Search

Spring and late fall grazing can lead to metabolic problems in horses (Equus caballus L.) as a result of elevated nonstructural carbohydrates (NSC) in pastures. Therefore, the objectives were to determine the impact of different forage species on blood glucose and insulin concentrations of horses during the spring and late fall. Research was conducted in May (spring) and October (late fall) in St. Paul, MN. Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) and mixed perennial cool-season grasses (CSG) were grazed in spring, and CSG and teff (Eragrostis tef [Zucc.] Trotter) were grazed in late fall by six adult horses randomly assigned to a forage in a cross-over design. Jugular catheters were inserted 1 hour before the start of grazing, and horses had access to pasture from 8 AM to 4 PM in the spring and 8 AM to 12 PM in the late fall. Jugular venous blood samples were collected from each horse before being turned out (0 hours) and then at 2 hours intervals after turnout. Plasma and serum samples were collected and analyzed for glucose and insulin, respectively. Corresponding forage samples were taken by hand harvest. Seasons were analyzed separately, and data were analyzed using the MIXED procedure in SAS with P ≤ .05. Teff had lower NSC compared with CSG in the late fall (P ≤ .05) with subsequently lower average glucose, average insulin, and peak insulin in horses grazing teff compared with CSG (P ≤ .05). These results suggest grazing teff could lower the glucose and insulin response of horses during late fall., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Glucose and insulin dynamics may be different in adult and aged horses., Objectives: To determine the effects of age and dietary carbohydrates on glucose and insulin dynamics in healthy horses., Study Design: Balanced Latin square with four isocaloric diets: CONTROL (hay plus restricted-starch-and-sugar fortified pellets), STARCH (control plus kibbled corn), FIBER (control plus unmolassed sugar beet pulp/soybean hull pellets) and SUGAR (control plus dextrose powder)., Methods: A total of 16 healthy Thoroughbreds and Standardbreds divided into two age groups: ADULT (8.8 ± 2.9 years; n = 8) and AGED (20.6 ± 2.1 years; n = 8). Following dietary adaptation, horses underwent an insulin-modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGTT), modified oral sugar test (OST) and dietary meal challenge. Outcome variables included: insulin sensitivity (SI), disposition index (DI), glucose effectiveness (Sg) and acute insulin response to glucose (AIRg) from the FSIGTT; peak glucose, peak insulin, time to peak, area under the curve for glucose (AUCg) and insulin (AUCi) from the OST and dietary meal challenge. Data were analyzed using multivariable linear mixed regression modelling., Results: AIRg was higher in AGED (mean [95% confidence interval]; 582.0 [455.0-709.0]) vs. ADULT (358.0 [224.0-491.0]; P = 0.03). ADULT and AGED horses had a higher SI on STARCH (adult: 3.3 [2.3-4.2]; aged: 2.8 [1.9-3.7]) and SUGAR (adult: 3.4 [2.5-4.3]; aged: 4.0 [3.1-4.9]) diets compared with CONTROL (adult: 2.0 [1.1-2.9], P = 0.029 (starch), P = 0.009 (sugar); aged: 1.4 [0.5-2.2], P = 0.009 (starch), P < 0.001 (sugar)). Feeding a STARCH (adult: 21581.0 [15029.0-28133.0]; aged: 35205.0 [29194.0-41216.0]) or SUGAR (adult: 26050.0 [19885.0-32215.0]; aged: 25720.0 [19770.0-31670.0]) meal resulted in postprandial hyperinsulinaemia (AUCi)., Main Limitations: Study cohort contained two insulin-sensitive breeds and no insulin-resistant breeds., Conclusions: Age and diet should be considered when evaluating glucose and insulin dynamics., (© 2017 EVJ Ltd.)