Energetic cost of locomotion on different equine treadmills

James H Jones, H. Ohmura, Scott D Stanley, A. Hiraga

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

10 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Reason for performing study: Human athletes run faster and experience fewer injuries when running on surfaces with a stiffness 'tuned' to their bodies. We questioned if the same might be true for horses, and if so, would running on surfaces of different stiffness cause a measurable change in the amount of energy required to move at a given speed? Hypothesis: Different brands of commercial treadmills have pans of unequal stiffness, and this difference would result in different metabolic power requirements to locomote at a given speed. Methods: We tested for differences in stiffness between a Mustang 2200 and a Säto I commercial treadmill by incrementally loading each treadmill near the centre of the pan with fixed weights and measuring the displacement of the pan as weights were added or removed from the pan. We trained six 3-year-old Thoroughbreds to run on the 2 treadmills. After 4 months the horses ran with reproducible specific maximum rates of O2 consumption (VO2max/kg bwt, 2.62 ± 0.23 (s.d.) mlO2 STPD/sec/kg) at 14.2 ± 0.7 (s.d.) m/sec. They were alternately run on the 2 treadmills at identical grade (0.40 ± 0.02%) and speeds (1.83 (walk), 4.0 (trot) and 8.0 (canter) m/sec, all ± 0.03 m/sec) while wearing an open-flow mask for measurement of VO2. Results: The Mustang treadmill was over 6 times stiffer than the Säto. The VO2/kg bwt increased by approximately 4-fold over the range of speeds studied on both treadmills. Oxygen consumption was significantly lower at all speeds for the Mustang treadmill compared to the Säto. The fractional difference in energy cost decreased by a factor of 6 with increasing speed, although absolute difference in cost was relatively constant. Conclusions: We suggest it costs less energy for horses to walk, trot or canter on a stiffer treadmill than on a more compliant treadmill, at least within the ranges of stiffness evaluated. Potential relevance: It may be possible to define a substrate stiffness 'tuned' to a horse's body enabling maximal energetic economy when running. The differences between treadmills allows more accurate comparisons between physiological studies conducted on treadmills of different stiffness, and might help to identify an ideal track stiffness to reduce locomotor injuries in equine athletes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)365-369
Number of pages5
JournalEquine Veterinary Journal
Volume38
Issue numberSUPPL.36
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2006

Fingerprint

exercise equipment
Locomotion
Horses
locomotion
horses
Costs and Cost Analysis
Running
Athletes
Weights and Measures
Wounds and Injuries
Masks
Oxygen Consumption
athletes
power requirement
energy
energy costs
oxygen consumption

Keywords

  • Elastic energy
  • Horse
  • Oxygen consumption
  • Stiffness

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Equine

Cite this

Energetic cost of locomotion on different equine treadmills. / Jones, James H; Ohmura, H.; Stanley, Scott D; Hiraga, A.

In: Equine Veterinary Journal, Vol. 38, No. SUPPL.36, 08.2006, p. 365-369.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Jones, James H ; Ohmura, H. ; Stanley, Scott D ; Hiraga, A. / Energetic cost of locomotion on different equine treadmills. In: Equine Veterinary Journal. 2006 ; Vol. 38, No. SUPPL.36. pp. 365-369.
@article{f267a7b13cd348e787a5d291db9c17a7,
title = "Energetic cost of locomotion on different equine treadmills",
abstract = "Reason for performing study: Human athletes run faster and experience fewer injuries when running on surfaces with a stiffness 'tuned' to their bodies. We questioned if the same might be true for horses, and if so, would running on surfaces of different stiffness cause a measurable change in the amount of energy required to move at a given speed? Hypothesis: Different brands of commercial treadmills have pans of unequal stiffness, and this difference would result in different metabolic power requirements to locomote at a given speed. Methods: We tested for differences in stiffness between a Mustang 2200 and a S{\"a}to I commercial treadmill by incrementally loading each treadmill near the centre of the pan with fixed weights and measuring the displacement of the pan as weights were added or removed from the pan. We trained six 3-year-old Thoroughbreds to run on the 2 treadmills. After 4 months the horses ran with reproducible specific maximum rates of O2 consumption (VO2max/kg bwt, 2.62 ± 0.23 (s.d.) mlO2 STPD/sec/kg) at 14.2 ± 0.7 (s.d.) m/sec. They were alternately run on the 2 treadmills at identical grade (0.40 ± 0.02{\%}) and speeds (1.83 (walk), 4.0 (trot) and 8.0 (canter) m/sec, all ± 0.03 m/sec) while wearing an open-flow mask for measurement of VO2. Results: The Mustang treadmill was over 6 times stiffer than the S{\"a}to. The VO2/kg bwt increased by approximately 4-fold over the range of speeds studied on both treadmills. Oxygen consumption was significantly lower at all speeds for the Mustang treadmill compared to the S{\"a}to. The fractional difference in energy cost decreased by a factor of 6 with increasing speed, although absolute difference in cost was relatively constant. Conclusions: We suggest it costs less energy for horses to walk, trot or canter on a stiffer treadmill than on a more compliant treadmill, at least within the ranges of stiffness evaluated. Potential relevance: It may be possible to define a substrate stiffness 'tuned' to a horse's body enabling maximal energetic economy when running. The differences between treadmills allows more accurate comparisons between physiological studies conducted on treadmills of different stiffness, and might help to identify an ideal track stiffness to reduce locomotor injuries in equine athletes.",
keywords = "Elastic energy, Horse, Oxygen consumption, Stiffness",
author = "Jones, {James H} and H. Ohmura and Stanley, {Scott D} and A. Hiraga",
year = "2006",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1111/j.2042-3306.2006.tb05570.x",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "38",
pages = "365--369",
journal = "Equine veterinary journal. Supplement",
issn = "2042-3306",
publisher = "British Equine Veterinary Association",
number = "SUPPL.36",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Energetic cost of locomotion on different equine treadmills

AU - Jones, James H

AU - Ohmura, H.

AU - Stanley, Scott D

AU - Hiraga, A.

PY - 2006/8

Y1 - 2006/8

N2 - Reason for performing study: Human athletes run faster and experience fewer injuries when running on surfaces with a stiffness 'tuned' to their bodies. We questioned if the same might be true for horses, and if so, would running on surfaces of different stiffness cause a measurable change in the amount of energy required to move at a given speed? Hypothesis: Different brands of commercial treadmills have pans of unequal stiffness, and this difference would result in different metabolic power requirements to locomote at a given speed. Methods: We tested for differences in stiffness between a Mustang 2200 and a Säto I commercial treadmill by incrementally loading each treadmill near the centre of the pan with fixed weights and measuring the displacement of the pan as weights were added or removed from the pan. We trained six 3-year-old Thoroughbreds to run on the 2 treadmills. After 4 months the horses ran with reproducible specific maximum rates of O2 consumption (VO2max/kg bwt, 2.62 ± 0.23 (s.d.) mlO2 STPD/sec/kg) at 14.2 ± 0.7 (s.d.) m/sec. They were alternately run on the 2 treadmills at identical grade (0.40 ± 0.02%) and speeds (1.83 (walk), 4.0 (trot) and 8.0 (canter) m/sec, all ± 0.03 m/sec) while wearing an open-flow mask for measurement of VO2. Results: The Mustang treadmill was over 6 times stiffer than the Säto. The VO2/kg bwt increased by approximately 4-fold over the range of speeds studied on both treadmills. Oxygen consumption was significantly lower at all speeds for the Mustang treadmill compared to the Säto. The fractional difference in energy cost decreased by a factor of 6 with increasing speed, although absolute difference in cost was relatively constant. Conclusions: We suggest it costs less energy for horses to walk, trot or canter on a stiffer treadmill than on a more compliant treadmill, at least within the ranges of stiffness evaluated. Potential relevance: It may be possible to define a substrate stiffness 'tuned' to a horse's body enabling maximal energetic economy when running. The differences between treadmills allows more accurate comparisons between physiological studies conducted on treadmills of different stiffness, and might help to identify an ideal track stiffness to reduce locomotor injuries in equine athletes.

AB - Reason for performing study: Human athletes run faster and experience fewer injuries when running on surfaces with a stiffness 'tuned' to their bodies. We questioned if the same might be true for horses, and if so, would running on surfaces of different stiffness cause a measurable change in the amount of energy required to move at a given speed? Hypothesis: Different brands of commercial treadmills have pans of unequal stiffness, and this difference would result in different metabolic power requirements to locomote at a given speed. Methods: We tested for differences in stiffness between a Mustang 2200 and a Säto I commercial treadmill by incrementally loading each treadmill near the centre of the pan with fixed weights and measuring the displacement of the pan as weights were added or removed from the pan. We trained six 3-year-old Thoroughbreds to run on the 2 treadmills. After 4 months the horses ran with reproducible specific maximum rates of O2 consumption (VO2max/kg bwt, 2.62 ± 0.23 (s.d.) mlO2 STPD/sec/kg) at 14.2 ± 0.7 (s.d.) m/sec. They were alternately run on the 2 treadmills at identical grade (0.40 ± 0.02%) and speeds (1.83 (walk), 4.0 (trot) and 8.0 (canter) m/sec, all ± 0.03 m/sec) while wearing an open-flow mask for measurement of VO2. Results: The Mustang treadmill was over 6 times stiffer than the Säto. The VO2/kg bwt increased by approximately 4-fold over the range of speeds studied on both treadmills. Oxygen consumption was significantly lower at all speeds for the Mustang treadmill compared to the Säto. The fractional difference in energy cost decreased by a factor of 6 with increasing speed, although absolute difference in cost was relatively constant. Conclusions: We suggest it costs less energy for horses to walk, trot or canter on a stiffer treadmill than on a more compliant treadmill, at least within the ranges of stiffness evaluated. Potential relevance: It may be possible to define a substrate stiffness 'tuned' to a horse's body enabling maximal energetic economy when running. The differences between treadmills allows more accurate comparisons between physiological studies conducted on treadmills of different stiffness, and might help to identify an ideal track stiffness to reduce locomotor injuries in equine athletes.

KW - Elastic energy

KW - Horse

KW - Oxygen consumption

KW - Stiffness

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84878435400&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84878435400&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2006.tb05570.x

DO - 10.1111/j.2042-3306.2006.tb05570.x

M3 - Article

C2 - 17402449

AN - SCOPUS:84878435400

VL - 38

SP - 365

EP - 369

JO - Equine veterinary journal. Supplement

JF - Equine veterinary journal. Supplement

SN - 2042-3306

IS - SUPPL.36

ER -