Role of active and passive recovery in adaptations to high intensity training

It has been established that Wingate-based high-intensity training (HIT) consisting of 4 to 6 x 30-s all-out sprints interspersed with 4-min recovery is an effective training paradigm. Despite the increased utilisation of Wingate-based HIT to bring about training adaptations, the majority of previous studies have been conducted over a relatively short timeframe (2 to 6 weeks). However, activity during recovery period, intervention duration or sprint length have been overlooked. In study 1, the dose response of recovery intensity on performance during typical Wingate-based HIT (4 x 30-s cycle all-out sprints separated by 4-min recovery) was examined and active recovery (cycling at 20 to 40% of V̇O2peak) has been shown to improve sprint performance with successive sprints by 6 to 12% compared to passive recovery (remained still), while increasing aerobic contribution to sprint performance by ~15%. In the following study, 5 to 7% greater endurance performance adaptations were achieved with active recovery (40%V̇O2peak) following 2 weeks of Wingate-based HIT. In the final study, shorter sprint protocol (4 to 6 x 15-s sprints interspersed with 2 min of recovery) has been shown to be as effective as typical 30-s Wingate-based HIT in improving cardiorespiratory function and endurance performance over 9 weeks with the improvements in V̇O2peak being completed within 3 weeks, whereas exercise capacity (time to exhaustion) being increased throughout 9 weeks. In conclusion, the studies demonstrate that active recovery at 40% V̇O2peak significantly enhances endurance adaptations to HIT. Further, the duration of the sprint does not seem to be a driving factor in the magnitude of change with 15 sec sprints providing similar adaptations to 30 sec sprints. Taken together, this suggests that the arrangement of recovery mode should be considered to ensure maximal adaptation to HIT, and the practicality of the training would be enhanced via the reduction in sprint duration without diminishing overall training adaptations.

The issue of data protection and data security in the (pre-Lisbon) EU third pillar

The key functional operability in the pre-Lisbon PJCCM pillar of the EU is the exchange of intelligence and information amongst the law enforcement bodies of the EU. The twin issues of data protection and data security within what was the EU’s third pillar legal framework therefore come to the fore. With the Lisbon Treaty reform of the EU, and the increased role of the Commission in PJCCM policy areas, and the integration of the PJCCM provisions with what have traditionally been the pillar I activities of Frontex, the opportunity for streamlining the data protection and data security provisions of the law enforcement bodies of the post-Lisbon EU arises. This is recognised by the Commission in their drafting of an amending regulation for Frontex , when they say that they would prefer “to return to the question of personal data in the context of the overall strategy for information exchange to be presented later this year and also taking into account the reflection to be carried out on how to further develop cooperation between agencies in the justice and home affairs field as requested by the Stockholm programme.” The focus of the literature published on this topic, has for the most part, been on the data protection provisions in Pillar I, EC. While the focus of research has recently sifted to the previously Pillar III PJCCM provisions on data protection, a more focused analysis of the interlocking issues of data protection and data security needs to be made in the context of the law enforcement bodies, particularly with regard to those which were based in the pre-Lisbon third pillar. This paper will make a contribution to that debate, arguing that a review of both the data protection and security provision post-Lisbon is required, not only in order to reinforce individual rights, but also inter-agency operability in combating cross-border EU crime. The EC’s provisions on data protection, as enshrined by Directive 95/46/EC, do not apply to the legal frameworks covering developments within the third pillar of the EU. Even Council Framework Decision 2008/977/JHA, which is supposed to cover data protection provisions within PJCCM expressly states that its provisions do not apply to “Europol, Eurojust, the Schengen Information System (SIS)” or to the Customs Information System (CIS). In addition, the post Treaty of Prüm provisions covering the sharing of DNA profiles, dactyloscopic data and vehicle registration data pursuant to Council Decision 2008/615/JHA, are not to be covered by the provisions of the 2008 Framework Decision. As stated by Hijmans and Scirocco, the regime is “best defined as a patchwork of data protection regimes”, with “no legal framework which is stable and unequivocal, like Directive 95/46/EC in the First pillar”. Data security issues are also key to the sharing of data in organised crime or counterterrorism situations. This article will critically analyse the current legal framework for data protection and security within the third pillar of the EU.

Navigating uncertain waters: a critical review of inferring foraging behaviour from location and dive data in pinnipeds

In the last thirty years, the emergence and progression of biologging technology has led to great advances in marine predator ecology. Large databases of location and dive observations from biologging devices have been compiled for an increasing number of diving predator species (such as pinnipeds, sea turtles, seabirds and cetaceans), enabling complex questions about animal activity budgets and habitat use to be addressed. Central to answering these questions is our ability to correctly identify and quantify the frequency of essential behaviours, such as foraging. Despite technological advances that have increased the quality and resolution of location and dive data, accurately interpreting behaviour from such data remains a challenge, and analytical methods are only beginning to unlock the full potential of existing datasets. This review evaluates both traditional and emerging methods and presents a starting platform of options for future studies of marine predator foraging ecology, particularly from location and two-dimensional (time-depth) dive data. We outline the different devices and data types available, discuss the limitations and advantages of commonly-used analytical techniques, and highlight key areas for future research. We focus our review on pinnipeds - one of the most studied taxa of marine predators - but offer insights that will be applicable to other air-breathing marine predator tracking studies. We highlight that traditionally-used methods for inferring foraging from location and dive data, such as first-passage time and dive shape analysis, have important caveats and limitations depending on the nature of the data and the research question. We suggest that more holistic statistical techniques, such as state-space models, which can synthesise multiple track, dive and environmental metrics whilst simultaneously accounting for measurement error, offer more robust alternatives. Finally, we identify a need for more research to elucidate the role of physical oceanography, device effects, study animal selection, and developmental stages in predator behaviour and data interpretation.