The effect of rising and sitting trot on back movements and head-neck position of the horse

Trunk Kinematics of Experienced Riders and Novice Riders During Rising Trot on a Riding Simulator

Asymmetry of horses and humans is widely acknowledged, but the influence of one upon the other during horse riding is poorly understood. Riding simulators are popular for education of beginners and analysis of rider biomechanics. This study compares trunk kinematics and saddle forces of 10 experienced riders (ER) and 10 novice riders (NR) performing rising trot on a simulator. Markers were placed on the 4th lumbar (L4) and 7th cervical (C7) spinous processes, and both acromion processes. Displacements in three axes of motion were tracked using 10 high-speed video cameras sampling at 240 Hz. Displacement trajectories at L4 and C7 were similar between both groups, displaying an asymmetrical butterfly pattern in the frontal plane, which reversed when changing diagonal. Comparison between groups, NR displayed greater vertical displacement and higher saddle impact forces at L4 (P = .034), greater amplitude of medio-lateral displacement on the right diagonal between C7 and L4, and on the right diagonal while seated they rotated left (acromion processes) while the ER rotated right. Within group comparison demonstrated that on the right diagonal both groups produced significantly greater medio-lateral displacement at L4, and NR displayed significantly greater medio-lateral displacement between C7 and L4. On the left diagonal NR produced significantly greater vertical displacement and higher saddle impact forces. The findings of this study suggest that ER were more stable, symmetrical, and had lower impact force on the saddle. These issues could be addressed in beginners using a simulator to avoid unnecessary stresses on horses.

Laterality in Horse Training: Psychological and Physical Balance and Coordination and Strength Rather Than Straightness

Simple Summary

For centuries, straightening a horse has been considered a key element in achieving its responsiveness and suppleness and has been a traditional goal in training. However, body asymmetry (natural crookedness), motor laterality (the preference for limbs on one side) and sensory laterality (the preference for sensory organs on one side) are naturally occurring phenomena. In humans, the forced correction of these imbalances, for example, forcing left-handed children to write with their right hands, has been shown to lead to psychological imbalance. In view of this, lateral asymmetries in horses should be accepted, and training should focus on psychological and physical balance, coordination and equal strength on both sides, instead of enforcing “straightness”. To explore this, we conducted a review of the literature on motor and sensory laterality in horses and found that the evidence suggests that enforcing straightness may be stressful and may even be counterproductive by causing psychological and physical imbalance relative to a horse, making it tense and uncooperative. In general, body asymmetry has been shown to have little impact on performance, but increases in motor and sensory laterality can indicate insufficiencies in housing, handling and training. We, therefore, propose that laterality should be recognized as a welfare indicator and that straightness in a horse should be achieved by conducting training focused on balance, coordination and equal strength on both sides.

Abstract

For centuries, a goal of training in many equestrian disciplines has been to straighten the horse, which is considered a key element in achieving its responsiveness and suppleness. However, laterality is a naturally occurring phenomenon in horses and encompasses body asymmetry, motor laterality and sensory laterality. Furthermore, forcibly counterbalancing motor laterality has been considered a cause of psychological imbalance in humans. Perhaps asymmetry and laterality should rather be accepted, with a focus on training psychological and physical balance, coordination and equal strength on both sides instead of enforcing “straightness”. To explore this, we conducted a review of the literature on the function and causes of motor and sensory laterality in horses, especially in horses when trained on the ground or under a rider. The literature reveals that body asymmetry is innate but does not prevent the horse from performing at a high level under a rider. Motor laterality is equally distributed in feral horses, while in domestic horses, age, breed, training and carrying a rider may cause left leg preferences. Most horses initially observe novel persons and potentially threatening objects or situations with their left sensory organs. Pronounced preferences for the use of left sensory organs or limbs indicate that the horse is experiencing increased emotionality or stress, and long-term insufficiencies in welfare, housing or training may result in left shifts in motor and sensory laterality and pessimistic mentalities. Therefore, increasing laterality can be regarded as an indicator for insufficiencies in housing, handling and training. We propose that laterality be recognized as a welfare indicator and that straightening the horse should be achieved by conducting training focused on balance, coordination and equal strength on both sides.

Differential rotational movement and symmetry values of the thoracolumbosacral region in high-level dressage horses when trotting

High-level dressage horses regularly perform advanced movements, requiring coordination and force transmission between front and hind limbs across the thoracolumbosacral region. This study aimed at quantifying kinematic differences in dressage horses when ridden in sitting trot-i.e. with additional load applied in the thoracolumbar region-compared with trotting in-hand. Inertial sensors were glued on to the midline of the thoracic (T) and lumbar (L) spine at T5, T13, T18, L3 and middle of the left and right tubera sacrale of ten elite dressage horses (Mean±SD), age 11±1 years, height 1.70±0.10m and body mass 600±24kg; first trotted in-hand, then ridden in sitting trot on an arena surface by four Grand Prix dressage riders. Straight-line motion cycles were analysed using a general linear model (random factor: horse; fixed factor: exercise condition; covariate: stride time, Bonferroni post hoc correction: P<0.05). Differential roll, pitch and yaw angles between adjacent sensors were calculated. In sitting trot, compared to trotting in-hand, there was increased pitch (mean±S.D), (in-hand, 3.9 (0.5°, sitting trot 6.3 (0.3°, P = <0.0001), roll (in-hand, 7.7 (1.1°, sitting trot 11.6 (0.9°, P = 0.003) and heading values (in-hand, 4.2 (0.8), sitting trot 9.5 (0.6°, P = <0.0001) in the caudal thoracic and lumbar region (T18-L3) and a decrease in heading values (in-hand, 7.1 (0.5°, sitting trot 5.2 (0.3°, P = 0.01) in the cranial thoracic region (T5-T13). Kinematics of the caudal thoracic and lumbar spine are influenced by the rider when in sitting trot, whilst lateral bending is reduced in the cranial thoracic region. This biomechanical difference with the addition of a rider, emphasises the importance of observing horses during ridden exercise, when assessing them as part of a loss of performance assessment.

Differential Rotational Movement of the Thoracolumbosacral Spine in High-Level Dressage Horses Ridden in a Straight Line, in Sitting Trot and Seated Canter Compared to In-Hand Trot

Assessing back dysfunction is a key part of the investigative process of "loss of athletic performance" in the horse and quantitative data may help veterinary decision making. Ranges of motion of differential translational and rotational movement between adjacent inertial measurement units attached to the skin over thoracic vertebrae 5, 13 and 18 (T5, T13, T18) lumbar vertebra 3 (L3) and tuber sacrale (TS) were measured in 10 dressage horses during trot in-hand and ridden in sitting trot/canter. Straight-line motion cycles were analysed using a general linear model (random factor: horse; fixed factor: exercise condition; Bonferroni post hoc correction: p < 0.05). At T5-T13 the differential heading was smaller in sitting trot (p ≤ 0.0001, 5.1° (0.2)) and canter (p ≤ 0.0001, 3.2° (0.2)) compared to trotting in-hand (7.4° (0.4)). Compared to trotting in-hand (3.4° (0.4)) at T18-L3 differential pitch was higher in sitting trot (p ≤ 0.0001, 7.5° (0.3)) and canter (p ≤ 0.0001, 6.3° (0.3)). At L3-TS, differential pitch was increased in canter (6.5° (0.5)) compared to trotting in-hand (p = 0.006, 4.9° (0.6)) and differential heading was higher in sitting trot (4° (0.2)) compared to canter (p = 0.02, 2.9° (0.3)). Compared to in-hand, reduced heading was measured in the cranial-thoracic area and increased in the caudal-thoracic and lumbar area. Pitch increased with ridden exercise from the caudal-thoracic to the sacral area.

Saddle and stirrup forces of equestrian riders in sitting trot, rising trot, and trot without stirrups on a riding simulator

Studies into horse-saddle-rider interaction demonstrate that increased vertical forces on the horse’s back are potentially damaging to the musculoskeletal system, and any practice that could lead to this warrants investigation. The contribution of the stirrups in stabilising the bodyweight of the rider, and the effect of riding without stirrups on force distribution to the horse, has yet to be fully described in the literature. The current study therefore aimed to compare saddle and stirrup forces in three conditions; sitting trot, rising trot, and sitting trot without stirrups on the riding simulator. Fourteen amateur female riders of mean age 34.6±10 years participated in the study and 20 s of data were collected for saddle and stirrup force across the three conditions. Mean and peak forces were extracted from the data for total force under the whole saddle, left and right sides of the saddle separately, left and right stirrups, and both stirrups combined. Peak vertical saddle forces were significantly higher in sitting trot without stirrups than with (P=0.011). Higher mean and peak saddle forces were seen on the right-hand side in all conditions (P<0.001) and there was an overall tendency for higher left stirrup forces in both sitting and rising trot with this being significant for peak force in sitting trot (P=0.039). The higher forces recorded when trotting without stirrups indicate that the stirrups play an important role in controlling the vertical acceleration of the rider in relation to the horse, however further studies are needed on live horses before any specific recommendations can be made regarding training practices. Asymmetrical saddle forces have a potentially negative effect on the horse and future research should also aim to identify the underlying causes of these patterns of rider asymmetry to improve both horse welfare and performance.

The Effect of Tree Width on Thoracolumbar and Limb Kinematics, Saddle Pressure Distribution, and Thoracolumbar Dimensions in Sports Horses in Trot and Canter

Simple Summary

Determining the correct saddle fit is essential in order to optimise the interaction between the horse and rider dyad, and to reduce the risk of back-related problems or loss of performance as a result of incorrect saddle fit. Although there are industry guidelines (Society of Master Saddlers) on correct saddle fit, some saddle fitters (and others) choose to fit saddles that are wider than industry guidelines on the assumption that increased saddle width will enhance equine locomotion and allow the horses’ thoracolumbar spine to function unhindered. This study quantified the effect that a saddle that was one width fitting wider and narrower (based on the Society of Master Saddlers industry guidelines) had on the kinematics of the thoracolumbar spine, thoracolumbar epaxial musculature profiles, equine locomotion, and saddle pressure distribution. It was found that a saddle that was one width fitting wider and narrower affected the kinematics of the thoracolumbar spine, resulting in concavities in epaxial musculature at T13 when using the wide saddle and at T18 when using the narrow saddle. The wide saddle caused areas of high pressures in the cranial region of the saddle and the narrow saddle caused areas of high pressures in the caudal region of the saddle. It is essential that the correct saddle fit is achieved for each horse and rider combination in order to optimise the horse-rider system and reduce the risk of back-related problems or loss of performance that may occur as a result of incorrect saddle fit.

Abstract

This study evaluated the effect of saddle tree width on thoracolumbar and limb kinematics, saddle pressure distribution, and thoracolumbar epaxial musculature dimensions. Correctly fitted saddles were fitted by a Society of Master Saddler Qualified Saddle Fitter in fourteen sports horses (mean ± SD age 12 ± 8.77 years, height 1.65 ± 0.94 m), and were altered to one width fitting wider and narrower. Horses were equipped with skin markers, inertial measurement units, and a pressure mat beneath the saddle. Differences in saddle pressure distribution, as well as limb and thoracolumbosacral kinematics between saddle widths were investigated using a general linear model with Bonferroni adjusted alpha (p ≤ 0.05). Compared with the correct saddle width, in trot, in the wide saddle, an 8.5% increase in peak pressures was found in the cranial region of the saddle (p = 0.003), a 14% reduction in thoracolumbar dimensions at T13 (p = 0.02), and a 6% decrease in the T13 range of motion in the mediolateral direction (p = 0.02). In the narrow saddle, a 14% increase in peak pressures was found in the caudal region of the saddle (p = 0.01), an 8% decrease in the range of motion of T13 in the mediolateral direction (p = 0.004), and a 6% decrease in the vertical direction (p = 0.004) of T13. Compared with the correct saddle width, in canter, in the wide saddle, axial rotation decreased by 1% at T5 (p = 0.03) with an 5% increase at T13 (p = 0.04) and a 5% increase at L3 (p = 0.03). Peak pressures increased by 4% (p = 0.002) in the cranial region of the wide saddle. Altering the saddle fit had an effect on thoracolumbar kinematics and saddle pressure distribution; hence, correct saddle fit is essential to provide unhindered locomotion.

Lameness Evaluation of the Athletic Horse

Lameness examination is commonly performed in the athletic horse. A skilled lameness diagnostician must have keen clinical and observational skills. Evaluation starts with a detailed history and thorough physical examination. Next, gait evaluation in the moving horse is performed. Lame horses have asymmetrical body movement due to unconscious shift of body weight. Recognition of the resultant head nod and pelvic hike is the basis for lameness diagnosis. Lameness identification is enhanced by circling, limb flexions, and riding. Most lame horses do not exhibit pathognomonic gait characteristics, and therefore, diagnostic analgesia is the best way to authenticate underlying sites of pain.

Effects of the rider on the kinematics of the equine spine under the saddle during the trot using inertial measurement units: Methodological study and preliminary results

Many factors associated with the saddle and the rider could produce pain in horses thus reducing performance. However, studies of horse-saddle-rider interactions are limited and determining their effects remains challenging. The aim of this study was to test a novel method for assessing equine thoracic and lumbar spinal movement under the saddle and collect data during trotting. Back movement was measured using inertial measurement units (n = 5) fixed at the levels of thoracic vertebrae T6, T12 and T16, and lumbar vertebrae L2 and L5. To compare unridden and ridden conditions, three horses were trotted in hand then at the rising trot (seated phase: left diagonal, rider seated; standing phase: right diagonal, rider standing). The protraction-retraction angles of the forelimbs and the hind limbs were also calculated in two dimensions (2D) using reflective markers. To compare conditions, linear mixed-effects regression models were used and estimated means (standard error) were calculated. The range of motion (ROM) of the caudal thoracic and thoracolumbar regions decreased respectively by -1.3 (0.4)° and -0.6 (0.2)° during the seated phase compared to the unridden condition. Concomitantly, the ROM of protraction and retraction angles increased in the ridden condition. This study demonstrated the ability of inertial measurement units to assess equine vertebral movements under the saddle. The rider, at the rising trot, affected the horse's global locomotion with measurable changes in the vertebral kinematics under the saddle.

Effect of the rider position during rising trot on the horse׳s biomechanics (back and trunk kinematics and pressure under the saddle)

Knowledge about the horse-saddle-rider interaction remains limited. The aim of this study was to compare the effect of the rider׳s position at rising trot on the pressure distribution, spine movements, stirrups forces and locomotion of the horse. The horse׳s back movements were measured using IMUs fixed at the levels of thoracic (T6, T12, T16) and lumbar (L2, L5) vertebrae, the pressure distribution using a pressure mat and stirrups forces using force sensors. The horse׳s and rider׳s approximated centres of mass (COM) were calculated using 2D reflective markers. To compare both trot phases (rider seated/rider standing), three horses were trotted at the rising trot by the same rider. Means±SD of each parameter for sitting and standing were compared using a Student׳s t test (p=0.05). Stirrups forces showed two peaks of equal magnitude in every stride cycle for left and right stirrups but increased during the standing phase. Simultaneously, the pressure for the whole mat significantly increased by +3.1kPa during the sitting phase with respect to standing phase. The T12-T16 and T16-L2 angular ranges of motion (ROM) were significantly reduced (-3.2° -1.2°) and the T6-T12 and L2-L5 ROM were significantly increased (+1.7° +0.7°) during sitting phase compared to standing phase. During rising trot, the sitting phase does not only increase the pressure on the horse׳s back but also reduces the back motion under the saddle compared to the standing phase. These results give new insights into the understanding of horse-rider interactions and equine back pain management.

The equine neck and its function during movement and locomotion

During both locomotion and body movements at stance, the head and neck of the horse are a major craniocaudal and lateral balancing mechanism employing input from the visual, vestibular and proprioceptive systems. The function of the equine neck has recently become the focus of several research groups; this is probably also feeding on an increase of interest in the equine neck in equestrian sports, with a controversial discussion of specific neck positions such as maximum head and neck flexion. The aim of this review is to offer an overview of new findings on the structures and functions of the equine neck, illustrating their interplay. The movement of the neck is based on intervertebral motion, but it is also an integral part of locomotion; this is illustrated by the different neck conformations in the breeds of horses used for various types of work. The considerable effect of the neck movement and posture onto the whole trunk and even the limbs is transmitted via bony, ligamentous and muscular structures. Also, the fact that the neck position can easily be influenced by the rider and/or by the employment of training aids makes it an important avenue for training of new movements of the neck as well as the whole horse. Additionally, the neck position also affects the cervical spinal cord as well as the roots of the spinal nerves; besides the commonly encountered long-term neurological effects of cervical vertebral disorders, short-term changes of neural and muscular function have also been identified in the maximum flexion of the cranial neck and head position. During locomotion, the neck stores elastic energy within the passive tissues such as ligaments, joint capsules and fasciae. For adequate stabilisation, additional muscle activity is necessary; this is learned and requires constant muscle training as it is essential to prevent excessive wear and tear on the vertebral joints and also repetitive or single trauma to the spinal nerves and the spinal cord. The capability for this stabilisation decreases with age in the majority of horses due to changes in muscle tissue, muscle coordination and consequently muscle strength.

Posture, flexibility and grip strength in horse riders

Since the ability to train the horse to be ambidextrous is considered highly desirable, rider asymmetry is recognized as a negative trait. Acquired postural and functional asymmetry can originate from numerous anatomical regions, so it is difficult to suggest if any is developed due to riding. The aim of this study was therefore to assess symmetry of posture, strength and flexibility in a large population of riders and to determine whether typical traits exist due to riding. 127 right handed riders from the UK and USA were categorized according to years riding (in 20 year increments) and their competition level (using affiliated test levels). Leg length, grip strength and spinal posture were measured and recorded by a physiotherapist. Standing and sitting posture and trunk flexibility were measured with 3-D motion capture technology. Right-left differences were explored in relation to years riding and rider competitive experience. Significant anatomical asymmetry was found for the difference in standing acromion process height for a competition level (−0.07±1.50 cm Intro/Prelim; 0.02±1.31 cm Novice; 0.43±1.27 cm Elementary+; p=0.048) and for sitting iliac crest height for years riding (−0.23±1.36 cm Intro/Prelim; 0.01±1.50 cm Novice; 0.86±0.41 cm Elementary+; p=0.021). For functional asymmetry, a significant interaction was found for lateral bending ROM for years riding x competition level (p=0.047). The demands on dressage riders competing at higher levels may predispose these riders to a higher risk of developing asymmetry and potentially chronic back pain rather than improving their symmetry.

Physiological stress responses and horse rider interactions in horses ridden by male and female riders

Traditionally, horse riding has been restricted to men but today equestrian sports are dominated by women. We hypothesised that men and women differ with regard to riding and the response they evoke in their horse. Cortisol and heart rate variability (HRV) were studied in male (n=8) and female riders (n=8) and in horses (n=8) ridden by men and women over a jumping course. Saliva for cortisol analysis was collected, cardiac beat to beat (RR) intervals were recorded and heart rate and HRV variables SDRR (standard deviation of RR interval) and RMSSD (root mean square of successive RR differences) calculated. In another experiment, saddle pressure was compared between male and female riders (n=5 each). Cortisol did not differ between male and female riders and increased in horses (P<0.001) irrespective of the sex of the rider. Heart rate in riders increased from walk to jumping (P<0.001) while HRV decreased (P<0.001) to the same extent in men and women. In horses, heart rate increased (P<0.001) and SDRR and RMSSD decreased during walk and remained low at trot and canter (P<0.001) irrespective of the riders’ sex. In trot (P<0.05) and canter (P<0.01) saddle pressure was slightly lower in female versus male riders. This is due to weight differences and not to a different seat. In conclusion, no fundamental differences existed in the physical effort, stress response and seat between male and female riders and in the response of horses to men and women.

Modelling biomechanical requirements of a rider for different horse-riding techniques at trot

The simplest model possible for bouncing systems consists of a point mass bouncing passively on a mass-less spring without viscous losses. This type of spring–mass model has been used to describe the stance period of symmetric running gaits. In this study, we investigated the interaction between horse and rider at trot using three models of force-driven spring (–damper)–mass systems. The first system consisted of a spring and a mass representing the horse that interact with another spring and mass representing the rider. In the second spring–damper–mass model, dampers, a free-fall and a forcing function for the rider were incorporated. In the third spring–damper–mass model, an active spring system for the leg of the rider was introduced with a variable spring stiffness and resting length in addition to a saddle spring with fixed material properties. The output of the models was compared with experimental data of sitting and rising trot and with the modern riding technique used by jockeys in racing. The models show which combinations of rider mass, spring stiffness and damping coefficient will result in a particular riding technique or other behaviours. Minimization of the peak force of the rider and the work of the horse resulted in an ‘extreme’ modern jockey technique. The incorporation of an active spring system for the leg of the rider was needed to simulate rising trot. Thus, the models provide insight into the biomechanical requirements a rider has to comply with to respond effectively to the movements of a horse.

Stirrup forces during horse riding: a comparison between sitting and rising trot

Injuries of horses might be related to the force the rider exerts on the horse. To better understand the loading of the horse by a rider, a sensor was developed to measure the force exerted by the rider on the stirrups. In the study, five horses and 23 riders participated. Stirrup forces measured in sitting trot and rising trot were synchronised with rider movements measured from digital films and made dimensionless by dividing them by the bodyweight (BW) of the rider. A Fourier transform of the stirrup force data showed that the signals of both sitting and rising trot contained 2.4 and 4.8 Hz frequencies. In addition, 1.1 and 3.7 Hz frequencies were also present at rising trot. Each stride cycle of trot showed two peaks in stirrup force. The heights of these peaks were 1.17±0.28 and 0.33±0.14 in rising and 0.45±0.24 and 0.38±0.22 (stirrup force (N)/BW of rider (N)) in sitting trot. A significant difference was found between the higher peaks of sitting and rising trot (P<0.001) and between the peaks within a single stride for both riding styles (P<0.001). The higher peak in rising trot occurred during the standing phase of the stride cycle. Riders imposed more force on the stirrups during rising than sitting trot. A combination of stirrup and saddle force data can provide additional information on the total loading of the horse by a rider.

Electromyography activity of the equine splenius muscle and neck kinematics during walk and trot on the treadmill

REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY

Skeletal muscle activity can be concentric or eccentric, anisometric or isometric and correlation of the equine splenius muscle activity with the movement of its effector joints at walk and trot has not yet been fully characterised.

OBJECTIVE

Investigating activity of the splenius muscle together with kinematics of head and cranial neck at walk and trot.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Kinematics and surface electromyography were measured in 6 horses (8-20-years-old, 450-700 kg) without signs of neck pain. Markers were placed on left and right crista facialis, and on left and right cervical vertebrae 1 and 3. Head and neck angle was calculated in sagittal and horizontal planes. Electrodes were placed over both splenius muscles at the level of C2. Left and right muscle activity was compared using Student t test for paired samples and correlations calculated using Pearson correlation coefficient. Significance was set at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

In all horses, maximum surface electromyography (sEMG) values at the trot were higher than at the walk. The intraindividual differences between maximum and minimum values of the EMG ranged from 45-127 mV in walk and from 154-524 mV in trot. Flexion-extension C1 angle changed by 43° in walk and 27° in trot. For each motion cycle, 2 EMG maxima were found in both gaits, occurring just prior to maximum extension of the C1 angle. Lateral bending at C1 angle changed by 16° in walk and 17° in trot and EMG reached maximum values bilaterally during maximum lateral bending at walk.

CONCLUSIONS

The splenius muscle reaches maximum activity at the beginning of the forelimb stance phases in trot, indicating functional stabilisation against flexion of the head and neck. Unilateral activity of the splenius muscle representing stabilisation against lateral movement was not found.

Vertical forces on the horse's back in sitting and rising trot

In equestrian sports, it is generally assumed that rising and sitting trot load the horse's back differently. The objective of this study was to quantify the load on the horse's back in these riding techniques. Kinematic data of 13 riders were collected in rising and sitting trot. The time-history of the position of the rider's centre of mass (CoM) was calculated, and differentiated twice to obtain the acceleration of the CoM. The reaction force between the rider and the horse's back was calculated from the acceleration. Forces were divided by the body weight of the rider to obtain dimensionless forces. As expected, the computed average vertical force did not differ between riding techniques and was not significantly different from the body weight of the riders. At trot, two force peaks were present during one stride cycle. Both peaks in rising trot were significantly lower compared to sitting trot (peak 1: 2.54+/-0.30 versus 2.92+/-0.29; p<0.001; peak 2: 1.95+/-0.34 versus 3.03+/-0.32; p<0.001). This supports the general assumption that rising trot is less demanding for the horse than sitting trot.

Kinetics and kinematics of the horse comparing left and right rising trot

REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY

At rising trot the rider sits alternately down on one diagonal pair of limbs and rises up on the other. The possible effects on asymmetry of locomotion induced by rising trot have rarely been studied.

OBJECTIVES

To demonstrate whether, and if so to what extent, rising trot causes asymmetrical loading in the vertical ground reaction force (VGRF) and/or asymmetrical effects on the locomotion pattern, comparing left and right side.

METHODS

Seven elite horses were ridden in left and right rising trot on a treadmill, while VGRF and kinematics were measured, with the horses' neck raised, the poll high and the bridge of the nose slightly in front of the vertical.

RESULTS

Force loading was generally increased in the limbs of the sitting diagonal. The lumbar back was lower between mid-stances of the sitting and nonsitting stance, pelvic roll was limited and the tuber coxae heights were lower on the sitting side. Maximal hindlimb protraction was decreased. Forelimb retraction was increased and the T6 height decreased.

CONCLUSION

The rider movement induces an uneven biphasic load that affects the back, pelvis and limb kinematics and VGRF.

POTENTIAL RELEVANCE

The generally advocated technique of alternating limbs when riding in rising trot is supported. The VGRF changes between rising on the left or right diagonal were distinct, but minor in absolute terms and therefore unlikely to have direct impact on the occurrence of locomotor injuries. Knowledge of an increase of asymmetry in rising trot is potentially useful for riders/trainers.