edX course

MOOC
Aquaponics - the circular food production system

Course reader
Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics

ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences, Wädenswil, Switzerland

Based on and adapted from Junge, R., Antenen, N., Villarroel, M., Griessler Bulc, T., Ovca, A., & Milliken,
S. (Eds.) (2020). Aquaponics Textbook for Higher Education. Zenodo.
http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3948179

Milliken, S., Griessler Bulc, T., & Junge, R. (Eds.) (2020). Entrepreneurial Skills for Aquaponics. Zenodo.
http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3948792
CONTENTS

1.1 BASICS OF AQUAPONICS .................................................................................................................................... 2

1.1.1 Elements of aquaponic systems .............................................................................................................. 3
1.1.2 Classification of aquaponics .................................................................................................................... 4

1.2 OPPORTUNITIES, RISK, CHALLENGES, AND LIMITATIONS ........................................................................................... 8

1.2.1 Is Aquaponics market ready? An European view .................................................................................... 8

1.3 AQUAPONICS – A CIRCULAR FOOD PRODUCTION SYSTEM ....................................................................................... 12

1.3.1 History of aquaponics ............................................................................................................................ 12
1.3.2 Current research themes ....................................................................................................................... 13
1.3.3 Urban agriculture & Vertical aquaponics .............................................................................................. 15

1.4 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................. 17

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 1

1.1 Basics of Aquaponics
Today, as a result of rapid population growth, increased food requirements and urbanization, the amount
of agricultural land is rapidly declining and our oceans are overfished. To meet future demands for food,
there is a need for innovative, space-saving, and ecological food production technologies. Aquaponics is
a polyculture (integrated multi-trophic production system) consisting of two technologies: aquaculture (a
fish farm) and soil-less (hydroponic) cultivation of plants (Figure 1). The primary goal of aquaponics are to
reuse the nutrients contained in fish feed and fish faeces in order to grow crops (Graber & Junge 2009;
Lennard & Leonard 2004; Lennard & Leonard 2006; Rakocy et al. 2003), and to recycle the water. The
integration of two systems into one removes some of the unsustainable factors of running aquaculture
and hydroponic systems independently (Somerville et al. 2014).

Figure 1: Basic material flows in aquaculture (a), hydroponic (b), and aquaponic (c) systems.

Fish excrements can be used by plants either directly or after bacteria have converted the ammonia and
nitrite to nitrate, the plant-available form of nitrogen. The fish feed adds a continuous supply of nutrients
to the plants, thereby solving the need for any discharge and replacement of depleted nutrient solutions
or, in the case of extensively operated systems, the adjustment of the solutions as in mineral fertilizer-
based hydroponics. As the need to buy additional fertiliser for the plant crop is reduced, the profit
potential of the system increases. Aquaponics is a rapidly emerging agricultural practice that therefore
offers a series of potential benefits; however, there are also major weaknesses to this potentially
sustainable agricultural production system.

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 2

1.1.1 Elements of aquaponic systems
The 'hardware' of an aquaponic system consists of (i) the fish tank, (ii) the water and air pumps, (iii) the
solids removal units (drum filters, settlers), (iv) the biofilter, (v) the plant grow beds, and (vi) the plumbing
materials (Figure 2). These elements are populated by a community, where the primary producers (plants)
are separated from consumers fish), and ubiquitous microorganisms build a ‘bridge’ between the two
main groups.

Figure 2: Main components of an aquaponic system (redrawn after Rakocy et al. 2006).

Aquaculture
Aquaculture is the captive rearing and production of fish and other aquatic animal and plant species under
controlled conditions (Somerville et al. 2014). Aquaculture is becoming an increasingly important source
of global protein production, while decreasing the pressure on the overfished oceans. However, some
aquaculture techniques such as open-water net cage systems and and flow-through systems, release
nutrient-rich wastewater into the environment, what can cause eutrophication and hypoxia in the water
bodies. In most recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) this wastewater is treated and to a hight extent
re-used within the system, resulting in a highly concentrated but reduced excess water flow. This excess
water can be treated more easily before releasing into the nature. However, these systems consume
much energy and generate a lot of fish sludge which has to be treated separately. Thus, aquaponics can
also be viewed as a form of RAS, or an extension of RAS.

Hydroponics
The development of hydroponics can be traced back to the work by Dr William Gericke at the University
of California in 1929 (Gericke 1937). Hydroponics has been expanding in the last decades, primarily
because it allows increased yields by reducing pests and soil-borne diseases, and by manipulating growing
conditions to meet optimal plant requirements, while increasing water- and fertilizer-use efficiency. It
also allows for the development of agriculture on poor-quality land (Somerville et al. 2014). However, so-
called conventional hydroponic cultivation also has its drawbacks. It utilizes costly, and often
unsustainably sourced, mineral fertilizers to produce crops, and it consumes energy. Hydroponic systems

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 3

require a considerable amount of macronutrients (C, H, O, N, P, K, Ca, S, Mg) and micronutrients (Fe, Cl,
Mn, B, Zn, Cu, Mo, Ni), which are essential for the growth of plants. The nutrients are added to hydroponic
solutions in ionic form, while C, H and O are available from air and water. The concentrations of nutrients
need to be monitored. Aquaponic systems, on the other hand, use water that is rich in waste of fish
production (feces and uneaten fish feed) as nutrietn source for plant growth. However, the nutrient
composition of the water is not always perfectly matched to the plants requirements. Some nutrients are
often deficient, so they need to be added to adjust their concentration, for example iron, phosphate, and
potassium (Bittsanszky et al. 2016a). In the following weeks you will learn more about nutrients.

1.1.2 Classification of aquaponics

The delineation between aquaponics and other integrated technologies is sometimes unclear. Palm et al.
(2018) proposed a definition of aquaponics, where the majority (> 50%) of nutrients sustaining plant
growth must be derived from waste originating from feeding the aquatic organisms. Aquaponics in the
narrower sense (aquaponics sensu stricto) is only applied to systems with hydroponics and without the
use of soil. Some of the new integrated aquaculture systems which combine fish with algae production
would also fall under this concept. On the other hand, the term aquaponics in the wider sense (aquaponics
sensu lato) can be applied to systems which include crop production techniques which utilize the
mineralization processes, buffer and nutrient storage function of the different substrates, including soil.
Palm et al. (2018) propose the term 'aquaponic farming' for these activities.

Table 1: A classification of aquaponics according to design principles with examples (adapted from Maucieri et al. 2018).
Design goal Categories Examples
Objective or Commercial crop production ECF Farm
main stakeholder
Household sufficiency Somerville et al. 2014

Education Graber et al. 2014a

Junge et al. 2014
Social enterprise Laidlaw & Magee 2016

Greening and decoration Schnitzler 2013

Size L large (> 1000 m2) Monsees et al. 2017

M medium (200-1000 m2) Graber et al. 2014b
S small (50-200 m2) Roof Water Farm
XS very small (5-50 m2) Podgrajšek et al. 2014
XXS micro systems (< 5 m2) Maucieri et al. 2018
Nozzi et al. 2016
Operational Extensive (allows for integrated sludge usage in Graber & Junge 2009
mode of the grow beds)
aquaculture Intensive (obligatory sludge separation) Schmautz et al. 2016b
compartment Nozzi et al. 2018
Water cycle Closed loop ('coupled' systems): water is recycled Graber & Junge 2009
management to aquaculture Monsees et al. 2017

Open loop or end-of pipe ('decoupled' systems): Monsees et al. 2017

after the hydroponic component, the water is
either not or only partially recycled to the
aquaculture component
Water type Freshwater Schmautz et al. 2016b
Klemenčič & Bulc 2015
Salt water Nozzi et al. 2016

Grow beds with different media Roosta & Afsharipoor 2012

Buhmann et al. 2015
Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 4
 Type of Ebb-and-flow system Nozzi et al. 2016
hydroponic
system Grow bags Rafiee & Saad 2010
Drip irrigation Schmautz et al. 2016b
Deep water cultivation (floating raft culture) Schmautz et al. 2016b
Nutrient film technique (NFT) Lennard & Leonard 2006
Goddek et al. 2016a
Use of space Horizontal Schmautz et al. 2016b
Klemenčič & Bulc 2015
Vertical Khandaker & Kotzen 2018

Aquaponics can address various goals or stakeholders, from research and development, educational and
social activities, to subsistence farming and commercial scale food production. It can be implemented in
various ways and environments, such as on arid and polluted land, backyard production, urban
agriculture, etc. While a system can simultaneously fulfill several objectives, including greening and
decoration, social interaction, and food production, normally it cannot achieve all of these at the same
time. To perform satisfactorily for each of the possible goals, the components of a system have to fulfil
different, sometimes contrasting, requirements. The choice of a suitable aquaponic system for a particular
situation should be based on realistic assessments (including a sound business plan, where appropriate)
and should result in a tailor-made solution. If we follow the classification of Maucieri et al. (2018), which
categorizes aquaponic systems according to various different categories (e.g. type of stakeholder,
operational mode, size, type of hydroponic system, etc.), several distinct options for choosing a suitable
aquaponic system emerge (Table 1). Any decision has to be made within the limits of the available budget,
though it is possible to construct a system at very low cost.

Classification according to operational mode: extensive (with integrated sludge usage) and
intensive (with sludge separation)
One part of the aquaponic system is the fish tank, where the fish are fed and, through their metabolism,
faeces and ammonia are excreted into the water. However, high concentrations of ammonia are toxic
for fish. Through nitrifying bacteria, ammonia is transformed to nitrite (fish toxic) and then into nitrate,
which is relatively harmless to fish and is the favoured form of nitrogen for growing crops such as
vegetables. Extensive production systems integrate the biofilter as well as the sludge removal directly
within the hydroponic unit, by using substrates that provide the appropriate support for the growth of
the biofilm, such as gravel, sand, or expanded clay. Intensive production systems use a separate biofilter
and sludge separation system. Both operational methods have their advantages and disadvantages.
Whilst integrated sludge usage allows for complete nutrient recycling, the negative aspects include
turbid water, and rather low biofilter performance, which only allow limited fish stocking. Separate
sludge removal and biofilter, on the other hand, allow intensive fish stocking of up to 100 kg/m3 or
more. The positive aspects include clear water, lower BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) concentration,
lower microbial load, and optimized biofilter performance. However, these systems only allow for
partial nutrient recycling. An additional sludge treatment step (on-site or off-site), such as connecting
sludge biodigesters or vermicomposting, may be necessary (Goddek et al. 2016b).

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 5

 Figure 3: Aquaponic system with integrated sludge usage.

Figure 4: Possible arrangement of an aquaponic system with sludge separation.

Water cycle management

Closed loop (coupled) systems: aquaponic systems can be constructed and operated as a recirculating
loop, with the water flow moving in both directions, from fish basin to the hydroponic unit, and vice
versa. Water is continuously or intermittently circulated from the RAS to the hydroponic unit, and back
to the RAS.

Open loop systems: recently there have been developments towards independent control over each
system unit, mostly because of the different environmental requirements of fish and plants. Such
systems, where aquaculture, hydroponics and, if applicable, fish sludge mineralization can be controlled
independently, are called decoupled aquaponic systems (DAPS) or double recirculating aquaponic
systems (DRAPS). Decoupled aquaponic systems consist of a RAS connected to the hydroponic unit (with
additional reservoir) via a one-way valve. Water is separately recirculated within each system and is
supplied on-demand from the RAS to the hydroponic unit, but it does not flow back (Goddek et al.
2016a; Monsees et al. 2017; Baganz et al., 2020).

Figure 5 shows a schematic illustration of coupled and decoupled aquaponics. In the coupled (closed
loop) system consisting of a RAS (blue: rearing tanks, clarifier and biofilter) directly connected to the
hydroponic unit (green: NFT-trays), water is constantly circulated from the RAS to the hydroponic unit
and back to RAS. In the decoupled (open-loop) aquaponic system consisting of a RAS connected to the
Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 6
hydroponic unit (with additional reservoir) via a one-way-valve, water is separately recirculated within
each system and water is supplied on-demand from the RAS to the hydroponic unit, but does not go
back to the RAS.

Figure 5: Schematic illustration of coupled (left) and decoupled (right) aquaponics.

Some types of hydroponic installations used in aquaponics

Nutrient Film Technique
In Nutrient Film Technique (NFT) systems, water from a fish tank is passed
through the bottom of a horizontal PVC pipe, in a thin film. These pipes have
holes cut into the top, in which plants are grown in such a way that their
roots dangle in the water flowing on the bottom. Nutrients from the tank
water are absorbed by the plants, and as their roots are only partly
submerged, this allows them to be in contact with atmospheric oxygen as
well.

Media bed technique

Media-filled bed units are the most popular design for small-scale
aquaponics. These designs use space efficiently, have a relatively low initial
cost, and are suitable for beginners because of their stability and simplicity.
In media bed units, the medium is used to support the roots of the plants
and functions as a mechanical and biological filter.

Deep Water or Floating Raft Culture

Deep Water Culture (DWC) systems use a polystyrene 'raft' which floats on
about 30 cm of water. The raft has holes in which plants are grown in net
pots, such that their roots are immersed in the water. The raft can also be
placed to float directly in the fish tank, or it can have water pumped from the
tank to a filtration system and then to channels containing a series of rafts.
An aerator provides oxygen to both the water in the tank and that containing
the raft. Since the roots have no medium to adhere to, this system can only
be used to grow leafy greens or herbs, and not larger plants. It is the most
popular system for commercial purposes, due to the speed and ease of harvest.

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 7

Use of space: horizontal and vertical systems
Most aquaponic systems use horizontal grow tanks or beds, emulating traditional land-based arable
growing to produce vegetables. However, over the years, new living wall and vertical farming
technologies have arisen and evolved which, when linked to the aquaculture part of the aquaponic
system, may allow more plants to be grown vertically rather than horizontally, and thus make the
systems more productive (Khandaker & Kotzen 2018).

Horizontal systems have the advantage of efficiently using daylight, and may well function without
additional lighting, even in winter. Therefore they have low electric energy consumption. The initial
investment costs are medium/low, especially if the land price is low.

Vertical systems present an optimal space-saving solution, making them very suitable for urban
facilities, either for decoration of for hyper-local food production. However, they require grow lights
above the grow beds. They also require fewer water pumps, but of higher power, which all adds up to
higher electric energy consumption. The initial investment costs are also high.

1.2 Opportunities, Risk, Challenges, and Limitations

Aquaponics potentially offers entrepreneurs many possibilities for starting a business, including the
commercial production of food and non-food products, consultancy services for the design and build of
commercial farms, the supply of specialist equipment, and domestic systems for restaurants, schools
and the general public. Commercial producers can sell plants and fish through a variety of direct and
indirect markets. Direct markets include famers markets, farm stalls, and community supported
agriculture (CSA) schemes; indirect markets include grocery stores, restaurants, institutions, and
wholesalers. Commercial producers can also diversify, by offering agritourism, training workshops, and
the sale of specialist equipment. The opportunities are manifold, but there are also challenges, risks and
limitations to keep in mind. In this subchapter we would like to highlight some of the challenges
involved in bringing this innovative technology successfully to the market.
1.2.1 Is Aquaponics market ready? A European view
In 2015 the European Parliamentary Research Service included aquaponics in a report on ten
technologies that could change our lives, alongside autonomous vehicles, graphene, 3D printing,
massive open online courses (MOOCs), virtual currencies (Bitcoin), wearable technologies, drones, smart
home technologies, and electricity storage (van Woensel et al. 2015). Aquaponics is therefore
acknowledged as being at the cutting edge of technological innovations. But is it too cutting edge? Is
there a viable market for it in Europe? One way to try to start to answer these questions is to use
Gartner’s Hype Cycle (Figure 6) which provides a graphic representation of the maturity and adoption of
technologies and applications, and how they are potentially relevant to solving real business problems
and exploiting new opportunities.

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 8

 Figure 6: Gartner’s Hype Cycle (Turnšek et al. 2020).

The bell-shaped Hype Level Curve explains a generally applicable path that a technology takes in terms of
its expectations over time. The rapid upward trend at the beginning of the curve results from a sudden
overly positive and irrational reaction to the introduction of a new technology, caused by the lure of
novelty followed by social contagion, which in turn attracts the first media coverage. Decision makers
follow the trend rather than carefully assessing the technology's potential themselves, and investors and
adopting companies aim to capitalize on possible first-mover advantages. The curve culminates in a sharp
peak, where high expectations are further boosted by media coverage. The overenthusiasm and over-
hyped investments then result in commercial adoptions of first-generation applications of the technology
that fail to meet performance and/or revenue expectations. Public disappointment spreads and is again
hyped by media, this time negatively, and the expectations suddenly ebb and collapse into a trough
(Steinert & Leifer 2010). The Engineering of Business Maturity Technology S-Curve, on the other hand, is
based on the notion that the performance or maturity of a technology develops only slowly in the
beginning, since its fundamentals are poorly understood, and investments into pilots and early adoptions
may result only in small gains. At some point the technology performance will take off until a plateau is
reached. The combination of the two curves forms the Hype Cycle. It can be divided into five distinct
phases: Innovation Trigger, Peak of Inflated Expectations, Through of Disillusionment, Slope of
Enlightenment, and Plateau of Productivity. These phases are characterized by distinct investment,
product and market patterns (Steinert & Leifer 2010).
An Innovation Trigger is anything that sets off a period of rapid development and growing interest. It may
be a product launch, a major improvement in price/performance, adoption by a respected organization,
or simply a rush of media interest that socializes and legitimizes the concept. The most common indicators
that an innovation is past the trigger but has not yet reached the Peak of Inflated Expectations is that it is
available for purchase from just one or two commercial vendors funded by seed rounds of venture capital,
it requires significant customization in order to work in an operational environment, the price is high
relative to the cost of production and to the cost of related but more established products, and suppliers
are not yet able to provide references or case studies (Fenn & Blosch 2018).

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 9

Indicators that a technology has reached the Peak of Inflated Expectations include the trade and business
press running frequent stories about the innovation and how early adopters are using it, analysts
speculating about its future impact and transformational power, a surge of suppliers (often 30 or more)
offering variations on the innovation, and established companies buying one or two early leading suppliers
in expensive, high-profile acquisitions toward the end of the peak. As the innovation slides into the Trough
of Disillusionment, there is not always a drop in the overall adoption numbers. Instead, the anticipated
rapid growth in adoption may simply be delayed. As a result, supplier consolidation and failure occur
because there is too little adoption growth, and suppliers use the same few case studies and references
(Fenn & Blosch 2018).
On the Slope of Enlightenment, early adopters who continue working with the technology begin to
experience net benefits and regain motivation. With more investments, the understanding of the
technology grows, resulting in improved performance, and the curve starts to rise again. Suppliers of the
innovation offer products that require little customer support, new success stories and references
accumulate, and press articles focus on the maturing capabilities and market dynamics of the suppliers.
Finally, in the Plateau of Productivity, the technology is realistically valued and mainstream adoption
surges. Clear leaders emerge from the many suppliers that joined the market on the Slope of
Enlightenment, investment activities focus on acquisitions and initial public offerings, and the terminology
connected with the innovation becomes part of everyday speech (e.g. googling, texting, blogging). The
time between the Peak of Inflated Expectations and the Plateau of Productivity has been termed the time-
to-value gap which, depending on the technology, varies between two years and two decades. Some
technologies, however, become obsolete before they reach the Plateau of Productivity, (Fenn & Blosch
2018).
One of the problems with the Hype Cycle is that it is not quite clear how to measure hype. One method
that has been used to gauge where aquaponics lies on the curve is to calculate the 'hype ratio', which is
the search results for 'aquaponics' in Google divided by search results for 'aquaponics' in Google Scholar
at a certain point in time. This provides an indication of the popularity of a subject in the public media in
comparison with academic circles. But read more about that in the section 1.3.1.
Innovations may be at different positions on the curve in different industries or regions, depending on the
pertinent macro-environmental factors. The recirculating aquaculture research community in the US
introduced the idea of aquaponics in the late 1970s, and the first commercial farms were developed there
in the 1980s. Several more sprang up in the following decade, and the number has since continued to
slowly increase. The most recent survey recorded 145 commercial producers in the US in 2013 (Love et
al. 2014). Aquaponics has developed at a much slower rate in Europe (Villarroel et al. 2016), and while
there are small prototype systems in most countries, and various commercial farms in development, there
is still only a handful that are fully operational, while others have tried and failed along the way. Early
adopters necessarily have to go through the phase of trial and error, making it a highly risky endeavour.
The small size of most of the farms is due to the high initial investment required coupled with the novelty.
Emerging technologies are technologies whose development, practical applications, or both are still
largely unrealized, such that they are figuratively emerging into prominence from a background of
nonexistence or obscurity 8 of the technology. Most investment costs are doubled when compared to the
competing enterprises that engage only in aquaculture or horticulture. Because investors are reluctant to
invest several million EUR in large-scale farms, small-scale pilot facilities are expected to provide a twofold
proofof-concept: technological and commercial. This leads to a 'chicken and egg' dilemma: large-scale
farms are not built because investors require comprehensive proof of concept, and the small-scale farms
are not able to provide this because they are simply too small. To become commercially viable, businesses
need to either scale up to be competitive with conventional production (which amounts to producing
Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 10
hundreds of tons of fish and thousands of tons of vegetables each year), or they need to develop
additional business models, such as an expanded product range, agritourism, consulting services,
education, or specialist equipment (Turnšek et al. 2019; Turnšek et al. 2020).
The indicators of where an innovation lies on Gartner‘s Hype Cycle (Fenn & Blosch 2018) are difficult to
apply in the case of aquaponics in Europe. A small handful of companies has been successful in securing
investment from venture capital (VC) funds, and this might have been facilitated by speculation by the
European Parliamentary Research Service analysts about the future impact and transformational power
of aquaponics (van Woensel et al. 2015). Indeed, since 2015, two start-ups received VC funding before
they received angel funding, and another received corporate funding before it received VC funding; both
of these are highly anomalous funding trajectories. At the same time, several start-ups – commercial
farms and suppliers of aquaponic systems – have failed over the past five years, and there is little evidence
of any great rush to take their place.
The hype around aquaponics is inflamed by market forecast reports which make unsubstantiated claims
about the technology, such as its comparative superiority in terms of productivity, growth time and
potential for diversification in a commercial setting (Turnšek et al. 2019). For example, the Aquaponics
Market Forecast 2020-2025 report valued the global market size (for produce, system components and
equipment) at around €522 million in 2018, with just under half of this being generated in the US, and
forecast a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of about 15% from 2019 to 2025; this would lead to a
global market worth €1.4 billion (IndustryARC 2019). Value Market Research forecast that the global
market will be worth €1.3 billion in 2024, €500.4 million of which will be generated in Europe (Value
Market Research 2020). According to IndustryARC, the driver behind this forecast growth is the increasing
rate of urbanisation and industrialisation, which will result in the loss of agricultural land and therefore
favour a technology that produces eight times more food per acre compared with traditional agriculture
(IndustryARC 2019). However, this assertion can be questioned. The comparatively high production rate
was derived from the website of Nelson and Pade, a leading provider of commercial and domestic
aquaponic systems, and is in itself unsubstantiated. The productivity of an aquaponic system is
determined by so many variables – the type of crop, the amount of nutrients in the water, the amount of
oxygen and carbon dioxide in the air, the amount of light and temperature, and so on. These are not
elements specific to aquaponics per se, but are controlled by greenhouse management practices, such as
fertigation, heating, artificial lighting, CO2 generation, etc. In addition, higher production volumes can only
be compared meaningfully if there is a clear reference to the input levels required to achieve this output.
While the productivity per unit area might be higher compared to conventional agriculture, aquaponic
systems might require more energy, capital and labour. Since these systems are not technically
standardised, data from any one system can only be considered as a case study, and should not be used
as the basis for making generalisations about the technology as a whole (Turnšek et al. 2019).
Optimists will argue that the development of aquaponics will progress in the future to follow Gartner’s
Hype Cycle towards a Slope of Enlightenment and eventually establish itself as a mature technology.
Pessimists, on the other hand, will argue that aquaponics is merely vacuous hype, with little chance of
ever reaching the Plateau of Productivity (Turnšek et al. 2020).

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 11

1.3 Aquaponics – A Circular Food Production System
1.3.1 History of aquaponics
The concept of using fish excrement to fertilize plants has existed for millennia, with early civilizations in
both Asia and South America using this method. The most well-known examples are the 'stationary
islands' or Aztec chinampas set up in shallow lakes in central America (1150–1350 BC), and the rice-fish
aquaculture system introduced in Asia about 1500 years ago, and still used today. Both the rice-fish
aquaculture system and the chinampas were listed by the FAO as Globally Important Agricultural Heritage
Systems (Koohafkan & Altieri 2018).

In Europe, the early RAS date back to the late 1970s (Bohl 1977). At the same time Naegel (1977) had
already tested the integration of hydroponics with the water and nutrient cycles of RAS. Contemporary
aquaponics in the USA started with the pioneering research of Todd, as referred to in Love et al. (2014),
together with studies by Goldman et al. 1974 and Ryther et al. 1975 of the reuse of nutrients from
wastewater for plant and animal production. Prior to the technological advances of the 1980s, most
attempts to integrate hydroponics and aquaculture had limited success. The 1980s and 1990s saw
advances in system design, biofiltration, and the identification of the optimal fish-to-plant ratios that led
to the creation of closed systems that allow for the recycling of water and nutrient buildup for plant
growth. The pioneers of aquaponics who inspired many followers were:
- Dr Mark McMurtry (McMurtry et al. 1990) began working on aquaponics when he was at North
Carolina State University in the mid-eighties to early nineties. He called the method 'Integrated
AquaVegeculture System' (IAVS). Today’s flood-and-drain systems, as favoured by backyard
practitioners, are derived from this model.
- Dr James Rakocy designed what is perhaps the most widely copied design, The University of Virgin
Islands (UVI) Aquaponic system in 1980 (Rakocy et al. 2003; Rakocy et al. 2004). He has developed
vital ratios and calculations in order to maximize production of both fish and vegetables while
maintaining a balanced ecosystem.
- In Australia, Dr Wilson Lennard has also produced key calculations and production plans for other
types of system (Lennard & Leonard 2004; Lennard & Leonard 2006).
- In Canada, Dr Nick Savidov (Savidov & Brooks 2004) showed that, when some key nutrients levels
were met, aquaponic systems had significantly superior production of tomatoes and cucumbers
when compared with hydroponic systems.

These research breakthroughs, as well as many others, have paved the way for various practitioner groups
and companies that are beginning to sprout worldwide. However, aquaponics research really took off only
after 2010 (see the comparative number of scientific publications on hydroponics, aquaculture, and
aquaponics in Figure 7). There is, however, a big difference between what the world is 'talking' about, and
what is being currently researched. Junge et al. (2017) coined the term 'hype ratio' as an indicator of the
popularity of a subject in the public media compared with academia. It is calculated as search results in
Google divided by search results in Google Scholar. Aquaponics has a 'hype ratio' of over 1000, which is
significantly higher than, for example hydroponics (over 100) and aquaculture (about 20). In this regard,
aquaponics can be termed 'an emerging technology' and an emerging science topic.

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 12

 Figure 7: The number of papers published on hydroponic*, aquaculture*, and aquaponic*‡ from 1978 to 2015
(data were collected from the Scopus database on 17 September 2016). ‡ Please note that the scale for
aquaponic* is two orders of magnitude lower than hydroponic* or aquaculture* (from Junge et al. 2017).

1.3.2 Current research themes

Trends in technology
As we saw above, the design of successful aquaponic systems depends on the user group. High-yield, soil-
less production requires a high input of technology (pumps, aerators, loggers) and knowledge, and is
therefore mostly suited for commercial operations. However, it is entirely possible to design and operate
low-tech aquaponic systems that require less skill to operate, and still yield respectable results. This
implied trade-off (high-tech/low-tech) and the broad range of applications of aquaponics have
consequences for further development pathways for the technology, system design, and socio-economic
aspects. Aquaponic technology might develop in at least two directions: on the one hand towards low-
tech solutions (probably mostly in developing countries and for non-professional applications) and, on the
other hand, towards highly efficient hi-tech installations (predominantly in developed countries and with
professional/commercial partners) (Junge et al. 2017).

While the technology itself does not pose limits to an area of the farm (because it can be modular), the
size of urban farms is determined by (i) the characteristics of the available area, which is necessarily
fragmented in a city (brownfield sites, underutilized or vacant buildings, and rooftops); and (ii) the
constraints posed by the economics of crop production. As a rule of thumb, the area required to break
even for commercial operations is around 1000 m2. Hobby and backyard installations can of course be
much smaller. Aquaponic farms can grow/expand by increasing the number of operating systems (or
modules), or by going vertical, although they cannot be scaled up too much without steeply increasing
construction and energy costs. The size range of urban aquaponic farms will probably range between 150
m2 and 3000 m2, due to space, economic, and management limitations, but this could be enough to cover
the basic requirements for an assortment of fresh vegetables for part of the urban population. Peri-urban
aquaponic farms could be larger and modified to include inland aquaculture systems or to re-use nutrient
rich effluent or composted fish sludge in rural areas.

Aquaponic technology itself can be considered to be immature, since there are still problems to be solved.
Simply linking a state-of-the-art aquaculture system with a state-of-the-art hydroponic system does not

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 13

consider other factors, such as problems with clogged drum filters, inefficient settlers, oxygen failures,
poorly designed settlers, and clogged water pipes. Even though the influence of plant grow beds (NFT,
drip irrigation, deep water culture) is already well known in hydroponic systems, the choice of those beds
in aquaponic systems needs to be further studied since it will have consequences for productivity and
operation. Further research is required in other areas as well. Since microorganisms are ubiquitous, they
play an important part in all stages of aquaponic production. The influence of environmental conditions
on their abundance, diversity, and roles could be investigated, for example by further use of Novel
Generation of Sequencing methods (Schmautz et al. 2016a, Eck et al. 2019, Schmautz et al. 2021). One of
the central questions is appropriate pest and disease control for aquaponic systems. Problems related to
plant protection in aquaponics were discussed by Bittsanszky et al. (2016b). They concluded that since
very few tools are available for plant protection in aquaponics, emphasis should be placed on
precautionary measures to minimize the infiltration of pests and pathogens. On the other hand, the
biological pest control methods currently available for organic agriculture have to be adapted to
aquaponics.

If aquaponics is to be developed as a successful high-tech method of food production, one focus will need
to be on reducing manpower requirements. While some automation is already well developed (for
watering and feeding, online monitoring and alarms for many parameters, especially oxygen), it needs to
be refined in order to allow for more precise and labour efficient operations, which will require the
development of suitable sensors. One option to reduce manpower might be to use robots. Versatile
systems, similar to FarmBot, should be developed for dedicated use in aquaponics.

Trends in systems design

While aquaponics has the potential to be sustainable, comprehensive life cycle analysis (LCA) studies of
aquaponic operations and products are scarce (Forchino et al. 2017; Maucieri et al. 2018). However, it is
clear that the ecological impact of aquaponics could be further improved by tapping into renewable
sources of energy, developing daylight harvesting methods to avoid the use of electrical energy, using
pre-treated or recycled water or rainwater, and improving the climate control of greenhouses. In an urban
environment, aquaponics ought to be further integrated into buildings, allowing for gas, water and energy
exchange between greenhouses and buildings. Improvements are also needed regarding organic material
cycles. Fish feed is the main nutrient input and defines, to a large extent, the sustainability of the
operation. Aquaponics (just like RAS) requires optimal nutrition for fish, and the fish feeds should consist
of sustainable, locally sourced materials (organic, vegetarian, insects). The aquaponic loop should be
further closed by digesting the fish sludge in order to re-use the nutrients in the aquaponic system, or by
rearing redworms and/or insects on plant residues and using these for fish feed, with the residual fish
sludge and plant waste being composted. The goal is to arrive at a zero-waste concept on the farm in
order to reduce the carbon footprint. Studies on greenhouse gas emissions could make this picture
complete. Finally, the possibility of using novel organisms in aquaponics (e.g. aquatic plants, marine fish,
algae and seaweeds, crustaceans etc.) should be further explored in order to expand the ecological cycle.
New aquaculture and plant products could also have implications for the economic viability of the
technology, as the following section discusses.

Socio-economic research
Currently, aquaponics is a small but emerging business sector. Although food production is the basic goal
of the operation, it is often combined with tourism and education in order to improve profitability.

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 14

Because of its relatively novel technological cross-cutting approach, aquaponics has no clear legal status
within the existing regulations in Europe (Joly et al. 2015). Whilst in the US aquaponic produce can be
certified as organic, in Europe this is currently not possible because aquaponics involves soil-less plant
production and RAS, both of which are not permitted by EU organic regulations.
Despite the potential of aquaponics as a food production technology, there are still open questions. As
we have shown above, aquaponics is a prominent topic in the social media, but little is known about
consumer knowledge and acceptance, which need be understood in different cultural and market
settings. In general, we do not know enough about how the sustainability advantages of aquaponics
should be communicated to consumers, compared to product quality such as taste, freshness, health, and
price (Newman et al. 2014).

Until now, most research on aquaponics has focused on developing functional facilities. One way to
improve profitability could be to improve efficiency. Efficient use of alternative energy sources, water,
and the recycling of organic effluents will save on production costs, but they need to be evaluated against
higher investment costs. To increase commercial production, novel business models must also be
developed in relation to the emerging ideas of circular and local economies, yet managing interfaces
increases complexity. Here, questions of framework conditions for operating costs, local logistics and
determinants of vegetable and fish shopping behaviour will need to be addressed. Besides improvement
in technological efficiency, there are also issues about operational management, and it could be
interesting to explore new transport-sensitive varieties of crops in order to obtain a sufficiently high
market price by avoiding competition with specialized horticulture. However, combining a new
technology with new products also increases entrepreneurial uncertainty.

Aquaponics is especially useful for educators: even a small classroom system offers a wide range of
possibilities for instruction at different educational levels, from primary school to university (Junge et al,
2019). Aquaponics can easily be integrated into all STEM (science, technology, engineering and
mathematics) subjects, not only to demonstrate basic biological and ecological principles, but also
chemistry, physics, and mathematics. A variety of competencies and skills can be gained by operating
aquaponic systems, such as basic lab skills, team work, environmental ethics, to name but a few. The
width of socio-economic aspects outlined here illustrates that aquaponics will only flourish with a broad
collaboration between several additional key players beyond natural scientists and engineers. These could
include, for example, (i) designers and architects to provide aesthetically pleasing designs; (ii) social
scientists to help understand perceptions and acceptance of aquaponics among a wider audience; and (iii)
health and nutritional scientists to explore how aquaponic products could be incorporated into diets as
healthy and sustainably produced food. Feedback loops to system developers and plant and fish
physiologists also need to be developed in order to improve systems with regard to consumer demand,
sustainability, and the nutritional value of the products.

1.3.3 Urban Agriculture & Vertical Aquaponics

Introduction to Urban Agriculture

Urban agriculture takes many forms. These can range from household, school and community gardens to
rooftop and indoor farms. A fundamental distinction is often made between urban agriculture (involving
food production in an urban area) and peri-urban agriculture, which occurs on the fringes of cities. In the
case of the latter, farming is largely undertaken by professional farmers on land that has often already
been used for farming for decades. An urban farm is a part of a local food system where food is cultivated
Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 15
and produced within an urban area, and marketed to consumers predominantly within that urban area.
Besides growing fruit and vegetables, urban farming can also include animal husbandry, beekeeping,
aquaculture, and non-food products such as producing seeds, cultivating seedlings, and growing flowers.
It can be characterized in terms of the geographic proximity of a producer to the consumer, and
sustainable production and distribution practices. Urban farms can take a variety of forms, including non-
profit gardens and for-profit businesses. They can provide jobs, job training, and health education, and
they can contribute to better nutrition and health for the community by providing locally grown, fresh
produce (McEldowney 2017). This subchapter focuses on commercial food production within urban areas
and, specifically, on rooftop greenhouses and other types of indoor farms. As towns and cities continue
to grow both in population and surface area, their infrastructural needs for transporting and distributing
food are constantly spreading, pushing food production further and further away from the urban
consumer and generating globalized food systems that contribute to 19-29% of global greenhouse gas
emissions (Vermeulen et al. 2012). Currently, the flow of food to cities follows a linear model, resulting in
a high consumption of energy resources and the generation of waste and CO2 emissions. Over two-thirds
of the global population are projected to be living in cities by 2050, and with some experts being sceptical
about the capacity of the biosphere to produce enough food for the entire human population, interest in
local production to contribute to sustainable urban food systems has re-emerged among decision-makers.
Urban horticulture has historically always contributed to the supply of fresh produce to urban dwellers,
but recently it has been gaining popularity in the Global North, with growing awareness of environmental
and health concerns. Over the past few years, commercial farms have been emerging in major northern
cities, promoting a trend of environmentally friendly local food, grown in highly efficient installations on
top of or inside buildings. Urban agriculture also provides opportunities for a closed cycle of resources in
the urban metabolism, in stark contrast to the traditional unidirectional flow.

Introduction to Vertical Aquaponics

Most aquaponic systems use horizontal grow beds, thereby emulating traditional soil-based practices for
growing vegetables. However, over recent years, new vertical farming technologies have evolved which,
when linked to the aquaculture part of an aquaponic system, may allow more plants to be grown in
comparison to horizontal beds, by using the vertical space that is usually not utilized in production units
and greenhouses, and could thus potentially make the systems more productive, especially in urban areas
where growing space can be expensive (Palm et al. 2018). This premise would appear to be supported by
comparative studies of vertical and horizontal hydroponic systems, which showed significantly greater
productivity in vertical systems in terms of ratio of yield to occupied floor area (Liu et al. 2004; Neocleous
et al. 2010; Ramírez-Arias et al. 2018; Ramírez‐ Gómez et al. 2012; Touliatos et al. 2016). However, while
optimal use of space is the most commonly cited advantage of vertical aquaponics, this is potentially
outweighed by the various disadvantages. Biofouling in an aquaponic system is typical, and vertical
systems are particularly susceptible to clogging and reduced flow rates that may starve the plants of
water, so routine pressure washing of system components will be needed to avoid this (Patillo 2017).
Furthermore, whereas a horizontal flow system only uses electricity to pump water back to the fish tanks,
additional pumping is required to lift water to the top of vertical aquaponic systems. Growing plants on
horizontal beds has the advantage that natural light is theoretically transmitted from all sides in a free-
standing greenhouse without any blockages from other equipment and system components and, where
lighting is required, these lighting systems can be readily located immediately above the plants without
any interference. However, with vertical aquaponics natural light from above will be greater towards the
upper part of the system compared to the bottom, and the vertical elements themselves will block light
Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 16
that is entering the greenhouse. Artificial lighting will therefore be required to compensate for these
losses (Khandaker & Kotzen 2018). Careful cost-benefit analyses need to be undertaken, weighing up the
benefits of potentially higher yields against the added costs of electricity, before embarking on vertical
aquaponics. There are a lot of different vertical hydroponic system designs which could potentially be
combined with a fish production unit. Vertical growing may involve multiple layers of deep water culture,
NFT, flood and drain systems, or growing towers that involve aeroponic growing methods, in which the
plant roots are suspended in the air and sprayed with nutrient rich water. The design of the system will
dictate how many plants can be grown per square meter, and will also influence yields. Numerous studies
have shown that root and shoot growth, plant–water relations, nutrient uptake, transpiration and yield
are all affected by root restriction in soilless culture. Plants may be more susceptible to growth
abnormalities, such as blossom end rot in tomatoes and peppers, and leaf tip burn in lettuce. The smaller
the root zone the more intensively the production system needs to be managed to provide a stress-free
rhizosphere environment for optimum plant growth (Heller et al. 2015).

1.4 References
Baganz, G., Baganz, D., Staaks, G., Monsees, H., & Kloas, W. 2020. Profitability of multi‐loop aquaponics:
Year‐long production data, economic scenarios and a comprehensive model case. Aquaculture Research,
51(7), 2711-2724.
Bittsanszky, A., Uzinger, N., Gyulai, G., Mathis, A., Junge, R., Villarroel, M., Kotzen, B. & Komives, T. 2016a.
Nutrient supply of plants in aquaponic systems. Ecocycles 2 (2), 17-20.
Bittsanszky, A., Gyulai, G., Junge R., Schmautz, Z. & Komives, T. 2016b Plant protection in ecocycle-based
agricultural systems: Aquaponics as an example. In Proceedings of the 28th International Plant Protection
Congress (IPPC), Berlin, Germany, 24–27 August 2016.
Bohl, M. 1977. Some initial aquaculture experiments in recirculating water systems. Aquaculture 11 (4),
323-328.
Buhmann, A. K., Waller, U., Wecker, B. & Papenbrock, J. 2015. Optimization of culturing conditions and
selection of species for the use of halophytes as biofilter for nutrient-rich saline water. Agricultural Water
Management 149, 102-114.
Connolly, K. & Trebic, T. 2010. Optimization of a Backyard Aquaponic Food Production System. Faculty of
Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Macdonald Campus, McGill University, BREE 495 Design 3.
Diver, S. 2006. Aquaponics – Integration of Hydroponics with Aquaculture. ATTRA – National Sustainable
Agriculture Information Service.
Duncan, T. 2014. World’s largest aquaponics project, in China’s third largest aquaculture lake.
Permaculture Research Institute.
Eck, M., Sare, A. R., Massart, S., Schmautz, Z., Junge, R., Smits, T. H., & Jijakli, M. H. (2019). Exploring
bacterial communities in aquaponic systems. Water 11(2), 260.
EIP-AGRI 2019. EIP-AGRI Focus Group on Circular Horticulture: Final Report. European Commission,
Brussels.
Fenn, J. & Blosch, M. 2018. Understanding Gartner’s hype cycles. Gartner Research.
Forchino, A.A., Lourguioui, H., Brigolin, D. & Pastres, R. 2017. Aquaponics and sustainability: the
comparison of two different aquaponic techniques using the life cycle assessment (LCA). Aquacultural
Engineering 77, 80-88.
Gericke, W.F. 1937. Hydroponics — Crop production in liquid culture media. Science 85 (2198), 177-178.

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 17

Goddek, S., Espinal, C.A., Delaide, B., Jijakli, M.H., Schmautz, Z., Wuertz, S. & Keesman, K J. 2016a.
Navigating towards decoupled aquaponic systems: A system dynamics design approach. Water 8 (7), 303.
Goddek, S., Schmautz, Z., Scott, B., Delaide, B., Keesman, K.J., Wuertz, S. & Junge, R. 2016b. The effect of
anaerobic and aerobic fish sludge supernatant on hydroponic lettuce. Agronomy 6 (2), 37.
Goldman, J.C., Tenore, K.R., Ryther, J.H. & Corwin, N. 1974. Inorganic nitrogen removal in a combined
tertiary treatment—marine aquaculture system—I. Removal efficiences. Water Research 8 (1), 45-54.
Graber, A. & Junge, R. 2009. Aquaponic systems: Nutrient recycling from fish wastewater by vegetable
production. Desalination 246 (1-3), 147-156.
Graber, A., Durno, M., Gaus, R., Mathis, A. & Junge, R. 2014a. UF001 LokDepot, Basel: The first commercial
rooftop aquaponic farm in Switzerland. In International Conference on Vertical Farming and Urban
Agriculture (VFUA 2014), Nottingham, United Kingdom, 9–10 September 2014.
Graber, A., Antenen, N. & Junge, R. 2014b. The multifunctional aquaponic system at ZHAW used as
research and training lab. In Maček Jerala, M. & Maček, M.A. (eds). Conference VIVUS: Transmission of
Innovations, Knowledge and Practical Experience into Everyday Practice. Collection of Papers, Strahinj, 14–
15 November 2014, pp. 245-255.
Heller, H., Bar-Tal, A., Assouline, S., Narkis, K., Suryano, A., de la Forge, A., Barak, M., Alon, H., Bruner, M.,
Cohen, S. & Tsohar, D. 2015. The effects of container geometry on water and heat regimes in soilless
culture: lettuce as a case study. Irrigation Science 33, 53-65.
IndustryARC 2019. Aquaponics Market Forecast 2020-2025.
Joly, A., Junge, R. & Bardocz, T. 2015. Aquaponics business in Europe: some legal obstacles and solutions.
Ecocycles 1 (2), 3-5.
Junge, R., Wilhelm, S. & Hofstetter, U. 2014. Aquaponic in classrooms as a tool to promote system
thinking. In Maček Jerala, M. & Maček, M.A. (eds.) Conference VIVUS: Transmission of Innovations,
Knowledge and Practical Experience into Everyday Practice. Collection of Papers, Strahinj, 14-15 November
2014, pp. 234-244.
Junge, R., König, B., Villarroel, M., Komives, T. & Jijakli, M.H. 2017. Strategic points in aquaponics. Water
9 (3), 182.
Junge, R., Bulc, T. G., Anseeuw, D., Yildiz, H. Y., & Milliken, S. (2019). Aquaponics as an educational
tool. Aquaponics Food Production Systems, 561.
Khandaker, M. & Kotzen, B. 2018. The potential for combining living wall and vertical farming systems
with aquaponics with special emphasis on substrates. Aquaculture Research 49 (4), 1454-1468.
Klemenčič, A.K. & Bulc, T.G. 2015. The use of vertical constructed wetland and ultrasound in aquaponic
systems. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 22 (2), 1420-1430.
Koohafkan, P. & Altieri, M.A. 2018. Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems: A Legacy for the
Future. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.
Laidlaw, J. & Magee, L. 2016. Towards urban food sovereignty: the trials and tribulations of community-
based aquaponics enterprises in Milwaukee and Melbourne. Local Environment 21 (5), 573-590.
Lennard, W.A. & Leonard, B.V. 2004. A comparison of reciprocating flow versus constant flow in an
integrated, gravel bed, aquaponic test system. Aquaculture International 12 (6), 539-553.
Lennard, W.A. & Leonard, B.V. 2006. A comparison of three different hydroponic sub-systems (gravel bed,
floating and nutrient film technique) in an aquaponic test system. Aquaculture International 14 (6), 539-
550.
Liu, W., Chen, D.K. & Liu, Z.X. 2004. High efficiency column culture system in China. Acta Horticulturae
691, 495-500.

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 18

Love, D.C., Fry, J.P., Genello, L., Hill, E.S., Frederick, J.A., Li, X. & Semmens, K. 2014. An international survey
of aquaponics practitioners. PLoS ONE 9 (7), e102662.
Maucieri, C., Forchino, A.A., Nicoletto, C., Junge, R., Pastres, R., Sambo, P. & Borin, M. 2018. Life cycle
assessment of a micro aquaponic system for educational purposes built using recovered material. Journal
of Cleaner Production 172, 3119-3127.
McMurtry, M.R., Nelson, P.V., Sanders, D.C. & Hodges, L. 1990. Sand culture of vegetables using
recirculated aquacultural effluents. Applied Agricultural Research 5 (4), 280-284.
McEldowney, J. 2017. Urban agriculture in Europe: Patterns, challenges and policies. European
Parliamentary Research Service.
Monsees, H., Kloas, W. & Wuertz, S. 2017. Decoupled systems on trial: Eliminating bottlenecks to improve
aquaponic processes. PloS ONE 12 (9), e0183056.
Naegel, L.C. 1977. Combined production of fish and plants in recirculating water. Aquaculture 10 (1), 17-24.
Neocleous, D., Kaittanis, C., Seraphides, N. & Polycarpou, P. 2010. Horizontal and vertical soilless growing
systems under Cyprus conditions. Journal of Applied Horticulture 12 (2), 140-144.
Newman, G.E., Gorlin, M. & Dhar, R. 2014. When going green backfires: How firm intentions shape the
evaluation of socially beneficial product enhancements. Journal of Consumer Research 41 (3), 823-839.
Nozzi, V., Parisi, G., Di Crescenzo, D., Giordano, M. & Carnevali, O. 2016. Evaluation of Dicentrarchus labrax
meats and the vegetable quality of Beta vulgaris var. cicla farmed in freshwater and saltwater aquaponic
systems. Water 8 (10), 423.
Nozzi, V., Graber, A., Schmautz, Z., Mathis, A. & Junge, R. 2018. Nutrient Management in Aquaponics:
Comparison of Three Approaches for Cultivating Lettuce, Mint and Mushroom Herb. Agronomy 8 (3), 27.
Palm, H.W., Knaus, U., Appelbaum, S., Goddek, S., Strauch, S.M., Vermeulen, T., Jijakli, M.H. & Kotzen, B.
2018. Towards commercial aquaponics: A review of systems, designs, scales and
nomenclature. Aquaculture International 26 (3), 813-842.
Pattillo, D.A. 2017. An overview of aquaponic systems: hydroponic components. NCRAC Technical Bulletin
19.
Podgrajsek, B., Schmautz, Z., Krivograd Klemencic, A., Jarni, K., Junge, R. & Griessler Bulc, T. 2014.
Preliminarni monitoring akvaponicnega sistema v biotehniskem centru Naklo: Preliminary Monitoring of
an Aquaponic System in Biotechnical Center Naklo. Moje Podezelje 5 (9), 10-11.
Rafiee, G. & Saad, C.R. 2010. The effect of natural zeolite (clinoptiolite) on aquaponic production of red
tilapia (Oreochromis sp.) and lettuce (Lactuca sativa var. longifolia), and improvement of water
quality. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology 8, 313-322.
Rakocy, J.E., Schultz, R.C., Bailey, D.S. & Thoman, E.S. 2003. Aquaponic Production of Tilapia and Basil:
Comparing a Batch and Staggered Cropping System. Acta Horticulturae 648, 63-70.
Rakocy, J.E., Bailey, D.S., Shultz, R.C. & Thoman, E.S. 2004. Update on tilapia and vegetable production in
the UVI aquaponic system. In New Dimensions on Farmed Tilapia: Proceedings of the Sixth International
Symposium on Tilapia in Aquaculture, pp. 12-16.
Rakocy, J.E., Masser, M.P. & Losordo, T.M. 2006. Recirculating Aquaculture Tank Production Systems:
Aquaponics — Integrating Fish and Plant Culture. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center, SRAC
Publication No. 454.
Ramírez-Arias, J.A.; Hernández-Ibarra, U.; Pineda-Pineda, J.; Fitz-Rodríguez, Horizontal and vertical
hydroponic systems for strawberry production at high densities. Acta Horticulturae 1227, 331-338.
Ramírez-Gómez, H., Sandoval-Villa, M., Carrillo-Salazar, A. & Muratalla-Lúa, A. 2012. Comparison of
hydroponic systems in the strawberry production. Acta Horticulturae 947, 165-172.

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 19

Roosta, H.R. & Afsharipoor, S. 2012. Effects of different cultivation media on vegetative growth,
ecophysiological traits and nutrients concentration in strawberry under hydroponic and aquaponic
cultivation systems. Advances in Environmental Biology 6 (2), 543-555.
Ryther, J.H., Goldman, J.C., Gifford, C.E., Huguenin, J.E., Wing, A.S., Clarner, J.P., Williams, L.D. & Lapointe,
B.E. 1975. Physical models of integrated waste recycling-marine polyculture systems. Aquaculture 5 (2),
163-177.
Savidov, N. & Brooks, A.B. 2004. Evaluation and Development of Aquaponics Production and Product
Market Capabilities in Alberta. Crop Diversification Centre South, Brooks, Alberta.
Schmautz, Z., Graber, A., Jaenicke, S., Goesmann, A., Junge, R. & Smits, T.H.M. 2016a. Microbial diversity
in different compartments of an aquaponics system. Archives of Microbiology 199 (4), 613-620.
Schmautz, Z., Loeu, F., Liebisch, F., Graber, A., Mathis, A., Griessler Bulc, T. & Junge, R. 2016b. Tomato
productivity and quality in aquaponics: comparison of three hydroponic methods. Water 8 (11), 533.
Schmautz, Z., Espinal, C. A., Bohny, A. M., Rezzonico, F., Junge, R., Frossard, E., & Smits, T. H. (2021).
Environmental parameters and microbial community profiles as indication towards microbial activities
and diversity in aquaponic system compartments. BMC microbiology, 21(1), 1-11.
Schnitzler, W.H. 2013. Urban hydroponics for green and clean cities and for food security. Acta
Horticulturae 1004, 13-26.
Smith, L. 2015. Aquaculture expert helps build one of the world's biggest fish farms in Middle East. New
South Wales Country Hour.
Somerville et al. 2014. Introduction to aquaponics. Somerville, C., Cohen, M., Pantanella, E., Stankus, A. &
Lovatelli, A. 2014. Small-scale Aquaponic Food Production: Integrated Fish and Plant Farming. FAO
Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper No. 589. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations, Rome, pp. 1-10.
Steinert, M. & Leifer, L. 2010. Scrutinizing Gartner’s hype cycle approach. Paper presented at the
Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET) conference on Technology Management for Global
Economic Growth, Phuket, Thailand.
Thorarinsdottir, R.I. (ed.) 2015. Aquaponics Guidelines. EU Lifelong Learning Programme, Reykjavik.
Touliatos, T., Dodd, I.C. & McAinsh, M. 2016. Vertical farming increases lettuce yield per unit area
compared to conventional horizontal hydroponics. Food and Energy Security 5 (3), 184–191.
Trang, N.T.D. & Brix, H. 2014. Use of planted biofilters in integrated recirculating aquaculture‐hydroponics
systems in the Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Aquaculture Research 45 (3), 460-469.
Turnšek, M., Joly, A., Thorarinsdottir, R., & Junge, R. (2020). Challenges of Commercial Aquaponics in
Europe: Beyond the Hype. Water, 12(1), 306.
Turnšek, M., Morgenstern, R., Schröter, I., Mergenthaler, M., Hüttel, S. & Leyer, M. 2019. Commercial
aquaponics: a long road ahead. In Goddek, S., Joyce, A., Kotzen, B. & Burnell, G.M. (eds.) Aquaponic
Food Production Systems: Combined Aquaculture and Hydroponic Production Technologies for the
Future, pp. 453-485.
Value Market Research 2020. Global Aquaponics Market Report.
Van Woensel, L. Archer, G. (2015) Ten technologies which could change our lives. European Parliamentary
Research Service. Scientific Foresight (STOA) unit.
Vermeulen, S., Campbell, B.M. & Ingram, J.S.I. 2012. Climate change and food systems. Annual Review of
Environment and Resources 37, 195-222.
Villarroel, M., Junge, R., Komives, T., König, B., Plaza, I., Bittsanszky, A., & Joly, A. 2016. Survey of
aquaponics in Europe. Water, 8 (10), 468.

Course Reader Week 1 – Basic Principles of Aquaponics 20