Abstract: Dressage is one of the Olympic equestrian sports practiced in several countries using different horse breeds. Specific characteristics of the walk, trot and canter are required for dressage. It has been assumed that some of these traits could be selected for genetically and contribute to dressage performance. The purpose of this study was to compare the walk, trot and conformation characteristics in young horses of different breeds used for dressage. A total of 142 horses age 3 years were classified into 3 groups of breeds (German, French and Spanish saddle horses) and tested using the same procedure. The skeletal conformation measurements were made by image analysis. Gait variables of the walk and trot were measured by the accelerometric gait analysis system Equimetrix. Discriminant analysis could explain the variability between the groups by taking into account the walk (P<0.0003), trot (P<0.0001) and conformation variables (P<0.0001). Many gait and conformation variables were significantly different between the breeds. In summary, the German horses had gait characteristics more adapted for dressage competition, and the results of this group could be used as a reference for early evaluation in dressage. Purebred Spanish horses could be considered as a reference for collected gaits used for farm work and old academic dressage. The gait and conformation tests could be applied in a breeding or crossing plan to detect more accurately young horses with good dressage ability.

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: Highly-trained dressage horses were studied to test the hypothesis that stride length is altered independently of stride duration in the transitions between the collected, working, medium and extended trot. Six well-trained dressage horses were filmed at a frame rate of 150 frames/s performing the collected, working, medium and extended trots in a sand arena. Temporal, linear and angular data were extracted from the films, with 4 strides being analysed for each horse and gait type. There were no significant asymmetries between the left and rights limbs or diagonals when data from the whole group were pooled, but 3 horses showed asymmetries in one or more variables (P < 0.01). Analysis of variance and post-hoc tests indicated that the speed increased significantly (P < 0.01) from the collected (3.20 m/s) to the working (3.61 m/s) to the medium (4.47 m/s) to the extended (4.93 m/s) trot. The increases in speed were associated with a significant increase in stride length from 250 cm in the collected trot, to 273 cm in the working trot, 326 cm in the medium trot and 355 cm in the extended trot (P < 0.01). The lengthening of the stride was a result of increases between each gait type in the over-reach distance, whereas the diagonal distance was significantly longer in the extended than the collected trot only (P < 0.01). The stride duration tended to decrease as speed increased, and the difference became significant between the collected and extended trots (P < 0.01).

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: In many equestrian activities a specific position of head and/or neck is required that is dissimilar to the natural position. There is controversy about the effects of these positions on locomotion pattern, but few quantitative data are available. OBJECTIVES: To quantify the effects of 5 different head and neck positions on thoracolumbar kinematics of the horse. METHODS: Kinematics of 7 high level dressage horses were measured walking and trotting on an instrumented treadmill with the head and neck in the following positions: HNP2 = neck raised, bridge of the nose in front of the vertical; HNP3 = as HNP2 with bridge of the nose behind the vertical; HNP4 = head and neck lowered, nose behind the vertical; HNP5 = head and neck in extreme high position; HNP6 = head and neck forward and downward. HNP1 was a speed-matched control (head and neck unrestrained). RESULTS: The head and neck positions affected only the flexion-extension motion. The positions in which the neck was extended (HNP2, 3, 5) increased extension in the anterior thoracic region, but increased flexion in the posterior thoracic and lumbar region. For HNP4 the pattern was the opposite. Positions 2, 3 and 5 reduced the flexion-extension range of motion (ROM) while HNP4 increased it. HNP5 was the only position that negatively affected intravertebral pattern symmetry and reduced hindlimb protraction. The stride length was significantly reduced at walk in positions 2, 3, 4 and 5. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant influence of head/neck position on back kinematics. Elevated head and neck induce extension in the thoracic region and flexion in the lumbar region; besides reducing the sagittal range of motion. Lowered head and neck produces the opposite. A very high position of the head and neck seems to disturb normal kinematics. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: This study provides quantitative data on the effect of head/neck positions on thoracolumbar motion and may help in discussions on the ethical acceptability of some training methods.