- Email: [email protected]
Effects of rider experience level on horse kinematics and behavior
Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 52 (2017) 64e72
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Equine Veterinary Science journal homepage: www.j-evs.com
Exercise Science Graduate Student Competition 56 Effects of rider experience level on horse kinematics and behavior
suggest no differences between beginner and advanced rider groups, future studies may reveal effects on joints during an entire stride cycle and in different gaits.
R.C. Strunk*, K.L. Vernon, W.C. Bridges, R.W. Blob, P.A. Skewes Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA
Key Words: kinematics, behavior, rider ability
Large lesson programs are an essential part of the horse industry. To meet demand and remain profitable, lesson barns sometimes require horses to work multiple times a day with different rider levels. There is little guidance as to the behavioral and physical effects of such protocols, so lesson program managers have limited scientific evidence upon which to base horse management and welfare decisions. The current data regarding horse and rider interactions includes motion pattern variability, trunk and spine kinematics and force plate analyses. While these data are helpful to explain scenarios that can affect the horse with an accomplished or singular rider, to our knowledge no data exists that examines how riders with varying skill level affect limb joint kinematics. This research was designed to determine if rider experience level affects horses’ movement, possibly resulting in increased physical effort by the horse. Secondarily, we aimed to determine if rider level affects changes in behavior patterns when ridden. Riders (n ¼ 8) were paired by skill level (beginner or advanced), and horses (n ¼ 8) were paired by sensitivity level (reactive or nonreactive). Horse and rider pairs were then randomly blocked into a repeated Latin square design using rider ability and horse sensitivity as factors. The Latin Square design created 16 trials, each comprised of 5 passes in a prescribed path at the trot. Kinematic analysis was completed using high-speed video capture, and joint angles were calculated using digitizing software through MATLAB (Math Works Inc., Natick, MA). An ANOVA was performed using JMP (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) based on the repeated Latin square design. The ANOVA suggested no differences in the measured joint angles between rider skill level or horse sensitivity level. To ensure that a subtle rider effect was not missed, all the kinematic measurements were combined to a multivariate meta analysis. While the meta analysis revealed no overall trends in the combined kinematic variables, one specific variable, the front fetlock, trended toward significance of P ¼ 0.06. Behaviors were quantified based on a designed ethogram and willingness scale, and each trial was videoed for analysis. Behaviors were analyzed by ANOVA, with rider level and horse sensitivity accounted for in the model. There were no differences in behavior measurements as a result of rider skill level or horse sensitivity. While our data 0737-0806/$ e see front matter
57 Effect of bioactive protein supplementation on equine gait kinematics K. Fikes*1, J.A. Coverdale 1, J.M. Campbell 2, J.L. Leatherwood 1, T.H. Welsh, Jr. 1, A.N. Bradbery 1, C.J. Hartz 1, M.S. Goehring 1, A.A. Millican 1, Tryon A. Wickersham 1 1 Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA; 2 APC Inc., Ankeny, IA, USA Twenty-seven Quarter Horses (467 to 681 kg BW; 8 to 18 yr of age) were used in a randomized design to determine the effects of bioactive protein supplementation on gait kinematics. Horses were randomly assigned to treatment for a 28-d trial. Treatments consisted of oral doses of 230g/d of 0 g (CON; n ¼ 9), 40 g (40; n ¼ 9; LIFELINE, APC Inc.), and 80 g of bioactive protein (80; n ¼ 9) daily. Horses were fed a commercial concentrate at 0.5% BW (as fed) daily. Horses received ad libitum coastal bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) hay daily and were exercised 5 d/wk at the walk, trot, and canter for approximately 60 min/d. Kinematic gait analysis was performed on d 0 for use as a covariate, and on d 14 and 28 to allow for determination of potential time and dosage effects. Video footage was collected and analyzed using gait analysis software (EquineTec). Horses completed 3 passes at walk and trot over a 10 m flight path. Handlers were specific to horse and blinded to treatment. Horses were allowed to self-select speed within the walk or trot to represent the most efficient kinematics for each individual. Stride length (SL) was determined as the distance the right front or hind limbs traveled during swing phase. Range of motion (ROM) of the knee and hock was measured using the difference between the maximum and minimum angles observed during each frame of swing phase. Data were analyzed using PROC MIXED of SAS. Significant treatment by d interactions were observed at the trot for front limb SL (P ¼ 0.01) and hind limb SL (P ¼ 0.05) with both CON and 40 decreasing from d 14 to 28, and 80 increasing from d14 to 28 for both measures of SL. In contrast, the treatment by d interaction for hock ROM at a walk (P ¼ 0.02) was characterized by a decrease from d14 to 28 of 3.91 and 2.67 degrees for CON and 80, respectively, and an increase of 2.58 degrees for 40. Hock ROM responded quadratically to treatment (P 0.01) on d28,
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Equine Veterinary Science journal homepage: www.j-evs.com
Exercise Science Graduate Student Competition 56 Effects of rider experience level on horse kinematics and behavior
suggest no differences between beginner and advanced rider groups, future studies may reveal effects on joints during an entire stride cycle and in different gaits.
R.C. Strunk*, K.L. Vernon, W.C. Bridges, R.W. Blob, P.A. Skewes Clemson University, Clemson, SC, USA
Key Words: kinematics, behavior, rider ability
Large lesson programs are an essential part of the horse industry. To meet demand and remain profitable, lesson barns sometimes require horses to work multiple times a day with different rider levels. There is little guidance as to the behavioral and physical effects of such protocols, so lesson program managers have limited scientific evidence upon which to base horse management and welfare decisions. The current data regarding horse and rider interactions includes motion pattern variability, trunk and spine kinematics and force plate analyses. While these data are helpful to explain scenarios that can affect the horse with an accomplished or singular rider, to our knowledge no data exists that examines how riders with varying skill level affect limb joint kinematics. This research was designed to determine if rider experience level affects horses’ movement, possibly resulting in increased physical effort by the horse. Secondarily, we aimed to determine if rider level affects changes in behavior patterns when ridden. Riders (n ¼ 8) were paired by skill level (beginner or advanced), and horses (n ¼ 8) were paired by sensitivity level (reactive or nonreactive). Horse and rider pairs were then randomly blocked into a repeated Latin square design using rider ability and horse sensitivity as factors. The Latin Square design created 16 trials, each comprised of 5 passes in a prescribed path at the trot. Kinematic analysis was completed using high-speed video capture, and joint angles were calculated using digitizing software through MATLAB (Math Works Inc., Natick, MA). An ANOVA was performed using JMP (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) based on the repeated Latin square design. The ANOVA suggested no differences in the measured joint angles between rider skill level or horse sensitivity level. To ensure that a subtle rider effect was not missed, all the kinematic measurements were combined to a multivariate meta analysis. While the meta analysis revealed no overall trends in the combined kinematic variables, one specific variable, the front fetlock, trended toward significance of P ¼ 0.06. Behaviors were quantified based on a designed ethogram and willingness scale, and each trial was videoed for analysis. Behaviors were analyzed by ANOVA, with rider level and horse sensitivity accounted for in the model. There were no differences in behavior measurements as a result of rider skill level or horse sensitivity. While our data 0737-0806/$ e see front matter
57 Effect of bioactive protein supplementation on equine gait kinematics K. Fikes*1, J.A. Coverdale 1, J.M. Campbell 2, J.L. Leatherwood 1, T.H. Welsh, Jr. 1, A.N. Bradbery 1, C.J. Hartz 1, M.S. Goehring 1, A.A. Millican 1, Tryon A. Wickersham 1 1 Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA; 2 APC Inc., Ankeny, IA, USA Twenty-seven Quarter Horses (467 to 681 kg BW; 8 to 18 yr of age) were used in a randomized design to determine the effects of bioactive protein supplementation on gait kinematics. Horses were randomly assigned to treatment for a 28-d trial. Treatments consisted of oral doses of 230g/d of 0 g (CON; n ¼ 9), 40 g (40; n ¼ 9; LIFELINE, APC Inc.), and 80 g of bioactive protein (80; n ¼ 9) daily. Horses were fed a commercial concentrate at 0.5% BW (as fed) daily. Horses received ad libitum coastal bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) hay daily and were exercised 5 d/wk at the walk, trot, and canter for approximately 60 min/d. Kinematic gait analysis was performed on d 0 for use as a covariate, and on d 14 and 28 to allow for determination of potential time and dosage effects. Video footage was collected and analyzed using gait analysis software (EquineTec). Horses completed 3 passes at walk and trot over a 10 m flight path. Handlers were specific to horse and blinded to treatment. Horses were allowed to self-select speed within the walk or trot to represent the most efficient kinematics for each individual. Stride length (SL) was determined as the distance the right front or hind limbs traveled during swing phase. Range of motion (ROM) of the knee and hock was measured using the difference between the maximum and minimum angles observed during each frame of swing phase. Data were analyzed using PROC MIXED of SAS. Significant treatment by d interactions were observed at the trot for front limb SL (P ¼ 0.01) and hind limb SL (P ¼ 0.05) with both CON and 40 decreasing from d 14 to 28, and 80 increasing from d14 to 28 for both measures of SL. In contrast, the treatment by d interaction for hock ROM at a walk (P ¼ 0.02) was characterized by a decrease from d14 to 28 of 3.91 and 2.67 degrees for CON and 80, respectively, and an increase of 2.58 degrees for 40. Hock ROM responded quadratically to treatment (P 0.01) on d28,