Abstract: The study of animal movement commonly requires the segmentation of continuous data streams into individual strides. The use of forceplates and foot-mounted accelerometers readily allows the detection of the foot-on and foot-off events that define a stride. However, when relying on optical methods such as motion capture, there is lack of validated robust, universally applicable stride event detection methods. To date, no method has been validated for movement on a circle, while algorithms are commonly specific to front/hind limbs or gait. In this study, we aimed to develop and validate kinematic stride segmentation methods applicable to movement on straight line and circle at walk and trot, which exclusively rely on a single, dorsal hoof marker. The advantage of such marker placement is the robustness to marker loss and occlusion. Eight horses walked and trotted on a straight line and in a circle over an array of multiple forceplates. Kinetic events were detected based on the vertical force profile and used as the reference values. Kinematic events were detected based on displacement, velocity or acceleration signals of the dorsal hoof marker depending on the algorithm using (i) defined thresholds associated with derived movement signals and (ii) specific events in the derived movement signals. Method comparison was performed by calculating limits of agreement, accuracy, between-horse precision and within-horse precision based on differences between kinetic and kinematic event. In addition, we examined the effect of force thresholds ranging from 50 to 150 N on the timings of kinetic events. The two approaches resulted in very good and comparable performance: of the 3,074 processed footfall events, 95% of individual foot on and foot off events differed by no more than 26 ms from the kinetic event, with average accuracy between -11 and 10 ms and average within- and between horse precision ≤8 ms. While the event-based method may be less likely to suffer from scaling effects, on soft ground the threshold-based method may prove more valuable. While we found that use of velocity thresholds for foot on detection results in biased event estimates for the foot on the inside of the circle at trot, adjusting thresholds for this condition negated the effect. For the final four algorithms, we found no noteworthy bias between conditions or between front- and hind-foot timings. Different force thresholds in the range of 50 to 150 N had the greatest systematic effect on foot-off estimates in the hind limbs (up to on average 16 ms per condition), being greater than the effect on foot-on estimates or foot-off estimates in the forelimbs (up to on average ±7 ms per condition).
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.
The research explores a universal method to determine stride segmentation in hoofed animals such as horses, using a single marker placed on the dorsal side of the hoof. This method is tested for reliability in different conditions such as moving on a straight line, moving in a circle, or at different gaits such as walk and trot.
Objective and Methodology
The primary objective of the article is to identify a robust and universally applicable method for stride event detection in hoofed animals. This is achieved using motion capture and a single marker placed on the hoof of the animal.
Eight horses were made to walk and trot over multiple forceplates in a straight line, and on a circle. The vertical force profile was used to detect kinetic events, which served as reference values.
Stride segmentation methods were developed and validated for use in different scenarios like movement in straight lines and circular paths, at walk and trot speeds.
Kinematic events were detected based on displacement, velocity or acceleration signals of the dorsal hoof marker, by using thresholds linked with derived movement signals and specific events.
The performance of the developed methods was tested by comparing the detection of foot-on and foot-off events based on the kinematic and kinetic event, calculating accuracy, limits of agreement, and precision.
Findings
The study found that the developed methods had a high degree of accuracy, with 95% of individual foot on and foot off events differing by no more than 26ms from the kinetic event.
In terms of precision, both within and between horse variations were found to be less than or equal to 8ms.
The use velocity thresholds for foot-on detection could result in biased estimates for the foot on the inside of the circle at a trot, but this was negated by adjusting thresholds.
No significant differences were identified between front and hind-foot timings, or different conditions, for the final four algorithms.
Different force thresholds between 50 and 150N significantly affected foot-off estimates in hind limbs, more than the effect on foot-on estimates or foot-off estimates for the forelimbs.
Insights and Conclusion
The research indicates that the proposed method for stride segmentation using a single dorsal hoof marker has robust measurement capabilities in different movement scenarios.
These methods can be applied in the study of animal movement, particularly in hoofed animals such as horses.
The research also provides insights on the effects of different velocity and force thresholds on the accuracy and precision of footfall detection.
Cite This Article
APA
Starke SD, Clayton HM.
(2015).
A universal approach to determine footfall timings from kinematics of a single foot marker in hoofed animals.
PeerJ, 3, e783.
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.783
Balch OK, Butler D, Collier MA. Balancing the normal foot: hoof preparation, shoe fit and shoe modification in the performance horse. Equine Veterinary Education 1997;9:143–154.
Barre A, Armand S. Biomechanical ToolKit: open-source framework to visualize and process biomechanical data. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine 2014;114:80–87.
Biewener AA. Allometry of quadrupedal locomotion: the scaling of duty factor, bone curvature and limb orientation to body size. Journal of Experimental Biology 1983;105:147–171.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Agreement between methods of measurement with multiple observations per individual. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 2007;17:571–582.
Burn JF, Usmar SJ. Hoof landing velocity is related to track surface properties in trotting horses. Equine and Comparative Exercise Physiology 2005;2:37–41.
Carstensen B, Simpson J, Gurrin LC. Statistical models for assessing agreement in method comparison studies with replicate measurements. The International Journal of Biostatistics 2008;4:1–26.
Chateau H, Camus M, Holden L, Falala S, Ravary B, Vergari C, Denoix JM, Pourcelot P, Crevier-Denoix N. Ground reaction force and moments around the hoof axes during circling on different ground surfaces at the trot. Proceedings of the 7th international conference on canine and equine locomotion (ICEL 7) 2012.
Clayton HM, Colborne GR, Burns TE. Kinematic analysis of successful and unsuccessful attempts to clear a water jump. Equine Veterinary Journal 1995;27:166–169.
Clayton HM, Sigafoos R, Curle RD. Effect of three shoe types on the duration of breakover in sound trotting horses. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 1991;11:129–132.
Galisteo AM, Garrido-Castro JL, Miró F, Plaza C, Medina-Carnicer R. Assessment of a method to determine the stride phases in trotting horses from video sequences under field conditions. Wiener Tierarztliche Monatsschrift 2010;97:65–73.
Ghoussayni S, Stevens C, Durham S, Ewins D. Assessment and validation of a simple automated method for the detection of gait events and intervals. Gait & Posture 2004;20:266–272.
Hobbs S, Orlande O, Edmundson C, Northrop A, Martin J. Development of a method to identify foot strike on an arena surface: application to jump landing. Comparative Exercise Physiology 2010;7:19–25.
Hodson EF, Clayton HM, Lanovaz JL. Temporal analysis of walk movements in the Grand Prix dressage test at the 1996 Olympic Games. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 1999;62:89–97.
Kiss RM. Comparison between kinematic and ground reaction force techniques for determining gait events during treadmill walking at different walking speeds. Medical Engineering & Physics 2010;32:662–667.
Leitch J, Stebbins J, Paolini G, Zavatsky AB. Identifying gait events without a force plate during running: A comparison of methods. Gait & Posture 2011;33:130–132.
Mc Clinchey HL, Thomason JJ, Runciman RJ. Grip and slippage of the horse’s hoof on solid substrates measured ex vivo. Biosystems Engineering 2004;89:485–494.
Merkens HW, Schamhardt HC. Relationships between ground reaction force patterns and kinematics in the walking and trotting horse. Equine Veterinary Journal 1994;17:67–70.
Merritt JS, Starke SD, Clayton HM. The point of application of the ground reaction force moves in circling horses. Equine Veterinary Journal 2014;46:43–43.
Mickelborough J, Van Der Linden ML, Richards J, Ennos AR. Validity and reliability of a kinematic protocol for determining foot contact events. Gait & Posture 2000;11:32–37.
Pantall A, Gregor RJ, Prilutsky BI. Stance and swing phase detection during level and slope walking in the cat: effects of slope, injury, subject and kinematic detection method. Journal of Biomechanics 2012;45:1529–1533.
Peham C, Scheidl M, Licka T. Limb locomotion–speed distribution analysis as a new method for stance phase detection. Journal of Biomechanics 1999;32:1119–1124.
Schamhardt HC, Merkens HW. Objective determination of ground contact of equine limbs at the walk and trot: comparison between ground reaction forces, accelerometer data and kinematics. Equine Veterinary Journal 1994;26:75–79.
Vos NJ, Riemersma DJ. Determination of coefficient of friction between the equine foot and different ground surfaces: an in vitro study. Equine and Comparative Exercise Physiology 2006;3:191–198.
Weyand PG, Kelly M, Blackadar T, Darley JC, Oliver SR, Ohlenbusch NE, Joffe SW, Hoyt RW. Ambulatory estimates of maximal aerobic power from foot -ground contact times and heart rates in running humans. Journal of Applied Physiology 2001;91:451–458.
Zeni JA Jr, Richards JG, Higginson JS. Two simple methods for determining gait events during treadmill and overground walking using kinematic data. Gait & Posture 2008;27:710–714.
Key K, Berg K, Kirkegaard J, Andresen KR, Hansen SS. Evaluating the Accuracy of a Vision-Based Algorithm for Groundline Estimation in Trotting Horses Using Multiple Camera Angles. Vet Med Sci 2026 Jan;12(1):e70739.
Clayton H, MacKechnie-Guire R, Byström A, Le Jeune S, Egenvall A. Guidelines for the Measurement of Rein Tension in Equestrian Sport. Animals (Basel) 2021 Sep 30;11(10).
Basu CK, Deacon F, Hutchinson JR, Wilson AM. The running kinematics of free-roaming giraffes, measured using a low cost unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). PeerJ 2019;7:e6312.