Regular readers should be familiar with my 2012 paper on the lengths of tails in non-avian dinosaurs (those who you who missed it, for shame! can catch up with my post here). In this I looked at the general lack of complete tails in the fossil record, but also showed that tail length varies considerably in dinosaurs, and thus should not be included in length estimates or mass estimates derived from length.Collecting data for the paper I scoured a number of museum collections, went through as much of the dinosaur literature as I felt able, and also contacted numerous researchers and curators to ask for any ideas and things I might have missed or undescribed specimens hidden in basements and drawers. Many people were generous with their time and knowledge and by the end of it, I was really pleased with what I had in terms of a dataset.
Almost inevitably though, without hours of publication and my blog post on the subject, people started contacting me with new leads. Many were things I had looked at and decided were not complete, but some were things I had missed and represented additional data. Great though this was, there was not a lot I could do with even a handful of new data – the paper was done. However, inspired I did dive back into the literature and had another look and did find a few more and as you may have guessed, have now got as far as I, or rather we, can. This time out I’m collaborating with Scott Persons (who has been doing a lot of his own tails stuff) and a mathematically inclined colleague Steve Le Comber.
Scott and I have pooled our resources and have now found nearly 50 dinosaur specimens with complete tails, though we have this time out also been including specimens with ‘nearly’ complete tails. Obviously subjective, but we’re working on that.
Anyway, we’re appealing for more data. If you are aware of a dinosaur that has a truly complete (every single caudal vert, down to the last nub) tail, that’s not on the list, then do please let us know. If you know of something that’s near complete (maybe just a tip missing, or a couple in the middle or similar) do also let us know. Please be as specific as possible – “I think I saw a hadrosaur with a good tail in the AMNH” isn’t going to win you any prizes or get us anywhere, and we have at this point checked out a lot of material. On that note, all we can really offer is a mention in the acknowledgements for good leads that yield datapoints, and this may also include some limited measure of gratitude, or even a pint at the next conference where you catch us. Maybe.
Here are the lists of what we have to date.
Complete tails:
| Othneilosaurus | SMA 0010 |
| Jeholosaurus | IVPP V 12529 |
| Scleidosaurus | NHM R1111 |
| Scutellosaurus | MNA PI. 175 |
| “Saichania” | MPC 100/1305 |
| Pinacosaurus | PIN 614 |
| Dyoplosaurus | Arbour et al., 2009 |
| Dryosaurus | YPM 1884 |
| Tethyshadros | Dalla Vecchia, 2009 |
| Edmontosaurus | Lull and Wright, 1942 |
| Lambeosaurus | ROM 1218 |
| Corythosaurus | ROM 845 |
| Hadrosauridae indet | TMP 1998.58.01 |
| Centrosaurus | Brown, 1917 |
| Psittacosaurus | Sereno, 1987 |
| Psittacosaurus | IVPP V 120888 |
| Coelophysis | AMNH 7229 |
| Sinocalliopteryx | JMP-V-05-8-01 |
| Gorgosaurus | Currie, 2003 |
| Gallimimus | Osmólska et al., 1972 |
| Ornithomimus | TMP 1995.11.001 |
| Caudipteryx | IVPP V 12430 |
| Nomingia | Barsbold et al., 2000 |
| Microraptor | IVPP V 13352 |
| Mei | Xu and Norell, 2004 |
| Jinfengopteryx | CAGS IG 040801 |
| Archaeopteryx | Wellnhofer, 1974 |
| Epidexipteryx | IVPP V 15471 |
| Lufengosaurus | Young, 1941 |
| Camarasaurus | Gilmore, 1925 |
| Opisthocoelicaudia | Borsuk-Bialynicka, 1977 |
| Protoceratops | Fastovsky et al. 2012 |
| Protoceratops | Fastovsky et al. 2012 |
| Leaellynasaura | Herne pers comm |
| Chasmosaurine | Mallon, 2010 |
| Stegosaurus | SMA 0092 |
| Archaeoceratops | IVPP V11115 |
| Parksosaurus | ROM 804 |
| Anchiceratops | CMN 8547 |
| Microraptor | Li et al 2012 |
| Anchiornis | IVPP |
| Sinusonasus | Xu & Wang 2004 |
| Spinophorosaurus | Remes et al 2009 |
| Kentrosaurus | Holotype |
| Ornithomimid | TMP 90.26.01 |
| Tenontosaurus | OMNH data |
Near complete tails:
| Epidendrosaurus | IVPP V 12653 |
| Sinornithoides | IVPP V9612 |
| Ceratosaurus | USNM 4735 |
| Khaan | IGM 100/1127 |
| Corythosaurus | Lull & Wright, AMNH 5240 |
| Anatosaurus | Lull & Wright 8399 |
| Anatosaurus | lull & wright |
| Tianyuraptor | Zheng et al 2009 |
| Apatosaurus | Gilmore 1936 |
| Juravenator | Chiappe & Goehlich, 2010 |
| Sciurumimus | Rauhut et al 2012 |
| Psittacosaurus sinensis | IVPP V 738 |
| Psittacosaurus | IVPP V14341.1 |
| Psittacosaurus | IVPP V14341.2 |
| Psittacosaurus | IVPP V14341.3 |
| Psittacosaurus | IVPP V14341.4 |
| Sinocalliopteryx | Ji et al 3007 |
| Sinosauropteryx | Currie & Chen 2001 |
| ?Heterodontosaurus | MCZ 4188 |
Any other suggestions (specimens or papers), please do add them to the comments below. All help is most gratefully received.
Dave Hone's Archosaur Musings 
Since Archaeopteryx and Anchiornis are included in the list, I assume you need also some basal avialan (or “near-avialan”, given the uncertain relationships among basal paravians): the holotypes of Aurornis (Godefroit et al. 2013b) and Eosinopteryx (Godefroit et al. 2013a) have complete tails.
As far as I recall, the tail of Tethyshadros holotype is not complete: the distal end remained in situ, and the exact number of missing elements is unknown. I may consider it a “near complete” tail.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v498/n7454/full/nature12168.html
http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v4/n1/full/ncomms2389.html
I’d had a look at Aurornis and wasn’t sure if it was complete or not and must ask Pascal about it, but had forgotten about Eosinopteryx – thanks for the reminder. You are right that we’re happy to look at uncertain stuff at the base on birds, but we’re not planning on going any further than that (Jeholornis, Confuscisornis etc. etc.).
Tehyshadros is one of the ones from the first paper, and while times has passed since I assembled that set, I think I asked Fabio about it to confirm it’s completeness.
No, you did not. As the tail preserves only 32 vertebrae (see Dalla Vecchia, 2009) is far from being complete.
Ah I’m thinking of Preondactylus – I did ask you about that at the Beijing Flugsaurier when talking about pterosaur tails. This is clearly an error and I’ll take it out of the complete list.
I believe there was a complete Centrosaurus tail pulled out of bonebed 43 in Dinosaur Park.
Any idea where it is? I did ask / look round the Tyrrell (as indeed has Scott) so if it’s there we’ve not turned it up.
It would be at the Tyrrell. You might want to ask Darren Tanke about it.
We’ve got some complete Leptoceratops tails here at the CMN in Ottawa, too.
OK thanks, annoying that appears to have been missed, but that’s why I wanted to ask, thanks again. If it’s OK, I’ll mail offlist to ask about the Lepto stuff.
Sounds good. Lemme know what you need.
Oh, and Chasmosaurine (Mallon, 2010) = Anchiceratops, CMN 8547
Thanks for the update Jordan!
Next time I’m at the Denver Museum of Nature and Science, I’ll ask about their Diplodocus — the tail *looks* complete but I don’t know whether it’s layperson-complete or paleontologist-complete.
And I apologize if this falls into your “I think I saw…” category, or if you’ve already checked it out…
Not sure I have. The most likely issue is that a lot of mounted stuff has missing pieces cast from other material, or is a composite of multiple specimens. As I lament in my original paper, even in the literature things are often described as ‘complete’ but can have quite a lot missing. If you could check . ask and let me know that would be great thanks!
Someone listened 🙂 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/dinosaurs/10196496/Well-preserved-dinosaur-tail-found-in-Mexico.html
I made it to DMNS yesterday but couldn’t find anyone to answer authoritatively; I’ll ask them via other means…
That’s very kind, thanks for the persistence, it’s much appreciated.
I was able to spend some time on this today and unfortunately confirmed that there are no complete tails to be found in Denver.
I suspected as much, but thanks for hunting this down for me, it’s much appreciated and knowing not to look there is genuinely valuable info.
One of the Hypsilophodon foxii (NHMUK R5829) on display in the NHM’s dinosaur gallery looks like it might be complete. It certainly appears to include the tip of the tail, but I don’t know if anything is missing from the middle, or how much of it is plaster reconstruction.
NHMUK R5830 in the same case certainly isn’t complete though.
Hmm, odd I’ve missed that and when I’d asked both Paul B and Susie M about this. Still, I’ll have to go have another look, thanks for the alert Dave.
Hmm, on second thoughts I’m not sure it is. Being a juvenile the vertebrae are really tiny, and I think there’s a joint there after all. That bit of the gallery isn’t terribly well lit either, so its easy to miss. One for the “very nearly” box it think.