taxonID	type	description	language	source
3FF1B4B5A2C650F2892A7DD3525024E3.taxon	description	Fig. 4	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
3FF1B4B5A2C650F2892A7DD3525024E3.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. A. jeanae is most similar to A. laurenae sp. nov. but is best distinguished by the dimensions of F 2 in females, which in A. jeanae is 3.8 × as long as wide (Fig. 4 B) but 3.3 × as long as wide in A. laurenae (Fig. 5 B). The sculpture of the mesoscutellar disc (Fig. 4 F) is also useful; the mesoscutellar disc is more or less rugose-reticulate throughout in A. jeanae but only has rugose-reticulate sculpture toward the outer margins in A. laurenae.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
3FF1B4B5A2C650F2892A7DD3525024E3.taxon	description	Description. Female (Fig. 4 A) – Body length: 1.9 – 3.2 mm (x ̄ = 2.7 mm; n = 25; holotype = 2.6 mm). Color: Antenna color: red brown throughout, at most slightly darker distally than proximally. Head color: vertex and occiput dark red brown, mandibles red brown basally to darker red brown apically, rest of head red brown throughout. Mesosoma color: pronotum and propodeum red brown laterally to dark red brown medially, mesoscutum dark red brown, scutellum dark red brown, and mesopleuron dark red brown dorsally and ventrally but red brown medially. Wing membrane color: hyaline throughout. Wing vein color: light brown. Leg color: red brown throughout, except for apical tarsomere which is conspicuously darker. Metasoma color: red brown to dark red brown. Antennae (Fig. 4 B): Antennomere count: 13. F 1 length: 2.4 × as long as wide. F 2 length: 3.8 × as long as wide. F 2: F 1 length ratio: 1.5. Placodeal sensilla on F 2: absent; sensilla present only on F 3 and following antennomeres. Head (Fig. 4 C): Upper frons sculpture: reticulate. Gena posterolateral projection in anterior view: distinctly projecting past compound eyes. Facial radiating striae: distinct and complete, reaching compound eyes. Supraclypeal area sculpture: reticulate. Supraclypeal area projection: slightly projecting. OOL vs POL: OOL distinctly longer. OOL vs LOL: OOL greater than twice LOL. POL vs LOL: POL greater than twice LOL. LOL vs DLO: LOL longer. Vertex sculpture: reticulate throughout. Clypeus sculpture: reticulate. Mesosoma (Figs 4 D – F): Pronotum pilosity: densely pilose along anterior margin and with only sparse setae elsewhere. Pronotum excluding pronotal plate sculpture: reticulate. Pronotal plate sculpture: reticulate. Mesopleuron excluding speculum sculpture: reticulate with fine intermediate striae. Speculum sculpture: reticulate. Mesopleuron pilosity: ventral margin and mesopleural triangle densely pilose and bare elsewhere. Mesoscutum pilosity: sparsely pilose. Mesoscutum sculpture: reticulate. Apparent length of anterior parallel lines: reaching one third across mesoscutum. Morphology of anterior parallel lines: narrow, distinct throughout perceptible length. Apparent length of parapsidal grooves: reaching halfway across mesoscutum. Morphology of parapsidal grooves: narrow, distinct throughout perceptible length. Morphology of median mesoscutal impression: apparent as a shallow impression extending across most of mesoscutum. Notauli completeness: incomplete, distinct posteriorly to indistinct in anterior third. Morphology of notauli: appearing as wide indentations with sloping edges throughout distinct portions. Metapleural sulcus: meeting posterior mesopleuron at about one third of its height. Lateral propodeal carinae: distinct and subparallel. Metapleuron sculpture: reticulate. Mesoscutellar foveae distinction: distinct, relatively deep anteriorly to shallower and inconspicuously delimited posteriorly. Mesoscutellar foveae sculpture: reticulate. Mesoscutellar disc sculpture: usually rugose-reticulate throughout; primarily reticulate, but usually with distinct rugose sculpture apparent throughout most of mesoscutellar disc. Mesoscutellar foveae length: reaching about one third across mesoscutellar disc. Mesoscutellar foveae shape: subquadrate, about as wide as long, separated by a narrow linear carina. Mesoscutellar disc shape: subcircular, about as wide as long. Wings: Marginal cell length: 3.2 × as long as wide. Fore wing distal fringe of marginal setae: absent. Metasoma: Punctation of metasomal terga: T 3 punctate only in posterior third and with T 4 and following punctate throughout. Male (Fig. 4 G) – Same as female except for the following: Body length: 1.8 – 2.6 mm (x ̄ = 2.1 mm; n = 25). Antennae: Antennomere count: 14. F 1 length: 2.4 × as long as wide. F 2 length: 2.9 × as long as wide. F 2: F 1 length ratio: 1.4. Placodeal sensilla on F 2: present. Wings: Fore wing distal fringe of marginal setae: present. Metasoma: Metasoma size: conspicuously smaller than in female.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
3FF1B4B5A2C650F2892A7DD3525024E3.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Tooker et al. (2004) reported this species only from several prairie sites in Illinois (USA). Nastasi and Deans (2021) did not report additional localities. However, specimens we examined revealed records from three additional state records: Indiana, Iowa, and Wisconsin. A verifiable iNaturalist observation (https: // www. inaturalist. org / observations / 114414672) also records this species from Ohio; we have since examined adult gall wasps reared from the plant material from the same site, which confirmed their suspected identity (in litt.). Lastly, a specimen identified during this study (USNMENT 01822302; see complete specimen data in Suppl. material 1: table 1) confirms the occurrence of this species in Missouri (Columbia, Boone County) (see discussion). Known and potential distribution are summarized in Fig. 9.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
644225A058885476940E95579A24418C.taxon	description	Fig. 5	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
644225A058885476940E95579A24418C.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. See diagnosis to Antistrophus jeanae Tooker & Hanks, 2004.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
644225A058885476940E95579A24418C.taxon	description	Description. Female (Fig. 5 A) – Body length: 1.8 – 2.6 mm (x ̄ = 2.2 mm; n = 25; holotype = 2.6 mm). Color: Antenna color: red brown throughout, at most slightly darker distally than proximally. Head color: vertex and occiput dark red brown, mandibles red brown basally to darker red brown apically, rest of head red brown throughout. Mesosoma color: pronotum and propodeum red brown laterally to dark red brown medially, mesoscutum dark red brown, scutellum dark red brown, and mesopleuron dark red brown dorsally and ventrally but red brown medially. Wing membrane color: hyaline throughout. Wing vein color: light brown. Leg color: red brown throughout, except for apical tarsomere which is conspicuously darker. Metasoma color: red brown to dark red brown. Antennae (Fig. 5 B): Antennomere count: 13. F 1 length: 2.2 × as long as wide. F 2 length: 3.3 × as long as wide. F 2: F 1 length ratio: 1.4. Placodeal sensilla on F 2: absent; sensilla present only on F 3 and following antennomeres. Head (Fig. 5 C): Upper frons sculpture: reticulate. Gena posterolateral projection in anterior view: distinctly projecting past compound eyes. Facial radiating striae: distinct and complete, reaching compound eyes. Supraclypeal area sculpture: reticulate. Supraclypeal area projection: slightly projecting. OOL vs POL: OOL distinctly longer. OOL vs LOL: OOL greater than twice LOL. POL vs LOL: POL greater than twice LOL. LOL vs DLO: LOL longer. Vertex sculpture: reticulate throughout. Clypeus sculpture: reticulate. Mesosoma (Figs 5 D – F): Pronotum pilosity: densely pilose along anterior margin and with only sparse setae elsewhere. Pronotum excluding pronotal plate sculpture: reticulate. Pronotal plate sculpture: reticulate. Mesopleuron excluding speculum sculpture: reticulate with fine intermediate striae. Speculum sculpture: reticulate. Mesopleuron pilosity: ventral margin and mesopleural triangle densely pilose and bare elsewhere. Mesoscutum pilosity: sparsely pilose. Mesoscutum sculpture: reticulate. Apparent length of anterior parallel lines: reaching one third across mesoscutum. Morphology of anterior parallel lines: narrow, distinct throughout perceptible length. Apparent length of parapsidal grooves: reaching halfway across mesoscutum. Morphology of parapsidal grooves: narrow, distinct throughout perceptible length. Morphology of median mesoscutal impression: apparent as a shallow impression extending across most of mesoscutum. Notauli completeness: incomplete, distinct posteriorly to indistinct in anterior third. Morphology of notauli: appearing as wide indentations with sloping edges throughout distinct portions. Metapleural sulcus: meeting posterior mesopleuron at about one third of its height. Lateral propodeal carinae: distinct and subparallel. Metapleuron sculpture: reticulate. Mesoscutellar foveae distinction: distinct, relatively deep anteriorly to shallower and inconspicuously delimited posteriorly. Mesoscutellar foveae sculpture: reticulate. Mesoscutellar disc sculpture: rugose-reticulate, primarily reticulate, but with distinct rugose-reticulate sculpture seemingly restricted to outer margins. Mesoscutellar foveae length: long, reaching about one third across mesoscutellar disc. Mesoscutellar foveae shape: subquadrate, about as wide as long, separated by a narrow linear carina. Mesoscutellar disc shape: subcircular, about as wide as long. Wings: Marginal cell length: 3.1 × as long as wide. Fore wing distal fringe of marginal setae: absent. Metasoma: Punctation of metasomal terga: T 3 punctate only in posterior third and with T 4 and following punctate throughout. Male (Fig. 5 G) – Same as female except for the following: Body length: 1.3 – 2.1 mm (x ̄ = 1.8; n = 25). Antennae: Antennomere count: 14. F 1 length: 2.3 × as long as wide. F 2 length: 3.2 × as long as wide. F 2: F 1 length ratio: 1.5. Placodeal sensilla on F 2: present. Wings: Fore wing distal fringe of marginal setae: present. Metasoma: Metasoma size: conspicuously smaller than in female.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
644225A058885476940E95579A24418C.taxon	etymology	Etymology. Named for Lauren Ahlert, a biology teacher at Wayne Valley High School in Wayne, New Jersey, USA, who has served as a tremendous source of inspiration and passion for the author of this species.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
644225A058885476940E95579A24418C.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Material examined in this study reveals that this species occurs in Illinois, Iowa, and Wisconsin (USA; see Suppl. material 1: table 1). A verified iNaturalist record (https: // www. inaturalist. org / observations / 136446787) also suggests that this species occurs in Mississippi. Known and potential distribution are summarized in Fig. 9.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
C7D8B46B4DBF566180573059EA645D17.taxon	description	Fig. 6	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
C7D8B46B4DBF566180573059EA645D17.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. A. meganae is the only species of the rufus complex in which the mesoscutellar foveae (Fig. 6 F) are long and ovate, reaching nearly halfway across the mesoscutellar disc. A. meganae also differs from most other members of the rufus complex by the POL (Fig. 6 C), which is longer than the OOL in A. meganae and A. minor but shorter than the OOL in the other species.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
C7D8B46B4DBF566180573059EA645D17.taxon	description	Description. Female (Fig. 6 A) – Body length: 1.8 – 3.2 mm (x ̄ = 2.5 mm; n = 25; holotype = 2.3 mm). Color: Antenna color: red brown throughout, at most slightly darker distally than proximally. Head color: vertex and occiput dark red brown, mandibles red brown basally to darker red brown apically, rest of head red brown throughout. Mesosoma color: pronotum and propodeum red brown laterally to dark red brown medially, mesoscutum dark red brown with distinct posterolateral red brown spots, scutellum dark red brown, and mesopleuron dark red brown dorsally and ventrally but red brown medially. Wing membrane color: hyaline throughout. Wing vein color: light brown. Leg color: red brown throughout, except for apical tarsomere which is conspicuously darker. Metasoma color: red brown to dark red brown. Antennae (Fig. 6 B): Antennomere count: 13. F 1 length: 2.6 × as long as wide. F 2 length: 3.6 × as long as wide. F 2: F 1 length ratio: 1.4. Placodeal sensilla on F 2: absent; sensilla present only on F 3 and following antennomeres. Head (Fig. 6 C): Upper frons sculpture: reticulate. Gena posterolateral projection in anterior view: distinctly projecting past compound eyes. Facial radiating striae: distinct and complete, reaching compound eyes. Supraclypeal area sculpture: reticulate. Supraclypeal area projection: slightly projecting. OOL vs POL: POL distinctly longer. OOL vs LOL: OOL less than twice LOL. POL vs LOL: POL twice LOL. LOL vs DLO: LOL longer. Vertex sculpture: reticulate throughout. Clypeus sculpture: reticulate. Mesosoma (Figs 6 D – F): Pronotum pilosity: densely pilose along anterior margin and with only sparse setae elsewhere. Pronotum excluding pronotal plate sculpture: reticulate. Pronotal plate sculpture: reticulate. Mesopleuron excluding speculum sculpture: reticulate with fine intermediate striae. Speculum sculpture: reticulate. Mesopleuron pilosity: ventral margin and mesopleural triangle densely pilose and bare elsewhere. Mesoscutum pilosity: sparsely pilose. Mesoscutum sculpture: reticulate. Apparent length of anterior parallel lines: reaching one third across mesoscutum. Morphology of anterior parallel lines: narrow, distinct throughout perceptible length. Apparent length of parapsidal grooves: reaching halfway across mesoscutum. Morphology of parapsidal grooves: narrow, distinct throughout perceptible length. Morphology of median mesoscutal impression: apparent as a shallow impression extending across most of mesoscutum. Notauli completeness: incomplete, distinct posteriorly to indistinct in anterior third. Morphology of notauli: appearing as wide indentations with sloping edges throughout distinct portions. Metapleural sulcus: meeting posterior mesopleuron at about one third of its height. Lateral propodeal carinae: distinct and subparallel. Metapleuron sculpture: reticulate. Mesoscutellar foveae distinction: distinct, relatively deep anteriorly to shallower and inconspicuously delimited posteriorly. Mesoscutellar foveae sculpture: reticulate. Mesoscutellar disc sculpture: rugose-reticulate, primarily reticulate, but with distinct rugose-reticulate sculpture seemingly restricted to outer margins. Mesoscutellar foveae length: long, reaching nearly halfway across mesoscutellar disc. Mesoscutellar foveae shape: ovate, slightly longer than wide, separated by a subtriangular carina slightly wider posteriorly than anteriorly. Mesoscutellar disc shape: subcircular, about as wide as long. Wings: Marginal cell length: 3.3 × as long as wide. Fore wing distal fringe of marginal setae: absent. Metasoma: Punctation of metasomal terga: T 3 punctate only in posterior third and with T 4 and following punctate throughout. Male (Fig. 6 G) – Same as female except for the following: Body length: 1.3 – 2.5 mm (x ̄ = 2.1 mm; n = 25). Antennae: Antennomere count: 14. F 1 length: 2.5 × as long as wide. F 2 length: 3.0 × as long as wide. F 2: F 1 length ratio: 1.4 (as in female). Placodeal sensilla on F 2: present. Wings: Fore wing distal fringe of marginal setae: present. Metasoma: Metasoma size: conspicuously smaller than in female.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
C7D8B46B4DBF566180573059EA645D17.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Tooker et al. (2004) reported this species only from several prairie sites in Illinois (USA). Nastasi and Deans (2021) did not report additional localities; however, the specimens we examined revealed novel records from Wisconsin (Suppl. material 1: table 1). We also sequenced DNA barcodes for individuals from Ohio (Suppl. material 1: table 6), and a series of specimens identified using the key represents a new state record from Michigan (see Discussion; Suppl. material 1: table 1). Known and potential distribution are summarized in Fig. 9.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
62CB72514DC65377B4765A3EC538E20F.taxon	description	Fig. 7	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
62CB72514DC65377B4765A3EC538E20F.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. A. minor is the only described species of Antistrophus in which the mesoscutellar disc is strongly ovate and distinctly wider than long (Fig. 7 F). Additionally, A. minor is easily separable from A. rufus (which also induces inconspicuous galls in stems of the S. laciniatum) and A. meganae by the shape and length of the mesoscutellar foveae; in A. minor, the mesoscutellar foveae are subquadrate and reach about one third across the mesoscutellar disc (Fig. 7 F) but are shorter and subrectangular in A. rufus (Fig. 8 F) and longer and ovate in A. meganae (Fig. 6 F). A. minor and A. meganae are also the only species of the rufus complex in which the POL is longer than the OOL. See additional comments in the diagnosis to A. rufus.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
62CB72514DC65377B4765A3EC538E20F.taxon	description	Description. Female (Fig. 7 A) – Body length: 1.4 – 2.4 mm (x ̄ = 2.0 mm; n = 25; lectotype = 2.3). Color: Antenna color: red brown throughout, at most slightly darker distally than proximally. Head color: vertex and occiput dark red brown, mandibles red brown basally to darker red brown apically, rest of head red brown throughout. Color: pronotum and propodeum mostly red brown, with some dark red brown coloration medially, mesoscutum dark red brown with at least distinct red brown spots posterolaterally, scutellum red brown to dark red brown, and mesopleuron dark red brown to red brown. Wing membrane color: hyaline throughout. Wing vein color: light brown. Leg color: red brown throughout, except for apical tarsomere which is conspicuously darker. Metasoma color: red brown to dark red brown. Antennae (Fig. 7 B): Antennomere count: 13. F 1 length: 2.6 × as long as wide. F 2 length: 3.6 × as long as wide. F 2: F 1 length ratio: 1.4. Placodeal sensilla on F 2: absent; sensilla present only on F 3 and following antennomeres. Head (Fig. 7 C): Upper frons sculpture: reticulate. Gena posterolateral projection in anterior view: distinctly projecting past compound eyes. Facial radiating striae: distinct and complete, reaching compound eyes. Supraclypeal area sculpture: reticulate. Supraclypeal area projection: slightly projecting. OOL vs POL: POL distinctly longer. OOL vs LOL: OOL twice LOL. POL vs LOL: POL greater than twice LOL. LOL vs DLO: LOL longer. Vertex sculpture: reticulate throughout. Clypeus sculpture: reticulate. Mesosoma (Figs 7 D – F): Pronotum pilosity: densely pilose along anterior margin and with only sparse setae elsewhere. Pronotum excluding pronotal plate sculpture: reticulate. Pronotal plate sculpture: reticulate. Mesopleuron excluding speculum sculpture: reticulate with fine intermediate striae. Speculum sculpture: reticulate. Mesopleuron pilosity: ventral margin and mesopleural triangle densely pilose and bare elsewhere. Mesoscutum pilosity: sparsely pilose. Mesoscutum sculpture: reticulate. Apparent length of anterior parallel lines: reaching one third across mesoscutum. Morphology of anterior parallel lines: narrow, distinct throughout perceptible length. Apparent length of parapsidal grooves: reaching halfway across mesoscutum. Morphology of parapsidal grooves: narrow, distinct throughout perceptible length. Morphology of median mesoscutal impression: apparent as a shallow impression extending across most of mesoscutum. Notauli completeness: incomplete, distinct posteriorly to indistinct in anterior third. Morphology of notauli: appearing as wide indentations with sloping edges throughout distinct portions. Metapleural sulcus: meeting posterior mesopleuron at about one third of its height. Lateral propodeal carinae: distinct and subparallel. Metapleuron sculpture: reticulate. Mesoscutellar foveae distinction: distinct, relatively deep anteriorly to shallower and inconspicuously delimited posteriorly. Mesoscutellar foveae sculpture: reticulate. Mesoscutellar disc sculpture: rugose-reticulate, primarily reticulate, but with distinct rugose-reticulate sculpture seemingly restricted to outer margins. Mesoscutellar foveae length: long, reaching about one third across mesoscutellar disc. Mesoscutellar foveae shape: subovate, slightly longer than wide, separated by a narrow linear carina. Mesoscutellar disc shape: ovate, distinctly longer than wide. Wings: Marginal cell length: 3.1 × as long as wide. Fore wing distal fringe of marginal setae: absent. Metasoma: Punctation of metasomal terga: T 3 punctate only in posterior third and with T 4 and following punctate throughout. Male (Fig. 7 G) – Same as female except for the following: Body length: 1.1 – 2.0 mm (x ̄ = 1.6; n = 25). Antennae: Antennomere count: 14. F 1 length: 2.3 × as long as wide. F 2 length: 2.9 × as long as wide. F 2: F 1 length ratio: 1.3. Placodeal sensilla on F 2: present. Wings: Fore wing distal fringe of marginal setae: present. Metasoma: Metasoma size: conspicuously smaller than in female.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
62CB72514DC65377B4765A3EC538E20F.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Antistrophus minor was described from adults reared alongside A. rufus in Illinois. We examined specimens providing new state records from Iowa and Wisconsin. Known and potential distribution are summarized in Fig. 9. It appears that A. minor is likely sympatric with A. rufus throughout the distribution of S. laciniatum, although further rearing of Silphium species will be needed to better understand the role of geography in the distribution of Antistrophus, especially regarding these two species.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
CEACC3F2F0CF5987846108C5DA1AEA07.taxon	description	Fig. 8	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
CEACC3F2F0CF5987846108C5DA1AEA07.taxon	diagnosis	Diagnosis. A. rufus is easily recognized amongst members of the rufus complex by the shape and dimensions of the mesoscutellar foveae (Fig. 8 F), which are short and subrectangular in A. rufus but longer and subquadrate or ovate in the other species. The narrow, well-defined notauli (Fig. 8 E) are also characteristic, as the other species all have wider and less-defined notauli. The smallest A. rufus specimens may exhibit slightly wider notauli, but the short, rectangular scutellar foveae are always apparent and readily distinguish this species from others. A. rufus also has the shortest F 2 relative to its width in females (2.8 × as long as wide; Fig. 8 B )). A. rufus are commonly reared alongside A. minor from inconspicuous, externally imperceptible galls in stems of Silphium laciniatum L.; these species are separated by the characters given above and those in the diagnosis of A. minor.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
CEACC3F2F0CF5987846108C5DA1AEA07.taxon	description	Description. Female (Fig. 8 A) – Body length: 2.3 – 3.6 mm (x ̄ = 2.9 mm; n = 25; lectotype = 2.8 mm). Color: Antenna color: red brown throughout, at most slightly darker distally than proximally. Head color: vertex and occiput dark red brown, mandibles red brown basally to darker red brown apically, rest of head red brown throughout. Mesosoma color: pronotum and propodeum red brown laterally to dark red brown medially, mesoscutum dark red brown with distinct posterolateral red brown spots, scutellum dark red brown, and mesopleuron dark red brown dorsally and ventrally but red brown medially. Wing membrane color: hyaline throughout. Wing vein color: light brown. Leg color: red brown throughout, except for apical tarsomere which is conspicuously darker. Metasoma color: red brown to dark red brown. Antennae (Fig. 8 B): Antennomere count: 13. F 1 length: 2.4 × as long as wide. F 2 length: 2.8 × as long as wide. F 2: F 1 length ratio: 1.2. Placodeal sensilla on F 2: absent; sensilla present only on F 3 and following antennomeres. Head (Fig. 8 C): Upper frons sculpture: reticulate. Gena posterolateral projection in anterior view: distinctly projecting past compound eyes. Facial radiating striae: distinct and complete, reaching compound eyes. Supraclypeal area sculpture: reticulate. Supraclypeal area projection: slightly projecting. OOL vs POL: OOL distinctly longer. OOL vs LOL: OOL greater than twice LOL. POL vs LOL: POL twice LOL. LOL vs DLO: LOL longer. Vertex sculpture: reticulate throughout. Clypeus sculpture: reticulate. Mesosoma (Figs 8 D – F): Pronotum pilosity: densely pilose along anterior margin and with only sparse setae elsewhere. Pronotum excluding pronotal plate sculpture: reticulate. Pronotal plate sculpture: reticulate. Mesopleuron excluding speculum sculpture: reticulate with fine intermediate striae. Speculum sculpture: reticulate. Mesopleuron pilosity: ventral margin and mesopleural triangle densely pilose and bare elsewhere. Mesoscutum pilosity: sparsely pilose. Mesoscutum sculpture: reticulate. Apparent length of anterior parallel lines: reaching one third across mesoscutum. Morphology of anterior parallel lines: narrow, distinct throughout perceptible length. Apparent length of parapsidal grooves: reaching halfway across mesoscutum. Morphology of parapsidal grooves: narrow, distinct throughout perceptible length. Morphology of median mesoscutal impression: apparent as a shallow impression extending across most of mesoscutum. Notauli completeness: incomplete, distinct posteriorly to indistinct in anterior third. Morphology of notauli: appearing as narrow, well-delimited indentations throughout distinct portions. Metapleural sulcus: meeting posterior mesopleuron at about one third of its height. Lateral propodeal carinae: distinct and subparallel. Metapleuron sculpture: reticulate. Mesoscutellar foveae distinction: distinct, relatively deep anteriorly to shallower and inconspicuously delimited posteriorly. Mesoscutellar foveae sculpture: reticulate. Mesoscutellar disc sculpture: rugose-reticulate, primarily reticulate, but with distinct rugose-reticulate sculpture seemingly restricted to outer margins. Mesoscutellar foveae length: short, occupying only anterior quarter of mesoscutellar disc. Mesoscutellar foveae shape: subrectangular, distinctly wider than long, and separated by a broad, elevated linear carina. Mesoscutellar disc shape: subcircular, about as wide as long. Wings: Marginal cell length: 2.7 × as long as wide. Fore wing distal fringe of marginal setae: absent. Metasoma: Punctation of metasomal terga: T 3 punctate only in posterior third and with T 4 and following punctate throughout. Male (Fig. 8 G) – Same as female except for the following: Body length: 1.9 – 3.5 mm (x ̄ = 2.5 mm; n = 25). Antennae: Antennomere count: 14. F 1 length: 2.1 × as long as wide. F 2 length: 2.5 × as long as wide. F 2: F 1 length ratio: 1.3. Placodeal sensilla on F 2: present. Wings: Fore wing distal fringe of marginal setae: present. Metasoma: Metasoma size: conspicuously smaller than in female.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
CEACC3F2F0CF5987846108C5DA1AEA07.taxon	distribution	Distribution. Antistrophus rufus was described from material collected in Illinois (USA) and has since been reported from Kansas (Tooker et al. 2004; Nastasi and Deans 2021). Additional material that we examined revealed additional records from Iowa and Wisconsin, and reiterated occurrence of this species in Kansas (Suppl. material 1: table 1). Known and potential distribution are summarized in Fig. 9.	en	Nastasi, Louis F., Tooker, John F., Davis, Charles K., Smith, Cecil N., Frey, Timothy S., Hatfield, M. J., Presnall, Tara M., Hines, Heather M., Deans, Andrew R. (2024): Cryptic or underworked? Taxonomic revision of the Antistrophus rufus species complex (Cynipoidea, Aulacideini). Journal of Hymenoptera Research 97: 399-439, DOI: 10.3897/jhr.97.121918
