Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Basic information about the influence of a rider on the equine back is currently lacking. HYPOTHESIS: That pressure distribution under a saddle is different between the walk, trot and canter. METHODS: Twelve horses without clinical signs of back pain were ridden. At least 6 motion cycles at walk, trot and canter were measured kinematically. Using a saddle pad, the pressure distribution was recorded. The maximum overall force (MOF) and centre of pressure (COP) were calculated. The range of back movement was determined from a marker placed on the withers. RESULTS: MOF and COP showed a consistent time pattern in each gait. MOF was 12.1 +/- 1.2 and 243 +/- 4.6 N/kg at walk and trot, respectively, in the ridden horse. In the unridden horse MOF was 172.7 +/- 11.8 N (walk) and 302.4 +/- 33.9 N (trot). At ridden canter, MOF was 27.2 +/- 4.4 N/kg. The range of motion of the back of the ridden horse was significantly lower compared to the unridden, saddled horse. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Analyses may help quantitative and objective evaluation of the interaction between rider and horse as mediated through the saddle. The information presented is therefore of importance to riders, saddlers and equine clinicians. With the technique used in this study, style, skill and training level of different riders can be quantified, which would give the opportunity to detect potentially harmful influences and create opportunities for improvement.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Sandy soil is often mentioned as a risk factor in the development of sand-related gastrointestinal disease (SGID) in the horse. There are other variables, but few studies confirm any of these. OBJECTIVE: To investigate soil type, pasture quality, feeding practice in the paddock, age, sex and body condition score as risk factors for sand intake in the horse. METHODS: Faeces were collected from 211 Icelandic horses on 19 different studs in Denmark together with soil samples and other potential risk factors. Sand content in faeces determined by a sand sedimentation test was interpreted as evidence of sand intake. Soil types were identified by soil analysis and significance of the data was tested using logistic analysis. RESULTS: Of horses included in the study, 56.4% showed sand in the faeces and 5.7% had more than 5 mm sand as quantified by the rectal sleeve sedimentation test. Soil type had no significant effect when tested as main effect, but there was interaction between soil type and pasture quality. Significant interactions were also found between paddock feeding practice and pasture quality. CONCLUSION: To evaluate the risk of sand intake it is important to consider 3 variables: soil type, pasture quality and feeding practice. Pasture quality was identified as a risk factor of both short and long grass in combination with sandy soil, while clay soil had the lowest risk in these combinations. Feeding practice in the paddock revealed feeding directly on the ground to be a risk factor when there was short (1-5 cm) or no grass. Also, no feeding outdoors increased the risk on pastures with short grass, while this had no effect in paddocks with no grass. More than 50% of all horses investigated in this study had sand in the faeces. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: The identification of risk factors is an important step towards prevention of SGID. Further research is necessary to determine why some horses exhibit more than 5 mm sand in the sedimentation test and whether this is correlated with geophagic behaviour.

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: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: The ability to shorten the duration of sedation would potentially improve safety and utility of detomidine. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of tolazoline and atipamezole after detomidine sedation. HYPOTHESIS: Administration of tolazoline or atipamezole would not affect detomidine sedation. METHODS: In a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, descriptive study, detomidine (0.02 mg/kg bwt i.v.) was administered to 6 mature horses on 4 separate occasions. Twenty-five mins later, each horse received one of 4 treatments: Group 1 saline (0.9% i.v.) as a placebo control; Group 2 atipamezole (0.05 mg/kg bwt i.v.); Group 3 atipamezole (0.1 mg/kg bwt i.v.); and Group 4 tolazoline (4.0 mg/kg bwt i.v.). Sedation, muscle relaxation and ataxia were scored by 3 independent observers at 9 time points. Horses were led through an obstacle course at 7 time points. Course completion time was recorded and the ability of the horse to traverse the course was scored by 3 independent observers. Horses were videotaped before, during and after each trip through the obstacle course. RESULTS: Atipamezole and tolazoline administration incompletely antagonised the effects of detomidine, but the time course to recovery was shortened. CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: Single bolus administration of atipamezole or tolazoline produced partial reversal of detomidine sedation and may be useful for minimising detomidine sedation.