Design Publications International Inc. 401 E Sonterra Blvd. Sté. 375 San Antonio, TX. 78258 info@dpintertnatinonalinc.com Office: +210 5043642 Office in Mexico: (+ 52) (33) 8000 0578 - Ext: 8578
Aquaculture Magazine (ISSN 0199-1388) is published bimontly, by Design Publications International Inc. All rights reserved.
www.aquaculturemag.com
editor`s comments
* Marco Linné Unzueta Associate Editor
Sustainable Development of Competitive Aquaculture
Today, the international community faces multiple interrelated challenges, ranging from the consequences of the current financial and economic crisis to increased vulnerability to climate change and extreme weather events. At the same time, it must address the pressing needs related to food and nutrition for a growing population with finite natural resources.
Aquaculture products, whether from fishing or aquaculture, are among the most traded foods worldwide. Global fisheries and aquaculture production reached a historic high in 2022, with 223.2 million tons, valued at USD 424 billion. Aquaculture accounted for 51% of this total production of aquatic animals, surpassing capture fisheries for the first time, according to the FAO (2024).
Due to the variety of production methods and their locations in the sector, especially in fishing and farming, it’s important to focus on improving biotechnologies, including artificial intelligence. This can help boost production that can substitute for natural ecosystem production and enhance global food security. It is also necessary to promote demand for other species, such as those native to
each region, as ingredients in aquaculture foods, which would increase the amount of protein available for human consumption.
In the field of aquaculture, marketing, economics, financial viability, and risk analysis are considered technological barriers directly related to commercial competitiveness. Therefore, it is essential to consider, both regionally and globally, the answers to questions such as:
» What technology is being considered?
» What are the short-, medium-, and long-term opportunities for technological innovation that should be taken into account?
» What are the technological obstacles to innovation?
» What is the economic importance of innovation that can improve the competitiveness of aquaculture?
» How can improvements in performance be measured, and how can these measurements be part of the problem of technological barriers?
» What are the possible solutions to technological barriers?
Current innovation technologies must be strengthened to enable sustainable and competitive aquaculture.
This involves overcoming numerous technical, regulatory, and economic barriers to innovation and commercial development. While technological innovation and measurement needs represent major challenges, a conducive environment must also be considered, including regulatory simplification and stability, the availability of investment capital for aquaculture companies, and the overall political environment, for the successful development of aquaculture.
In addition, value chains (now called value networks) should be evaluated and strengthened and considered as the evolution of supply chains. The emergence of “value chains” as an organizational structure reflects the continuous evolution of the market economy and represents a marked change in the behavior of organizational strategies, with the aim of satisfying specific long-term market objectives and achieving mutual benefits for all “links” in the chain.
This will enable companies to have technological, organizational, social, and institutional benchmarks corresponding to international best practices as a means of generating the necessary momentum for modernization in each productive sector.
Organizadores:
Organizadores Locales:
Plastic-Lined Ponds and Eco-Aquaculture Systems Had Lower CO2 Emissions than Earthen Aquaculture Ponds
* By Aquaculture Magazine Editorial Team
Estuaries and coastal wetlands, positioned between ocean and land, are major hotspots for carbon emissions. Annual carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from estuarine waters are estimated to reach 0.25 petagrams of CO2-carbon (Pg CO2-C), making them significant contributors to atmospheric CO2. In recent years, many estuarine and coastal zones have been reclaimed for aquaculture ponds to meet the growing demand for fishery products. However, this rapid development has intensified environmental challenges, particularly greenhouse gas emissions.
China currently has the largest global coverage of aquaculture ponds, with an estimated 15,633 km2 along its coast. The use of feed, fertilizers, and high stocking densities contributes to nutrient and carbon accumulation in pond waters and sediments. Elevated organic loads can increase subsequent CO2 release into the atmosphere. Emissions vary by aquaculture systems, site, and management practices, yet empirical data remain limited. Most previous research has concentrated on earthen aquaculture ponds (EAP), while systems such as plastic-lined aquaculture ponds (PLAP) and mangrove wetland ecoaquaculture systems (MWEAS) have received little attention.
Coastal aquaculture ponds typically rely on seawater from nearby coats, where salinity and nutrient levels differ by region. Some evidence indicates that higher salinity ponds release less CO2 and can even function as carbon sinks, whereas other studies suggest that nutrient-rich, high-salinity waters may stimulate ecosystem respiration, thus enhancing CO2 emissions.
This study investigates CO2 emission fluxes in three aquaculture system types within an estuarine area in Guangxi Province (Zhuang Autonomous Region), South China: EAP, PLAP, and MWEAS. The research objectives are twofold: first, to quantify CO2 emission fluxes and their temporal variations across farming stages in these three systems; and second, to
Estuaries and coastal wetlands are critical carbon hotspots, releasing vast amounts of CO2 annually. In China, aquaculture expansion has transformed these ecosystems, but also intensified greenhouse gas emissions. Earthen aquaculture ponds, plastic-lined ponds, and mangrove wetland ecoaquaculture systems present contrasting impacts on carbon fluxes. Understanding how salinity, nutrient dynamics, and systems design influence CO2 emissions is key to advancing sustainable coastal aquaculture management.
evaluate the influence of salinity and other environmental parameters on CO2 emissions.
Two hypotheses are proposed:
» CO2 flux differs significantly among the three systems, with PLAP and MWEAS exhibiting lower emissions compared to EAP; and
» Higher salinity reduces CO2 emission fluxes from estuarine aquaculture ponds.
By comparing these systems under varying environmental conditions, the study aims to provide insights into the role of aquaculture practices in regulating carbon dynamics and contributing to sustainable management of coastal ecosystems.
Material and Methods
This study was carried out at Zhulin Farm (21.45° N, 109.30° E), located at the mouth of the Fucheng River in Beihai City, Guangxi, South China. The area has a subtropical marine monsoon climate with an average annual temperature of 17.2°C and rainfall of 1,428.2 mm. Seawater salinity averages 30% but fluctuates seasonally. The landscape includes mangrove wetlands, reservoirs, ditches, and aquaculture ponds, mainly established by clearing wetland vegetation.
The aquaculture systems investigated were EAP, PLAP, and MWEAS. For sampling, Three EAPs, three PLAPs, and two MWEASs were selected. Each EAP and PLAP had three sampling points, while MWEAS had five. Sampling was conducted during different farming stages - June (initial), September (growth), and December (final) of 2021, between 9:00 and 11:00 a.m. Carbon dioxide (CO2) emission fluxes were measured with the floating chamber method.
Results
Variations in environmental parameters
Environmental parameters varied significantly between system types (p < 0.05), except for water temperature (p > 0.05). Water in the PLAP had a higher pH (8.60 ± 0.48) than EAP (8.47 ± 0.65) and MWEAS (8.27 ± 0.23) (p < 0.05). The average total phosphorus (TP) and c concentrations in MWEAS (TP: 0.27 ± 0.06 mg L−1, PO43−: 0.11 ± 0.03 mg L−1) and PLAP (TP: 0.29 ± 0.09 mg L−1, PO43−: 0.19 ± 0.06 mg L−1) were significantly higher than those in EAP (TP: 0.09 ± 0.01 mg L−1, PO43−: 0.04 ± 0.01 mg L−1) (p < 0.01). There were temporal changes in the environmental parameters, with higher phosphorus (P) nutrient concentration in the initial stage and higher pH level in the final stage (p < 0.01).
Variations in Chlorophyll-α concentrations
Chlorophyll-α (Chl-α) concentration ranged from 21.84 to 98.28 μg L−1 in EAP, 32.76 to 333.06 μg L−1 in PLAP, and 24.57 to 185.64 μg L−1 in MWEAS (Figure 1a). Compared to EAP (59.89 ± 20.68 μg L−1), the average Chl-α concentrations in PLAP (109.53 ± 91.29 μg L −1) and MWEAS (117.34 ± 42.04 μg L−1) were significantly higher (p < 0.01). In terms of farming stages, all system types exhibited a similar temporal pattern, with Chl-α concentration being significantly higher in the initial stage than in the growth and final stages (p < 0.01).
Variations in CO2 emission flux
Significant variations in CO2 emission flux were observed between system types (p < 0.01) (Figure 1b). CO2 emission flux ranged from 2.76 to 19.30 mg m−2 h−1 in EAP, − 27.28 to 12.39 mg m−2 h−1 in PLAP, and − 17.78 to 14.18 mg m−2 h−1 in MWEAS. On average, EAP served as a source of atmospheric CO2 (8.96 ± 4.88 mg m−2 h−1), while PLAP (− 0.61 ± 12.4 mg m−2 h−1) and MWEAS (− 0.41 ± 9.03 mg m−2 h−1) acted as sinks (p < 0.01). Across the different farming stages, PLAP and MWEAS functioned mostly as carbon sinks in the initial stage, with average values of − 16.60 ± 6.78 and − 10.87 ± 6.34 mg m−2 h−1 re-
spectively, which substantially offset their CO2 emissions in the subsequent farming stages (Figure 1b).
Effects of environmental parameters on CO2 emission flux
Relationships between CO2 emission flux and environmental parameters are presented in Figure 2. In general, CO2 emission flux from these aquaculture systems were significantly and positively correlated with water temperature and DOC concentration (p < 0.05), while negatively with salinity, phosphorus concentrations (TP and PO43− ), and Chl-α concentration (p < 0.05).
Structural equation model (SEM) considering the effect of system type and farming stage explained 76% and 88% of the variations in Chl-a concentration and CO2 emission flux, respectively. The standardized total effect (STE) indicated that temperature changes had the greatest impact on CO2 emission flux (STE = 0.78), followed by TP (STE = 0.69), farming stage (STE = 0.45), Chl-α concentration (STE = 0.39) and system type (STE = 0.36). Based on standardized direct effects (SDE), TP (SDE = 0.44), Chl-α concentration (SDE = 0.39) and
temperature (SDE = 0.36) had significant direct effects on CO2 emission flux.
Discussion
The balance between photosynthesis and respiration largely determines carbon dioxide (CO2) emission flux in aquatic ecosystems. In this study, plastic-lined aquaculture ponds (PLAP) and mangrove wetland ecoaquaculture systems (MWEAS) supported higher phytoplankton biomass than earthen aquaculture ponds (EAP); as indicated by Chlorophyll-α
Estuaries and coastal wetlands, positioned between ocean and land, are major hotspots for carbon emissions.
(Chl-α) concentration nearly twice those in EAP (Figure 1a). CO2 emission flux was negatively correlated with Chl-α, suggesting that phytoplankton photosynthesis reduced CO2 levels, leading to net absorption in PLAP and MWEAS. Phosphorus availability reinforced this effect, with total phosphorus (TP) and phosphate (PO43-) positively related to Chl-α and negatively to CO2 flux (Figure 2).
PLAP exhibited significantly lower emissions than EAP due to structural differences. The plastic liner limited sediment-water interactions, restricting organic matter mineralization and subsequent CO2 release, Moreover, PLAP showed more efficient feed utilization and reduced dissolved organic carbon (DOC), which was positively correlated with CO2 emissions . MWEAS further benefited from mangrove vegetation, particularly Kandelia obovate, whose roots secrete tannins and polyphenols that inhibit microbial decomposition, slowing sediment organic matter breakdown and reducing emissions.
CO2 flux also varied across farming stages, following a consistent trend: growth stage > final stage > initial stage (Figure 1b). Higher water temperature (WT) during the growth stage increased respiration and decomposition, while greater feed input added organic substrates, both boosting CO2 production (Figure 2a, 2b). Interestingly, net CO2 absorption occurred in PLAP and MWEAS at the initial stage despite temperatures above 25°C, likely due to optimal conditions for phytoplankton growth, which peaked in Chl-α concentration before declining as temperature surpassed the threshold for productivity.
The overall fluxes observed (- 27.28 to 19.30 mg m-2 h-1; mean 2.54 ± 1.11 mg m-2 h-1) were lower than in nearby freshwater and brackish systems but higher than in high-salinity ponds. A clear negative relationship between salinity and CO2 flux was found indicating that higher salinity suppresses microbial metabolism
A clear negative relationship between salinity and CO2 flux was found indicating that higher salinity suppresses microbial metabolism and enhances carbon retention.
and enhances carbon retention. This finding aligns with national emission reduction strategies, suggesting salinity management, plastic liners, and eco-aquaculture practices as effective mitigation measures.
Limitations include the absence of measurements during non-farming stages and nighttime, as well as limited insights into microbial mechanisms. Addressing these gaps will improve future evaluations of aquaculture’s role in carbon cycling and its potential emission reduction.
Conclusions
When you compare CO2 emission flux from three aquaculture systems: earthen aquaculture ponds (EAP), plastic-lined aquaculture ponds (PLAP), and mangrove wetland ecoaquaculture systems (MWEAS), you
will find that PLAP and MWEAS act as net CO2 sinks during the initial farming stage. This is mainly due to higher primary productivity and lower levels of organic substrate. However, as farming progresses, both systems shift toward net CO2 emissions, similar to traditional earthen ponds.
Overall, you can expect PLAP and MWEAS to function as CO2 sinks, while EAP will remain a CO2 source. By integrating high-salinity water into your coastal aquaculture management, you can further reduce CO2 emissions, since elevated salinity slows down organic matter degradation. Implementing plastic liners, adopting ecological aquaculture systems, and managing with high-salinity water provide you with effective strategies to mitigate CO2 emissions in aquaculture operations.
This is a summarized version developed by the editorial team of Aquaculture Magazine based on the review article titled “PLASTIC-LINED PONDS AND ECO-AQUACULTURE SYSTEMS HAD LOWER CO2 EMISSIONS THAN EARTHEN AQUACULTURE PONDS)” developed by: MIN LV - Shaoyang University and Fujian Normal University; ZHINAN SU AND GUANGLONG QIU -Guangxi Academy of Sciences; KAM W. TANG - Texas A&M University: YAN HONG, JIAFANG HUANG, WANYI ZHU AND PING YANGSchool of Geographical Sciences; YIFEI ZHANG - Institute of Changjiang Water Environment and Ecological Security; YINGYI CHEN - Wuhan Regional Climate Center; HONG YANG - University of Reading. The original article, including tables and figures, was published on JULY 2024, through JOURNAL OF HIDROLOGY. The full version can be accessed online through this link: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2024.132601
This informative version of the original article is sponsored by: REEF INDUSTRIES INC.
A Review of the Latest Advances in Aquaculture Nutrition Research
From fishmeal dependence to molecular nutrition, aquaculture has transformed over two decades, tripling production while cutting feed ratios. Today, the sector faces the challenge of sustainable growth: replacing scarce ingredients, reducing emissions, and harnessing biotechnology. The future lies in precision diets, innovative proteins, and AI-driven solutions for global food security.
*By Aquaculture Magazine Editorial Team
Over the last two decades, aquaculture has achieved major advances in precision feeding and farming technology, boosting production from 42 million tons in 2002 to 130.9 million
tons in 2022. Since feed represents nearly two-thirds of production costs, improved nutritional knowledge has been essential. Feed conversion ratios have dropped from 1.8–3 to 1.2–1.8, reflecting greater efficiency.
Traditionally dependent on fishmeal and fish oil, the sector has diversified toward animal byproducts and plantbased ingredients, with fish-derived inputs often reduced to below 10% in grower diets and reserved mainly for
One breakthrough was identifying Δ4 fatty acyl desaturase activity in marine fish, revealing a novel pathway for long-chain PUFA synthesis. This discovery highlights opportunities for synthetic biology to reduce dependence on fish oil.
hatchery, broodstock, and finishing phases.
Global aquaculture is projected to grow another 10% by 2032, heightening the deficit of sustainable feed ingredients. Although the share of
fishmeal and fish oil has declined, absolute consumption continues to rise.
The FAO’s Blue Transformation Roadmap emphasizes sustainable growth, reduced reliance on animal-derived proteins, and lower emissions. Meet-
ing these goals will require optimizing species-specific nutrition, improving digestibility of alternative ingredients, and minimizing waste, ensuring aquaculture’s sustainable expansion. The article reviews re-
cent advancements, challenges, and potential biotechnological applications in aquaculture nutrition (Figure 1) within the broader context of key findings in the field.
Major Discoveries in Aquaculture Nutrition in the Recent Decades
A comprehensive understanding of fish metabolism has been central to advancing aquaculture nutrition, improving feed conversion, and developing more precise diets. While nutritional theories from terrestrial animals have provided a foundation, key differences in anatomy, physiology, and metabolism in aquatic species have necessitated specific discoveries that now guide the field.
Genetic mechanisms of feeding preferences
Recent studies revealed that taste receptor genes regulate feeding behavior in teleosts. The umami receptor gene taste 1 receptor member1 (T1R1) influences acceptance of plant-based proteins in zebrafish, while Taste 1 receptor member 3 (Tas1r3) has been linked to carnivorous preferences in other species. Manipulating these
genes alters both feeding behavior and metabolic strategies, opening possibilities for genetic approaches to reduce reliance on high-protein, lipid-rich diets.
Amino acid sensing pathways
Fish use the mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway to sense amino acid levels and the general control nonderepressible 2 (GCN2) pathway to detect amino acid balance. This dual mechanism helps regulate protein metabolism, particularly relevant as plant proteins with imbalanced amino acid profiles replace fishmeal. Bioactive compounds such as phosphatidic acid or leucine derivatives can enhance protein synthesis efficiency under conditions improving feed conversion and sustainability.
Lipid metabolism and PUFA synthesis
One breakthrough was identifying Δ4 fatty acyl desaturase activity in marine fish, revealing a novel pathway for long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) synthesis. This discovery highlights opportunities for synthetic biology to reduce dependence on fish oil. Research in large yellow croaker
also identified regulators of lipid accumulation, including Perilipin 2 (PLIN2), long-chain noncoding Ribonucleic Acids (RNAs), and pathways linking Docosahexaenoic Acid (DHA) to reduce inflammation. A database linking feed fatty acid profiles to tissue composition now supports predictive dietary strategies.
Nutritional immunology and vitamin D
Vitamin D has been found to modulate intestinal immunity by altering gut microbiota metabolites, which regulate IL-22 and antimicrobial peptide expression. This positions vitamin D as a key factor in precision nutrition strategies for disease resistance in aquaculture.
Glucose metabolism and insulin receptors
Fish are traditionally considered glucose intolerant, but recent work on insulin receptors revealed divergent physiological roles. Loss of both receptors caused severe hyperglycemia, while individually they promoted different metabolic outcomes: receptor “a” enhancing lipid synthesis from glucose, and receptor “b” promoting lipolysis and protein synthesis via growth hormone signaling. These findings suggest potential for genetic or nutritional interventions to improve carbohydrate utilization.
Collective impact
Together, these discoveries mark a shift in aquaculture nutrition from focusing solely on feed composition and growth rates toward molecular and cellular insights into metabolism. Though many findings remain at the experimental or translational stage, they provide critical foundations for sustainable practices, reducing reliance on animal-derived ingredients, and improving efficiency while minimizing environmental impacts. By linking genetics, nutrient sensing, lipid biology, immunology, and carbohydrate metabolism, aquaculture nutrition research is positioned to support the next generation of sustainable feed strategies.
Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats/ associated protein 9 (CRISPR/Cas9) enables targeted modifications that improve nutrient use and resilience.
Key Theoretical Progress in Aquaculture Nutrition
Aquaculture nutrition research began in the 1950s, with Halver’s pioneering studies in 1957 marking the field’s formal inception. Since then, requirements for proteins, amino acids, lipids, fatty acids, carbohydrates, vitamins, and minerals have been established for species such as Atlantic salmon, common carp, rainbow trout, large yellow croaker, and Japanese flounder. Traditionally, these studies relied on growth performance, feed efficiency, and enzymatic parameters, but in the past two decades, molecular and cellular biology tools have elevated the field to “molecular nutrition,” enabling improved growth, health, and product quality.
Genes and proteins in nutritional metabolism
A key advance has been identifying genes and proteins that regulate nutrient metabolism. Teleost fish, due to a third genome duplication, exhibit unique regulatory mechanisms and novel genes compared to mammals. For instance, while mammals have three carnitine palmitoyltransferase I (CPT I) isoforms, fish possess multiple CPT I variants, as shown in seabream and yellow catfish. Similarly, fish retain extra retinoid X receptor (RXR) paralogs, with yellow catfish expressing five subtypes. Such du-
plications highlight the complexity of teleost metabolism but also leave gaps in functional characterization.
Multilevel regulation of metabolism
Nutrient metabolism in fish is controlled at transcriptional, translational, and posttranslational levels, with post-translational modifications (PTMs) such as phosphorylation, acetylation, and ubiquitination modifying protein function. Proteins can undergo multiple PTMs simultaneously, adding regulatory complexity. Elucidating these mechanisms is vital for precision nutrition strategies.
Organelle interactions
Organelles — including Endoplasmic Reticulum (ER), mitochondria, and lipid droplets (LDs) — are central to nutrient metabolism. The ER interacts extensively with mitochondria and LDs, facilitating lipid and calcium exchange. Dysregulation of ER–mitochondria contacts contribute to insulin resistance in obesity. In fish, ER stress influences lipid metabolism and induces hepatic steatosis. LD–mitochondria crosstalk mediates high-fat diet effect, while mitochondrial dysfunction enhances ROS production and lipid oxidation, promoting insulin resistance. Despite
progress, more research is needed on these dynamic organelle networks.
Regulated cell death
Aquatic studies have shown how apoptosis, autophagy, lipophagy, and ferroptosis regulate metabolism. For instance, ER stress-induced autophagy alleviated triglyceride accumulation in yellow catfish, while zincactivated lipophagy reduced lipid deposition. Ferroptosis, linked to iron overload and lipid peroxidation, has
been associated with metabolic disorders and stress responses in fish. Targeting regulated cell death (RCD) pathways offers potential strategies for metabolic disease control.
Immunometabolism
The interplay between metabolism and immune responses — termed immunometabolism — has emerged as a crucial field. Studies in large yellow croaker macrophages revealed palmitate-induced inflammation me-
diated by lysophosphatidylcholine acyltransferase 3, DHA’s protective effects, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) regulation of lipid metabolism. These findings highlight how dietary nutrients can modulate immune–metabolic crosstalk, though broader disease-related mechanisms remain underexplored.
Precision nutrition
As summarized in Nutrient Requirements of Fish and Shrimp (NRC, 2022), nutrient demands of cultured species are well documented. However, reliance on fishmeal and fish oil has increased costs, spurring the search for plant- and animal-based alternatives. Current farming practices, genetic improvements, and environmental pressures demand a revision of nutrient requirements. In China, with >300 cultured species and diverse environments, achieving precise nutrition is especially challenging. Between 2018 and 2022, the Ministry of Science and Technology launched a major project on Precise Nutrition and Metabolic Regulation of Aquatic Economic Animals, producing new requirement parameters and regulatory targets. These efforts underscore precision nutrition as essential for sustainable aquaculture.
Practical Problems in Aquaculture
Nutrition
Feed remains the most important input in aquaculture and a limiting factor for animal health. Formulated diets, made from blends of raw materials, have supported the growth of the industry, but many practical challenges remain that hinder sustainable feed development and application.
Databases for precision nutrition
Nutritional requirements vary by species, developmental stage, physiology, and environmental conditions. A comprehensive, dynamic database of nutritional requirements has not yet been established, leaving gaps in formulating precise diets. Similarly, data on the bioavailability of nutrients in feedstuffs are incomplete. Since protein is the costliest ingre-
dient, more systematic evaluations of nutrient content, digestibility, and utilization rates are urgently needed.
Feed processing parameters
Processing technologies such as extrusion strongly affect nutrient stability, digestibility, and water stability. Thermo-sensitive nutrients are easily lost, making it essential to refine parameters like particle size, pressure, and drying time. Establishing real-time monitoring systems and standardized databases for processing parameters would improve feed quality and consistency across species and environments.
Fishmeal replacement
Fishmeal, long the cornerstone of aquafeeds, is increasingly scarce and expensive. Alternatives include animal proteins (insect meal, meat and bone meal, poultry byproducts), plant proteins (soybean, corn, cottonseed, rapeseed), and single-cell proteins (microalgae, yeast). Strategies such as nutrient balancing and multi-source blending have reduced fishmeal dependency, but further development is needed to achieve cost-effective, zero-fishmeal diets without compromising growth, health, or product quality.
Plant protein utilization
While plant proteins offer economic benefits, antinutritional factors, poor digestibility, and imbalanced nutrient profiles limit their efficiency. Technologies such as fermentation,
enzymatic hydrolysis, breeding for low antinutritional factors (lowANF) varieties, and supplementation with functional feed additives are improving utilization. For example, fermentation of rapeseed meal has increased digestibility and reduced antinutritional compounds, making it a more viable protein source.
Functional feed additives
Functional ingredients like taurine, glutamine, bile acids, carotenoids, polyunsaturated fatty acids, and plant extracts enhance growth, immunity, and feed efficiency. They are especially valuable in high-quality, low-fishmeal feeds, reducing costs while supporting animal health. Careful selection of functional feed additives (FuFAs) based on efficacy and availability is essential for commercial application.
Functional and fermented feeds
Beyond meeting basic requirements, functional feeds aim to regulate metabolism, enhance stress tolerance, and improve product quality. Materials such as krill meal, insect proteins, fermented plant proteins, and algae are increasingly incorporated. Predigestion technologies — through physical, chemical, or biological treatments — have also gained momentum, with enzymatic and microbial fermentation improving nutrient conversion and animal performance.
Standardization and precision feeding
In summary, addressing these challenges — nutritional databases, fishmeal replacement, plant protein utilization, feed additives, functional and fermented diets, processing improvements, and precision feeding — will be key to achieving sustainable, efficient, and environmentally friendly aquaculture nutrition.
Strategies for Sustainable Expansion of Aquaculture
The sustainable expansion of aquaculture depends on feeds and systems that reduce carbon footprints, minimize nutrient emissions, and meet consumer demands for product quality. Key strategies include lowcarbon feeds, emission-reduction tools, bioprocessing, and precision management.
Low-carbon feeds
Fishmeal, long the cornerstone of aquafeeds, is increasingly scarce and expensive.
Updating feed product standards ensures consistent quality and supports industrial-scale production. At the same time, precision feeding technologies are emerging as a transformative approach. By integrating sensors, internet of things (IoT), and artificial intelligent (AI) farmers can monitor environmental parameters and fish growth in real time, adjusting feeding amounts and frequencies to minimize waste, preserve water quality, and maximize growth. Advances in deep learning and behavioral monitoring promise even more refined and automated feeding systems.
The carbon footprint (CF) of aquafeeds comes from ingredient production, transport, processing, and use. Aquatic feeds require more energy than terrestrial feeds due to finer grinding and extrusion, making grinding, pelleting, and drying major emission drivers. Improving mill efficiency, recovering heat, and reducing packaging can lower CF. Ingredient choice is equally critical: animal meals have higher CFs, but purely plant-based formulas risk poor growth unless amino acid balance and digestibility are corrected. Promising alternatives include single-cell proteins (algae, bacteria, fungi) and insect meals, which efficiently convert waste into high-quality protein with far lower emissions, though scaling and cost remain challenges.
Emission reductions
Most aquatic animals retain less than half of dietary nitrogen and phosphorus, with the surplus fueling eutrophication. Solutions include refining requirements by life stage, improving digestibility, and adding targeted supplements. Proteases enhance protein hydrolysis and reduce nitrogen waste, while phytase improves phosphorus bioavailability from plant meals, lowering reliance on inorganic
P. Protecting enzyme activity during extrusion through encapsulation or surface spraying is essential. Organic acids such as citric, formic, and butyrate improve mineral absorption, gut health, and feed efficiency, though optimal doses vary by species.
Fermentation
Microbial and enzymatic fermentation reduces antinutritional factors in plant proteins (e.g., phytic acid, tryp-
sin inhibitors), produces beneficial peptides, and improves digestibility. Fermented soybean, rapeseed, and cottonseed meals can replace part of fishmeal, but excessive inclusion may harm growth or trigger oxidative stress, requiring species-specific evaluation.
Meeting supply-chain demands
With rising global consumption, flesh quality — including texture, flavor,
and color — has become central. Nutrition and husbandry can enhance these traits: adequate protein and vitamins, selected botanicals, and additives such as creatine or marine algae influence connective tissue and flavor compounds. Exercise also shows promise for improving texture.
In summary, combining low-carbon ingredients and efficient manufacturing with enzyme, acid, and fermentation technologies, alongside precision feeding, provides a clear path to reducing environmental impacts while ensuring high-quality aquaculture products for a growing global market.
Applications of Modern Biotechnology in Aquaculture Nutrition
The rapid expansion of aquaculture requires a deeper understanding of nutritional metabolism across genes, transcripts, proteins, post-translational modifications (PTMs), metabolites, and gut microbiota. Traditional growth trials, though valuable, are time-consuming, low in throughput, and highly dependent on experimental conditions, limiting their reproducibility. Modern biotechnology addresses these gaps by enabling high-throughput, precise, and reproducible analyses, offering powerful tools to map nutrient pathways and responses.
Cell models
Cultured cells provide controlled conditions to study nutrient effects, avoiding the variability of whole-animal trials. They are used for screening ingredients, assessing toxicity, and exploring immune or metabolic responses. For example, liver progenitor cells and macrophage models have helped clarify how herbal extracts, algal compounds, or hydrolyzed proteins modulate lipid accumulation and inflammation. Gene manipulation in cell models allows validation of nutrient-related signaling pathways, while coculture systems reveal crosstalk between metabolic and immune cells.
Genomics and transcriptomics
Genomic tools uncover genetic variations influencing nutritional requirements and adaptation. Population genomics links genotype to nutrient utilization, while comparative genomics highlights species-specific traits such as olfactory receptors. Transcriptomics reveals diet-induced regulation at the RNA level, identifying how bile acids or lipid levels shape gene expression and nutrientsensing pathways. Together, these approaches guide feed optimization and species-specific formulations.
Proteomics and PTMs
Proteomic analysis identifies proteins altered by diet or environment, revealing shifts in metabolic pathways. PTMs such as phosphorylation and acetylation regulate energy-related proteins like AMPK and mTOR, while broader surveys of modifications (e.g., succinylation, crotonylation) expand understanding of nutrient control at the protein level.
Metabolomics
By profiling small molecules, metabolomics provides real-time insight into energy and nutrient fluxes. It has shown, for example, how reducing fishmeal can impair glucose metabolism in cobia or how taurine supplementation improves carbohydrate utilization in tilapia. Integration with other omics helps identify biomarkers for growth, health, and stress adaptation.
Microbiomics
Sequencing of gut microbial communities links diet to host health. Studies show dietary postbiotics or reduced starch improve microbiota balance, while gene catalogs of fish gut microbiomes clarify host–microbe interactions. Future approaches combining metagenomics and metatranscriptomics will deepen insights into microbial functionality.
Genome editing
Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats/associated pro-
tein 9 (CRISPR/Cas9) enables targeted modifications that improve nutrient use and resilience. For example, gene knockouts in zebrafish altered energy pathways and improved hypoxia tolerance, while myostatin deletion in red sea bream enhanced growth and feed efficiency.
Collectively, these biotechnologies enable precision nutrition, optimized feed design, and improved sustainability in aquaculture.
Limitations and Challenges in Applying Modern Biotechnology to Aquatic Nutrition
Despite major advances, modern biotechnology in aquaculture nutrition faces significant hurdles. A key challenge is the lack of stable cell lines for many species, limiting physiologically relevant in vitro models. Omics approaches are constrained by incomplete databases, low-quality reference genomes, poor annotation of metabolites and microbes, and variability across laboratories, which reduces reproducibility. Proteomics is hampered by masking effects of abundant proteins and insufficient PTM annotation. Data integration requires costly sequencing, advanced computing, and standardized management. Finally, genome editing suffers from low efficiency, technical and ethical concerns, regulatory vari-
ability, and limited consumer acceptance, complicating large-scale application.
Future Outlook
Aquaculture nutrition faces ongoing challenges but offers vast opportunities for sustainable growth. Key priorities include developing alternatives to fishmeal and fish oil, expanding knowledge of species-specific nutritional needs, and creating specialized databases to support AI-driven feed formulation. Long-term goals involve advancing precision nutrition through biotechnology, optimized nutrient ratios, targeted additives, and gene-edited breeding. These innovations will promote efficient, environmentally friendly aquaculture and ensure food security for a growing global population.
This is a summarized version developed by the editorial team of Aquaculture Magazine based on the review article titled “NUTRIENT PHYSIOLOGY, METABOLISM, AND NUTRIENT-NUTRIENT INTERACTIONS. A REVIEW OF THE LATEST ADVANCES IN AQUACULTURE NUTRITION RESEARCH” developed by: Chunxiang Ai - Xiamen University; Xiangjun Leng - Shanghai Ocean University; Zhi Luo - Huazhong Agricultural University; Zhigang Zhou -Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences; Qinghui Ai - Ocean University of China. The original article, including tables and figures, was published on AUGUST 2025, through THE JOURNAL OF NUTRITION. The full version can be accessed online through this link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tjnut.2025.08.009
Nanotechnology in Aquaculture: A Novel Approach to Enhance Productivity
Nanotechnology revolutionizes aquaculture by improving nutritional efficiency, advancing targeted disease prevention through nano vaccine delivery, and supporting real-time aquatic environment monitoring. These innovations promote both productivity and sustainability, but they also require robust risk assessments and regulatory oversight to address potential toxicity and environmental impacts. Future advancements in nanotechnology will be expected to AI-powered nano sensors and exacting diagnostic devices, enabling smarter automation and adaptive capacity in aquaculture operations.
* By Harshit Singh, Shashank Singh, Arya Singh, Sumit Kumar and Anil Singh
Introduction
In recent years, aquaculture has attracted considerable attention across multiple disciplines due to its significant contribution to improving access to nutritious food in developing countries and its potential to enhance food security amid the ongoing growth of the global popula-
tion (Igwegbe et al., 2021). Although the expansion of aquaculture has led to certain environmental challenges, the sector holds significant promise for alleviating poverty and improving nutrition, particularly given that developing countries account for approximately 80% of global aquaculture production (Phillips et al., 2016).
Nanotechnology holds significant promise for advancing aquaculture systems by lowering costs, enhancing efficiency, and minimizing environmental impacts — factors that are increasingly crucial for sustaining the global population, which now exceeds seven billion. The success of these innovations is contingent upon their
Nanotechnology has emerged as a promising approach, creating opportunities for innovative solutions. It involves the development and application of materials at the nanoscale (1–100 nm), which possess distinctive properties that enable a wide range of novel applications.
ability to meet standards of quality, cost-effectiveness, environmental sustainability, and minimal risk to human health (Chena & Yadab, 2011).
The term “nanomaterial” is derived from the prefix “nano,” which comes from the Greek word for “dwarf.” Specifically, “nano” denotes a factor of 10-9, or one billionth of a meter. Nanomaterials typically refer to substances with dimensions ranging from 1 to 100 nanometers (nm) (Rai &
Ingle, 2012). The term “nanotechnology” was first introduced by Professor Taniguchi at the 1974 conference of the Japanese Society of Precision Engineering. Nanotechnology refers to a scientific field focused on the synthesis, characterization, and application of devices, materials, and technical systems that operate at the nanoscale, specifically within the size range of 1 to 100 nm. Nanotechnology represents a highly promising
field that encompasses a wide range of scientific disciplines and technological applications. Recent rapid progress in nanoscience and nanotechnology has created new opportunities across various industrial and consumer sectors, positioning these fields as catalysts for a new industrial revolution, particularly in agriculture and related industries. Among contemporary scientific advancements, nanotechnology is rapidly emerg-
ing as a foundational platform for the next generation of development and transformation within agri-food systems (Kuzma et al., 2006). The global market for nanotechnology in the food sector has demonstrated substantial growth, though it has not reached the previously anticipated annual rate of over 24%. A 2024 market analysis estimated the value of the global food nanotechnology market at around USD 25.1 billion in 2024, with a projected compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 10.5% from 2025 to 2033 (Sneha Mali, 2025).
Nanotechnology has emerged as a promising approach, creating opportunities for innovative solutions. It involves the development and application of materials at the nanoscale (1–100 nm), which possess distinctive properties that enable a wide range of novel applications (Matteucci et al., 2018). These novel materials are engineered to exhibit distinctive physical or chemical characteristics resulting from their nanoscale dimensions, shape, surface area, conductivity, or surface chemistry, and
have found diverse applications in sectors such as textiles, electronics, engineering, and medicine (Smith et al., 2007). Nanotechnology encompasses the study and manipulation of matter at the nanoscale — specifically within the range of approximately 1 to 100 nm — where unique phenomena, including enhanced physical, chemical, and biological properties, can facilitate innovative applications (Vyom et al., 2012).
Relative Size of Nanoparticles vs. Aquatic Organisms
Currently, there are numerous potential future applications for these technologies. Within the agri-food sector, research on nanomaterialbased delivery systems has explored the use of nanoparticles, micelles, liposomes, biopolymers, emulsions, protein-carbohydrate complexes, dendrimers, and solid lipid nanoparticles, among others.
Nanoparticles, generally characterized as particles with dimensions ranging from 1 to 100 nm, are significantly smaller than aquatic
Nanoparticles, generally characterized as particles with dimensions ranging from 1 to 100 nm, are significantly smaller than aquatic organisms across all biological levels.
organisms across all biological levels (Figure 1). For context, many engineered nanoparticles — such as silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) — typically exhibit mean diameters between 2 and 35 nm, whereas silver nanowires (AgNWs) possess diameters of approximately 57 nm and can extend several micrometers in length. In comparison, aquatic viruses are generally about 300 nm in size, bacteria measure around 5,000 nm (0.5 to 5 µm), algae such as Raphidocelis subcapitata range from 2 to 10 µm (10,000 nm), and larger organisms like the crustacean Daphnia magna or fish embryos and larvae are on the scale of millimeters (1,000,000 nm or more) (Sohn et al., 2015).
Application of Nanotechnology in Aquaculture
Nanotechnology encompasses diverse applications in aquaculture, offering significant potential to transform the industry. Current uses include pathogen detection and control, water treatment, pond sterilization, and the efficient delivery of nutrients and drugs (Figure 2). Within the agri-food sector, research on nanomaterial-based delivery systems has utilized nanoparticles,
micelles, liposomes, biopolymers, emulsions, carbohydrate complexes, dendrimers, and solid nano-lipid particles (Luis et al., 2019).
Applications of nanoparticles as fish medicine
Many types of Nanoparticles are used in fish medicine like as silver nanoparticles, gold nanoparticles, zinc oxide, titanium dioxide nanoparticles. The key properties that confer advantages to these nanomaterials include enhanced absorption and bioavailability, improved dispersion and solubility, greater stability against environmental degradation during food processing, and the ability to provide controlled release kinetics (Ogunkalu, 2019).
Silver (Ag) nanoparticles
Silver nanoparticles are widely regarded as highly effective antibacterial agents within the context of fish culture. Their antibacterial properties stem from their capacity to disrupt or inhibit bacterial functions, a process largely mediated by the release of silver ions (Ag+) (Knetsch and Koole, 2011). These nanoparticles have proven effective against various pathogens, including Staphylococcus aureus, Edwardsiella tarda, and cyanobacterial species such as Anabaena and Oscillatoria (Swain et al., 2014). Additionally, silver nanoparticles have demonstrated significant antibacterial activity against bacterial strains that exhibit resistance to multiple drugs (Prakash et al., 2015).
Titanium dioxide nanoparticles
Titanium dioxide (TiO₂) nanoparticles have demonstrated significant bactericidal activity, resulting in the elimination of bacterial cells. When used in conjunction with Fe₃O₄ nanoparticles, TiO₂ nanoparticles have been shown to be effective against bacterial species such as Streptococcus iniae, Edwardsiella tarda, and Photobacterium damselae (Cheng et al., 2009).
Gold nanoparticles
This progressive disruption eventually leads to the gradual demise of
bacterial cells. Furthermore, gold (Au) nanoparticles have the ability to interact with tRNA within the ribosome, thereby enhancing chemical toxicity and contributing to bacterial cell death (Cui et al., 2012).
Multidisciplinary Applications of Nanotechnology in Aquaculture
Nano sensors, nanoimaging technologies, and nanochips are widely utilized across various sectors to facilitate rapid and efficient outcomes. In industrial applications, nano delivery systems encompass a range of advanced structures, including nano capsules, nanospheres, nanorobots, nano cochleates, nanomachines, and nanodevices, all designed to ensure precise and effective operational performance.
Water purification processes focus on eliminating toxic ions, organic pol-
lutants, microorganisms, their metabolic byproducts, and oil spills. The removal of organic contaminants from water is a significant challenge for many industries. Industrial effluents
Nanotechnology encompasses diverse applications in aquaculture, offering significant potential to transform the industry.
often contain substantial concentrations of organic hydrocarbons — such as benzene, toluene, methylbenzene, and xylene (collectively known as BTEX )— which must be removed prior to the discharge of wastewater into natural water bodies.
Drug delivery for health management
Oral nano-delivery systems incorporating nanoparticles have been utilized for various purposes, including improved regulation of drug release (Eldridge et al., 1990). Alginate, a naturally occurring polymer composed of β-D-mannuronic acid (M) and α-Lguluronic acid (G), is derived from certain species of brown algae and bacteria (Shah & Mraz, 2019).
Nano delivery of nutraceuticals
The use of nano-encapsulated health supplements and nutraceuticals containing nano additives — such as vitamins, antimicrobials, antioxidants, flavorings, colorants, and preservatives — represents a rapidly developing area of research in aquaculture. These nano additives are employed for health management, value addition, and stress reduction in fish and shellfish. Additionally, they contribute to improved absorption and bioavailability of nutrients within the body, as demonstrated by nano forms
In industrial applications, nano delivery systems encompass a range of advanced structures, including nano capsules, nanospheres, nanorobots, nano cochleates, nanomachines, and nanodevices, all designed to ensure precise and effective operational performance.
of minerals like calcium and magnesium (Omosanya et al., 2021).
Nanobased fish vaccines
Nano vaccines have been employed either as immunostimulant adjuvants or as delivery systems for targeted antigen administration, facilitating sustained antigen release (Zhao et al., 2014). In aquaculture, fish vaccines have been formulated using chitosan nanoparticles, such as an inactivated vaccine against infectious salmon anaemia virus (ISAV), which incorporates DNA encoding the ISAV replicase as an adjuvant. This approach achieved protection rates exceeding 77% against ISAV
infection (Rivas Aravena et al., 2015). Additionally, both chitosan and chitosan/tripolyphosphate nanoparticles have been utilized to develop an oral DNA vaccine targeting Vibrio anguillarum in Asian seabass (Lates calcarifer) (Vimal et al., 2012).
Water quality treatment in aquaculture
Nano-sensors are capable of detecting pathogens and pollutants in aquatic environments, thereby promoting healthier conditions for aquatic organisms. Advanced nano biosensor systems are being developed to enable the identification of extremely low concentrations of
parasites, bacteria, viruses, and various pollutants in water. Additionally, nanotechnology has been applied to address water pollution — one of the major challenges in aquaculture. The effectiveness of water treatment using nanomaterials is attributed to their high photocatalytic and adsorption capacities, offering efficient and cost-effective solutions for water purification (Chen et al., 2016).
Microbial disinfection
Ginger-derived nanoparticles have been shown to prevent infections caused by motile Aeromonas septicaemia in Asian carp fingerlings (Korni & Khalil, 2017). Various metal
Advanced nano biosensor systems are being developed to enable the identification of extremely low concentrations of parasites, bacteria, viruses, and various pollutants in water.
Delivery of dietary supplements and nutraceuticals
nanoparticles, including those composed of silver, titanium, and copper, have also been utilized for disease prevention and treatment. These metal nanoparticles exhibit multiple antibacterial mechanisms, with one of the most potent being their ability to disrupt bacterial cell membranes and cell walls through electrostatic interactions (Fajardo et al., 2022).
A fundamental principle supporting the use of nanoparticles to enhance fish growth is their capacity to increase nutrient absorption within the digestive tract. When micronutrients are delivered as nanoparticles in aquaculture feeds, they can more effectively penetrate cellular barriers, resulting in improved absorption rates. This method has proven to be more efficient than supplementation with organic Selen methionine. For example, diets supplemented with nano-selenium have been shown to elevate muscle selenium levels, boost antioxidant capacity, and improve both the relative growth rate and final body weight in crucian carp (Carassius auratus gibelio) (Fajardo et al., 2022).
Tagging and Nano-Barcoding
Radio frequency identification (RFID) technology utilizes chips equipped with nanoscale radio circuits and embedded identification codes. These RFID tags are capable of storing extensive information, can be scanned remotely, and may be integrated into
products for automatic identification of objects anywhere. In aquaculture, RFID tags can serve as tracking devices and can also be used to monitor fish metabolism, swimming patterns, and feeding behaviors.
Nano-barcodes, which are monitoring devices composed of metallic stripes embedded with nanoparticles, encode information through variations in their striping patterns. The use of nano-barcoding enables processing industries and exporters to trace the origin and track the delivery status of aquatic products throughout the supply chain until they reach the market. Additionally, when combined with nano sensors and synthetic DNA labelled with color-coded probes, nano-barcode devices can be employed to detect pathogens, monitor temperature fluctuations, and identify leaks, thereby enhancing overall product quality (Rather et al., 2011).
Merits and Demerits of Aquaculture
The application of nanotechnology in aquaculture markedly improves feed efficiency and nutrient uptake, resulting in enhanced growth and re-
productive outcomes in fish. This advancement contributes to the overall sustainability and productivity of aquaculture operations. Incorporating nanoparticles such as selenium, zinc, and iron into fish diets has been demonstrated to strengthen antioxidant defenses and increase disease resistance in aquatic organisms. However, some nanoparticles may not be biodegradable and could accumulate within fish tissues or the surrounding aquatic environment, raising concerns regarding potential toxicity and long-term ecological effects. The absence of comprehensive regulatory guidelines and standardized risk assessment protocols further complicates the safe implementation of these technologies, as the impacts of nanoparticles can differ significantly across species and developmental stages (Fajardo et al., 2022).
Conclusion
The incorporation of microelements in nanoparticle form into aquaculture feeds is revolutionizing the sector by providing notable benefits for the health and productivity of both shrimp and fish. Owing to their
minute size and large surface area, nanoparticles significantly improve the absorption and bioavailability of vital nutrients, which in turn promotes higher growth rates, better feed utilization, and enhanced overall health in aquatic species. Notably, nanoparticles such as nano-selenium, nano-zinc, and nano-iron have been shown to strengthen antioxidant defenses, support muscle growth, and increase disease resistance in both fish and shrimp.
Future Prospective of Nanotechnology
Nanotechnology offers significant advances in aquaculture through targeted nanoparticle vaccines for disease control, enhanced feed efficiency with nano-formulated nutrients, and real-time water quality monitoring via nano sensors. These innovations can increase productivity, sustainability, and fish health while reducing antibiotic use and
environmental impact. However, safe application requires thorough risk assessment, regulation, and research to address potential toxicity and ecological concerns. Overall, nanotechnology is set to transform aquaculture into a more efficient and sustainable industry.
References and sources consulted by the author on the elaboration of this article are available under previous request to our editorial staff.
Harshit Singh, Shashank Singh* and Anil Singh Department of Aquaculture, College of Fisheries. Corresponding author*: drssaqua@gmail.com
Arya Singh Department of Aquatic Animal Health Management, College of Fisheries. Sumit Kumar Department of Aquatic Environment Management, College of Fisheries.
Acharya Narendra Deva University of Agriculture and Technology, Kumarganj, Ayodhya-224229, (U.P.), India.
Aquaculture 2035:
Designing Resilience Through AI and Data in a Climate-Unstable World
* By Dimitris Pafras
Aquaculture has rapidly evolved into a cornerstone of global food production, offering a vital solution to the growing need for sustainable protein sources in the face of escalating population growth and increasing nutritional awareness (Fiorella et al., 2021). Its expansion not only contributes significantly to food security but also supports the livelihoods
of millions around the world. However, this accelerated growth brings with it a series of challenges, such as managing limited natural resources, controlling disease outbreaks, and ensuring water quality and environmental sustainability.
The situation is made worse by the escalation of climate change, which poses increasing risks to aquaculture systems through rising sea tem-
peratures, acidification, and extreme weather (Stentiford et al., 2020). Conventional methods of management have somewhat relied on reactive approaches; however, climate change is bringing forth rapid and complex environmental dynamics and challenges that cannot be adequately managed through contemporary systems. Therefore, rapid advancement, at the very least, towards sophisticated
Conventional methods of management have somewhat relied on reactive approaches; however, climate change is bringing forth rapid and complex environmental dynamics and challenges that cannot be adequately managed through contemporary systems in aquaculture. There are lots of opportunities for keeping things sustainable, being productive, and adapting as fish farming goes toward a more tech-smart and climate-ready way. But there are big hurdles in the way of using such systems.
management practices that take proactive and data-driven approaches is crucial. Conventional management strategies, when intensified upon by climate change and its complexities, can no longer cope with the anticipated risks of aquaculture systems.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is emerging as a key force in aquaculture, offering technologies like machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), and computer vision (CV) to optimize operations and promote sustainable development (Jordan & Mitchell, 2015; LeCun et al., 2015). Unlike other industries, AI in aquaculture must operate within biologically diverse and ecologically sensitive systems. Its applications range from automated feeding and disease diagnostics to water quality forecasting and fish behavior monitoring (Chiu et al., 2022; Islam et al., 2024; Zhao et al., 2021). The sector’s survival depends on adopting predictive systems that combine AI, IoT, and big data to create a flexible and resilient framework.
10 key applications of AIoT:
» Smart feeding systems - optimize feeding quantity and time.
» Water quality management - continuous monitoring with sensors and problem prediction.
» Disease detection & classification - with biosensors, computer vision and AI models.
» Biomass assessment - non-contact, computer vision or acoustic signals.
» Fish behavior detection - for signs of stress or disease.
» Counting organisms - automated, with AI and sensors.
» Species classification & identification - in challenging underwater conditions.
» Growth & reproduction estimation - with automated systems.
» Monitoring of individual fish - for behavioral analysis.
» Robotics & automation - with underwater vehicles and robotic systems.
Climate Volatility and Aquaculture Vulnerabilities
Climate change impacts aquaculture in a variety of ways, mainly through physical effects such as rising ocean temperatures, changes in water quality, and the increased frequency of extreme weather events. Higher water temperatures directly affect the physiology of farmed species, influencing their growth rates, feeding behavior, and immune responses. Additionally, acidification of oceans and the degradation of water quality due to rising CO2 levels exacerbate the challenges faced by aquaculture systems, further compromising the viability of production.
Building a more effective and sustainable aquaculture system starts with an understanding of the intricate relationship between fish growth and the physicochemical characteristics of water.
Quantitative Insights: Linking Environmental Data to Fish Growth Dynamics
The predictive transformation of aquaculture hinges on the deep understanding of how environmental variables drive biological outcomes. As farms evolve into sensor-integrated ecosystems, the ability to interpret and act on physicochemical data becomes paramount. This section presents a set of key analytical visualizations that illustrate the relationships between core water parameters and fish growth. These diagrams serve both as evidence and as operational tools for data-driven aquaculture in a climate-uncertain world.
The bar chart (Figure 1) represents the relative importance of various physicochemical parameters — such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, pH, salinity, and turbidity — in predicting fish growth rates.
The heatmap-style matrix visualizes the Pearson correlation coefficients between key water quality parameters and observed fish growth (Figure 2). Strong positive correlations appear in dark blue, while negative or neutral correlations are shaded lighter or red.
The scatter plot with a fitted regression line (Figure 3) displays the observed relationship between average water temperature and fish growth rate across multiple production cycles.
Building a more effective and sustainable aquaculture system starts with an understanding of the intricate relationship between fish growth and
the physicochemical characteristics of water. This chapter’s analytical visualizations emphasize how crucial it is to keep an eye on and control vari-
ables like temperature, turbidity, pH, and dissolved oxygen. The data analysis’s conclusions highlight the importance of contemporary analytical techniques by enabling fish farmers to forecast and maximize fish growth using precise environmental data. In a world impacted by climate change and unpredictable environmental conditions, these insights are especially important. In particular, the relationship between temperature and dissolved oxygen highlights how crucial it is to always keep an eye on these variables in order to maximize output and reduce hazards.
With the integration of sensors and real-time data analysis, fish farmers can forecast and adjust environmental conditions, ensuring fish welfare and production efficiency. The next steps involve further improving predictive models and monitoring technology, while also fostering collaboration with the scientific community to continually enhance analytical methods.
Biological and Economic Consequences
The biological consequences of climate change are immediate, as higher temperatures and extreme weather events negatively impact the sustainability of farmed species. Disease outbreaks spread more rapidly in warmer waters, and the aquaculture sector loses approximately $10 billion annually due to climate-related disruptions (FAO, 2023). Moreover, climate change further destabilizes economic conditions, as production factors and market prices fluctuate due to external influences.
The Figure 4 illustrates the relationship between environmental variability (such as temperature fluctuations, pH, and oxygen levels) and their impact on production, including losses, costs, and disease risks. Each bubble represents a scenario, with the size of the bubble indicating the level of uncertainty or predicted risk. The colors of the bubbles reflect the severity of the risk: green for low risk, yellow for medium risk, and red for high or critical risk.
The predictive transformation of aquaculture hinges on the deep understanding of how environmental variables drive biological outcomes. As farms evolve into sensor-integrated ecosystems, the ability to interpret and act on physicochemical data becomes paramount.
Example scenarios include Scenario A (Low O₂ + high temperatures, represented by a red bubble in the top right), Scenario B (Stable conditions, represented by a green bubble in the bottom left), and Scenario C (pH fluctuations + moderate heat, represented by a yellow-orange bubble in the middle zone).
The Data-Driven Producer
The challenge for producers in 2035 will be to develop a skillset that enables them to operate effectively in a world increasingly dominated by data and uncertainty. “Data literacy” will be crucial, as producers will need to interpret data from sensors, alerts from AI systems, and real-time information to make informed decisions. The ability to understand this data and translate it into strategic actions for farm development, animal health,
and environmental sustainability will be essential for success.
Additionally, future producers will need systems thinking skills to balance ecological, technological, and economic factors. They must create an integrated strategy for production that considers environmental constraints, technological solutions, and the economics of aquaculture.
Tools of the trade
The tools for success in aquaculture by 2035 will revolve around real-time monitoring systems, AI platforms, and machine learning models. Realtime sensors will track essential parameters such as dissolved oxygen levels, pH, and biomass, providing immediate feedback to the producer. AI platforms will enable predictive models to optimize feeding strategies and alert producers to potential
disease outbreaks before they spread, reducing the impact on production.
The use of Artificial Intelligence and machine learning will be pivotal in forecasting and early detection of issues in aquaculture. A notable example is the use of IBM’s Watson in Norwegian salmon farms, which predicts lice outbreaks with an accuracy of 92%. This predictive capacity allows farm managers to take proactive measures, preventing widespread damage to the fish population and improving overall farm productivity.
The concept of “digital twins” – virtual replicas of physical aquaculture systems – offers a powerful tool for simulating the potential impacts of climate change on farm operations. By using digital twins, producers can model farm responses to scenarios such as a 2°C rise in water temperature before making real-world adjustments. This allows them to test solutions in a controlled, simulated environment and implement strategies that are most likely to succeed under changing conditions.
The Figure 5 illustrates the architecture of a next-generation smart aquaculture system. At its foundation
lies a dense network of environmental sensors that continuously monitor key water parameters such as temperature, oxygen levels, pH, and salinity. These data are transmitted to a cloud-based AI engine, where machine learning models analyze both historical and real-time inputs to detect trends, predict risks, and suggest optimal interventions. The insights are visualized in a decision-making dashboard accessible by the operator, who can then adapt feeding schedules, aeration levels, or take proactive health measures. The system is closed loop, learning over time and improving both accuracy and efficiency through continuous feedback.
The transition to a more resilient and sustainable aquaculture sector requires active involvement from governments and the international community. Policy interventions will be crucial in facilitating this shift and supporting the adoption of cuttingedge technologies in the sector. Subsidies for IoT adoption and real-time monitoring systems could provide the necessary financial incentives for producers to invest in smart technologies. Particularly for small and
Climate change impacts aquaculture in a variety of ways, mainly through physical effects such as rising ocean temperatures, changes in water quality, and the increased frequency of extreme weather events.
medium-sized enterprises, funding for infrastructure development and training in new technologies will be key to the success of the transition.
Future farmers will also be qualified data users and strategic managers thanks to the development of educational initiatives and certification pathways for producers. To manage sensor data and incorporate it into decision-making processes for sustainability, growth, and health, producers need to receive training.
Industry collaboration
Industry-wide collaboration and data-sharing networks will also be essential for creating a more resilient and sustainable aquaculture industry. Establishing regional data-sharing networks will allow producers to collaborate and exchange valuable information in real-time, reducing management costs and increasing production efficiency. These networks could include early-warning systems that enable producers to detect threats to their farms, such as diseases, extreme weather events, or changes in water quality, before they wreak havoc on their operations.
Such collaboration would extend to governmental bodies and agencies, which should create data platforms that support collective knowledge and action. Through this collabora-
tion, a broader strategic goal can be achieved: the collection and analysis of data to develop joint programs for prevention and adaptation to climate risks.
Autonomous Swarm Systems: The Future of Smart Aquaculture
The rapid evolution of aquaculture due to real-time, predictive technologies is headed by Autonomous Swarm Systems. These AI-enabled underwater robotic units constitute cooperative networks designed for monitoring phytoplankton, diagnosing fish health, and providing resilience to the system.
Inspired by swarm behavior in animals, these robots work together, exchanging information and adapting their commands. They essentially operate as self-organizing mesh agents traversing through aquaculture systems in a game-like manner or possibly even as a living organism.
Swarm units equipped with biosensors, computer vision, and hydroacoustic tools to assess:
» Fish behavior and health (stress, erratic movement).
» Water quality (pH, temperature, salinity, oxygen).
» Integrity of infrastructure (net damage).
» AI-driven analysis on pathogen hotspots.
The units work in real-time coordination to identify areas of concern and share findings with human operators on-site.
The modalities include:
» Scalability across large farms
» Redundancy with distributed intelligence (if one unit fails, others can compensate)
» Low maintenance with auto docking
» Localized early warning system with good accuracy.
In the context of climate volatility, swarm systems can detect early changes in variables such as temperature or pH, providing timely alerts
for emerging threats like heatwaves or acidification before they escalate. Such systems can operate with existing IoT and AI networks, sending data to cloud-based systems and quickening the decision-making processes of digital twins and dashboards. A hybrid model combining swarm agents with fixed sensors would cut costs and allow better access for smaller producers.
Swarm rings are being tested in Norway, Japan, and Chile, showing system performance improvements of up to 27%. In the future, the focus will be on standards for communication, better battery life, and edge AI for real-time decision-making. In conclusion, Autonomous Swarm Systems are redefining aquaculture, where interactions were limited to static observation, towards intelligent dynamic interactions with the environment.
There are lots of opportunities for keeping things sustainable, being productive, and adapting as fish farming goes toward a more techsmart and climate-ready way. But there are big hurdles in the way of
using such systems. One big hurdle to advanced tech use is still the high costs at the start, especially for small and medium businesses. Also, strong rules for data safety and privacy must be set up to gather store and analyze large amounts of data. The making of flexible AI models that can work well in different production types of an environment conditions is important too. It will need help from institutions, working together from different fields, and steady money for teaching, learning, and practical study to solve these problems.
“Resilience in aquaculture will be less a matter of reaction and more a function of design — where biology, data, and policy converge.”
References and sources consulted by the author on the elaboration of this article are available under previous request to our editorial staff.
* Dimitris Pafras. Ph.D. candidate in Marine Biology & Fisheries Dynamics. University of Thessaly (UTh), School of Agricultural Sciences. Department of Ichthyology and Aquatic Environment (DIAE).
Can Pakistan Become the Next Powerhouse in Shrimp Farming?
* By Philip Buike
Pakistan shares the same climatic conditions as the Gujarat region of India (an area with a booming shrimp industry), so it has the same low land and labor costs and also could certainly benefit from a boost in hard currency generating exports, shrimp farming would appear to stand out as a logical option. However, as we will see, despite sporadic ventures by both the government and private enterprise since the early 90´s, Pakistan´s shrimp exports continue to be almost entirely dominated by the wild fishery.
In this article, I will briefly review the history of shrimp farming in Pakistan up to present, mentioning the most notable ventures and what could be learnt from these attempts at establishing a viable industry.
The latter part of the article will discuss what I feel will be required to maintain current impetus and how the challenges that will arise from upscaling could be met.
A Brief History of Shrimp Farming in Pakistan
It has long been recognized that Pakistan has all the key factors shared by the major shrimp producing nation; that is, a favorable climate, available land with access to either seawater or brackish water, low labor and land purchase costs and reasonable proximity to international markets. Pakistan actually has a land border with China, the World’s largest market for farmed shrimp and literally millions of acres of underutilized land around the Indus Delta that could be used to raise warm water shrimp.
With this in mind it is not surprising that the first attempts at shrimp farming go back more than thirty years, starting with a project set up by the department of livestock and Fisheries and Lipton’s Tea Company. According to reports by the FAO, amongst the main reasons this project failed was the lack of locally available feed, seed and local expertise, three issues that appear to be recurrent problems over the years.
Many industry experts have wondered, given the meteoric rise in shrimp farming in India, currently providing around one in five of all shrimps available on the world market; What has happened (or not) during the same period in Pakistan, its Northern neighbor? The short answer to that is frankly not much, but that is not the end of the story, because the real question should be why rather than what?
In the early 2000`s a second major government initiative involved the construction and operation of a Shrimp hatchery in Hawk´s Bay, a coastal area just south of Karachi. Larvae of a local shrimp species Fenneropenaeus merguiensis, were produced using eggs from wild caught females, a strategy that has since shown to be extremely risky in terms of biosecurity. The larvae produced were reared to adults in converted extensive fish farms in the adjoining area of Gharo, a vast mangrove delta system that is ideal for this purpose.
A second hatchery was built in Clifton (relatively close to the first hatchery site), but this was also closed down after a few years of inconclusive results. Reasons cited include low growth due to low salinity during the grow out phase, high feed costs and fundamentally, less profitable than alternative fish crops for local farmers.
Moving forward to the current decade, there has not been any significant advances in Shrimp production until late 2024, when a private company announced the export of Penaeus vannamei cultured in the Gharo area of the Indus delta. Closer inspection reveals a highly organized operation using relevant technology and competent management strategies. At the time of writing a second local company whose core business is oil, is also actively starting up operations in roughly the same area, in what appears to be a large enough scale to be significant.
Previous Government Initiatives, Outcomes and Lessons Learnt
In the past, the government’s approach to developing new export agro-industries (including shrimp) has had two major flaws.
1.
No infrastructure support
Because the various segments of the production/value chain fall under the jurisdiction of multiple government departments from environmental protection to export legislation, coordination and a shared vision is key to overall success. However, rather than implementing a collaborative effort, involving all relevant entities from inception, the government has up to now, treated these projects as standalone initiatives with no general blue print to follow. As a result, projects in the agriculture, livestock, and fisheries sectors have all tended to focus predominately on production, and within this, often limited to small scale proof of concept pilot projects. Whilst this has value as a very first step, it is not nearly enough to provide a solid foundation for an industry. Therefore, it is no surprise that previous efforts floundered once the product was harvested (i.e. at the point of sale), not during the production process itself.
2. No recognition of the importance of scale
Secondly, the government has consistently and despite evidence to the
contrary, assumed that demonstrating the possibility of production of certain agricultural products would automatically attract private sector investment in agro-inputs, particularly processing, marketing and distribution in order to complete the production/distribution chain. However, the private sector has understandably, remained hesitant to invest until assured of a sufficient scale of production to be able to penetrate foreign markets.
Meanwhile, due to underdeveloped value chains, farmers often faced challenges in cost-effective input procurements as well as selling their produce at a fair price, so they, in turn, started switching to other options, ultimately undermining the government’s efforts. This unfortunately has been exactly the case up to very recently, for shrimp farming in Pakistan, with local farmers reverting to fish production for the local market after finding serious difficulties in selling their first shrimp crops.
By drawing on lessons learned, I feel government initiatives would be more effective if they were concentrated on the following priorities:
i. Adopt an approach that focuses on developing all segments of the value chain simultaneously. In other words, design a realistic Policy Framework in conjunction with the private sector and ensure that its implementation is fully coordinated across all the different administrative departments involved, not just livestock and fisheries, as appears to have been the case on previous occasions. Fundamentally, the Pakistani government must ensure that all relevant departments and ministries are fully coordinated and are acting as partners with the private sector, not just as a legislative body divorced from the success of this initiative.
ii. Investment incentives. This could be achieved by actively engaging the private sector (both investors and entrepreneurs) by offering strategic incentives, particularly in the areas of seed and feed provision and processing. Elimination of import duties on necessary equipment for production and processes, along with tax incentives for potential investors would
be a real help and a positive sign that the government was serious in its intention to support this industry.
Another possibility would be to implement key interventions under a public-private partnership model — publicly funded and privately executed — rather than leaving it entirely to the private
Moving forward to the current decade, there has not been any significant advances in Shrimp production until late 2024, when a private company announced the export of Penaeus vannamei cultured in the Gharo area of the Indus delta.
Photo courtesy Philip Buike.
A new semi-intensive shrimp farm constructed on saline soil unfit for agricultural use (Note: HDPE pond liners, auto-feeders and paddle wheel aerators). These operations are providing a yield of around 10 to 15 tons/hec/harvest which compares favorably with international standards (Photo courtesy Philip Buike).
sector. This however would be an unusually brave step for Pakistan´s current political regime.
iii. Foreign market promotion. Countries such as Ecuador have demonstrated how important generic promotion can be. As such, the Pakistani Government could have a major impact on international market acceptance through the promotion of national shrimp and ensuring that quality control and international food hygiene standards are rigorously followed in those processing plants approved for shrimp export.
3. So, what has changed?
Although Pakistan does not currently have a single hatchery that can provide shrimp eggs to private-sector farmers, nauplii are imported mainly from Thailand and Vietnam. These
The
current tendency therefore appears to be a move away from government lead initiatives toward private sector ventures, initially financed by local capital. This is a pattern I have seen before in other countries that eventually became shrimp power houses.
very early-stage larvae are then reared to post larvae and distributed to local farmers at a reasonable price.
This I feel is a sensible strategy at this stage, post larvae are not limited in either price, availability or quality and once production volume justifies the investment, a domestic maturation unit(s) will be established. Technically this does not present the challenge it did when Ecuador for example, was just getting off the ground. So though technically Pakistan does not yet have an internal seed supply, in reality this is not a barrier to expansion as seed is being located at a competitive price and of high quality due to the extensive experience of suppliers.
Similarly, until recently, specialized shrimp feed was not produced locally, forcing farmers to rely on costly imports. However Thai Union (a reputable and well-established feed
company) is now producing shrimp feed in Pakistan, that said, more national feed mills would certainly be welcome. However, specialist shrimp diet is now available at internationally competitive prices and as feed represents around 60% of direct operating costs, the importance of this cannot be overstated.
Undoubtedly, there continues to be a lack of local expertise in shrimp farming operations; As such, startup companies have either associated with foreign operators with proven track records or hired foreign consultants to guide them through the operation process. This is a necessary step and something that both Ecuador and India invested in during the early years, time has shown that this was justified. Local operators will learn from observation of best practices and will soon be able to inde-
A typical shrimp farm constructed on the salt pans of the Indus Delta near to Karachi, Pakistan. This particular farm was built around 2017, however current operations are using smaller lined ponds, recirculation technology and are moving toward a more biosecure model of production through reduced water use (Photo courtesy Philip Buike).
pendently run successful production modules, as has been amply demonstrated in India over the last decade or so.
So, whilst Pakistan has always had the natural conditions favorable to shrimp farming, it currently also has access to local feed and seed, and can count on expertise gained in similar environments in leading shrimp producing nations.
However, ground up processing from harvest to packaging is also vital if Pakistan is to get a toehold in a very competitive international market.
In the early 2000`s a second major government initiative involved the construction and operation of a Shrimp hatchery in Hawk´s Bay, a coastal area just south of Karachi. Larvae of a local shrimp species Fenneropenaeus merguiensis, were produced using eggs from wild caught females, a strategy that has since shown to be extremely risky in terms of biosecurity.
The current lack of end-to-end cold chain and inadequate processing and value-added facilities compliant with international food safety standards, could potentially pose challenges to the development of shrimp farming in the short term. It is in this area, not production, that the industry could most benefit from government support to establish linkages to successfully locate the finished product in leading export markets.
Note: this directly relates to production volume or scale. In broad terms, to be economically efficient, a
packing plant needs at least 25 tons of product per day, every day. This equates to an annual raw material demand (whole shrimp) of around 10,000 tons or around 500 hectares of semi-intensive shrimp ponds, not a lot by international standards but quiet a goal if you are starting from nothing.
In other words, to get this off the ground, Pakistan (or more realistically, a group of investors (such as Dhabaji and Energi Asia, two of the first pioneers) need to get about 500 hectares of shrimp ponds into production
as soon as possible. With that production volume, there will be enough incentive to build all the hatcheries, feed mills and packing plants that are required.
The current tendency therefore appears to be a move away from government lead initiatives toward private sector ventures, initially financed by local capital. This is a pattern I have seen before in other countries that eventually became shrimp power houses. It takes time to get local investors onboard, but when they do, things usually move very quickly, as foreign investment is attracted by tangible results and the fact the local businesses are already involved.
Conclusions
The current situation and a pathway for the future of shrimp farming in Pakistan can be summarized as follows:
» The physical production of shrimp in Pakistan is a proven reality.
» Historically, industry growth has been seriously restricted due to lack of input materials and support infrastructure.
» Currently, the private sector initiatives have led to a significant improvement in the situation by demonstrating viable export pathways, and provision of vital inputs such as feed and seed at internationally competitive prices.
» Government initiatives have up to present, not been particularly effective, however there is a significant role for a coordinated government/private sector joint effort. That said, it is likely that the private sector will forge ahead with or without this help.
In conclusion therefore, Pakistan potentially has a great future if and when a critical production volume is reached (about 10,000 tons per year), such that large scale investment in support infrastructure is warranted.
This could happen very quickly, if one or two big players decide to get involved or perhaps less so, if limited solely to the efforts of local investors, but at this stage I think it is safe to say that finally, shrimp farming in Pakistan, is here to stay.
Philip Buike C.V. holds a bachelor’s degree in Fisheries Science from the University of Plymouth and a master’s degree in Aquaculture and Pathology from the University of Stirling. He has over 30 years of industrial experience in shrimp farming and now has his own consultancy company specializing in intensive shrimp farming projects. He built Europe’s only commercial shrimp hatchery in the Austrian Alps and is currently chief consultant for Vismar International Ltd.
If you are interested in finding out investment potential in Shrimp farming in Pakistan, please contact the Author: philipbuike64@gmail.com
Karachi fish market. The vast majority of local seafood is sold daily at the Karachi fish market, meeting international food standards will be a vital step in developing Pakistan´s export trade (January 2025) (Photo courtesy Philip Buike).
Economic Viability and Return on Investment for Farmers Adopting Modern and Sustainable Methods
* By S. Venkatesh,
* K. Naveen Kumar, Dr. E. Prabu
Introduction
Aquaculture has rapidly become one of the fastest-growing sectors in global food production, playing a crucial role in satisfying the increasing demand for high-quality aquatic protein while reducing pressure on wild fish stocks. Recently, the industry has undergone significant transformations fueled by the adoption of organic production practices, advanced technologies, and integrated farming systems designed to enhance productivity, profitability, and environmental sustainability. Organic aquaculture emphasizes eco-friendly inputs and premium-quality outputs, demonstrating strong long-term
Aquaculture has rapidly become one of the fastestgrowing sectors in global food production. The industry has undergone significant transformations fueled by the adoption of organic production practices, advanced technologies, and integrated farming systems designed to enhance productivity, profitability, and environmental sustainability. This article explores the economic viability, technological advancements, and sustainability implications of Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS), Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture (IMTA), and automated feeding technologies, highlighting their potential to create a more profitable and ecologically responsible future for the industry.
economic viability despite the higher initial investments required. At the same time, innovations such as Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS), Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture (IMTA), and automated feeding technologies are transforming operational efficiency, resource utilization, and market competitiveness. These advancements, along with integrated fish-livestock-crop systems, allow producers to diversify their income streams, optimize resource use, and build resilience against economic and environmental uncertainties. This article explores the economic viability, technological advancements, and sustainability implications of mod-
ern and integrated aquaculture approaches, highlighting their potential to create a more profitable and ecologically responsible future for the industry.
Organic Aquaculture
Organic aquaculture, despite requiring a higher initial capital outlay, has demonstrated strong long-term economic viability. A recent assessment focusing on Indian major carps cultivated under organic culture systems (OCS) reported significantly enhanced productivity, with yields reaching up to 19 tons per hectare markedly exceeding those achieved through conventional methods. Eco-
Innovations such as recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS), integrated multitrophic aquaculture (IMTA), and automated feeding technologies are transforming operational efficiency, resource utilization, and competitiveness in the aquaculture industry market.
nomic analysis further underscored the financial strength of OCS, revealing a net present value (NPV) of USD 1,004,101.38 per hectare, a notably short payback period of 1 year and 9 months, and a compelling internal rate of return (IRR) of 51% over a tenyear horizon. The findings highlight that economic success in organic aquaculture is closely linked to overall fish yield and the premium pricing of organically produced fish. Consequently, optimizing production efficiency and establishing stable market channels are essential to maximizing returns and ensuring the long-term sustainability of organic aquaculture systems.
Modern Technologies
The adoption of advanced aquaculture technologies including Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS),
Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture (IMTA), and automated feeding systems has markedly enhanced operational efficiency, productivity, and environmental sustainability within the sector. These innovations enable high-density fish farming, improve feed conversion ratios, reduce labor demands, and support uninterrupted, year-round production, thereby boosting both economic returns and the overall resilience of aquaculture enterprises. Integrated systems such as IMTA and polyculture not only foster ecological harmony but also offer substantial economic benefits by diversifying aquaculture outputs. This diversification helps stabilize income in the face of market fluctuations or disease outbreaks and introduces additional revenue streams through the cultivation of compatible species like seaweeds and shellfish. Moreover,
these holistic approaches contribute to cost reductions by enhancing water quality management and reducing the incidence of disease, further supporting the sustainability and profitability of modern aquaculture practices.
Integrated Systems and Diversification
Integrated fish livestock crop farming systems have proven to be highly effective in improving household income and strengthening food security, especially for smallholder farmers. These systems facilitate the efficient use of on-farm resources, thereby minimizing reliance on external inputs, reducing production expenses, and enhancing overall economic returns. The synergistic relationships among the different components of the system fish, livestock, and crops
not only maximize resource productivity but also support the longterm sustainability and resilience of farming practices. Such integrated approaches offer a holistic model for sustainable agriculture, aligning ecological balance with economic viability.
Market Trends and Sustainability
There is a growing global demand for sustainably and organically produced seafood, which consistently commands premium market prices. This shift in consumer preference offers improved return on investment for aquaculture producers who adopt environmentally responsible practices and effectively access these high-value market segments. By aligning production methods with sustainability standards, producers can capitalize on emerging market trends while contributing to ecological stewardship.
Recirculating Aquaculture Systems
Yield
and efficiency
RAS have demonstrated superior production efficiency compared to conventional pond or raceway systems, largely due to their ability to support higher stocking densities and maintain optimal environmental conditions. These controlled systems typically achieve improved feed conversion ratios (FCR), leading to more efficient feed utilization and reduced feed costs per unit of fish produced.
Resource use and sustainability
RAS utilize substantially less water than traditional aquaculture methods, thereby lowering operational expenses associated with water usage and wastewater management. The closed-loop configuration of RAS enhances biosecurity by minimizing exposure to external pathogens, resulting in reduced disease incidence and improved survival rates. This combination of resource efficiency and health management contributes to greater stability and long-term profitability in aquaculture operations.
Profitability metrics
Under optimal conditions, RAS projects can attain IRR between 20% and 30%, with payback periods varying from 3 to 10 years depending on factors such as species cultivated, market dynamics, and operational scale. Reported average returns on investment (ROI) for RAS are approximately 7.3%, with a range spanning from 2% to 18%, and higher profitability can be achieved through effective management and access to favorable market opportunities. In contrast, traditional pond-based systems generally involve lower upfront capital and energy expenditures; however, they tend to produce lower yields and are more susceptible to risks associated with disease outbreaks, predation, and environmental variability, which can negatively impact overall productivity and economic stability.
Cost structure and risks
A primary limitation of RAS lies in the substantial initial capital investment required for infrastructure such as tanks, filtration units, and pumping systems, as well as the continuous energy demands for system operation. Additionally, labor and management costs per unit of production tend to be higher compared to traditional methods, unless the system is optimized to achieve high biomass yields relative to tank volume. Startup ventures in RAS are also subject to elevated failure rates if operational efficiencies are not met or if reliable market access is not secured, underscoring the importance of careful planning and management in ensuring long-term viability.
Long-term perspective
When supported by sound system design, skilled technical management,
and reliable market access, RAS have the potential to deliver strong longterm profitability through consistent production, elevated yields, and access to premium markets. While traditional aquaculture systems may present a lower financial barrier to entry and reduced short-term risk for small-scale or resource-constrained farmers, they typically fall short of the long-term productivity and efficiency achievable with RAS technology.
Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture
High initial and operational costs
IMTA systems demand considerable initial investment for infrastructure development, specialized training, and tailored system design particularly when implemented in offshore settings or adapted to novel environmental conditions. Additionally, ongoing operational expenditures tend to be elevated, owing to the requirement for skilled personnel and the
A common challenge in IMTA systems is the disparity in market value between high-value species such as finfish and lowervalue co-cultured species like shellfish and seaweed.
increased complexity of managing multiple species within a single production system.
Market imbalance and revenue streams
A common challenge in IMTA systems is the disparity in market value between high-value species such as finfish and lower-value co-cultured species like shellfish and seaweed. This economic imbalance can constrain overall revenue generation and deter wider adoption, as returns from the lower-value components may not adequately compensate for the added complexity and operational costs. While the development of new markets and value chains for IMTA products is critical to improving profitability, progress in this area can be slow and marked by uncertainty.
System complexity and skill requirements
The management of IMTA systems introduces greater operational complexity, as it involves the cultivation of species from multiple trophic levels. This approach necessitates the acquisition of specialized technical skills and more intensive management practices. Farmers are required to simultaneously rear and market diverse species, each with unique biological requirements and market conditions. The demand for multidisciplinary expertise can pose a signifi-
Automated feeding technologies enhance feed conversion efficiency by administering accurately timed and measured feed portions, thereby minimizing overfeeding and reducing feed waste.
cant barrier to adoption, particularly for small-scale producers with limited resources and technical capacity.
Environmental and regulatory challenges
Nearshore IMTA farms are subject to ecological risks, including nutrient accumulation and the potential for harmful algal blooms, which can negatively affect both cultured and surrounding wild populations. Furthermore, existing regulatory frameworks are often not designed to accommodate the integrated, multispecies structure of IMTA systems, presenting additional challenges in securing permits and ensuring regulatory compliance.
Economic and social uncertainty
IMTA remains a relatively emerging practice in many parts of the world, with few large-scale commercial implementations outside of Asia. The limited availability of established operational models poses challenges for attracting investment and gaining public acceptance or social license to operate. The economic sustainability of IMTA systems is highly dependent on the effective optimization of production processes, cost-efficiency, and the successful marketing of all co-cultured species, including access to high-value market segments.
Seasonal and biological variability
Seasonal variability and complex biological interactions among co-cultured species can influence overall productivity and lead to fluctuations in output, introducing uncertainty into revenue forecasts and increasing financial risk.
Impact of Automated Feeding Systems on Operational Costs in Fish Farming Feed cost reduction
Automated feeding technologies enhance feed conversion efficiency by administering accurately timed and measured feed portions, thereby minimizing overfeeding and reducing feed waste. Given that feed expenses can constitute up to 40% of total operational costs in aquaculture, this level of precision contributes significantly to overall cost reduction. Additionally, decreased feed waste supports improved water quality, which in turn lowers expenditures associated with water
treatment and filtration, further enhancing system efficiency and sustainability.
Labor savings
Automation considerably reduces labor requirements by enabling a single operator to manage multiple automated feeding units, allowing continuous, around-the-clock feeding without the need for shift-based staffing. This reduction in manual involvement not only lowers labor costs but also allows personnel to concentrate on other critical aspects of farm management, thereby improving overall operational efficiency.
Improved growth and productivity
Implementing consistent and optimized feeding schedules supports improved growth rates and size uniformity in cultured fish, thereby shortening production cycles and increasing total yield, which positively impacts economic performance. Additionally, enhanced water quality and reduced stress levels resulting from precise feeding contribute to better fish health and lower mortality rates, further strengthening overall profitability.
Maintenance and operational efficiency
Automated feeding systems are typically engineered for straightforward and cost-effective maintenance, often allowing existing farm personnel to handle routine upkeep, thereby reducing operational expenses. When integrated with farm management software and sensor technologies, these systems enable real-time mon-
The management of IMTA systems introduces greater operational complexity, as it involves the cultivation of species from multiple trophic levels.
itoring and dynamic adjustments, enhancing both operational efficiency and traceability across the production process.
Return on Investment
The upfront cost of implementing automated feeding systems is generally recovered within three years or less, primarily through significant reductions in feed expenses, labor requirements, and overall operational inefficiencies. These cumulative savings, combined with enhanced productivity, often lead to improved profit margins and a higher return on investment for farms that adopt such technologies.
Conclusion
Adopting organic, modern, and integrated aquaculture methods enables fish and shrimp farmers to achieve strong economic returns and longterm sustainability by optimizing investments, yields, and market access. RAS offer higher profitability through increased production, resource efficiency, and biosecurity, though they require greater capital and management expertise. Automated feeding systems further reduce costs and improve growth and efficiency, contributing to faster payback and enhanced profitability. Together, these technologies drive sustainable, resilient, and economically viable aquaculture.
S. Venkatesh*, K. Naveen Kumar and Dr. E. Prabu. Tamil Nadu Dr. J. Jayalalithaa Fisheries University, (DIVA), Muttukadu, Chennai-603 112. Contact: senthilvenkat1401@gmail.com
Phage Cocktail Therapy for AHPND in Penaeus vannamei: Promise, Challenges, and Microbial Shifts
Shrimp aquaculture faces persistent bacterial challenges, particularly AHPND caused by Vibrio parahaemolyticus harboring pirAB toxin genes. Traditional mitigation approaches offer inconsistent outcomes and raise sustainability concerns. Bacteriophage therapy, utilizing viruses that target and lyse bacterial hosts, presents a promising, eco-friendly alternative to bacterial diseases. This study assesses the effectiveness of a three-phage cocktail during experimental infection in Penaeus vannamei.
* By Sonia A. Soto-Rodríguez*, Bruno Gomez-Gil, Rodolfo Lozano-Olvera, Karla G. Aguilar-Rendon, Jean Pierre González-Gómez, Cristobal Chaidez
Introduction
Shrimp aquaculture faces persistent bacterial challenges, particularly AHPND caused by Vibrio parahaemolyticus harboring pirAB toxin genes (Soto-Rodriguez et al., 2022). Shrimp farmers have used
various methods to control AHPND in hatcheries and grow-out, such as functional disinfectants, diet ingredients, herbal products, probiotics, and biofloc technology. However, today there are no efficient methods to control this disease. Biological and
eco-friendly alternatives could help mitigate the devastating loss in the shrimp industry and avoid or reduce the use of antimicrobial agents, such as phage therapy. Traditional mitigation approaches offer inconsistent outcomes and raise sustainabil-
Results showed that the phages exhibited varying degrees of tolerance to stress conditions. Phages with high burst sizes and short latency periods are generally more effective at targeting, infecting, and eliminating specific bacterial species or groups.
ity concerns. Bacteriophage therapy, utilizing viruses that target and lyse bacterial hosts, presents a promising, eco-friendly alternative to bacterial diseases. However, the emergence of phage resistance and the complexity of marine microbial ecosystems war-
rant careful evaluation. This study assesses the effectiveness of a threephage cocktail during experimental infection in Penaeus vannamei, evaluating survival, tissue pathology, microbial shifts, and genomic characterization.
Methods
Phage selection
Three lytic phages were selected based on host specificity and genomic safety profiles: vB_Pd_PDCC-1 (Veyrand-Quirós et al., 2020), vB_Vc_SrVc9
(Lomelí-Ortega et al., 2021), and vB_ Vp_PvVp11 (this study). Genome annotation confirmed the absence of virulence and antibiotic resistance genes.
Biological characterization of phages.
The lytic activity and environmental stability of bacteriophages targeting V. parahaemolyticus AHPND were evaluated using killing curves and one-step growth curves. Phage effectiveness and key parameters such as latent period and burst size was also assessed.
Experimental design
Juvenile shrimp (~0.5 g) were distributed into four treatment groups with five replicates:
» Positive control: infected with V. parahaemolyticus M0605 (AHPND).
» Phage therapy: infected + phage cocktail.
» Negative control: non-infected.
» Phage control: phage cocktail without infection.
Phage therapy was administered via immersion 10 minutes before bacterial inoculation.
Survival and histopathology
Mortality was monitored over 72 hours. Hepatopancreas tissues were fixed in Davidson’s solution and stained for histopathological analysis. Lesions were classified to identify the stages of AHPND.
Metagenomic sampling
Water samples were collected at 0, 6, 24, and 48 h post-infection (hpi). Shotgun metagenomics was performed using Illumina sequencing, and taxonomic classification was carried out with Kraken2.
Results and Discussion
A host range analysis showed that the phages could infect several pathogenic Vibrio strains, including six AHPND-causing isolates. Phage Vp11 inhibited the growth of V. parahaemolyticus (Figure 1a). Environmental stability tests revealed how temperature, salinity exposure affected phage viability. Results showed that the phages exhibited varying degrees of tolerance to stress conditions. Phages with high burst sizes and short latency periods are generally more effective at targeting, infecting, and eliminating specific bacterial species or groups (Abedon et al., 2001). Phage Vp11 is characterized by a good latency period of 25 minutes and a burst size of 41.3 PFU/cell (Figure 1b).
These findings illustrate the potential of these phages to lyse Vibrio species (vibriophages), which are critical opportunistic pathogens.
Survival patterns
Acute mortality was delayed in phage therapy shrimp (first death at 8 hpi vs. 6 hpi in control). A significant reduc-
tion in mortality was observed at 12 hpi (Figure 2, p < 0.0001), but cumulative survival at 72 hpi did not differ significantly (González-Gómez et al., 2023). This indicates partial earlystage protection.
Histological progression
Shrimp in both infected groups (positive control and phage therapy) showed pathognomonic AHPND lesions, including tubular sloughing and reduced vacuolation (Aguilar-
Rendón et al., 2020) (Figures 3a, b). The phage therapy group progressed through stages faster, suggesting accelerated resolution but also earlier onset of terminal damage. It was evident fewer lesions and a better recovery of the hepatopancreas in shrimps of phage therapy (Figures 3c, d).
Microbial community dynamics
Genomic analyses of phages revealed no virulence factors or tRNAs. Alpha diversity dropped significantly in phage-treated water at 24 hpi (Shannon index, p < 0.006). Principal Component Analysis revealed distinct microbial compositions, with enrichment of V. parahaemolyticus and commensal bacteria like Ruegeria and Erythrobacter (Dong et al., 2023; Ali et al., 2022).
Conclusion
Phage cocktail therapy offers protection against AHPND during critical acute stages of infection. These findings support the potential application of phage therapy as a sustainable alternative to antibiotics in shrimp aquaculture. Integrating phages with toxin inhibitors and quorum sensing disruptors may enhance control strategies. Future efforts should focus on optimizing cocktail composition, resistance monitoring, and microbiome management in shrimp culture systems.
References and sources consulted by the author on the elaboration of this article are available under previous request to our editorial staff.
This is a summarized version of based on the research article titled “PHAGE COCKTAIL AGAINST VIBRIO PARAHAEMOLYTICUS CAUSING ACUTE HEPATOPANCREATIC NECROSIS DISEASE (AHPND) IN PENAEUS VANNAMEI: GENOMIC, BIOLOGICAL, AND PATHOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION” by: Sonia Soto-Rodriguez -Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo (CIAD), Mazatlan Unit, E. Quiroz-Guzman- Centro de Investigaciones Biológicas del Noroeste, B. Gomez-Gil -CIAD, Mazatlan Unit, R. Lozano-Olvera -CIAD, Mazatlan Unit, K. Aguilar-Rendon -CIAD, Mazatlan Unit, J.M. Serrano-Hernández -CIAD, Mazatlan Unit, Jean Pierre González-Gómez -CIAD, Culiacan Unit, Cristobal Chaidez- -CIAD, Culiacan Unit.
* Sonia A. Soto-Rodríguez, Bruno Gomez-Gil, Rodolfo Lozano-Olvera, Karla G. Aguilar-Rendon, Jean Pierre González-Gómez, Cristobal Chaidez *ssoto@ciad.mx
Centro de Investigación en Alimentación y Desarrollo, A.C. (CIAD), Subsede Mazatlán en Acuicultura y Manejo Ambiental, Av. Sábalo-Cerritos 82112, Mazatlán, México.
We Need to Interest the Uninterested!
* By Antonio Garza de Yta, Ph.D.
In all the years I’ve been writing this column, I had never received as much feedback as I did on the last edition. Truly, “influencers” and “excelsheeters” are something aquaculture experts deal with every day. However, the comment that caught my attention most was from my good friend and financial expert Ali Abdulhussain, a young professional of world-class quality, with outstanding analytical skills, and with whom I’ve had the great opportunity to work closely in Oman. His view is that despite all the things we might complain about, “influencers” and “excelsheeters” serve the function of interest the uninterested. How true that is!
Aquaculture professionals have not been able to build a proper com-
munication agenda, and we’ve failed to convey the importance of our activity. Even though FAO and WHO have highlighted its importance, we have not been able to reach the broader population and, even less so, those who make budget decisions in government or investment decisions in private capital funds. If we were to place something on the sector’s agenda today, I think Ali’s comment is the most accurate of all: We need to interest the uninterested.
A few years ago, I was in Italy having dinner with a colleague who asked the waiter whether the bass being offered was wild-caught or farmed. Upon hearing that it was wild-caught, my colleague immediately asked if he had anything better to offer us. I’ll never forget the look
on the waiter’s face, but before he could say anything, my companion told him that for safety, he only ate farmed products, because he knew where they came from and what they had been fed, thanks to the sustainability and traceability standards demanded of the industry; whereas the wild-caught product could have been in any type of water and fed on anything. We took the opportunity to explain to him that it’s false that aquaculture uses hormones in feed and that today it is an increasingly safe industry, without which we couldn’t feed the growing population. I am convinced that after that conversation, our new friend saw aquaculture differently.
I don’t mean to say that the way my colleague interacted in that restau-
In
all the years I’ve been writing this column, I had never received as much feedback as I did on the last edition. Truly, “influencers” and “excelsheeters” are something aquaculture experts deal with every day. However, the comment
that
caught my attention most was from my good friend and financial expert Ali Abdulhussain. His view is that despite all the things we might complain about, “influencers” and “excelsheeters” serve the function of interest the uninterested. How true that is!
We can’t stay stuck in the same old narrative; we have to learn from those “influencers” and tell stories that expand our audience, rather than always speaking among ourselves.
rant is ideal — personally, I don’t think we should speak negatively about responsibly practiced fishing, as it provides jobs for millions of families and high-quality food for society at large — but what I do want to share is that we need to deliver a disruptive message. We can’t stay stuck in the same old narrative; we have to learn from those “influencers” and tell stories that expand our audience, rather than always speaking among ourselves. We have to seek novel ideas and communicate them not in hours but in capsules of less than a minute. We cannot expect the world to adapt to us — it is we who must adapt to the world.
Today we must communicate our story in a way that encourages governments to allocate budgets to aquaculture so that it can develop
where it still hasn’t. We must present the sector in a way that attracts investors, not as a recipe for becoming billionaires in a few years, but as what it truly is: a reliable long-term activity. We have the goose that lays golden eggs, and we haven’t figured out how to sell it. Aquaculture is the most sustainable way to produce animal protein on the planet — the one that will allow millions of human beings to eat well and fully develop their intellectual capacity, living long and healthy lives. Plus, we have a delicious product! So, let’s learn from those who have been able to communicate their ideas, and in a professional, serious — but disruptive — manner, go after that new audience and take on this great challenge: to interest the uninterested.
* Antonio Garza de Yta is COO of Blue Aqua International-Gulf, Vice President of the International Center for Strategic Studies in Aquaculture (CIDEEA), President of Aquaculture Without Frontiers (AwF), Past President of the World Aquaculture Society (WAS), Former Secretary of Fisheries and Aquaculture of Tamaulipas, Mexico, and Creator of the Certification for Aquaculture Professionals (CAP) Program with Auburn University.
Auditing Your Online Marketing Presence
An engaging and effective online presence that includes a website and/or social media has become a vital component of the marketing strategy for the vast majority of aquaculture and agricultural businesses, especially those engaged in direct marketing. However, it is equally important to regularly audit your online presence, ensuring that the tools you are using and your approach continue to help you achieve your goals.
* By Sarah Cornelisse
An engaging and effective online presence that includes a website and/or social media has become a vital component of the marketing strategy for the vast majority of aquaculture and agricultural businesses, especially those engaged in direct marketing. Seventy-one percent of small businesses had a website in 2023, and 96% use social media in their marketing strategy (Haan, 2024; Kiplangat, 2025). Through online tools, businesses are able to connect with customers and
the public, not just to advertise products, but to connect with them at a more personal level, telling your story and engaging in conversation, just as you might do in person.
A lot of emphasis is placed on developing an online or social media marketing strategy, and rightly so, due to the importance of these digital connections to marketing and business success. However, it is equally important to regularly audit your online presence, ensuring that the tools you are using and your approach continue
to help you achieve your goals. Often, the use and performance of online tools are reviewed individually.
However, an online, or digital, marketing audit is comprehensive, looking at your presence across all platforms. As described by Heinrich, “A digital marketing audit is a thorough, objective evaluation of an organization’s marketing strategies. It assesses marketing activities’ effectiveness, relevance, and alignment with business goals and surfaces opportunities for improvement” (2025).
Be sure to keep in mind the marketing funnel or customer journey when assessing your online marketing presence. How effectively does information and content connect with customers, and how easily are they able to engage and interact with you?
A strong online marketing audit begins with a review of your marketing goals for your online presence. For instance, do goals include growing brand awareness, improving customer engagement, increasing product sales quantity, or revenue? Your audit findings should allow you to assess whether the platforms you are using are aligned with your goals. Be sure to include all aspects of your business’s online marketing presence in your audit. This should include:
» Website (including online store).
» Social media platforms (Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, etc.).
» Email list and newsletter.
» Google business profile.
» Third-party review sites (Yelp, etc.).
» Online directories (Chamber of Commerce, Visitors Bureau, etc.).
Start your audit by reviewing the accuracy of information such as contact information, business hours, and links to your website, online store, or social media. Following this, take into account your use of each online tool. For instance, are you routinely using each social media platform that your business is on? How often are you posting or using other features (Stories, Reels, boosted posts, etc.)? Are you responding to customer reviews? Analytical data gathered by the tools used is valuable for uncovering the effectiveness of your current actions.
Study performance data such as open rate, click-through rates, signups, likes, shares, number or value of purchases, and other quantitative information.
Finally, assess qualitative aspects of your online marketing presence. This includes things such as ease and clarity of website and/or online store navigation and accessibility, brand voice, and messaging. Data provided by social media tools allows you to assess the level and quality of engagement with your audience, while Google Analytics data can provide insight into the user experience of your website and online store.
One aspect of your online presence that bears specific mention is
Start your audit by reviewing the accuracy of information such as contact information, business hours, and links to your website, online store, or social media. Following this, take into account your use of each online tool.
brand consistency. Since online marketing tools did not become available at the same time, and each has evolved differently since its launch, it stands to reason that you likely integrated the use of individual tools at different times. Or perhaps different people within your business are responsible for managing different tools, such as one person being responsible for your website, online store, Google profile, and review sites, while another is responsible for managing your social media platforms and email newsletter. Either scenario can lead to inconsistent branding across platforms that make up your online presence. Specific things to look at during an audit include logo, business name, visual identity elements (photos, colors, fonts), and your core messages and tone across platforms.
Be sure to keep in mind the marketing funnel or customer journey when assessing your online marketing presence. How effectively does information and content connect with customers, and how easily are they able to engage and interact with you? It is often the small things, such as how quickly a website loads, that will determine whether a customer moves from awareness to decision, that is, making a purchase.
Once your audit is complete, it is important to act on your findings. You should have a list of areas for improvement, along with things that are working successfully. Building on what is effective, create a list of short- and long-term improvements that you will implement. For example, through your audit, you may determine that your presence on Instagram is not driving the re-
Are you routinely using each social media platform that your business is on? How often are you posting or using other features (Stories, Reels, boosted posts, etc.)? Are you responding to customer reviews?
sults you desire but that your YouTube videos are achieving high reach and engagement, leading you to decide to mothball your business’s Instagram account and increase your focus on developing YouTube videos that can also be shared on your website, through other social media platforms, and your email newsletter.
It is often recommended that audits take place annually or when a problem is identified or brought to your attention. However, there are other events that may lead you to perform an online presence audit. These include:
» Changes to the business, such as rebranding or new product/service offerings.
» Changes in strategy in response to market changes.
» Personnel changes, such as hiring a marketing consultant.
Whatever triggers an audit of your business’s online presence, be intentional and thorough during the process. Your business’s online presence may be the first impression customers or the public get of your business. Your goal through an audit is to ensure that your business has an accurate and consistent presence across all platforms and outlets being used. An online marketing audit will allow you to:
» Improve your understanding of current performance.
» Determine where improvements can be made.
» Ensure actions align with goals.
» Identify opportunities.
Performed routinely, online marketing presence audits will allow you to enhance your online presence, attracting new customers and strengthening connections with existing ones.
Disclaimer: Where individual or trade names appear, no discrimination is intended, and no endorsement by Penn State Extension is implied. References and sources consulted by the author on the elaboration of this article are available under previous request to our editorial staff. * Sarah Cornelisse is a Senior Extension Associate of agricultural entrepreneurship and business management at Penn State University in the Department of Agricultural Economics, Sociology and Education. Sarah has expertise in direct marketing, value-added dairy entrepreneurship and marketing, the use of digital and social media for agricultural farm and food business marketing, and business and marketing planning and decision making. Originally from New York State, she has a B.A in Mathematics from the State University of New York at Geneseo, and M.S. degrees in Agricultural Economics and Animal Science, both from Penn State University. Correspondence email: sar243@psu.edu
Can Probiotics for Shrimp Prevent or Cure Disease?
The term “probiotic” is applied to bacteria for a wide range of purposes, typically without adequate consideration of what rigorous scientific studies actually demonstrate about the specific effects and benefits of those microbes. I am of the opinion that purported mechanisms of action for this commonly used term, as applicable to shrimp farming, are inaccurate for most commercial products.
* By Stephen Newman, Ph.D.
Most people when they hear or use the term probiotic think of yogurt with many different microbial species added to it. These “probiotics” are consumed orally and those bacteria that survive the barrier of an acidic stomach (which is not the norm with shrimp as they have a near neutral pH gut) move through the digestive
tract where they colonize some portion of the gut. This is claimed to alter the existing microbiome, with the added bacteria becoming a stable component of the microbiome. This is purported to positively impact the health of the host.
This focused definition omits the plethora of other impacts that bacteria can have ranging from impacting
the environment via bioremediation to stimulating non-specific immunity in the host, etc. It is also contentious. The microbiome is a complex assemblage of multiple species of bacteria, fungi, and protozoa that colonize external and internal surfaces. Much of the evidence to date suggests that the addition of “probiotics” may (or may not) cause short term altera-
There are mechanisms by which probiotics could in theory cure or prevent diseases. These include out competing for essential nutrients, such as enzyme cofactors (metals like Fe or vitamins) or the production of antibiotics or anti-microbial peptides (AMPs) that will inhibit specific strains.
tions in the microbiome at best. The apparent need to continually dose with probiotics strongly suggests that any alterations to the microbiome are temporary.
Many bacteria degrade organic matter. Many also convert ammonia into metabolites such as nitrite, nitrates and atmospheric nitrogen. They may have narrow ranges of ac-
tivity or other traits that make them ill-suited for use in commercial products for aquaculture. Some are very good at it, while others may be extremely fastidious and others are poorly suited. Some companies offer Nitrobacter and Nitrosomonas strains for nitrification. Many other bacteria do this as well, including several Bacillus species, that can be dried,
have a shelf stable spore form, do not require refrigeration and are not very expensive. Many companies are selling blends of bacteria that compete against each other, potentially reducing the overall efficiency of the process. The inherent variability of production environments demands that any standardized approach take these variables into account.
The cell walls of many different microbes are capable of stimulating the immune system. This is well documented for both fish and shrimp (and mammals). For shrimp, the impact is largely non-specific as they do not form antibodies, a component of a classic humoral response. The nature and intensity of the impact depends on a number of variables. These include how much of the material they are being exposed to, what form it is in, how often they are being exposed to it, the levels of stress the animals are under and how functional their immune systems are among others. These factors determine how strong of an immune reaction there is.
Many lab studies are based on exposing animals under controlled conditions that are not consistent with the real world. They may be in aquaria or microcosms with limited water exchange ensuring that the animals ingest the compounds repeatedly and through multiple pathways. Furthermore, for spore forming Bacillus species that germinate and grow in these systems to high enough levels, the vegetative cells are responsible for the observed impact, not the spores. The spores germinate at rates
that are environmentally and strain dependent.
Pathogens fall into two general categories. They are either obligate or opportunistic. Many bacteria isolated from sick animals aren’t the cause of illness but take advantage of the organisms’ compromised immune systems. These are opportunistic. Obligate pathogens can cause disease in strong, healthy animals. The mere presence of the pathogen at certain levels is enough to infect healthy animals, proliferate and cause disease. Highly virulent pathogens possess virulence determinants, properties that ensure that they can damage healthy animals. Some examples would be toxins (such as PirA and PirB toxins in Vibrio parahaemolyticus strains), potent enzymes that are present at high enough levels to damage tissue and an ability to sequester critical nutrients such as iron (vibrios may contain genes that encode for outer membrane proteins to bind these making them unavailable to the host), etc.
Most of the time, acute disease in farmed shrimp is a result of multiple pathogens. It could be a mix of opportunistic pathogens or both obligate
Pushing production paradigms to maximize productivity very often results in the animals being stressed. All too often farmers focus on what they see as the bottom line.
and opportunistic. In farmed shrimp, infection with pathogens such as the virus that causes White spot (WSSV) or the fungal etiologic agent responsible for Enterocytozoon hepatopenaei (EHP) are often accompanied by bacteremias, of which vibrios are typically a major component. There are many other species of bacteria that can be problematic. Most are opportunistic, but a few are obligate.
There can be a synergy between multiple potential pathogens. White feces syndrome in shrimp (a common problem in SE Asia) is due to the fungus, EHP and a vibrio together. EHP by itself does not cause mortality, but when there is coinfection with a vibrio, the result is white feces and acute mortality. As pathogen levels increase in an animal, it may retain its appetite, but it won’t grow which creates a significant disparity in the population sizes at harvest and high FCRs. Its impact on the hepatopancreas, an organ that is critical for digestion and immunity weakens the animal, making it highly susceptible to invasion by both opportunistic and obligate pathogens.
For probiotics to be active via altering the microbiome and thus the
Many
bacteria degrade organic matter. Many also convert ammonia into metabolites such as nitrite, nitrates and atmospheric nitrogen. They may have narrow ranges of activity or other traits that make them ill-suited for use in commercial products for aquaculture.
metabolome (this is the sum of the metabolites that the microbiome produces) in the prevention or curing of diseases, several things must be considered. If they prevented disease, they would have to keep potential pathogen loads below the threshold levels that cause acute disease. This, more than likely, would require them to be constantly present. Most bacteria produce anti-microbial peptides and other compounds that allow them to compete for nutrients while inhibiting their competitors.
There are mechanisms by which probiotics could in theory cure or prevent diseases. These include out competing for essential nutrients, such as enzyme cofactors (metals
like Fe or vitamins) or the production of antibiotics or anti-microbial peptides (AMPs) that will inhibit specific strains. However, they require sufficient numbers of the probiotic to be in close enough proximity to the pathogens to be effective. Given that no commercial probiotics persist in animals or the immediate environment at high levels, it is unlikely that any probiotic will cure or prevent disease from obligate pathogens via altering the microbiome.
These microbial products such as AMPs do not act in the same manner as antibiotics. Antibiotics are fed to animals at dosage levels that ensure that there are high enough tissue levels to inhibit the organisms to which
they are directed. They do not act on viruses, only bacteria and fungi. They are localized and overall tissue levels are not going to function as antibiotics do. The observation that given strains of bacteria inhibit the growth of other bacteria by close proximity does not mean that this is what is going on in the host. Pathogens are often in biofilms which protect and isolate them, and the overall tissue loads are far too low to act in the same manner that antibiotics do.
The role of stress in disease susceptibility is well documented. Stressors weaken animals making them less able to fight off infection. These include but are not limited to inadequate nutrition (too much or too lit-
tle of essential nutrients), excessively high densities, water quality issues (sudden changes in salinity, too low or too high of a pH, etc.), low DO levels, high metabolite levels (H2S, CH4, nitrate, nitrite, NH3/4, etc.), presence of toxic strains of algae and bacteria, chronic low levels of pathogens, frequent handling of shrimp as a result of partial harvests or transfers, etc.
Healthy stress-free animals are in a homeostasis with their environments. They are able to adapt to moderate environmental perturbations without negative impacts. Stressors impact their ability to adapt and result in increased susceptibility to both obligate and opportunistic pathogens.
There are no magic bullets. Fundamentals impact outcomes. Failure to keep obligate pathogens out of production systems increases the chances of animals falling ill. Control starts with the broodstock.
Screening animals for pathogens on a population basis does not work unless one is working with animals that have been held indoors under controlled conditions for at least a few generations and repeat testing has failed to find anything of concern. Each individual animal should be tested. While low levels of obligate pathogens may make it through this gauntlet, these are not likely to cause problems in a relatively stress-free
Population screening needs to be conducted on nauplii, zoea, mysis and post larval shrimp. Samples must be representative of the population.
environment with optimal conditions. For the sake of accuracy, there are potential pathogens where every effort should be made to exclude them as they can infect and kill animals when present at very low levels. Fortunately, these are relatively rare.
Population screening needs to be conducted on nauplii, zoea, mysis and post larval shrimp. Samples must be representative of the population. Selecting obviously ill animals for testing can be helpful. Live feeds must be from totally biosecure sources and thoroughly tested as well. Far too often a hatchery will use local sources of wild polychaetes or artemia that are mass produced under non-axenic conditions resulting in contaminating broodstock, and subsequently nauplii, zoea, mysis and post larval shrimp. If testing reveals a biosecurity failure, then the producer should either communicate the risks to clientele or destroy the batch and start over with clean animals.
The production environment influences risk. If your neighbors are in close proximity and there are no safeguards to ensure influents and effluents are not being mixed, then the risk of introducing a disease into a naive population increases. Many have addressed this risk by the widespread use of disinfectants, typically chlorine, to treat the incoming water before fertilization and stocking. As discussed in an earlier article, this can actually make matters worse.
Testing
healthy animals and noting differences between them and sick animals does not mean that the microbiomes in healthy animals are responsible for their health.
Pushing production paradigms to maximize productivity very often results in the animals being stressed. All too often farmers focus on what they see as the bottom line. How many MTs of final saleable product can one produce from a given pond? Ideally farmers should find the balance between striving for the most production possible and limiting the stress that invariably is a component of this approach. Proper biosecurity and stress reduction are both essential elements of consistent success.
Widespread misinformation does not help the industry. It encourages people to think that they do not have to pay attention to the basics. In the end, it may ensure that the cycles of severe profit limiting diseases will persist and that new pathogens will
be generated. Throwing the kitchen sink into the ponds does not offer the best approach. Anyone with widespread experience with shrimp and fish farming can attest to this.
Testing healthy animals and noting differences between them and sick animals does not mean that the microbiomes in healthy animals are responsible for their health. Even when one challenges the animals under controlled conditions, a non-specific immune response is more than likely the reason for the observed differences. Ultimately, the focus should be on biosecurity fundamentals and stress reduction. Once these are adequately addressed, benefits should become apparent with higher survivals, better growth, better FCRs and the bottom line, increased profits.
* Stephen G. Newman has a bachelor’s degree from the University of Maryland in Conservation and Resource Management (ecology) and a Ph.D. from the University of Miami, in Marine Microbiology. He has over 40 years of experience working within a range of topics and approaches on aquaculture such as water quality, animal health, biosecurity with special focus on shrimp and salmonids. He founded Aquaintech in 1996 and continues to be CEO of this company to the present day. It is heavily focused on providing consulting services around the world on microbial technologies and biosecurity issues.
For years, sustainable seafood certification has been touted as a market-based solution, a shining beacon guiding shoppers, restaurants, and retailers towards a healthier ocean. We have been told that labels like Marine Stewardship Council’s (MSC) “blue tick” or Aquaculture Stewardship Council’s (ASC) farmed fish mark are powerful enough to reshape industry behavior, weed out the bad actors, and offer consumers an ethical compass at the seafood counter. But if sustainability is the goal, why did the entire edifice of certification collapse into irrelevance the moment politics took center stage and U.S. tariffs entered the scene?
Recent developments in the American seafood tariff landscape have exposed a brutal truth: certification meant nothing in the battle over market access, price, and trade policy in ‘Make America Great Again 2025’.
If sustainability labels are supposed to reward responsible producers — driving change through recognition and access — how did, they play absolutely no role in the outcome?
FishProf suggests the answer isn’t just a story about tariffs, but a fundamental provocation and asks, “Is third-party certification obsolete in today’s world? And is it time to demand something radically better?”
Tariffs, Trade Wars, and the Vanishing Impact of Certification
In April 2025, the Trump administration imposed sweeping new tariffs on seafood imports from nearly all trading partners. 10% across the board, with additional, country-specific penalties scaling much higher for top exporters like China. The justification? Protecting American jobs, restoring reciprocity, and “liberating” the U.S. seafood market from unfair foreign competition.
Notably absent from the calculus was any mention of environmental standards, traceability, third-party sustainability certification or the reliance on seafood imports. The new tariffs were set with crude arithme-
For years, sustainable seafood certification has been touted as a market-based solution, a shining beacon guiding shoppers, restaurants, and retailers towards a healthier ocean. But if sustainability is the goal, why did the entire edifice of certification collapse into irrelevance the moment politics took center stage and U.S. tariffs entered the scene?
tic based on the U.S. trade deficit, not ecological responsibility or transparent supply chains. Whether a shipment was tagged with the MSC, ASC, or Best Aquaculture Practices (BAP) label made zero difference — at the border, a certified tuna loin was hit just as hard hit as a slab of IUU-riddled, uncertified fish.
Certification: Side-Lined by Realpolitik
This is not a story of missed opportunity, but one of massive systemic failure. Certification schemes have repeatedly argued that market recognition — preferential access, tariff exemptions, or even simple differentiation at the border — will accelerate the shift toward sustainability. And yet, when the biggest seafood market on earth re-engineered its trade regime, certification was simply ignored.
Instead, the U.S. system prefers its own regulatory approaches, namely the Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIM), requiring basic catch documentation for a handful of vulnerable species, not private sustainability labelling. Even as U.S. authorities tout “confidence in seafood” through regulatory controls, there’s scant acknowledgment that well-intentioned thirdparty standards are even relevant to the policy conversation.
In fact, federal deregulation trends suggest that not only is certification an afterthought, but even bedrock science-based management and environmental oversight being deliberately sidelined. When it comes to trade rules, it’s national security,
deficit math’s, and electoral calculation, not ecological responsibility, that calls the shots.
So far, from what the FishProf has seen, there is little to no public evidence that major USA seafood retailers or leading certification/accreditation bodies have issued strong public defenses of certification or directly challenged the U.S. tariffs based on sustainability credentials.
What the FishProf has observed:
» Trade and Retail Response: Large U.S. seafood retailers and companies are primarily focused on adapting to supply chain disruptions and higher costs caused by the tariffs, rather than advocating for preferential treatment for certified products. Industry leaders have publicly discussed scrambling to move production and source products from lower-tariff nations. A pragmatic business response rather than a sustainability or certification defense. There’s an emphasis on maintaining supply and managing price increases, not on advocating for certification as a route to tariff relief.
» Industry Associations: The National Fisheries Institute (NFI), the main U.S. seafood trade association, has been active in urging the U.S. government to eliminate or soften tariffs and other trade barriers. However, their advocacy centers on overall industry competitiveness and market access, not on defending certification as a means of sustainability or trade benefit. Their responses highlight the neg-
ative impact of tariffs on Americans buying seafood, the health of the nation and jobs that rely on imported seafood and argue for fairer trade policies, but do not advocate for certification-based exemptions or elevating eco-labels as a criterion for tariff waivers.
» Certification Bodies: There are references to the prevalence of sustainability certifications — such as Oregon fisheries being MSC certified — when communicating with government agencies and the public. However, neither MSC nor other major international certification organizations appear to have launched any targeted campaign or high-profile statements demanding that certified sea-
food products be exempted from tariffs. Their messaging, both on their websites and in public forums, stays focused on promoting the broader benefits of certified seafood, not on the tariff fight.
» Industry Frustration: Across trade publications and industry commentary, there is a striking silence — no public defense of the “value” of certification in the context of tariffs, nor calls for the government to recognize certifications as part of the tariff regime. Instead, most industry leaders see tariffs as disconnected from environmental certification, driven by domestic politics and international trade disputes rather than sustainability goals.
Recent developments in the American seafood tariff landscape have exposed a brutal truth: certification meant nothing in the battle over market access, price, and trade policy in ‘Make America Great Again 2025’.
Farmed Roe On Scallop bake.
In fact, federal deregulation trends suggest that not only is certification an afterthought, but even bedrock science-based management and environmental oversight being deliberately sidelined. When it comes to trade rules, it’s national security, deficit math’s, and electoral calculation, not ecological responsibility, that calls the shots.
FishProf feels this absence is telling. Certification bodies and major retailers have not been able to influence U.S. trade policy to reward or recognize sustainability certification as a factor in tariff decisions. The U.S. tariffs have been imposed indiscriminately, regardless of third-party certification, and industry advocacy has focused on competitiveness, not sustainability exemption. Instead, certification remains a private, market-driven tool primarily for brand reputation and access to voluntary markets, with little leverage in hard policy discussions like tariffs.
If Certification Is Irrelevant, What Is It For?
The implications are profound and, the FishProf believes, if we are honest, a devastating critique of the certification movement. The FishProf wants us all to be clear:
» Certification cannot guarantee market access — labels don’t shield you from tariffs.
» Certification does not drive national trade policy — politics, not evidence, runs the show.
» Certification has lost its carrots and sticks — incentives evaporate if governments don’t care.
If sustainability standards matter so little at the highest policy levels, what are we really buying each time we select the “eco-labelled” product?
Critics have increasingly charged that certification has become little more than a marketing tool — one that reassures consumers, profits industry, and yet does little to move the needle on deep systemic issues like overfishing, human rights violations, and market distortion. Labels are expensive to maintain, out of reach for small producers, and most damning used by some companies to “green-
Quick fried Vannamei Shrimp, curry flavor.
The
time for ‘feel good’ labels is over. Real change now requires systems-level thinking, stronger demand for public accountability, and the courage to admit that what’s “certified” sustainable must mean more than a paid for marketing badge.
wash” business-as-usual. FishProf has often spoken of certification as a ‘business between harvester and consumer, adding costs but few benefits.
When trade policy views a certified fish as indistinguishable from an uncertified one, the premise that certification confers unique value is fundamentally undermined.
A System Ripe for Disruption — or Replacement?
Some champions of certification will argue that these setbacks are temporary, or that the solution is more lobbying for certification-based trade incentives. But if the result is that the
U.S. (and, by extension, global) trade policy doesn’t care about labels in its biggest market interventions, the writing is on the wall for the future of seafood eco-labels.
Has there been any global authority that has awarded certificated product a clear way through to their country Fish Prof wonders? While most major seafood-importing nations, including the U.S. and key markets in the EU, have not offered certified seafood a privileged or expedited entry through their tariff or regulatory systems, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) stands out as a notable exception FishProf believes.
In recent years, KSA authorities have explicitly recognized internationally accredited seafood certifications, such as those from the BAP and ASC, as key criteria for product acceptance and market access. In practical terms, this means that exporters possessing these certifications are granted a more streamlined route through the kingdom’s import controls and are generally favored for government procurement, institutional contracts, and broader market entry. Noting, they give priority to KSA products, of course. This policy, unique in its overt preference for certified product, demonstrates that at
Baked Farmed Barramundi.
The
new tariffs were set with crude arithmetic based on the U.S. trade deficit, not ecological responsibility or transparent supply chains.
least one national authority has chosen to reward third-party eco-labels not only for their sustainability assurances but as a mechanism to assure imported food safety, etc. effectively connecting private certification to tangible regulatory and market benefits. MSC does not meet their guidelines.
So, what next? Here are uncomfortable but necessary questions for the seafood sustainability movement:
» If governments (apart from KSA) aren’t aligning trade with sustainability, are certifications just virtue signaling for Northern consumers?
» Is it time to demand mandatory traceability, public transparency, and regulatory reform — instead of private labels?
» Should advocacy shift towards making sustainability a minimum market requirement, not an optional feel-good premium?
» Are certification bodies willing to publicly acknowledge their current impotence in shaping policy — and reinvent themselves for real impact?
The End of Certification as We Know It?
No significant U.S. retailers or certification/accreditation organizations have come out to publicly and robustly defend or advocate for the recognition of certification in the 2025 tariff debate. Their response has focused overwhelmingly on business adapta-
Farmed Roe Off Scallops.
tion and general market access, not on sustainability credentials or the role of certification in policy exemptions. This lack of defense underscores the current powerlessness of eco-labels in high-stakes, politicized trade processes.
The spectacular failure of certification to influence the U.S. tariff process is a wake-up call. If the goal is sustainable seafood and certification is sidelined in the most important market decisions then it’s not only the end for certification’s primacy, but the beginning of a reckoning for the sustainability movement.
The time for ‘feel good’ labels is over. Real change now requires systems-level thinking, stronger demand for public accountability, and the courage to admit that what’s “certified” sustainable must mean more than a paid for marketing badge. Until then, we must be honest: certification may not be dead, but it’s certainly irrelevant in the battle that matters most.
The future? A data-driven, benchmarked aquaculture industry unlocks a virtuous cycle of improvement, risk
reduction, and trust. It delivers more profitable, sustainable operations for producers; smarter policies and oversight for governments; lower risks and costs for financiers and insurers; and stronger confidence, safety, and choice for consumers instead of trying to understand what the thousands of labels mean. FishProf believes that stakeholders willing to invest in robust data infrastructure today will shape the most resilient, competitive, and trusted aquaculture systems of tomorrow.
References and sources consulted by the author on the elaboration of this article are available under previous request to our editorial staff.
AUGUST 2025
AQUA NOR
Aug. 19-21, 2025
Trondhein, Norway
T: +47 73 56 86 40
E: post@nor-fishing.no
W: https://www.aquanor.no/en/ 15th CENTRAL AMERICAN AQUACULTURE SYMPOSIUM
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON FISHERIES AND AQUACULTURE (ICFA)
Nov. 11-12, 2025
George Town, Malaysia
T: +91 8280047516 (Call 9.00AM to 7.00PM)
E: papers.asar@gmail.com
W: https://asar.org.in/Conference/53624/ICFA/
AQUACULTURE MAGAZINE
Design Publications International Inc. 401 E Sonterra Blvd. Sté. 375 San Antonio, TX. 78258, USA Office: +210 504 3642 Office in Mexico: +52(33) 8000 0578 - Ext: 8578
