Analyze Diet
Equine veterinary journal2025; 58(2); 497-507; doi: 10.1111/evj.70126

Spatiotemporal patterns in British racing and equestrian sports: Implications for pathogen transmission.

Abstract: The widespread assumption that there is minimal potential for pathogen transmission between British racehorse and sport horse populations remains unverified by empirical evidence. Objective: To characterise spatiotemporal patterns of horse attendance at racing and other sport events in Great Britain in 2018. Methods: Spatiotemporal analysis. Methods: Publicly available data from British Horseracing Authority, British Dressage, British Eventing, Endurance GB, and British Showjumping events in Great Britain during 2018 were analysed. Horse attendance was summarised by discipline, month, and season. Venue density was mapped with kernel density estimation. Sport venues within 5 km of racecourses with horse attendance within 24 h of racing were identified and Kulldorff's spatial scan statistic was used to detect significant time-space clustering of venue use. Results: Excluding showjumpers, 49,012 horses competed in 8314 events across 598 venues during 2018, generating over 400,000 horse-venue attendances. Most horses (97.2%; n = 47,635/49,012) competed in a single discipline. Venue attendances peaked in summer and were concentrated in southeast England. There were five significant space-time clusters of venue-events within 5 km and 24 h of each other involving 5 racecourses and 8 sport venues. The most likely cluster was in the southeast of England, between January and July, with a relative risk of 62.54. Conclusions: Inconsistent horse identification precluded horse-level analysis of showjumping data. Conclusions: Racehorse and sport horse populations competing in Great Britain are largely separate, but limited opportunities for local or indirect pathogen spread do exist during peak seasons in areas with high venue density.
Publication Date: 2025-12-05 PubMed ID: 41351275PubMed Central: PMC12892370DOI: 10.1111/evj.70126Google 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

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.

Overview

  • This study analyzed the patterns of horse participation in racing and equestrian sport events in Great Britain during 2018 to understand the potential for pathogen transmission between racehorse and sport horse populations.
  • The research mapped horse attendance across disciplines, locations, and times, identifying where and when horses from different equestrian activities might come into contact, thereby posing risks for disease spread.

Introduction and Background

  • There is a common assumption that British racehorses and sport horses (used in disciplines such as dressage, eventing, endurance, and showjumping) have limited interaction, thus minimal risk of pathogen transmission between these populations.
  • Empirical evidence supporting or refuting this assumption had been lacking prior to this study.

Objectives

  • To characterize the spatiotemporal (space and time) attendance patterns of horses at racing and other sport events across Great Britain in 2018.
  • To assess the implications of these patterns for potential pathogen transmission between different horse populations.

Methods

  • Data Sources:
    • Used publicly available data from relevant authorities governing various equestrian disciplines: British Horseracing Authority, British Dressage, British Eventing, Endurance GB, and British Showjumping.
    • Included all events held in Great Britain within the calendar year 2018.
  • Data Analysis:
    • Summarized horse attendance by discipline, month, and season to identify temporal trends.
    • Mapped venue density using kernel density estimation to visualize geographic clustering.
    • Identified sport venues located within 5 km of racecourses with horse attendance occurring within 24 hours of racing events to detect possible close spatiotemporal overlap.
    • Used Kulldorff’s spatial scan statistic to detect significant space-time clusters of venue use, indicating places and times where horses from different disciplines might be in close contact.

Results

  • Scope of Data:
    • A total of 49,012 horses (excluding showjumpers) competed in 8,314 events across 598 venues.
    • These events generated over 400,000 individual horse-venue attendances.
  • Discipline Participation:
    • The majority of horses (97.2%) competed exclusively in a single discipline, suggesting limited cross-discipline horse movement.
    • Showjumping data could not be analyzed at the horse level due to inconsistent horse identification.
  • Temporal Patterns:
    • Venue attendance peaked during summer months, indicating heightened activity and possible increased disease transmission risk during this season.
  • Spatial Patterns:
    • Attendance was geographically concentrated in southeast England, a region with many venues close to one another.
    • Five significant space-time clusters of venues were detected where racecourses and sport venues were within 5 km and had horse attendance within 24 hours of each other.
    • The most prominent cluster occurred from January to July in southeast England with a high relative risk (62.54) indicating strong co-occurrence and potential for disease transmission.

Conclusions and Implications

  • Racehorse and sport horse populations in Great Britain generally remain separate, minimizing widespread pathogen transmission between these groups.
  • Despite this, the presence of space-time clusters near densely packed venues creates limited but concrete opportunities for indirect or local pathogen spread.
  • These risk periods mostly correlate with peak competition seasons in regions with high venue density, particularly in the southeast of England.
  • Inconsistent horse identification, especially in showjumping data, presents challenges to detailed analysis and tracking of horse movement across disciplines.
  • Understanding these patterns can help improve disease control measures by targeting specific venues and timeframes where cross-population transmission risk is higher.

Cite This Article

APA
McGilvray TA, Stevens KB, Spence KL, Rosanowski SM, Slater J, Cardwell JM. (2025). Spatiotemporal patterns in British racing and equestrian sports: Implications for pathogen transmission. Equine Vet J, 58(2), 497-507. https://doi.org/10.1111/evj.70126

Publication

ISSN: 2042-3306
NlmUniqueID: 0173320
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 58
Issue: 2
Pages: 497-507

Researcher Affiliations

McGilvray, Tegan A
  • Royal Veterinary College, London, UK.
Stevens, Kim B
  • Royal Veterinary College, London, UK.
Spence, Kelsey L
  • Royal Veterinary College, London, UK.
  • University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
Rosanowski, Sarah M
  • Equine Veterinary Consultants (EVC) Limited, Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Slater, Josh
  • Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Werribee, Victoria, Australia.
Cardwell, Jacqueline M
  • Royal Veterinary College, London, UK.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Horses
  • United Kingdom / epidemiology
  • Sports / statistics & numerical data
  • Horse Diseases / transmission
  • Horse Diseases / epidemiology
  • Horse Diseases / microbiology
  • Spatio-Temporal Analysis
  • Seasons

Grant Funding

  • SPrj039 / Horserace Betting Levy Board
  • G3021 / The Horse Trust

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

This article includes 35 references
  1. BHA. British Horseracing Authority Rules of Racing. 2024.
  2. British Horseracing Authority. BHA General Instructions (BHAGI 7.1): Racecourse Stabling and Facilities Standards. 2018.
  3. British Horseracing Authority. BHA General Instructions (BHAGI 7.2). 2018.
  4. Horserace Betting Levy Board. HBLB Codes of Practice for the 2025 equine breeding season. .
  5. Spence KL, Rosanowski SM, Slater J, Cardwell JM. Challenges to exotic disease preparedness in Great Britain: the frontline veterinarian's perspective. Equine Vet J 2021;54:563–573.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13469pubmed: 34043828google scholar: lookup
  6. Spence KL, Cardwell JM, Slater J, Rosanowski SM. Preliminary insight into horse owners' perceptions of, and attitudes towards, exotic diseases in the United Kingdom. BMC Vet Res 2019;15:212.
    doi: 10.1186/s12917-019-2120-5pmc: PMC6790027pubmed: 31606050google scholar: lookup
  7. British Showjumping. Pioneering step in the fight against the spread of equine disease. British Showjumping 2021.
  8. Collins A. Flu vaccination rules. Endurance GB 2025.
  9. Crozier A, Marr C, McEwen J, Newton JR. Equine Infectious Disease Advisory Group (EIDAG) Advice notes for BEF Member bodies and organisers of horse gatherings Group Members. 2024.
  10. British Eventing. Biosecurity. British Eventing 2025.
  11. British Dressage. BD Rules Update: Equine Register. British Dressage 2021.
  12. Robin M, Archer D, Garros C, Gardès L, Baylis M. The threat of midge‐borne equine disease: investigation of species on UK equine premises. Vet Rec 2014;174:301.
    doi: 10.1136/vr.102151pubmed: 24508765google scholar: lookup
  13. Wittmann EJ, Baylis M. Climate change: effects on ‐transmitted viruses and implications for the UK. Vet J 2000;160:107–117.
    doi: 10.1053/tvjl.2000.0470pubmed: 10985802google scholar: lookup
  14. Davis J, Garner MG, East IJ. Analysis of local spread of equine influenza in the Park Ridge region of Queensland. Transbound Emerg Dis 2009;56(1–2):31–38.
  15. Martínez‐López B, Perez AM, Sánchez‐Vizcaíno JM. Social network analysis: review of general concepts and use in preventive veterinary medicine. Transbound Emerg Dis 2009;56:109–120.
  16. Rosanowski SM, Cogger N, Rogers CW. An investigation of the movement patterns and biosecurity practices on Thoroughbred and Standardbred stud farms in New Zealand.. Prev Vet Med 2013;108:178–187.
  17. Boden LA, Parkin TDH, Yates J, Mellor D, Kao RR. Summary of current knowledge of the size and spatial distribution of the horse population within Great Britain.. BMC Vet Res 2012;8:1–7.
    doi: 10.1186/1746-6148-8-43pmc: PMC3351363pubmed: 22475060google scholar: lookup
  18. Robin CA, Wylie CE, Wood JLN, Newton JR. Making use of equine population demography for disease control purposes: preliminary observations on the difficulties of counting and locating horses in Great Britain.. Equine Vet J 2011;43:372–375.
  19. Robin CA, Lo Iacono G, Gubbins S, Wood JLN, Newton JR. The accuracy of the National Equine Database in relation to vector‐borne disease risk modelling of horses in Great Britain.. Equine Vet J 2013;45:302–308.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.12018pubmed: 23294172google scholar: lookup
  20. . The National Equestrian Survey 2023: Overview Report.. 2023.
  21. Spence KL, O'Sullivan TL, Poljak Z, Greer AL. Descriptive analysis of horse movement networks during the 2015 equestrian season in Ontario, Canada.. PLoS One 2019;14:e0219771.
  22. nBritish Eventingn. About. British Eventing website. [cited 2025 Sep 3]. Available from: https://www.britisheventing.com/aboutn
  23. nBritish Horseracing Authorityn. Fixtures. British Horseracing Authority website. [cited 2025 Sep 3]. Available from: https://www.britishhorseracing.com/racing/fixturesn
  24. Spence KL, O'Sullivan TL, Poljak Z, Greer AL. Estimating the potential for disease spread in horses associated with an equestrian show in Ontario, Canada using an agent‐based model.. Prev Vet Med 2018;151:21–28.
  25. Spence KL, O'Sullivan TL, Poljak Z, Greer AL. Descriptive and network analyses of the equine contact network at an equestrian show in Ontario, Canada and implications for disease spread.. BMC Vet Res 2017;13:1–9.
    doi: 10.1186/s12917-017-1103-7pmc: PMC5480143pubmed: 28637457google scholar: lookup
  26. Sánchez‐Matamoros A, Martínez‐López B, Sánchez‐Vizcaíno F, Sánchez‐Vizcaíno JM. Social network analysis of equidae movements and its application to risk‐based surveillance and to control of spread of potential equidae diseases.. Transbound Emerg Dis 2013;60:448–459.
  27. . The National Equestrian Survey 2015: Overview Report.. 2015.
  28. . General principles on identification and traceability of live animals.. 2022.
  29. Moloney B, Sergeant ESG, Taragel C, Buckley P. Significant features of the epidemiology of equine influenza in New South Wales, Australia, 2007.. Aust Vet J 2011;89:56–63.
  30. Boone SA, Gerba CP. The occurrence of influenza A virus on household and day care center fomites.. J Infect 2005;51:103–109.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2004.09.011pubmed: 16038759google scholar: lookup
  31. Kulldorff M. SaTScan™ User Guide for Version 9.4. SaTScan™ 2015.
  32. Golding N, Medlock JM, Vaux AGC. Distribution of West Nile virus vector, , in England. Vet Rec 2012;171:278.
    pubmed: 22983524
  33. . First detection of West Nile virus in UK mosquitoes. Gov.uk 2025.
  34. Silva IR, Duczmal LH, Kulldorff M. Confidence intervals for spatial scan statistic. Comput Stat Data Anal 2021;158:107185.
  35. Firestone SM, Schemann KA, Toribio JALML, Ward MP, Dhand NK. A case‐control study of risk factors for equine influenza spread onto horse premises during the 2007 epidemic in Australia. Prev Vet Med 2011;100:53–63.

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.