to long. Mundhenk 02:50, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

If anything's primarily commercial, delete it. -- Hoary 00:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

All the websites now up have little advertising and they all have very relevant or unusual information and photos htat are easily acessible, so I removed the tag. --RainbowWerewolf (talk) 14:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe all the years the nymph is underground eating sap, they are storing energy to emerg as adults, go up the tree, mate, lay eggs and die. Perhaps they don't live long enough as adults to eat anything. kuriousjorge —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kuriousjorge (talk • contribs) 01:14, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

If a reputable book about cicadas says this, it may be added (with reference); if not, don't add it, however interesting it may be. -- Hoary 00:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Richard Dawkins mentions this 13 or 17 (prime number) life cycle in his book The Blind Watchmaker at the page 100. Could it be the citation needed for that? Well, I'm going to add that as citation anyway. -- Jari Pennanen 0:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

If Dawkins says it, you may use him as a reference. -- Hoary 00:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

In general, it is better form to get it from the source. Is Dawkins the originator of the theory or is someone else the source? Check to make sure he isn't citing from another work. Mundhenk 04:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

The prime number life cycle theory (i.e. they emerge after that period so that the chance of different species emerging in the same year is minimised) is mentioned in a BBC TV series called 'The Code' featuring Marcus Du Sautoy. The (current) article doesn't appear to mention this theory. Something to add perhaps?1812ahill (talk) 13:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I have heard the horrible sound every year of my life even seen them every year of my life! But if they olny come out every so often, why do I alsways see them? Sarah Hardwick — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.30.142.211 (talk) 00:45, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Sarah: possibly, because not all cicadas are periodic. Only some of them do that.IAmNitpicking (talk) 14:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I removed a link that I thought was unnecessary and contained interesting but jocular comments and no information, it was a blog site, and the person who'd posted the pictures there also gave one of those pictures to the gallery, where it is prominently features. It's a beautiful photo, and the others were good too, although kind of similair I think... I in no way mean to give offense, I was simply concerned.... --RainbowWerewolf (talk) 14:00, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Is this an endangered species or not? If not, which IUCN Classification would best describe it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.251.55.162 (talk) 13:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I really doubt it. I can hear them out my window right now. Caffeine927 (talk) 21:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Not entirely sure why in the symbolism section all the mentioned works of Aesop are named in French, then English, as if they had anything to do with French or France. (Aesop was Greek) 139.140.192.143 (talk) 12:16, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

An excellent point -- I've adjusted the wording there, and dropped a little bit of the literary analysis of La Fontaine's style while seems a bit off topic. Does anyone know if the Aesop original is really a cicada? It's often translated into English as grasshopper, or cricket, but that may just be because cicadas are not so familiar to British readers. Certainly La Fontaine's version is a cicada. Mooncow (talk) 01:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I too am curious about the Cicada's extensive diet, or habits that might have caused the disappearnece of mosquitos in the woods near my home, is this just a strange coincidence? I tend to doubt that! Another reason these cool lil buggers are a blessing more than a "pest" Also, why?? do they think everything is a "landing strip"?? Can they see us? dont they sense our movement? are they trying to "hitch a ride" because they seem to "aim" for you. cars too, so sad to see so many dead because of MOVING cars. Also, they seem drawn to sunny spots more than shady, why? they are definately eating leaves too but they seem to love FLYING in the sun. can they die of heat? are they used to water or will they drown? Also Ive heard of strong mythological and symbolic importance of cicadas in Egyptian times, truth to this, or just hype?? How long aprox. have they been around?? Thanks for any (and all) info!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.93.138.214 (talk) 22:14, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I was digging in my son's sand box when I came across many dead Cicada's buried near the bottom of the sand. I looked at some very close and noticed that a few of them had a larve that looks like it came out through the neck area. I have never heard of Cicada's going back underground. What stage of life is this?

Douglasaero (talk) 15:37, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

That's some parasite insects or flies that laid eggs on them after cicada's death. --Revth (talk) 04:39, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

You may have stumbled across a Cicada Killer Wasp's nest. They bury their eggs with cicadas that they have stung and paralyzed, so that when the eggs hatch they can feed on them. Biznob (talk) 21:57, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Somebody wrote "dogs eat beatals" After the "In 2004, "cicada" ranked 6th in Merriam-Webster's Words of the Year." This page really should be locked... Moocowsrule (talk) 20:41, 19 October 2008 (UTC)moocowsrule

Thank you for watching and for reverting the change. Unfortunately, we must live with vandalism and deal with it as you did. It is so common that if this page was locked, another one would be vandalized. Eventually, the whole Wikipedia would be locked. — Xavier, 00:51, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

That is true... but still, this page should at least be monitored more often, so that this sort of thing doesn't happen again. Moocowsrule (talk) 03:08, 21 October 2008 (UTC)moocowsrule

More vandalism is at the first sound clip "Calling song of Magicicada cassini". I tried to delete the offensive text but I cannot find a way through the Edit function. 27.109.112.112 (talk) 08:42, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't mind helping, but what exactly is the vandalism? I may be missing something, not knowing American insects, but it all seems OK, as long as that really is what Magicicada sounds like. JonRichfield (talk) 11:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

is having a 4MB animated GIF on the article page wise? it locked up my browser for quite awhile to load it, and even then things were pretty choppy. I am using a pretty fast computer on broadband; perhaps we can post the sequence and from there link to an animated version for those who want it? Or maybe it can be optimized? --98.217.14.211 (talk) 22:18, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I had no problems opening the page (Windows XP, slow PC, fast broadband connection, Firefox). Maybe the Wikipedia servers were having some problem at the time you accessed the page (although that doesn't explain why displaying the animation should be choppy after the file was downloaded). And the animation really is spectacular... --NorwegianBlue ^talk 09:11, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I've found new cicada shells and dead cicadas in my friend's area in Illinois. I notice they're not magicicadas. they have strange markings on their head/neck(whatever it is).

Sir aaron sama girl (talk) 20:23, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

of a cicada making its song? Because that explaination confused the hell outta me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.219.104 (talk) 20:54, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

The article says they don't "sting in the usual sense" which is accurate, they're not using an ovipositor. However, it then continues to refer to its bite as a sting. They DO bite, all members of the "true bug" family have a piercing sucking proboscis. In this case, it's used for sap. How is that not a bite? It's a bite. call it a bite. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 21:59, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I live near Sydney Australia and am surrounded by the bush. In summer we have millions of very noisy cicadas and a rain of fine mist which I'm sure is either cicada pee or some hormone secretion. When I say a fine mist, I'm not exaggerating. You can feel it and see it like fine rain on a clear sunny day and it is definitely something from the cicadas yet I cannot find any article that relates to this. I would like to know more about this spray, please Farmgirl130 (talk) 10:29, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm reading Jean-Henri Fabre's "Social Life in the Insect World" [7] right now, and he seems content to call it urine. It is a very old source, but according to him people in 1911 Provence, France were all quite familiar with this spray. He even translates an old Provençal poem about cicadas that mentions it. He was under the impression it was used as a defense mechanism; I have no idea if that's the case. Personally, I've never seen a cicada in North America do this. Even though the science is outdated, maybe some of Fabre's more cultural stuff about cicadas, like the poem, would be neat to see here.--RemyWay (talk) 14:44, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

I'm from Sydney too and back in the 1970's when I was a kid one of our favourite passtimes was cicada hunting. I can say that sometimes, but not always, when we climbed trees (usually maples) to catch cicadas they would pee on us and fly off in an attempt to escape. It would usually be at the last second as you reached up to grab them, a small squirt. Definitely used as a defense mechanism. Happy days :-) 203.9.151.254 (talk) 07:12, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Does the sting from a "Cicada Killer Wasp" cause permanent or temporary paralysis? Is there a way to reverse the paralysis caused to a Cicada by one of these wasps? Biznob (talk) 21:59, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

That is an interesting question, and I don't know the answer to it. There was some recent research on ladybug paralysis by a wasp Dinocampus coccinellae. Most ladybugs didn't survive but about 25% started moving around and eating, etc., once the wasp no longer needed a paralyzed ladybug to guard its cocoon. So there may also be hope for paralyzed cicadas. Sharktopus ^talk 21:15, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

An image used in this article, File:New Zealand cicada song.ogg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 15 August 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:58, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Just wondering since all living things share a Common ancestor would it be better to say that there are not closely related to true Locusts instead of saying they are not related to true locusts.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.125.80.205 (talk) 23:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I live in New Jersey. Cicadas are everywhere. 17-year cycle apparently. Flying from leaf to leaf in trees. But I never see them mating. I heard they mate "butt-to-butt", with overlapping wings, backing into each other. Wondering if this is true. Also I can get more cicada photos if anybody wishes but I am not a power nature photographer.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 19:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

@User:Tomwsulcer, yes it's true. Here's a pic. --99of9 (talk) 09:18, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Wow - that pic is interesting. This might be the way they mate in the wild when in trees but I have seen them mate in the missionary position as well. When we hunted them as children we would put them in an old ice-cream container. After a while we would let them go but often by then males and females of the correct species would have begun mating. They would be in the missionary position with legs firmly wrapped around each other. Seperating them (we were kids, remember) was almost impossible! 203.9.151.254 (talk) 09:44, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Cool stuff, everybody. How weird nature is. I wonder if we can add cicada-style to the list of KamaSutra-ish positions.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 12:09, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Can you tell me if this is a cicada? If not then what is it? http://www.flickr.com/photos/33195905@N00/9056016427/ 2.25.120.140 (talk) 14:45, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Wrong place to ask, but since you are here, no it is not a cicada, nor nearly. It is a stink-bug of the family called twig-wilters. The family's technical name is "Coreidae". JonRichfield (talk) 18:46, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

The sentence that says adult cicadas eat plant sap has a reference to #19 ... which is about cicadas swarming dogs. Is there a real reference for that point? IAmNitpicking (talk) 02:14, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

The link in reference #19 does support that adult cicadas eat. The other text about dogs was added in may, doesn't belong, and has been removed. Thank you for noticing the problem. Pseudonymous Rex (talk) 02:37, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

It is difficult to find any reliable sources for this, but grasshoppers apparently eat cicadas, so that could be added to the Predators section. Not only did I find a few anecdotal articles on the net about it, but I also saw a grasshopper eat a cicada earlier today myself. If anyone finds any better source, feel free to update the article. --Mlewan (talk) 16:03, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

"In the final nymphal instar, they construct an exit tunnel to the surface and emerge. They then molt (shed their skins) on a nearby plant for the last time and emerge as adults. The exuvia, or abandoned exoskeleton, remains, still clinging to the bark of trees."

Here in Sydney (Australia) it is common to see these shells not only on the bark of trees (usually about 3 feet or 1 metre off the ground) but also attached to brick walls. Cicadas will molt on any suitable (rough) surface. They molt on shrubs as well. 203.9.151.254 (talk) 07:20, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Cicada/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The main problem in this article is the lack of references. IronChris | (talk) 04:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 04:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 14:31, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cicada. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110713040007/http://www.insecteducation.com/tag/arthropoda to http://www.insecteducation.com/tag/arthropoda

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:40, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Under the Biology section, in the Description subsection, it states "Cicadas lack the ability to jump as exhibited by other members of the Auchenorrhyncha." However, under the Locomotion subsection it states "Cicadas, like other Auchenorrhyncha, are adapted for jumping (saltation)"

Additionally, the citation on the second statement involves only insects not in Cicadoidea. The cited source covers other insects in cicadamorpha, only tabulating data from membracids.

I haven't located a source that says one way or the other, but at this point, the article is self-contradicting. Takophiliac (talk) 16:00, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Well spotted. No idea how that crept in. Of course they don't jump. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

There was a brilliant and fascinating article in The Washington Post during the last major Cicada invasion in the DC area in the spring of 2004. The article discussed the theory that the fact that the 13-year and 17-year cicada happens to emerge in a period of years which is a double-digit prime number is not a mere coincidence. It is actually a result of mathematical probability. Perhaps this theory can be worked into the wiki page some day. The article can still be found online and is referenced here. ^[1]Mark The Droner (talk) 16:57, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

See Periodical cicadas. The theory is less popular with scientists nowadays. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:00, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

There are a number of good articles describing the "Allee Effect," e.g., https://daily.jstor.org/cicadas-are-back/ . i assume the entry for Periodic Cicada addresses this?

I'm not sure how to find citations for this (though one of the existing citations, Garmin and Harrison, seems to substantiate it in the title, at least with regards to central Kentucky), but it is my understanding that up through the mid-to-late twentieth century, these critters were more commonly called 'locusts' (than 'cicadas') throughout much of the Midwest (including at least central and northeastern Ohio). This seems important to mention briefly, if only to differentiate them from locusts (which are actually swarming grasshoppers), but I'm not sure which section of the article it should go under. Etymology doesn't seem quite right, and if the usage was confined to a small geographical area it may not be important enough for the opening sentence, nor does it seem like quite the right sort of information for the Human Culture section. Thoughts?

Seems to have been nothing other than simple confusion or grasping for a familiar name; can't find evidence of anything specific enough to mention here. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:37, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

I think you make a very good point worth noting: That in some areas and time periods, references to "locusts" really meant cicadas. Important distinction for historical and scientific value. I'd agree it should be discussed somewhere in the article. The article on Periodic Cicadas has a subsection on their mentions in historic records and notes they were called "locusts." The history is very interesting, but specific to the periodic cicada. It'd be redundant to include it all under the main Cicade article, but maybe a mention and link so readers can find the info? Just a suggestion. Cynthisa (talk) 21:37, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

The superfamily Cicadoidea contains 3,500 species of treehoppers and 22,000 species of leafhoppers, none of which are cicadas. In my opinion it is confusing for a reader to see these in an article titled "Cicada". A better way might be to have an article about Cicadas and a separate article about the superfamily. It is incorrect to call treehoppers and leafhoppers cicadas, as the title of this article does.

Bob Webster (talk) 04:54, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

The colloquial term "treehopper" is best used for the family Membracidae which does not belong to the superfamily Cicadoidea. Shyamal (talk) 07:01, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

You're right, my mistake. I misread the introduction of this article and assumed leafhoppers and treehoppers were included in Cicadoidea as they are in some older sources. Bob Webster (talk) 22:41, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

I have a real problem with this statement (made twice in the article): "The majority of cicadas are nocturnal" (citing ref 51). Is this in fact so? Perhaps on a global basis? All of the cicada in my area (Central Plains, USA, so hardly representative of global trends, but still....) are diurnal with many crepuscular (the "dusk singers" are a well-known phenomenon in US). The point is, 1) does ref 51 actually BACK UP this nocturnal claim with specific evidence? Or is it a throw-away comment made specific to a single genera or bioregion? Basically, ref 51 needs to be checked/verified. And, 2) even if majority ARE nocturnal, clearly more should be said on the topic because the statement runs counter to many peoples' experiences, even if true. For example, perhaps subtopic discussing bioregions where they are diurnal or, certainly a subsection on the "dusk singers" could be warranted since they're distinct enough to have their own groups. See CicadaMania, e.g., http://www.cicadamania.com/cicadas/category/life-cycle/annual/. I've bookmarked this article for further research and possible revisions, if warranted. Don't know when (if!) I'll get to them though, hence this note, if anyone else wants to have a go. (Or maybe I'm the only one bugged by this??)

Cynthisa (talk) 20:35, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

I agree. Most cicadas I've seen and heard are definitely not nocturnal. Bob Webster (talk) 04:46, 30 June 2018 (UTC)

I agree too and I have deleted the statement and added more on the pattern. Most are diurnal, a few call at dusk and a rare few are known to be nocturnal. Shyamal (talk) 08:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC) Also pinging @Dyanega:

this entire article is very poorly written and sourced. as an example, there are several sourced sections that claim cicada are incapable of jumping, AND several that claim they are capable of it. there are contradictions and inconsistencies like this all throughout. if you use sources that claim the exact opposite thing YOU CANNOT USE THEM. 2604:6000:7A4B:900:1596:46B1:DC34:68E0 (talk) 21:46, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

There certainly are issues with the article - I found words like cibarium and filter chamber that would almost instantly leap into one's head when one hears about cicadas and there is NO MENTION of them. It would however help to identify specific issues so that we can fix them. Shyamal (talk) 08:59, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

User:Cwmhiraeth, Chiswick Chap just pinging to make sure you’re aware of this discussion. I’m on the road and unable to research these issues until after the 1st. ^{Atsme📞📧} 14:12, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

re-ping Cwmhiraeth - ^{Atsme📞📧} 14:14, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

The source for the statement that they cannot jump stated that "Auchenorrhyncha ... nearly all (except cicadas) are also excellent jumpers", going on to state that the nymphs do not jump at all, so I am rephrasing. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 16:08, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

There was also an inaccurate statement about Cercopis vulnerata jumping, calling it a cicada when in fact it is a froghopper. I have removed this to a more appropriate location. Are there omissions in the article? Yes, I'm sure there are, but the GA criteria just say "broad in its scope" and don't demand comprehensiveness. Shyamal, or anybody else, is welcome to improve the article as they think fit. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:06, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Shyamal - while there were a few errors that needed correction, not all were “glaring” unless you happen to be an entomologist. That’s why open collaboration helps build the pedia and makes our articles better. I don’t know of any editor on WP who knows 100% about every single topic, so we do our best to collaborate in an effort to make sure our articles are accurate. Your help and knowledge is appreciated but would you be so kind as to tone down your criticism in your edit summaries and on the TP? For example, the GA review was done in 2015 - the source cited to the cicada’s ability to jump stated “Adults of many species are strong flyers and nearly all (except cicadas) are also excellent jumpers.”^[2] A slight misinterpretation of that sentence is understandable and why it often takes more than a few editors to catch it. Anyway, thank you for helping to make the article better. ^{Atsme📞📧} 16:22, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Sources
^ https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2004/05/03/no-cicadas-on-ice/7f29eabc-be0e-464e-8ed3-2ee811d4d0f7/ ^ Resh, V.H.; Cardé, R.T. (2009). Encyclopedia of Insects. Encyclopedia of Insects. Elsevier Science. p. 56. ISBN 978-0-08-092090-0. Retrieved 2018-08-23.

Well, part of the issue is how GA review criteria are interpreted - I think it is easy to miss the spirit for the wording. First of all Wikipedia is meant to be an encyclopedia and a good article is a good tertiary source that leads readers to good secondary sources for further reading (and that means that appropriate sources should be cited, and it is not enough to just accept any reliable-looking source that is properly formatted and added at the end of a paragraph). "Broad in scope" does indeed mean that all aspects are covered (but not in depth - ie comprehensive) and this is best reviewed by examining other published encyclopaedic / tertiary sources. In the end fulfilling GA criteria is not something that is meant to satisfy GA reviewers, a good article is meant to be good enough for 90$ of the audience that is seeking information. I of course agree that it needs collaboration. Shyamal (talk) 04:15, 24 August 2018 (UTC)

I read most species are in the tropics but how far north/south? are they everywhere? in the desert? in the Arctic? In permanent frost? do they live on every continent?

These are the important questions, I need to know!!! 😂 184.97.170.170 (talk) 15:19, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Please read the section Cicada#Taxonomy_and_diversity, it answers these questions. Dyanega (talk) 18:04, 24 January 2022 (UTC)