IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0198545.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The laterality of the gallop gait in Thoroughbred racehorses

Author

Listed:
  • Paulette Cully
  • Brian Nielsen
  • Bryony Lancaster
  • Jessica Martin
  • Paul McGreevy

Abstract

Laterality can be observed as side biases in locomotory behaviour which, in the horse, manifest inter alia as forelimb preferences, most notably in the gallop. The current study investigated possible leading-leg preferences at the population and individual level in Thoroughbred racehorses (n = 2095) making halt-to-gallop transitions. Videos of flat races in the UK (n = 350) were studied to record, for each horse, the lead-leg preference of the initial stride into gallop from the starting stalls. Races from clockwise (C) and anti-clockwise (AC) tracks were chosen alternately at random to ensure equal representation. Course direction, horse age and sex, position relative to the inside rail and finishing position were also noted. On C courses, the left/right ratio was 1.15, which represents a significant bias to the left (z = –2.29, p = 0.022), while on AC courses it was 0.92 (z = 0.51, p = 0.610). In both course directions, there was no significant difference between winning horses that led with the left leading leg versus the right (C courses, z = –1.32, p = 0.19 and AC courses, z = –0.74, p = 0.46). Of the 2,095 horses studied 51.26% led with their L fore and 48.74% with their R, with no statistically significant difference (z = -1.16, p = 0.25). Therefore, there was no evidence of a population level motor laterality. Additionally, 22 male and 22 female horses were randomly chosen for repeated measures of leading leg preference. A laterality index was calculated for each of the 44 horses studied using the repeated measures: 22 exhibited right laterality (of which two were statistically significant) and 21 exhibited left laterality (eight being statistically significant); one horse was ambilateral. Using these data, left lateralized horses were more strongly lateralized on an individual level than the right lateralized horses (t = 2.28, p = 0.03, DF = 34) and mares were more left lateralized than males (t = 2.4, p = 0.03, DF = 19).

Suggested Citation

  • Paulette Cully & Brian Nielsen & Bryony Lancaster & Jessica Martin & Paul McGreevy, 2018. "The laterality of the gallop gait in Thoroughbred racehorses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0198545
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198545
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0198545
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0198545&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0198545?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael Peterson & Wayne Sanderson & Nurlan Kussainov & Sarah Jane Hobbs & Patti Miles & Mary C. Scollay & Hilary M. Clayton, 2021. "Effects of Racing Surface and Turn Radius on Fatal Limb Fractures in Thoroughbred Racehorses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-16, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0198545. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.