Re: "O." grandis (was Re: Paranychodon questions)

[Jonathon Woolf <jwoolf@erinet.com>]

Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. wrote:

> (Sadly, the type material of "O." grandis is lost, so that we can't compare
> it directly with other tyrannosaurid genera).

Something I've wondered about from time to time -- when someone says
such-and-so material is "lost," what exactly does that mean?  In my mind, the
phrase always conjures an image Jack Horner described in DIGGING DINOSAURS: the
bones of _Hadrosaurus foulkii_ being lost _in_ the collection of the Princeton
museum.  As in, everyone knew it was there somewhere, but no one knew exactly
which bones belonged to it.

So, does "lost" mean "destroyed," like the original _Spinosaurus_ material that
was destroyed in bombing attacks in WWII?  Does it mean "missing, whereabouts
unknown," like the originals of Peking Man from Zhoukoudian cave?  Or does it
mean "somewhere in X collection, exactly where nobody knows?"

-- JSW