Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: No data exist on the GRF-kinematics relation due to changes caused by equestrian interventions. HYPOTHESIS: Through the judicious use of draw reins the rider can influence the kinematics of the horse to meet stated goals of dressage training. Relating the results to previously published kinetic data of the same experiment implies a possible relationship between kinetics and kinematics. METHODS: The kinematics of 8 sound Swedish Warmblood horses were measured whilst the horses were being ridden with and without draw reins. Three conditions were evaluated: 1) draw reins only (DR), 2) combination of draw reins and normal reins (NR+DR) and 3) normal reins only (NR). RESULTS: Head and neck angles were significantly decreased by the draw rein but 4-5 times more so for DR when with NR+DR. The forelimb position at hoof lift-off was significantly more caudal with DR. In the hind limb the hip joint extended more quickly and the hock joint flexed more with NR+DR than with NR. Compared to DR the hip joint angular pattern was not significantly different, but the pelvis was more horizontal. CONCLUSION: Riding with a draw rein can have significant influence on the kinematics of the horse. Some of the observed changes can be coupled to changes in kinetics. The hock joint angle seems to be a fairly reliable indicator of load on the hind limb and the angle of femur appears important for hind limb propulsion, when considered in conjunction with the orientation of the pelvis. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: These findings are important for riders and trainers, as kinematic changes are what trainers observe. It is thereby important to ascertain which kinematic changes are consistently coupled to changes in kinetics in order for trainers to be able to judge correctly the success of intended goals. Further studies are warranted to validate and confirm suggested relationships between kinetics and kinematics.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Responses of horses in frightening situations are important for both equine and human safety. Considerable scientific interest has been shown in development of reactivity tests, but little effort has been dedicated to the development of appropriate training methods for reducing fearfulness. OBJECTIVES: To investigate which of 3 different training methods (habituation, desensitisation and counter-conditioning) was most effective in teaching horses to react calmly in a potentially frightening situation. HYPOTHESES: 1) Horses are able to generalise about the test stimulus such that, once familiar with the test stimulus in one situation, it appears less frightening and elicits a reduced response even when the stimulus intensity is increased or the stimulus is presented differently; and 2) alternative methods such as desensitisation and counter-conditioning would be more efficient than a classic habituation approach. METHODS: Twenty-seven naive 2-year-old Danish Warmblood stallions were trained according to 3 different methods, based on classical learning theory: 1) horses (n = 9) were exposed to the full stimulus (a moving, white nylon bag, 1.2 x 0.75 m) in 5 daily training sessions until they met a predefined habituation criterion (habituation); 2) horses (n = 9) were introduced gradually to the stimulus and habituated to each step before the full stimulus was applied (desensitisation); 3) horses (n = 9) were trained to associate the stimulus with a positive reward before being exposed to the full stimulus (counter-conditioning). Each horse received 5 training sessions of 3 min per day. Heart rate and behavioural responses were recorded. RESULTS: Horses trained with the desensitisation method showed fewer flight responses in total and needed fewer training sessions to learn to react calmly to test stimuli. Variations in heart rate persisted even when behavioural responses had ceased. In addition, all horses on the desensitisation method eventually habituated to the test stimulus whereas some horses on the other methods did not. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Desensitisation appeared to be the most effective training method for horses in frightening situations. Further research is needed in order to investigate the role of positive reinforcement, such as offering food, in the training of horses.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Dehydration and heat stress are serious welfare issues for equids working in developing countries. There is a lack of any standardised method or validated interpretation of the skin tent test in horses and donkeys. Owners of dehydrated and heat-stressed animals often depend on veterinary examination for identification of these conditions, leading to delays in treatment and unnecessary reliance on external sources to effect welfare improvement. OBJECTIVES: To validate a standardised skin tent test for dehydration and a behavioural measure of heat stress in working equids; and to examine the effect of heat stress and dehydration on tripping and staggering behaviour. METHODS: The study was carried out on 130 working horses and donkeys in Pakistan. Associations between skin tent and blood parameters (packed cell volume [PCV], serum total protein [TP], serum osmolality), clinical parameters, resting and drinking behaviour were examined. Heat stress behaviour (increased respiratory rate and depth, head nodding, flared nostrils, apathy) was observed in conjunction with rectal temperature. Tripping and staggering were assessed using a simple obstacle course. RESULTS: In both species, heat stress behaviour was significantly associated with increased rectal temperature (P<0.001). A positive skin tent test was not significantly associated with PCV or TP, although in donkeys it was significantly associated with lower serum osmolality (P<0.001). More animals age >15 years had a positive skin tent than those in younger age groups (P = 0.037). Very thin horses were more likely to have a positive skin tent than those in thin or moderate condition (P = 0.028). There was no significant correlation between skin tent and tripping or staggering in either species. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Heat stress behaviour is related to increased body temperature in working horses and donkeys. Owners may use this to make judgements regarding rest and cooling, precluding the need to seek veterinary attention. The skin tent test for dehydration used in this study did not show a significant relationship with PCV or TP. However, the use of blood parameters to validate the skin tent test may be confounded by anaemia, hypoproteinaemia or electrolyte depletion. Alternative methods are needed to confirm or refute the validity of the skin tent test in working equids.

Abstract: REASON FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Although anecdotal reports of increased orthopaedic injury risk in equine sports exist, there is little scientific evidence to support this. OBJECTIVES: To test whether horses undertaking a single competitive sport have increased risk of specific injuries compared to those used for general purpose riding (GP); and whether injury type varies with sport category and performance level. METHODS: Data from 1069 records of horses undergoing orthopaedic evaluation (1998-2003) and meeting inclusion criteria were reviewed. Sport category (GP, showjumping, dressage, eventing, racing), level (nonelite or elite) and diagnosis were recorded. Effects of sport category and level on probability of a specific diagnosis were assessed using chi-squared tests. Logistic regression was used to determine which competitive sports and levels increased risk of injury compared with GP. RESULTS: Overall there was a significant effect of sport category and level on diagnosis (P<0.0001). There was significant difference between anatomical site injured and sport category (P<0.0001); a high risk of forelimb superficial digital flexor tendon injury in elite eventing (P<0.0001) and elite showjumping (P = 0.02); distal deep digital flexor tendon (DDFT) injury in elite showjumping (P = 0.002); and hindlimb suspensory ligament injury in elite (P<0.0001) and nonelite (P = 0.001) dressage. There was a low risk of tarsal injury in elite eventing (P = 0.01) and proximal DDFT injury in dressage (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Horses competing in different sports are predisposed to specific injuries; particular sports may increase the risk of injury at certain anatomical sites; and the type and site of injury may reflect the type and level of performance. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: These findings could guide clinicians in the diagnosis of sport related injuries.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Force transmission under an English saddle (ES) at walk, trot and canter is commonly evaluated, but the influence of a side saddle (SS) on the equine back has not been documented. HYPOTHESIS: Force transmission under a SS, with its asymmetric construction, is different from an ES in walk, trot and canter, expressed in maximum overall force (MOF), force in the quarters of the saddle mat, and centre of pressure (COP). The biomechanics of the equine back are different under a SS compared to ES. METHODS: Thirteen horses without clinical signs of back pain ridden in an indoor riding school with both saddles were measured using an electronic saddle sensor pad. Synchronous kinematic measurements were carried out with tracing markers placed along the back in front of (withers, W) and behind the saddle (4th lumbar vertebra, L4). At least 6 motion cycles at walk, trot and canter with both saddles (ES, SS) were measured. Out of the pressure distribution the maximum overall force (MOF) and the location of the centre of pressure (COP) were calculated. RESULTS: Under the SS the centre of pressure was located to the right of the median and slightly caudal compared to the COP under the ES in all gaits. The MOF was significantly different (P<0.01) between saddles. At walk, L4 showed significantly larger (P<0.01) vertical excursions under the ES. Under the SS relative horizontal movement of W was significantly reduced (P<0.01) at trot, and at canter the transversal movement was significantly reduced (P<0.01) . In both trot and canter, no significant differences in the movement of L4 were documented. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: The results demonstrate that the load under a SS creates asymmetric force transmission under the saddle, and also influences back movement. To change the load distribution on the back of horses with potential back pain and as a training variation, a combination of both riding styles is suitable.