Analyze Diet
American journal of veterinary research2009; 70(10); 1220-1229; doi: 10.2460/ajvr.70.10.1220

Hoof accelerations and ground reaction forces of Thoroughbred racehorses measured on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces.

Abstract: To compare hoof acceleration and ground reaction force (GRF) data among dirt, synthetic, and turf surfaces in Thoroughbred racehorses. Methods: 3 healthy Thoroughbred racehorses. Methods: Forelimb hoof accelerations and GRFs were measured with an accelerometer and a dynamometric horseshoe during trot and canter on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces at a racecourse. Maxima, minima, temporal components, and a measure of vibration were extracted from the data. Acceleration and GRF variables were compared statistically among surfaces. Results: The synthetic surface often had the lowest peak accelerations, mean vibration, and peak GRFs. Peak acceleration during hoof landing was significantly smaller for the synthetic surface (mean + or - SE, 28.5g + or - 2.9g) than for the turf surface (42.9g + or - 3.8g). Hoof vibrations during hoof landing for the synthetic surface were < 70% of those for the dirt and turf surfaces. Peak GRF for the synthetic surface (11.5 + or - 0.4 N/kg) was 83% and 71% of those for the dirt (13.8 + or - 0.3 N/kg) and turf surfaces (16.1 + or - 0.7 N/kg), respectively. Conclusions: The relatively low hoof accelerations, vibrations, and peak GRFs associated with the synthetic surface evaluated in the present study indicated that synthetic surfaces have potential for injury reduction in Thoroughbred racehorses. However, because of the unique material properties and different nature of individual dirt, synthetic, and turf racetrack surfaces, extending the results of this study to encompass all track surfaces should be done with caution.
Publication Date: 2009-10-03 PubMed ID: 19795936DOI: 10.2460/ajvr.70.10.1220Google 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.
  • Journal Article
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't

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 research paper explores the comparison of hoof acceleration and ground reaction force (GRF) in Thoroughbred racehorses on different track surfaces – dirt, synthetic, and turf. The results showed that synthetic surfaces often exhibited the lowest peak accelerations, mean vibrations, and peak GRFs.

Methodology

  • Three healthy Thoroughbred racehorses were chosen for this study.
  • The researchers measured forelimb hoof accelerations and GRFs using an accelerometer and a dynamometric horseshoe.
  • The tests were carried out during the horses’ trot and canter on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces at a racecourse.
  • The data was then analyzed to extract maxima, minima, temporal components, and a measure of vibration.
  • The variables of acceleration and GRF were then compared statistically among different surfaces.

Results

  • The synthetic surface often led to the lowest peak accelerations, mean vibration, and peak GRFs.
  • Peak acceleration during hoof landing on the synthetic surface was significantly smaller than that on the turf surface.
  • Hoof vibrations during hoof landing on the synthetic surface were less than 70% of those for the dirt and turf surfaces.
  • The peak GRF for the synthetic surface was 83% and 71% of those for the dirt and turf surfaces respectively.

Conclusions

  • The synthetic surface, due to its low hoof accelerations, vibrations, and peak GRFs, indicates its potential for reducing injuries in Thoroughbred racehorses.
  • The authors caution that because of the unique material properties and diverse nature of individual dirt, synthetic, and turf racetrack surfaces, the results of this study may not be universally applicable to all track surfaces.

Cite This Article

APA
Setterbo JJ, Garcia TC, Campbell IP, Reese JL, Morgan JM, Kim SY, Hubbard M, Stover SM. (2009). Hoof accelerations and ground reaction forces of Thoroughbred racehorses measured on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces. Am J Vet Res, 70(10), 1220-1229. https://doi.org/10.2460/ajvr.70.10.1220

Publication

ISSN: 0002-9645
NlmUniqueID: 0375011
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 70
Issue: 10
Pages: 1220-1229

Researcher Affiliations

Setterbo, Jacob J
  • Biomedical Engineering Graduate Group, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA. jjsetterbo@ucdavis.edu
Garcia, Tanya C
    Campbell, Ian P
      Reese, Jennifer L
        Morgan, Jessica M
          Kim, Sun Y
            Hubbard, Mont
              Stover, Susan M

                MeSH Terms

                • Acceleration
                • Animals
                • Biomechanical Phenomena / physiology
                • Female
                • Hoof and Claw / physiology
                • Horses / physiology
                • Physical Conditioning, Animal / physiology
                • Running / physiology
                • Surface Properties

                Citations

                This article has been cited 16 times.
                1. Horan K, Price H, Day P, Mackechnie-Guire R, Pfau T. Timing Differences in Stride Cycle Phases in Retired Racehorses Ridden in Rising and Two-Point Seat Positions at Trot on Turf, Artificial and Tarmac Surfaces. Animals (Basel) 2023 Aug 9;13(16).
                  doi: 10.3390/ani13162563pubmed: 37627354google scholar: lookup
                2. Horan K, Coburn J, Kourdache K, Day P, Carnall H, Brinkley L, Harborne D, Hammond L, Peterson M, Millard S, Pfau T. Hoof Impact and Foot-Off Accelerations in Galloping Thoroughbred Racehorses Trialling Eight Shoe-Surface Combinations. Animals (Basel) 2022 Aug 23;12(17).
                  doi: 10.3390/ani12172161pubmed: 36077882google scholar: lookup
                3. Pfau T, Bolt DM, Fiske-Jackson A, Gerdes C, Hoenecke K, Lynch L, Perrier M, Smith RKW. Linear Discriminant Analysis for Investigating Differences in Upper Body Movement Symmetry in Horses before/after Diagnostic Analgesia in Relation to Expert Judgement. Animals (Basel) 2022 Mar 17;12(6).
                  doi: 10.3390/ani12060762pubmed: 35327159google scholar: lookup
                4. Vergara-Hernandez FB, Nielsen BD, Robison CI, Fabus TA, Kompare JL, LeCompte Lazić RA, Colbath AC. Average stride length and stride rate of Thoroughbreds and Quarter Horses during racing. Transl Anim Sci 2022 Jan;6(1):txab233.
                  doi: 10.1093/tas/txab233pubmed: 35198858google scholar: lookup
                5. Horan K, Kourdache K, Coburn J, Day P, Carnall H, Harborne D, Brinkley L, Hammond L, Millard S, Lancaster B, Pfau T. The effect of horseshoes and surfaces on horse and jockey centre of mass displacements at gallop. PLoS One 2021;16(11):e0257820.
                  doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257820pubmed: 34813584google scholar: lookup
                6. Lazarus BS, Chadha C, Velasco-Hogan A, Barbosa JDV, Jasiuk I, Meyers MA. Engineering with keratin: A functional material and a source of bioinspiration. iScience 2021 Aug 20;24(8):102798.
                  doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2021.102798pubmed: 34355149google scholar: lookup
                7. Maeda Y, Hanada M, Oikawa MA. Epidemiology of racing injuries in Thoroughbred racehorses with special reference to bone fractures: Japanese experience from the 1980s to 2000s. J Equine Sci 2016;27(3):81-97.
                  doi: 10.1294/jes.27.81pubmed: 27703403google scholar: lookup
                8. Younes M, Robert C, Barrey E, Cottin F. Effects of Age, Exercise Duration, and Test Conditions on Heart Rate Variability in Young Endurance Horses. Front Physiol 2016;7:155.
                  doi: 10.3389/fphys.2016.00155pubmed: 27199770google scholar: lookup
                9. Takahashi T. The effect of age on the racing speed of Thoroughbred racehorses. J Equine Sci 2015;26(2):43-8.
                  doi: 10.1294/jes.26.43pubmed: 26170760google scholar: lookup
                10. Starke SD, Clayton HM. A universal approach to determine footfall timings from kinematics of a single foot marker in hoofed animals. PeerJ 2015;3:e783.
                  doi: 10.7717/peerj.783pubmed: 26157641google scholar: lookup
                11. Takahashi T, Matsui A, Mukai K, Ohmura H, Hiraga A, Aida H. The Effects of Inclination (Up and Down) of the Treadmill on the Electromyogram Activities of the Forelimb and Hind limb Muscles at a Walk and a Trot in Thoroughbred Horses. J Equine Sci 2014;25(4):73-7.
                  doi: 10.1294/jes.25.73pubmed: 25558180google scholar: lookup
                12. Setterbo JJ, Chau A, Fyhrie PB, Hubbard M, Upadhyaya SK, Symons JE, Stover SM. Validation of a laboratory method for evaluating dynamic properties of reconstructed equine racetrack surfaces. PLoS One 2012;7(12):e50534.
                  doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050534pubmed: 23227183google scholar: lookup
                13. Lewis R, Asplin KE, Bruce G, Dart C, Mobasheri A, Barrett-Jolley R. The role of the membrane potential in chondrocyte volume regulation. J Cell Physiol 2011 Nov;226(11):2979-86.
                  doi: 10.1002/jcp.22646pubmed: 21328349google scholar: lookup
                14. Horan K, Pfau T. Effects of jockey position and surfaces on horse movement asymmetry and horse-jockey synchronisation during trotting exercise. PLoS One 2025;20(5):e0324753.
                  doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0324753pubmed: 40455846google scholar: lookup
                15. Aoun R, Ogunmola Z, Musso A, Taguchi T, Takawira C, Lopez MJ. Shoe configuration effects on equine forelimb gait kinetics at a walk. PeerJ 2025;13:e18940.
                  doi: 10.7717/peerj.18940pubmed: 40028219google scholar: lookup
                16. Horan K, Coburn J, Kourdache K, Day P, Carnall H, Brinkley L, Harborne D, Hammond L, Millard S, Weller R, Pfau T. Hoof slip duration at impact in galloping Thoroughbred ex-racehorses trialling eight shoe-surface combinations. PLoS One 2024;19(10):e0311899.
                  doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0311899pubmed: 39392818google scholar: lookup