Effect of age at training initiation on hoof morphology and lameness in juvenile American Quarter Horses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lameness, discipline, training intensity, environmental variability, and shoeing are all factors demonstrated to affect hoof loading and therefore act as adaptive stimuli to alter hoof morphology. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of age at training initiation on hoof morphology and lameness incidence and determine if specific hoof morphology measurements correlate with lameness in juvenile American Quarter Horses. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: American Quarter Horses (n = 42; 29 two-year-olds, 13 three-year-olds) entering training were monitored for hoof morphology and lameness over 6 months (months 0, 2, 4, and 6). Hoof measurements (palmar/plantar angles, frog base width/length, toe length/angle, heel length/angle, heel and foot width, wall height/angle) from radiographs and photographs were recorded. Lameness was graded subjectively and objectively (Lameness locator®). Statistical analyses were performed with Fisher's exact test and repeated measures ANOVA with p < 0.05. RESULTS: 25/42 horses developed subclinical lameness (16/42 forelimb, 19/42 hindlimb), with 3-year-olds developing lameness more frequently compared to 2-year-olds overall (p = 0.04; 84.6 vs. 48.3%) and in forelimbs (p = 0.05; 61.5% vs. 27.6%); no difference was noted between 2- versus 3-year-olds in hindlimbs (p = 0.2; 61.5% vs. 37.9%). In lame versus sound forelimbs, 3-year-olds had decreased foot width (p = 0.03; 11.48 cm [CI 10.68-12.28] vs. 12.21 cm [CI 11.99-12.42]), decreased toe length (p = 0.03; 6.02 cm [CI 5.69-6.36] vs. 6.45 cm [CI 6.32-6.58]), shorter lateral wall height (p = 0.03; 4.64 cm [CI 4.31-4.96] vs. 5.11 cm [CI 5.03-5.2]), and shorter medial wall height (p = 0.02; 4.58 cm [CI 4.06-5.10] vs. 5.15 cm [CI 4.99-5.30]). In lame versus sound hindlimbs, horses overall (p = 0.05; 3.74, CI 3.53-3.96 vs. 3.55, CI 3.48-3.61) and 3-year-olds had longer heels p = 0.01; 3.90 cm (CI 3.5-4.3) vs. 3.50 cm (CI 3.39-3.61). MAIN LIMITATIONS: Small sample size, lack of control group not entering training. CONCLUSIONS: Three-year-old American Quarter Horses entering training were more likely to develop forelimb lameness than 2-year-olds. This subclinical lameness was associated with specific hoof morphology characteristics (decreased foot width, toe length, heel length, and lateral/medial wall height; greater toe angle).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".