Clayton Hilary M, Murray Rachel, Williams Jane M, Walker Vicki, Fisher Mark, Fisher Diane, Nixon Jane, Mackechnie-Guire Russell
Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA.
Rossdales LLP, Suffolk, UK.
Equine Vet J. 2025 Jul;57(4):1127-1137. doi: 10.1111/evj.14451. Epub 2024 Dec 22.
Noseband adjustment should avoid discomfort and allow some jaw movement.
To determine pressure beneath a cavesson noseband at five tightness levels during standing and chewing. It was hypothesised that increased noseband tightness is associated with increases in nasal and mandibular pressures while standing and chewing, accompanied by increases in eye temperature and blink rate.
Experimental.
Eight highly-trained dressage horses wore a snaffle bridle with their own bit. Pressure mats over the nasal bones and beneath the mandibular rami recorded sub-noseband pressures (50 Hz) for five tightness levels (2.0, 1.5, 1.0, 0.5, 0.0 finger-equivalents from loosest to tightest) measured using a taper gauge during quiet standing and chewing a treat. Eye temperature and blink rate were recorded synchronously. Data were analysed using Friedmans two-way ANOVA with Wilcoxon post hoc tests and Bonferroni adjustment for repeated measures. Significance level p ≤ 0.01.
During standing, total force increased from (mean ± SD) 5.8 ± 4.4 N (nasal) and 12.3 ± 8.2 N (mandibular) at 2.0 finger-equivalents to 45.1 ± 24.9 N (nasal) and 70.7 ± 25.7 N (mandibular) at 0.0-finger-equivalents. Forces and pressures were higher on the mandibles than nasal bones although differences did not always reach statistical significance. Horses willingly ingested and chewed a treat at all noseband tightness levels generating forces ~100 N and pressure >40 kPa without increases in eye temperature or blink rate that would suggest discomfort. Post hoc tests indicated significantly higher pressure for 0.0 finger-equivalents than 2.0 finger-equivalents (p < 0.01).
Small sample size. Nosebands always tested from loosest to tightest.
Mandibular pressure exceeded nasal pressure and values at both sites increased with noseband tightness. Horses accepted high noseband pressures when chewing a treat with a cavesson adjusted from 0.0 to 2.0 finger-equivalents. Blink rate and eye temperature suggest horses were not distressed when chewing at 2.0 to 0.0 finger-equivalents tightness.
鼻革调整应避免不适,并允许下颌有一定活动。
测定站立和咀嚼时五个松紧度水平下卡弗森鼻革下方的压力。研究假设是,鼻革松紧度增加与站立和咀嚼时鼻腔及下颌压力增加相关,同时伴有眼温及眨眼频率升高。
实验性研究。
八匹训练有素的盛装舞步马佩戴配有各自衔铁的简易马勒。在安静站立和咀嚼一块零食时,使用锥度规测量五个松紧度水平(从最松到最紧分别为2.0、1.5、1.0、0.5、0.0指当量),通过置于鼻骨上方和下颌支下方的压力垫记录鼻革下方压力(50赫兹)。同时记录眼温及眨眼频率。数据采用Friedmans双向方差分析,并通过Wilcoxon事后检验及Bonferroni重复测量校正进行分析。显著性水平p≤0.01。
站立时,总力从2.0指当量时的(均值±标准差)5.8±4.4牛(鼻腔)和12.3±8.2牛(下颌)增加到0.0指当量时的45.1±24.9牛(鼻腔)和70.7±25.7牛(下颌)。下颌上的力和压力高于鼻骨处,尽管差异并非总是具有统计学意义。在所有鼻革松紧度水平下,马都乐意摄取并咀嚼零食,产生的力约为100牛,压力>40千帕,且眼温或眨眼频率没有升高,这表明没有不适。事后检验表明,0.0指当量时的压力显著高于2.0指当量时的压力(p<0.01)。
样本量小。鼻革总是从最松到最紧进行测试。
下颌压力超过鼻腔压力,且两个部位的压力值均随鼻革松紧度增加而升高。当使用卡弗森鼻革从0.0调整到2.0指当量咀嚼零食时,马能承受较高的鼻革压力。眨眼频率和眼温表明,马在2.0至0.0指当量松紧度下咀嚼时并未感到痛苦。