FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Frontiers in veterinary science2025; 12; 1569067; doi: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1569067

Task-specific morphological and kinematic differences in Lipizzan horses.

Abstract: Equine locomotion emerges from a dynamic interplay between morphology, biomechanics, and functional demands. This study examines the relationship between morphological measurements and gait kinematics in Lipizzan horses, a breed renowned for its diverse work tasks and standardized environmental conditions. These horses offer a unique opportunity to explore task-specific adaptations in biomechanics, with significant implications for breeding strategies and welfare practices. Unassigned: The study involved 71 healthy Lipizzan horses that were housed at the Lipica stud farm and performed various work tasks. Morphological measurements were taken with the help of a sartorial meter and an equine measuring stick to determine head and body measurements. Both the left and right sides of the body were measured to ensure consistency. Kinematic data, including regularity, symmetry, cadence, dorsoventral power, propulsion power, stride length and speed, were recorded using the Equimetrix accelerometer at a sampling rate of 100 Hz. The data was collected during several walks and trots where the horses were led over a 50-meter track. Unassigned: Task-based analysis revealed strong links between morphology and gait in four working groups, with distal limb measurements, especially hoof and pastern lengths, most consistently associated with stride and rhythm parameters. No significant associations were found at the whole-cohort level. Several morphological measurements showed contrasting effects across working groups, and half of the bilaterally measured traits revealed side-specific correlations. The clearest patterns emerged in horses used for general training and riding school. In horses in general training, strong associations were found between distal limb measurements and stride length or cadence, particularly during walk. In riding school horses, broader body measurements were linked to kinematic parameters including propulsion power, dorsoventral power, and symmetry. Unassigned: This study highlights the dynamic interplay between conformation and functional demands in clinically sound horses. Rather than exerting fixed effects, morphological measurements interacted with work type to shape gait expression, even in the absence of pathology. These findings underscore the need to consider both structure and task when evaluating locomotion. Integrating morphometric assessment into training and selection strategies may support performance, soundness, and welfare in healthy working horses.
Copyright © 2025 Zupan Šemrov, Přibylová and Gobbo.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2025-06-17 PubMed ID: 40599329PubMed Central: PMC12208837DOI: 10.3389/fvets.2025.1569067Google 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 study investigates how the physical attributes of Lipizzan horses, including head and body size, affect the way they move during different tasks. The findings showed that certain measurements, especially those related to the parts of the horse’s leg closest to the ground, were highly linked to stride and rhythm during movement.

Study Setup and Methodology

  • The research was conducted with 71 healthy Lipizzan horses at the Lipica stud farm. This breed of horse is well-known for its diverse working tasks, hence providing a varied data set for the study.
  • Morphological measurements such as head and body dimensions were taken with a sartorial meter and an equine measuring stick. This was done on both sides of the horse for consistency.
  • Kinematic data, which refers to the motion of the horses, was collected utilizing an Equimetrix accelerometer at a sampling rate of 100Hz. This data includes factors such as regularity, symmetry, cadence, dorserventral power, propulsion power, stride length, and speed.
  • Data capture was done as the horses performed different tasks, like walking and trotting along a 50-meter track.

Findings from the Study

  • The research reveals a strong correlation between the horses’ morphology and gait in four different work groups. Most consistent links were found with the distal limb measurements, which includes the hoof and pastern length, and stride and rhythm parameters.
  • Some morphological measurements showed different influences across different working groups, and half of the bilaterally measured traits had side-specific correlations.
  • A clear pattern was seen in general training horses, where distal limb measurements were strongly associated with stride length or cadence, especially during walks. Similarly, in riding school horses, the broader body measurements correlated with propulsion power, dorsoventral power, and symmetry.
  • Notably, significant associations were not found at the whole-cohort level, indicating the variance across different types and functions of horses.

Implication of the Study

  • The study underscores the dynamic relationship between a horse’s structure and its functional demands and how these interact to influence movement, even in the absence of pathological conditions.
  • The findings suggest the importance of considering both a horse’s structure and its working purpose when evaluating its locomotion. This hints at the potential for integrating morphometric assessment into training and selection strategies for performance optimization, soundness, and welfare in healthy working horses.

Cite This Article

APA
Zupan Šemrov M, Přibylová L, Gobbo E. (2025). Task-specific morphological and kinematic differences in Lipizzan horses. Front Vet Sci, 12, 1569067. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2025.1569067

Publication

Frontiers in veterinary science
ISSN: 2297-1769
NlmUniqueID: 101666658
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 12
Pages: 1569067
PII: 1569067

Researcher Affiliations

Zupan Šemrov, Manja
  • Department of Animal Science, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Domžale, Slovenia.
Přibylová, Lucie
  • Department of Ethology and Companion Animal Science, Faculty of Agrobiology, Food, and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czechia.
Gobbo, Elena
  • Department of Animal Science, Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana, Domžale, Slovenia.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.

References

This article includes 52 references
  1. Biewener A, Patek S. Animal locomotion. Oxford: Oxford University Press; (2008).
  2. Barrey E. Methods, applications and limitations of gait analysis in horses. Vet J (1999) 157:7–22.
    doi: 10.1053/tvjl.1998.0297pubmed: 10030124google scholar: lookup
  3. Hildebrand M. Symmetrical gaits of horses: gaits can be expressed numerically and analyzed graphically to reveal their nature and relationships. Science (1965) 150:701–8.
    doi: 10.1126/science.150.3697.701pubmed: 5844074google scholar: lookup
  4. Jayes AS, Alexander RMN. Mechanics of locomotion of dogs () and sheep (). J Zool (1978) 185:289–308.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1978.tb03334.xpubmed: 700246google scholar: lookup
  5. Gasc J-P. Comparative aspects of gait, scaling and mechanics in mammals. Comp Biochem Physiol A Mol Integr Physiol (2001) 131:121–33.
    doi: 10.1016/S1095-6433(01)00457-3pubmed: 11733171google scholar: lookup
  6. Garland T, Janis CM. Does metatarsal/femur ratio predict maximal running speed in cursorial mammals?. J Zool (1993) 229:133–51.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7998.1993.tb02626.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  7. Wall-Scheffler CM. Size and shape: morphology’s impact on human speed and mobility. J Anthropol (2012) 2012:1–9.
    doi: 10.1155/2012/340493google scholar: lookup
  8. Christiansen P. Locomotion in terrestrial mammals: the influence of body mass, limb length and bone proportions on speed. Zool J Linnean Soc (2002) 136:685–714.
    doi: 10.1046/j.1096-3642.2002.00041.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  9. Fabre A, Cornette R, Goswami A, Peigné S. Do constraints associated with the locomotor habitat drive the evolution of forelimb shape? A case study in musteloid carnivorans. J Anat (2015) 226:596–610.
    doi: 10.1111/joa.12315pmc: PMC4450962pubmed: 25994128google scholar: lookup
  10. Back W, Clayton HM, Rossdale PD. Equine locomotion. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Saunders Elsevier; (2013).
  11. Koenen EPC, Aldridge LI, Philipsson J. An overview of breeding objectives for warmblood sport horses. Livest Prod Sci (2004) 88:77–84.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livprodsci.2003.10.011google scholar: lookup
  12. Galisteo AM, Morales J, Cano MR, Miró F, Agüera E, Vivo J. Inter-breed differences in equine forelimb kinematics at the walk. J Veterinary Med Ser A (2001) 48:277–85.
    doi: 10.1046/j.1439-0442.2001.00344.xpubmed: 11475902google scholar: lookup
  13. Holmström M, Fredricson I, Drevemo S. Biokinematic analysis of the Swedish warmblood riding horse at trot. Equine Vet J (1994) 26:235–40.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1994.tb04376.xpubmed: 8542845google scholar: lookup
  14. Ricard A, Dumont Saint Priest B, Danvy S, Barrey E. Accelerometers provide early genetic selection criteria for jumping horses. Front Genet (2020) 11:448.
    doi: 10.3389/fgene.2020.00448pmc: PMC7248255pubmed: 32508876google scholar: lookup
  15. Leleu C, Cotrel C, Barrey E. Relationships between biomechanical variables and race performance in French Standardbred trotters. Livest Prod Sci (2005) 92:39–46.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livprodsci.2004.07.019pubmed: 15789646google scholar: lookup
  16. Hardeman AM, Egenvall A, Serra Bragança FM, Swagemakers J, Koene MHW, Roepstorff L. Visual lameness assessment in comparison to quantitative gait analysis data in horses. Equine Vet J (2022) 54:1076–85.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13545pmc: PMC9786350pubmed: 34913524google scholar: lookup
  17. Bosch S, Serra Bragança F, Marin-Perianu M, Marin-Perianu R, Van Der Zwaag B, Voskamp J. EquiMoves: a wireless networked inertial measurement system for objective examination of horse gait. Sensors (2018) 18:850.
    doi: 10.3390/s18030850pmc: PMC5877382pubmed: 29534022google scholar: lookup
  18. Biau S, Burgaud I. Application of kinesiology taping to equine abdominal musculature in a tension frame for muscle facilitation increases longitudinal activity at the trot. Equine Vet J (2022) 54:973–8.
    doi: 10.1111/evj.13533pubmed: 34719053google scholar: lookup
  19. Leleu C, Bariller F, Cotrel C, Barrey E. Reproducibility of a locomotor test for trotter horses. Vet J (2004) 168:160–6.
    doi: 10.1016/S1090-0233(03)00109-6pubmed: 15301764google scholar: lookup
  20. Argüelles D, Saitua A, De Medina AS, Muñoz JA, Muñoz A. Clinical efficacy of clodronic acid in horses diagnosed with navicular syndrome: a field study using objective and subjective lameness evaluation. Res Vet Sci (2019) 125:298–304.
    doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2019.07.018pubmed: 31351199google scholar: lookup
  21. Moorman VJ, Reiser RF, Peterson ML, McIlwraith CW, Kawcak CE. Effect of forelimb lameness on hoof kinematics of horses at a walk. Am J Vet Res (2013) 74:1192–7.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.74.9.1192pubmed: 23977891google scholar: lookup
  22. Peham C, Licka T, Girtler D, Scheidl M. Supporting forelimb lameness: clinical judgement vs. computerised symmetry measurement. Equine Vet J (1999) 31:417–21.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1999.tb03842.xpubmed: 10505958google scholar: lookup
  23. Weishaupt MA, Wiestner T, Hogg HP, Jordan P, Auer JA, Barrey E. Assessment of gait irregularities in the horse: eye vs. gait analysis. Equine Vet J (2001) 33:135–40.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2001.tb05376.xpubmed: 11721554google scholar: lookup
  24. Wennerstrand J, Johnston C, Roethlisberger-Holm K, Erichsen C, Eksell P, Drevemo S. Kinematic evaluation of the back in the sport horse with back pain. Equine Vet J (2004) 36:707–11.
    doi: 10.2746/0425164044848226pubmed: 15656501google scholar: lookup
  25. Dovc P, Kavar T, Sölkner H, Achmann R. Development of the Lipizzan horse breed. Reprod Domest Anim (2006) 41:280–5.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0531.2006.00726.xpubmed: 16869882google scholar: lookup
  26. Lovšin E, Fazarinc G, Pogačnik A, Bavdek SV. Growth dynamics of Lipizzan horses and their comparison to other horse breeds. Pflugers Arch Eur J Physiol (2001) 442:r211–2.
    doi: 10.1007/s004240100029pubmed: 11678344google scholar: lookup
  27. Rault J-L, Hintze S, Camerlink I, Yee JR. Positive welfare and the like: distinct views and a proposed framework. Front Vet Sci (2020) 7:370.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00370pmc: PMC7343720pubmed: 32714949google scholar: lookup
  28. Turner PV. Moving beyond the absence of pain and distress: focusing on positive animal welfare. ILAR J (2019) 60:366–72.
    doi: 10.1093/ilar/ilaa017pubmed: 33119093google scholar: lookup
  29. Webber S, Cobb ML, Coe J. Welfare through competence: a framework for animal-centric technology design. Front Vet Sci (2022) 9:885973.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.885973pmc: PMC9280685pubmed: 35847650google scholar: lookup
  30. Campbell DLM, Ingham AB, Lee C. Review: environmental enrichment builds functional capacity and improves resilience as an aspect of positive welfare in production animals. Animal (2024) 18:101173.
    doi: 10.1016/j.animal.2024.101173pubmed: 38761442google scholar: lookup
  31. Zechner P, Zohman F, Sölkner J, Bodo I, Habe F, Marti E. Morphological description of the Lipizzan horse population. Livest Prod Sci (2001) 69:163–77.
    doi: 10.1016/S0301-6226(00)00254-2google scholar: lookup
  32. Debeljak N, Košmerlj A, Altimiras J, Zupan Šemrov M. Relationship between anatomical characteristics and personality traits in Lipizzan horses. Sci Rep (2022) 12:12618.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-16627-zpmc: PMC9308772pubmed: 35871229google scholar: lookup
  33. Carroll CL, Huntington PJ. Body condition scoring and weight estimation of horses. Equine Vet J (1988) 20:41–5.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.1988.tb01451.xpubmed: 3366105google scholar: lookup
  34. López-Sanromán FJ, Holmbak-Petersen R, Santiago I, Gómez De Segura IA, Barrey E. Gait analysis using 3D accelerometry in horses sedated with xylazine. Vet J (2012) 193:212–6.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2011.10.012pubmed: 22082509google scholar: lookup
  35. Vicente AA, Carolino N, Ralão-Duarte J, Gama LT. Selection for morphology, gaits and functional traits in Lusitano horses: I. Genetic parameter estimates. Livest Sci (2014) 164:1–12.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2014.01.020google scholar: lookup
  36. Weishaupt MA, Waldern NM, Amport C, Ramseier LC, Wiestner T. Effects of shoeing on intra- and inter-limb coordination and movement consistency in Icelandic horses at walk, tölt and trot. Vet J (2013) 198:e109–13.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2013.09.043pubmed: 24345777google scholar: lookup
  37. Steudel K. The work and energetic cost of locomotion 1. The effects of limb mass distribution in quadrupeds. J Exp Biol (1990) 154:273–83.
    doi: 10.1242/jeb.154.1.273pubmed: 2277260google scholar: lookup
  38. Ross MW. Conformation and lameness. In: Ross NW, Dyson S, editors. Diagnosis and management of lameness in the horse. Philadelphia, PA: Williams & Wilkins; (2003). 15–31.
  39. Byström A, Egenvall A, Eisersiö M, Engell MT, Lykken S, Lundesjö Kvart S. The impact of teaching approach on horse and rider biomechanics during riding lessons. Heliyon (2025) 11:e41947.
    doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e41947pmc: PMC11791127pubmed: 39906839google scholar: lookup
  40. Deuel NR, Park J. The gait patterns of Olympic dressage horses. Int. J. Sport Biomech (1990) 6:198–226.
    doi: 10.1123/ijsb.6.2.198google scholar: lookup
  41. Clayton HM. Comparison of the stride kinematics of the collected, medium, and extended walks in horses. Am J Vet Res (1995) 56:849–52.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.1995.56.07.849pubmed: 7574149google scholar: lookup
  42. Tijssen M, Hernlund E, Rhodin M, Bosch S, Voskamp JP, Nielen M. Automatic detection of break-over phase onset in horses using hoof-mounted inertial measurement unit sensors. PLoS One (2020) 15:e0233649.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233649pmc: PMC7259550pubmed: 32469939google scholar: lookup
  43. Clayton HM, Hobbs SJ. An exploration of strategies used by dressage horses to control moments around the center of mass when performing passage. PeerJ (2017) 5:e3866.
    doi: 10.7717/peerj.3866pmc: PMC5623309pubmed: 28970972google scholar: lookup
  44. De Cocq P, Mooren M, Dortmans A, Van Weeren PR, Timmerman M, Muller M. Saddle and leg forces during lateral movements in dressage. Equine Vet J (2010) 42:644–9.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00201.xpubmed: 21059074google scholar: lookup
  45. Popescu S, Diugan EA, Spinu M. The interrelations of good welfare indicators assessed in working horses and their relationships with the type of work. Res Vet Sci (2014) 96:406–14.
    doi: 10.1016/j.rvsc.2013.12.014pubmed: 24461957google scholar: lookup
  46. Danışan S, Yaranoğlu B, Özen H. The relationship of personality traits with breed, sex, and racing performance in sport horses. J Vet Behav (2024) 71:18–26.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2023.12.005google scholar: lookup
  47. Aune A, Fenner K, Wilson B, Cameron E, McLean A, McGreevy P. Reported behavioural differences between geldings and mares challenge sex-driven stereotypes in ridden equine behaviour. Animals (2020) 10:405.
    doi: 10.3390/ani100304057pmc: PMC7142782pubmed: 32131444google scholar: lookup
  48. Fenner K, Caspar G, Hyde M, Henshall C, Dhand N, Probyn-Rapsey F. It’s all about the sex, or is it? Humans, horses and temperament. PLoS One (2019) 14:e0216699.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0216699pmc: PMC6516668pubmed: 31086385google scholar: lookup
  49. Duberstein KJ, Gilkeson JA. Determination of sex differences in personality and trainability of yearling horses utilizing a handler questionnaire. Appl Anim Behav Sci (2010) 128:57–63.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2010.09.012google scholar: lookup
  50. Huizinga HA, van der Werf JHJ, Korver S, van der Meij GJW. Stationary performance testing of stallions from the Dutch warmblood riding horse population. I. Estimated genetic parameters of scored traits and the genetic relation with dressage and jumping competition from offspring of breeding stallions. Livest Prod Sci (1991) 27:231–44.
    doi: 10.1016/0301-6226(91)90099-Cgoogle scholar: lookup
  51. Clayton HM, Hobbs S-J. The role of biomechanical analysis of horse and rider in equitation science. Appl Anim Behav Sci (2017) 190:123–32.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2017.02.011google scholar: lookup
  52. Rault J-L, Bateson M, Boissy A, Forkman B, Grinde B, Gygax L. A consensus on the definition of positive animal welfare. Biol Lett (2025) 21:20240382.
    doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2024.0382pmc: PMC11883819pubmed: 39837489google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,824 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.