Re: Specimen not in collection - usable?

[Pedro Andrade <dinosauria_pt@yahoo.com>]

My girlfriend mentioned a big ammonite somwhere in Portugal that's not been 
removed from its place because removing it would require destroying the 
environment, so that's what got me thinking. 

Matthew Miller said: "I understand the situation is hypothetical but if the 
geology around
the specimen is poor or just simply if you cant remove it how do you
intend to even study the specimen in the first place let alone somehow
prep part of it to even begin studying it.  The only way I could see
this happening is if you have a set up similar to that of Dinosaur National 
Monument where the bones are housed insitu under a structure."

That's what I thought, but imagine the fossil is in a position where it's 
features can be identified (like an ammonite, or a trilobite, maybe even a 
dinosaur). I know I'm probably pushing it a bit too far, but I hope you get my 
point. Regarding the Dinosaur National Monument thing, it's true the fossils 
weren't removed from the rock, but a museum has been built around them, so it's 
not the situation I was imagining.

Andrew Farke said: "This happens relatively frequently in paleoichnology - in 
this case, a 
cast is often made of the footprint and deposited in a museum."

I see, but what is the type specimen? I'd suppose it's the original fossil that 
remained in the field, but what happens when erosion destroys it?

Thanks everyone for the prompt replies.

Cheers
Pedro Andrade