I don't mind the screenshot at all, it gives me more chance to ramble about this!
Absolutely true, since getting into hymenoptera taxonomy I've seen firsthand how much it never ends-- definitely there is much more to describe than could be be done in a lifetime. It's beautiful and daunting and exciting to me.
My current work (which is kind of an accidental "basically a master's thesis but without getting a master's degree") involves describing a handful of new species in the chalcid genus *Eurytoma* (family Eurytomidae), but that genus is massive and definitely in need of revision. Trouble is that they're also very difficult, so many of them look near-identical, even to me, and I've been staring at them under microscopes for the better part of a year at this point. Still, someone will have to do it at some point......there's a possibility that someone could end up being future me, but who knows, haha.
Meanwhile, I've also been involved in a variety of side projects with the grad student I work under, who mostly does gall wasp stuff. Front that I can say that the superfamily Cynipoidea is due to get exploded and restructured one of these days-- another Chalcidoidea situation where you're going to end up with a bunch of new families. Cynipidae and Figitidae definitely arent monophyletic ❤️. But that's a huge undertaking, and only in the earlier stages at this point, so it's more of a "that'll happen at some point years down the line" rather than a "there's actively a manuscript being written for this"
but on a smaller scale there's a LOT of work to be done in cynipoidea. especially outside of cynipini (the oak gall wasps), there's literally like....4 or 5 people working on non-cynipini total and 2 of them are in the lab I work with. I could be a 3rd person if you count my involvement here.
And at this point it's a really common experience in this lab to have moments of "oh there are so many more species here than people thought", it's practically par for the course! The inquiline gall wasp genus I mentioned in the tags before, Ceroptres? Has like less than 20 described species in the US rn. I've been involved in the paper where another 22 of them are being described, and it's only scratching the surface because they're a lot more specialized than we thought. If someone went through unsorted material from that genus at one of the major museum collections they'd easily find, what, hundreds of new species?
And this isn't that unusual! The recurring theme is that as soon as you start to look closer, especially with host specialization in mind, you realize "dear god there are hundreds of thousands of undescribed species"