FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Animals (Basel) / Electromyographic and Kinematic Comparison of the Leading an...
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2023; 13(11); 1755; doi: 10.3390/ani13111755

Electromyographic and Kinematic Comparison of the Leading and Trailing Fore- and Hindlimbs of Horses during Canter.

Abstract: This study compared muscle activity and movement between the leading (Ld) and trailing (Tr) fore- (F) and hindlimbs (H) of horses cantering overground. Three-dimensional kinematic and surface electromyography (sEMG) data were collected from right triceps brachii, biceps femoris, middle gluteal, and splenius from 10 ridden horses during straight left- and right-lead canter. Statistical parametric mapping evaluated between-limb (LdF vs. TrF, LdH vs. TrH) differences in time- and amplitude-normalized sEMG and joint angle-time waveforms over the stride. Linear mixed models evaluated between-limb differences in discrete sEMG activation timings, average rectified values (ARV), and spatio-temporal kinematics. Significantly greater gluteal ARV and activity duration facilitated greater limb retraction, hip extension, and stifle flexion ( < 0.05) in the TrH during stance. Earlier splenius activation during the LdF movement cycle ( < 0.05), reflected bilateral activation during TrF/LdH diagonal stance, contributing to body pitching mechanisms in canter. Limb muscles were generally quiescent during swing, where significantly greater LdF/H protraction was observed through greater elbow and hip flexion ( < 0.05), respectively. Alterations in muscle activation facilitate different timing and movement cycles of the leading and trailing limbs, which justifies equal training on both canter leads to develop symmetry in muscular strength, enhance athletic performance, and mitigate overuse injury risks.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2023-05-25 PubMed ID: 37889657PubMed Central: PMC10252091DOI: 10.3390/ani13111755Google Scholar: Lookup
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.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

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 study provides an analysis of muscle activity and movement differences between the leading and trailing limbs of a horse while cantering. The authors summarise that the findings can help to balance training on both sides to develop muscular strength, enhance performance, and reduce the risk of injury in horses.

Research Design and Methodology

  • The research involved collecting three-dimensional kinematic and surface electromyography (sEMG) data from horses during their cantering routine. The muscles investigated were the right triceps brachii, biceps femoris, middle gluteal, and splenius.
  • Data was collected from 10 ridden horses performing a straight left- and right-lead canter.
  • Statistical parametric mapping was used to evaluate differences in muscle activation and joint-waveforms between the leading and trailing limbs, both for the fore- and hindlimbs.
  • Linear mixed models were also used to evaluate the differences in sEMG activation timings, Average Rectified Values (ARV), and spatio-temporal kinematics.

Key Findings

  • The study found that the trailing hindlimb (TrH) showed greater gluteal ARV and activity duration, enabling increased limb retraction, hip extension, and stifle flexion during stance.
  • There was also earlier splenius activation during the leading forelimb (LdF) movement cycle. The authors explain that this reflects bilateral activation during the trailing forelimb and leading hindlimb’s (TrF/LdH) diagonal stance, contributing to body pitching mechanisms in canter.
  • The research also observed that limb muscles were generally inactive during the swing phase, where significantly greater protraction was observed in the leading limbs through an increased elbow and hip flexion.

Implications and Conclusion

  • The differences in muscle activation timings and movements between the leading and trailing limbs during canter indicate that alterations in muscle activation are necessary to facilitate these unique timing and movement cycles.
  • The authors concluded that these findings highlight the importance of providing equal training to both leading and trailing limbs. They argue that balanced training can result in the development of symmetry in muscular strength in horses, which can contribute to enhanced athletic performance.
  • In addition, balanced training can also mitigate the risks of overuse injuries that could occur as a result of focusing on one limb more than the other.

Cite This Article

APA
St George LB, Clayton HM, Sinclair JK, Richards J, Roy SH, Hobbs SJ. (2023). Electromyographic and Kinematic Comparison of the Leading and Trailing Fore- and Hindlimbs of Horses during Canter. Animals (Basel), 13(11), 1755. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13111755

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 13
Issue: 11
PII: 1755

Researcher Affiliations

St George, Lindsay B
  • Research Centre for Applied Sport, Physical Activity and Performance, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, UK.
Clayton, Hilary M
  • Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA.
Sinclair, Jonathan K
  • Research Centre for Applied Sport, Physical Activity and Performance, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, UK.
Richards, Jim
  • Allied Health Research Unit, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, UK.
Roy, Serge H
  • Delsys/Altec Inc., Natick, MA 01760, USA.
Hobbs, Sarah Jane
  • Research Centre for Applied Sport, Physical Activity and Performance, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, UK.

Conflict of Interest Statement

Co-author S.H.R. is employed at Delsys Inc., the manufacturer of the EMG sensors used in this study. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

This article includes 56 references
  1. Hildebrand M. Analysis of asymmetrical gaits.. J. Mammal. 1977;58:131–156.
    doi: 10.2307/1379571google scholar: lookup
  2. Leach D. Recommended terminology for researchers in locomotion and biomechanics of quadrupedal animals.. Cells Tissues Organs 1993;146:130–136.
    doi: 10.1159/000147434pubmed: 8470455google scholar: lookup
  3. Leach D, Ormrod K, Clayton H. Standardised terminology for the description and analysis of equine locomotion.. Equine Vet. J. 1984;16:522–528.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1984.tb02007.xpubmed: 6519042google scholar: lookup
  4. Back W, Schamhardt H, Barneveld A. Kinematic comparison of the leading and trailing fore- and hindlimbs at the canter.. Equine Vet. J. 1997;29:80–83.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1997.tb05060.xpubmed: 9354296google scholar: lookup
  5. Merkens H.W., Schamhardt H.C., Van Osch G., Hartman W. Ground reaction force patterns of Dutch Warmbloods at the canter.. Am. J. Vet. Res. 1993;54:670.
    pubmed: 8317757
  6. Clayton H. The extended canter: A comparison of some kinematic variables in horses trained for dressage and for racing.. Cells Tissues Organs 1993;146:183–187.
    doi: 10.1159/000147443pubmed: 8470464google scholar: lookup
  7. Faber M, Johnston C, Schamhardt H, Van Weeren P, Roepstorff L, Barneveld A. Three-dimensional kinematics of the equine spine during canter.. Equine Vet. J. 2001;33:145–149.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2001.tb05378.xpubmed: 11721556google scholar: lookup
  8. Burns T.E., Clayton H.M. Comparison of the temporal kinematics of the canter pirouette and collected canter.. Equine Vet. J. 1997;29:58–61.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1997.tb05055.xpubmed: 9354291google scholar: lookup
  9. Clayton H.M. Comparison of the collected, working, medium and extended canters.. Equine Vet. J. 1994;26:16–19.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1994.tb04866.xpubmed: 8542844google scholar: lookup
  10. Deuel N.R., Park J.-J. The gait patterns of Olympic dressage horses.. J. Appl. Biomech. 1990;6:198–226.
    doi: 10.1123/ijsb.6.2.198google scholar: lookup
  11. Clayton H.M. Time-motion analysis of show jumping competitions.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 1996;16:262–266.
    doi: 10.1016/S0737-0806(96)80195-Xgoogle scholar: lookup
  12. St George L, Hobbs S.J., Sinclair J, Richards J, Roddam H. Does equestrian knowledge and experience influence selection and training practices for showjumping horses?. Comp. Exerc. Physiol. 2019;15:123–135.
    doi: 10.3920/CEP180049google scholar: lookup
  13. Hellsten E.T., Viklund Å., Koenen E., Ricard A., Bruns E., Philipsson J. Review of genetic parameters estimated at stallion and young horse performance tests and their correlations with later results in dressage and show-jumping competition.. Livest. Sci. 2006;103:1–12.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2006.01.004google scholar: lookup
  14. Wallin L, Strandberg E, Philipsson J. Genetic correlations between field test results of Swedish Warmblood Riding Horses as 4-year-olds and lifetime performance results in dressage and show jumping.. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2003;82:61–71.
    doi: 10.1016/S0301-6226(02)00307-Xgoogle scholar: lookup
  15. Niki Y, Ueda Y, Masumitsu H. A force plate study in equine biomechanics 3. The vertical and fore-aft components of floor reaction forces and motion of equine limbs at canter.. Bull. Equine Res. Inst. 1984;1984:8–18.
  16. Crevier-Denoix N, Falala S, Holden-Douilly L, Camus M, Martino J, Ravary-Plumioen B, Vergari C, Desquilbet L, Denoix J.M., Chateau H. Comparative kinematic analysis of the leading and trailing forelimbs of horses cantering on a turf and a synthetic surface.. Equine Vet. J. 2013;45:54–61.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12160pubmed: 24304405google scholar: lookup
  17. Witte T, Knill K, Wilson A. Determination of peak vertical ground reaction force from duty factor in the horse (Equus caballus). J. Exp. Biol. 2004;207:3639–3648.
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.01182pubmed: 15371472google scholar: lookup
  18. McGuigan M.P., Wilson A.M. The effect of gait and digital flexor muscle activation on limb compliance in the forelimb of the horse Equus caballus.. J. Exp. Biol. 2003;206:1325–1336.
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.00254pubmed: 12624168google scholar: lookup
  19. Harrison S.M., Whitton R.C., King M, Haussler K.K., Kawcak C.E., Stover S.M., Pandy M.G. Forelimb muscle activity during equine locomotion.. J. Exp. Biol. 2012;215:2980–2991.
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.065441pubmed: 22875767google scholar: lookup
  20. Jansen M, Van Raaij J, Van den Bogert A, Schamhardt H, Hartman W. Quantitative analysis of computer-averaged electromyographic profiles of intrinsic limb muscles in ponies at the walk.. Am. J. Vet. Res. 1992;53:2343–2349.
    pubmed: 1476320
  21. Zsoldos R, Kotschwar A, Kotschwar A, Groesel M, Licka T, Peham C. Electromyography activity of the equine splenius muscle and neck kinematics during walk and trot on the treadmill.. Equine Vet. J. 2010;42:455–461.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00263.xpubmed: 21059045google scholar: lookup
  22. Zsoldos R, Kotschwar A, Kotschwar A, Rodriguez C, Peham C, Licka T. Activity of the equine rectus abdominis and oblique external abdominal muscles measured by surface EMG during walk and trot on the treadmill.. Equine Vet. J. 2010;42:523–529.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00230.xpubmed: 21059055google scholar: lookup
  23. Robert C, Valette J, Denoix J. Correlation between surface electromyography and kinematics of the hindlimb of horses at trot on a treadmill.. Cells Tissues Organs 1999;165:113–122.
    doi: 10.1159/000016681pubmed: 10516424google scholar: lookup
  24. Licka T, Frey A, Peham C. Electromyographic activity of the longissimus dorsi muscles in horses when walking on a treadmill.. Vet. J. 2009;180:71–76.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2007.11.001pubmed: 18314362google scholar: lookup
  25. Licka T.F., Peham C, Frey A. Electromyographic activity of the longissimus dorsi muscles in horses during trotting on a treadmill.. Am. J. Vet. Res. 2004;65:155–158.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.2004.65.155pubmed: 14974571google scholar: lookup
  26. Hodson-Tole E. Effects of treadmill inclination and speed on forelimb muscle activity and kinematics in the horse.. Equine Comp. Exerc. Physiol. 2006;3:61–72.
    doi: 10.1079/ECP200681google scholar: lookup
  27. Kienapfel K, Preuschoft H, Wulf A, Wagner H. The biomechanical construction of the horse’s body and activity patterns of three important muscles of the trunk in the walk, trot and canter.. J. Anim. Physiol. Anim. Nutr. 2018;102:e818–e827.
    doi: 10.1111/jpn.12840pubmed: 29135048google scholar: lookup
  28. St George L, Roy S, Richards J, Sinclair J, Hobbs S.J. Surface EMG signal normalisation and filtering improves sensitivity of equine gait analysis.. Comp. Exerc. Physiol. 2019;15:173–185.
    doi: 10.3920/CEP190028google scholar: lookup
  29. Gellman K.S., Bertram J. The equine nuchal ligament 2: Passive dynamic energy exchange in locomotion.. Vet. Comp. Orthop. Traumatol. 2002;15:07–14.
  30. Dunbar D.C., Macpherson J.M., Simmons R.W., Zarcades A. Stabilization and mobility of the head, neck and trunk in horses during overground locomotion: Comparisons with humans and other primates.. J. Exp. Biol. 2008;211:3889–3907.
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.020578pmc: PMC2768006pubmed: 19043061google scholar: lookup
  31. St George L, Clayton H.M., Sinclair J, Richards J, Roy S.H., Hobbs S.J. Muscle Function and Kinematics during Submaximal Equine Jumping: What Can Objective Outcomes Tell Us about Athletic Performance Indicators?. Animals 2021;11:414.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11020414pmc: PMC7915507pubmed: 33562875google scholar: lookup
  32. De Luca C.J. The use of surface electromyography in biomechanics.. J. Appl. Biomech. 1997;13:135–163.
    doi: 10.1123/jab.13.2.135google scholar: lookup
  33. Hermens H.J., Freriks B., Disselhorst-Klug C., Rau G. Development of recommendations for SEMG sensors and sensor placement procedures.. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 2000;10:361–374.
    doi: 10.1016/S1050-6411(00)00027-4pubmed: 11018445google scholar: lookup
  34. Hobbs S.J., Richards J., Clayton H.M., Hobbs S.J.. The effect of centre of mass location on sagittal plane moments around the centre of mass in trotting horses.. J. Biomech. 2014;47:1278–1286.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.02.024pubmed: 24636530google scholar: lookup
  35. Holt D, St George L, Clayton H, Hobbs S.J. A simple method for equine kinematic gait event detection.. Equine Vet. J. 2017;49:688–691.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12669pubmed: 28117488google scholar: lookup
  36. Back W, Schamhardt H, Savelberg H, Van den Bogert A, Bruin G, Hartman W, Barneveld A. How the horse moves: 1. Significance of graphical representations of equine forelimb kinematics.. Equine Vet. J. 1995;27:31–38.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1995.tb03029.xpubmed: 7774544google scholar: lookup
  37. Back W, Schamhardt H, Savelberg H, Van Den Bogert A, Bruin G, Hartman W, Barneveld A. How the horse moves: 2. Significance of graphical representations of equine hind limb kinematics.. Equine Vet. J. 1995;27:39–45.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1995.tb03030.xpubmed: 7774545google scholar: lookup
  38. St George L, Hobbs S.J., Richards J, Sinclair J, Holt D, Roy S. The effect of cut-off frequency when high-pass filtering equine sEMG signals during locomotion.. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 2018;43:28–40.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jelekin.2018.09.001pubmed: 30219734google scholar: lookup
  39. Witte T, Hirst C, Wilson A. Effect of speed on stride parameters in racehorses at gallop in field conditions.. J. Exp. Biol. 2006;209:4389–4397.
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.02518pubmed: 17050854google scholar: lookup
  40. Tokuriki M, Aoki O. Neck muscles activity in horses during locomotion with and without a rider.. 1991:146–150.
  41. Buchner H, Savelberg H, Schamhardt H, Barneveld A. Limb movement adaptations in horses with experimentally induced fore-or hindlimb lameness.. Equine Vet. J. 1996;28:63–70.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1996.tb01591.xpubmed: 8565956google scholar: lookup
  42. Robert C, Valette J, Denoix J. The effects of treadmill inclination and speed on the activity of two hindlimb muscles in the trotting horse.. Equine Vet. J. 2000;32:312–317.
    doi: 10.2746/042516400777032246pubmed: 10952380google scholar: lookup
  43. Robert C, Valette J.P., Pourcelot P, Audigie F, Denoix J.M. Effects of trotting speed on muscle activity and kinematics in saddlehorses.. Equine Vet. J. 2002;34:295–301.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2002.tb05436.xpubmed: 12405704google scholar: lookup
  44. Tokuriki M, Aoki O. Electromyographic activity of the hindlimb muscles during the walk, trot and canter.. Equine Vet. J. 1995;27:152–155.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1995.tb04909.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  45. Dutto D.J., Hoyt D.F., Clayton H.M., Cogger E.A., Wickler S.J. Joint work and power for both the forelimb and hindlimb during trotting in the horse.. J. Exp. Biol. 2006;209:3990–3999.
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.02471pubmed: 17023593google scholar: lookup
  46. Denoix J.M. Biomechanics and Physical Training of the Horse.. 2014.
  47. Biewener A.A. Muscle-tendon stresses and elastic energy storage during locomotion in the horse.. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. Part B Biochem. Mol. Biol. 1998;120:73–87.
    doi: 10.1016/S0305-0491(98)00024-8pubmed: 9787779google scholar: lookup
  48. Wells A, Blache D. Horses do not exhibit motor bias when their balance is challenged.. Animal 2008;2:1645–1650.
    doi: 10.1017/S1751731108002772pubmed: 22444016google scholar: lookup
  49. Byström A, Clayton H, Hernlund E, Rhodin M, Egenvall A. Equestrian and biomechanical perspectives on laterality in the horse.. Comp. Exerc. Physiol. 2020;16:35–45.
    doi: 10.3920/CEP190022google scholar: lookup
  50. Eisersiö M, Roepstorff L, Rhodin M, Egenvall A. A snapshot of the training schedule for 8 professional riders riding dressage.. Comp. Exerc. Physiol. 2015;11:35–45.
    doi: 10.3920/CEP140024google scholar: lookup
  51. Krueger K, Schwarz S, Marr I, Farmer K. Laterality in horse training: Psychological and physical balance and coordination and strength rather than straightness.. Animals 2022;12:1042.
    doi: 10.3390/ani12081042pmc: PMC9028236pubmed: 35454288google scholar: lookup
  52. Robert C, Valette J, Denoix J.M. The effects of treadmill inclination and speed on the activity of three trunk muscles in the trotting horse.. Equine Vet. J. 2001;33:466–472.
    doi: 10.2746/042516401776254745pubmed: 11558741google scholar: lookup
  53. Crook T, Wilson A, Hodson-Tole E. The effect of treadmill speed and gradient on equine hindlimb muscle activity.. Equine Vet. J. 2010;42:412–416.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00222.xpubmed: 21059038google scholar: lookup
  54. Miller R.A., Thaut M.H., McIntosh G.C., Rice R.R. Components of EMG symmetry and variability in parkinsonian and healthy elderly gait.. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. Electromyogr. Mot. Control. 1996;101:1–7.
    doi: 10.1016/0013-4694(95)00209-Xpubmed: 8625872google scholar: lookup
  55. Hof A, Elzinga H, Grimmius W, Halbertsma J. Speed dependence of averaged EMG profiles in walking.. Gait. Posture. 2002;16:78–86.
    doi: 10.1016/S0966-6362(01)00206-5pubmed: 12127190google scholar: lookup
  56. Tokuriki M, Aoki O, Niki Y, Kurakawa Y, Hataya M, Kita T. Electromyographic activity of cubital joint muscles in horses during locomotion.. Am. J. Vet. Res. 1989;50:950–957.
    pubmed: 2764349

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,344 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.