Okay, so I need to find the measure of angle STR. Let me first try to understand the problem. The diagram has points P, Q, R, S, and T. The Asymptote code draws lines between these points, but maybe I can visualize it. The key pieces of information given are that ST is parallel to QR, angle P is 40 degrees, and angle Q is 35 degrees. Hmm.

First, let me recall some geometry concepts. Since ST is parallel to QR, maybe there are some properties related to parallel lines and transversals. Like corresponding angles or alternate interior angles. Also, angles at points P and Q are given. Maybe triangle properties are involved here.

Let me try to sketch the diagram mentally. Point Q is at the origin, R is to the right, P is somewhere above R, connected to Q and R. Then S is a point between P and Q, and T is a point connected to R and S. So ST is parallel to QR. So QR is the base, and ST is another line parallel to it somewhere above.

Since angle P is 40 degrees, that's the angle at point P between lines PS and PR. Angle Q is 35 degrees, which is the angle at point Q between lines QP and QR. Hmm, maybe triangle PQR is involved here? Wait, but in the Asymptote code, they draw T connected to S, so maybe triangle STR is part of a larger figure.

Wait, maybe triangle PQR is a triangle with points P, Q, R. Then S is a point on PQ, and T is a point on PR, such that ST is parallel to QR. Since ST is parallel to QR, triangle PST is similar to triangle PQR by the basic proportionality theorem or Thales' theorem. But I need to check if that's applicable here.

Alternatively, since ST || QR, the corresponding angles where a transversal cuts them should be equal. Let me consider line PR as a transversal cutting ST and QR. Then angle at S between PS and ST should be equal to angle at Q between PQ and QR. Wait, angle Q is 35 degrees. So maybe angle STR is related to that.

Wait, angle STR is at point S between points T, S, and R. So in triangle STR, angle at S is STR. Since ST is parallel to QR, maybe the corresponding angle at Q is equal to angle STR? Let me think.

If ST is parallel to QR, then when line SR is a transversal, the corresponding angles at S and Q should be equal. But angle at Q is 35 degrees. So angle STR would be 35 degrees? But that seems too straightforward. Let me verify.

Wait, angle at Q is 35 degrees. If we look at triangle PQR, angle at Q is 35 degrees. Then, when we draw ST parallel to QR, then angle STR would be equal to angle PQR because they are corresponding angles. So yes, angle STR is 35 degrees. But wait, the problem says angle P is 40 degrees. So maybe there's a triangle at point P with angle 40 degrees.

Hold on, maybe triangle PQS? Let me check. If S is on PQ, then triangle PQS has angle at P of 40 degrees. Wait, but I need to figure out more information. Maybe I need to use the fact that angles in a triangle sum up to 180 degrees.

Alternatively, maybe using the concept of exterior angles. If ST is parallel to QR, then the angle at T between ST and PR should be equal to the angle at R between QR and PR. But angle at R is angle QRP. Wait, do we know angle QRP?

Wait, in triangle PQR, we know angle at Q is 35 degrees. If we can find angle at P, which is 40 degrees, then angle at R would be 180 - 35 - 40 = 105 degrees. So angle QRP is 105 degrees. Then, since ST is parallel to QR, angle at T (which is angle STR) would be equal to angle QRP, which is 105 degrees? Wait, that contradicts the previous thought.

Wait, now I'm confused. Let me clarify. If ST is parallel to QR, and PR is a transversal, then the corresponding angles at S and R should be equal. So angle at S (which is angle STR) should be equal to angle at R (which is angle QRP). So angle STR = angle QRP = 105 degrees. But that seems too big, given the Asymptote code.

Wait, looking at the Asymptote code again: Q is at (0,0), R is at (1,0), P is at (1.1,0.5), SS is 0.6*P, and T is R + 0.6*(P-R). So T is 0.6 units from R towards P. And S is 0.6*P, so 0.6 along the way from Q to P? Wait, no, SS is 0.6*P, but since Q is at (0,0), maybe S is 0.6 of the way from Q to P? Wait, the code says SS = 0.6*P, but in Asymptote, multiplication by a scalar scales the coordinates. So if P is (1.1, 0.5), then 0.6*P would be (0.66, 0.3). But since Q is at (0,0), maybe S is the point from Q to P, 0.6 of the way. So S = Q + 0.6*(P - Q) = (0 + 0.6*(1.1 - 0), 0 + 0.6*(0.5 - 0)) = (0.66, 0.3). Then T is R + 0.6*(P - R) = (1,0) + 0.6*( (1.1 - 1), (0.5 - 0) ) = (1,0) + 0.6*(0.1, 0.5) = (1 + 0.06, 0 + 0.3) = (1.06, 0.3). So T is (1.06, 0.3), S is (0.66, 0.3). So ST is a horizontal line at y=0.3 from x=0.66 to x=1.06. QR is from (0,0) to (1,0), so it's the x-axis. So ST is indeed parallel to QR since both are horizontal. So the figure is such that ST is parallel to QR, and both are horizontal lines.

So in this coordinate system, point S is at (0.66, 0.3), T is at (1.06, 0.3). So ST is from (0.66,0.3) to (1.06,0.3). Then, point P is at (1.1,0.5). So line SP connects (0.66,0.3) to (1.1,0.5). Line PR connects (1.1,0.5) to (1,0). So angle at P is between SP and PR. Let me calculate that angle. The coordinates can help.

First, vector PS: from S(0.66,0.3) to P(1.1,0.5): (1.1 - 0.66, 0.5 - 0.3) = (0.44, 0.2). Vector PR: from P(1.1,0.5) to R(1,0): (1 - 1.1, 0 - 0.5) = (-0.1, -0.5). The angle between these two vectors can be found using the dot product formula:

cos(theta) = (PS . PR) / (|PS| |PR|)

PS . PR = (0.44)(-0.1) + (0.2)(-0.5) = -0.044 - 0.1 = -0.144

|PS| = sqrt(0.44² + 0.2²) = sqrt(0.1936 + 0.04) = sqrt(0.2336) ≈ 0.4833

|PR| = sqrt((-0.1)² + (-0.5)²) = sqrt(0.01 + 0.25) = sqrt(0.26) ≈ 0.5099

So cos(theta) ≈ -0.144 / (0.4833 * 0.5099) ≈ -0.144 / 0.246 ≈ -0.585

So theta ≈ arccos(-0.585) ≈ 125.6 degrees. Wait, but the problem states angle P is 40 degrees. Hmm, but according to the coordinates given, angle at P is approximately 125.6 degrees. That's conflicting. So maybe the Asymptote code's coordinates are just a diagram, not to scale? Because in reality, angle P is given as 40 degrees. So perhaps the Asymptote code is just a rough sketch, and the actual problem is more general.

Therefore, maybe I shouldn't rely on the coordinates but just the given angles. Let's go back.

Given that ST is parallel to QR, angle P is 40 degrees, angle Q is 35 degrees. Need to find angle STR.

Let me consider triangle PQR. Wait, but in the diagram, points S and T are connected, so maybe the figure is more complex. Let me try to label all known angles and see.

In triangle PQR, if angle at Q is 35 degrees, angle at P is 40 degrees, then angle at R is 180 - 35 - 40 = 105 degrees. So angle QRP is 105 degrees. Then, since ST is parallel to QR, and line PR is a transversal, the corresponding angles at S and R should be equal. So angle STR (which is at S between T and R) should be equal to angle QRP (which is at R between Q and P). So angle STR = angle QRP = 105 degrees. But that seems too big because angle Q is 35 degrees. Maybe I made a mistake here.

Wait, angle STR is at point S, between points T, S, and R. If ST is parallel to QR, then angle STR is equal to angle QRP. But angle QRP is the angle at R in triangle PQR. So if angle QRP is 105 degrees, then angle STR is also 105 degrees. But 105 degrees is quite large. However, looking at the Asymptote code, point T is connected to R and S, and S is connected to P. So maybe triangle STR is a different triangle. Wait, maybe angle STR is part of triangle STR, but if ST is parallel to QR, then maybe there's a relationship there.

Alternatively, maybe using the concept of alternate interior angles. Since ST || QR, then angle at S between ST and SR is equal to angle at R between QR and PR. So angle STR (which is at S) is equal to angle QRP (which is at R). So angle STR = angle QRP = 105 degrees.

But wait, in triangle PQR, angle Q is 35 degrees, angle P is 40 degrees, so angle R is 105 degrees. Therefore, angle QRP is 105 degrees. Therefore, angle STR should be 105 degrees. But the problem says angle P is 40 degrees, which is angle SPQ or angle QPS? Wait, in the Asymptote code, angle P is at point P between SP and PR. So angle P is 40 degrees.

Wait, maybe triangle P is connected to S and R. So in triangle PSR, angle at P is 40 degrees. Then, since ST is parallel to QR, maybe we can use similar triangles or some proportionality.

Alternatively, maybe triangle STR is similar to triangle PQR. If ST is parallel to QR, then by the basic proportionality theorem (Thales' theorem), if a line divides two sides of a triangle proportionally, then it is parallel to the third side. But here, ST is parallel to QR, and S is on PQ, T is on PR. So by Thales' theorem, PQ/PS = PR/PT. But maybe this is not directly helpful here.

Alternatively, since ST || QR, then the angles formed by a transversal will be equal. For example, angle at S between ST and SP is equal to angle at Q between QP and QR. But angle at Q is 35 degrees. So angle between SP and ST is 35 degrees.

Wait, angle between SP and ST is equal to angle between QP and QR, which is 35 degrees. So maybe angle P in triangle PST is 35 degrees. But angle P in the problem is given as 40 degrees. Hmm, confusing.

Wait, perhaps I need to consider triangle PST. If angle at S is 35 degrees (from the parallel lines), angle at P is 40 degrees (given), then angle at T would be 180 - 35 - 40 = 105 degrees. But angle STR is at S, but angle at S in triangle PST is 35 degrees. Wait, but angle STR is different. Wait, maybe angle STR is part of triangle STR, which is connected to point R.

Alternatively, maybe I need to use the concept of exterior angles. If I can find angle at S in triangle STR, maybe through some other relationships.

Wait, let's try another approach. Since ST is parallel to QR, and PR is a transversal, the corresponding angles are equal. So angle between PR and ST at point T is equal to angle between PR and QR at point R. But angle between PR and QR at R is angle QRP, which is 105 degrees. Therefore, angle between PR and ST at T is also 105 degrees. But angle STR is at point S, so maybe that's not directly helpful.

Alternatively, maybe triangle STR is part of triangle PQR. Wait, point S is on PQ, point T is on PR, so triangle STR is inside triangle PQR. Since ST is parallel to QR, triangles PST and PQR are similar. Therefore, the ratio of sides is the same. So if we can find the ratio of PS to PQ, then we can find the ratio of PT to PR, but I don't have lengths here.

Alternatively, since angle at P is 40 degrees, and angle at Q is 35 degrees, perhaps the lines create some relationships. Wait, in triangle PQR, angle at P is 40 degrees, angle at Q is 35 degrees, so angle at R is 105 degrees as before. Then, since ST is parallel to QR, the angle at S between PS and ST is equal to angle at Q between PQ and QR, which is 35 degrees. So angle PST is 35 degrees. Then, in triangle PST, we have angle at P is 40 degrees, angle at S is 35 degrees, so angle at T is 105 degrees. Then, angle at T is 105 degrees. But angle STR is at S between T, S, R. Wait, how is that connected?

Wait, maybe angle STR is part of triangle STR. Let me consider point S, connected to T and R. So in triangle STR, we need to find angle at S. To find angle STR, we might need to know other angles in triangle STR. If we can find angle at T or angle at R, then we can compute angle S.

Alternatively, since ST is parallel to QR, the angles formed by a transversal with these lines are equal. So if we take line SR as a transversal, then angle at S between SR and ST is equal to angle at R between SR and QR. But angle at R between SR and QR is angle QRS. Wait, angle QRS is part of triangle PQR. In triangle PQR, angle at R is 105 degrees. So angle QRS is part of that. Wait, but triangle PQR's angle at R is 105 degrees. If we draw line SR, which is part of triangle PQR, then angle QRS is the same as angle PRQ, which is 105 degrees. But maybe that's not directly helpful.

Wait, perhaps using the concept of alternate interior angles. Since ST is parallel to QR, and PR is a transversal, then angle at T between PR and ST is equal to angle at R between PR and QR. So angle PRT (which is angle between PR and RT) is equal to angle QRP (which is 105 degrees). Therefore, angle PRT is 105 degrees. Then, in triangle PRT, angle at P is 40 degrees, angle at R is 105 degrees, so angle at T is 180 - 40 - 105 = 35 degrees. Then, angle at T is 35 degrees. But angle STR is at S, so maybe not directly.

Alternatively, maybe triangle STR is similar to some other triangle. Since ST is parallel to QR, and S is on PQ, T is on PR, then triangles PST and PQR are similar. Therefore, the ratio of sides is the same. So PS/PQ = PT/PR. If we denote PS = x, then PQ = x + SQ. But without lengths, maybe we can express angles.

Alternatively, maybe using the Law of Sines in triangles PST and PQR. In triangle PST, angle at P is 40 degrees, angle at S is 35 degrees, angle at T is 105 degrees. In triangle PQR, angle at P is 40 degrees, angle at Q is 35 degrees, angle at R is 105 degrees. So triangles PST and PQR are similar by AAA similarity. Therefore, all corresponding angles are equal. Therefore, angle STR, which is part of triangle STR, is equal to angle PQR, which is 35 degrees? Wait, no. Wait, angle STR is at S, which corresponds to angle at Q in triangle PQR. So if triangle PST ~ triangle PQR, then angle at S (which is angle PST) corresponds to angle at Q (which is 35 degrees). Therefore, angle PST is 35 degrees. Then, in triangle STR, angle at S is angle STR, which may be related.

Wait, maybe I need to consider that angle STR is equal to angle PQR because of the parallel lines. Since ST || QR, then angle STR (which is between SR and ST) is equal to angle PQR (which is between PQ and QR). Therefore, angle STR = angle PQR = 35 degrees.

But then, angle PQR is 35 degrees, which is given. So would angle STR be 35 degrees? But earlier, using corresponding angles, I thought angle STR was 105 degrees. Now, this is conflicting.

Wait, maybe the confusion arises from different points. Let me clarify:

- ST is parallel to QR.

- Angle at Q is 35 degrees (angle PQR).

- Angle at P is 40 degrees (angle SPQ or QPS?).

If line SR is a transversal cutting ST and QR, then the corresponding angles at S and R would be equal. Therefore, angle between SR and ST at S (angle STR) is equal to angle between SR and QR at R (angle QRS). But angle QRS is part of triangle PQR. In triangle PQR, angle at R is 105 degrees. However, angle QRS is not necessarily 105 degrees because triangle PQR's angle at R is between PR and QR, but angle QRS is between SR and QR. So unless SR is aligned with PR, which it isn't, angle QRS is different.

Alternatively, maybe using the fact that triangles PST and PQR are similar. Since ST || QR, triangles PST ~ PQR by AA similarity (angle at P is common, and angle PST = angle PQR = 35 degrees). Therefore, the ratio of sides is consistent. Therefore, the angles in triangle PST correspond to those in triangle PQR. Therefore, angle at S in triangle PST is 35 degrees, angle at T is 105 degrees. Then, angle STR is part of triangle STR. Hmm, but how does this connect?

Wait, perhaps angle STR is equal to angle QRP, which is 105 degrees. But how?

Alternatively, maybe using the concept of exterior angles. In triangle STR, angle at S is angle STR, angle at R is angle SRT, and angle at T is angle STR. Wait, no. Wait, triangle STR has points S, T, R. So angles at S, T, R.

If I can find two angles in triangle STR, then I can find the third. If I can relate angle STR to known angles.

Alternatively, since ST is parallel to QR, the angle between ST and SR at T is equal to the angle between QR and PR at R. So angle STR (at S) is equal to angle PQR (at Q). Therefore, angle STR = 35 degrees.

But then, angle PQR is 35 degrees, which is at point Q between PQ and QR. If angle STR is equal to that, then angle STR is 35 degrees. But earlier, using corresponding angles, I thought angle STR was 105 degrees. So which one is correct?

Wait, maybe it's the alternate interior angles. If ST || QR, and PR is a transversal, then angle at T between PR and ST is equal to angle at R between PR and QR. So angle PRT (at R) is equal to angle PRT (at T). Wait, that seems circular.

Wait, perhaps using the concept of consecutive interior angles. If ST || QR, and PR is a transversal, then the consecutive interior angles at T and R sum to 180 degrees. But angle at T (angle RT S) and angle at R (angle QRP) would sum to 180 degrees? But angle QRP is 105 degrees, so angle RT S would be 75 degrees? But that might not be directly helpful.

Alternatively, maybe considering triangle STR. If we can find two angles, we can find the third. For example, if angle S is angle STR, angle T is some angle, angle R is some angle. But without more information, it's hard.

Wait, maybe using the Law of Sines in triangle STR. But I don't have any side lengths. Alternatively, maybe using the fact that triangles PST and PQR are similar. Since triangle PST ~ triangle PQR (as established earlier by AA similarity), then the ratio of sides is equal, and the angles correspond. Therefore, angle at S in triangle PST is equal to angle at Q in triangle PQR, which is 35 degrees. Therefore, angle PST = 35 degrees. Then, in triangle STR, angle at S is angle STR, which is adjacent to angle PST. Wait, if angle PST is 35 degrees, and angle STR is part of triangle STR, maybe angle STR is 35 degrees? But angle PST is 35 degrees, which is at S between P and T. Then angle STR is at S between T and R. So unless PR is a straight line, these angles are separate. Therefore, maybe angle STR is not directly equal to 35 degrees.

Alternatively, perhaps using the fact that angle at S in triangle PST is 35 degrees, and angle at S in triangle STR is another angle. If we can relate these two angles through some property.

Wait, maybe considering that PR is divided by S and T such that PS/PR = PT/PQ (from similar triangles PST ~ PQR). Then, the ratio of the segments can help find some angles. But without lengths, maybe it's difficult.

Alternatively, maybe using the concept that the sum of angles around point S is 360 degrees. So angle around S: angle PST (35 degrees) + angle STR + angle between SP and SR = 360. But unless we know the angle between SP and SR, which is angle SRP, maybe we can find something.

Wait, angle SRP is part of triangle PQR. In triangle PQR, angle at R is 105 degrees. If line SR is drawn, then angle SRP is part of that 105 degrees. If we can find angle SRP, then angle STR can be found as 180 - angle SRP - angle P (40 degrees). Wait, but angle SRP is part of triangle SRP.

Alternatively, maybe using the fact that in triangle PQR, angle at R is 105 degrees. If we draw line SR, then angle SRP + angle SRQ = 105 degrees. But angle SRQ is angle at R between S and Q, which is angle SRQ. But since ST is parallel to QR, maybe there's a relationship there.

Wait, this is getting too convoluted. Maybe a better approach is to use coordinate geometry. Given the Asymptote coordinates, even though they are approximate, maybe we can compute the angles numerically.

Given the coordinates:

Q = (0,0)

R = (1,0)

P = (1.1,0.5)

SS = 0.6*P = (0.66,0.3)

T = R + 0.6*(P - R) = (1,0) + 0.6*(0.1,0.5) = (1.06,0.3)

So, coordinates:

S = (0.66, 0.3)

T = (1.06, 0.3)

R = (1,0)

So, points S, T, R are at (0.66,0.3), (1.06,0.3), (1,0). So, triangle STR has points at (0.66,0.3), (1.06,0.3), (1,0). Let's compute the vectors.

First, compute vectors for sides of triangle STR:

From S(0.66,0.3) to T(1.06,0.3): vector ST = (1.06 - 0.66, 0.3 - 0.3) = (0.4, 0)

From T(1.06,0.3) to R(1,0): vector TR = (1 - 1.06, 0 - 0.3) = (-0.06, -0.3)

From R(1,0) to S(0.66,0.3): vector RS = (0.66 - 1, 0.3 - 0) = (-0.34, 0.3)

Now, to find angle STR at point S. To find angle at S, we need vectors from S to T and from S to R.

Vector ST: from S to T: (1.06 - 0.66, 0.3 - 0.3) = (0.4, 0)

Vector SR: from S to R: (1 - 0.66, 0 - 0.3) = (0.34, -0.3)

Now, angle between vectors ST (0.4, 0) and SR (0.34, -0.3). The angle can be found using the dot product formula:

cos(theta) = (ST . SR) / (|ST| |SR|)

Compute the dot product:

ST . SR = (0.4)(0.34) + (0)(-0.3) = 0.136 + 0 = 0.136

|ST| = sqrt(0.4² + 0²) = 0.4

|SR| = sqrt(0.34² + (-0.3)²) = sqrt(0.1156 + 0.09) = sqrt(0.2056) ≈ 0.4534

Therefore, cos(theta) ≈ 0.136 / (0.4 * 0.4534) ≈ 0.136 / 0.1814 ≈ 0.749

Therefore, theta ≈ arccos(0.749) ≈ 41.4 degrees.

But according to the problem, angle STR should be an exact value, not approximate. So maybe this coordinate approach isn't the best here because the coordinates are given for drawing purposes, not actual measures. Therefore, the angles computed here are approximate and don't reflect the exact answer.

Therefore, going back to the original problem, perhaps the answer is 35 degrees, as angle STR would correspond to angle PQR, which is 35 degrees. But earlier, using triangle PST similar to PQR, angle at S is 35 degrees, but that's angle PST. Then, angle STR is another angle at S. So maybe angle STR is 35 degrees.

Alternatively, maybe angle STR is 180 - angle P - angle Q - angle SRT. Wait, but without knowing other angles, it's hard.

Alternatively, maybe using the Law of Sines in triangle STR. But without side lengths, it's difficult.

Wait, another approach: Since ST is parallel to QR, then the distance between ST and QR is constant. Therefore, the height from P to QR is the same as the height from T to QR. But maybe not directly helpful.

Wait, maybe using the fact that triangle PQR has angles 40, 35, 105 degrees. Then, since ST is parallel to QR, the triangle PST is similar to triangle PQR. Therefore, the angles in triangle PST are the same: 40, 35, 105 degrees. Therefore, angle at S is 35 degrees. Then, in triangle STR, angle at S is adjacent to angle at S in triangle PST. Wait, but they are different triangles. Unless they share a common side or angle.

Alternatively, maybe considering that angle at S in triangle STR is the same as angle at S in triangle PST, but that's not necessarily true.

Wait, maybe the problem is simpler. Since ST is parallel to QR, and angle P is 40 degrees, then angle between PS and PR is 40 degrees. Then, since ST is parallel to QR, the angle between PT and PR is equal to angle between PR and QR at R, which is 105 degrees. Therefore, angle at T is 105 degrees. Then, in triangle PRT, angles are 40, 105, and the remaining angle at R is 35 degrees. Wait, but angle at R in triangle PRT would be different from angle QRP.

Wait, maybe not. Let me think.

Alternatively, since ST || QR, then the angles formed by a transversal with these lines are equal. For example, angle between ST and PR at T is equal to angle between QR and PR at R. So angle at T (angle PRT) is equal to angle QRP. Angle QRP is 105 degrees. Therefore, angle PRT is 105 degrees. Then, in triangle PRT, angles are at P (40 degrees), at R (105 degrees), so angle at T is 180 - 40 - 105 = 35 degrees. Therefore, angle at T in triangle PRT is 35 degrees.

But angle at T in triangle PRT is the same as angle STR? Wait, angle STR is at S between T and R. So unless there's a relationship between angle STR and angle PRT, which is at T.

Alternatively, maybe angle STR is equal to angle PRT because of some parallel lines. But since ST is parallel to QR, and if we consider line SR as a transversal, then angle at T between ST and SR (angle STR) is equal to angle at R between QR and SR. But angle at R between QR and SR is angle QRS. However, angle QRS is part of triangle PQR. In triangle PQR, angle at R is 105 degrees, which is between PR and QR. If we draw SR, angle QRS is part of angle QRP. Wait, confusing.

Alternatively, maybe using the fact that in triangle PRT, angle at T is 35 degrees. Then, angle STR is equal to angle PRT, which is 35 degrees. Therefore, angle STR = 35 degrees.

But I need to verify this.

Wait, if ST || QR, then angle between ST and PR at T is equal to angle between QR and PR at R. So angle PRT (at R) is equal to angle PRT (at T). But angle PRT is 105 degrees, so angle PRT at T is 105 degrees. Then, in triangle PRT, angles at P is 40 degrees, at T is 105 degrees, so angle at R is 35 degrees. Therefore, angle at R in triangle PRT is 35 degrees. But angle at R in triangle PRT is the same as angle QRS. Therefore, angle QRS is 35 degrees. Then, angle STR is part of triangle STR, which is connected to point R. If angle QRS is 35 degrees, then angle STR would be supplementary to angle QRS if they are adjacent. But unless points S, R, T are colinear, which they are not.

Wait, maybe angle STR is equal to angle QRS because of alternate interior angles. Since ST || QR, and line SR is a transversal, then angle between SR and ST at T (angle STR) is equal to angle between SR and QR at R (angle QRS). Therefore, angle STR = angle QRS. But angle QRS is part of triangle PQR. In triangle PQR, angle QRP is 105 degrees. If line SR is drawn, then angle QRS is part of angle QRP. Therefore, angle QRS = angle QRP - angle SRP. But unless we know angle SRP, we can't find angle QRS.

Alternatively, maybe angle SRP is equal to angle SPQ, which is given as 40 degrees. But angle SRP is part of triangle SRP. If we can relate angle SRP to angle SPQ.

Alternatively, maybe using the fact that in triangle SRP, angle at S is angle SRP, angle at P is 40 degrees, angle at R is angle SRP. Wait, getting confused.

Alternatively, maybe using the Law of Sines in triangle PQR and triangle SRP. Since triangle SRP is similar to triangle PQR (if they are similar). Wait, triangle SRP shares angle at P (40 degrees) with triangle PQR. If another angle is equal, then they are similar. For example, if angle SRP = angle QRP (105 degrees), then triangles SRP and PQR are similar by AA similarity. Then, the ratio of sides would be consistent. However, angle SRP is part of angle QRP, which is 105 degrees. If angle SRP = 105 degrees, then angle QRS = 0 degrees, which is impossible. Therefore, triangles SRP and PQR are not similar.

This is getting too complicated. Maybe there's a simpler approach.

Wait, let's recall that in a triangle, if a line is drawn parallel to one side, it divides the other two sides proportionally. So, since ST || QR, then PS/SR = PT/TR. But without knowing the lengths, maybe we can express it as PS/SR = PT/TR. However, since we don't have lengths, maybe we can express angles in terms of each other.

Alternatively, maybe using the fact that the sum of angles around point S is 360 degrees. So angle around S: angle PST (35 degrees) + angle STR + angle SRQ = 360. But angle SRQ is part of triangle SQR, which is not directly helpful.

Alternatively, maybe using the Law of Sines in triangle STR and triangle PST. Since triangles PST and PQR are similar, then the ratio of sides is equal. So PS/PQ = PT/PR. Therefore, the ratio of corresponding angles is preserved. Therefore, angle STR corresponds to angle PQR, which is 35 degrees. Therefore, angle STR = 35 degrees.

But earlier, using triangle PRT, we found angle at T is 35 degrees. If angle STR is 35 degrees, then angle PRT is 105 degrees, angle at T in triangle PRT is 35 degrees. Then, angle STR is 35 degrees. So both approaches suggest angle STR is 35 degrees. Therefore, maybe the answer is 35 degrees.

But wait, according to the problem statement, angle P is 40 degrees, angle Q is 35 degrees, and angle STR is the one to find. If angle STR is 35 degrees, that would correspond to angle PQR, which is at a different point. So maybe the answer is 35 degrees. But I need to verify.

Alternatively, maybe using the fact that angle STR is equal to angle PQR because of the parallel lines. Since ST || QR, and they are cut by transversal SR, then angle STR (at S) is equal to angle PQR (at Q). Therefore, angle STR = 35 degrees.

Yes, that seems to make sense. Because when two parallel lines are cut by a transversal, the corresponding angles are equal. Here, ST || QR, and transversal SR creates corresponding angles at S and Q. Therefore, angle STR (at S between T and R) is equal to angle PQR (at Q between P and R). Therefore, angle STR = angle PQR = 35 degrees.

Therefore, after going through various approaches and considering the properties of parallel lines and corresponding angles, the measure of angle STR is 35 degrees.

**Final Answer**
\boxed{35^\circ}
</think>