Fish Diets in Aquaponics

This is a self-archived version of an original article. This version may differ from the original in pagination and typographic details. Author(s): Title: Year: Version: Copyright: Rights: Rights url: Please cite the original version: CC BY 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Fish Diets in Aquaponics © The Author(s) 2019. Published version Robaina, Lidia; Pirhonen, Juhani; Mente, Elena; Sánchez, Javier; Goosen, Neill Robaina, L., Pirhonen, J., Mente, E., Sánchez, J., & Goosen, N. (2019). Fish Diets in Aquaponics. In S. Goddek, A. Joyce, B. Kotzen, & G. M. Burnell (Eds.), Aquaponics Food Production Systems : Combined Aquaculture and Hydroponic Production Technologies for the Future (pp. 333-352). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15943-6_13 2019 Chapter 13 Fish Diets in Aquaponics Lidia Robaina, Juhani Pirhonen, Elena Mente, Javier Sánchez, and Neill Goosen Abstract Fish and feed waste provide most of the nutrients required by the plants in aquaponics if the optimum ratio between daily fish feed inputs and the plant growing area is sustained. Thus, the fish feed needs to fulfil both the fish’s and plant’s nutritional requirements in an aquaponic system. A controlled fish waste production strategy where the nitrogen, phosphorus and mineral contents of fish diets are manipulated and used provides a way of influencing the rates of accumulation of nutrients, thereby reducing the need for the additional supplementation of nutrients. To optimize the performance and cost-effectiveness of aquaponic production, fish diets and feeding schedules should be designed carefully to provide nutrients at the right level and time to complement fish, bacteria and plants. To achieve this, a species-specific tailor-made aquaponic feed may be optimized to suit the aquaponic system as a whole. The optimal point would be determined based on overall system performance parameters, including economic and environmental sustainability measures. This chapter thus focuses on fish diets and feed and reviews the state of the art L. Robaina (*) Aquaculture Research Group (GIA), Ecoaqua Institute, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Telde, Gran Canaria, Spain e-mail: [email protected] J. Pirhonen Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland e-mail: juhani.pirhonen@jyu.fi E. Mente Department of Ichthyology and Aquatic Environment, University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece e-mail: [email protected] J. Sánchez Department of Physiology, Faculty of Biology, Regional Campus of International Excellence “Campus Mare Nostrum”, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain e-mail: [email protected] N. Goosen Department of Process Engineering, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa e-mail: [email protected] ©The Author(s) 2019 S. Goddek et al. (eds.), Aquaponics Food Production Systems, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15943-6_13 333 in fish diets, ingredients and additives, as well as the nutritional/sustainable challenges that need to be considered when producing specific aquaponic feeds. Keywords Aquaponic diets · Sustainability · Feed by-products · Nutrient flow · Nutritional requirements · Feeding times 13.1 Introduction Aquatic food is recognized to be beneficial to human nutrition and health and will play an essential role in future sustainable healthy diets (Beveridge et al. 2013). In order to achieve this, the global aquaculture sector must contribute to increasing the quantity and quality of fish supplies between now and 2030 (Thilsted et al. 2016). This growth should be promoted not only by increasing the production and/or number of species but also by systems diversification. However, fish from aquaculture has only recently been included in the food security and nutrition (FSN) debate and the future strategies and policies, demonstrating the important role of this production to prevent malnutrition in the future (Bénét et al. 2015), as fish provide a good source of protein and unsaturated fats, as well as minerals and vitamins. It is important to note that many African nations are promoting aquaculture as the answer to some of their current and future food production challenges. Even in Europe, fish supply is currently not self-sufficient (with an unbalanced domestic supply/demand), being increasingly dependent on imports. Therefore, ensuring the successful and sustainable development of global aquaculture is an imperative agenda for the global and European economy (Kobayashi et al. 2015). Sustainability is generally required to show three key aspects: environmental acceptability, social equitability and economic viability. Aquaponic systems provide an opportunity to be sustainable, by combining both animal and plant production systems in a cost-efficient, environmentally friendly and socially beneficial ways. For Staples and Funge-Smith (2009), sustainable development is the balance between ecological well-being and human well-being, and in the case of aquaculture, an ecosystem approach has been only recently understood as a priority area for research. Aquaculture has been the fastest growing food production sector during the last 40 years (Tveterås et al. 2012), being one of the most promising farming activities to meet near-future world food needs (Kobayashi et al. 2015). Total production statistics from aquaculture (FAO 2015) reveal an annual increment in global production of 6%, which is expected to provide up to 63% of global fish consumption by 2030 (FAO 2014), for an estimated population of nine billion people in 2050. In the case of Europe, the predicted increase is seen not only within the marine sector but also in terrestrially produced products. Some of the expected challenges to the growth of aquaculture during the coming years are the reduction in the use of antibiotics and other pathological treatments, the development of efficient aquaculture systems and equipment, together with species diversification and increased sustainability in the 334 L. Robaina et al. area of feed production and feed use. The shift from fishmeal (FM) in feed to other protein sources is also an important challenge, as well as the ‘fish-in-fish-out’ratios. There is a long history, reaching back to the 1960s, of promoting the growth of the aquaculture sector towards proper sustainability including the encouragement to adapt and create new and more sustainable feed formulas, reduce feed spilling and reduce the food conversion ratio (FCR). Although aquaculture is recognized as the most efficient animal production sector, when compared with terrestrial animal production, there is still room for improvement in terms of resource efficiency, diversification of species or methods of production, and moreover a clear need for an ecosystem approach taking full advantage of the biological potential of the organisms and providing adequate consideration of environmental and societal factors (Kaushik 2017). This growth in aquaculture production will need to be supported by an increase in the expected total feed production. Approximately three million additional tons of feed will need to be produced each year to support the expected aquaculture growth by 2030. Moreover, replacing fishmeal and fish oil (FO) with plant and terrestrial substitutes is needed which requires essential research into formula feed for animal farming. The animal and aquafeed industries are part of a global production sector, which is also the focus for future development strategies. Alltech’syearlysurvey(Alltech 2017) reveals that total animal feed production broke through 1 billion metric tons, with a 3.7% increase in production from 2015 despite a 7% decrease in the number of feed mills. China and the USA dominated production in 2016, accounting for 35% of the world’s total feed production. The survey indicates that the top 10 producing countries have more than half of the world’s feed mills (56%) and account for 60% of total feed production. This concentration in production means that many of the key ingredients traditionally used in formulations for commercial aquaculture feeds are internationally traded commodities, which subjects aquafeed production to any global market volatility. Fishmeal for example is expected to double in price by 2030, whilst fish oil is likely to increase by over 70% (Msangi et al. 2013). This illustrates the importance of reducing the amount of these ingredients in fish feed whilst increasing the interest and focus on new or alternative sources (García-Romero et al. 2014a,b; Robaina et al. 1998,1999;Terovaetal.2013; Torrecillas et al. 2017). Whilst new offshore platforms have been developed for aquaculture production, there is also a significant focus on marine and freshwater recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS), as these systems use less water per kg fish feed used, which increases fish production whilst reducing environmental impacts of aquaculture including reductions in water usage (Ebeling and Timmons 2012; Kingler and Naylor 2012). RAS can be integrated with plant production in aquaponic systems, which readily fit into local and regional food system models (see Chap. 15) that can be practised in or near large population centres (Love et al. 2015a). Water, energy and fish feed are the three largest physical inputs for aquaponic systems (Love et al. 2014,2015b). Approximately 5% of feed is not consumed by the farmed fish, whilst the remaining 95% is ingested and digested (Khakyzadeh et al. 2015). Of this share, 30–40% is retained and converted into new biomass, whilst the 13 Fish Diets in Aquaponics 335 remaining 60–70% is released in the form of faeces, urine and ammonia (FAO 2014). On average, 1 kg of feed (30% crude protein) globally releases about 27.6 g of N, and 1 kg of fish biomass releases about 577 g of BOD (biological oxygen demand), 90.4 g of N and 10.5 g of P (Tyson et al. 2011). Aquaponics is currently a small but rapidly growing sector which is clearly suited to take advantage of the following political and socio-economic challenges, where 1) aquatic produce meets the need for food security and nutrition, 2) fish self-sufficient regions are established around the world, 3) aquaculture is a key sector but global ingredients and global feed production comes under focus, 4) innovation in agriculture promotes biodiversity in more sustainable ways and as part of the circular economy and 5) there is a greater take up of locally produced foods. These aspects tie in with the recommendations from the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (Le Gouvello et al. 2017), regarded the sustainability of the aquaculture and fish feed, which has recommended that efforts should be made to localize aquaculture production and the circular approach, and for putting in place a quality control programme for new products and by-products, as well as processing local fish feed within regions. So far, aquaponics as ‘small-scale aquaculture farms’could provide examples for the implementation of the bioeconomy and local-scale Aquaponic R+D+I Consortium Technological Innovation Hydroponic Agriculture Aquaponics Technology Processing / Testing Economy Management Biowastes Processing / Testing Validation/ Upscaling Education and Training Marketing Aquaponic Feed Development and the Circular Bioeconomy Aquaculture Fig. 13.1 Schematic representation of a multidisciplinary approach to locally valorize bio-by- products for aquaponic diets. (Based on ‘R+D+I towards aquaponic development in the ultraperipheric islands and the circular economy’; ISLANDAP project, Interreg MAC/1.1a/ 2072014-2019) 336 L. Robaina et al. production, thus promoting ways of using products and by-products from organic matter not suitable for use for other purposes, e.g. farmed insects and worms, macro- and microalgae, fish and by-product hydrolysates, new agro-ecology-produced plants and locally produced bioactives and micronutrients, whilst reducing the environmental footprint with quality food (fish and plants) production and moving towards zero waste generation. Moreover, aquaponics provides a good example for promoting a multidisciplinary way of learning about sustainable production and bioresource valorization, e.g. the ‘Islandap Project’(INTERREG V-A MAC 2014- 2020) (Fig. 13.1). The following sections of this chapter review the state of the art of fish diets, ingredients and additives, as well as nutritional/sustainable challenges to consider when producing specific aquaponic feeds. 13.2 Sustainable Development of Fish Nutrition The sustainable development of fish nutrition in aquaculture will need to correspond with the challenges that aquaponics delivers with respect to the growing need for producing high-quality food. Manipulating the nitrogen, phosphorus and the mineral content of fish diets used in aquaponics is one way of influencing the rates of the accumulation of nutrients, thereby reducing the need for the artificial and external supplementation of nutrients. According to Rakocy et al. (2004), fish and feed waste provide most of the nutrients required by plants if the optimum ratio between daily fish feed input and plant growing areas is sustained. Solid fish waste called ‘sludge’in aquaponic systems results in losing approximately half of the available input nutrients, especially phosphorus, that theoretically could be used for plant biomass production but information is still limited (Delaide et al. 2017; Goddek et al. 2018). Whilst the goal of sustainability in fish nutrition in aquaculture will in the future be achieved by using tailor-made diets, fish feed in aquaponics needs to fulfil the nutritional requirements both for fish and for plants. Increases in sustainability will in part derive from less dependence on fishmeal (FM) and fish oil (FO) and novel, high-energy, low-carbon footprint raw natural ingredients. To safeguard biodiversity and the sustainable use of natural resources, the use of wild fisheries-based FM and FO needs to be limited in aquafeeds (Tacon and Metian 2015). However, fish performance, health and final product quality may be altered when substituting dietary FM with alternative ingredients. Thus, fish nutrition research is focused on the efficient use and transformation of the dietary components to provide the necessary essential nutrients that will maximize growth performance and achieve sustainable and resilient aquaculture. Replacing FM, which is an excellent but costly protein source in fish diets, is not straightforward due to its unique amino acid profile, high nutrient digestibility, high palatability, adequate amounts of micronutrients, as well as having a general lack of anti-nutritional factors (Gatlin et al. 2007). 13 Fish Diets in Aquaponics 337 Many studies have shown that FM can be successfully replaced by soybean meal in aquafeeds, but soybean meal has anti-nutritional factors such as trypsin inhibitors, soybean agglutinin and saponin, which limit its use and high replacement percentages in farming carnivorous fish. High FM replacement by plant meals in fish diets can also reduce nutrient bioavailability in fish, which results in nutrient alterations in the final quality of the product (Gatlin et al. 2007). It can also cause undesirable disturbances to the aquatic environment (Hardy 2010) and reduce fish growth due to the reduced levels of essential amino acids (especially methionine and lysine), and reduced palatability (Krogdahl et al. 2010). Gerile and Pirhonen (2017) noted that a 100% FM replacement with corn gluten meal significantly reduced growth rate of rainbow trout but FM replacement did not affect oxygen consumption or swimming capacity. High levels of plant material can also affect the physical quality of the pellets, and may complicate the manufacturing process during extrusion. Most of the alternative plant-derived nutrient sources for fish feeds contain a wide variety of anti-nutritional factors that interfere with fish protein metabolism by impairing digestion and utilization, therefore leading to increased N release in the environment which can affect fish health and welfare. In addition, diets including high levels of phytic acid altered phosphorus and protein digestion that lead to high N and P release into the surrounding environment. Feed intake and palatability, nutrient digestibility and retention may vary according to fish species’tolerance and levels and can change the quantity and composition of the fish waste. Taking into consideration these results, fish diet formulations in aquaponics should investigate ‘the tolerance’dietary levels of anti-nutritional factors (i.e. phytate) for different feed ingredients and for each fish species used in aquaponics and also the effects of the addition of minerals such as Zn and phosphate in the diets. It also should be noted that even if plant material is regarded as an ecologically sound option to replace FM in aquafeeds, plants need irrigation, and thus may induce ecological impacts in the form of their water and ecological footprints (Pahlow et al. 2015) from nutrient run-off from the fields. Terrestrial animal by-products such as non-ruminant processed animal proteins (PAPs) derived from monogastric farmed animals (e.g. poultry, pork) that are fitfor human consumption at the point of slaughter (Category 3 materials, EC regulation 142/2011; ΕC regulation 56/2013) could also replace FM and support the circular economy. They have higher protein content, more favourable amino acid profiles and fewer carbohydrates compared to plant feed ingredients whilst also lacking antinutritional factors (Hertrampf and Piedad-Pascual 2000). It has been shown that meat and bone meals may serve as a good phosphorus source when it is included in the diet of Nile tilapia (Ashraf et al. 2013), although it has been strictly banned in the feed of ruminant animals due to the danger of initiating bovine spongiform encephalopathy (mad cow disease). Certain insect species, such as black soldier fly(Hermetia illucens), could be used as an alternative protein source for sustainable fish feed diets. The major environmental advantages of insect farming are that (a) less land and water are required, (b) that greenhouse gas emissions are lower and that (c) insects have high feed conversion efficiencies (Henry et al. 2015). However, there is a continuing need 338 L. Robaina et al. for further research to provide evidence on quality and safety issues and screening for risks to fish, plants, people and the environment. It is important to note that fish cannot synthesize several essential nutrients required for their metabolism and growth and depend on the feed for this supply. However, there are certain animal groups that can use nutrient-deficient diets, as they bear symbiotic microorganisms that can provide these compounds (Douglas 2010), and thus, fish can obtain maximal benefit when the microbial supply of their essential nutrients is scaled to demand. Undersupply limits fish growth, whilst oversupply can be harmful due to the need for the fish to neutralize toxicity caused by non-essential compounds. The extent to which the microbial function varies with the demands of different fish species and what are the underlying mechanisms are largely unknown. Importantly, an aquatic animal’s gut microbiota can in theory play a critical role in providing the necessary nutrients and obtaining sustainability in fish farming (Kormas et al. 2014; Mente et al. 2016). Further research in this field will help facilitate the selection of ingredients to be used in fish feeds that promote gut microbiota diversity to improve fish growth and health. Research into the utilization of alternative plant and animal protein sources and low trophic fish feed ingredients is ongoing. The substitution of marine sourced raw ingredients in fish feed, which could be used directly for human food purposes should decrease fishing pressure and contribute to preserving biodiversity. Low trophic-level organisms, such as black soldier fly, which may serve as aquafeed ingredients may be grown on by-products and waste of other agricultural industrial practices given different nutritional quality meals, thereby adding additional environmental benefits. However, efforts to succeed with the circular economy and the recycling of organic and inorganic nutrients should be handled with care since undesirable compounds in raw materials and seafood products could increase the risk to animal health, welfare, growth performance and safety of the final product for consumers. Research and continuous monitoring and reporting on contaminants of farmed aquatic animals in relation to the maximum limits in feed ingredients and diets are essential to inform revisions in and introductions of new regulations. 13.3 Feed Ingredients and Additives 13.3.1 Protein and Lipid Sources for Aquafeeds Since the end of the twentieth century, there have been significant changes in the composition of aquafeeds but also advances in manufacturing. These transformations have originated from the need to improve the economic profitability of aquaculture as well as to mitigate its environmental impacts. However, the driving forces behind these changes is the need to decrease the amount of fishmeal (FM) and fish oil (FO) in the feeds, which have traditionally constituted the largest proportion of the feeds, especially for carnivorous fish and shrimp. Partly because of overfishing but especially due to the continuous increase in global aquaculture volume, there is 13 Fish Diets in Aquaponics 339 an increasing need for alternative proteins and oils to replace FM and FO in aquafeeds. The composition of fish feeds has changed considerably as the proportion of FM in diets has decreased from >60% in the 1990s to <20% in modern diets for carnivorous fish such as Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), and FO content has decreased from 24% to 10% (Ytrestøyl et al. 2015). As a consequence the so-called fish-in-fish-out (FIFO) ratio has decreased below 1 for salmon and rainbow trout meaning that the amount of fish needed in the feed to produce 1 kg of fish meat is less than 1 kg (Fig. 13.2). Thus, carnivorous fish culture in the twenty-first century is a net producer of fish. On the other hand, feeds for lower trophic omnivorous fish species (e.g. carp and tilapia) may contain less than 5% FM (Tacon et al. 2011). Farming such low trophic fish species is ecologically more sustainable than for higher trophic species, and FIFO for tilapia was 0.15 and for cyprinids (carp species) only 0.02 in 2015 (IFFO). It should be noted that total FM replacement in the diets of tilapia (Koch et al. 2016) and salmon (Davidson et al. 2018) is not possible without significantly affecting production parameters. Today, the major supply of proteins and lipids in fish feed comes from plants, but also commonly from other sectors, including meals and fats from meat and poultry by-products and blood meal (Tacon and Metian 2008). Additionally, waste and Kg of Fish Oil Used per Produced Kg Fish in : Fish Out - Ratio Amount of Fish Oil Used 1985 Fish In - Fish Out 4,0 3,5 3,0 2,5 2,0 1,5 1,0 0,5 0,0 0,40 0,35 0,30 0,25 0,20 0,15 0,10 0,05 0,00 20151990 1995 2000 2005 2010 Fig. 13.2 Fish-in-fish-out ratio (blue line, left y-axis) and the amount of fish oil used (yellow line, right y-axis) for rainbow trout feed in Finland between 1990 and 2013. (Data from www.raisioagro. com) 340 L. Robaina et al. tilapia-strawberry aquaponic system, the total amount of feed required to produce ions (e.g. NO 3 –, Ca 2+ ,H 2 PO 4  and K + ) for plants was calculated at different fish densities, with better result for small fish density 2 kg fish/m 3 to reduce the cost of hydroponic solution supplementation (Villarroel et al. 2011). It is well known that plants have daily rhythms and circadian rhythmicity in leaf movements was first described in plants by de Mairan in the early eighteenth century (McClung 2006). Circadian rhythms in plants control everything from the time of flowering to plant nutrition and thus these rhythms need to be taken into account especially when using artificial horticultural lighting. Fish are also tied into daily rhythms in most physiological functions, including feeding and nutrient uptake. It should not be surprising that fish exhibit feeding rhythms because food availability and the occurrence of predators are hardly constant but restricted to a particular time of day/night (López-Olmeda and Sánchez-Vázquez 2010). Thus, fish should be fed at the right time according to their appetite rhythms: meals scheduled during daytime for diurnal fish species, and at night for nocturnal fish. It is well known that fish show daily patterns of deamination of proteins and nitrogenous wastes related to their nutritional status and feeding rhythms (Kaushik 1980). Feeding time affects nitrogen excretion, as Gelineau et al. (1998) reported ammonia production and protein catabolism were lower in fish fed at dawn (in phase with their feeding rhythm) than in those fed at midnight (out of phase). Most interestingly, urea excretion shows circadian rhythmicity that persist in starved fish under constant conditions (Kajimura et al. 2002), revealing its endogenous origin. Furthermore, urea permeability (determined as body urea contents after immersion in a urea solution) coincided with the acrophase, i.e. the peak of the daily excretion rhythm, indicating that urea does not permeate cells by simple diffusion but there is a circadian control. Plants also show daily rhythms in nitrogen uptake, as early described by Pearson and Steer (1977), who found a daily pattern of nitrate uptake and nitrate reductase in peppers kept in a constant environment. The nitrate concentration in the leaves of spinach also increased during the night as the uptake rate of nitrate by the roots increase at that time (Steingrover et al. 1986). In aquaponics, the evidence thus points to the need for matching excretion rhythms in fish and nutrient uptake rhythms in plants. To Fish Feed Aquaculture Hydroponics Input Output Fig. 13.3 Nutrient flow in an aquaponic system. Note that fish feed, through wastewater from the aquaculture system, provides the minerals required for plants to grow in the hydroponic system. Meal timing should be designed to match feeding/ excretion rhythms in fish and nutrient uptake rhythms in plants 13 Fish Diets in Aquaponics 347 optimize the performance and cost-effectiveness of aquaponic systems, fish diets and feeding schedules should be designed carefully to provide nutrients at the right level and the right time to complement both fish and plants. References Adler PR, Harper JK, Wade EM, Takeda F, Summerfelt ST (2000) Economic analysis of an aquaponic system for the integrated production of rainbow trout and plants. Int J Recirculat Aquacult 1:15–34 Alltech (2017) Alltech yearly survey 2017. https://go.alltech.com/alltech-feed-survey-2017 Ashraf S, Rania SM, Ehab REH (2013) Meat and bone meal as a potential source of phosphorus in plant-protein-based diets for Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus). Aquacult Intl 21:375–385 Béné C, Barange M, Subasinghe R, Pinstrup-Andersen P, Merino G, Hemre G-I, Williams M (2015) Feeding 9 billion by 2050 –putting fish back on the menú. Food Sec 7:261–274. https:// doi.org/10.1007/s12571-015-0427-z Betancor MB, Li K, Sprague M, Bardal T, Sayanova O, Usher S, Han L, Måsøval K, Torrissen O, Napier JA, Tocher DR, Olsen RO (2017) An oil containing EPA and DHA from transgenic Camelina sativa to replace marine fish oil in feeds for Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.): Effects on intestinal transcriptome, histology, tissue fatty acid profiles and plasma biochemistry. PLoS ONE 12(4):e0175415. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175415 Beveridge MCM, Thilsted SH, Phillips MJ, Metian M, Troell M, Hall SJ (2013) Meeting the food and nutrition needs of the poor. J Fish Biol:1067. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfb.12187 Bittsanszky A, Uzinger N, Gyulai G, Mathis A, Junge R, Villarroel M, Kotzen B, Komives T (2016) Nutrient supply of plants in aquaponic systems. Ecocycles 2:17–20 Buzby KM, Lin L-S (2014) Scaling aquaponic systems: Balancing plant uptake with fish output. Aquacult Eng 63:39–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2014.09.002. Camacho-Rodríguez J, Macías-Sánchez MD, Cerón-García MC, Alarcón FJ, Molina-Grima E (2017) Microalgae as a potential ingredient for partial fish meal replacement in aquafeeds: nutrient stability under different storage conditions. J Appl Phycol. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10811-017-1281-5 Davidson J, Kenney PB, Barrows FT, Good C, Summerfelt ST (2018) Fillet quality and processing attributes of post-smolt Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, fed a fishmeal-free diet and a fishmealbased diet in recirculation aquaculture systems. J World Aquacult Soc 49:183–196. https://doi. org/10.1111/jwas.12452 Davis DA, Gatlin DM (1996) Dietary mineral requirement of fish and marine crustaceans. Rev Fish Sci 4:75–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/10641269609388579 Delaide B, Delhaye G, Dermience M, Gott J, Soyeurt H, Jijakli MH (2017) Plant and fish production performance, nutrient mass balances, energy and water use of the PAFF Box, a small-scale aquaponic system. Aquac Eng 78:130–139 Douglas AE (2010) The symbiotic habit. Princeton University Press, Princeton Ebeling JM, Timmons MB (2012) Recirculating aquaculture systems. In: Tidwell JH (ed) Aquaculture production systems. Wiley, Hoboken EC (2009) Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European parliament and of the council of 21 October 2009 laying down health rules as regards animal by-products and derived products not intended for human consumption and repealing regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 (animal by-products regulation). Off J Eur Union L 300/1. https://doi.org/10.3000/17252555.L_2009. 300.eng Encarnação P (2016) Chapter 5: Functional feed additives in aquaculture feeds. In: Nates SF (ed) Aquafeed formulation. Academic, San Diego, pp 217–237 348 L. Robaina et al. Endut A, Jusoh A, Ali N, Wan Nik WB (2011) Nutrient removal from aquaculture wastewater by vegetable production in aquaponics recirculation system. Desalinat Water Treat 32:422–430. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2011.2761 EU (2017) Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/893 of 24 May 2017 amending Annexes I and IV to Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Annexes X, XIV and XV to Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 as regards the provisions on processed animal protein. Off J Eur Union L138/92. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/893/oj FAO (2014) The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture. Food and Agricultural Organization, Rome, Italy FAOSTAT (2015) Fish and fishery products –world apparent consumption statistics based on food balance sheets (1961–) García-Romero J, Gines R, Izquierdo M, Robaina L (2014a) Marine and freshwater crab meals in diet for red porgy (Pagrus pagrus): effect on fillet fatty acid profile and flesh quality. Aquaculture 420–421:231–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2013.10.035 García-Romero J, Gines R, Vargas R, Izquierdo M, Robaina L (2014b) Marine and freshwater crab meals in diet for red porgy (Pagrus pagrus): Digestibility, ammonia-N excretion, phosphorus and calcium retention. Aquaculture 428–429:158–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture. 2014.02.035 Gatlin DM, Barrows FT, Brown P, Dabrowski K, Gaylord TG, Hardy RW, Herman E, Hu GS, Krogdahl A, Nelson R, Rust M, Sealey W, Skonberg D, Souza EJ, Stone D, Wilson R, Wurtele E (2007) Expanding the utilization of sustainable plant products in aquafeeds; A review. Aquacult Res 38:551–579 Gelineau A, Medale F, Boujard T (1998) Effect of feeding time on postprandial nitrogen excretion and energy expenditure in rainbow trout. J Fish Biol 52:655–664 Gerile S, Pirhonen J (2017) Replacement of fishmeal with corn gluten meal in feeds for juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) does not affect oxygen consumption during forced swimming. Aquaculture 479:616–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2017.07.002 Goddek S, Delaide B, Mankasingh U, Ragnarsdottir KV, Jijakli H, Thorarinsdottir R (2015) Challenges of sustainable and commercial aquaponics. Sustainability 7:4199–4224. https:// doi.org/10.3390/su7044199. Goddek S, Espinal CA, Delaide B, Jijakli MH, Schmautz Z, Wuertz S, Keesman KJ (2016) Navigating towards decoupled Aquaponic systems: a system dynamics design approach. Water 8:303. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3930.0246 Goddek S, Delaide BPL, Joyce A, Wuertz S, Jijakli HM, Grosse A, Eding EH, Bläser I, Reuterg M, Keizer LCP, Morgenstern R, Körner O, Verreth J, Keesman KJ (2018) Nutrient mineralization and organic matter reduction performance of RAS-based sludge in sequential UASB-EGSB reactors. Aquacult Eng 83:10–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2018.07.003 Graber A, Junge R (2009) Aquaponic systems: nutrient recycling from fish wastewater by vegetable production. Desalination 246:147–156 Hardy RW (2010) Utilization of plant proteins in fish diets: effects of global demand and supplies of fishmeal. Review article. Aquacult Res 41:770–776 Henry M, Gasco L, Piccolo G, Fountoulaki E (2015) Review on the use of insects in the diet of farmed fish: past and future. Anim Feed Sci Technol 203:1–22 Hertrampf JW, Piedad-Pascual F (2000) Handbook on ingredients for aquaculture feeds. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. 624 pp IFFO, The Marine Ingredients Association. http://www.iffo.net Junge R, König B, Villarroel M, Komives T, Jijakli H (2017) Strategic points in aquaponics. Water 9(3):182. https://doi.org/10.3390/w9030182 Kajimura M, Iwata K, Numata H (2002) Diurnal nitrogen excretion rhythm of the functionally ureogenic gobiid fish Mugilogobius abei. Comp Biochem Physiol B 131:227–239 Kaushik SJ (1980) Influence of the nutritional status on the daily pattern of nitrogen excretion in the carp (Cyprinus carpio L.) and the rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri R.). Reprod Nut Develop 20:1751–1765 13 Fish Diets in Aquaponics 349 Kaushik S (2017) Aquaculture deals with the production of all kinds of aquatic organisms through human intervention, 2017 meeting. International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences (CAETS –http://www.caets.org). Madrid, 14–15 November 2017 Khakyzadeh V, Luque R, Zolfigol MA, Vahidian HR, Salehzadeh H, Moradi V, Soleymani AR, Moosavi-Zare AR, Xu K (2015) Waste to wealth: a sustainable aquaponic system based on residual nitrogen photoconversion. Royal Society of Chemistry 5:3917–3921. https://doi.org/ 10.1039/C4RA15242E Kingler D, Naylor R (2012) Searching for Solutions in Aquaculture: Charting a Sustainable Course. Anual Rev Environ Resour 37:247–276 Kloas W, Groß R, Baganz D, Graupner J, Monsees H, Schmidt U, Staaks G, Suhl J, Tschirner M, Wittstock B, Wuertz S, Zikova A, Rennert B (2015) A new concept for aquaponic systems to improve sustainability, increase productivity, and reduce environmental impacts. Aquacult Environ Interact 7:179–192. https://doi.org/10.3354/aei00146 Koch JF, Rawlesb SD, Webster CD, Cummins V, Kobayashic Y, Thompson KR, Gannam AL, Twibell RG, Hyded NM (2016) Optimizing fish meal-free commercial diets for Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus. Aquaculture 452:357–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2015. 11.017 Kormas KA, Meziti A, Mente E, Fretzos A (2014) Dietary differences are reflected on the gut prokaryotic community structure of wild and commercially reared sea bream (Sparus aurata). Microbiology open. https://doi.org/10.1002/mbo3.202 Kobayashi M, Msangi S, Batka M, Vannuccini S, Dey MM, Anderson JL (2015) Fish to 2030: the role and opportunity for aquaculture. Aquacult Econ Manage 19:282–300. https://doi.org/10. 1080/13657305.2015.994240 Krogdahl A, Penn M, Thorsen J, Refstie S, Bakke AM (2010) Important anti-nutrients in plant feedstuffs for aquaculture: An update on recent findings regarding responses in salmonids. Aquacult Res 41:333–344 Kumar V, Sinha AK, Makkar HPS, De Boeck G, Becker K (2012) Phytate and phytase in fish nutrition. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr 96:335–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0396.2011. 01169.x Lazzarotto, V., Médale, F., Larroquet, L. & Corraze, G. (2018). Long-term dietary replacement of fishmeal and fish oil in diets for rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss): Effects on growth, whole body fatty acids and intestinal and hepatic gene expression. PLoS One 13(1) https://doi.org/10. 1371/journal.pone.0190730 Le Gouvello, Raphaëla et François Simard (eds) (2017). Durabilité des alimments pour le poisson en aquaculture: Réflexions et recommandations sur les aspects technologiques, économique sociaux et environnementaux. Gland, Suisse: UICN, et Paris, France : Comité français de l’UICN. 296 pp López-Olmeda JF, Sánchez-Vázquez FJ (2010) Feeding rhythms in fish: from behavioural to molecular approach. In: Kulczykowska E, Popek W. Kapoor BG (eds) Biological clock in fish. CRC Press, Enfield, pp 155–184 Love DC, Fry JP, Genello L, Hill ES, Frederick A, Li X, Semmens K (2014) An International survey of aquaponics practitioners. PLoS One 9(7):e102662. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0102662 Love DC, Fry JP, Li X, Hill ES, Genello L, Semmens K, Thompson RE (2015a) Commercial aquaponics production and profitability: findings from an international survey. Aquaculture 435:67–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2014.09.023 Love DC, Uhl MS, Genello L (2015b) Energy and water use of a small-scale raft aquaponics system in Baltimore, Maryland, United States. Aquacult Eng 68:19–27 Lückstädt C (2008) The use of acidifiers in fish nutrition. CAB Rev Perspect Agricult Veterinary Sci Nutr Natur Resour 3:1–8 Makkar HPS, Ankers P (2014) Towards sustainable animal diets: a survey-based study. Anim Feed Sci Technol 198:309–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2014.09.018 Makkar HPS, Tran G, Heuzé V, Ankers P (2014) State-of-the-art on use of insects as animal feed. Anim Feed Sci Techn 197:1–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2014.07.008 McClung CR (2006) Plant circadian rhythms. Plant Cell 18:792–803 350 L. Robaina et al. Mente E, Gannon AT, Nikouli E, Hammer H, Kormas KA (2016) Gut microbial communities associated with the molting stages of the giant freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii. Aquaculture 463:181–188 Msangi S, Kobayashi M, Batka M, Vannuccini S, Dey MM, Anderson JL (2013) Fish to 2030: prospects for fisheries and aquaculture. World Bank Report Number 83177-GLB. http://docu ments.worldbank.org/curated/en/458631468152376668/ Naylor RL, Hardy RW, Bureau DP, Chiu A, Elliott M, Farrell AP, Forster I, Gatlin DM, Goldburg RJ, Hua K, Nichols PD (2009) Feeding aquaculture in an era of finite resources. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:15103–15110 Ng W-K, Koh C-B (2017) The utilization and mode of action of organic acids in the feeds of cultured aquatic animals. Rev Aquacult 9:342–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/raq.12141 Ng W-K, Ang L-P, Liew F-L (2001) An evaluation of mineral supplementation of fish meal-based diets for African catfish. Aquacult Int 9:277–282 NRC. N.R.C (2011) Nutrient requirements of fish and shrimp. The National Academies Press, Washington, District Columbia Oliva-Teles A (2012) Nutrition and health of aquaculture fish. J Fish Dis 35:83–108. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1365-2761.2011.01333.x Pahlow M, Oel PR, Mekonnen MM, Hoekstra AY (2015) Increasing pressure on freshwater resources due to terrestrial feed ingredients for aquaculture production. Sci Total Environ 536:847–857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.07.124 Palm HW, Seidemann R, Wehofsky S, Knaus U (2014) Significant factors affecting the economic sustainability of closed aquaponic system. Part I: system design, chemo-physical parameters and general aspects. AACL Bioflux 7:20–32 Partanen KH, Mroz Z (1999) Organic acids for performance enhancement in pig diets. Nutr Res Rev 12:117–145 Pearson CJ, Steer BT (1977) Daily changes in nitrate uptake and metabolism in Capsicum annuum. Planta 137(2):107–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00387546 Prabhu PAJ, Schrama JW, Kaushik SJ (2016) Mineral requirements of fish: a systematic review. Rev Aquacult 8:172–219 Rakocy JE, Shultz RC, Bailey DS, Thoman ES (2004) Aquaponic production of tilapia and basil: comparing a batch and staggered cropping system. Acta Hortic 648:63–69. https://doi.org/10. 17660/ActaHortic.2004.648.8 Rakocy JE, Masser MP, Losordo TM (2006) Recirculating aquaculture tank production systems: aquaponicsintegrating fish and plant culture. Southern Regional Aquaculture Center, pp 1–16 Robaina L, Izquierdo MS, Moyano FJ, Socorro J, Vergara JM, Montero D (1998) Increase of the dietary n-3/n-6 fatty acid ratio and addition of phosphorus improves liver histological alterations induced by feeding diets containing soybean meal to gilthead seabream, Sparus aurata. Aquaculture 161:281–293 Robaina L, Corraze G, Aguirre P, Blanc D, Melcion JP, Kaushik S (1999) Digestibility, postprandial ammonia excretion and selected plasma metabolites in European sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax) fed pelleted or extruded diets with or without wheat gluten. Aquaculture 179:45–56 Roosta HR, Hamidpour M (2011) Effects of foliar application of some macro- and micro-nutrients on tomato plants in aquaponic and hydroponic systems. Scientia Horticulturae 129:396–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2011.04.006 Shah MR, Giovanni Antonio Lutzu GA, Alam A, Sarker P, Chowdhury MAK, Parsaeimehr A, Liang Y, Daroch M (2018) Microalgae in aquafeeds for a sustainable aquaculture industry. J Appl Phycol 30:197–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-017-1234-z Staples D, Funge-Smith S (2009) Ecosystem approach to fisheries and aquaculture: Implementing the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok, Thailand. RAP Publication 2009/11, 48 pp Steingrover E, Ratering P, Siesling J (1986) Daily changes in uptake, reduction and storage of nitrate in spinach grown at low light intensity. Physiol Plantarum 66:555–556 Suomela JP, Tarvainen M, Kallio H, Airaksinen S (2017) Fish oil finishing diet maintains optimal n-3 long-chain fatty acid content in European whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus). Lipids 52:849–855. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11745-017-4290-x 13 Fish Diets in Aquaponics 351 Tacon AGJ (1987) The nutrition and feeding of farmed fish and shrimp - a training manual. Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations, Rome, Italy Tacon AGJ, Metian M (2008) Global overview on the use of fish meal and fish oil in industrially compounded aquafeeds: trends and future prospects. Aquaculture 285:146–158. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2008.08.015 Tacon AGJ, Metian M (2015) Feed matters: Satisfying the feed demand of aquaculture. Rev Fish Sci Aquacult 23(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/23308249.2014.987209 Tacon AGJ, Hasan MR, Metian M (2011) Demand and supply of feed ingredients for farmed fish and crustaceans: trends and prospects. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper no. 564. FAO, Rome, 87 pp Terova G, Robaina LE, Izquierdo MS, Cattaneo AG, Molinari S, Bernardini G, Saroglia M (2013) PepT1 mRNA expression levels in sea bream (Sparus aurata) fed different plant protein sources. Springer Plus 2:17. https://doi.org/10.1186/2193-1801-2-17 Thilsted SH, Thorne-Lyman A, Webb P, Bogard JR, Subasinghe R, Phillips MJ, Allison EH (2016) Sustaining healthy diets: The role of capture fisheries and aquaculture for improving nutrition in the post-2015 era. Food Policy 61:126–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2016.02.005 Torrecillas S, Robaina L, Caballero MJ, Montero D, Calandra G, Mompel D, Karalazos V, Sadasivam K, Izquierdo M (2017) Combined replacement of fishmeal and fish oil in European sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax): production performance, tissue composition and liver morphology. Aquaculture 474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2017.03.031 Treadwell D, Taber S, Tyson R, Simonne E (2010) HS1163: Foliar-applied micronutrients in aquaponics: s guide to use and sourcing, IFAS Extension. University of Florida Tveterås S, Asche F, Bellemare MF, Smith MD, Guttormsen AG, Lem A, Lien K, Vannuccini S (2012) Fish is food –the FAO’sfish price index. PLoS ONE 7:e36731 Tyson RV, Treadwell DD, Simonne EH (2011) Opportunities and challenges to sustainability in aquaponic systems. HortTechnology 21:6–13 Van Huis A, Oonincx DGAB (2017) The environmental sustainability of insects as food and feed. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 37:43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-017-0452-8 Villarroel M, Alvariño JMR, Duran JM (2011) Aquaponics: integrating fish feeding rates and ion waste production for strawberry hydroponics. Spanish J Agricult Res 9:537–545 White C (2017) Algae-based aquafeed firms breaking down barriers for fish-free feeds. https:// www.seafoodsource.com/news/aquaculture/algae-based-aquafeed-firms-breaking-down-bar riers-for-fish-free-feeds Ytrestøy T, Aas TS, Åsgård T (2015) Utilisation of feed resources in production of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in Norway. Aquaculture 448:365–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture. 2015.06.023 Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. 352 L. Robaina et al.