Forage nutritive analysis in practical equine feeding: challenges and opportunities.

Overview

• This study investigated how horse owners in Sweden use forage nutritive analyses in feeding their horses and identified challenges they face in using these analyses effectively.
• It found that while many have access to forage analysis reports, barriers such as sampling difficulties and lack of clear guidance limit their full utilization.

Introduction and Background

• Forage is a primary component of equine diets, but its nutritional quality can vary widely.
• Understanding the nutritive value of forage is critical to avoid underfeeding or overfeeding horses, both of which can negatively impact health and performance.
• Despite this, previous research showed forage nutritive analyses are not widely used in equine nutrition.
• This study aimed to assess how horse owners in Sweden use these analyses and what challenges they face.

Methods

• Data was collected via an online survey distributed to horse owners.
• The survey included questions about:
  • Respondent demographics and horse care background
  • Access to forage nutritive analytical reports
  • Whether and how the reports were used in feeding decisions
  • Suggestions for improving use and accessibility of forage analyses
• A total of 425 complete responses were received and analyzed.

Results

• Access to Forage Reports:
  • 84% (356/425) of respondents had access to a forage nutritive analytical report for their forage.
  • 16% (69/425) did not have access to such reports.
• Usage of Forage Reports:
  • Among those with reports:
    • 52% (185/356) used them to calculate horse feed rations accurately.
    • 45% (160/356) used the reports to estimate the amount of forage allowance.
• Reasons for Not Using Reports:
  • Among those without reports:
    • 39% (27/69) cited difficulty obtaining representative forage samples as a main barrier.
    • 26% (18/69) felt forage analyses were unnecessary.
• Barriers and Solutions Suggested:
  • Lower price for conducting forage analyses was suggested by 40% (168/425) of respondents to increase usage.
  • 32% (135/425) wanted more specific feeding recommendations linked to forage analysis reports to facilitate practical use.

Conclusions

• A majority of horse owners in the survey had access to forage nutritive analytical reports, indicating good availability of such services.
• However, challenges such as difficulty in sampling and lack of clear instructions limited full use of the reports in feeding management.
• Improving education on interpreting forage analysis, providing specific feeding recommendations, and reducing cost barriers could help horse owners optimize feeding based on forage quality.
• This could ultimately improve horse health and nutrition by preventing common feeding errors related to variability in forage nutrient content.