Abstract: A wireless acceleration measurement system was applied to free-moving cows and horses. Sensors were available as a collar and a flat box for measuring leg or trunk movements. Results were transmitted simultaneously by radio or stored in an 8-MB internal memory. As analytical procedures, frequency distributions with standard deviations, spectral analyses, and fractal analyses were applied. Bymeans of the collar sensor, basic behavior patterns (standing, grazing, walking, ruminating, drinking, and hay uptake) could be identified in cows. Lameness could be detected in cows and horses by means of the leg sensor. The portion of basic and harmonic spectral components was reduced; the fractal dimension was reduced. The system can be used for the detection and analysis of even small movements of free-moving humans or animals over several hours. It is convenient for the analysis of basic behaviors, emotional reactions, or events causing flight or fright or for comparing different housing elements, such as floors or fences.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Little is known in quantitative terms about the influence of different head-neck positions (HNPs) on the loading pattern of the locomotor apparatus. Therefore it is difficult to predict whether a specific riding technique is beneficial for the horse or if it may increase the risk for injury. OBJECTIVE: To improve the understanding of forelimb-hindlimb balance and its underlying temporal changes in relation to different head and neck positions. METHODS: Vertical ground reaction force and time parameters of each limb were measured in 7 high level dressage horses while being ridden at walk and trot on an instrumented treadmill in 6 predetermined HNPs: HNP1 – free, unrestrained with loose reins; HNP2 – neck raised, bridge of the nose in front of the vertical; HNP3 – neck raised, bridge of the nose behind the vertical; HNP4 – neck lowered and flexed, bridge of the nose considerably behind the vertical; HNP5 – neck extremely elevated and bridge of the nose considerably in front of the vertical; HNP6 – neck and head extended forward and downward. Positions were judged by a qualified dressage judge. HNPs were assessed by comparing the data to a velocity-matched reference HNP (HNP2). Differences were tested using paired t test or Wilcoxon signed rank test (P<0.05). RESULTS: At the walk, stride duration and overreach distance increased in HNP1, but decreased in HNP3 and HNP5. Stride impulse was shifted to the forehand in HNP1 and HNP6, but shifted to the hindquarters in HNP5. At the trot, stride duration increased in HNP4 and HNP5. Overreach distance was shorter in HNP4. Stride impulse shifted to the hindquarters in HNP5. In HNP1 peak forces decreased in the forelimbs; in HNP5 peak forces increased in fore- and hindlimbs. CONCLUSIONS: HNP5 had the biggest impact on limb timing and load distribution and behaved inversely to HNP1 and HNP6. Shortening of forelimb stance duration in HNP5 increased peak forces although the percentage of stride impulse carried by the forelimbs decreased. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: An extremely high HNP affects functionality much more than an extremely low neck.

Abstract: The purpose of the present study was to gain more insight into the contribution of the forelimbs and hindlimbs of the horse to energy changes during the push-off for a jump. For this purpose, we collected kinematic data at 240 Hz from 23 5-year-old Warmbloods (average mass: 595 kg) performing free jumps over a 1.15 m high fence. From these data, we calculated the changes in mechanical energy and the changes in limb length and joint angles. The force carried by the forelimbs and the amount of energy stored was estimated from the distance between elbow and hoof, assuming that this part of the leg behaved as a linear spring. During the forelimb push, the total energy first decreased by 3.2 J kg(-1) and then increased again by 4.2 J kg(-1) to the end of the forelimb push. At the end of the forelimb push, the kinetic energy due to horizontal velocity of the centre of mass was 1.6 J kg(-1) less than at the start, while the effective energy (energy contributing to jump height) was 2.3 J kg(-1) greater. It was investigated to what extent these changes could involve passive spring-like behaviour of the forelimbs. The amount of energy stored and re-utilized in the distal tendons during the forelimb push was estimated to be on average 0.4 J kg(-1) in the trailing forelimb and 0.23 J kg(-1) in the leading forelimb. This means that a considerable amount of energy was first dissipated and subsequently regenerated by muscles, with triceps brachii probably being the most important contributor. During the hindlimb push, the muscles of the leg were primarily producing energy. The total increase in energy was 2.5 J kg(-1) and the peak power output amounted to 71 W kg(-1).

Abstract: The ability to jump over an obstacle depends upon the generation of work across the joints of the propelling limb(s). The total work generated by one hind limb of a horse and the contribution to the total work by four joints of the hind limb were determined for a jump. It was hypothesized that the hip and ankle joints would have extensor moments performing positive work, while the knee would have a flexor moment and perform negative work during the jump. Ground reaction forces and sagittal plane kinematics were simultaneously recorded during each jumping trial. Joint moment, power and work were determined for the metatarsophalangeal (MP), tarsal (ankle), tibiofemoral (knee) and coxofemoral (hip) joints. The hip, knee and ankle all flexed and then extended and the MP extended and then flexed during ground contact. Consistent with our hypothesis, large extensor moments were observed at the hip and ankle joints and large flexor moments at the knee and MP joints throughout ground contact of the hind limb. Peak moments tended to occur earlier in stance in the proximal joints but peak power generation of the hind limb joints occurred at similar times except for the MP joint, with the hip and ankle peaking first followed by the MP joint. During the first portion of ground contact (approximately 40%), the net result of the joint powers was the absorption of power. During the remainder of the contact period, the hind limb generated power. This pattern of power absorption followed by power generation paralleled the power profiles of the hip, ankle and MP joints. The total work performed by one hind limb was 0.71 J kg(-1). Surprisingly, the knee produced 85% of the work (0.60 J kg(-1)) done by the hind limb, and the positive work performed by the knee occurred during the first 40% of the take-off. There is little net work generated by the other three joints over the entire take-off. Velocity of the tuber coxae (a landmark on the pelvis of the animal) was negative (downward) during the first 40% of stance, which perhaps reflects the negative work performed to decrease the potential energy during the first 40% of contact. During the final 60% of contact, the hip, ankle and MP joints generate positive work, which is reflected in the increase of the animal's potential energy.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: Equine lameness is commonly evaluated when the horse is being ridden, but the influence of the rider on the lameness has not been documented. OBJECTIVE: To document the effect of 2 riders of different training levels on the vertical movement of the head and croup. METHODS: Twenty mature horses were ridden at trot by an experienced dressage rider and a novice rider, as well as trotted in hand. Kinematic measurements of markers placed on the horse's head and sacral bone were carried out. The asymmetries of the vertical head and sacral bone motion were calculated as lameness parameters and compared with paired t tests. RESULTS: Trotting in hand, 17 horses showed forelimb lameness (1-4/10) and 13 hindlimb lameness (1-2/10). Intra-individually, 11 horses showed significant differences in forelimb lameness and 4 horses showed significant differences in hindlimb lameness when ridden. Over all horses, hindlimb lameness increased significantly under the dressage rider compared to unridden horses. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of a rider can alter the degree of lameness; however, its influence cannot be predicted for an individual horse. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: In order to evaluate mild lameness, horses should be evaluated at trot both under saddle and in hand. If lameness is exacerbated, a second rider may be helpful; the level of training of the rider should be taken into consideration.