4.3 Article

Comparative anatomy and muscle architecture of selected hind limb muscles in the Quarter Horse and Arab

Journal

JOURNAL OF ANATOMY
Volume 212, Issue 2, Pages 144-152

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7580.2007.00848.x

Keywords

Arab; architecture; biomechanics; equine; locomotion; muscle; Quarter Horse

Funding

  1. BBSRC [BB/E013244/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  2. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/E013244/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/E013244/1] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Quarter Horse (bred for acceleration) and the Arab (bred for endurance) are situated at either end of the equine athletic spectrum. Studies into the form and function of the leg muscles in human sprint and endurance runners have demonstrated that differences exist in their muscle architecture. It is not known whether similar differences exist in the horse. Six Quarter Horse and six Arab fresh hind limb cadavers were dissected to gain information on the muscle mass and architecture of the following muscles: gluteus medius; biceps femoris; semitendinosus; vastus lateralis; gastrocnemius; tibialis cranialis and extensor digitorum longus. Specifically, muscle mass, fascicle length and pennation angle were quantified and physiological cross-sectional area (PCSA) and maximum isometric force were estimated. The hind limb muscles of the Quarter Horse were of a significantly greater mass, but had similar fascicle lengths and pennation angles when compared with those of the Arab; this resulted in the Quarter Horse hind limb muscles having greater PCSAs and hence greater isometric force potential. This study suggests that Quarter Horses as a breed inherently possess large strong hind limb muscles, with the potential to accelerate their body mass more rapidly than those of the Arab.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available