BROOD X SKl'TENDEriM lilli). 
51 
yoar 1002 was not niark(Ml l)y \]\o vovuvvcuvo of any 1.'>-V(\'ir l)r()()(l. 
and Ikmu'c \hv nn-ords for tliat year, for (lie (irs( lime, could |)i-acli- 
cally all \)0 assii^iUMl without (Hicstiou to Brood X. it liad hccn 
anticipatcul by the writer and otlicrs that many of the records in 
middle and soutluM'n lUinois. for example, and nortliern Missouri, 
which luid heen refiM-rcnl to tlu* two lari^e l.S-ycMir ])i-oo(ls, mii^ht pos- 
sibly heloni^: to Brood X of the 17-year race. Kather to our sur|)rise, 
liowever, the old limits of distribution for the tluve broods in (piestion 
seem to i)e pretty dc^linitely conlirmcMl. 
A'ery thoroui^;]! ])lans were made early in 1902 to have the entire 
territory over whicli tlie ])rood was ex])ect(Ml fully and ade(|nat(>l\- 
i;;. -Ma]) showing d 
1 X, I'.il'. 
reported, an<l the responses received by this Bureau wvvc numei-ous 
and satisfactory for practically the whole area covered b\ the brood. 
In addition to this several of the entomologists of the different States 
witliin tlie range of the })rood carried on independent investiirations. 
and tlic records obtained V)y them, most of which have been pub- 
lished sinc(\ liave been incorporated with the reports received by this 
Bureau. All of the records agree in showin^i: the substantial accuracy 
of the limits of this brood as hitherto platted. The State records 
available and used in the followini; list of States and counties, so far 
as they represent counties new to our records, are those reported by 
Pettit for Michigan, Smith for New Jersey, Sanderson for Delaware, 
