Horse Bedding: Beware the Marketing Hype
/By Jo Warrilow
The performance of any racehorse is dependent on a number of factors, but a high standard of stable management and an overriding commitment to the delivery of an exemplary care regimen are paramount if a horse is to remain healthy and in peak condition, enabling it to hopefully enjoy a successful racing career.
Due to the intense fitness and exercise routine that racehorses are exposed to, a comfortable stable is essential to ensure they are able to rest adequately.
The choice of bedding is an important consideration for those responsible for running a yard. Not only is bedding used in the stable, but it is also often used when travelling, which of course, is a regular requirement for any competing racehorse. Traditionally, the original choice of bedding was straw, but like so many aspects of stable management, this has evolved dramatically. Now there are a plethora of choices in terms of the different types available. The million-dollar question is, which bedding to choose? While a deep, luxurious bed may look aesthetically pleasing, does the bedding type represent the best-in-class when addressing factors influencing the horse’s health?
A recent in-depth study by equine scientist Dr David Marlin explored the most popular bedding types (sawdust, flax straw, cardboard, barley straw, straw pellets, miscanthus, hemp, wood fibre, rape straw, wheat straw, wood pellets and shavings) and the findings revealed that when the products are put under scientific scrutiny, the claims made on pack rarely match up to reality.
Dust-free or Dust-y?
An earlier survey in January 2021 indicated that shavings and wood pellets were deemed to be the most popular choice of bedding, with wood shavings clearly leading the way. The appeal of this bedding type is largely attributed to the dust-free claims that many brands make, and Dr Marlin’s lab testing proved that the majority of brands in this sector scored highly in terms of the dust criteria (although technically a dust-free bedding is impossible to achieve)—but not all. Two popular shavings brands earned the top score, but at the same time, another well-known shavings brand and a wood pulp fibre bedding product performed badly in this area. Equally, a natural hemp brand, regularly marketed as a dust-free bedding was found to earn the dubious title of being the dustiest. Three brands of bedding, which carried the marketing claim of being dust-free, were in fact found to be low-dust, moderately dusty and in the case of the hemp-based product included in the study, very dusty.
Hygienic quality
The hygienic quality of various bedding types was also put to the test. On a positive note, all were found to be free of Aspergillus, the major mould species guilty of causing respiratory disease in horses. However, other moulds and bacteria (which are a source of endotoxin and implicated in equine asthma, causing or worsening respiratory health) were identified. These were used as an indicator of how ‘clean’ the bedding was. The worst offender against this marker was once again a hemp-based bedding, followed by a shavings brand which boasts the claim of being ‘ultra-hygienic’ and a fine woodchip bedding brand.
Absorbency
Absorbency is of course a natural requirement to ensure the comfort of the horse and can also be a key factor influencing foot health. Absorbency may be especially important where only a limited amount of bedding is being used for example, if bedding is laid on top of rubber matting or in situations where a horse may be drinking excessively. The findings here were fairly predictable with the top three performers for absorbency being represented by popular pellet-type beddings. One of these was proved to actually absorb over five times its own weight of water. However, the hemp-based bedding option, which boasts the claim that it is ‘probably the most absorbent bedding money can buy’ once again highlighted the importance of not always believing the marketing hype, lagging behind in eighth place, out of the 12 beddings tested. Equally, one of the shavings brands marketed as ‘super absorbent’ came in third from the bottom (in 10th place), while the worst performing bedding in terms of absorbency—a fine woodchip—carries the promise of being ‘highly absorbent’.
Bedding coverage
A coverage measurement was reviewed, which provides guidance on how much bedding would be needed to make up a bed. The most generous coverage was delivered by two of the pellet brands, closely followed by a fine woodchip bedding. However, this result came at a price, with the top performing pellet brand also representing the most expensive. This should be viewed alongside the fact that while there would be an initial high outlay, the ongoing maintenance with this product was extremely cost effective. Four shavings brands offered the best value options to lay a brand-new bed.
And the winners were …
The research provides a detailed breakdown of the performance of all 12 popular brands. Taking into consideration the requirements for cleanliness, low dust and absorbency, the study pointed to the winners tied between a straw pellet and a pine shavings brand, with further shavings products also offering a good option at an improved value for money price point.
Commenting on the findings, Dr David Marlin said, “This research proves that once again, many horse owners or those involved in making buying decisions in relation to the management and care of horses are being duped by spurious marketing claims which are not substantiated by scientific data. Some brands are a little shy of the truth, while others are frankly bordering on dishonesty. Not only is this practice unethical and unacceptable, but it can also have a potential detrimental impact on a horse’s health. I’d urge any horse owner or care provider, reviewing the many bedding options available to them, to invest time in reading our comprehensive study prior to committing their hard-earned cash to prevent making any costly mistakes.”
How the survey was conducted
New, unopened bales of bedding were purchased either directly from manufacturers or approved stockists. Bales were opened, and 1kg samples were removed. Bales were chosen to represent a range of types, prices and popularity based on an online survey of 1885 owners who rated 2,776 beddings which DrDavidMarlin.com carried out in 2021.
The following techniques were used to analyse the bedding:
Dust
100g samples of bedding were placed in a plastic box 43 x 38 x 28cm - total volume 45.8 litres. An airtight lid was fitted, and the box was rotated mechanically at 1 revolution per second for 60 seconds. The peak total particles (count per litre) and peak PM2.5 (ug/m3) and PM10 (ug/m3) were recorded at a height of 20cm inside the box (internal height 26cm) with the bedding at the bottom of the box (M2000 2nd generation, Temtop, San Jose, CA 95131, USA). The lab background PM2.5, PM10 and particle count were measured before and after each sample test and subtracted from the value measured for the bedding. The box was then cleaned, vacuumed and wiped before the next sample. Samples were measured in triplicate and the mean reported.
Hygienic quality
Samples were submitted to an accredited laboratory for measurement of total viable count (TVC) at 30°C, which measures all living organisms in the bedding (i.e., bacteria, moulds, yeasts, protozoa, etc.) as an indicator of hygienic quality. Samples were also analysed for Aspergillus species – a mould commonly associated with equine asthma.
Absorbency
50g samples of bedding were placed in 25 x 35cm sealable plastic bags. 500ml of water at 15-18°C was then added to the bedding, and the bag hung vertically for 30 minutes. At this time holes were made in the bottom of the bags and the samples allowed to drain to remove excess water for 3 minutes after which the bag was weighed. The final weight minus the initial weight (50g) was expressed as a fold increase over the initial weight (i.e., if no water had been absorbed, the value would be 0; and if all the water had been absorbed the maximum value would be 500/50 = 10-fold increase). Samples were tested in triplicate and the mean reported.
Spread volume/coverage
The density of each bedding was measured by weighing a fixed volume of bedding. If the bedding was compressed, then it was broken up to represent the form in which it would be used to form a bed. The amount of bedding in kg that would be required to cover one square metre to a depth of 10cm (~4in) was then calculated.