FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
PloS one2024; 19(10); e0311899; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0311899

Hoof slip duration at impact in galloping Thoroughbred ex-racehorses trialling eight shoe-surface combinations.

Abstract: Horseshoes used during racing are a major determinant of safety as they play a critical role in providing traction with the ground surface. Although excessive hoof slip is detrimental and can predispose to instabilities, falls and injuries, some slip is essential to dissipate energy and lower stresses on the limb tissues during initial loading. This study aimed to quantify hoof slip duration in retired Thoroughbred racehorses galloping over turf and artificial (Martin Collins Activ-Track) tracks at the British Racing School in the following four shoeing conditions: 1) aluminium; 2) steel; 3) GluShu (aluminium-rubber composite); and 4) barefoot. High-speed video cameras (Sony DSC-RX100M5) filmed 389 hoof-ground interactions from 13 galloping Thoroughbreds at 1000 frames per second. A marker wand secured to the lateral aspect of the hoof wall aided tracking of horizontal and vertical hoof position in Tracker software over time, so the interval of hoof displacement immediately following impact (hoof slip duration) could be identified. Data were collected from leading and non-leading forelimbs at speeds ranging from 24-56 km h-1. Linear mixed models assessed whether surface, shoeing condition or speed influenced hoof slip duration (significance at p≤0.05). Day and horse-jockey pair were included as random factors and speed was included as a covariate. Mean hoof slip duration was similar amongst forelimbs and the non-leading hindlimb (20.4-21.5 ms) but was shortest in the leading hindlimb (18.3±10.2 ms, mean ± 2.S.D.). Slip durations were 2.1-3.5 ms (p≤0.05) longer on the turf than on the artificial track for forelimbs and the non-leading hindlimb, but they were 2.5 ms shorter on the turf than on the artificial track in the leading hindlimb (p = 0.025). In the leading hindlimb, slip durations were also significantly longer for the aluminium shoeing condition compared to barefoot, by 3.7 ms. There was a significant negative correlation between speed and slip duration in the leading forelimb. This study emphasises the importance of evaluating individual limb biomechanics when applying external interventions that impact the asymmetric galloping gait of the horse. Hoof slip durations and the impact of shoe-surface effects on slip were limb specific. Further work is needed to relate specific limb injury occurrence to these hoof slip duration data.
Copyright: © 2024 Horan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2024-10-11 PubMed ID: 39392818PubMed Central: PMC11469542DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0311899Google 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.

This research studied the duration of hoof slip in galloping thoroughbred ex-racehorses while they were shod with different shoes and ran on different surfaces. It found that the type of shoes and surface, and the speed of the horse, all affected the duration of hoof slip.

Study Objective

  • The main objective of this study was to measure the amount of hoof slip duration in retired Thoroughbred racehorses, galloping on different surfaces using different types of horseshoes.
  • Four types of shoes were used in this experiment: aluminium, steel, GluShu (a composite of aluminium and rubber), and barefoot.
  • The experiment was conducted on both turf and artificial track surfaces.

Methodology

  • The research was carried out using 13 galloping Thoroughbreds.
  • The researchers used high-speed cameras to film 389 hoof-ground interactions.
  • A marker wand was used to track the horizontal and vertical position of the hoof over time. This allowed the researchers to identify the duration of hoof displacement immediately after impact (the ‘hoof slip duration’).
  • Data were gathered from both the leading and non-leading forelimbs at speeds ranging from 24-56 km/h.

Statistical Analysis and Results

  • The research team used linear mixed models to evaluate whether the type of surface, the shoeing condition, or the galloping speed influenced the duration of hoof slip.
  • It was found that hoof slip duration was similar among the forelimbs and non-leading hindlimb, but shortest in the leading hindlimb.
  • Hoof slip durations were significantly longer when the horse galloped on turf as compared to the artificial track, for forelimbs and the non-leading hindlimb. However, in the leading hindlimb, slip durations were shorter on the turf than on the artificial track.
  • The research found a significant negative correlation between speed and slip duration in the leading forelimb.
  • The research also found that the aluminium shoeing condition had a significantly longer slip duration compared to when the horse was barefoot in the leading hindlimb.

Conclusion

  • The study emphasized the importance of considering individual limb biomechanics while applying external interventions that impact the asymmetric galloping gait of the horse.
  • The results showed that the impact of shoe-surface effects on slip were limb specific.
  • The researchers concluded that further studies are needed to relate specific limb injury occurrence to these hoof slip duration data.

Cite This Article

APA
Horan K, Coburn J, Kourdache K, Day P, Carnall H, Brinkley L, Harborne D, Hammond L, Millard S, Weller R, Pfau T. (2024). Hoof slip duration at impact in galloping Thoroughbred ex-racehorses trialling eight shoe-surface combinations. PLoS One, 19(10), e0311899. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0311899

Publication

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
NlmUniqueID: 101285081
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 19
Issue: 10
Pages: e0311899

Researcher Affiliations

Horan, Kate
  • The Royal Veterinary College, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom.
Coburn, James
  • James Coburn AWCF Farriers Ltd, Newmarket, United Kingdom.
Kourdache, Kieran
  • The British Racing School, Newmarket, United Kingdom.
Day, Peter
  • The Royal Veterinary College, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom.
Carnall, Henry
  • James Coburn AWCF Farriers Ltd, Newmarket, United Kingdom.
Brinkley, Liam
  • James Coburn AWCF Farriers Ltd, Newmarket, United Kingdom.
Harborne, Dan
  • James Coburn AWCF Farriers Ltd, Newmarket, United Kingdom.
Hammond, Lucy
  • The British Racing School, Newmarket, United Kingdom.
Millard, Sean
  • The Royal Veterinary College, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom.
Weller, Renate
  • University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Pfau, Thilo
  • The Royal Veterinary College, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom.
  • University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Horses / physiology
  • Hoof and Claw / physiology
  • Shoes
  • Biomechanical Phenomena
  • Forelimb / physiology
  • Gait / physiology
  • Running / physiology

Conflict of Interest Statement

I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: J.C. owns the company James Coburn AWCF Farriers Ltd., which employed H.C., L.B. and D.H. at the time of the study. J.C., P.D., H.C., L.B. and D.H. and are now registered farriers. T.P. and R.W. are the owners of EquiGait, a provider of gait analysis products and services. This does not alter our adherence to all polices on sharing data and materials. The funders had no role in the design of the study or the collection, analyses and interpretation of data.

References

This article includes 57 references
  1. Holden-Douilly L, Pourcelot P, Desquilbet L, Falala S, Crevier-Denoix N, Chateau H. Equine hoof slip distance during trot at training speed: Comparison between kinematic and accelerometric measurement techniques.. Vet J 2013;197: 198–204.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2013.02.004pubmed: 23489849google scholar: lookup
  2. Pardoe CH, McGuigan MP, Rogerst KM, Rowet LL, Wilson AM, Basic V. The effect of shoe material on the kinetics and kinematics of foot slip at impact on concrete.. Equine Vet J 2001; 70–73.
    pubmed: 11721574
  3. Plevin S, McLellan J. Clinical insights: Musculoskeletal injury in the racehorse: What is new?. Equine Vet J 2020;52: 639–642.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13309pubmed: 32748991google scholar: lookup
  4. Cheney JA, Liou SY, Wheat JD. Cannon-bone fracture in the thoroughbred racehorse.. Med Biol Eng 1973;11: 613–620.
    doi: 10.1007/BF02477408pubmed: 4788889google scholar: lookup
  5. Drevemo S, Hjerten G, Johnston C. Drop hammer tests of Scandinavian harness racetracks.. Equine Vet J 1994;26: 35–38.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1994.tb04870.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  6. Nigg B.M., Segesser B. The Influence of Playing Surfaces on the Load on the Locomotor System and on Football and Tennis Injuries.. Sport Med 1988;5: 375–385.
    doi: 10.2165/00007256-198805060-00003pubmed: 3135565google scholar: lookup
  7. Johnston C, Roepstorff L, Drevemo S, Ronéus N. Kinematics of the distal forelimb during the stance phase in the fast trotting Standardbred.. Equine Vet J 1995;27: 170–174.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1995.tb03059.xpubmed: 8818591google scholar: lookup
  8. Willemen MA, Savelberg HHCM, Barneveld A. The improvement of the gait quality of sound trotting warmblood horses by normal shoeing and its effect on the load on the lower forelimb.. Livest Prod Sci 1997;52: 145–153.
    doi: 10.1016/S0301-6226(97)00130-9google scholar: lookup
  9. Witte TH, Knill K, Wilson AM. 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
  10. Back W, Schamhardt HC, Savelberg HHCM, Van den Bogert AJ, Bruin G, Hartman W. 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
  11. Pratt GW. Model for injury to the foreleg of the Thoroughbred racehorse.. Equine Vet J 1997; 30–32.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1997.tb05048.xpubmed: 9354284google scholar: lookup
  12. Radin EL. Subchondral bone changes and cartilage damage.. Equine Vet J 1999;31: 94–95.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1999.tb03799.xpubmed: 10213419google scholar: lookup
  13. Serink RT, Nachemson A, Hansson G. The Effect of Impact Loading on Rabbit Knee Joints.. Acta Orthop 1977;48: 250–262.
    doi: 10.3109/17453677708988764pubmed: 920116google scholar: lookup
  14. Dekel S, Weissman SL. Joint changes after overuse and peak overloading of rabbit knees in vivo.. Acta Orthop 1978;49: 519–528.
    doi: 10.3109/17453677808993232pubmed: 216227google scholar: lookup
  15. Radin EL, Parker HG, Pugh JW, Steinberg RS, Paul IL, Rose RM. Response of joints to impact loading—III: Relationship between trabecular microfractures and cartilage degeneration.. J Biomech 1973;6: 51–57.
    doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(73)90037-7pubmed: 4693868google scholar: lookup
  16. Gustas P, Johnston C. In vivo transmission of impact shock waves in the distal forelimb of the horse.. Equine Vet J 2001;33: 11–15.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2001.tb05350.xpubmed: 11721549google scholar: lookup
  17. Peterson M, Roepstorff L, Thomason JJ, Mahaffey CA, McIlwraith CW. Racing surfaces: current progress and future challenges to optimize consistency and performance of track surfaces for fewer horse injuries.. Racing Surfaces Test Lab White Pap 2012.
  18. Henley WE, Rogers K, Harkins L, Wood JLN. A comparison of survival models for assessing risk of racehorse fatality.. Prev Vet Med 2006;74: 3–20.
    doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2006.01.003pubmed: 16546277google scholar: lookup
  19. Williams RB, Harkins LS, Hammond CJ, Wood JLN. Racehorse injuries, clinical problems and fatalities recorded on British racecourses from flat racing and National Hunt racing during 1996, 1997 and 1998.. Equine Vet J 2001;33: 478–486.
    doi: 10.2746/042516401776254808pubmed: 11558743google scholar: lookup
  20. Arthur RM. Comparison of Racing Fatality Rates on Dirt, Synthetic, and Turf at Four California Racetracks.. AAEP Proc 2010;56: 405–408.
  21. Parkin TDH, Clegg PD, French NP, Proudman CJ, Riggs CM, Singer ER. Risk of fatal distal limb fractures among Thoroughbreds involved in the five types of racing in the United Kingdom.. Vet Rec 2004;154: 493–497.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.154.16.493pubmed: 15130054google scholar: lookup
  22. Peterson M, Sanderson W, Kussainov N, Hobbs SJ, Miles P, Scollay MC. Effects of racing surface and turn radius on fatal limb fractures in thoroughbred racehorses.. Sustain 2021;13: 1–16.
    doi: 10.3390/sጂ0539google scholar: lookup
  23. Crevier-Denoix N, Pourcelot P, Ravary B, Robin D, Falala S, Uzel S. Influence of track surface on the equine superficial digital flexor tendon loading in two horses at high speed trot.. Equine Vet J 2009.
    doi: 10.2746/042516409x394445pubmed: 19469232google scholar: lookup
  24. Symons JE, Garcia TC, Stover SM. Distal hindlimb kinematics of galloping Thoroughbred racehorses on dirt and synthetic racetrack surfaces.. Equine Vet J 2014;46: 227–232.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12113pubmed: 23742040google scholar: lookup
  25. Setterbo JJ, Garcia TC, Campbell IP, Reese JL, Morgan JM, Kim SY. Hoof accelerations and ground reaction forces of Thoroughbred racehorses measured on dirt, synthetic, and turf track surfaces.. Am J Vet Res 2009;70: 1220–1229.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.70.10.1220pubmed: 19795936google scholar: lookup
  26. Horan K, Coburn J, Kourdache K, Day P, Carnall H, Brinkley L. Hoof Impact and Foot-Off Accelerations in Galloping Thoroughbred Racehorses Trialling Eight Shoe–Surface Combinations.. Animals 2022;12: 1–31.
    doi: 10.3390/ani12172161pmc: PMC9454475pubmed: 36077882google scholar: lookup
  27. Dallap Schaer BL, Ryan CT, Boston RC, Nunamaker DM. The horse-racetrack interface: A preliminary study on the effect of shoeing on impact trauma using a novel wireless data acquisition system.. Equine Vet J 2006;38: 664–670.
    doi: 10.2746/042516406X156389pubmed: 17228583google scholar: lookup
  28. Hernandez JA, Scollay MC, Hawkins DL, Corda JA, Krueger TM. Evaluation of horseshoe characteristics and high-speed exercise history as possible risk factors for catastrophic musculoskeletal injury in Thoroughbred racehorses.. Am J Vet Res 2005;66: 1314–1320.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.2005.66.1314pubmed: 16173471google scholar: lookup
  29. Hill AE, Gardner IA, Carpenter TE, Stover SM. Effects of injury to the suspensory apparatus, exercise, and horseshoe characteristics on the risk of lateral condylar fracture and suspensory apparatus failure in forelimbs of Thoroughbred racehorses.. Am J Vet Res 2004;65: 1508–1517.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.2004.65.1508pubmed: 15566089google scholar: lookup
  30. Kane AJ, Stover SM, Gardner IA, Case JT, Johnson BJ, Read DH. Horseshoe characteristics as possible risk factors for fatal musculoskeletal injury of Thoroughbred racehorses.. Am J Vet Res 1996;57: 1147–1152.
    pubmed: 8836365
  31. Balch OK, Helman RG, Acvp D, Collier MA, Acvs D. Underrun Heels and Toe-Grab Length as Possible Risk Factors for Catastrophic Musculoskeletal Injuries in Oklahoma Racehorses.. 2001;47.
  32. BHA. Equipment Code—Horse Equipment—Shoes.. British Horseracing Authority Rules of Racing 2024. pp. 15.1–16.2.
  33. Parsons KJ, Spence AJ, Morgan R, Thompson JA, Wilson AM. High speed field kinematics of foot contact in elite galloping horses in training.. Equine Vet J 2011;43: 216–222.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00149.xpubmed: 21592218google scholar: lookup
  34. Gustås P, Johnston C, Hedenström U, Roepstorff L, Drevemo S. A field study on hoof deceleration at impact in Standardbred trotters at various speeds.. Equine Comp Exerc Physiol 2006;3: 161–168.
    doi: 10.1017/ECP200694google scholar: lookup
  35. Harvey AM, Williams SB, Singer ER. The effect of lateral heel studs on the kinematics of the equine digit while cantering on grass.. Vet J 2012;192: 217–221.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2011.06.003pubmed: 21752677google scholar: lookup
  36. McClinchey HL, Thomason JJ, Runciman RJ. Grip and slippage of the horse’s hoof on solid substrates measured ex vivo.. Biosyst Eng 2004;89: 485–494.
  37. Mahaffey CA, Peterson ML, Thomason JJ, McIlwraith CW. Dynamic testing of horseshoe designs at impact on synthetic and dirt Thoroughbred racetrack materials.. Equine Vet J 2016;48: 97–102.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12360pubmed: 25251227google scholar: lookup
  38. BHA. Amendments to the Rules of Racing—Cobalt and Shoes.. Press Release 2016 [cited 26 Mar 2024].
  39. Horan K, Kourdache K, Coburn J, Day P, Brinkley L, Carnall H. Jockey Perception of Shoe and Surface Effects on Hoof-Ground Interactions and Implications for Safety in the Galloping Thoroughbred Racehorse.. J Equine Vet Sci 2021;97: 103327.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2020.103327pubmed: 33478759google scholar: lookup
  40. Horan K, Kourdache K, Coburn J, Day P, Carnall H, Harborne D. The effect of horseshoes and surfaces on horse and jockey centre of mass displacements at gallop.. PLoS One 2021;16: 1–31.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257820pmc: PMC8610270pubmed: 34813584google scholar: lookup
  41. Horan K, Coburn J, Kourdache K, Day P, Harborne D, Brinkley L. Influence of speed, ground surface and shoeing Condition on hoof breakover duration in galloping Thoroughbred racehorses.. Animals 2021;11: 2588.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11092588pmc: PMC8472780pubmed: 34573553google scholar: lookup
  42. Crevier-Denoix N, Pourcelot P, Holden-Douilly L, Camus M, Falala S, Ravary-Plumioën B. Discrimination of two equine racing surfaces based on forelimb dynamic and hoof kinematic variables at the canter.. Vet J 2013.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2013.09.046pubmed: 24360756google scholar: lookup
  43. Bertram JEA, Gutmann A. Motions of the running horse and cheetah revisited: fundamental mechanics of the transverse and rotary gallop.. J R Soc Interface 2009;6: 549–559.
    doi: 10.1098/rsif.2008.0328pmc: PMC2696142pubmed: 18854295google scholar: lookup
  44. Hildebrand M. Analysis of Asymmetrical Gaits.. J Mammal 1977;58: 131–156.
    doi: 10.2307/1379571google scholar: lookup
  45. Back W, Schamhardt HC, Barneveld A. Kinematic comparison of the leading and trailing fore- and hindlimbs at the canter.. Equine Vet J Suppl 1997;23: 80–83.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1997.tb05060.xpubmed: 9354296google scholar: lookup
  46. Tan H, Wilson AM. Grip and limb force limits to turning performance in competition horses.. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci 2011;278: 2105–2111.
    doi: 10.1098/rspb.2010.2395pmc: PMC3107634pubmed: 21147799google scholar: lookup
  47. Self Davies ZT, Spence AJ, Wilson AM. Ground reaction forces of overground galloping in ridden Thoroughbred racehorses.. J Exp Biol 2019;222.
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.204107pubmed: 31444280google scholar: lookup
  48. Burn JF, Usmar SJ. Hoof landing velocity is related to track surface properties in trotting horses.. Equine Comp Exerc Physiol 2005;2: 37–41.
    doi: 10.1079/ECP200542google scholar: lookup
  49. Chateau H, Holden L, Robin D, Falala S, Pourcelot P, Estoup P. Biomechanical analysis of hoof landing and stride parameters in harness trotter horses running on different tracks of a sand beach (from wet to dry) and on an asphalt road.. Equine Vet J 2010;42: 488–495.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00277.xpubmed: 21059050google scholar: lookup
  50. Peterson ML, Reiser RF, Kuo PH, Radford DW, McIlwraith CW. Effect of temperature on race times on a synthetic surface.. Equine Vet J 2010;42: 351–357.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00072.xpubmed: 20525055google scholar: lookup
  51. Hobbs SJ, Northropp AJ, Mahaffey C, Martin JH, Murray R, Roepstorff L. Equine Surfaces White Paper.. 2014.
  52. Hitchens PL, Morrice-West A V., Stevenson MA, Whitton RC. Meta-analysis of risk factors for racehorse catastrophic musculoskeletal injury in flat racing.. Vet J 2019;245: 29–40.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2018.11.014pubmed: 30819423google scholar: lookup
  53. Orlande O, Hobbs SJ, Martin JH, Owen AG, Northrop AJ. Measuring hoof slip of the leading limb on jump landing over two different equine arena surfaces.. Comp Exerc Physiol 2012;8: 33–39.
    doi: 10.3920/cep11011google scholar: lookup
  54. Back W, van Schie MHM, Pol JN, van Schie P. Synthetic shoes attenuate hoof impact in the trotting warmblood horse.. Equine Comp Exerc Physiol 2006;3: 143–151.
    doi: 10.1017/ECP200691google scholar: lookup
  55. Heiden TL, Sanderson DJ, Inglis JT, Siegmund GP. Adaptations to normal human gait on potentially slippery surfaces: The effects of awareness and prior slip experience.. Gait Posture 2006;24: 237–246.
    doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2005.09.004pubmed: 16221549google scholar: lookup
  56. Yxklinten U, Johnston C, Roepstorff L, Drevemo S. Öllöv Original and the biomechanics in horses.. Uppsala; 1998.
  57. Day P, Collins L, Horan K, Weller R, Pfau T. The Effect of Tungsten Road Nails on Upper Body Movement Asymmetry in Horses Trotting on Tarmac.. J Equine Vet Sci 2020;90: 1–5.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2020.103000pubmed: 32534777google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 1 times.
  1. Siedler C, Zinkanel YM, Schramel JP, Peham C. Comparing the Difference in Traction Between the Bare Hoof, Iron Horseshoes and Two Glue-On Models on Different Surfaces. Sensors (Basel) 2025 Sep 26;25(19).
    doi: 10.3390/s25195975pubmed: 41094798google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,658 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.