Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-018-0249-z

Towards commercial aquaponics: a review of systems,

designs, scales and nomenclature

Harry W. Palm 1 & Ulrich Knaus 1 & Samuel Appelbaum 2 &

Simon Goddek 3 & Sebastian M. Strauch 1 &
Tycho Vermeulen 4 & M. Haїssam Jijakli 5 & Benz Kotzen 6

Received: 10 November 2017 / Accepted: 30 January 2018 / Published online: 3 March 2018
# Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract Aquaponics is rapidly developing as the need for sustainable food production
increases and freshwater and phosphorous reserves shrink. Starting from small-scale opera-
tions, aquaponics is at the brink of commercialization, attracting investment. Arising from
integrated freshwater aquaculture, a variety of methods and system designs has developed that

Harry W. Palm and Ulrich Knaus contributed equally to this work.

* Harry W. Palm
[email protected]

Ulrich Knaus
[email protected]
Samuel Appelbaum
[email protected]
Simon Goddek
[email protected]
Sebastian M. Strauch
[email protected]
Tycho Vermeulen
[email protected]
M. Haїssam Jijakli
[email protected]
Benz Kotzen
[email protected]

1
Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Department of Aquaculture and Sea-Ranching,
University of Rostock, Justus-von-Liebig-Weg 6, D-18059 Rostock, Germany
2
French Associates Institute for Agriculture and Biotechnology of Drylands, Jacob Blaustein Institutes
for Desert Research, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Sede Boqer Campus, Midreshet
Ben-Gurion, 8499000 Beersheba, Israel
814 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

focus either on fish or plant production. Public interest in aquaponics has increased dramat-
ically in recent years, in line with the trend towards more integrated value chains, greater
productivity and less harmful environmental impact compared to other production systems.
New business models are opening up, with new customers and markets, and with this
expansion comes the potential for confusion, misunderstanding and deception. New stake-
holders require guidelines and detail concerning the different system designs and their
potentials. We provide a definitive definition of aquaponics, where the majority (> 50%) of
nutrients sustaining the optimal plant growth derives from waste originating from feeding
aquatic organisms, classify the available integrated aquaculture and aquaponics (open, domes-
tic, demonstration, commercial) systems and designs, distinguish four different scales of
production (≤ 50, > 50–≤ 100 m2, > 100–≤ 500 m2, > 500 m2) and present a definite nomen-
clature for aquaponics and aquaponic farming allowing distinctions between the technologies
that are in use. This enables authorities, customers, producers and all other stakeholders to
distinguish between the various systems, to better understand their potentials and constraints
and to set priorities for business and regulations in order to transition RAS or already
integrated aquaculture into commercial aquaponic systems.

Keywords Aquaponic farming . Aquaponic systems . Circular economy . Definition . Integrated

aquaculture systems . Nomenclature . Scale of operation . System design

Introduction

The combinations of fish and plant cultivation in integrated aquaculture systems date back to
the early development of aquaculture in China about 2000 years ago. Modern aquaponics, or
the combination of fish and soilless plant production systems, can be traced back to the first
known hydroponic cultivation of various plants in the effluent from catfish holding tanks by
Sneed et al. (1975, cited in Lewis et al. 1978), designed as a single-pass system without
biofiltration. Naegel (1977) for the first time combined the production of the fish species
Tilapia mossambica and Cyprinus carpio in a recirculation aquaculture system (RAS) with
iceberg lettuce and tomatoes under hydroponic raft cultivation without the addition of special
plant nutrients. This first fully closed or coupled aquaponic system already included
biofiltration, a sedimentation tank and a sludge return with denitrification in a bypass,
enriching the process water to 1200 mg NO3/l during the first 7 weeks. Subsequent early
closed aquaponic systems were designed by Lewis et al. (1978), Watten and Busch (1984) and
Rakocy (1989) as well as presented as ‘Integrated Aqua-Vegeculture System’ by Mark
McMurtry and Doug Sanders in the 1980s (Diver 2006).

3
Biobased Chemistry & Technology, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 17, 6700 AA Wageningen,
The Netherlands
4
Safi Sana, Stationsplein 30, 1382 AD, PO Box 5064, 1380 GB Weesp, The Netherlands
5
Gembloux Agro Bio Tech, Integrated and Urban Plant Pathology, University of Liège, Liège,
Belgium
6
Department of Architecture and Landscape, University of Greenwich, Park Row, London SE10 9LS,
UK
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 815

Aquaponics has received considerable more attention in recent years, as can be seen in the
increasing number of publications in the scientific literature from approximately 5 in 2010 to
approximately 35 in 2014 (Junge et al. 2017). This form of cultivation is considered one of the
most efficient and sustainable animal protein production systems. Fish, in general, require less
feed per kilogram added growth than all other agricultural animal products such as beef,
mutton and goat (Tilman and Clark 2014), and in aquaponics, feed loss and fish waste can be
reused and converted into valuable plant biomass. Additionally, in terms of water efficiency,
aquaponics is potentially more efficient than the current stand-alone systems of conventional
recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) and hydroponics. According to Lennard and Leonard
(2006), water is replaced (not exchanged) in aquaponics only to account for the water lost
through plant-mediated evapotranspiration, where evaporative loss was the main mechanism.
Palm et al. (2014a) had a daily water input of 5.77% and a water removal rate of 1.37% during
cleaning in a closed ebb-flow substrate aquaponics system for Nile tilapia (Oreochromis
niloticus) combined with tomatoes (water loss 4.4%), and Knaus and Palm (2017a) demon-
strated a daily water replacement of 1.48% and a water removal rate of 0.26% (water loss
1.22%) in a more efficient system with Nile tilapia and African catfish (Clarias gariepinus)
combined with herbs. Lennard and Leonard (2004) replaced 2.43–2.86% in a closed
aquaponics with Murray cod (Maccullochella peelii peelii) and Green oak lettuce (Lactuca
sativa), and Naegel (1977) added 2–3% of water daily to the system, mainly due to loss of
water by evaporation, overspill and the disposal of excess sludge.
In general, aquaponic systems combine RAS for fish and hydroponics for plant production
(Goddek et al. 2015). Essential elements are fish-rearing tanks, solid removal components
(mechanical filtration, e.g. clarifiers, microscreens), biofilters (nitrification unit), a hydroponic
component and a sump (Rakocy 2012; Somerville et al. 2014). According to Rakocy et al.
(2010) and Somerville et al. (2014), aquaponics can be categorized from mini-, hobby- and
backyard installations to small-, semi- and large commercial systems. However, all types have
different variations and adaptations that relate to different types of site and local conditions.
A main weakness in the development of larger scale aquaponic systems is the economic
sustainability in comparison to stand-alone systems (RAS, hydroponics) and the different
factors (e.g. energy use) that influence economic failure or success. This area is crucial but
sadly under researched. Initial studies either suggested negative outcome in terms of cost
benefits (Vermeulen and Kamstra 2012; Stadler et al. 2015) or positive outcomes in the future
(Goddek et al. 2015). Love et al. (2015a) who summarized aquaponic systems, with particular
reference to the USA, discussed the wide range of production systems, where approximately
31% had the potential ability to attain profitability or economic sustainability. The companies
that had the best prognoses were those that also distributed materials (system components) and
services know how. The recent rise in interest in aquaponics by researchers, companies and the
public is however undermined by disparate perceptions concerning ecological benefits and
economic needs. Similar to RAS technology, investment costs, e.g. in state-of-the-art green-
house technology can be high, resulting in possible economic constraints and even the loss of
invested capital. Consequently, better guidelines and explanations concerning the different
systems and their potentials, as well as the risks arising from different component usage and
system designs, are urgently needed.
A first summary of aquaponics guidelines (The EU Aquaponics Hub, COST Action
FA1305) reported different aquaponic systems, from research units to large-scale commercial
operations (Thorarinsdottir et al. 2015). Inasmuch as aquaponics has a wide range of applica-
tions according to the degree of commercialization (domestic vs. commercial) and possible
816 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

plant cultivation techniques, there is still no general system design recommendations. The
objectives of this review is thus to summarize the current state of the knowledge on component
use and system design, as well as the resulting classification of the currently available
aquaponic systems, demonstrating the given limitations brought about by the type and scale
of the system. This facilitates the development of a standardized nomenclature which is
proposed in order to distinguish between integrated aquaculture, aquaponics and aquaponic
farming, considering the wide variation in system designs according to the component use and
scale of operation. Different categories of coupled and decoupled aquaponics are compared,
and future developments of both systems are discussed.

Integrated aquaculture systems

Aquaculture is the farming of aquatic organisms, including fish, molluscs, crustaceans or other
invertebrates such as echinoderms, ascidians, polychaetes and aquatic plants. Farming implies
some sort of intervention in the rearing process to enhance production, such as regular stocking,
feeding, protection from predators, etc. Farming also implies individual or corporate ownership of
the stock being cultivated (FAO 1988). Integrated aquaculture systems are defined as the
concurrent or sequential linkage between two or more farming activities, one of which is
aquaculture. For example, integrated aquaculture can be defined as the integration of another
(secondary) species (fish, plants or algae) into a system that benefits from the main targeted
species (e.g. fish). Such systems date back to the early development of aquaculture in SE Asia, in
China, in the Eastern Han Dynasty, 25–220 AD (Kangmin 1988; Fernando 1993), where carp and
rice field production were combined benefitting both. As described by Lu and Li (2006), the
ecological principles such as mutualism and symbiosis are achieved by linking the food web with
benefits for fish, plants and microbes in a rice-fish culture. Contemporary integrated aquaculture
systems have high variability in the use of resources and are found in many geographic regions,
even under brackish or marine conditions. There are four different kinds of integrated production
systems (Fig. 1) that all combine the use of water and the integration of a secondary or several
species that benefit from each other.
There are different forms of rice-fish systems, irrigated, rain fed, deep-water and coastal
systems (Dela Cruz et al. 1992). The most used component is the field area, where the fields
contain a sump to concentrate fish for harvesting with a cover to protect the fish from excessive
temperatures (Kangmin 1988). Rice fields may also be built in terraces with good opportunities
for water flow. In modern times, a more mechanized form of rice-fish cultivation was developed

Fig. 1 Overview of integrated production systems, rice-fish culture and livestock-fish culture systems,
aquaponics, integrated multitrophic aquaculture (IMTA)
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 817

with the use of fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides and irrigation facilities on a large scale in most
continents (Fernando 1993). Today, rice fields are also used to treat the effluent water of fish
aquaculture in which the rice fields receive the nutrient-enriched water, before the filtered water is
drained into the natural water effluents such as small rivers or other drainage systems.
Livestock-fish culture systems combine livestock, such as goats, with catfish pond
aquaculture in which the cages for the livestock are built over the fish ponds, and the
excrements of the goats are used as fertilizer to increase algal and fish growth (e.g.
Little and Muir 1987; Mukherjee et al. 1992). This is also done with chickens, ducks
as well as pigs.
Aquaponics can also be considered a land-based integrated aquaculture system in
which the effluent water is used for soilless plant cultivation. The aquatic organisms
can be keep in monoculture, polyculture (polyponics = multiple fish species use in
aquaponics in the sense of Knaus and Palm 2017b) or under integrated multitrophic
aquaculture conditions. Modern aquaponic systems use technological components to
recirculate the water in the fish production unit and to perform solid removal.
However, after more than 40 years of development, a wide variation of systems
exists, that necessitates a careful reconsideration of its terminology.
Integrated multitrophic aquaculture (IMTA) is the most current form of species inte-
gration within aquaculture production systems and was originally developed for raising
marine organisms (Soto 2009). In IMTA, species are combined that utilize different
trophic levels and, in combination, they can minimize nutrient output into the environ-
ment or even become extractive (Chopin et al. 2001; Troell et al. 2003, 2009; Palm et al.
2017). The main goal is to feed the less developed (more primitive) species of organisms
from the feed remnants of higher level aquaculture species and their metabolic end
products in order to exploit the actual input resource of fish feed efficiently and
sustainably, whilst at the same time reducing negative waste outputs into the environment.
IMTA usually combines fish, mussels and algae (different types of seaweed). The
boundaries between IMTA (in the sea) and aquaponics (on land) can be unclear, for
example in the implementation of a freshwater IMTA system with aquaponic production
conditions (Bakhsh and Chopin 2012) or the concept of aquaponics as a land-based
freshwater IMTA system for keeping the aquatic organisms, combining the aquaculture
production (e.g. fish, crayfish, molluscs, etc.) with the hydroponic production of aquatic
plants (explained in Gunning et al. 2016) (also known as FIMTA = freshwater IMTA
according to Bakhsh et al. 2015). Similarly, combinations of aquaponics with marine
water resources (described as "saltwater aquaponics" in Gunning et al. 2016) have also
become known, combining saltwater fish with brackish water or salt loving plants
(halophytes) such as Salicornia dolichostachya, Tripolium pannonicum (Buhmann et al.
2015; Waller et al. 2015) or Sesuvium portulacastrum and Batis maritima (Boxman et al.
2017). For these cases, Gunning et al. (2014) coined the term MARAPONIC systems, as
exemplified by the production of Salicornia europaea (marsh samphire) in combination
with Oncorhynchus mykiss (rainbow trout) under marine water conditions. With the use of
saline water production environments under desert conditions, only a small number of
brackish water aquaponic systems are known. Kotzen and Appelbaum (2010) and
Appelbaum and Kotzen (2016) tested different conventional herbs (e.g. basil, mint) and
vegetables (e.g. tomato, aubergine) for production in arid regions. The difference com-
pared to freshwater aquaponic systems was the higher conductivity level up to 6800 μS/
cm, considered to be moderately saline, which is often found in arid regions.
818 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

Aquaponic terminology

Aquaponics is a hybridized name conflated from aquaculture and hydroponics. Based on

classical closed systems (see above), it combines the farming of aquatic organisms (FAO 1988)
with water-based terrestrial plant culture (Lennard 2015). The suffix ‘ponics’ in hydroponics as
well as aquaponics comes from the Greek ‘ponos’ for work, and thus, the term aquaponics is
unfortunate as it really translates as ‘waterwork’ which does not adequately describe what the
system really is and what it does. However, farming is an important word and concept here, as
aquaculture farms aquatic organisms and there is legal ownership of the facilities who can
claim ownership of production. Without ownership, fish production falls under fisheries and
fishing which is something totally different logistically and legally. This general concept of
farming must also be applied to aquaponics where the fish or other aquatic organisms are at the
centre of the production system.
The term aquaponics has thus far been used by different authors, mainly to denote the
combined culture of fish and plants in an aquatic environment (Lennard 2015). The practice
originated from aquaculture production systems and the attempt to reuse and reduce the
nutrients in the effluent waters (Sneed et al. 1975, cited in Lewis et al. 1978; Naegel 1977).
Aquaponics was first defined by Rakocy (2012) as encompassing recirculating aquaculture
systems (RAS) that incorporate the production of plants without soil, as earliest presented by
Naegel (1977). In such systems, mainly non-toxic nutrients (P, NO3) and organic matter as by-
products from the primary cultured species (e.g. fish) are used to grow plants, which may be of
aquatic or terrestrial origin.
Lennard (2015) defined aquaponics as BA system of integrated, tank-based, aquatic-animal
(fish) culture and hydroponic plant culture wherein the majority of nutrients required for plant
growth arise from wastes derived from feeding fish.^ The organisms involved were designated
as the initial user (i.e. the fish that consume the initial nutrient source, the feed), the
intermediate converter (the bacteria) and the tertiary user (the plants). Originally, derived from
classical coupled systems, the fish waste was entirely used to produce plants with a maximized
and efficient use of the nutrient source (fish feed) having the positive effect of reducing
nutrient discharges compared to conventional aquaculture. According to Lennard (2015), at
least 80% by weight (and often more) of the nutrients required for optimal plant growth are
derived from fish waste alone. Modern aquaponics often use additional fertilizers to supple-
ment nutrients missing from the fish feed for the plants. Therefore, aquaponics so far includes a
wide range of systems from complete recirculating units that only use the fish feed as a nutrient
source (closed or coupled aquaponics) to separated aquaculture and hydroponic units
(decoupled aquaponics) with significant nutrient addition and water control. Adopted from
Lennard (2015), referring optimal plant growth to comparable cultivation practices in use, and
considering the most recent research results of increasing importance to selectively add
nutrients into the commercial systems to achieve the required plant product quality, and as a
result of the COST Action FA 1305—‘EU Aquaponics Hub’, we alter and expand the
definition as follows:
‘Aquaponics is a production system of aquatic organisms and plants where the majority
(> 50%) of nutrients sustaining the optimal plant growth derives from waste originating
from feeding the aquatic organisms’.
A classical aquaponic system consists of three main units: (1) the aquaculture unit com-
prising fish tanks, (2) filtration system comprising sludge removal devices (e.g. sedimenter)
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 819

and optional biofiltration (e.g. trickling filter) and (3) a hydroponic component for the plant
production including deep water culture (DWC), nutrient film technique (NFT), ebb-
and-flow tables and drip systems. Naegel (1977) already included an additional sludge
return with denitrification in a bypass. The fish-rearing unit can be operated from low
to very high stocking densities in single tanks or combining different aquatic species
under polyponics or following the concept of a freshwater IMTA. The plant cultiva-
tion can also range from a few plants to intensive hydroponic production systems. To
maintain maximum water quality, the waste removal device must be adapted to cover
increasing productivity, so that aquaponic systems can vary from extensive to highly
intensive. However, simple technical solutions are also feasible through the use of
near-natural surface waters (ponds) as opposed to highly engineered intensive
aquaponic production systems with complex greenhouse technology. Thus, the agro-
technical production principle ‘aquaponics’ offers highest variability in system design
compared to other integrated production systems.

Aquaponic systems design

Open pond aquaponics

Open pond aquaponics has been developed in East Asia and often utilizes catfish (e.g. Clarias
sp.) or tilapia (Oreochromis sp., Pantanella 2008). Most commonly produced fish species are
herbivorous carps (grass carp—Ctenopharyngodon idella, silver carp—Hypophthalmichthys
molitrix, bighead carp—Hypophthalmichthys nobilis), tench (Tinca tinca), pike larvae (Esox
lucius), pike perch (Sander lucioperca) fry, catfish (Silurus glanis) fry production and African
catfish (Clarias gariepinus) summer production in outdoor ponds (Horváth et al. 2002). Open
pond aquaponics is a very cost-effective method of integrating the production of fish and
plants. Very few technical and energy-driven components are used, including a minimal use of
water pumps, water flow and aeration (Fig. 2). The main component is usually an artificial
pond stocked with one or more fish species (mono/polyculture). Additional fertilizers can be
added to the pond to enhance plant growth. Most often, a raft system for plant cultivation is
installed directly on the pond surface. The plant roots therefore depend directly on the nutrient-
enriched pond water. They are often stocked in batch cultivation and serve the direct sales
market or are only for home use (Table 1). In Bangladesh, experimental pond polyculture with
pangasius (Pangasius hypophthalmus) and tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus) is used to
produce okra (Abelmoschus esculentus), water spinach (Ipomoea aquatica), pudina (Mentha
arvensis), brinjal/eggplant/aubergine (Solanum melongena), tomatoes (Lycopersicon
esculentum), giant taro (Alocasia macrorrhiza) and Indian red spinach (Basella rubra) on
bamboo pond rafts with varying results (Roy et al. 2013; Salam et al. 2013). Within these
experiments, rafts can cover up to 4% of the total pond area, and only pudina production
showed good results and was profitable.
In Thailand, an experiment using stocked hybrid catfish (Clarias macrocephalus ×
C. gariepinus) in a pond was described by Sikawa and Yakupitiyage (2010) with comparisons
of water substrate filtration using different aggregates (styrofoam, sand and gravel). Lettuce
(Lactuca sativa) yield was best when using the sand substrate (followed by gravel) and showed
an even higher harvest when the nutrient water was filtered via an external affiliated mechan-
ical and biological cleaning unit. The external filtration of the pond water reduced total
820 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

Fig. 2 Classification of aquaponic systems according to system and design into the four main categories: open,
domestic, demonstration and commercial aquaponics (s.s. sensu stricto, s.l. sensu lato). The # sign identifies those
adopted from Stickney (1994) from various types of aquaculture and Horváth et al. (2002) from carp and pond
fish culture

suspended solid content by 61%, demonstrating the advantage of using an external cleaning
unit in pond aquaponics.
In Slovenia, a land-based aquaponic system was described by Klemenčič and Bulc (2015)
with the use of common carp (Cyprinus carpio) under extensive fish stocking densities as a
pilot operation of aquaponics under field conditions. The system consisted of two 36-m3 ponds
(one control), a treatment system located outside the pond (water was pumped in recirculation)

Table 1 Aquaponic systems with markets used, fish rearing principles and main plant culture principles
(modified after Rakocy et al. 2010; Somerville et al. 2014). DWC, deep water culture; NFT, nutrient film
technique

Aquaponics system Markets Fish rearing Main plant culture principle

principle

Open aquaponics Home use/direct Batcha Hydroponics and substrate based

sales
Domestic systems Home use/direct Batch DWC, NFT, ebb-flow, media bed
(mini/hobby/backyard-coupled) sales
Demonstration aquaponics Education, Batch DWC, NFT, ebb-flow, media bed,
(e.g. living walls-coupled) exhibition aeroponic, vertical

Commercial aquaponics and aquaponics farming

Small/semi-commercial systems Retail/wholesale Batch/staggeredb DWC, NFT, ebb-flow, drip,
(coupled or decoupled) aeroponic, vertical, substrate/soil
Large-scale systems (coupled or Wholesale Staggered NFT with full nutrient management,
decoupled) substrate/soil
a
Batch = rearing of one fish population or one fish age group
b
Staggered (after Rakocy 2012) = rearing of more than one fish age group with intensification of fish production
over the whole year
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 821

with a lamellar settler, a roughing filter and a vertically constructed wetland filled with
expanded clay and planted with tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum). The growth of carp
was better in combination with the aquaponics, and the tomato harvest was high (38.4 kg/m2
wet weight). This land-based pilot aquaponic system clearly demonstrated the possibility of
integrated production under field conditions with only little effort in the system design. Due to
the favourable cost structure of such pond systems, this type of aquaponics should be more
closely studied in the future.

Domestic aquaponics

Domestic aquaponic systems correspond to classical aquaponics where mainly fish is jointly
cultivated with plants in closed or coupled systems. They include mini and hobby installations
that can generally be characterized by the use of small fish tank volumes, extensive stocking
densities and small plant areas (Fig. 3). In terms of general system design and component use,
they have in common that they usually include only a single fish reservoir (e.g. aquarium) or
tank and a small hydroponic unit (mini-system) with a total maximum area of approximately
2 m2. They may include ornamental fish, and in their simplest form, the plants float directly on
the water surface of the aquarium or fish tank. Extended versions separate the aquaculture unit
from the hydroponic unit by pumping the nutrient-enriched water to the hydroponic unit (Fig. 3a).
These systems usually use internal aquarium filters purchased from aquarium suppliers.
Larger systems may also contain a sedimentation unit and a sump with the expansion of
functional recirculating components. In such hobby installations, water flows by gravity
towards a small-sized sedimenter followed by the plant cultivation area, mostly using substrate
systems (media beds), and then it flows into the sump (Fig. 3b). From the sump, the water is

Fig. 3 Overview of different domestic aquaponic system designs. a Mini-system. b Hobby system. c Backyard
aquaponic system (NFT, nutrient film technique; Raft, floating raft; Gravel = media bed substrate system)
822 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

pumped back with the help of a single pump into the fish tank. Additional aeration by air
pumps or spray bars is often required to maintain fish growth and health. The space require-
ment does not exceed 2–3 m2 to a maximum of 10 m2, and the fish are often kept as
fishkeeping instead of targeting production. As an indoor system, it can produce throughout
the year.
Domestic constructions with the purpose of fish and plant production for human consump-
tion are described as backyard aquaponics and are frequently built by enthusiasts. In the
literature, experimental setups of this size also firm under small-scale aquaponics due to a lack
of proper definition. These systems use larger sized fish tanks, may be several tens of m2 in
size (Malcolm 2007, Fig. 3c), but do not exceed 50 m2 where the water circulation within a
unit still can be achieved with a single pump. Occasionally, airlift pumps are used where air is
pumped into a pipe located in the sump. This has the effect of pushing up the water in the pipe
and thereby getting rid of the need for a water pump. The method is cost effective and on the
whole cheaper than pumping. Backyard aquaponics can be equipped with a larger sedimenter
and biofilter as cleaning units and different hydroponic subsystems (Tables 1 and 2). In the
northern hemisphere, production is limited to the spring, summer and early autumn period
when the water heating allows significant production.
Domestic aquaponics have been most frequently installed in urban backyards, often located
in domestic scale greenhouses attached to a house or located away from the house in a garden.
Other systems are found on urban rooftops for the better use of the incident light for production
with an area of 20 to 50 m2 per house (de Vries and Fleuren 2015) or, in general, for improved
use of urban areas (Kotzen 2012). They have extensive stocking densities in common,
resulting in a low feed input per day and a reduced rate of suspended solids and nutrients in
the process water. On a 25-m2 production area, Palm et al. (2014b) produced fish biomass of
13 kg (biomass weight gain) in about 92 days of production with significant numbers of
cucumbers, tomatoes and basil. The hydroponic units usually consist of media bed substrate

Table 2 Scale of aquaponic operations, with focus on developed countries (DWC, deep water culture = floating
raft; NFT, nutrient film technique)

Domestic Small-scale/semi- Intermediate/large-scale commercial for

commercial business and industry

Site area ≤ 50 m2 > 50–≤ 100 m2 > 100–≤ 500, > 500 m2a
Aquaculture unit Single tank Few tanks (1–4b) Full recirculation aquaculture system
Fish rearing Batch, extensive Batch/staggered, Staggered, intensive
principle extensive to intensive
Biofilter No/yes Yes Yes
Pumps No/single Backup, bypass systems Multiple, bypass systems
Degree of Low Medium High
mechanization
Hydroponic DWC, NFT, ebb-flow DWC, NFT, ebb-flow DWC, NFT with full nutrient
subsystem media bed planting table, drip, management, ebb-flow planting table,
aeroponic, vertical drip irrigation, soil (farming)
Plant culture Batch Batch/staggered Staggered/intercropping
principle
Cultivation Spring to Spring to Year-round
period autumn/year-round autumn/year-round
Decoupled No No/yes No/yes
a
modified after Love et al. (2015a)
b
Rakocy (2012)
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 823

systems (e.g. gravel), which also serve as a biofilter (Rakocy et al. 2006; Tyson et al. 2008;
Somerville et al. 2014), but sometimes smaller NFT installations (e.g. by using perforated
drainpipes) and DWC (raft) systems are also possible. Known advantages of the use of media
beds are the biofilter characteristics with biofilm formation and nitrifying bacteria, minerali-
zation and the reuse of organic substrates for soil cultivation of crops through composting
(Somerville et al. 2014). Lennard and Leonard (2006) demonstrated benefits of green oak
lettuce (Lactuca sativa) gravel bed cultivation in contrast to raft and NFT systems with a 20%
less efficient nitrogen removal rate of the NFT system and reduced biomass gain of lettuce.
Another positive potential is the incorporation of worms (vermiponics) into the aggregate.
Vermiponics usually use tiger worms (Eisenia fetida) in ebb and flow systems. The worms help to
remove any decaying material from the plants, and their own waste is a fertilizer for plants.
Additionally, the worms can also be used as part of the fish diet when removed from the gravel
and fed to the fish. One disadvantage is the accumulation of suspended solids on the aggregates,
such as gravel, sand, perlite or clay, and an overload of these suspended solids can have a negative
impact on fish feeding activities and the solid removal component stability (Rakocy 2012).
Therefore, the size of such media beds filled with, for example, a gravel substrate is limited due to
the difficultly in moving and cleaning them, the abrasion of plants by gravel particles and the high
potential for clogging of suspended solids. Other negative aspects include the formation of
anaerobic zones, the comparatively high labour input for washing and managing the substrates
(Somerville et al. 2014) and a fairly limited production of fish and plants. This limits their
application for commercial purposes (Table 1). Descriptions of the backyard aquaponics type are
found in Watten and Busch (1984), Kotzen and Appelbaum (2010), Palm et al. (2014a, b), Palm
et al. (2015), Morgenstern et al. (2016) and Knaus and Palm (2017a, b).

Small-scale and semi-commercial systems

Small-scale aquaponic systems are characterized by a technical expansion of functional com-

ponents and production areas compared to domestic installations. These systems are built for
retail market (Table 1) purposes (farmers’ markets and stands, Love et al. 2015a) and use a
larger area and one or several larger sized fish tanks and plant units (Table 2). The use of more
than one fish tank and hydroponic subunits allows staggered but not necessarily continuous fish
and plant production to harmonize nutrient flow over a longer period. To optimize fish and plant
output, these systems require mechanical (sedimenter) and biological (biofilter) filtration units,
and they can use different hydroponic subsystems, such as DWC (raft), NFT techniques or ebb-
and-flow tables (Fig. 4a, Table 2). Still using gravity to distribute the fish process water to the
plant units, at the minimum, a single pump (with a backup pump system to avoid fish loss in
case of breakdown) is required to circulate the water between the filters, fish tanks and/or the
combined fish and plant units. Because of the small size of less than 100 m2 and lower
investment costs, production is mainly restricted to the spring, the summer and the early autumn
period in the northern hemisphere to minimize energy costs (Table 2). However year around
production in small greenhouses is possible. From the production point of view, small-scale
aquaponics was identified with a lettuce output of 50–500 heads by Somerville et al. (2014).
Small-scale aquaponics still often use media bed systems with a variety of substrates (but
mainly gravels) for plant cultivation. One problem is the management of the substrate, with
transport and cleaning (as it is awkward and heavy) so that the maximum area for plant production
becomes limited (Rakocy et al. 2006). Due to this problem, gravel media beds are only common
in the small-sized aquaponics (also see backyard aquaponics). Sand was described as an excellent
824 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

Fig. 4 Scale of aquaponic systems. a Small-scale system. b Semi-commercial system. c Large-scale system. d
Scheme of a decoupled aquaponic system (FT, fish tank; SS, solids separation; SD, solids disposal; PS, pump-
sump; BF, biofiltration; TF, trickling filter; NFT, nutrient film technique; Ebb-Flow = planting tables; Raft =
floating raft troughs; TTF, transfer tank fish process water; TTP, transfer tank plant process water; WD, water
discard)
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 825

substrate for plant growth. However, problems with clogging were described by McMurtry et al.
(1990, 1997) and Rakocy (2012). To resolve this problem, a coarse grade of sand can be used to
reduce the clogging capacity of the media beds. Other substrates that can be used in media beds
are perlite (Rakocy et al. 2006), the light expanded clay aggregate LECA™ (Graber and Junge
2009), volcanic gravel/pumice (tuff or tufa), limestone gravel, river bed gravel, recycled plastic
such as plastic bottle caps (held submerged with a layer of gravel), and organic substrates such as
coconut fibre, sawdust, peat moss, and rice hulls (Somerville et al. 2014). Despite some problems,
media bed systems offer certain advantages in plant production and system stability. The effects of
nutrient accumulations, such as phosphorus, in media beds (gravel substrate) were reported by
Palm et al. (2015) as a reservoir for demand-induced nutrient uptake by plants in a backyard-sized
system. Other advantages which are also found in small-scale NFT and raft systems include the
very low labour input during a balanced run of the system (steady state according to Palm et al.
2014a), low energy consumption due to the single pump and gravity-driven water flow and very
low water exchange rates.
Small-scale aquaponic systems mark the further development of domestic systems with an
expansion of the production area, the fish tanks and the hydroponic units, and they can still be
constructed technically by non-professionals. Due to their technically relatively simple design,
these systems have been widely used and described in the literature, e.g. in Watten and Busch
(1984), Essa et al. (2008), Ako and Baker (2009), Simeonidou et al. (2012), Villarroel et al. (2011)
and Love et al. (2015b). With a total size less than 50 m2, some of them represent backyard systems
or even hobby installations belonging into domestic aquaponics. Small-scale aquaponic systems
are also found on rooftops in urban areas as described in Somerville et al. (2014). Roof gardens
using aquaponics is a special form of urban use, increasing the value of urban areas and rooftops.
Semi-commercial aquaponic ventures operate between small-scale and large-scale produc-
tion systems with a high degree of mechanization. They define the beginning of commercial
production for the retail market (Table 1), as distinguished from domestic and small-scale use.
According to the characteristics mentioned above, sites can have a production area lower than
100 m2 (Table 2) as described for commercial ventures by Love et al. (2015a). From the
production point of view, semi-commercial aquaponics was identified with a lettuce output of
500–2500 heads by Somerville et al. (2014). The ‘FishGlassHouse’ at University of Rostock
(Germany) has an output of approximately 1200 basil, mint or other crops per experiment with
the use of 100-m2 hydroponic production area and about 90-m2 area for fish production,
targeting the retail market. Producing warm water African catfish (Clarias gariepinus) under
intensive cultivation, the output reaches about 2–4 t fish per annum.
Semi-commercial aquaponics can use more than a single pump, besides gravity, to circulate
the water, may include bypass systems (multi-loop) and require higher investment costs
(Table 2). The fish production uses RAS technology suited to the selected species with
increasing numbers of fish tanks (Fig. 4b). The effluent water has high nitrate concentrations
(resulting from the higher fish stocking density) and is oxygenated inside the biofilter. The
nutrient-enriched process water is connected to the hydroponic units, which may be differen-
tiated into DWC (raft), NFT, ebb-and-flow tables, aeroponics or a combination of different
subsystems. System design alterations depend on the location and specific regional conditions,
making both coupled and decoupled systems feasible (Table 2). Ebb and flow tables were
developed for conventional hydroponic commercial garden specialists (Raviv and Lieth 2008)
and adapted to aquaponics. Additionally, drip irrigation techniques (Raviv and Lieth 2008) can
be used for semi-commercial systems. However, the investment and maintenance costs can be
826 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

high as each plant is connected to the drip irrigation system with a pipe and a terminal dripper,
which feeds the nutrient-enriched water from a central water reservoir by pumping.
Semi-commercial ventures require additional consideration concerning system stability, fish
health and microbe control inside the system. Aiming for a higher plant yield, the principle of
culturing plants has developed more complex technology, such as climatic and environmental
control (CO2 greenhouse enrichment), the use of water monitoring tools, waste and sludge
management, effective biofiltration and solids removal devices, power backup systems and
biosecurity, as well as pest management. They are therefore usually based in greenhouses and
require employees skilled in aquaculture and plant cultivation techniques (Somerville et al.
2014). They also require sufficient energy and may be connected to alternative energy
supplies. Intermediate between small-scale aquaponics and large-scale commercial operations,
semi-commercial aquaponic products can be sold to both retail and wholesale markets
(Table 1). Semi-commercial aquaponic ventures are especially suitable for regional markets
and depend on the marketing advantages of aquaponic-produced products (e.g. marketed and
sold as being aquaponics, i.e. being unique and ‘sustainable’), as compared with convention-
ally produced ones, compensating for higher production costs.

Large-scale (intermediate) commercial aquaponic operations

Large-scale commercial aquaponic operations seek a maximum production output of fish and
plants. They require high investment costs and management skills, and they operate with a high
degree of mechanization including computerization and monitoring of water quality. They are
located within climatically controlled greenhouses, and because of climate control with high
energy consumption, they often utilize alternative energy sources. Methods for a maximum yield
can mainly be achieved through increasing the numbers of plants cultured per growing area, the
selection and efficient use of hydroponic subsystems and the use of a maximum stocking density
of fish or other aquatic animals. Large-scale aquaponics produce predominantly for indirect
markets like grocery stores, restaurants, institutions and wholesalers (Love et al. 2015a) (Table 1).
In order to increase the number of cultivated plants and to achieve the best possible quality,
management protocols for different crops must be met. In hydroponics, the number of plants
cultivated per square meter is a main factor in intensification (e.g. Goddek et al. 2015). The
number of plants for large-scale operations was described as being > 2500 lettuce heads per
annum in Somerville et al. (2014). However, depending on the location, higher value plants such
as herbs and tomatoes are the focus of the operation. The average site area for large-scale
production was described by Love et al. (2015a) with 0.01 ha (100 m2), but commercial
operations can have land areas above 500 m2 as seen in the UVI system (US Virgin Islands,
Rakocy 2012) or in the FishGlassHouse at the University of Rostock (Germany, Herde and Wild
2015; Palm et al. 2016). Considering that aquaponics’ larger scale ventures are increasing, it is
apparent that there is a need to readjust the scale descriptors. The examples noted above
producing 2500 lettuce heads or over an area of 100 m2 only produce an average of around 7
lettuces per day. We thus propose that systems between 100 and 500 m2 are termed intermediate-
scale commercial operations and anything above 500 m2 is considered to be large scale (Table 2).
In large-scale commercial aquaponics, intensive RAS technology is used to increase the yield
of fish products, including delivery throughout the year. The use of multiple rearing units with
staggered production is a recommended method for large-scale operations (Rakocy et al. 2006;
Rakocy 2012; Fig. 4c). A minimum of four fish tanks for rearing different ages or size ranges of
fish is useful to optimize fish production, marketing and sales. In line with intensive staggered fish
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 827

production, plants can also be cultured by staggering planting at suitable intervals or simulta-
neously using intercropping principles with short-cycle plants, such as herbs and leafy vegetables
with year-round producers, such as mint or basil or other woody herbs which can be cut and which
regrow and can be cut again at various intervals (Rakocy 2012). Commercial operations can use
many and different hydroponic subsystems to increase the plant harvest. Several methods are
commonly found, including DWC (raft) (Love et al. 2015a), and NFT, as well as techniques
adopted from conventional hydroponics, ebb-and-flow tables or drip irrigation technology
(Table 2). In contrast to small-scale aquaponics, the use of media beds is not recommended due
to a higher management input (Rakocy 2012) and also due to greater health control restrictions.
The higher fish stocking density in intensive aquaponics is associated and is required with
an improved removal of waste and sludge. As was described by Junge et al. (2017), sludge
separation increases water quality, and the efficiency of resource use can be increased through
the theoretical integration of a biodigester unit or an anaerobic nutrient remineralization
component (ANRC) with an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor (Goddek
et al. 2016). Controlling the sludge concentration in the nitrification tank to a mixed liquid
suspended solids (mlss) value of 1 g/l, a dissolved oxygen content of over 4 mg O2/l, a daily
load of about 3 g BOD5/kg fish and a sludge amount of 400 g mlss in the aeration tank of 400 l
with the help of a sludge return bypass, Naegel (1977) achieved a daily sludge load in the
nitrification tank of less than 0.2 g BOD5/g mlss, securing a complete oxidation of all
nitrogenous compounds. To optimize fish and plant output, the degree of mechanization has
to be adapted. Automatic climate and environmental control, quality monitoring of fish and
plants, water monitoring tools, management for waste and sludge with solid removal devices
and biofiltration, power generator backups, biosecurity, fish welfare and water quality moni-
toring equipment are recommended (Somerville et al. 2014). The reuse of water with cold
traps, biogas systems and photovoltaic systems constitute special arrangements for highly
engineered large-scale operations, especially for temperate climatic zone (Kloas et al. 2012).
This type of large-scale aquaponics is often operated using the decoupled principle whereby
the aquaculture unit is physically separated from the hydroponic unit (Thorarinsdottir et al.
2015). Fish effluent water is not circulating through all units, but is used as the basis of nutrient
enrichment with the addition of conventional hydroponic fertilization. Figure 4d shows a
scheme of a large-scale decoupled aquaponic facility with the separation of the aquaculture
unit and the hydroponic subsystems, wherein the fish effluent water flows in one direction only
from the aquaculture unit to the hydroponic unit. The nutrient-enriched process water (fertilizer
+ fish nutrient water) circulates in the hydroponics unit. The nutrient solution from the fish can
thus be adapted with added hydroponic nutrients as required for different plant species.
However, in order to be termed aquaponics, following the definition of the aquaponic
production principle noted above, the majority (> 50%) of nutrients sustaining the optimal
plant growth must derive from waste (effluent water, solid and sludge removal) originating
from feeding the aquatic organisms. Large-scale decoupled aquaponic systems have the
advantage of better disease management of fish and plants and show good growth values.
These facilities have been described, e.g. by Kloas et al. (2015), Karimanzira et al. (2016) or
Suhl et al. (2016) and are in the test phase in Germany, Spain and China (INAPRO 2017).

Examples of large-scale aquaponic systems

Large-scale aquaponic systems are currently under development, and published examples of
these systems are still rare. A first modern commercial up-scaled system was developed at the
828 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

University of Virgin Islands (UVI) Aquaponic System and designed by James Rakocy from
preliminary investigations that began in the 1980s (Rakocy 1989). It was developed to produce
different species of plants as part of a coupled system. The final large-scale commercial system,
with an area above 500 m2, consisted of six hydroponic tanks (Fig. 5b) (30.56 m in length,
11.35 m3) and four fish rearing tanks and was used as a standard system by Al-Hafedh et al.
(2008) and with a reduced number of plant growing troughs also by Savidov (2004).
A ‘semi-closed loop’ (coupled) aquaponic system was described by Graber et al. (2014)
and was partly reported by Schmautz et al. (2016) regarding the aquaponic research and

Fig. 5 a Semi-coupled ZHAW system (Graber et al. 2014). b UVI commercial RAFT system (Rakocy 2012).
BF, biofilter (nitrification); DF, drum filter (solids separation)
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 829

training facility at ZHAW in Waedenswil, Switzerland (Fig. 5a). Three identical recirculating
aquaculture systems are connected to hydroponic production units comprising three channels
for production of tomatoes and three modules with five channels for NFT and a total
production area of 292 m2. A central sump connects the aquaculture and hydroponic units,
with the backflow from the plants to fish units periodically managed by an electronic control
unit.
The FishGlassHouse, a contemporary facility which can be managed as a coupled as well as
a decoupled aquaponic system, was built in August 2015 on the campus of the University of
Rostock (Germany), Faculty of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Department of
Aquaculture and Sea-Ranching (Fig. 6, Palm et al. 2016). With an aquaculture unit of 300
and 600 m2 of plant cultivation area (100 m2 water transfer area), it generally uses ebb-and-
flow planting tables with a range of gravel substrates, DWC (raft) and NFT systems. The
hydroponic subunits (six hydroponic cabins), using tables or rafts, are interchangeable or can
be used in combination in the same hydroponic cabin or coupled in different cabins. They can
also be used with a decoupled production design. The FishGlassHouse in its current set up thus
represents a hybrid between coupled and decoupled aquaponics and, under full production,
would reach a large-scale aquaponic operation.
Future commercial aquaponic systems may reach up to several 10.000 m2, similar to
hydroponic farms in The Netherlands. A new trend for large-scale aquaponic ventures is the
use of different types of subunits for the plants. Thus, for example, ebb-and-flow planting
tables with a high load of potted crops, such as herbs, medicinal and ornamental plants, are
becoming increasingly important due to the better nutrient supply, bioactive environment in
planting pots and following the already established product demand by the customers.
However, the production method of potted crops not necessarily applies soilless plant produc-
tion. It consequently does not fall under the soilless plant cultivation principle of aquaponics
(see below, aquaponics sensu stricto). This also concerns fish farmers that collect the effluent
water to supply soil-planted crops with nutrients. We herewith use the term aquaponic farming
(aquaponics sensu lato) for this activity (Fig. 2).

Special aquaponic system design constructions

Aquaponic system design varies considerably, and thus, the designs change as they are
developed for the variability in different environments. Newer forms of aquaponics include
vertical gardens and living wall components originating from hydroponic design and may be
located as part of roof farming (Fig. 2). Thus, a new trend in aquaponics uses vertical systems
(mainly in urban areas) which can maximize the production output by using the vertical space
that is usually not utilized in production units/greenhouses. Vertical aquaponics can use
hydroponics such as DWC, NFT, ebb and flood or growing towers with aeroponics (Pattillo
2017) and can also be developed for home or interior production as small ‘cupboard’—
systems as described in Wilson (2015) for fresh food in urban homes and urban food
service establishments. Love et al. (2015a) noted that one third of commercial aquaponic
producers (29%) used vertical towers which are similar to NFT but equipped with vertical
trays or tubes for plant cultivation. The general advantage of vertical systems is found in better
use of space and greater design possibilities (Fernández-Cañero et al. 2015).
There are a lot of different vertical aquaponic system designs which use technically different
vertical/horizontal combined hydroponic components and a fish production unit. For example,
830 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

Fig. 6 FishGlassHouse at University of Rostock with aquaculture units (extensive, semi-intensive and intensive
RAS) and hydroponic cabins (101-106), Germany (Palm et al. 2016) (FT, fish tank; SS, solids separation; PS,
pump-sump; TF, trickling filter; BF, biofilter; NFT, nutrient film technique; TTF: transfer tank fish process water;
TTP, transfer tank plant process water; Aq, Aquarium; DWC, Deep water culture; Ebb-Flow = planting tables;
Raft, floating raft troughs)
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 831

Giacomantonio (2012) described a self-sustaining vertical aquaponic micro-farm with the com-
bination of aquaculture, hydroponics, solar, wind and battery technologies. The system is
constructed by a scaffolding parabolic arch support structure which contains an active medium
(grow mat) on which the plants are cultured. A further development of this system is described
under Giacomantonio (2013) for the production of decorative and/or food plants. The vertical
garden is mounted on a cylinder, which is connected to a motor and can adjust the plants
optimally to the sunlight. Both systems have a very low water requirement compared to
conventional plant cultivation and can be used externally or internally, using growing towers.
Growing towers were described by Pattillo (2017) as vertical hollow elements, through which
nutrient-rich RAS water flows, moistening the roots through a kind of rain. Within the tower,
substrates can be stored which, however, should be flushed more frequently due to clogging.
Another form of vertical plant cultivation is described in the so-called living walls, which are
often used in architecture providing ecological and environmental benefits in urban areas (Perini
et al. 2013). These green vertical systems were developed for energy saving purposes in buildings
(evaporative cooling, shadowing) like green facades with climbing plants or include plants that
are placed in perforated panels or geotextile felt thereby supporting the vegetation (e.g. Perez et al.
2011). Living walls can also be used in aquaponics as a further development of the original form
with food-producing properties, but there are only a small number of investigations. An important
component in living walls is the choice of substrates for plant cultivation. Experiments by Kotzen
and Khandaker (2017), at the University of Greenwich, London, showed that for aquaponic
production in living walls coconut fibre and mineral wool were the best growing media for basil
(Ocimum basilicum), spinach (Beta vulgaris) and chicory (Cichorium intybus). Another type has
been described by Gumble (2015) with a rotating living wall prototype, wherein the plant
cultivating substrate rotates over the vertical axis. This invention of the rotating living wall seems
to be of interest in the future but must be adapted for aquaponic production.
Aquaponics has also moved onto the roofs of buildings and can be part of green roof
infrastructure and urban agriculture especially in high-density urban areas where local food
production is being encouraged. Aquaponics has already been successfully installed on a number
of roofs in various cities around the world, with Urban Farmers AG (2017) Switzerland, the
Netherlands and in the USA or ‘die Urbanisten e.V.^ (2017) Dortmund (Germany). The system
design generally corresponds to the regular aquaponic system design of various production scales
with a recirculating aquaculture unit and NFT or DWC (raft) systems for plant cultivation. De
Vries and Fleuren (2015) have developed a spatial typology of urban agriculture according to size.
Domestic aquaponics can be organized on a privately owned roof with an area of 20–50 m2 per
house. Professional roof garden aquaponics require roofs between 500 and 1.500 m2. Thus, even
roof top aquaponics illustrates variability of the production areas and system design components.
Many designers and planners are looking to the future to provide healthy local food with all
the benefits this brings in reducing food miles, reducing the carbon and ecological footprint of
products and providing food security. Vertical farming and roof top agriculture which can include
aquaponics is envisaged as a key way to implement this vision. Vertical farming was defined by
Kalantari and Tahir (2016) as a system of commercial farming (plants, animals and other life
forms), which are by artificially stacked vertically above each other. This integration of agricul-
tural culture or farming into the architectural landscape of urban regions leads to the production of
foodstuffs within individual buildings or building complexes. The ‘living tower’, described by
Scott (2009) as a building that integrates agriculture in a single tower, combines living walls and
roof-top farming in an urban environment. There are even more radical visions to enable farming
(and aquaponics) in skyscrapers through the sustainable use of human, animal and plant waste
832 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

resulting in a self-sufficient long-term production. Hence, the living tower is considered as a

closed unit with a complete recirculation of water. The benefits of production in a living tower are
continuous indoor year round production, very low transportation costs, low degree of disease
susceptibility, complete water recycling, high production efficiency versus conventional farming
and recycling of plant and human waste for energy production, water recovery and nutrient
recovery (e.g. through a methane digester) (e.g. the ‘Living city’ by Scott 2009; the ‘Dynamic
Tower’ by David Fisher, ‘Aberrant Agriculture’ by Scott Johnson or the ‘2020 Tower’ by Kiss
and Cathcart Architects: in Scott 2009). Living towers and indeed vertical cities where all the
functions of a city are contained within a building or building cluster are, however, visions that are
at the conceptual stage. However, if and when they get implemented they are most likely to
include aquaponics as part of the food production system and would be fully integrated into the
buildings’ water, energy and waste management systems.

Nomenclature of aquaponic systems

Aquaponic production systems cultivate aquatic organisms, in particular those species that
require constant feed supply such as fish, amphibians, crustaceans and other invertebrates. The
nutrients provided from the excretions of these organisms are utilized to support plant growth.
This nomenclature incorporates the production of algae, soilless plant cultivation, gardening
plants and crops (Table 3).
As a result of the historic development of aquaponics, and following the definition by
Rakocy (2012), aquaponics encompasses the farming of aquatic organisms that incorporate the
production of plants without soil. This applies to the hydroponic production of plants by using
effluent waters or nutrients that originate from the farming of aquatic organism. According to
the new definition of aquaponics, altered from Lennard (2015), the majority (> 50%) of
nutrients sustaining the optimal plant growth must derive from waste originating from feeding
the aquatic organisms. Consequently, aquaponics in the narrower sense (aquaponics (s.s.) or
sensu stricto) is restricted to the hydroponic principle without the use of soil or substrates such
as sand or gravel. Newest integrated aquaculture systems combine fish with algae production,
either macro-algae inside separate tanks or microalgae inside photo-bioreactors. In both cases,
the production process is without any soil-like substrates and herewith falls under the concept
of aquaponics (s.s.). Because the term aquaponics has been already widely applied and is most
likely to remain, it should therefore be restricted to the soilless plant cultivation without any
substrate in the sense of Rakocy (2012) and other authors.
Aquaponics in the wider sense (aquaponics (s.l.) or sensu lato) is found in indoor and
outdoor substrate aquaponics, which includes horticulture techniques for the production of
herbs or gardening plants and the crop production in agriculture, also under the use of
conventional soil cultivation techniques. It utilizes the mineralization processes, buffer and
nutrient storage function of the different substrates. Because these activities are common
horticulture and agriculture practices, we herewith introduce the term aquaponic farming for
these activities.
Based on the purpose and function of the known aquaponic systems, it is possible to
distinguish among the four main categories, open pond, domestic, demonstration and com-
mercial aquaponic systems (Fig. 2). ‘Open pond aquaponics’ contains all aquaponic system
design variants, which use free surface waters such as lakes or ponds combined with an on-
pond or on-land hydroponic component. Ponds are regarded as human-made surface waters
 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

Table 3 Aquaponic nomenclature (DWC, deep water culture; NFT, nutrient film technique; s.s., sensu stricto; s.l., sensu lato)

Product Algae Soilless plant cultivation Gardening plants Crops

Concept Aquaponics (s.s.) Aquaponics (s.s.) Aquaponics (s.l.) Aquaponics (s.l.)

Industrial Biotechnology Hydroponics Horticulture Agriculture
activity
Production Industrial Domestic to industrial Domestic to corporate Farms
Scale Demonstration/commercial Demonstration/small-scale Demonstration/small-scale Commercial
/semi-commercial/commercial /semi-commercial/commercial
Technology Algae reactors Various subsystems Various systems Various systems
Systems Liquid DWC, NFT, ebb and flow, drip, Substrate Substrate and soil
aeroponics
Nomenclature Aquaponics Aquaponics Aquaponic farming Aquaponics farming
Definition The majority (> 50%) of nutrients sustaining the optimal plant growth derive from waste originating from feeding the aquatic organismsa
a
Altered after Lennard (2015)
833
834 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

and examples include the well-known carp ponds, fertilized or not or aerated, in monoculture
or polyculture, respectively, under extensive and semi-intensive production (Horváth
et al. 2002). Open pond aquaponics can also include the production of marine species, when
using nutrients from semi-intensive to intensive fish production (shrimp culture) in coastal
ponds or cages, similar to the IMTA system design, but with a hydroponic component on land.
Systems with or without soil are possible (aquaponics s.s. and s.l.).
‘Domestic aquaponics’ (Fig. 2) includes all types of aquaponic system designs used for
private purposes such as mini-, hobby- and backyard systems. A variety of fish species,
especially ornamental fish species, can be used, which are produced primarily for the purpose
of human interest (mini-systems, aquarium aquaponics) or for private home production
(hobby, backyard systems, Table 1). These systems can be installed in urban areas with a high
housing density. Vertical aquaponics, also represented in other categories, can be classified
here as a system for private use (Fig. 2). Systems with or without soil for the plant production
are possible (aquaponics s.s. and s.l.) (Table 3).
Demonstration aquaponics (Fig. 2) have been built to represent food chain use in aquaponic
production systems. These include, for example, aquaponic demonstration units in school
classrooms or industry workshops. Here, the principle of sustainable resource fish and plant
production is explained. Demonstration aquaponic systems can be used as, for example, living
walls in exhibitions or industrial buildings (Wilson 2015). Aquaponics can also be used in
architecture to embellish the human environment. In this case, a commercial benefit is not
striven for. The combination of aquaponics and architecture in the artistic sense or as a
component of structures is under development. Vertical aquaponics can be used here as a
demonstration but without the aim of a high production output. Again, systems with or without
soil for the plant production are possible (aquaponics s.s. and s.l.).
Commercial aquaponic systems, including small-scale to semi-commercial (> 50–≤
100 m2), urban gardening, roof aquaponics, living towers and vertical aquaponics, have a
wide range of applications. Systems with or without substrate or soil for the plant production
are possible (aquaponics s.s. and s.l.) (Fig. 2). Intermediate-scale (between 100 and 500 m2)
and especially large-scale (> 500 m2 up to several ha) commercial operations clearly show the
trend towards industrialized production (Table 2), with a high degree of mechanization. There
are attempts to combine commercial hydroponic plant production with effluents and nutrients
originating from aquaculture. If the plant production under the hydroponic principle utilizes
more than 50% of the plant required nutrients for optimal growth from the aquaculture unit
(according to the definition either from effluent waters or from other wastes), the entire
production still falls under aquaponics (s.s.). On the other hand, the direct application of
aquaculture-derived nutrients for plant and crop production in substrate or soil is also possible
(aquaponic farming). Brod et al. (2017) applied dried fish sludge on agricultural land and
achieved a relative agronomic efficiency compared with mineral fertilizer of 50-80%. Below
the threshold of 50%, production can still considered to be following the aquaponic concept
towards a circular flow economy; however, the products result from biotechnology, hydro-
ponics, horticulture or agriculture (Table 3).
Thus, according to the presented nomenclature, all forms of aquaponics unite the use of more
than 50% of nutrients from fish effluents for optimal plant growth, either directly from the
effluents or through recovery from the solid waste. Consequently, in aquaponics, any form of
plant cultivation is possible irrespective of the technical design of the hydroponic unit. We are
aware that a minimum level of nutrient reuse requires new methods to identify this threshold. We
therefore suggest that to distinguish aquaponics from regular farming, the nutrients from the
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 835

aquaculture effluents or other wastes allow 50% of the intended yield obtained through regular
farming practices of the respective crop (relative agronomic efficiency according to Brod et al.
2017), either solely under hydroponics (aquaponics s.s.) or with the use of substrates (aquaponic
farming). This assures the public and customers that the product is from aquaponics and not from
regular hydroponics or other farming systems. The posited nomenclature applies to all forms of
integrated aquaculture and plant systems where the fish rearing and plant production units do not
fall under freshwater or marine fisheries. When applying this nomenclature, all forms of
aquaponics can be unequivocally placed (see Fig. 2, Table 3), independent from the cultivated
organisms or the scales of production.

Future developments and research needs

Aquaponics can be considered a contemporary and ecologically sustainable agricultural

production system that supports the development of a recycling economy. It can be integrated
into the existing value chains, either coming from the aquaculture or the plant production side.
However, a successful transfer of the often smaller sized systems into commercial applications
requires a wide range of skills and research needs.
There are many different aquaponic systems in use (Tables 1 and 2, Figs. 3, 4, and 5).
Whilst the system components may vary according to scale, the functions and applications
remain more or less constant, around the world. However, climatic factors can and will
determine the types of fish and vegetables grown as well as the general construction. Thus,
for example, it is unlikely that Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus) or trout will be grown in the
Caribbean as it is too hot and it would be too costly to keep water and air temperatures low.
The climate will influence the arrangement of system components, for example, shading or
cooling under intensive natural light conditions or the requirement for indoor production in the
temperate climate zone of the northern hemisphere with different plant yields throughout the
year (e.g. Knaus and Palm 2017a, b). Advantages have been demonstrated in aquaponic
facilities with a relatively stable climate and optimum temperatures for fish and plant produc-
tion, such as those found in the Caribbean Virgin Islands (Rakocy 1989) or in the Canary
Islands (Spain). In the US Virgin Islands, the plants are grown outdoors in direct sunlight,
whilst the fish are located under shade structures. In the northern hemisphere, systems need
protection in greenhouses especially during the cold winter months, where with heating and
lighting production occur the whole year round. However, greenhouses in warmer Mediterra-
nean areas will require cooling during the hotter months. This variability demonstrates that the
location of the aquaponic system is of tremendous importance, generalizations and compari-
sons are difficult to make, and the sustainability of the commercial systems depends on local
adaptations and preconditions.
One of the key current debates in aquaponics centres around coupled and decoupled
systems. However, both stand alongside each other, because they rely on different production
principles and also target different markets (Tables 1 and 2). Consequently, they have different
research needs and problems to be addressed. Coupled systems (often single pump or single-
loop systems) require relatively stable conditions for fish and plant production and are often
technologically limited due to their smaller size and lower investment costs. Their future
development lies in the numerous small-scale to medium-sized semi-commercial ventures,
driven by the increasing demand for locally and regionally produced healthy and sustainable
food products where there may be limited water supply and space and where investment costs
836 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

need to be low. In these systems, an optimum selection of fish, polyponics (in the sense of
Knaus and Palm 2017b) and plant species (also intercropping) is necessary to be sustainable,
where the chemo-physical characteristics and nutrient dynamics are balanced. However, due to
nutrient constraints, up-scaling of such systems seems to be limited to a certain size.
Decoupled aquaponic systems (several pumps or multiple-bypass/loop systems) may be
considered as a variation of horticulture, where the plants are the main focus and where the
nutrient fish water is enhanced to provide the optimal nutrient conditions and leading to high
growth rates (Delaide et al. 2016). Because the RAS systems, also in the form of integrated
multitrophic aquaculture (IMTA), and the hydroponic system run independent and require
different optimal water conditions (e.g. pH), decoupled large-scale commercial operations require
higher investment costs and water monitoring as this is in two systems. The commercial running
of decoupled systems needs to be a focus of future investigations. However, because these
systems also could function solely as horticulture in cases in which not enough effluent water
or fish waste can be provided through the aquaculture unit, public surveillance and control of these
systems (over 50% of the nutrients originate from the aquatic organisms) is required in order to
distinguish and market the products from aquaponic (s.s., s.l.) production.
Aquaponic farming combines aquaculture with the farming of plants and crops in substrate
or soil. There is so far no research carried out on how to measure the influence of the
aquaponic waste onto the plant performance in comparison to regular farming practices. This
is urgently needed in future research. Within coupled systems, nutrient remineralization
processes and the impact of the RAS water on plant growth, including the possibly central
position responsible microorganisms, are not yet understood and need urgent consideration.
They are already known to play an important role in the ammonium cycle. Promising studies
have shown plant productivity in aquaponics as high as in hydroponics despite lower concen-
trations in NPK. Such phenomena could be attributed to beneficial micro-organisms for plant
nutrition. They also might play also an important role in natural control of plant pathogens.
Additionally there are numerous areas which also require research and development. It is
evident that fish species that allow high stocking densities will be especially important,
necessitating efficient management of nutrient flow and solid removal. Because solid removal
is decisive for the water quality, fish welfare and nutrient availability in coupled and decoupled
aquaponics (s.s.) as well as for aquaponics (s.l.) farming, new technologies might support the
better reuse of aquaculture wastes. Other important issues to be addresses are pest control and
the effects of different feed and nutrients on plant and fish health and product quality. Still the
future development of these systems towards commercial systems depends on market accep-
tance, future retail prices and the ability of the systems and management to be adapted to a
wide range of different local conditions.
Future developments include special aquaponic systems, such as vertical aquaponics, urban
gardening and roof aquaponics, living walls and living towers (Fig. 2). There is great
speculation and vision of what our future cities will look like and be able to produce, and in
this respect, much more work is required to integrate aquaponics as part and parcel of these
visions. Whilst today, research is focused on vertical aquaponics and living walls as special
components, these are most likely to become part of integrated systems which are combined
into our smart city environments. Much work has yet to be done in integrating water harvesting
and management, water re-use, energy supply and waste management. It is important to stress
that this is likely to be part of the future, where continuous supply is managed sustainably to
meet increasing market demands especially as cities grow. In order to achieve this, there needs
to be considerable research in the set-up and design of vertical aquaponics, with particular
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 837

interests in plant cultivation substrates and the technical possibilities, e.g. rotating growing
systems which orient to sunlight.

Conclusions

Aquaponics is coming of age. This can be readily seen in the rapid growth in small scale and
larger practice as it is in research. This paper has been written in response to this maturation as
it is crucial to take stock of the different types of aquaponic systems especially for those about
to plunge into the field and in particular those considering entering into commercial scale
aquaponic production and farming.
Aquaponic systems vary considerably in scale and sophistication which are usually related.
It is possible to distinguish between main categories: ‘open pond aquaponics’, ‘domestic
aquaponics’, ‘demonstration aquaponics’ and ‘commercial aquaponics (intermediate or
large-scale)’. Of all the systems, open pond aquaponics’ strongly contrasts to the other
systems, as they are relatively simple and usually open to the elements. All other aquaponic
systems utilize components, derived from conventional intensive aquaculture systems (RAS)
and techniques of soilless plant cultivation (hydroponics). As aquaponic systems increase in
size and production areas towards commercial systems, technology increases and becomes
more complicated especially due to the need for using and treating the aquaculture waste. The
attitude and cultivation principles of the aquaculture unit and hydroponics unit differ in their
intensive use. This requires adaptation of the simple media-bed substrate systems on domestic
aquaponics to NFT or ebb-and-flow tables on large-scale systems, and the development of
coupled into decoupled systems. However, both are meant for different purposes, allow
decentral production of highly valuable and sustainable food and nowadays find representa-
tives in commercial aquaponics.
This paper has illustrated the breadth of aquaponic types, which includes those that
incorporate traditional hydroponic plant production systems such as NFT, DWC (raft), table
substrate ebb and flow and drip systems as well as aeroponics and the incorporation of vertical
systems. The largest systems (large-scale) mostly use DWC (raft) or NFT-growing systems as
using gravel increases maintenance and labour costs. The main principle of aquaponics is that
water from the aquatic organisms is used to grow the plants. However, we maintain that
aquaponics requires that more than 50% of the nutrients for plant growth (agronomic efficien-
cy), either from the process waters or from the solids removal, originates from culture of fish or
other aquatic organisms. We, the authors of the paper and the members of COST Action
FA1305, ‘The EU Aquaponics Hub’, propose the following definition of aquaponics as follows:
‘Aquaponics is a production system of aquatic organisms and plants where the majority
(> 50%) of nutrients sustaining the optimal plant growth derives from waste originating
from feeding the aquatic organisms’.
According to this new nomenclature, aquaponics in the narrower sense (aquaponics (s.s.) or
sensu stricto) is restricted to the hydroponic principle without the use of soil or substrates such
as sand or gravel. Below the threshold of 50% nutrient use, a production still can be considered
following the aquaponic concept towards a circular flow economy; however, the products still
originate from conventional biotechnology, hydroponics, horticulture or agriculture. Finally,
we also propose that according to this nomenclature, aquaponic systems that are combined
with the conventional substrate or soil cultivation of crops are also possible, contrary to earlier
838 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

definitions of aquaponics, and should be termed ‘aquaponic farming’ (aquaponics (s.l.) or

sensu lato) as the produce is as ‘natural’ as horticulture or field grown crops. This is of
relevance also for larger commercial scales where products are marketed and produced for
wider sale. With the suggested nomenclature, all aquaponic categories from ‘open pond
aquaponics’ to large-scale commercial systems are covered because of the clear origin of
the process water or solid waste originating nutrients from farming aquatic organisms.
As aquaponics starts to become better known and produce is being sold in larger quantities,
the consumer needs to know that aquaponic farm sourced produce is safe, healthy and that it can
be considered organic if grown with organic fish feed and with no added non-natural chemicals,
unlike large-scale hydroponic produce which is mostly grown with non-organic nutrient
solutions. Aquaponic farming has to be much more sensitive in terms of plant crop protection
as additives can affect the fish, and thus, plant problems are treated organically without harming
the aquatic organisms. The consumer is about to be confronted with the choice of purchasing
produce, say lettuce or tomatoes, grown/farmed in soil, grown/farmed organically in soil, grown
hydroponically and grown/farmed aquaponically. The consumer needs to know that aquaponic
vegetables and fish are grown using a sustainable method with only natural inputs and are
unlike hydroponically grown vegetables which usually use inorganic nutrients. As noted,
commercial-scale aquaponics requires a different level of technology and operation to function
successfully, but it also needs for the public to understand that aquaponic produce exists in order
to be healthy food that is more sustainable and environmentally friendly.

Acknowledgments This review is a product of COST Action FA1305 ‘The EU Aquaponics Hub: Realising
Sustainable Integrated Fish and Vegetable Production for the EU’. We thank the Ministry of Agriculture,
Environment and Consumer Protection of Mecklenburg Western Pomerania and EIP-AGRI operational groups
for supporting research in aquaponic fish and plant production (‘Aquaponik in MV’, BNRZD: 13 903 000 0103;
WM-EIP-0007-15). Financial support was provided by the Leibniz Association within the scope of the Leibniz
Science Campus Phosphorus Research Rostock (SAS-2015-IOW-LWC). This project was supported through the
pilot project ‘FishGlassHouse: Innovationsinitiative zur ressourceneffizienten Nahrungsmittelproduktion in MV’
(European Fisheries Fund-EFF, grant number VI-560/730-32616-2013/025).

Author contributions Harry W. Palm and Ulrich Knaus wrote most parts of the manuscript. The paper was
then jointly developed during the COST Action FA1305, with valuable inputs and participation of the other
authors. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

Ako H, Baker A (2009) Small-scale lettuce production with hydroponics or aquaponics. College of Tropical
Agriculture and Human Resources Sustainable Agriculture: 1–7
Al-Hafedh YS, Alam A, Beltagi MS (2008) Food production and water conservation in a recirculating aquaponic
system in Saudi Arabia at different ratios of fish feed to plants. J World Aquac Soc 39(4):510–520.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-7345.2008.00181.x
Appelbaum S, Kotzen B (2016) Further investigations of aquaponics using brackish water resources of the Negev
desert. Ecocycles 2(2):26–35
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 839

Bakhsh HK, Chopin TA (2012) A variation on the IMTA theme: a land-based, closed-containment freshwater
IMTA system for tilapia and lettuce. AAC Spec Publ No 22:57–60
Bakhsh HK, Chopin T, Murray SA, Belyea E, Hamer A (2015) Adapting the concepts of tropical integrated
agriculture-aquaculture (IAA) and aquaponics to temperate-cold freshwater integrated multi-trophic aqua-
culture (FIMTA). In: Wade J, Jackson T, Brewer K Aquaculture Canada 2014, Proceedings of Contributed
Papers, Bulletin of the Aquaculture Association of Canada (2015-1): 17–25
Boxman SE, Nystrom M, Capodice JC, Ergas SJ, Main KL, Trotz MA (2017) Effect of support medium,
hydraulic loading rate and plant density on water quality and growth of halophytes in marine aquaponic
systems. Aquac Res 48(5):2463–2477. https://doi.org/10.1111/are.13083
Brod E, Oppen J, Kristoffersen AØ, Haraldsen TK, Krogstad T (2017) Drying or anaerobic digestion of fish
sludge: Nitrogen fertilisation effects and logistics. Ambio 46 (8):852–864
Buhmann AK, 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. Agric Water Manag 149:102–114.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.11.001
Chopin T, Buschmann AH, Halling C, Troell M, Kautsky N, Neori A, Kraemer GP, Zertuche-González JA,
Yarish C, Neefus C (2001) Integrating seaweeds into marine aquaculture systems: a key toward sustainabil-
ity. J Phycol 37(6):975–986. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1529-8817.2001.01137.x
de Vries J, Fleuren R (2015) A spatial typology for designing a local food system.In: Localizing urban food
strategies. Farming cities and performing rurality. 7th International Aesop Sustainable Food Planning
Conference Proceedings, Torino, 7-9 October 2015, edited by Giuseppe Cinà and Egidio Dansero, Torino,
Politecnico di Torino, 2015: 297–306, ISBN 978-88-8202-060-6
Dela Cruz CR, Lightfoot C, Costa-Pierce BA, Carangal VR, Bimbao MAP (1992) Rice-fish research and
development in Asia. ICLARM Conf. Proc. 24, p 457
Delaide B, Goddek S, Gott J, Soyeurt H, Jijakli MH (2016) Lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. Sucrine) growth
performance in complemented aquaponic solution outperforms hydroponics. Water 8(10):467. https://doi.
org/10.3390/w8100467
die Urbanisten e.V. (2017) https://dieurbanisten.de/.die Urbanisten e.V. Rheinische Straße 137, 44137 Dortmund,
Germany
Diver S (2006) Aquaponics–integration of hydroponics with aquaculture. Publication No. IP163. ATTRA,
National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service: p 28
Essa MA, Goda AMAS, Hanafy MA, El-Shebly AA, Mohamed RA, El-Ebiary EH (2008) Small-scale fish
culture: guiding models of aquaponics and net-enclosures fish farming in Egypt. Egypt J Aquat Res 34(3):
320–337
FAO (1988) Definition of aquaculture. Seventh Session of the IPFC Working Party of Expects on Aquaculture,
IPFC/WPA/WPZ, p.1–3, RAPA/FAO, Bangkok
Fernández-Cañero R, Pérez-Urrestarazu L, Egea G (2015) Design and preliminary assessment of a vertical
aquaponics system for ornamental purposes. In: International Conference on Living Walls and Ecosystems
Services:1–41
Fernando CH (1993) Rice field ecology and fish culture–an overview. Hydrobiologia 259(2):91–113. https://doi.
org/10.1007/BF00008375
Giacomantonio PJ (2012) Vertical aquaponic micro farm. U.S. Patent No. 8,181,391. Washington, DC: U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office
Giacomantonio PJ (2013) Rotating aquaponic vertical garden using a stretchable grow media. U.S. Patent No. 8,
516,743. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
Goddek S, Delaide B, Mankasingh U, Ragnarsdottir KV, Jijakli MH, Thorarinsdottir R (2015) Challenges of
sustainable and commercial aquaponics. Sustainability 7(4):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(7):303. https://doi.org/10.3390
/w8070303
Graber A, Junge R (2009) Aquaponic systems: nutrient recycling from fish wastewater by vegetable production.
Desalination 246(1–3):147–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2008.03.048
Graber A, Antenen N, Junge R (2014) The multifunctional aquaponic system at ZHAW used as research and
training lab. In: 3rd Conference with International Participation, Conference VIVUS – on Agriculture,
Environmentalism, Horticulture and Floristics, Food Production and Processing and Nutrition
»Transmission of Innovations, Knowledge and Practical Experience into Everyday Practice«, 14th and
15th November 2014, Biotechnical Centre Naklo, Strahinj 99, Naklo, Slovenia: 245–255
Gumble J (2015) Green towers: production and financial analyses of urban agricultural systems. Master thesis
Pennsylvania State University. The Graduate School College of Agricultural Sciences: 110 p
Gunning D, Harman L, Keily M, Nunan R, Jones P, Horgan B, Burnell G (2014) Designing a marine aquaponics
(maraponics) system to model IMTA. In Proceedings of the Aquaculture Europe Conference 2014, San
840 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

S e b a s t i a n , S p a i n , 1 4 – 1 7 O c t o b e r 2 0 1 4 ; Av a i l a b l e o n l i n e : h t t p s : / / w w w. w a s .
org/easonline/documents/MeetingPresentations/AE2014/AE2014_0681.pdf. Accessed on 13 Sept 2016
Gunning D, Maguire J, Burnell G (2016) The development of sustainable saltwater-based food production
systems: a review of established and novel concepts. Water 8(12):598. https://doi.org/10.3390/w8120598
Herde L, Wild M (2015) Aquaponik in Rostock. Zukunftsmusik im Glashaus. DEGA. Gartenbauwissenschaft
12:45–48 [in German]
Horváth L, Tamás G, Seagrave C (2002) Carp and pond fish culture. Second Edition. Including chinese
herbivorous species, pike, tench, zander, wels catfish, goldfish, african catfish and sterlet. Fishing News
Books, Blackwell Science, p 170
INAPRO (2017) Innovative aquaponics for professional application. http://www.inapro-project.eu/
Junge R, König B, Villarroel M, Komives T, Jijakli MH (2017) Strategic points in aquaponics. Water 9(3):182.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w9030182
Kalantari F, Tahir OM (2016) Public acceptance of vertical farming in urban high-density area of Kuala Lumpur.
SelectedWorks. Faculty of Design and Architecture, University Putra Malaysia, 43300 Serdang, Malaysia: 44 p
Kangmin L (1988) Rice-fish culture in China: a review. Aquaculture 71(3):173–186. https://doi.org/10.1016
/0044-8486(88)90257-8
Karimanzira D, Keesman KJ, Kloas W, Baganz D, Rauschenbach T (2016) Dynamic modeling of the INAPRO
aquaponic system. Aquac Eng 75:29–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2016.10.004
Klemenčič AK, Bulc TG (2015) The use of vertical constructed wetland and ultrasound in aquaponic systems.
Environ Sci Pollut Res 22(2):1420–1430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3463-x
Kloas W, Rennert B, Van Ballegooy C, Drews M (2012) Aquaponic system for vegetable and fish production.
U.S. Pat. No. 8,291,640 B2. Washington 2012, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
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. Aquac Environ Interact 7(2):179–192. https://doi.
org/10.3354/aei00146
Knaus U, Palm HW (2017a) Effects of fish biology on ebb and flow aquaponical cultured herbs in northern
Germany (Mecklenburg Western Pomerania). Aquaculture 466:51–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
aquaculture.2016.09.025
Knaus U, Palm HW (2017b) Effects of the fish species choice on vegetables in aquaponics under spring-summer
conditions in northern Germany (Mecklenburg Western Pomerania). Aquaculture 473:62–73. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2017.01.020
Kotzen B (2012) The power of landscape: the power of the landscape architect. In: Peer Reviewed Proceedings
of ECLAS 2012 Conference. The Power of Landscape at Warsaw University of Life Sciences - SGGW.
Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, pp 185–189. ISBN 9788393588404
Kotzen B, Appelbaum S (2010) An investigation of aquaponics using brackish water resources in the Negev
Desert. J Appl Aquac 22(4):297–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454438.2010.527571
Kotzen B, Khandaker M (2017) The potential for combining living wall and vertical farming systems in
aquaponics. European Aquaculture Society Conference 2017 Meeting abstract, 17-20 October 2017,
Dubrovnik, EAS Oostende, Belgium. https://www.was.org/easOnline/AbstractDetail.aspx?i=8445
Lennard WA (2015) AQUAPONICS: a nutrient dynamic process and the relationship to fish feeds. World
aquaculture society September, 2015: 20–23
Lennard WA, Leonard BV (2004) A comparison of reciprocating flow versus constant flow in an integrated,
gravel bed, aquaponic test system. Aquac Int 12(6):539–553. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-004-8528-2
Lennard WA, Leonard BV (2006) A comparison of three different hydroponic sub-systems (gravel bed, floating
and nutrient film technique) in an Aquaponic test system. Aquac Int 14(6):539–550. https://doi.org/10.1007
/s10499-006-9053-2
Lewis WM, Yopp JH, Schramm Jr HL, Brandenburg AM (1978) Use of hydroponics to maintain quality of
recirculated water in a fish culture system. Trans Am Fish Soc 107(1):92–99. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-
8659(1978)107<92:UOHTMQ>2.0.CO;2
Little D, Muir J (1987) A guide to integrated warm water aquaculture. Institute of Aquaculture, Stirling ISBN 0-
901636-71-1. 238 p
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. Aquac Eng 68:19–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2015.07.003
Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842 841

Lu J, Li X (2006) Review of rice–fish-farming systems in China—one of the globally important ingenious

agricultural heritage systems (GIAHS). Aquaculture 260(1):106–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
aquaculture.2006.05.059
Malcolm J (2007) The start of an obsession. Backyard aquaponics magazine, issue 1, Summer 2007: 10–17
McMurtry MR, Nelson PV, Sanders DC, Hodges L (1990) Sand culture of vegetables using recirculated
aquacultural effluents. Appl Agric Res 5(4):280–284
McMurtry MR, Sanders DC, Cure JD, Hodson RG, Haning BC, Amand ECS (1997) Efficiency of water use of
an integrated fish/vegetable co-culture system. J World Aquac Soc 28(4):420–428. https://doi.org/10.1111
/j.1749-7345.1997.tb00290.x
Morgenstern R, Biernatzki R, Boelhauve M, Braun J, Dapprich P, Gerlach A, Haberlah-Korr V, Mergenthaler M,
Mistele B, Schuster C, Winkler P, Wittmann M, Lorleberg W (2016) Pilotstudie BNachhaltige Aquaponik-
Erzeugung für Nordrhein-Westfalen^. Forschungsbericht des Fachbereichs Agrarwirtschaft Soest und des
Instituts für Green Technology und Ländliche Entwicklung. 100 p [in German]
Mukherjee TK, Geeta S, Rohani A, Phang SM (1992) A study on integrated duck-fish and goat-fish production
systems. In: Mukherjee TK, Moi PS, Panandam JM, Yang YS (1992) Integrated livestock-fish production
systems. Proceedings. In FAO/IPT Workshop on Integrated Livestock-Fish Production Systems, Kuala
Lumpur (Malaysia), 16-20 Dec 1991
Naegel LCA (1977) Combined production of fish and plants in recirculating water. Aquaculture 10(1):17–24.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0044-8486(77)90029-1
Palm HW, Seidemann R, Wehofsky S, Knaus U (2014a) Significant factors influencing the economic sustain-
ability of closed aquaponic systems. Part I: system design, chemo-physical parameters and general aspects.
AACL Bioflux 7(1):20–32
Palm HW, Bissa K, Knaus U (2014b) Significant factors affecting the economic sustainability of closed
aquaponic systems. Part II: fish and plant growth. AACL Bioflux 7(3):162–175
Palm HW, Nievel M, Knaus U (2015) Significant factors affecting the economic sustainability of closed
aquaponic systems. Part III: plant units. AACL Bioflux 8(1):89–106
Palm HW, Strauch S, Knaus U, Wasenitz B (2016) Das FischGlasHaus – eine Innovationsinitiative zur energie
und nährstoffeffizienten Produktion unterschiedlicher Fisch- und Pflanzenarten in Mecklenburg-
Vorpommern (BAquaponik in MV^). Fisch Fischmarkt Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 1:38–47 [in German]
Palm HW, Unger P, Kleinertz S, Wasenitz B, Mann G (2017) Baltic IMTA – Verfahrensentwicklung einer
Integrierten Multi Trophischen Aquakultur für die Küstengewässer Mecklenburg-Vorpommerns (Teil 4).
Fisch Fischmarkt Mecklenburg-Vorpommern 2(2017):45–48 [in German]
Pantanella E (2008) Pond aquaponics: new pathways to sustainable integrated aquaculture and agriculture.
Aquaculture News 34, May 2008
Pattillo DA (2017) An overview of aquaponic systems: hydroponic components. NCRAC Technical Bulletins
19. http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ncrac_techbulletins/19
Perez G, Rincon L, Vila A, Gonzalez JM, Cabeza LF (2011) Green vertical systems for buildings as passive
systems for energy savings. Appl Energy 88(12):4854–4859. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.06.032
Perini K, Ottelé M, Haas EM, Raiteri R (2013) Vertical greening systems, a process tree for green façades and
living walls. Urban Ecosyst 16(2):265–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11252-012-0262-3
Rakocy JE (1989) Hydroponic lettuce production in a recirculating fish culture system. Univ. Virgin Islands
Agric. Exp. Station, Island Perspect 3: 5–10
Rakocy JE (2012) Chapter 14: aquaponics–integrating fish and plant culture. In: Tidwell JH (ed) Aquaculture
Production Systems, 2012, 1st edn. Wiley, Hoboken, 343–386
Rakocy JE, Masser MP, Losordo TM (2006) Recirculating aquaculture tank production systems: aquaponics-
integrating fish and plant culture. SRAC Publication - Southern Regional Aquaculture Center (454): 16 p
Rakocy JE, Bailey DS, Shultz RC, Danaher JJ (2010) The status of aquaponics–2010. World Aquac Soc 2010
Raviv M, Lieth JH (2008) Soilless culture: theory and practice. Elsevier, Amsterdam ISBN: 978-0-444-52975-6.
587 p
Roy M, Salam M, Hossain MB, Shamsuddin M (2013) Feasibility study of aquaponics in polyculture pond.
World Appl Sci J 23:588–592
Salam MA, Asadujjaman M, Rahman MS (2013) Aquaponics for improving high density fish pond water quality
through raft and rack vegetable production. World 5(3):251–256
Savidov N (2004) Evaluation and development or aquaponics production and product market capabilities in Alberta.
Ids Initiatives Fund Final Report Project #679056201, August 17, 2004. Alberta Agric Food Rural Dev 190 p
Schmautz Z, Graber A, Jaenicke S, Goesmann A, Junge R, Smits TH (2016) Microbial diversity in different
compartments of an aquaponics system. Arch Microbiol:1–8
Scott JO (2009) A living tower: using architecture for sustainable future growth. Doctoral dissertation, University
of Cape Town: 75 p
842 Aquacult Int (2018) 26:813–842

Sikawa DC, Yakupitiyage A (2010) The hydroponic production of lettuce (Lactuca sativa L) by using hybrid
catfish (Clarias macrocephalus x C. gariepinus) pond water: potentials and constraints. Agric Water Manag
97(9):1317–1325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.03.013
Simeonidou M, Paschos I, Gouva E, Kolygas M, Perdikaris C (2012) Performance of a small-scale modular
aquaponic system. AACL Bioflux 5(4):182–188
Sneed K, Allen K, Ellis JE (1975) Fish farming and hydroponics. Aquaculture and the fish farmer 1(1):11–18
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 2014. Rome,
FAO: 262 p
Soto D (2009) Integrated mariculture: a global review. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Technical Paper. No. 529.
FAO, Rome, 183p
Stadler M, Baganz D, Vermeulen T, Keesman KJ (2015) Circular economy and economic viability of aquaponic
systems: Comparing urban, rural and peri-urban scenarios under Dutch conditions. Proceedings of the
ICESC 2015, Gold Coast, Australia
Stickney RR (1994) Principles of aquaculture. Wiley, Hoboken 502 p
Suhl J, Dannehl D, Kloas W, Baganz D, Jobs S, Scheibe G, Schmidt U (2016) Advanced aquaponics: evaluation
of intensive tomato production in aquaponics vs. conventional hydroponics. Agric Water Manag 178:335–
344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2016.10.013
Thorarinsdottir RI, Kledal PR, Skar SLG, Sustaeta F, Ragnarsdottir KV, Mankasingh U, Pantanella E, van de Ven
R, Shultz RC (2015) Aquaponics guidelines 2015. 64 p
Tilman D, Clark M (2014) Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature 515(7528):
518–522. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13959
Troell M, Halling C, Neori A, Chopin T, Buschmann AH, Kautsky N, Yarish C (2003) Integrated mariculture:
asking the right questions. Aquaculture 226(1-4):69–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0044-8486(03)00469-1
Troell M, Joyce A, Chopin T, Neori A, Buschmann AH, Fang J-G (2009) Ecological engineering in aquaculture
— potential for integrated multi-trophic aquaculture (IMTA) in marine offshore systems. Aquaculture 297(1-
4):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2009.09.010
Tyson RV, Simonne EH, Treadwell DD, White JM, Simonne A (2008) Reconciling pH for ammonia biofiltration
and cucumber yield in a recirculating aquaponic system with perlite biofilters. Hortscience 43(3):719–724
Urban Farmers (2017) UrbanFarmers, Technoparkstrasse 1 8005 Zürich, Switzerland. https://urbanfarmers.
com/intro/
Vermeulen T, Kamstra A (2012) The need for systems design for robust aquaponic systems in the urban
environment. In: International Symposium on Soilless Cultivation 1004: 71–77
Villarroel M, Alvariño JMR, Duran JM (2011) Aquaponics: integrating fish feeding rates and ion waste
production for strawberry hydroponics. Span J Agric Res 9(2):537–545. https://doi.org/10.5424
/sjar/20110902-181-10
Waller U, Buhmann AK, Ernst A, Hanke V, Kulakowski A, Wecker B, Orellana J, Papenbrock J (2015)
Integrated multi-trophic aquaculture in a zero-exchange recirculation aquaculture system for marine fish
and hydroponic halophyte production. Aquac Int 23(6):1473–1489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-015-
9898-3
Watten BJ, Busch RL (1984) Tropical production of tilapia (Sarotherodon aurea) and tomatoes (Lycopersicon
esculentum) in a small-scale recirculating water system. Aquaculture 41(3):271–283. https://doi.org/10.1016
/0044-8486(84)90290-4
Wilson G (2015) Wilson’s cities alive. Aquaponics network Australia 1(1):1–8