Aquaponics as Sustainable Path to Food Sovereignty: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Lubna A. Ibrahim
,
Hiba Shaghaleh
,
Gamal Mohamed El-Kassar
,
Mohamed Abu-Hashim
,
Elsayed Ahmed Elsadek
,
Yousef Alhaj Hamoud

Aquaponics emerges as a beacon of hope, showcasing how humanity can adapt, innovate, and thrive while preserving the delicate balance of our natural resources. Within aquaponic systems, a symbiotic cycle unfolds: fish waste serves as vital nutrients for plants, while these same plants act as natural filters, purifying the water destined to circulate back to the fish tanks. This harmonious relationship between aquatic life and vegetation fosters a closed-loop ecosystem, significantly curbing water wastage and elevating the system’s overall sustainability. This method not only produces high-quality organic vegetables and fruits but also sustainable protein sources, addressing the challenges of both food security and water conservation.

  • aquaponics
  • automation
  • food sustainability
  • food sovereignty

1. Introduction

Irrigation is essential for agriculture, especially in areas with limited rainfall. Various methods like surface, drip, sprinkler, and sub-surface irrigation are used based on crop type, soil, and water availability. Amidst the challenges posed by burgeoning population growth, water scarcity, and environmental changes, efficient irrigation techniques have become increasingly important [1]. Traditional irrigation techniques frequently lead to substantial water loss through evaporation, runoff, and uneven distribution. This has prompted numerous researchers and analysts to explore alternative approaches, aiming to optimize current methods to boost agricultural output while conserving water resources and ensuring the long-term sustainability of agriculture and water usage [1][2][3][4][5][6][7]. In an era defined by the urgent need for sustainable solutions, the convergence of agriculture and aquaculture has given rise to a revolutionary method known as aquaponics. This innovative approach not only challenges conventional farming practices but also offers a transformative pathway towards achieving food sovereignty and optimizing water usage (Figure 1) [8][9].
Water 15 04310 g001
Figure 1. Aquaponics system overview, featuring the indication of water recycling direction via the red arrow.
Aquaponics emerges as a beacon of hope, showcasing how humanity can adapt, innovate, and thrive while preserving the delicate balance of our natural resources [9][10][11][12][13][14]. Within aquaponic systems, a symbiotic cycle unfolds: fish waste serves as vital nutrients for plants, while these same plants act as natural filters, purifying the water destined to circulate back to the fish tanks. This harmonious relationship between aquatic life and vegetation fosters a closed-loop ecosystem, significantly curbing water wastage and elevating the system’s overall sustainability [10]. This method not only produces high-quality organic vegetables and fruits but also sustainable protein sources, addressing the challenges of both food security and water conservation [9][10]. Aquaponic systems can also be automated and monitored using sensors and IoT technologies, allowing for precise control over factors like fertilization, irrigation, and lighting [11][12][13]. Automation in aquaponics not only increases efficiency but also contributes to higher yields and better resource utilization. However, while this approach holds promise, gaps in existing research are apparent [11][12][13][14][15]. The current focus lacks attention to technological innovation in aquaponic systems, particularly in emerging technologies like AI integration and IoT applications. Additionally, scalability challenges in large-scale aquaponics and the adaptability of systems to diverse environmental conditions remain understudied, along with limited guidance on urban agriculture integration.
The chemistry within aquaponics stands as a linchpin for the effective functioning of automated commercial setups, significantly impacting system functionality [13]. Efficient control of water quality, proper management, and good system design are essential for achieving high yields and quality produce [13]. This not only contributes to food security but also ensures access to safe, culturally fitting, and healthful sustenance via sustainable means, aligning with the concept of food sovereignty [14]. However, manually managing and analyzing aquaponics systems can be challenging, particularly when scaling up to commercial levels. Additionally, research gaps persist in addressing challenges related to manual management at commercial scales, hindering the development of efficient strategies for optimal system functionality.

2. Aquaponics

2.1. Nomenclature in Aquaponics and Legislation

Rakocy [15] explains that aquaponics involves the cultivation of aquatic organisms alongside plant growth without soil. However, to avoid confusion, the term “aquaponics” should specifically refer to hydroponic plant cultivation without any substrate. Lennard [16] proposes a revised definition where the waste generated by feeding aquatic organisms must supply at least 50% of the necessary nutrients for optimal plant growth. This specific approach, known as aquaponics sensu stricto (s.s.), solely utilizes hydroponic methods (aqua-farming techniques without soil or substrates like sand or rock or gravel). Fish production combined with algae production in photobioreactors or separate tanks is now a common feature of integrated systems for aquaculture. Aquaponics sensu lato (s.l.) is employed in both indoor and outdoor substrate aquaponics, incorporating horticultural strategies for growing herbs, cultivating or gardening plants, and conventional soil-based agricultural crop production. This approach leverages the buffer, nutrient storage, and mineralization processes of different substrates.
Aquaponic systems can be broadly classified into four types: open pond, domestic, demonstration, and commercial, each serving different purposes and functions. In modern commercial aquaponics, the three main designs are: one-loop “coupled aquaponic systems (CAS)”, two-loop “decoupled aquaponic systems (DAS)” [17], and multiloop decoupled aquaponic systems (DAPSs) [18]. CASs are utilized at various scales, including domestic systems for personal use, social projects like school aquaponics [19], and commercial production exceeding 100 m2. Open-pond aquaponics encompasses system variations that combine a hydroponic component with free surface waters like lakes or ponds, either on-pond or on land. Domestic aquaponics encompasses all types of systems used for private purposes, ranging from small-scale systems for personal consumption to hobby/backyard systems for home production. Aquaponic demonstration systems are specifically constructed to showcase the food chain in aquaponic production, and are often used in classrooms or workshops. Commercial aquaponics serves diverse purposes such as urban gardening, roof aquaponics, living towers, vertical aquaponics, and small to semi-commercial systems (>50–100 m2). Larger-scale commercial operations (100–500 m2 and beyond) trend towards industrialized, highly mechanized production.
Aquaponics, aligning with the UN Sustainable Development Goals, faces hurdles in organic certification due to EU Regulation’s strict guidelines [19]. Proposed changes, such as incorporating soil in hydroponic areas and enhancing fish welfare, require collaborative efforts from horticulture, aquaculture, and organics. Despite challenges, the industry garners significant interest, hinting at promising market opportunities. Notably, aquaponics lacks specific inclusion in Europe’s agricultural policies [20]. South Africa also lacks dedicated aquaponics policies [21], and in Egypt, aquaponics lacks legal recognition. Certainly, investigating organic certification for aquaponic production is crucial for its acceptance as a healthy and sustainable local food source, even though it may not be a mandatory requirement for the industry to flourish.
To enhance organic aquaponics, revising legislation in line with statutory organic certification standards (as seen in the USA and the EU) is crucial. According to the UK’s DEFRA (Department of Food and Rural Affairs), organic farming avoids the use of human-made fertilizers, pesticides, growth regulators, and GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms), promoting environmentally, socially, and economically sustainable production [22]. Current rules might lack scientific bases and favor existing hierarchies. Embracing innovations like controlled aquaponic greenhouses is environmentally friendly. Certification should adapt to these advances, emphasizing science-based, ethical, and nature-oriented production. To achieve these goals, outlined below are specific policies for organic aquaponics. Proposed policies prioritize environmental, social, and economic sustainability while excluding basic regulations on water quality, organic fish feed, antibiotics, or pesticides.
Crops regulations: Plants can be grown in various hydroponic systems, with soil-based substrates allowed. Fertility in coupled aquaponic systems should come from aquaculture water, while fish waste enhances soil fertility in both coupled and decoupled systems.
Aquaculture regulations: Fish and aquatic organisms must meet welfare standards, considering habitat, diurnal cycles, and environmental stimulation. Tanks should include species-specific enrichments like structures, shelters, or sandy substrates. Local species fitting water parameters should be chosen to reduce the need for artificial heating or cooling. Regular checks for distress signs are essential.
Systems regulations: Organic aquaponic systems must primarily rely on fish water and waste for nutrients. Any additions, like seaweed extracts, must be organic and sustainable. Coupled systems should avoid substances harmful to fish health. The use of alternative energy systems and water harvesting is encouraged, especially in water-deficient areas.

2.2. Aquaponic Systems Development

Coupled aquaponic systems (CASs) operate as single continuous loops, with water flowing in a single direction or towards an outlet in each tank [23], shown in Figure 2. In contrast, decoupled aquaponic systems (DASs) have two separate loops between which solutions can flow [24], shown in Figure 2. This allows for greater control over water parameters in the hydroponic portion without affecting the aquaculture portion, resulting in superior filtration and better manipulation of nutrient concentrations and pH level [25][26]. Nutrient supplementation can enhance plant quality and reduce the risk of nutrient deficiencies [27]. Double recirculation aquaponic systems (DRAPSs) optimize fish production while allowing for dynamic adjustments in nutrient concentrations and pH levels [28], shown in Figure 2.
Water 15 04310 g005
Figure 2. (a): The CAS represents a coupled aquaponic system, and (b): the DAS illustrates a decoupled aquaponic system. Both CAS and DAS designs were introduced by Palm et al. [23] and Kloas et al. [24]. (c): Decoupled (multiloop) aquaponics (DAPS), adapted from Goddek et al. [20]. (d): Concept of the double recirculation aquaponics system (DRAPS) [25][28]. The numbers (1–19) in (a,b) indicate the sensor locations.
Decoupled multiloop aquaponics systems (DAPSs) separate the RASs and hydroponic units, providing inherent benefits for both plants and fish [24][29], shown in Figure 2. CASs are popular due to their ease of setup and adaptability, while DAS and multiloop systems can be more efficient but require more expertise and management.

2.3. Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RASs)

The RAS is crucial for land-based fish production in aquaponic systems and for rearing aquatic animals such as shellfish, crabs, and shrimp [30], shown in Figure 5. RASs employ mechanical and biological filtration, gas exchange, and production tanks to cultivate fish. Mechanical filtration eliminates solid waste, while beneficial bacteria convert toxic ammonia into nitrate. Oxygenation and carbon dioxide removal are performed before water recirculation. By employing mechanical filtration, water quality can be improved by up to 85% [31], and waste removal can be enhanced by increasing the recirculation rate [32]. Biofilters consisting of media-filled strata replace the need for biological filters. The RAS significantly reduces water exchange by 90–99% and occupies less than 1% of the space required by conventional aquaculture [33].

2.4. Hydroponic Components

Hydroponics is a soilless agricultural technique utilizing a nutrient-rich solution for crop cultivation. It can be implemented as a closed or open system [34]. Among hydroponic methods, the NFT (nutrient film technique) system yields lower lettuce and nitrate elimination compared to clutter DWC (deep water culture) [35].
Media beds provide an ample surface area for nitrifying bacteria growth and function as physical filters, eliminating the need for a separate biofilter [36]. However, Pattillo [37] noted that the maintenance cost of media bed culture is a significant drawback. Sediment accumulation disrupts water flow, resulting in uneven fertilization and the formation of anaerobic zones. Media bed culture is more suitable for smaller-scale aquaponic operations, while low-maintenance hydroponic components like DWC are better suited for larger-scale projects [23].

3. Aquaponics Systems Performance

3.1. Fish Species, Feed, and Growth Indicators

Aquatic organisms tolerant of high population densities and elevated levels of TN, TP, TSS, and potassium are crucial for productive aquaponic systems [38]. Species capable of thriving near densities of 0.06 kg/L are suitable, while fish above this threshold should not be stored [39]. Nile tilapia are widely used and considered excellent for aquaponics due to their adaptability, followed by carp and African catfish [40][41]. Nile tilapia can tolerate high TSS and nitrite levels up to 4.67 mg/L and survive at dissolved oxygen levels of 0.5–1.0 mg/L, allowing for higher stocking densities to meet plant nutrient requirements [42].
Fish feed constitutes 70% of aquaculture costs, but only 20–30% of the nitrogen (N) content is consumed by fish, while 70–80% is released into the water as waste or utilized in aquaponics [43][44]. Fish meal, despite being rich in amino acids and phosphorus, lacks essential micronutrients and potassium for plant growth [45]. Polyculture, involving different aquatic species, shows potential for enhancing plant growth in aquaponics but requires further research [33][46][47]. The impacts of excretion from different fish species on nutrient levels in aquaponic solutions and plant yields remain uncertain. Exploring alternative fish feeds that generate wastewater with higher levels of potassium (K) and magnesium (Mg) and maximizing nutrient conversion into plant biomass requires additional investigation.

3.2. Plant Species, Nutrients, Growth, and Indexes

Leafy vegetables are ideal for aquaponics due to their fast growth, short growth period, low nutrient demands, and nitrogen tolerance [48]. Commonly grown crops include basil, herbs, tomatoes, lettuce, salad greens, chard, pepper, kale, and cucumbers, chosen based on fish density and nutrient levels [33][47][49]. Nutrient absorption varies throughout plant growth stages, with an optimal uptake of P, K+, S, Ca2+, and Mg2+ at pHs from 6.0–8.0. Other nutrients like Fe2+, Mn2+, B3+, Cu2+, and Zn2+ are best absorbed at a pH below 6.0 [50]. Leafy greens require higher nitrate levels than fruiting vegetables, and larger root areas enhance nitrate absorption. Flowering crops are more valuable but have greater nutrient needs and longer growth cycles, posing challenges in aquaponics [51].
Combining a trout farm with a NFT culture for lettuce and basil can yield a 12.5% ROI and lower water remediation costs [52]. Leafy greens and herbs are popular due to their year-round availability and restaurant demand [44][53]. Li et al. [46] considered plant number, height, fresh weight, and fish-to-plant ratios to estimate FCR and SGR. Researchers have analyzed plant yields, leaf nutrient content, and plant quality indexes to assess productivity [54][55][56], while others have incorporated microalgae bacteria to increase nitrogen use efficiency and reduce N2O emissions [57]. Leaf quality is assessed visually using a 1–4 scale for color, known as the PQI [50][51][57]. Leaf yellowing may result from nutrient deficiencies or inadequate fish feed. Aquaponics productivity is evaluated through plant, water, and fish performance, while increased yields are measured by assessing biomass growth in plants and fish [50][58][59].

3.3. Nitrifying Bacteria and Microflora

Aquaponics involves nitrification, converting TAN to nitrites and nitrates through two steps [60], shown in Figure 3. Ammonia-oxidizing bacteria (AOB) and nitrate-oxidizing bacteria (NOB) facilitate this process. TAN is produced by fish through their waste and gills [31]. AOB use TAN as an energy source, while plants prefer NH4+. Nitrosomonas bacteria transform ammonia to nitrite, while Nitrobacter bacteria convert nitrite to nitrate [50]. Nitrite, a byproduct of ammonia processed by AOB, poses a threat to aquatic life when it exceeds 0–1 mg/L. Maintaining nitrite levels within this range is crucial for the well-being of fish, plants, and bacteria. Nitrates, generated through NOB’s nitrification process, serve as a nitrogen source for plants and are fish-safe when kept below 90 mg/L. To ensure proper biofilter design, maintaining levels between 50 and 100 ppm is recommended.
Water 15 04310 g006
Figure 3. Nitrification process during a time period spent in three main aquaponic systems.
Optimal nitrification conditions include temperatures of 25–30 °C, pH levels of 7–9, and oxygen levels below 20 mg/L [39]. Nitrates should be within the safe range of 150–300 mg/L [26]. Nitrospira, Nitrobacter, and Nitrosomonas are the primary nitrifying bacteria, and microalgae can reduce ammonia levels [61][62][63]. Fish retain only 20–30% of nitrogen from their feed, releasing 70–80% into the water [26][31]. Plants utilize only 10–37% of this released nitrogen, with the rest lost. Studying Nitrospira strains in aquaponics biofilters can improve Nutrient Use Efficiency (NUE) [26][31][44][64]. Biofilms and interactions between nitrifying bacteria and other organisms enhance nutrient availability for plants [38]. 

3.4. Water Quality, Consumption, and Use Efficiency in Aquaponics

Aquaponics is a sustainable farming method that conserves freshwater and promotes water stress alleviation [65][66]. Maintaining appropriate water chemistry parameters is critical for system stability and the well-being of plants and fish. Factors such as pH, dissolved oxygen levels, temperature, and nutrient concentrations require vigilant monitoring and control. pH affects nutrient availability and microbial activity, while dissolved oxygen is vital for the respiration of both fish and beneficial bacteria. Temperature influences metabolic rates and the efficiency of biological processes. Water quality is crucial, monitored using sensors for DO, pH, and temperature [60]. Weekly water samples are collected and analyzed for nutrients and minerals [26][61][67][68].
Furthermore, water quality management is essential in preventing the accumulation of harmful substances and maintaining a healthy environment. Regular monitoring of parameters such as ammonia, nitrite, nitrate, dissolved solids, and trace elements is necessary to detect imbalances and take corrective actions promptly. Research focuses on improving fish and cash yields, considering the initial capital cost [69][70][71]. Geographical location affects optimal parameter ranges [72]. Aquaponics using RASs is suitable for arid areas with water shortages [73]. Microbial systems can reduce waste and improve water quality [46]. 

4. Technology

Automation technology plays a significant role in maintaining optimal water chemistry conditions. Automated systems can monitor and adjust parameters in real time, ensuring stable and precise control. This reduces the risk of human error and enables efficient resource management. In the 1970s, advancements such as robotics, IT, embedded systems, and software engineering were combined with aquaponics to create a more precise farming method, known as aquaponics 3.0 [74][75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83]. Towards the end of 2016, research began to incorporate Industry 4.0 concepts into aquaponics, giving rise to aquaponics 4.0—a digital farming approach involving remote monitoring, extensive automation, and smart decision making for optimal crop yield and quality [81]. Industry 4.0’s evolution has significantly revolutionized efficiency and automation in farming. Digital twin technology, replicating plant production lines virtually, stands as a notable advancement, enhancing overall system performance. Industry 4.0 technologies applied in aquaponics are described in the subsequent sections. Achieving this advanced digitization demands smooth data integration, a seamless information flow, and effective knowledge management. This allows the system to adjust and learn from past experiences, enabling it to adapt to diverse situations.

4.1. Smart Aquaponic Systems

Smart systems in aquaponics use machine learning to predict and optimize parameters. For example, (1) predictive analytics software [81] can optimize fish feed rates, and sensors can predict and prevent disease outbreaks. (2) Autonomous wireless aquaponics uses regression techniques to make smart decisions based on sensed parameters. (3) “Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs)” are used to assess crop quality and growth rate [84]. They can recognize patterns and features indicative of high-quality crops and help farmers optimize crop productivity for improved profitability and sustainability.

4.2. Internet of Things (IoT) Systems

IoT systems can monitor and control aquaponics remotely, using sensor-based, actuator-based, or hybrid systems. Remote monitoring and control, as well as wireless sensors, are crucial elements of IoT in aquaponics. Remote monitoring allows farmers to track water quality, temperature, and nutrient levels, while remote control enables them to adjust settings like water flow rates, lighting, and temperature [66][81][85][86]. Wireless sensors collect data on multiple parameters and can detect issues before they become serious problems [87][88]. By combining these components, farmers can optimize their aquaponics systems, improving efficiency and productivity. Odema et al. [66] developed sensor-based modules enabling real-time data collection for informed decision making and remote control of aquaponics systems [74], showcasing a remote ChlF sensor that optimizes artificial lighting for improved energy efficiency and crop growth [74][75]. In Sub-Saharan Africa, the integration of an IoT water quality sensor system with local farms has doubled fish length prediction accuracy and enabled the achievement of a 99% accuracy rate for fish weight prediction in a mobile aquaponics system, significantly enhancing efficiency and management [89].

4.3. Big Data

Big data significantly enhances aquaponics, enabling data-driven decisions [90]. Sensors collect diverse data on water quality, nutrients, environment, and crop/fish health. Analyzing these data uncovers trends, optimizing systems for efficiency, productivity, and sustainability. It aids in predictive modeling, disease detection, and overall management, advancing modern aquaponics [90][91][92]. It optimizes fish quality, water conditions, and predicts plant outcomes while analyzing sensor data for fish health, ensuring quality and timely interventions [92]. Algorithms monitor water parameters, maintaining stable conditions and preventing contamination. Predictive analysis forecasts plant growth, aiding cultivation decisions for consistent production. This integration boosts efficiency and offers sustainable insights for aquaponic ecosystems [91].

4.4. Artificial Intelligence (AI)

AI, employing machine learning and neural networks, analyzes sensor data in aquaponics, optimizing water quality, crop growth, and fish health [93]. It drives data-driven decisions, enhancing efficiency and resource use. AI aids in predictive modeling, disease detection, and system management, boosting productivity and sustainability. It optimizes fish quality and water conditions and predicts plant outcomes while estimating maturity levels [91][93]. Analyzing sensor data, AI guides optimal harvest and breeding times for fish and aids decisions on crop harvest cycles and rotations based on plant growth stages and nutrient absorption.

5. Economic Feasibility, Energy Consumption, and Benefits

5.1. Economic Feasibility

An aquaponic farm with a 76 m3 tilapia fish tank and a 1142 m2 DWC lettuce plant growth bed (LPGB) has an initial venture cost of USD 217,078 [94]. Small UVI systems cost USD 285,134, while large UVI systems cost USD 1,030,536 for aquaponic foundations [95]. The annual net revenues of smaller systems range from USD 4222 to USD 30,761, with IRR and MIRR rates varying from 0 percent to 27 percent [95]. The UVI system [48], with a growing area of 214 m2, could generate USD 110,000 per year by selling only basil, whereas the revenue from selling okra would be only USD 6400. Basil had the highest value per kg (USD 8.80–11.03), and Boston lettuce generated more income per week per m2 (USD 7.50–9.20) than basil (USD 3.96–4.96) due to higher returns and higher planting density. Not all fruit crops, such as melon, zucchini, and cucumber, had a weekly income per m2 above USD 1.32. Morgenstern [96] found that a small-sized aquaponic farm with a 3 m3 European catfish fish tank and a 59 m2 DWC LPGB would require an initial investment cost of EUR 151,468. A medium-sized aquaponic farm with a 10 m3 European catfish fish tank and a 195 m2 DWC LPGB would have an initial investment cost of EUR 304,570. A commercial-scale aquaponic farm with a 300 m3 European catfish fish tank and a 5568 m2 DWC LPGB would have an initial investment cost of EUR 3,705,371. According to Lobillo-Eguíbar [97], aquaponic infrastructure costs range from EUR 2266.27 to EUR 2252.13 for two small-scale aquaponics systems, generating a family farm income per FWU (family work unit) of EUR 3090.41 and EUR 153.50. A total of 62 kg of tilapia and 352 kg of 22 distinct vegetables and fruits were produced, with a typical net farming value-add of EUR 151.3 and EUR 91.34. The results showed positive accounting benefits and negative economic profit when labor costs were included. The level of commoditization was around 44%, allowing for some specific independence.

5.2. Energy Consumption

Energy consumption in aquaponics systems holds immense significance due to its pivotal role in ensuring system functionality and the well-being of aquatic organisms and plants. As per studies, aquaponic systems in the Midwest and Arkansas reflect annual energy costs ranging from USD 5991.06 to USD 7337.04 within total operating expenses [98]. Notably, heating constitutes nearly 50% of these costs, albeit subject to significant variability based on farm location [99][100].
LED lighting stands out in aquaponics for its superior energy efficiency and plant growth promotion compared to other options. Studies highlight LEDs for higher yields, energy savings, and environmental benefits, making them ideal for large-scale aquaponic setups [101][102][103]. Tailored LED treatments have been effective in enhancing plant growth, improving energy efficiency, and boosting specific plant characteristics [104]. Studies note that specific LED combinations, like far-red light in red plus blue LEDs, significantly enhance plant growth in lettuce [105][106]. Optimizing artificial lighting parameters like DLI (daily light integral) and PPFD (photosynthetic photon flux density) play a crucial role in enhancing plant growth and yield [107][108][109]. Utilizing controlled switching frequencies to shift lighting into pulsed modes significantly improves energy efficiency in aquaponics. These customized “light recipes” yield substantial energy savings compared to continuous lighting while maintaining plant characteristics [110][111]. 
The continuous circulation of water is fundamental to aquaponic systems, facilitating the distribution of nutrients essential for plant growth and maintaining optimal conditions for aquatic life. Goddek et al. [11] underscore energy-intensive issues in aquaponics, particularly within indoor systems that consume significant electrical and heating energy, while also emphasizing challenges in nutrient recycling, pathogen control, and supply chain management. However, the operation of pumps required for this circulation demands a significant amount of energy. The need for a consistent and uninterrupted flow of water throughout various system components contributes substantially to overall energy consumption. Energy-efficient pumps reduce your environmental footprint and save you money on energy costs in the long run. In an aquaponics system, where the water pump runs continuously, the impact of energy efficiency is significant. Efficient pumps consume less electricity while delivering the required flow rate, helping you achieve a more sustainable and cost-effective operation. 
Regulating temperatures within an optimal range is crucial for the well-being of both fish and plants in aquaponics. This often involves the use of energy-intensive systems like heaters or air conditioning units, especially in regions with extreme temperature fluctuations. While essential, these systems contribute significantly to the overall energy demands of aquaponic setups.
To address resource conservation, a process engineering approach targets water and energy usage in hydroponics [112]. Integrating renewable energy boosts system ecological performance. Aquaponics holds potential for efficient and sustainable technology, welcoming integration possibilities like biogas and solar power (reference [14]).

5.3. Social, Economic, and Environmental Benefits for Food Security

The integration of agriculture in urban areas brings about social, economic, and environmental advantages, contributing to both food security and sustainable development. It also promotes the growth of cities while fostering scientific and cultural knowledge [113]. From an economic perspective, urban agriculture, including the production of crops, fisheries, and livestock, provides raw food that can be distributed to the city’s residents, maximizing conservation efforts [113]. While this concept had previously posed environmental challenges, it has now evolved into an environmentally friendly strategy within city centers [113]. Aquaponics systems, utilizing the principles of the 4Rs (source, rate, time, and place), play a crucial role in enhancing productivity, stability, and profitability, thereby ensuring food security. The four pillars used to assess and measure the status of food security include food availability, accessibility, utilization, and stability [114]. Evaluating aquaponics’ sustainability reveals that while its infrastructure, electricity usage, and feed pose environmental impacts, this closed-loop system offers a sustainable means of producing fish and plants.
Aquaponics can help achieve food sovereignty goals by providing fresh, healthy, and locally grown food that is secure, satiating, and socially acceptable. The closed-loop system ensures food safety and reduces dependence on imported food, promoting food independence and addressing food insecurity. Aquaponics uses less water than traditional agriculture, reduces the risk of water pollution, and can grow a variety of crops, promoting the safeguarding of natural resources. By increasing access to fresh, healthy, and locally grown food, aquaponics promotes social harmony and reduces the risk of social unrest. It also allows small-scale farmers to have a voice in agricultural policies, promoting democratic oversight and community resilience.

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/w15244310

References

  1. Ibrahim, L.A.; Abu-Hashim, M.; Shaghaleh, H.; Elsadek, E.; Hamad, A.A.; Alhaj Hamoud, Y. A Comprehensive Review of the Multiple Uses of Water in Aquaculture-Integrated Agriculture Based on International and National Experiences. Water 2023, 15, 367.
  2. Elsadek, E. Use of Automatic Control to Improve the Performance of Field Irrigation Systems; Damietta University: Damietta, Egypt, 2018.
  3. Elnemr, M.K.; El-Sheikha, A.M.; Elsadek, E.A. Determination of Optimal Location of Soil Moisture Sensing Devices for Trickle Irrigation Systems. Misr. J. Agric. Eng. 2019, 36, 157–174.
  4. Franz Gouertoumbo, W.; Alhaj Hamoud, Y.; Guo, X.; Shaghaleh, H.; Ali Adam Hamad, A.; Elsadek, E. Wheat Straw Burial Enhances the Root Physiology, Productivity, and Water Utilization Efficiency of Rice under Alternative Wetting and Drying Irrigation. Sustainability 2022, 14, 16394.
  5. Elsadek, E.; Zhang, K.; Mousa, A.; Ezaz, G.T.; Tola, T.L.; Shaghaleh, H.; Hamad, A.A.A.; Alhaj Hamoud, Y. Study on the In-Field Water Balance of Direct-Seeded Rice with Various Irrigation Regimes under Arid Climatic Conditions in Egypt Using the AquaCrop Model. Agronomy 2023, 13, 609.
  6. Abu-hashim, M.; Shaban, K. Deficit irrigation management as strategy to adapt water scarcity-potential application on Mediterranean saline soils. Egypt Soil Sci. 2017, 5, 261–271.
  7. Ali, H.; Ahmed, N.; Abu-hashim, M. Potential effect of irrigation intervals and potassium phthalate on fennel plants grown in semi-arid regions. Egypt. J. Soil Sci. 2020, 60, 83–98.
  8. Smit, B.; Pilifosova, O. Adaptation to Climate Change in the Context of Sustainable Development and Equity. Clim. Chang. Impacts Adapt. Vulnerability 2001, 8, 877.
  9. Zhang, L.; Dabipi, I.K.; Brown, W.L., Jr. Internet of Things Applications for Agriculture. In Internet of Things A to Z; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018; pp. 507–528. ISBN 9781119456735.
  10. Tschirner, M.; Kloas, W. Increasing the Sustainability of Aquaculture Systems: Insects as Alternative Protein Source for Fish Diets. GAIA—Ecol. Perspect. Sci. Soc. 2017, 26, 332–340.
  11. Lee, C.; Wang, Y.-J. Development of a Cloud-Based IoT Monitoring System for Fish Metabolism and Activity in Aquaponics. Aquac. Eng. 2020, 90, 102067.
  12. Lova Raju, K.; Vijayaraghavan, V. IoT Technologies in Agricultural Environment: A Survey. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 2020, 113, 2415–2446.
  13. Yanes, A.R.; Martinez, P.; Ahmad, R. Towards Automated Aquaponics: A Review on Monitoring, IoT, and Smart Systems. J. Cleaner Prod. 2020, 263, 121571.
  14. Kish, Z. Food Sovereignty BT—Encyclopedia of Global Justice; Chatterjee, D.K., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2011; pp. 352–358. ISBN 978-1-4020-9160-5.
  15. Rakocy, J.E. Aquaponics—Integrating Fish and Plant Culture. In Aquaculture Production Systems; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2012; pp. 344–386. ISBN 9781118250105.
  16. Lennard, W.A. Aquaponics: A Nutrient Dynamic Process and the Relationship to Fish Feeds. World Aquac. 2015, 46, 20–23.
  17. Wittman, H. Food Sovereignty: A New Rights Framework for Food and Nature? Environ. Soc. 2011, 2, 87–105.
  18. Goddek, S.; Joyce, A.; Wuertz, S.; Körner, O.; Bläser, I.; Reuter, M.; Keesman, K.J. Decoupled Aquaponics Systems BT—Aquaponics Food Production Systems: Combined Aquaculture and Hydroponic Production Technologies for the Future; Goddek, S., Joyce, A., Kotzen, B., Burnell, G.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 201–229. ISBN 978-3-030-15943-6.
  19. European Parliament & Council of the European Union (EU) 2018/848 Regulation. Organic production and labeling of organic products and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 (30 May). Off. J. Eur. Union OJEU 2018, OJL 150, 1–92.
  20. Joly, A.; Junge, R.; Bardocz, T. Aquaponics Business in Europe: Some Legal Obstacles and Solutions. Ecocycles 2015, 1, 3–5.
  21. Mchunu, N.; Lagerwall, G.; Senzanje, A. Aquaponics in South Africa: Results of a National Survey. Aquac. Reports 2018, 12, 12–19.
  22. BBC. Good Food What Does Organic Mean. Available online: https://www.bbcgoodfood.com/howto/guide/o (accessed on 15 September 2022).
  23. Palm, H.W.; Knaus, U.; Appelbaum, S.; Goddek, S.; Strauch, S.M.; Vermeulen, T.; Haïssam Jijakli, M.; Kotzen, B. Towards Commercial Aquaponics: A Review of Systems, Designs, Scales and Nomenclature. Aquac. Int. 2018, 26, 813–842.
  24. Kloas, W.; Groß, R.; Baganz, D.; Graupner, J.; Monsees, H.; Schmidt, U.; Staaks, G.; Suhl, J.; Tschirner, M.; Wittstock, B.; et al. A New Concept for Aquaponic Systems to Improve Sustainability, Increase Productivity, and Reduce Environmental Impacts. Aquac. Environ. Interact. 2015, 7, 179–192.
  25. Thorarinsdottir, R. Aquaponics Guidelines; University of Iceland: Haskolaprent, Iceland, 2015; p. 68.
  26. Hu, Z.; Lee, J.W.; Chandran, K.; Kim, S.; Brotto, A.C.; Khanal, S.K. Effect of Plant Species on Nitrogen Recovery in Aquaponics. Bioresour. Technol. 2015, 188, 92–98.
  27. Delaide, B.; Delhaye, G.; Dermience, M.; Gott, J.; Soyeurt, H.; Jijakli, M.H. Plant and Fish Production Performance, Nutrient Mass Balances, Energy and Water Use of the PAFF Box, a Small-Scale Aquaponic System. Aquac. Eng. 2017, 78, 130–139.
  28. Monsees, H.; Kloas, W.; Wuertz, S. Decoupled Systems on Trial: Eliminating Bottlenecks to Improve Aquaponic Processes. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0183056.
  29. de Graaf, F.; Goddek, S. Smarthoods: Aquaponics Integrated Microgrids. In Aquaponics Food Production Systems; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 379–392.
  30. Lekang, O. (Ed.) Aquaculture Engineering, 1st ed.; Blackwell Publishing Ltd.: Hong Kong, China, 2007.
  31. Wongkiew, S.; Hu, Z.; Chandran, K.; Lee, J.W.; Khanal, S.K. Nitrogen Transformations in Aquaponic Systems: A Review. Aquac. Eng. 2017, 76, 9–19.
  32. Ngo Thuy Diem, T.; Konnerup, D.; Brix, H. Effects of Recirculation Rates on Water Quality and Oreochromis Niloticus Growth in Aquaponic Systems. Aquac. Eng. 2017, 78, 95–104.
  33. Zou, Y.; Hu, Z.; Zhang, J.; Xie, H.; Liang, S.; Wang, J.; Yan, R. Attempts to Improve Nitrogen Utilization Efficiency of Aquaponics through Nitrifies Addition and Filler Gradation. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2016, 23, 6671–6679.
  34. Maucieri, C.; Nicoletto, C.; van Os, E.; Anseeuw, D.; van Havermaet, R.; Junge, R. Hydroponic Technologies BT—Aquaponics Food Production Systems: Combined Aquaculture and Hydroponic Production Technologies for the Future; Goddek, S., Joyce, A., Kotzen, B., Burnell, G.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 77–110. ISBN 978-3-030-15943-6.
  35. Lennard, W.A.; Leonard, B. V A Comparison of Three Different Hydroponic Sub-Systems (Gravel Bed, Floating and Nutrient Film Technique) in an Aquaponic Test System. Aquac. Int. 2006, 14, 539–550.
  36. Maucieri, C.; Forchino, A.A.; Nicoletto, C.; Junge, R.; Pastres, R.; Sambo, P.; Borin, M. Life Cycle Assessment of a Micro Aquaponic System for Educational Purposes Built Using Recovered Material. J. Cleaner Prod. 2018, 172, 3119–3127.
  37. Pattillo, A. An Overview of Aquaponic Systems: Aquaculture Components; NCRAC Technical Bulletins; IOWA State University: Ames, IA, USA, 2017; pp. 1–18.
  38. Ebeling, J.M.; Timmons, M.B. Recirculating Aquaculture; Cayuga Aqua Ventures: Ithaca, NY, USA, 2010; ISBN 0971264627.
  39. Rakocy, J.E.; Masser, M.P.; Losordo, T.M. Recirculating Aquaculture Tank Production Systems: Aquaponics-Integrating Fish and Plant Culture; Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service. Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources; Oklahoma State University: Stillwater, OK, USA, 2016.
  40. Love, D.C.; Uhl, M.S.; Genello, L. Energy and Water Use of a Small-Scale Raft Aquaponics System in Baltimore, Maryland, United States. Aquac. Eng. 2015, 68, 19–27.
  41. Oladimeji, A.S.; Olufeagba, S.O.; Ayuba, V.O.; Sololmon, S.G.; Okomoda, V.T. Effects of Different Growth Media on Water Quality and Plant Yield in a Catfish-Pumpkin Aquaponics System. J. King Saud Univ. Sci. 2020, 32, 60–66.
  42. Ru, D.; Liu, J.; Hu, Z.; Zou, Y.; Jiang, L.; Cheng, X.; Lv, Z. Improvement of Aquaponic Performance through Micro- and Macro-Nutrient Addition. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 16328–16335.
  43. Obirikorang, K.A.; Sekey, W.; Gyampoh, B.A.; Ashiagbor, G.; Asante, W. Aquaponics for Improved Food Security in Africa: A Review. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 5, 705549.
  44. Saha, S.; Monroe, A.; Day, M.R. Growth, Yield, Plant Quality and Nutrition of Basil (Ocimum Basilicum L.) under Soilless Agricultural Systems. Ann. Agric. Sci. 2016, 61, 181–186.
  45. International Aquaculture Feed Formulation Database (IAFFD). Feed Ingredient Composition Database. 2018. Available online: https://www.iaffd.com/home.html?v=4.01 (accessed on 3 March 2022).
  46. Li, C.; Zhang, B.; Luo, P.; Shi, H.; Li, L.; Gao, Y.; Lee, C.T.; Zhang, Z.; Wu, W.-M. Performance of a Pilot-Scale Aquaponics System Using Hydroponics and Immobilized Biofilm Treatment for Water Quality Control. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 208, 274–284.
  47. Ibrahim, L.A.; Shaghaleh, H.; Abu-Hashim, M.; Elsadek, E.A.; Hamoud, Y.A. Exploring the Integration of Rice and Aquatic Species: Insights from Global and National Experiences. Water 2023, 15, 2750.
  48. Bailey, D.S.; Ferrarezi, R.S. Valuation of Vegetable Crops Produced in the UVI Commercial Aquaponic System. Aquac. Rep. 2017, 7, 77–82.
  49. Love, D.C.; Fry, J.P.; Li, X.; Hill, E.S.; Genello, L.; Semmens, K.; Thompson, R.E. Commercial Aquaponics Production and Profitability: Findings from an International Survey. Aquaculture 2015, 435, 67–74.
  50. Delaide, B.; Goddek, S.; Gott, J.; Soyeurt, H.; Jijakli, M. Lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. Var. Sucrine) Growth Performance in Complemented Aquaponic Solution Outperforms Hydroponics. Water 2016, 8, 467.
  51. Rakocy, J.; Shultz, R.C.; Bailey, D.S.; Thoman, E.S. Aquaponic Production of Tilapia and Basil: Comparing a Batch and Staggered Cropping System. Acta Hortic. 2004, 648, 63–69.
  52. Adler, P.R.; Harper, J.K.; Wade, E.M.; Takeda, F.; Summerfelt, S.T. Economic Analysis of an Aquaponic System for the Integrated Production of Rainbow Trout and Plants. Int. J. Recirc. Aquac. 2000, 1, 15–34.
  53. Knaus, U.; Palm, H.W. Effects of the Fish Species Choice on Vegetables in Aquaponics under Spring-Summer Conditions in Northern Germany (Mecklenburg Western Pomerania). Aquaculture 2017, 473, 62–73.
  54. Estrada-Perez, N.; Hernandez-Llamas, A.; Ruiz-Velazco, M.J.; Zavala-Leal, I.; Romero-Bañuelos, C.A.; Cruz-Crespo, E.; Juárez-Rossete, C.; Domínguez-Ojeda, D.; Campos-Mendoza, A. Stochastic Modelling of Aquaponic Production of Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) with Lettuce (Lactuca sativa) and Cucumber (Cucumis sativus). Aquac. Res. 2018, 49, 3723–3734.
  55. Goddek, S.; Vermeulen, T. Comparison of Lactuca Sativa Growth Performance in Conventional and RAS-Based Hydroponic Systems. Aquac. Int. 2018, 26, 1377–1386.
  56. Buzby, K.M.; Lin, L.-S. Scaling Aquaponic Systems: Balancing Plant Uptake with Fish Output. Aquac. Eng. 2014, 63, 39–44.
  57. Pinho, S.M.; Molinari, D.; de Mello, G.L.; Fitzsimmons, K.M.; Coelho Emerenciano, M.G. Effluent from a Biofloc Technology (BFT) Tilapia Culture on the Aquaponics Production of Different Lettuce Varieties. Ecol. Eng. 2017, 103, 146–153.
  58. Maucieri, C.; Nicoletto, C.; Junge, R.; Schmautz, Z.; Sambo, P.; Borin, M. Hydroponic Systems and Water Management in Aquaponics: A Review. Ital. J. Agron. 2017, 11, 1–11.
  59. Pinho, S.M.; de Mello, G.L.; Fitzsimmons, K.M.; Emerenciano, M.G.C. Integrated Production of Fish (Pacu Piaractus Mesopotamicus and Red Tilapia Oreochromis Sp.) with Two Varieties of Garnish (Scallion and Parsley) in Aquaponics System. Aquac. Int. 2018, 26, 99–112.
  60. Somerville, C.; Cohen, M.; Pantanella, E.; Stankus, A.; Lovatelli, A. Small-Scale Aquaponic Food Production: Integrated Fish and Plant Farming. FAO Fish. Aquac. Tech. Pap. 2014, 589, 1–288.
  61. Schmautz, Z.; Graber, A.; Jaenicke, S.; Goesmann, A.; Junge, R.; Smits, T.H.M. Microbial Diversity in Different Compartments of an Aquaponics System. Arch. Microbiol. 2017, 199, 613–620.
  62. Bartelme, R.P.; McLellan, S.L.; Newton, R.J. Freshwater Recirculating Aquaculture System Operations Drive Biofilter Bacterial Community Shifts around a Stable Nitrifying Consortium of Ammonia-Oxidizing Archaea and Comammox Nitrospira. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 8, 101.
  63. Gilles, S.; Ismiño, R.; Sánchez, H.; David, F.; Núñez, J.; Dugué, R.; Darias, M.J.; Römer, U. An Integrated Closed System for Fish-Plankton Aquaculture in Amazonian Fresh Water. Animal 2014, 8, 1319–1328.
  64. Zou, Y.; Hu, Z.; Zhang, J.; Xie, H.; Guimbaud, C.; Fang, Y. Effects of PH on Nitrogen Transformations in Media-Based Aquaponics. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 210, 81–87.
  65. da Silva Cerozi, B.; Fitzsimmons, K. Use of Bacillus Spp. to Enhance Phosphorus Availability and Serve as a Plant Growth Promoter in Aquaponics Systems. Sci. Hortic. 2016, 211, 277–282.
  66. Odema, M.; Adly, I.; Wahba, A.; Ragai, H. Smart Aquaponics System for Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT). In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Systems and Informatics 2017, Cairo, Egypt, 9–11 September 2017; Hassanien, A., Shaalan, K., Gaber, T., Tolba, M., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume 639, pp. 844–854.
  67. Suhl, J.; Dannehl, D.; Kloas, W.; Baganz, D.; Jobs, S.; Scheibe, G.; Schmidt, U. Advanced Aquaponics: Evaluation of Intensive Tomato Production in Aquaponics vs. Conventional Hydroponics. Agric. Water Manage. 2016, 178, 335–344.
  68. Sace, C.F.; Fitzsimmons, K.M. Vegetable Production in a Recirculating Aquaponic System Using Nile Tilapia (Oreochromis Niloticus) with and without Freshwater Prawn (Macrobrachium Rosenbergii). Acad. J. Agric. Res. 2013, 1, 236–250.
  69. Wada, T. Theory and Technology to Control the Nutrient Solution of Hydroponics. In Plant Factory Using Artificial Light; Anpo, M., Fukuda, H., Wada, T., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 5–14. ISBN 978-0-12-813973-8.
  70. Stone, N.M.; Thomforde, H.K. Understanding Your Fish Pond Water Analysis Report. Available online: https://www.uaex.uada.edu/publications/PDF/FSA-9090.pdf (accessed on 14 June 2022).
  71. Bhatnagar, A.; Devi, P. Water Quality Guidelines for the Management of Pond Fish Culture. Int. J. Environ. Sci. 2013, 3, 1980–2009.
  72. Goddek, S.; Körner, O. A Fully Integrated Simulation Model of Multi-Loop Aquaponics: A Case Study for System Sizing in Different Environments. Agric. Syst. 2019, 171, 143–154.
  73. Shaalan, M.; El-Mahdy, M.; Saleh, M.; El-Matbouli, M. Aquaculture in Egypt: Insights on the Current Trends and Future Perspectives for Sustainable Development. Rev. Fish. Sci. Aquac. 2018, 26, 99–110.
  74. Wang, D.; Zhao, J.; Huang, L.; Xu, D. Design of A Smart Monitoring and Control System for Aquaponics Based on OpenWrt BT. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Information Engineering for Mechanics and Materials, Huhhot, China, 25–26 July 2015; Atlantis Press: Amsterdam, Netherlands; 2015; pp. 937–942.
  75. Pasha, A.K.; Mulyana, E.; Hidayat, C.; Ramdhani, M.A.; Kurahman, O.T.; Adhipradana, M. System Design of Controlling and Monitoring on Aquaponic Based on Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 2018 4th International Conference on Wireless and Telematics (ICWT), Nusa Dua, Indonesia, 12–13 July 2018; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 1–5.
  76. Aishwarya, K.S.; Harish, M.; Prathibhashree, S.; Panimozhi, K. Survey on IoT Based Automated Aquaponics Gardening Approaches. In Proceedings of the 2018 Second International Conference on Inventive Communication and Computational Technologies (ICICCT), Coimbatore, India, 20–21 April 2018; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 1495–1500.
  77. Zaini, A.; Kurniawan, A.; Herdhiyanto, A.D. Internet of Things for Monitoring and Controlling Nutrient Film Technique (NFT) Aquaponic. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Computer Engineering, Network and Intelligent Multimedia (CENIM), Surabaya, Indonesia, 26–27 November 2018; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 167–171.
  78. Shaout, A.; Scott, S.G. IoT Fuzzy Logic Aquaponics Monitoring and Control Hardware Real-Time System. In Proceedings of the Proceedings of the International Arab Conference on Information Technology, Yassmine Hammamet, Tunisia, 22–24 December 2017; pp. 22–24.
  79. Saaid, M.F.; Fadhil, N.S.M.; Ali, M.S.A.M.; Noor, M.Z.H. Automated Indoor Aquaponic Cultivation Technique. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 3rd International Conference on System Engineering and Technology, Shah Alam, Malaysia, 19–20 August 2013; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 285–289.
  80. Ahmad, R.; Tichadou, S.; Hascoet, J.-Y. A Knowledge-Based Intelligent Decision System for Production Planning. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2017, 89, 1717–1729.
  81. Kumar, N.H.; Baskaran, S.; Hariraj, S.; Krishnan, V. An Autonomous Aquaponics System Using 6LoWPAN Based WSN. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 4th International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud Workshops (FiCloudW), Vienna, Austria, 22–24 August 2016; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 125–132.
  82. Aceto, G.; Persico, V.; Pescapé, A. A survey on information and communication technologies for Industry 4.0: State-of-the-art, taxonomies, perspectives, and challenges. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor. 2019, 21, 3467–3501.
  83. Tyson, R.V.; Danyluk, M.D.; Simonne, E.H.; Treadwell, D.D. Sustainable aquaponic vegetable and fish co-production. Proc Fla. State Hortic. Soc. 2012, 125, 381–385.
  84. Lu, J.-Y.; Chang, C.-L.; Kuo, Y.-F. Monitoring Growth Rate of Lettuce Using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks. In Proceedings of the Agricultural and Food Sciences, Computer Science, Environmental Science, Boston, MA, USA, 7–10 July 2019; American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers: St. Joseph, MI, USA, 2019; p. 1.
  85. Manju, M.; Karthik, V.; Hariharan, S.; Sreekar, B. Real Time Monitoring of the Environmental Parameters of an Aquaponic System Based on Internet of Things. In Proceedings of the 2017 Third International Conference on Science Technology Engineering & Management (ICONSTEM), Chennai, India, 23–24 March 2017; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 943–948.
  86. Dutta, A.; Dahal, P.; Prajapati, R.; Tamang, P.; Kumar, E.S. IoT Based Aquaponics Monitoring System. In Proceedings of the 1st KEC Conference Proceedings, Lalitpur, Nepal, 27 September 2018; Volume 1, pp. 75–80.
  87. Elsokah, M.M.; Sakah, M. Next Generation of Smart Aquaponics with Internet of Things Solutions. In Proceedings of the 2019 19th International Conference on Sciences and Techniques of Automatic Control and Computer Engineering (STA), Sousse, Tunisia, 24–26 March 2019; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 106–111.
  88. Sreelekshmi, B.; Madhusoodanan, K.N. Automated Aquaponics System. In Emerging Trends in Engineering, Science and Technology for Society, Energy and Environment; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2018; pp. 719–724.
  89. Eneh, A.H.; Udanor, C.N.; Ossai, N.I.; Aneke, S.O.; Ugwoke, P.O.; Obayi, A.A.; Ugwuishiwu, C.H.; Okereke, G.E. Towards an improved internet of things sensors data quality for a smart aquaponics system yield prediction. MethodsX 2023, 11, 102436.
  90. Karimanzira, D.; Rauschenbach, T. An Intelligent Management System for Aquaponics. Automatisierungstechnik 2021, 69, 345–350.
  91. Abbasi, R.; Martinez, P.; Ahmad, R. An ontology model to represent aquaponics 4.0 system’s knowledge. Inf. Process Agric. 2022, 9, 514–532.
  92. Wei, Y.; Li, W.; An, D.; Li, D.; Jiao, Y.; Wei, Q. Equipment and Intelligent Control System in Aquaponics: A Review. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 169306.
  93. Abbasi, R.; Martinez, P.; Ahmad, R. Crop diagnostic system: A robust disease detection and management system for leafy green crops grown in an aquaponics facility. Artif. Intell. Agric. 2023, 10, 1–12.
  94. Tokunaga, K.; Tamaru, C.; Ako, H.; Leung, P. Economics of Small-Scale Commercial Aquaponics in Hawai‘I. J. World Aquac. Soc. 2015, 46, 20–32.
  95. Engle, C.R. Economics of Aquaponics; No. 5006; Southern Regional Aquaculture Center Publication: Stoneville, MS, USA, 2015.
  96. Morgenstern, R.; Lorleberg, W.; Biernatzki, R.; Boelhauve, M.; Braun, J.; Haberlah-Korr, V. Pilotstudie “Nachhaltige Aquaponik-Erzeugung Für Nordrhein-Westfalen.” Fachhochschule Südwestfalen, Soest; Fachhochschule Südwestfalen: Iserlohn, Germany, 2017; ISBN 978-3-940956-66-8.
  97. Lobillo-Eguíbar, J.; Fernández-Cabanás, V.M.; Bermejo, L.A.; Pérez-Urrestarazu, L. Economic Sustainability of Small-Scale Aquaponic Systems for Food Self-Production. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1468.
  98. Goddek, S.; Delaide, B.; Mankasingh, U.; Ragnarsdottir, K.; Jijakli, H.; Thorarinsdottir, R. Challenges of Sustainable and Commercial Aquaponics. Sustainability 2015, 7, 4199–4224.
  99. Asciuto, A.; Schimmenti, E.; Cottone, C.; Borsellino, V. A Financial Feasibility Study of an Aquaponic System in a Mediterranean Urban Context. Urban For. Urban Green. 2019, 38, 397–402.
  100. Joyce, A.; Goddek, S.; Kotzen, B.; Wuertz, S. Aquaponics: Closing the Cycle on Limited Water, Land and Nutrient Resources. In Aquaponics Food Production Systems; Goddek, S., Joyce, A., Kotzen, B., Burnell, G.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 19–34. ISBN 978-3-030-15943-6.
  101. Paucek, I.; Appolloni, E.; Pennisi, G.; Quaini, S.; Gianquinto, G.; Orsini, F. LED lighting systems for horticulture: Business growth and global distribution. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7516.
  102. Singh, D.; Basu, C.; Meinhardt-Wollweber, M.; Roth, D. LEDs for energy efficient greenhouse lighting Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 49, 139–147.
  103. Yan, Z.; He, D.; Niu, G.; Zhou, Q.; Qu, Y. Growth, nutritional quality, and energy use efficiency in two lettuce cultivars as influenced by white plus red versus red plus blue leds. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2020, 13, 33–40.
  104. Gao, W.; He, D.; Ji, F.; Zhang, S.; Zheng, J. Effects of Daily Light Integral and LED Spectrum on Growth and Nutritional Quality of Hydroponic Spinach. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1082.
  105. Jin, W.; Urbina, J.L.; Heuvelink, E.; Marcelis, L.F.M. Adding Far-Red to Red-Blue Light-Emitting Diode Light Promotes Yield of Lettuce at Different Planting Densities. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 11, 609977.
  106. Kong, Y.; Nemali, A.; Mitchell, C.; Nemali, K. Spectral quality of light can affect energy consumption and energy-use efficiency of electrical lighting in indoor lettuce farming. HortScience 2019, 54, 865–872.
  107. Huber, B.M.; Louws, F.J.; Hernández, R. Impact of Different Daily Light Integrals and Carbon Dioxide Concentrations on the Growth, Morphology, and Production Efficiency of Tomato Seedlings. Front. Plant Sci. 2021, 12, 615853.
  108. Yan, Z.; He, D.; Niu, G.; Zhou, Q.; Qu, Y. Growth, nutritional quality, and energy use efficiency of hydroponic lettuce as influenced by daily light integrals exposed to white versus white plus red light-emitting diodes. HortScience 2019, 54, 1737–1744.
  109. Zheng, J.F.; He, D.X.; Ji, F. Effects of light intensity and photoperiod on runner plant propagation of hydroponic strawberry transplants under LED lighting. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2019, 12, 26–31.
  110. Olvera-Gonzalez, E.; Escalante-Garcia, N.; Myers, D.; Ampim, P.; Obeng, E.; Alaniz-Lumbreras, D.; Castaño, V. Pulsed led-lighting as an alternative energy savings technique for vertical farms and plant factories. Energies 2012, 14, 1603.
  111. Gillani, S.A.; Abbasi, R.; Martinez, P.; Ahmad, R. Review on Energy Efficient Artificial Illumination in Aquaponics. Cleaner Circ. Bioecon. 2022, 2, 100015.
  112. Lund, H. The implementation of renewable energy systems. Lessons learned from the Danish case. Energy 2010, 35, 4003–4009.
  113. Halim, J. Akuaponik Pekarangan; Penebar Swadaya: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2018.
  114. Faber, M.; Witten, C.; Drimie, S. Community-Based Agricultural Interventions in the Context of Food and Nutrition Security in South Africa. S. Afr. J. Clin. Nutr. 2011, 24, 21–30.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
Video Production Service
Feedback