New "fishless" feeds could make aquaculture

more sustainable
Ben Coxworth August 7, 2013
3 PICTURES

Prawns raised on the Novacq fish-free feed additive (Photo: CSIRO) . View gallery (3 images)

When it comes to commercial aquaculture, a lot of people have some legitimate concerns fish farms can introduce
antibiotics, anti-algal chemicals and concentrated fish waste into the ocean; escaped fish can upset the local
ecological balance; and wild fish still need to be caught in large numbers, as a food source for some species of farmed
fish. While there have been recent efforts to address the first two concerns, the fish-in-the-fish-food problem is now
being taken on in two different research projects. These are aimed at replacing the fish content in fish feed with more
sustainable ingredients.

A diet of microbes for prawns

Traditionally, farmed prawns (or shrimp, depending on where youre from) have been fed pellets that contain some fish
meal and fish oil. These are included mainly to help the animals grow large, and to do so quickly. Scientists at
Australias Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), however, have spent the past 10
years developing a feed additive that does away with those fishy ingredients. The result, known as Novacq, was
officially announced at the end of last month.
Novacq contains marine microorganisms that have been bred in captivity, and which have been shown to play a
crucial role in prawns growth process. In a large-scale field test, the product was mixed with an existing commercial
feed (taking the place of the usual fish meal and oil), then used in ponds at an Australian prawn farm. According to
CSIRO, the Novacq-consuming black tiger prawns grew an average of 30 percent faster than their regular-food-eating
counterparts, plus they were healthier.

CSIRO plans to conduct more tests of the additive, and has licensed the technology to Australias Ridley AgriProducts.
It is hoped that Novacq will be commercially available within about a year.

Turning meat-eating fish into vegetarians

Fish meal and oil are also used in the pellets eaten by carnivorous fish, such as sea bream and striped bass.
Scientists at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, however, have developed an alternative
feed that consists entirely of plant-based ingredients.
Instead of fish meal, the experimental new feed includes corn, wheat, and soy. Taking the place of fish oil is a
combination of lipids (fatty acids) from algae, amino acid supplements, and soybean or canola oil.

Dr. Allen Place (left) and Dr. Aaron Watson, developers of the vegetarian fish feed (Photo: University of Maryland Center for Environmental
Science/Cheryl Nemazie)

Not only have test fish apparently thrived on the feed, but their flesh reportedly has PCB and mercury levels that are
100-fold lower than those found in fish consuming regular pellets containing wild-caught fish. According to co-creator
of the feed Dr. Allen Place, this would allow consumers to eat striped bass twice a week, as opposed to the once
every two weeks thats currently recommended.
Sources: CSIRO, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science's Institute for Marine and Environmental
Technology

Could Insects be Alternative to Fish Meal in Aquaculture?

by Content Provider | Aug 7, 2015 | Blog | 2 comments

Aquaculture uses proteins such as fish meal, meat, and soy protein to feed fish. However, insect based meal could also play a
major role in feeding fish in aquaculture, and could become a sustainable alternative to fish meals.

Finding sustainable feed for aquaculture production could be challenging for fish farmers, considering the cost and environmental
issues. Fish farmers often use fish meal, or pelleted feed that are made from other fish as a source of protein. Using wild caught fish to
feed farmed fish has always been a controversial issue.

Insects as an Alternative to Fish Meal in Aquaculture

A major portion of the seafood in the market comes from aquaculture, and fish meal is an essential part of many types of aquaculture feed
around the world. This is because fish meal is high in protein which ensures the optimum growth, taste and health of the fish.
In many cases, plant based protein could be a viable substitute for fish meal. Insects could also become a key player in the fish feed
market, which could also be a sustainable alternative to fish meal. In many countries around the world, insects are already being cultured
for commercial use in fish farms.

Insects to feed the world

Imagine millions of maggots squirming over a blackened piece of fruit or on a bloody lump of rotten flesh. You might find this disgusting, but
it could be just a step away in the food chain from reaching your dinner table. Tests are being done in countries like South Africa, the US,
France, Canada and the Netherlands where they are gearing up for large-scale farming of insects to feed chicken, pigs and farmed fish.
Many of them are convinced that bugs can provide a sustainable alternative to more conventional but increasingly expensive
cereals, fish meal and soybeans. BBC Future

Insect farming is taking shape

As the demand for feed and animal based food rises, producers are already using bugs as a source of protein in their feed. A report
from MIT Technology Review says that insects are already being used directly as a source of protein in food in the market. They also say
your next meal could directly or indirectly be made with insect, because when you pick up a bag of tortilla chips or a power bar from the
supermarket, it might be made from insects.
So insects are going to be the next revolutionary solution for the food and feed crisis of the world. As the population rises, animal feed from
insect farms could be a cheap and sustainable alternative to conventional feed.
Entrepreneurs, researchers, and even the United Nations are looking for an animal feed less expensive than the soybeans and
fish meal typically used today. Insects like mealworms and fly larvae, a natural food for wild birds and fish, could be a nearperfect replacement. MIT Technology Review

Bug based feed will improve livestock production

The 2013 report by Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N. (FAO) on
edible insects suggests that a bug-based diet will produce bigger and stronger livestock. The report pointed to several studies on fish and
Japanese quail. In this experiment ground crickets replaced up to 50 percent of the fish meal in their feed. The fish growing on insect meals
outperformed their counterpart fish growing on traditional commercial fish meal. The cricket fed fish showed higher growth rate and also
laid more eggs.

Conclusion:
Studies have found that certain insect based fish feed could be a sustainable and commercially viable substitute to fish meal. It could be a
cheaper and better alternative in many ways. However the insect farms are still in its early stages. Reaching industrial-scale production is
the next step, and new technology will need to play a role.
Want to learn more about aquaculture system? Why not start your own Home Based Fish Farming Business? We can help.
Contact our office at 303-495-3705 or Click Here to book a meeting with us.
We would love to hear from you, your thoughts and feedback on this article would greatly inspire us. Please leave a comment
below or on our Facebook page .
Source: WorldWide Aquaculture

Related articles and resources:

Tips on Feeding Your Fish Reduce Aquaculture Feed Costs | WorldWide Aquaculture

The Best Way to Feed Your Aquarium & Farmed Fish | WorldWide Aquaculture

Start Your Own Home Based Fish Farming Business for Profit | WorldWide Aquaculture

Feeds for Aquaculture :: Office of Aquaculture

Animal Frontiers Article | American Society of Animal Science

Fish nutritionist
Marty Riche
feeds juvenile
Florida
pompano during
studies to
determine
appropriate
feeds and
feedingmanagement
practiceas for
profitable inland
production of
saltwater fish.
(D1228-11)

Insect meal, a new player in aquaculture feed | Undercurrent News

Aquaculture: Fishmeal Alternative | Fields of Thought
Fishmeal: The good, the bad and the ugly SeafoodSource.com
Insects May Someday Be Your Next Meals Last Meal | MIT Technology Review
BBC Future How insects could feed the food industry of tomorrow

Finding Alternative Fish Feeds for Aquaculture

Imagine you are invited to a buffet lunch and the only thing on the menu is a food you dont enjoy. How much do you think
you will eat? While it may qualify as a wonderful, nutritious food, you wont necessarily partake.
Now, imagine you are a fish in a tank full of feed you wont touch.

Reducing reliance on captured marine fish proteins and oils for fish feeds is an important goal in aquaculture. But fish are picky about their
feed, and fish nutritionists need to find nutritious feeds, low in fishmeals and oils, that fish will eat.
A Growing Demand
Feed provides the nutrients required for building and sustaining life. If fish dont eat well, they wont grow and thrive. Commercial fish farms
rely on feeds that now include fishmeal as a major source of protein and oil. The protein- and lipid-rich feed pellets used for farmed fish
have traditionally been made in part from small, bony fish species, like menhaden, herring, and capelin.
Pet food and diets for swine and poultry have also traditionally used fishmeal and oil. And as more people around the globe turn to fish as a
source of lean protein, they drive the growth of aquaculture worldwide; aquaculture now supplies half of the seafood produced for human
consumption.
Thus, the demand for proteins and lipids for fish diets has increased while the supply of marine fishmeal has not increased, causing more
pressure and price increases on the limited supply of fishmeal. Replacements for fishmeal and fish oil are needed to support sustainable
aquaculture.
Agricultural Research Service (ARS) aquaculture scientists are working to develop fish feeds that dont include fishmeal. Since November
2007, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have been engaged in the
Alternative Feeds Initiative to accelerate development of other feeds for aquaculture. The initiatives purpose is to identify alternative
dietary ingredients that will reduce the amount of fishmeal and fish oil contained in aquaculture feeds while maintaining
the important human health benefits of farmed seafood.
Developing alternative ingredients that are produced in sufficient quantities to become standard components of diets is a Fish nutritionist
key research priority, requiring understanding of an ingredients nutritional value, its ability to blend with other ingredients, Rick Barrows
examines flax oil
its effect on pellet stability, and, of course, its appeal to fish.
that will be
Different Fish, Different Food
infused into
pellets for
Different species of fish not only have different nutritional requirements, but they also seem to have different palate
rainbow trout
requirements. In Hagerman, Idaho, ARS fish physiologist Rick Barrows is tasked with formulating and manufacturing
feed.
feeds for several fish species, including trout, salmon, white seabass, and yellowtail. Barrows and his ARS collaborators (D1429-3)
have developed many different formulations for these fish depending on their stage of development, from fry (baby fish) to
adults. Barrows produces the feed himself using a piece of food-manufacturing equipment called a cooking extruder.
My colleagues and I are open to looking at a variety of ingredients for fishmeal replacement, including plants, animal processing products,
and even single-cell organisms like yeast and bacteria, says Barrows. We conduct not only growth studies but also palatability studies to
ensure fish will eat the nutritious feed.
Feeding Salmon
William Wolters, research leader and director of the ARS National Cold Water Marine Aquaculture Center in Franklin, Maine, is
collaborating with Barrows to develop diets for Atlantic salmon using concentrated plant proteins. Protein levels in most grain and oilseed
sources are low and need to be concentrated to reach the high protein requirements of fish. Current studies are evaluating six experimental
diets, containing combinations of alternative proteins, and a fishmeal control diet being fed to fish in 15 tanks with automatic feeders.

Fishmeal-free
diet for
California
yellowtail
containing 30
percent
spirulina.
(D1942-1)

While the studies are still ongoing, it certainly seems that the modern alternative diets work better than previous alternative
diets, says Wolters. When top-performing low-fishmeal feeds in these studies are identified, they will be further evaluated
in two separate studies.
Salmon spend 1 years in the hatchery and then 1 to 2 years growing to adult size. According to the Maine
Aquaculture Association (MAA), there are about 1,300 acres of marine waters leased in the state for aquaculture purposes
600 acres for finfish. Salmon is a large commodity in Maine aquacultureannually producing between 25 and 35 million
pounds.

The issue of substitutes for fishmeal and oil as feed ingredients is a very important one that cuts across many finfish
species, says MAA executive director Sebastian Belle. The work that Dr. Wolters is doing on salmon feeds, in cooperation
with Dr. Barrows, is groundbreaking and, if successful, will be very helpful to domestic growers in meeting the challenge of
limited fishmeal and oil supplies. Worldwide, these supplies are limited, and as aquaculture increases we must find
alternative feed ingredients that satisfy the fishes nutritional needs while resulting in a product with the appropriate
nutritional qualities for humans.
Providing Nutrients for a Hungry Species

In Florida, there is interest in rearing saltwater Florida pompano in low-salinity water in order to diversify production to inland fish farms,
bringing pompano fish stocks closer to consumers. Pompano, an active, fast-growing fish, is one of Floridas highest valued fish. ARS fish
biologist Marty Riche, at the Harry K. Dupree Stuttgart National Aquaculture Research Centers facility in Fort Pierce, Florida, is developing
the alternative feeds for this species.
Riche uses various ingredients, like corn gluten meal, soy proteins, and poultry-processing coproducts, to develop feeds containing less
fishmeal.
Pompano are voracious eatersespecially larvae and juveniles, says Riche, so much so that they will eat beyond being satisfied. This
eating behavior is reflected in larval and juvenile growth.
Barrows, Riche, and other ARS researchers are developing a nutrient-availability database of different ingredients that have potential to
replace fishmeal. Nutrient availability describes how much of the ingredient is available to the animal for sustenance. There are currently
17 ingredients in the database for pompano, says Riche.
While fishmeal can largely be replaced without harming fish health, fish oils are not so easily replaced. Plant oils are now being identified
that could possibly replace or substantially reduce the use of fish oils in feed products, says Riche.
Serving Up Algae
Algae may have the potential to replace fishmeal completely in some fish feed and perhaps replace some of the fish oils. Under a
cooperative research agreement with Kent Bioenergy of San Diego, California, Barrows is investigating the usein fish feedof protein
coproducts that result from biodiesel production from algae.
Bioenergy production from algae is a growing industry: A few years ago there were 12 companies producing ethanol this way; last year
there were 100, and 350 are projected to be in existence by the end of 2010.
Barrows and corporate collaborator Carbon Capture Corporation in Imperial Valley, California, are using algae to create fishmeal-free diets
for California yellowtail and white seabass. We are finding that algal feeds could be competitively priced, contain fewer contaminants,
result in fewer nutrients in fish effluent, and be sustainable, says Barrows.
Sometimes palatability is a hurdle when feeding a new type of feed to fish. But, says Barrows, it appears that dried algae as fish feed
actually increases fish appetite. When we formulate a new feed, we test trout first in our palatability studies, since they are aggressive
eaters. If trout eat the feed, we then test it on other species.
This work is pivotal to the feed-manufacturing business. According to Barrows, ARS is exploring ingredients and combinations and
developing gateway formulas to prove the concept of fishmeal-free feeds. This eliminates the risk commercial feed developers would
usually carry. Now feed companies can use ARS fishmeal-free feed as a basis for their own fish-feed formulas.BySharon
Durham, Agricultural Research Service Information Staff.
This research is part of Aquaculture, an ARS national program (#106) described atwww.nps.ars.usda.gov.
Rick Barrows is with the USDA-ARS Small Grains and Potato Germplasm Research Unit, Hagerman Fish Culture Experiment Station, 3059
National Fish Hatchery Rd., Hagerman, ID 83332; (208) 837-9096 ext. 1109.
William Wolters is with the USDA-ARS National Cold Water Marine Aquaculture Center, 25 Salmon Farm Rd., Franklin, ME 04634; (207)
422-2713.
Marty Riche is with the USDA-ARS Harry K. Dupree Stuttgart National Aquaculture Research Center, 5600 Hwy. U.S. 1 North, Fort Pierce,
FL 34946; (772) 465-2400, ext. 638.
"Finding Alternative Fish Feeds for Aquaculture" was published in the October 2010 issue of Agricultural Research magazine

Review
Nature 405, 1017-1024 (29 June 2000) | doi:10.1038/35016500

Effect of aquaculture on world fish supplies

Rosamond L. Naylor1, Rebecca J. Goldburg2, Jurgenne H. Primavera3, Nils Kautsky4,5, Malcolm C. M. Beveridge6, Jason Clay7, Carl
Folke4,5, Jane Lubchenco8, Harold Mooney1 & Max Troell4,5
Topof page

Abstract
Global production of farmed fish and shellfish has more than doubled in the past 15 years. Many people believe that
such growth relieves pressure on ocean fisheries, but the opposite is true for some types of aquaculture. Farming
carnivorous species requires large inputs of wild fish for feed. Some aquaculture systems also reduce wild fish
supplies through habitat modification, wild seedstock collection and other ecological impacts. On balance, global
aquaculture production still adds to world fish supplies; however, if the growing aquaculture industry is to sustain
its contribution to world fish supplies, it must reduce wild fish inputs in feed and adopt more ecologically sound
management practices.
The worldwide decline of ocean fisheries stocks has provided impetus for rapid growth in fish and shellfish farming, or
aquaculture. Between 1987 and 1997, global production of farmed fish and shellfish (collectively called 'fish') more than doubled
in weight and value, as did its contribution to world fish supplies 1. Fish produced from farming activities currently accounts for
over one-quarter of all fish directly consumed by humans. As the human population continues to expand beyond 6 billion, its
reliance on farmed fish production as an important source of protein will also increase.
Growth in aquaculture production is a mixed blessing, however, for the sustainability of ocean fisheries. For some types of
aquaculture activity, including shrimp and salmon farming, potential damage to ocean and coastal resources through habitat
destruction, waste disposal, exotic species and pathogen invasions, and large fish meal and fish oil requirements may further
deplete wild fisheries stocks2. For other aquaculture species, such as carp and molluscs, which are herbivorous or filter feeders,
the net contribution to global fish supplies and food security is great 3. The diversity of production systems leads to an underlying
paradox: aquaculture is a possible solution, but also a contributing factor, to the collapse of fisheries stocks worldwide.
Here we examine marine and freshwater fish farming activities around the world and ask: does aquaculture enhanceor
diminishthe available fish supply? This is an important scientific and policy issue, and one that also addresses the common
perception that aquaculture is an 'add on' to current ocean fish productivity. Many people believe that aquaculture production will
compensate for the shortfall in ocean harvests as ocean fisheries deteriorate, or that fish farming will restore wild populations by
relieving pressure on capture fisheries. We conclude that the compensation argument is correct for some aquaculture practices
but unfounded for others. We do not find evidence that supports the restoration argument.
Our analysis focuses on aquaculture trends in the past 1015 yearsa period of heightened ecological and economic integration
between capture fisheries and aquaculture activities. We limit our discussion to finfish, bivalves and crustaceans, which
collectively make up three-quarters of global aquaculture production by weight, and exclude seaweed production 1. Ocean
fisheries and aquaculture now share or compete for many coastal ecosystem services, including the provision of habitat and
nursery areas, feed and seed (larvae) supplies, and assimilation of waste products. Aquaculture and ocean fisheries are further
linked economically through competition in world markets for the sale of their products, and biologically through exotic species
invasions and pathogen transmission. Each of these connections is examined below.
As aquaculture production continues to increase and intensify, both its reliance and its impact on ocean fisheries are likely to
expand even further. The balance between farmed and wild-caught fish, as well as the total supply of fish available for human
consumption, will depend on future aquaculture practices. In the final section, we explore technological, management and policy
options for sustaining aquaculture production. We argue that farming can contribute to global (net) fish supplies only if current
trends in fish meal and fish oil use for aquaculture are reversed and policies are enforced to protect coastal areas from
environmental degradation.
Topof page

Aquaculture is a diverse activity

More than 220 species of finfish and shellfish are farmed; the range includes giant clams, which obtain most of their nutrients
from symbiotic algae; mussels, which filter plankton; carps, which are mainly herbivorous; and salmon, which are carnivorous 1.
Two key criteria, ownership of stock and deliberate intervention in the production cycle (husbandry), distinguish aquaculture
from capture fisheries. Fish farming typically involves the enclosure of fish in a secure system under conditions in which they can
thrive. Interventions in fish life cycles range from exclusion of predators and control of competitors (extensive aquaculture) to
enhancement of food supply (semi-intensive) to the provision of all nutritional requirements (intensive). Intensification implies
increasing the density of individuals, which requires greater use and management of inputs, greater generation of waste
products and increased potential for the spread of pathogens.
Production practices and their impacts on marine ecosystems vary widely. Molluscs are generally farmed along coastlines where
wild or hatchery-reared seed are grown on the seabed bottom or in suspended nets, ropes or other structures. The animals rely
entirely on ambient supplies of plankton and organic particles for food. Several systemsponds, tanks or cagesare used in
farming finfish. Most marine and diadromous finfish are reared in floating net cages nearshore, and all their nutrition is supplied
by formulated feeds. Carp and other freshwater finfish are usually grown in ponds, often integrated within agricultural
ecosystems. Shrimp dominate crustacean farming and are grown in coastal ponds. Farming of both shrimp and freshwater finfish
varies in its intensity and dependence on formulated feeds.

Within aquaculture's wide diversity of species and production practices, two distinct subsectors have emerged during the past
decade4. The first group includes commercial farms that primarily use intensive and semi-intensive methods to produce mediumto high-valued commodities for regional or global markets. The other group encompasses family and cooperative farms that rely
on extensive and semi-intensive practices to produce low-value species for household subsistence or local markets. Some
divisions between these sectors are becoming blurred. In China and other parts of Asia, for example, many small-scale farming
operations are intensifying as land and water resources become increasingly scarce and valuable 5.
Harvested weight and value for some of the most widely consumed aquaculture species are shown in Table 1. Asia accounts for
roughly 90% of global aquaculture production, and China alone contributes more than two-thirds of the total 1. Europe, North
America and Japan collectively produce just over one-tenth of global aquaculture output but consume the bulk of farmed seafood
that is traded internationally.
Table 1: Global weight and value for nine of the most widely consumed aquaculture species

Full table

The production of carp has increased markedly in Asia (mainly China) for local or regional consumption by relatively low-income
households. In contrast, increased volumes of salmon, shrimp and other high-value species have been marketed mainly in
industrialized countries. Farmed output and markets for other lower-value species, such as tilapia and milkfish, have increased in
both developing and industrialized countries. Most farmed molluscs are still consumed locally and regionally in China and in other
developing countries. However, production for global markets of certain species, including the Pacific cupped oyster, blue mussel,
New Zealand mussel and Yesso scallop, has increased in several developed countries 1.
Market dynamics affecting both the supply and demand for aquaculture products differ sharply among types of fish. Expanding
aquaculture production can alleviate pressure on wild fisheries stocks; for example, increasing the production of farmed fish that
compete directly with wild fish (such as shrimp, salmon and molluscs) reduces prices and creates conditions that can lower
investments in fishing fleets and fishing effort over time. Other farmed fish, such as tilapia, milkfish and channel catfish, provide
alternatives to ocean fish such as cod, hake, haddock and pollock. Because niche markets have started to develop for several
types of wild-caught fish, however, capture rates have remained high even as the production of viable substitutes has increased 4.
The ability of the aquaculture sector to replace or provide market alternatives for ocean catches depends significantly on the
economics and policies of fisheries. High fixed costs of fishing fleets, inelastic supplies of labour in the fishing industry, and
continued subsidies to the fisheries sector that approach 2025% of gross revenue globally 6 may mean that increased
aquaculture production will not result in lower catches of wild fish in the short term. In the case of salmon, increased farm
production has not resulted in reduced capture levels despite 3050% declines in international prices for four of the five main
species of wild salmon (chinook, coho, pink and chum) during the 1990s. Salmon catches worldwide actually rose by 27%
between 1988 and 1997 (ref.7). Similarly, despite rapid growth in alternative farmed fish like tilapia, wild capture of hake and
haddock remained relatively stable during the past decade 8. These examples show little obvious effect of aquaculture production
on capture rates of wild fish.
Topof page

Fishing down and farming up the food web

Capture fisheries landings as a whole have plateaued at around 8595 Mt (million metric tonnes, or megatonnes) per year 8.
Moreover, there has been a gradual shift in wild fish capture from large and valuable carnivorous species to smaller, less valuable
species that feed at lower trophic levels9. Although catch rates for some species have not declined during the 1990s, most ocean
fisheries stocks are now recognized as over or fully fished10.
Aquaculture production, meanwhile, has surged, particularly during the past 1015 years. Farmed fish supplies totalled 29 Mt in
1997, compared with 10 Mt a decade ago1. Such growth helps to explain current patterns in ocean fish capture; between 1986
and 1997, 4 of the top 5, and 8 of the top 20 capture species were used in feed production for the aquaculture and livestock
industries8. These speciesanchoveta, Chilean jack mackerel, Atlantic herring, chub mackerel, Japanese anchovy, round
sardinella, Atlantic mackerel and European anchovyare all small pelagic fishes.

Many intensive and semi-intensive aquaculture systems use 25 times more fish protein, in the form of fish meal, to feed the
farmed species than is supplied by the farmed product 11. In contrast, extensive and traditional systems use little or no fish meal,
although nutrient-rich materials are often added to the water to stimulate growth of algae and other organisms on which the fish
feed. Dietary requirements vary widely among fish species, depending on the aquaculture system, fish meal source and other
dietary components (Table 2).
Table 2: Wild fish inputs used in feed for the ten types of fish and shell fish most commonly farmed in 1997 *

Full table

About 80% of carp and 65% of tilapia worldwide are farmed without the use of modern compound feedsfeeds formulated from
multiple ingredients. In China, farmed production of carp and other omnivorous species is intensifying, however, and new
commercial feed mills are being developed to serve these industries 5, 12. More modern, intensive systems for herbivorous and
omnivorous finfish rely heavily on added feeds, because fish are stocked at high densities that cannot be supported by natural
food sources. Such systems, for example, US catfish farms, generally use compound feeds that contain high percentages of
protein supplements from soybean meal, cottonseed meal and peanut meal13. Compound feeds for herbivorous and omnivorous
finfish can also contain low to moderate levels of protein from fish and terrestrial animals.
In contrast, fish meal and fish oil are dominant ingredients in compound feeds for carnivorous finfish and marine shrimp. These
two ingredients supply essential amino acids (such as lysine and methionine) that are deficient in plant proteins and fatty acids
(eicosapentanoic acid (EPA) and docosahexanoic acid (DHA)) not found in vegetable oils 14. They also provide energy, which is
important because fish tend to convert carbohydrates to energy inefficiently 14.
Herbivorous, omnivorous and carnivorous finfish all require about the same quantity of dietary protein per unit weight. But
herbivorous and omnivorous freshwater finfish, such as carp, utilize plant-based proteins and oils better than carnivorous finfish,
and they require minimal quantities of fish meal to supply essential amino acids 14. Nevertheless, compound feeds for omnivorous
fish, such as tilapia, often contain about 15% fish meal, exceeding required levels 11. Manufacturers often over-formulate feeds, in
part because dietary information for particular species is insufficient.
Because of the high levels of fish meal and fish oil in aquaculture feeds, many species require more fish biomass as inputs than
the farmed fish produced. For the ten types of fish most commonly farmed, an average of 1.9 kg of wild fish is required for every
kilogram of fish raised on compound feeds (Table 2). Only three of the ten types of fishcatfish, milkfish and carprequire less
fish as inputs than is ultimately harvested. (Marine molluscs and many filter-feeding carp are not fed compound feeds at all.) In
contrast, carnivorous species require 2.55 times as much fish biomass as feed as is produced.
Although aquaculture has the fastest growing demand for fish meal and fish oil, fish are not the only animals fed diets containing
fish meal. The poultry and swine industries are the world's largest consumers of fish meal 15. The proportion of fish meal in
aquaculture feeds is, however, much higher than in poultry and livestock feeds, which on average contain only 23% fish meal
as a protein supplement. The production of a kilogram of pork or poultry typically uses large amounts of plant proteins, but only
a few hundred grams of fish, whereas production of a kilogram of carnivorous fish can use up to 5 kg of wild fish16.
The relative feed efficiency of fish farming is a complex subject that has not yet been fully analysed. Some aquaculture
proponents argue that even if farmed fish production requires more wild fish biomass than is ultimately harvested, it is still more
efficient than the production of commercially valuable carnivorous species in the wild 17. Assuming a canonical value of a 10%
energy flow between trophic levels18, producing 1 unit of predatory fish requires 10 units of food (largely small pelagic fish)
compared with 25 units to produce a unit of farmed fish. This comparison is subject to debate, because energy flows between
marine fish at different trophic levels are not well documented. Nevertheless, such efficiency comparisons bolster the logic for
using some small pelagic fish in fish feeds.
Regardless of the exact efficiency ratio used, however, the growing aquaculture industry cannot continue to rely on finite stocks
of wild-caught fish, a number of which are already classified as fully exploited, overexploited or depleted 8, 10. Taking efficiency
arguments to their logical conclusionthat ever increasing amounts of small pelagic fish should be caught for use in aquaculture
feeds to expand the total supply of commercially valuable fishwould clearly be disastrous for marine ecosystems. Such an
approach would also severely constrain the long-term growth of the aquaculture industry itself.

Topof page

Appropriation of net aquatic primary production

Data in the preceding section indicate that feed requirements for some types of aquaculture systems place a strain on wild fish
stocks. But what is the aggregate impact of fish farming on ocean fisheries and marine resources? Tracing the flow of net aquatic
primary production that moves through aquaculture (Fig. 1) provides a framework for assessing whether farmed fish production
adds to global fish supplies on a net basis.
Figure 1: Flow chart of capture and farmed fisheries products from aquatic primary production.

Numbers refer to 1997 data and are in units of megatons (million metric tonnes) of fish. Thicker lines refer to direct flows of aquatic primary
production through capture fisheries and aquaculture to humans. Thin lines refer to indirect and minor flows. Red lines indicate negative
feedbacks on production base.

High resolution image and legend (73K)

An estimated 8% of total aquatic primary production (137,000 Mt dry weight) is needed to sustain capture fisheries, seaweed
collection and aquaculture; this proportion ranges from 2% in the open ocean to 2435% in freshwater, shelf and upwelling
systems19. Global capture fisheries (plus aquatic plants) remove 123 Mt from the sea and lakes 20, of which 27 Mt is directly
discarded as bycatch21.
Capture fisheries landings (excluding discarded bycatch) amount to 96 Mt, of which 65 Mt of whole fish and 1 Mt of seaweeds are
consumed by humans. The remaining 30 Mt of fish catch plus another 2 Mt of processing scraps from aquaculture and fisheries
are used for fish meal production22. The fish meal industry has proposed that fishing vessels be encouraged to retain bycatch,
now discarded, for sale to producers of fish meal and fish oil 15.Sale of bycatch could prove undesirable, however, if it undermines
efforts to reduce bycatch rates or decreases in situ recycling of bycatch.
One-third of the fish used to make fish meal inputs, 10 Mt, is converted to aquaculture feeds20, 22. The remaining two-thirds of
the fish, 22 Mt, is used to make fish meal for chicken, pig and other animal feeds, although the share of aquaculture continues
to increase. The proportion of fish meal supplies used for farming fish rose from 10% in 1988 to 17% in 1994 and 33% in 1997
(refs22, 23,24).
Other feed inputs to aquaculture are derived from terrestrial agriculture or, in the case of filter-feeding molluscs, from planktonic
production. Pelagic and benthic microalgae are also consumed directly by herbivorous and omnivorous carp and tilapias and are
thus important in extensive and semi-intensive freshwater ponds common in the tropics. Mollusc farming and other extensive
aquaculture do not use compound feeds and do not therefore appropriate fisheries production directly.
Total aquaculture production of finfish, crustaceans and molluscs amounts to 29 Mt (plus 8 Mt of farmed seaweeds). However,
the net volume of fish flowing to human consumption through aquaculture is at maximum 19 Mt after ocean fisheries capture for
fish feeds is subtracted. The appropriation of aquatic productivity for fish feeds reduces supplies of wild fish that could potentially
be consumed directly. In southeast Asia, for example, small pelagic fishes, such as mackerel, anchovy and sardines, provide an
important protein source for people25, 26. Although some fish used for fishmeal and fish oil, such as menhaden, are distasteful to
humans, the demand for small pelagic fish for direct human consumption is likely to increase with population growth in the
developing world.
Topof page

Ecological links between aquaculture and wild fish stocks

The use of wild fish to feed farmed fish places direct pressure on fisheries resources. But aquaculture can also diminish wild
fisheries indirectly by habitat modification, collection of wild seedstock, food web interactions, introduction of exotic species and

pathogens that harm wild fish populations, and nutrient pollution (Fig. 2). The magnitude of such effects varies considerably
among aquaculture systems, but it can be great, as the following examples illustrate.
Figure 2: Ecological links between intensive fish and shrimp aquaculture and capture fisheries.

Thick blue lines refer to main flows from aquatic production base through fisheries and aquaculture to human consumption of seafood.
Numbers refer to 1997 data and are in units of megatons (million metric tonnes) of fish, shellfish and seaweeds. Thin blue lines refer to
other inputs needed for production. Hatched red lines indicate negative feedbacks.

High resolution image and legend (76K)

Habitat modification.
Hundreds of thousands of hectares of mangroves and coastal wetlands have been transformed into milkfish and shrimp ponds.
This transformation results in loss of essential ecosystem services generated by mangroves, including the provision of nursery
habitat, coastal protection, flood control, sediment trapping and water treatment. Mangrove forests serve as nurseries that
provide food and shelter to many juvenile finfish and shellfish caught as adults in coastal and offshore fisheries 27, 28, 29, 30; in
southeast Asia, mangrove-dependent species account for roughly one-third of yearly wild fish landings excluding trash fish 31. A
positive relationship between finfish and shrimp landings and mangrove area has been documented in Indonesia, Malaysia and
the Philippines32, 33, 34. Mangroves are also linked closely to habitat conditions of coral reefs and seagrass beds 35, 36. Loss of
mangrove forests results in increased sediment transport onto downstream coral reefs. Fisheries capture from reefs contributes
about 10% of human fish consumption globally and much more in developing countries 37.
The loss in wild fisheries stocks due to habitat conversion associated with shrimp farming is large. We estimate that a total of
400 g of fish and shrimp are lost from capture fisheries per kilogram of shrimp farmed in Thai shrimp ponds developed in
mangroves (Box 1). If other fish and shellfish species caught in waterways adjoining mangrove areas are considered, the total
reduction increases to 447 g of wild fish biomass per kilogram of shrimp raised. If the full range of ecological effects associated
with mangrove conversion is accounted for, including reduced mollusc productivity in mangroves and losses to seagrass beds and
coral reefs, the net yield from these shrimp farms is loweven without considering the use of fish meal in aquaculture feeds.
Moreover, building aquaculture ponds in mangrove areas transforms fisheries from a common property resource available to
multiple users to a privatized farm resource.
Use of wild seed to stock aquaculture ponds.
Many aquaculture operations, especially extensive ponds, stock wild-caught rather than hatchery-reared finfish or shellfish postlarvae. Examples include farming of milkfish in the Philippines and Indonesia, tuna in South Australia, shrimp in south Asia and
parts of Latin America and eels in Europe and Japan. In these systems, aquaculture is not a true alternative to wild harvests, but
rather a means to raise wild fish to marketable size in captivity by lowering the high mortality rates characteristic of wild
populations.
If bycatch rates are high, collecting seedstock for aquaculture operations can have very large consequences for wild fisheries. For
example, milkfish constitute only 15% of total finfish fry collected inshore by seine net 38the remaining 85% are discarded and
left to die on the beach. The 1.7 billion wild fry stocked annually in Philippine milkfish ponds 39 thus result in a loss of about 10
billion fry of other finfish species. In India and Bangladesh, up to 160 fish and shrimp fry are discarded for every fry of the giant
tiger shrimp, Penaeus monodon, collected to stock shrimp ponds40, 41. The magnitude of annual fry bycatch is estimated at 62
million to 2.6 billion in three collecting centres in West Bengal, India 40.
Food web interactions.
Many small pelagic fisheries exploited for feed are over-fished and are strained by climatic variability associated with El Nio
Southern Oscillation events8, 10. The impact of pelagic fisheries depletion is thought to reduce available food supplies for marine
predators, including valuable species consumed by humans 42, 43, 44. In the North Sea, for example, over-exploitation of many
capelin, sandeel and Norway pout stocks, mainly for reduction to fishmeal, has been implicated in the declines of certain stocks

of other wild fish such as cod9, 45, 46, and changes in the distribution, populations sizes and reproductive success of various seal
and seabird colonies47, 48, 49. Similarly, a strong interaction between anchoveta and sea bird and mammal populations has been
well documented for the Peruvian upwelling system50.
Introduction of non-indigenous organisms.
In some cases, aquaculture affects stocks of wild and farmed fish through biological pollution. Atlantic salmonthe dominant
salmon species farmedfrequently escape from net pens. As much as 40% of Atlantic salmon caught by fishermen in areas of
the North Atlantic Ocean are of farmed origin51. In the north Pacific Ocean, over 255,000 Atlantic salmon have reportedly
escaped since the early 1980s and are caught by fishing vessels from Washington to Alaska 52. Increasing evidence suggests that
farm escapees may hybridize with and alter the genetic makeup of wild populations of Atlantic salmon which are genetically
adapted to their natal spawning grounds53. Such genetic alterations could exacerbate the decline in many locally endangered
populations of wild Atlantic salmon53, 54, 55.
Movement of stocks for aquaculture purposes can also increase the risk of spreading pathogens. The relationships between
farmed and wild fish and disease transfer are complex and often difficult to disentangle. In Europe, however, serious epidemics
of furunculosis and Gyrodactylus salaris in stocks of Atlantic salmon have been linked to movements of fish for aquaculture and
re-stocking56.
Since the early 1990s, Whitespot and Yellowhead viruses have caused catastrophic, multimillion-dollar crop losses in shrimp
farms across Asia. Both pathogens have recently appeared in farmed and wild shrimp populations in the United States 57, 58 and
the Whitespot virus has been reported in several countries in Central and South America (T. Flegel, personal communication; D.
V. Lightner, personal communication). The Whitespot virus has caused high mortalities in Texas shrimp farms 59 and may cause
mortality of wild crustaceans (Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture Virus Working Group, personal communication). This virus is
thought to have been introduced into a Texas shrimp farm by release into nearby coastal waters of untreated wastes from plants
processing imported Asian tiger shrimp60, and by shipping of contaminated white shrimp Litopenaeus vannamei larvae
throughout the Americas (T. Flegel. personal communication).
Effluent discharge.
Untreated wastewater laden with uneaten feed and fish faeces may contribute to nutrient pollution near coastal ponds and
cages61, 62. Pollution problems are most severe in shallow or confined water bodies 63; they also tend to be serious in regions
where intensive aquaculture systems are concentrated. In many such areas, sedimentation of food particles and faecal pellets
under and around fish pens and cages negatively affects the biogeochemistry of benthic communities 64. Moreover, nitrogen
wastes (for example, ammonia and nitrite) that exceed the assimilative capacity of receiving waters lead to deterioration in
water quality that is toxic to fish and shrimp 65. Problems of effluent discharge from aquaculture have been widely discussed, but
management options for altering nitrogen biogeochemistry are based mostly on controlling the intensity of fish production in
monoculture and polyculture systems65. Aquaculturists have a stake in regulating nutrient pollution, because poor water quality
and high stocking densities often promote outbreaks of pathogens and subsequent declines in farm productivity.
Topof page

Towards sustainable aquaculture

The evidence presented above shows that total world aquaculture production currently adds to net global fish supplies, although
many types of aquaculture result in a net loss of fish. Aquaculture's potential contribution to fish supplies is severely diminished
by rapid growth in production of species fed carnivorous diets and by aquaculture practices that lead to coastal habitat
destruction, biological pollution and discharge of untreated effluents. Continued expansion of aquaculture will require healthy
coastal and freshwater ecosystems. Without clear recognition of the industry's dependence on natural ecosystems, it is unlikely
that aquaculture will develop to its full potential or will continue to supplement ocean fisheries. We therefore suggest that the
aquaculture industry prioritizes the following four chief goals: (1) expansion of the farming of low trophic level fish; (2) reduction
of fish meal and fish oil inputs in feed; (3) development of integrated farming systems; and (4) promotion of environmentally
sound aquaculture practices and resource management.
Farming down the food web.
Carps and marine molluscs account for more than three-quarters of current global aquaculture output, and tilapia, milkfish and
catfish contribute another 5% of total production. Fed mainly on herbivorous diets, these species provide most of the 19 Mt gain
in fish supplies from aquaculture shown in Fig. 1. But market forces and government policies in many countries favour rapid
expansion of high-value, carnivorous species, such as salmon and shrimp. Moreover, fish meal and fish oil are already being
added to carp and tilapia feeds for weight gain, especially in Asia where farming systems are intensifying as a result of increased
scarcity and value of land and freshwater resources. Given the huge volume of farmed carp and tilapia in Asia, significant
increases in the fish meal and fish oil content of feed could place even more pressure on pelagic fisheries, resulting in higher
feed prices and harm to marine ecosystems.

New initiatives by governments and international donor agencies are needed to further encourage farming of low trophic level
fish with herbivorous diets66, 67,68, 69. At the same time, more scientific research on the feed requirements of herbivores and
omnivores is required to lessen the impetus to add fish meal and fish oil to their feeds 69. Substituting vegetable oils for fish oils
in freshwater fish diets is technically possiblethe n-3 fatty acids in fish oil are not essential in such diets 70but the fatty acid
profile and thus flavour and marketability may be affected 71, 72. Moreover, some herbivorous fish appear to have more robust
immune systems when fish oil is included in their diet 73.
Reducing fish meal and fish oil inputs in feed.
Feed is the largest production cost for commercial aquaculture (for example, most farming of salmon, other marine finfish and
shrimp), and thus improving feed efficiency in industrial systems is already a priority. Moreover, fish meal prices have risen in
real terms in the past three decades and are likely to increase further with continued growth in demand. Increases in fish meal
and fish oil prices could undermine the profitability of many aquaculture enterprises 16.
Research to develop substitutes for these feed ingredients is now focused on commodities such as oilseeds (especially soybeans),
meat byproducts (such as blood meal and bone meal) and microbial proteins 74, 75. Already the fish meal content of some feeds
has been reduced considerably, for example in the salmon industry, albeit largely by substitution with cheaper fish oil.
Nevertheless, complete replacement of fish meal and fish oil in aquaculture feeds faces severe barriers. Especially for
carnivorous fishes, vegetable proteins have inappropriate amino-acid balance and poor protein digestibility, although inclusion of
meat byproducts can help overcome this problem74, 76.
Substitution of fish oil with cheaper vegetable oil in aquaculture feeds may also affect consumer demand, as evidence suggests
that the ratio of n-6:n-3 fatty acids in human diets is already too high 70, 77. There are, however, alternative sources of n-3 fatty
acids for humans, including molluscs and other types of seafood, and research is underway to increase the n-3 fatty-acid content
in poultry products and in oilseeds used for feed78, 79 (W. F. Kirk, personal communication). A move towards partial substitution of
plant and terrestrial animal proteins for fish proteins in feed is widely accepted within the aquaculture industry, but the urgency
of such efforts remains controversial. Because over-exploitation of pelagic fisheries has negative ecological and social
consequences, developing a strategy to replace fish meal and fish oil in feeds should become both a private and public-sector
priority.
Integrating production systems.
Polyculture systems have been used for centuries. Even today, four of the most widely cultivated fish species are produced
together in the same pond in China: silver carp (a phytoplankton filter feeder), grass carp (a herbivorous macrophyte feeder),
common carp (an omnivorous detritus bottom feeder) and bighead carp (a zooplankton filter feeder) 69, 80. This type of system
efficiently utilizes available food resources and water resources (that is, surface, pelagic and benthic) of the pond ecosystem,
with the consequent effects of reducing costs and increasing productivity.
Integrated systems can also be used for high-valued fish, such as salmon and shrimp, to reduce effluents, diversify products and
increase productivity. Several studies show that seaweed and mussels grow well in wastewater from intensive and semi-intensive
systems, thereby reducing nutrient and particulate loads to the environment 81, 82, 83, 84, 85. For example, in Chile salmon can be
farmed with Gracilaria chilensis (an agarophytic red alga) that removes large amounts of dissolved nitrogen and phosphorous
wastes from salmon cages86. The effluent output from salmon farming is used to produce a seaweed crop, and the added
revenue from the sale of the seaweed more than pays for the extra infrastructure needed for the integrated system. Policies that
require producers to internalize environmental costs of effluent discharge (for example, through mandatory sewage treatment)
can make such systems even more profitable. The marketability of molluscs raised in intensive fish farming areas is currently
constrained, however, by human health considerations that must be addressed to make these types of integrated system
economically viable.
Promoting environmentally sound aquaculture and resource management.
Long-term growth of the aquaculture industry requires both ecologically sound practices and sustainable resource management.
Such practices can be encouraged by regulating the siting of ponds in mangroves and other coastal wetlands, establishing fines
to minimize escapes from aquaculture netpens, enforcing strict biosafety measures for imported stock, and mandating treatment
and recirculation of wastewater. Many aquaculturists have adopted such practices in the absence of strict policy measures,
especially as environmental concerns have surfaced in recent years. In poor countries, however, these policies are often neither
economically and socially feasible, nor politically enforceable. Despite significant improvements in the industry, there remains a
considerable distance between ecologically sound technologies on the shelf and those actually implemented in the field. External
funding agenciessuch as development banksare strategically positioned to influence the development of aquacultural
technology, rehabilitation of ecosystems degraded by aquaculture and protection of coastal ecosystems.
How markets for resources are managed in the future will be a principal determinant of whether aquaculture depletes or
enhances net fish supplies. The absence of regulations or price disincentives on coastal pollution, for example, limits mollusc
farming and slows the adoption of non-polluting technologies by other marine aquaculture systems. Subsidies within the ocean
fisheries sector often prevent farmed fish from substituting for wild fish catch, at least until fisheries are fully depleted.

Perhaps the largest unknown for both the private and public sectors is the future availability of freshwater for aquaculture
production. Increasing scarcity of freshwater resources could severely limit the farming of herbivorous fish such as carps and
tilapia. With a more binding constraint on freshwater systems, there is even more pressure to develop marine aquaculture
systems that are ecologically and socially sound.
Topof page

Mandate for the future

Fulfilling aquaculture's long-term potential to supplement global fish supplies and to provide food for the world's growing
population will require a shared vision between the public and private sectors. Governments can support research and
development on environmentally benign systems, eliminate implicit subsidies for ecologically unsound fish production, and
establish and enforce regulatory measures to protect coastal ecosystems. At the same time, the private sector must alter its
course and recognize that current practices that lead to dependence on pelagic fisheries, habitat destruction, water pollution and
non-native introductions run counter to the industry's long-term health. If public and private interests act jointly to reduce
external costs generated by farming systems, present trends may be reversed and the net contribution of aquaculture to global
fish supplies can become increasingly positive. Without this shared vision, an expanded aquaculture industry poses a threat, not
only to ocean fisheries, but also to itself.
Topof page

References
1.

Food and Agricultural Organization Aquaculture Production Statistics 19881997 (Food and Agricultural Organization,
Rome, 1999).

2.

Naylor, R. et al. Nature's subsidies to shrimp and salmon farming.Science 282, 883884
( 1998). | Article | ISI | ChemPort |

3.

Williams, M. in Sustainable Aquaculture (ed. Bardach, J. E.) 15 51 (Wiley, 1997).

4.

Muir, J. F. & Young, J. A. Aquaculture and marine fisheries: will capture fisheries remain competitive? J. Northw. Atl.
Fish. Sci. 23, 157174 ( 1998).

5.

Cremer, M. , Baoxin, Z. , Schmittou, H. & Jian, Z. in International Aquafeed Directory and Buyers' Guide 1999 1925
(Turret RAI, Middlesex, UK, 1999).

6.

Milazzo, M. in World Bank Technical Paper no. 406 (The World Bank, Washington DC, 1998).

7.

Johnson, H. M. Annual Report on the United States' Seafood Industry 6th edn (H. M. Johnson & Associates, Bellevue,
WA, 1998).

8.

Food and Agricultural Organization The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 1998 (Food and Agricultural
Organization, Rome, 1999).

9.

Pauly, D. , Christensen, V. , Dalsgaard, J. , Froese, R. & Torres, F. Jr Fishing down marine webs. Science 279, 860 863
(1998). | Article | PubMed | ISI | ChemPort |

10. National Research Council Sustaining Marine Fisheries (National Academy Press, Washington DC, 1999).
11. Tacon, A. G. J. Feeding tomorrow's fish. World Aquaculture 27, 2032 (1996).
12. Crook, F. W. , Hsu, H. & Lopez, M. in Agricultural Outlook 1316 (USDA Economic Research Service, Washington DC,
1999).
13. Robinson, E. Channel catfish. Int. Aquafeed 1, 15 23 (1998).
14. De Silva, S. S. & Anderson, T. A. Fish Nutrition in Aquaculture (Chapman and Hall, London, 1994).
15. Pike, I. H. in International Aquafeed Directory (ed. Fraser, S.) 39 49 (Turret, Middlesex, UK, 1998).
16. Tacon, A. C. G. in International Aquafeed Directory (ed. Fraser, S.) 5 37 (Turret, Middlesex, UK, 1998).
17. Forster, J. Aquaculture chickens, salmon: a case study. World Aquaculture Magazine 30, 33,3538, 40,6970 (1999).
18. Odum, E. P. Fundamentals of Ecology (W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia, 1979).

19. Pauly, D. & Christensen, V. Primary production required to sustain global fisheries. Nature 374, 255257
(1995). | Article | ISI | ChemPort |
20. Tacon, A. FAO aquaculture production update. Int. Aquafeeds 2 , 1316 (1998).
21. Alverson, D. L. , Freeberg, M. H. , Murawski, S. A. & Pope, J. G. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper no. 339 (Food and
Agricultural Organization, Rome, 1994).
22. Pike, I. H. Fishmeal outlook. Int. Aquafeeds 1, 5 8 (1998).
23. Tacon, A. Estimated global aquafeed production and aquaculture in 1997 and projected growth. Int. Aquafeed 2, 5
( 1999).
24. Barlow, S. in Fish Farmer 4043 (Amben, Surrey, UK, 1989).
25. Dalzell, P. & Ganaden, R. A. A Review of the Fisheries for Small Pelagics in Philippine Waters. (Bureau of Fisheries and
Aquatic Resources, International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management, Quezon City, The Philippines, 1987).
26. Trinidad, A. C. , Pomeroy, R. S. , Corpuz, P. V. & Aguero, M.Bioeconomics of the Philippine Small Pelagics
Fishery (International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management, Manila, The Philippines, 1993).
27. Robertson, A. I. & Duke, N. C. Mangroves as nursery sites: comparisons of the abundance and species composition of
fish and crustaceans in mangroves and other nearshore habitats in tropical Australia. Mar. Biol.96, 193205
( 1987). | ISI |
28. Primavera, J. H. Fish predation on mangrove-associated penaeids: The role of structures and substrate. J. Exp. Mar.
Biol. Ecol. 215, 205216 (1997). | Article | ISI |
29. Primavera, J. H. Mangroves as nurseries: shrimp populations in mangrove and non-mangrove habitats. Est. Coast.
Shelf Sci. 46, 457 464 (1998). | Article | ISI |
30. Ronnback, P. The ecological basis for economic value of seafood production supported by mangrove
ecosystems. Ecological Economics 29, 235252 (1999). | Article | ISI |
31. Sasekumar, A. , Chong, V. C. & Lim, K. H. in Proceedings of the Third ASEAN-Australia Symposium on Living Coastal
Resources: Status Reviews 1 (eds Wilkinson, C., Sudara, S. & Ming, C. L.) 139165 (Australian Institute of Marine
Science, Townsville, Australia, 1994).
32. Martosubroto P. & Naamin, M. Relationship between tidal forests (mangroves) and commercial shrimp production in
Indonesia. Mar. Res. Indonesia 18, 8186 (1977).
33. Camacho, A. S. & Bagarinao, T. in Mangroves of Asia and the Pacific: Status and Management, Technical Report
UNDP/UNESCO Research and Pilot Programme on Mangrove Ecosystem in Asia and the Pacific (RAS/79/002) (Natural
Resources Management Center and National Mangrove Committee, Ministry of Natural Resources, Quezon City, The
Philippines, 1987).
34. Sasekumar, A. & Chong, V. C. in Proceedings of the 10th Annual Seminar of the Malaysian Society of Marine
Sciences (Sasekumar, A., Phang, S. M. & Chong, E. L.) 1015 (Ardyas, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 1987).
35. Ogden, J. C. The influence of adjacent systems on the structure and function of coral reefs. Proceedings of the
International Coral Reef Symp.1, 123129 (1988).
36. Yanez-Arancibia, A. , Lara-Dominguez, A. L. & Day, J. W. Jr Interactions between mangroves and seagrass habitats
mediated by estuarine nekton assemblages: coupling of primary and secondary production.Hydrobiologia 264, 112
(1993).
37. Munro, J. J. in Reef Fisheries (eds Polunin, C. R. & Roberts, C. M.) 1 14 (Chapman and Hall, London, 1994).
38. Bagarinao, T. & Taki, Y. in Indo-Pacific Fish Biology: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Indo-Pacific
Fishes (eds Uyeno, T., Arai, R., Taniuchi, T. & Matsuura, K.) 728 739 (Ichthyological Society of Japan, Tokyo, 1986).
39. Bagarinao, T. in Tropical Mariculture (ed. de Silva, S.) 381448 (Academic, London, 1998).
40. Banerjee, B. K. & Singh, H. The Shrimp Bycatch in West Bengal (Bay of Bengal Programme, Madras, India, 1993).
41. Islam, M. M. , Rahman, S. L. , Halder, G. C. , Mazid, M. A. & Mahmood, N. Extent of damage to different crustaceans
and fin fishes in collectingPenaeus monodon (Fabricius) post-larvae in Satkhira coastal region. J. Mar. Biol. Assoc.
India 38, 17 (1996).

42. Folke, C. & Kautsky, N. The role of ecosystems for a sustainable development of aquaculture. Ambio 18, 234 243
(1989). | ISI |
43. Hamer, K. C. , Monaghan, P. , Uttley, J. D. , Walton, P. & Burns, M. D. The influence of food supply on the breeding
ecology of kittiwakes (Rissa tridactyla) in Shetland. Ibis 135, 255263 (1993). | ISI |
44. Fischer, J. , Haedrich, R. L. & Sinclair, P. R. Interecosystem Impacts of Forage Fish Fisheries (Eco-Research Program,
Memorial University of Newfoundland, Newfoundland, 1997).
45. Hislop, J. R. G. Changes in North Sea gadoid stocks. ICES J. Marine Science 53, 11461156 (1996). | Article | ISI |
46. Monaghan, P. Seabirds and sandeelsthe conflict between exploitation and conservation in the northern North
Sea. Biodivers. Conserv. 1, 98111 (1992). | ISI |
47. Wright, P. J. & Begg, G. S. A spatial comparison of common guillemots and sandeels in Scottish waters. ICES J. Mar.
Sci. 54, 578592 (1997). | Article | ISI |
48. Brown, E. G. & Pierce, G. J. Monthly variation in the diet of harbour seals in inshore waters along the southeast
Shetland (UK) coastline. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 167, 275 289 (1998). | ISI |
49. Phillips, R. A. , Caldow, R. W. G. & Furness, R. W. The influence of food availability on the breeding effort and
reproductive success of Arctic skuas (Stercorarius parasiticus ). Ibis 138, 410419 (1996). | ISI |
50. Pauly, D. in The Peruvian Anchoveta and its Upwelling Ecosystem: Three Decades of Change (eds Pauly, D. &
Tsukayama, I.) 325342 (ICLARM, Manila, The Philippines, 1987).
51. Hansen, P. , Jacobsen, J. A. & Und, R. A. High numbers of farmed Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, observed in oceanic
waters north of the Faroe Islands. Aquaculture Fisheries Management 24, 777 781 (1993).
52. McKinnell, S. & Thomson, A. J. Recent events concerning Atlantic salmon escapees in the Pacific. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 54 ,
12211225 (1997). | Article | ISI |
53. Gross, M. R. One species with two biologies: Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in the wild and in aquaculture. Can. J. Fish.
Aquat. Sci. 55(Suppl.1), 114 (1998 ). | Article |
54. McGinnity, P. et al. Genetic impact of escaped farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) on native populations: use of
DNA profiling to assess freshwater performance of wild, farmed, and hybrid progeny in a natural river
environment. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 54, 998 1008 (1997). | Article | ISI |
55. Slaney, T. L. , Hyatt, K. D. , Northcote, T. G. & Fielden, R. J. Status of anadromous salmon and trout in British Columbia
and Yukon Fisheries.Am. Fish. Soc. 21, 20 35 (1996).
56. McVicar, A. H. Disease and parasite implications of the coexistence of wild and cultured salmon populations. ICES J.
Mar. Sci. 54, 10931103 (1997). | Article | ISI |
57. Nadala, E. C. B. & Loh, P. C. A comparative study of three different isolates of white spot virus. Dis. Aquat.
Organisms 33, 231234 ( 1998). | ISI |
58. Lightner, D. V. A Handbook of Shrimp Pathological and Diagnostic Procedures for Diseases of Cultured Penaeid
Shrimp (World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 1996).
59. Nunan, L. M. , Poulos, B. T. & Lightner, D. V. The determination of White Spot Shrimp Virus (WSSV) and Yellow Head
Virus (YHV) in imported commodity shrimp. Aquaculture 160, 1930 ( 1998). | Article | ISI |
60. Lightner, D. V. et al. Risk of spread of penaeid shrimp viruses in the Americas by the international movement of live and
frozen shrimp. Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz. 16, 146160 (1997).
61. Braaten, B. , Aure, J. , Ervik, A. & Boge, E. Pollution problems in Norwegian fish farming. ICES Coastal
Management 26, 11 (1983).
62. Gowen, R. J. & Bradbury, N. B. The ecological impact of salmonid farming in coastal waters: a review. Oceanogr. Mar.
Biol. Ann. Rev. 25, 563575 ( 1987).
63. Iwama, G. K. Interactions between aquaculture and the environment.Crit. Rev. Environ. Contr. 21, 177216 (1991).
64. Ervik, A. et al. Regulating the local environmental impact of intensive marine fish farming. Aquaculture 158, 85 94
(1997). | Article | ISI |

65. Hargreaves, J. A. Nitrogen biogeochemistry of aquaculture ponds.Aquaculture 166, 181212 (1998).

| Article | ISI | ChemPort |
66. Tacon, A. J. Contribution to food fish supplies. FAO Fisheries Circular886 (Rev. 1), 1721 (1997 ).
67. Baily, C. Aquaculture and basic human needs. World Aquaculture 27, 2831 (1997).
68. El-Sayed, A. M. Alternative dietary protein sources for farmed Tilapia, Oreochromis spp. Aquaculture 179, 149168
(1999). | Article | ISI |
69. Tacon, A. J. & De Silva, S. S. Feed preparation and feed management strategies within semi-intensive fish farming
systems in the tropics.Aquaculture 151, 379404 (1997). | Article | ISI |
70. Bell, J. G. in Biology of Farmed Fish (eds Black, K. D. & Pickering, A. D.) 114145 (Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield,
UK, 1998).
71. Morris, C. A. , Haynes, K. C. , Keeton, J. T. , and Gatlin, D. M. Fish oil and dietary pelagics and flavor of channel
catfish. J. Food Sci. 60, 12251227 (1995).
72. Steffens, W. Effects of variation in essential fatty acids in fish feeds on nutritive value of freshwater fish for
humans. Aquaculture 151, 97119 (1997). | Article | ISI | ChemPort |
73. Pilarczyk, A. Changes in specific carp immune reaction caused by addition of fish oil to pellets. Aquaculture 129, 425
429 (1995). | Article | ISI |
74. Webster, C. D. , Tiu, L. G. , Margan, A. M. & Gannam, A. Effect of partial and total replacement of fishmeal on growth
and body composition of sunshine bass, Morone chrysops X M. saxatilis, fed practical diets. J. World Aquaculture
Soc. 30, 443 453 (1999). | ISI |
75. Tacon, A. G. J. Feed Ingredients for Carnivorous Fish Species: Alternatives to Fishmeal and Other Fishery
Resources (Food and Agricultural Organization, Rome, 1994).
76. Lim, C. & Dominy, W. G. in Proceedings of the Aquaculture Feed Processing and Nutrition Workshop (eds Akiyama, D.
M. & Tan, R. K. H.) 163172 (American Soybean Association, Singapore, 1991).
77. Pond, C. The Fats of Life (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK, 1998).
78. Huttenbauer, S. Entrepreneurship in Food Preservation and Nutriceuticals Harvard Business School Case Study (Harvard
Business School Publishing, Boston, Massachusetts, 1999).
79. Mooney, J. W. Lipid and flavour quality of stored breast meat from broilers fed marine algae. J. Sci. Food
Agriculture 78, 134 140 (1998). | Article | ISI | ChemPort |
80. Bardach, J. E. , Ryther, J. H. & McLarney, W. O. Aquaculture: the Farming and Husbandry of Freshwater and Marine
Organisms (John Wiley, New York, 1972).
81. Jones, T. O. & Iwama, G. K. Polyculture of the Pacific oyster,Crassostrea gigas (Thunberg), with chinook
salmon, Oncorhynchus tshawytscha . Aquaculture 92, 313 322 (1991). | Article | ISI |
82. Neori, A. et al. Seaweed biofilters as regulators of water quality in integrated fish-seaweed culture
units. Aquaculture 141, 183199 (1996). | Article | ISI |
83. Phang, S. -M. , Shaharuddin, S. , Noraishah, H. & Sasekumar, A. Studies on Gracilaria changii (Cracilariales,
Rhodophyta) from Malaysian mangroves. Hydrobiologia 326/327, 347 352 (1996). | ChemPort |
84. Troell, M. , Ronnback, P. , Kautsky, N. , Halling, C. & Buschmann, A. Ecological engineering in aquaculture: the use of
seaweeds for removing nutrients from intensive mariculture. J. Appl. Phycology 11, 8997
(1999). | Article | ISI | ChemPort |
85. Soto, D. & Mena, G. Filter feeding by the freshwater mussel, Diplodon chilensis, as a biocontrol of salmon farming
eutrophication. Aquaculture171, 6581 (1999). | Article | ISI |
86. Troell, M. et al. Integrated marine cultivation of Gracilaria chilensis(Gracilariales, Rhodophyta) and salmon cages for
reduced environmental impact and increased economic output. Aquaculture 156, 4561 (1997). | Article | ISI |
87. Food and Agricultural Organization Aquaculture production statistics 19871996. Fish. Circ. 815 (Rev. 10) (1998).

88. Singh, H. R. , Chong, V. C. , Sasekumar, A. & Lim, K. H. in Proceedings of the Third ASEAN-Australia Symposium on
Living Coastal Resources: Status Reviews (eds Wilkinson, C., Sudara S. & Ming, C. L.) 105122 (Australian Institute of
Marine Science, Townsville, Australia, 1994).
89. Menasveta, P. Mangrove destruction and shrimp culture systems. World Aquaculture 28, 3642 ( 1997).
90. Rosenberry, B. (ed.) World Shrimp Farming (Shrimp News International, San Diego, California, 1998).
91. Ronnback, P. , Troell, M. , Primavera, J. H. & Kautsky, N. Distribution pattern of shrimps and fish
among Avicennia and Rhizophoramicrohabitats in the Pagbilao mangroves, Philippines. Est. Coast. Shelf. Sci. 48, 223
234 (1999).
Topof page

Acknowledgements
We thank M. Williams, W. Falcon, V. Spruill, M. Drew, N. Wada, R. Kautsky, K. Jauncey, C. Tirado, R. Hoguet, R. Tatum and R.
Mitchell for comments and assistance, and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation for funding.
Topof page

1.

Stanford University, Institute for International Studies, Encina Hall 400E, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305-6055, USA

2.

Environmental Defense, 257 Park Avenue South, New York, New York 10010, USA

3.

Aquaculture Department, Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Center, Tigbauan, Iloilo , 5021, Philippines

4.

Department of Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, S-106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

5.

The Beijer Institute, Stockholm, Sweden

6.

Institute of Aquaculture, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, UK

7.

World Wildlife Fund, 1250 24th Street NW, Washington DC 20037, USA

8.

Department of Zoology, Oregon State University, Corvalles, Oregon 97331-2914, USA

Correspondence to: Rosamond L. Naylor1 Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to R.L.N. (e-mail: Email: roz@leland.stanford.edu).

Topof page

In a world of rapidly evolving technological advancements, theres one industry that deserves its fair share of attention: sustainable aquaculture. As
human populations continue to rise, the need for increased food productions stands a foremost concern for sustaining our futures growing appetite.
Like our ancestors before us, people are turning to the sea for the solution.
Its a relationship that goes back for centuries, mankind and the sea. For years, humans have harvested food from the ocean, providing us with the
rich and essential nutrients we need. Yet in recent decades, humankind has witnessed the decline of numerous ocean species, animals we once
believed to be so abundant we couldnt possibly alter their populations, let alone drive them to extinction. But thats exactly what were doing or
more precisely, thats the direction were headed. Experts say that over half the worlds wild caught fisheries are fully exploited, meaning that fish
are being caught at the maximum rate to simply keep the population stable. Even more, over thirty percent of fisheries are overexploited, meaning
that fish are being caught at a faster rate than they can reproduce, leading to the demise of the population and potentially the demise of the species
itself.
So it seems the solution to the looming food crisis lies not, then, in the ocean itself, but in reaping the oceans benefits through something humans
have been doing for quite some time, farming.

Aquaculture, otherwise known as fish farming, has been on the rise over the past few decades to meet the soaring demand for seafood. Farmed
marine species currently constitute over half the seafood consumed worldwide, a number likely to increase as human populations continue to boom
at a rate of over 100 million people per year. While farming fish and other marine species offers an alternative to overfishing wild populations, its not
a perfect system and many aspects of aquaculture need increased scientific knowledge and technological advancement to become a viable source
of food production in the coming years.
Current aquaculture methods are rife with environmental risks. The most common type of aquaculture is mariculture, the cultivation of marine
organisms in the ocean or within an enclosed section of the ocean. This includes open-net pens and cages that place farmed fish in direct contact
with natural coastal environments. As with many types of farmed animals, aquaculture faces challenges such as disease outbreak, feed production,
and waste removal. However, by farming in an open system, the challenges go beyond the farmed animals themselves and often pose enormous
risks to the surrounding environment. Infectious diseases among farmed fish can spread not only among cultured animals, but can also spread to
native populations, introducing non-native diseases into the environment or facilitating disease through unsanitary conditions in densely packed
farmed fish. Furthermore, non-native or genetically modified fishes can escape pens and potentially outcompete native species, threatening local
fish populations in that area.

Another major issue in farming fish sustainability involves the use of their feed. The most common fishes people eat also happen to be the oceans
top predatory fishes tuna and salmon. These fish are not only large, but they are also carnivorous and require a diet high in fats. In order to feed
and sustain these kinds of farmed fish, other fish species must be harvested from the ocean and therefore face pressures from overfishing. Current
methods utilize fish meal, which combines fish oil, wheat products, and chemicals into pellets that are then fed to cultivated fish. This also poses a
problem, as many carnivorous fish are not designed to metabolize large amounts of carbohydrates. The use of fish feed will continue to be an issue
in the struggle for sustainable aquaculture until we find a way to provide sustainable food to farmed fisheries.
In an attempt to alleviate the environmental impact of fish farming, some forward thinking aquaculturists have turned to closed-contained systems,
either solid-wall systems that float on the water or tank systems that operate entirely on land and perfecting their methods by successfully growing
fish that are herbivores. By separating farmed species from native populations, both systems protect the environment from accidental fish escapes,
limit the spread and transfer of disease and parasites between local and farmed fish, and decrease the amount of fish feed and waste excreted into
the local ecosystem.
While solid wall closed-containment systems provide a better alternative to current aquaculture methods, there are still concerns in regards to
sustainability and overall environmental impact. One of which includes the disposal of discharged water from the systems and their potential for
contaminants into the external environment. Another barrier to sustaining these systems is energy, the high cost of pumping water through the
system and maintaining the necessary electricity to meet the demands on a commercial scale.

However, innovative scientists from the University of Marylands Department of Marine Biotechnology have developed what they call a new
generation of aquaculture technology, a closed-contained system that operates entirely on land and expels zero waste into the environment. Dr.
Yonathan Zohar, one of the leading pioneers in the development of this technology, is a scientist and professor at the universitys Institute of Marine
and Environmental Technology (IMET) spearheading the project. Committed to creating a sustainable, low-impact aquaculture system from the
start, Zohar developed a system that recycles 99 percent of its water, with losses coming from evaporation. It brings in common household tap
water, adds the necessary salt components, controls temperature and pH, and does it all for each specific species of fish. It also filters waste
products from the fish through different microbial communities in order to detoxify the water and creates methane as a supplemental biofuel.
This land-based alternative aquaculture system provides fish a continuous supply of clean water, reducing the spread of pathogens, disease,
contaminants, and toxins. It also allows for fish to grow more efficiently, as they dont need to expend energy fighting currents like fish farmed in
open-net pens would likely experience and can instead convert more energy into biomass. Zohar and his team also addressed one of the biggest
obstacles in aquaculture, getting fish to reproduce at predictable cycles. By simulating environmental cues such as altering water temperature,
lighting, and salinity levels, and then providing fish a pellet they created that mimics the hormone to induce natural reproduction, they were able to
get predictable reproductive events.
The fish are clean, they grow faster, and they taste the same as fish you would eat from the ocean. A nearly self-sustaining system, its a
combination of the latest in scientific knowledge and technology. Zohars system eliminates many of the detrimental environmental impacts from
open-net pens and cages in coastal aquaculture production. Ultimately the goal would be to have such systems close to large urban areas where
the demand for fresh fish is very popular. The environmental footprint of transportation would be drastically reduced thus reducing the emission of
CO2. But like all growing industries, sustainable aquaculture still has many challenges to face.

It will take the continued efforts of scientists, government and policy-makers, and aquaculture industries to come together to solve these remaining
hurdles to a sustainable commercial fish farming. We need to be conscious and aware of the efforts being put forth by scientists such as Zohar to
invest in the advancements in aquaculture that address these major challenges in current fish farming practices. Our oceans can no longer provide
us with enough fish to feed our rising population. As my father said in 1973, With earth's burgeoning human populations to feed we must turn to the
sea with new understanding and new technology. We must farm it as we farm the land. The future of sustainable fish farming brings the sea to the
land and gives us the opportunity to domesticate and harvest the species we need without directly burdening the ocean we rely upon.
In an effort to move towards a sustainable future, it will take not only innovative thinking but also global knowledge to make effective decisions.
Aquaculture is a growing, and highly demanded industry. As the demand continues to grow, sustainability must remain a top priority and important
aspect of future production. While improved technology is a big step in the right direction, it also requires the demand of the consumer. We are a
part of the solution, and we can demand for a sustainable future.
Warm regards,

Jean-Michel Cousteau
President, Ocean Futures Society
with Jaclyn Mandoske

First Photo: Holly Lohuis, Jean-Michel Cousteau and the Ocean Futures Society were guests of Marine Harvest in
British Columbia where the team spent time underwater, filming their farmed Atlantic salmon. Carrie Vonderhaar,
Ocean Futures Society
Second Photo: The Ocean Futures Society expedition team spent time diving in the salmon farms of British
Columbia. Unfortunately many of these farms are extremely detrimental to rich, diverse marine ecosystem of the
Pacific Northwest. Carrie Vonderhaar, Ocean Futures Society
Third Photo: Dr. Alexandre Honczaryk, researcher at National Institute for Amazonia Research has developed closed
contained ponds in the heart of the Amazon and is growing fish from eggs and sperm of some of the favorite
Amazonian fish to consume. Carrie Vonderhaar, Ocean Futures Society
Fourth Photo: Closed contained fish farms are the future in fish farming. Jean-Michel firmly believes this is the
direction we need to invest resources, time and energy. Carrie Vonderhaar, Ocean Futures Society
Fifth Photo: While on expedition in the Amazon, Jean-Michel Cousteau and Holly Lohuis learn all about sustainable,
closed contained fish farms from Dr. Alexandre Honczaryk, researcher at National Institute for Amazonia Research.

Here Alex is showing Jean-Michel and Holly the eggs of a prized Amazonian fish, tambaqui, a herbivore that has been
easily overfished in much of the Amazon basin. Carrie Vonderhaar, Ocean Futures Society

What type of food do farmed fish eat?

Farmed fish and shrimp eat feed that is specially formulated to contain all the essential nutrients they need to keep them healthy and growing and maintain the human
health benefits of seafood consumption. The ingredients are formed into pellets, similar in many ways to dry dog food.
There are about 40 essential nutrients needed by all animals. Categories of essential nutrient include vitamins, dietary minerals, essential fatty acids and essential
amino acids. These are provided by a number of feed ingredients including fish, plant, andprocessing waste meals and oils.

Did you know?

Farmed shellfish such as oysters, clams and mussels do not need to be
fed a manufactured feed. These shellfish are filter feeders and
consume plankton and other particles present in the water.

(top)

2. Do all farmed fish eat the same thing?

No. Fish nutritional needs vary by species. Herbivorous fish eat a feed mixture that may contain plant proteins (e.g., soy, corn), vegetable oils, minerals, and vitamins.
In the wild, carnivorous fish such as salmon eat other fish. Therefore, feeds for farmed carnivorous fish (as well as many herbivorous fish) include fish oils and proteins
as well as plant proteins, minerals, and vitamins that achieve the nutrition requirements of the fish and offer health benefits to humans. Traditionally, diets for carnivorous
fish contained 30-50% fish meal and oil; however, continued research is leading to greatly reduced reliance on these ingredients.
(top)

3. Why use fishmeal and fish oil in the diets of farmed fish?
While fish and shrimp don't need fishmeal and oil in their diets, these ingredients have almost a perfect balance of the 40 or so essential nutrients that animals need to
be healthy and grow the same reason that seafood is so good for humans as well.
Fishmeal is a natural and well-balanced source of high-quality protein. As ingredients in aquaculture feed, fishmeal and fish oil supply essential amino acids and fatty
acids reflected in the normal diet of fish. Fish oil is a major natural source of the healthy omega-3 fatty acids eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid
(DHA). These fatty acids are not made by the fish, but become concentrated in fish further up the food chain from the marine phytoplankton (microscopic marine algae
and microbes) that do synthesize them.
Through research, we are learning that other combinations of ingredients can achieve the balance of the 40 essential nutrients. Affordable replacement ingredients for
fishmeal and fish oil are becoming increasingly common, which is leading to declining percentage on those ingredients in farmed fish diets.
Including ingredients like oils from phytoplankton maintain the nutrient requirements of the final product without depending on fish oil. The economics of using blended
oils is improving as fish oil prices rise and the technology to produce phytoplankton (and other replacement ingredients) improves.

Did you know?

Fish and shellfishboth wild and farmedare very nutritious for
humans. Fish are a natural and well-balanced source of high-quality
protein. The unsaturated fats in marine fish, known as omega-3 fatty
acids (eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA))

are proven to benefit heart and cardiovascular health. Omega-3-rich

diets from oily fish such as sardines, herring, trout, and salmon are
associated with a reduced risk of heart attack, stroke, and other
cardiovascular diseases. Recent research has shown that Omega-3s may
improve cognitive and neurological health as well. Marine fish contain
significantly higher amounts of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids than
terrestrial animals or freshwater fish. See our Seafood & Health
FAQ for more information.

(top)

4. Where does fishmeal and fish oil come from?

About of the fishmeal and oil are produced from the harvest of small, open-ocean (pelagic) fish such as anchovies, herring, menhaden, capelin, anchovy, pilchard,
sardines, and mackerel. These fish have short life cycles and are capable of rapid reproduction and stock replenishment. The other is generated from the scraps
produced when fish are processed for human consumption.
The United States is a small net producer of both fishmeal and fish oil. The largest U.S. fishmeal and oil production comes from menhaden caught in the east coast and
Gulf, the second largest component of US production comes from fish processing trimmings produced in Alaskas seafood industry.

Did you know?

Fisheries used for the production of fishmeal and oil are often referred to
as reduction or industrial fisheries because of the steps used to
process the fish into meal and oil. Industrial fishing is a major
component (20-30%) of global fisheries and a vital livelihood for many
coastal economies. Reduction fisheries mainly are located off the coast
of Peru and Chile, as well as in the North Atlantic, North Sea, and Baltic
Sea. Chile and Peru account for about 40 percent of the global
production. Careful fisheries management, including quota and catch
limit systems maintains the sustainability of these fisheries over
time. Click here for a table of fisheries management control
measures used in different regions.
Because these reduction fisheries are heavily regulated and the supply
has remained relatively constant, increased demand for these fish
increases the price for fishmeal and fish oil. As a result, alternatives are
being sought for use in aquaculture feeds.

For more information on fishmeal and fish oil benefits,

sustainability, production, and quality assurance, visit
the website of the International Fishmeal and Fish Oil
Organization.

(top)

5. What are forage fish used for?

The small, open-ocean fish that are caught in industrial fisheries are consumed directly, used as bait in commercial and recreational fisheries and in lobster traps, used
as ingredients in the feed for aquaculture, pigs, poulty, cattle, and pet food; and are converted into fish oil pills.
(top)

6. What are fishmeal and fish oil used for?

Fishmeal and fish oil supply several major industries because they are natural ingredients of high nutritional value. While they have been major ingredients of swine and
poultry feeds for many decades, a growing percentage of these resources have been used to manufacture aquatic feeds. This is due to the worldwide growth of
aquaculture over the past two decades. Demand for fish oil in the supplement industry also is rising rapidly.
Fishmeal and oil are beneficial components of the diets of farmed fish. Because of this, aquaculture producers have been willing to pay more for these ingredients. As
well, substitutes to fishmeal and oil have long been developed for terrestrial animal agriculture, while substitutes for aquaculture are just now coming online. With rising
costs for fishmeal and oil, aquaculture producers are developing cost-effective, yet healthful alternatives.

Did you know?

Replacements and alternatives for fish meal in aquaculture feeds is an
active and important area of research in which NOAA other federal
agencies are heavily involved. The NOAA-USDA Alternative Feeds
Initiativeis identifying alternative dietary ingredients that will reduce the
amount of fishmeal and fish oil contained in aquaculture feeds while
maintaining the important human health benefits of farmed seafood.
Ultimately, the initiative will lead to the commercialization of
alternatives for some species, which will result in reduced dependence
on marine fish resources by feed manufacturers and seafood farmers
worldwide.
For example, recent research has led to success in the use of the
leftover trimmings from the fish processing industry. (Fish trimmings
consist of the parts of the fish that are not converted into fillets or steaks
during processing). Trimmings that used to be waste now can constitute
a significant percent of the raw materials for fishmeal production.

(top)

7. Does aquaculture consume more wild fish than is

produced?
When aquaculture is considered as an aggregate industry, the answer is no. Globally, aquaculture uses about half a metric ton of wild whole fish to produce one metric
ton of farmed seafood, meaning that aquaculture is a net producer of protein.
Feed conversion ratios (the amount of feed eaten by a fish related to the amount that fish provides for human consumption) vary among species, but farmed fish are far
more efficient at converting feed than wild fish or other farmed animals such as cows and pigs.

For more information on fishmeal and fish oil benefits,

sustainability, production, and quality assurance, visit
the website of the International Fishmeal and Fish Oil
Organization.

(top)

8. Doesnt harvesting pelagic fish have a detrimental impact

on the food chain and other animals that depend on them?
Forage fish serve a dual function of contributing to overall ecosystem biomass and supporting global food supply, the latter through both direct human consumption and
providing feed for terrestrial farming and aquaculture. There is concern that ecosystem function is reduced at current catch levels; addressing this concern happens
through fishery management rules (such as catch quotas) within individual capture fisheries. For a discussion of marine resources and sustainability, click here
.
Aquaculture is one of many end-uses for harvested forage fish, which also include providing fishmeal in diets of livestock, serving as baitfish for commercial and
recreational fisheries, and increasingly as nutritional supplement and pet food ingredients. In the absence of aquaculture, these fish would be consumed by other
industries.
The world supply of fish from pelagic fisheries has remained relatively constant over the past twenty years at around 6 million metric tons. These types of fish generally
are capable of rapid reproduction and stock replenishment. Many pelagic fisheries are recognized as successfully regulated and many stocks are fished at levels below
the biomass that achieves maximum sustainable yield. Careful fisheries management, including quota and catch limit systems, maintains the sustainability of these
fisheries over time.
(top)

9. What is being done to develop alternative feed

ingredients?
Future growth of marine finfish and shrimp aquaculture will need protein and oil sources greater than current fishmeal and fish oil production can satisfy. NOAA, in
partnership with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), launched the NOAA-USDA Alternative Feeds Initiative in 2007 to accelerate the development of
alternative feeds for aquaculture. The purpose of the Alternative Feeds Initiative is to identify alternative dietary ingredients that will reduce the amount of fishmeal and
fish oil contained in aquaculture feeds while maintaining the important human health benefits of farmed seafood.
In addition to looking for substitutes, research is examining how farmed fish utilize feed, varying formulations, timing dietary needs with developmental stages, and other
strategies to improve feed use efficiency.
Ultimately, the initiative will lead to the commercialization of alternatives for some species that will result in reduced dependence on marine fish resources by feed
manufacturers and seafood farmers worldwide. The biggest challenges for researchers are to develop alternative ingredients that fish will eat, that supply the nutrition
fish require to grow, and to make available alternative ingredients that are commercially viable. Current research, including that being done through the NOAA-USDA
Alternative Feeds Initiative, is making great strides toward overcoming these challenges.
(top)

10. What are potential alternatives to feeding fish to fish?

Potential alternative include meals and oils from plants (the greatest source of protein and edible oil on earth), fish processing waste, yeast, bugs and other special
meals, and even seaweed. Potential alternative ingredients already in use include soybeans, barley, rice, peas, canola, lupine, wheat gluten, corn gluten, other various
plant proteins, yeast, insects and algae. Other sources that show great promise include waste from bio-energy and bio-plastic production and fish processing waste
(trimmings). Farmed seaweed has significant growth potential as a source of food and fiber for both aquaculture feed and human consumption. Researchers have
been successful in identifying alternatives that grow fish and help maintain the human health benefits of eating seafood.

Did you know?

The diet of farmed fish is currently not exclusively based on feeding fish
to fish. We understand that herbivorous fish can eat a feed mixture that
may contain plant proteins (e.g., soy, corn), vegetable oils, minerals, and
vitamins. We also know that in the wild, piscivorous fish (such as
salmon) eat other fish. However you may be surprised to learn that even
farmed piscivorous fish a great deal of the diet includes plant proteins,
oils, minerals, and vitamins as long as they achieve the nutrition
requirements of the fish. As research explores alternatives to replace
fishmeal and oil in the diets of farmed fish, the percentage of fish meal
and fish oil will continue to decrease while still providing the human
health benefits of eating seafood. What do you call a vegetarian salmon?

(top)

11. Can some of the waste that results from processing fish
be used as fish food?
Yes. The use of fish processing waste (trimmings) for the production of fishmeal and oil may be used. For example, discarded by-catch in 1994 was estimated to total
17.9-39.5 million metric tons (mt). This is a potentially large source of fishmeal. More recent estimates of by-catch of 20 million mt are equivalent to 25% of the reported
annual harvest by marine capture fisheries. In Alaska alone, the fish processing industry generates about 1.2 million mt of by-product waste annually, from which high
quality fishmeal and oil suitable for aquatic feeds may be produced.

Did you know?

Scientists at NOAAs Northwest Fisheries Science Center have been
working on finding profitable uses for fish trimmings since the 1950s.
Current research focuses on incorporating fish trimmings cost-effectively
and within the constraints of short seasons, variable volumes of
materials, and remote locations. NOAA scientists are working with
industry academic partners to create a production process that can costeffectively process the trimmings in to a high-value dried meal, suitable
for feeding to numerous species in aquaculture. Preliminary fish growth
studies have shown equivalent performance between meal using
trimmings created with the new process and high quality conventional
fish meal and fish oil. Other alternative proteins and oils from plants or
other organisms can be used in combination with this high performance
meal to achieve excellent fish growth.

(top)

12. What about arguments that farmed fish are

contaminated with mercury and other heavy metals?
No farmed fish are on the avoid list due to mercury. These compounds enter and concentrate in organisms largely through what they eat. Just like feeds for other
domestic animals, aquaculture feeds are regulated by the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) and Departments of Agriculture in respective states, with advisement
from the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO). The FDA and state agencies conduct inspections as well as collect and analyze feed and fish

samples to help ensure that feeds and the fish that consume them meet strict state and federal requirements. Formulated feed ingredients used in aquaculture are
regularly monitored to avoid possible contamination of feed with methyl mercury.
According to the FDA and EPA, studies show that for people eating the standard U.S. diet, the health benefits of omega-3 fatty acids far outweigh the potential
drawbacks of mercury toxicity due to fish consumption. Specific advisories are in effect for pregnant women, those trying to get pregnant, nursing women, and children.
See our FAQ on Seafood and Human Health for more information.
(top)

13. Are there growth hormones in U.S. farmed fish?

Growth hormone is not used in U.S. aquaculture. Although growth hormones may be given to other farm animals such as cattle and sheep, their use in food fish is
prohibited by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Even if it was allowed, there is no incentive to use it, as it has not been shown to improve growth or
efficiency in farmed fish. Certain additives such as pigments, antioxidants, and other nutritional supplements have been proven safe and their use in fish feeds is
permitted by FDA regulation.
(top)

14. Are antibiotics fed to fish to improve growth (or for any
reason other than disease)?
In the United States, antibiotics are not fed to fish for non-therapeutic reasons through their feed or any other mechanism. The use of antibiotics for non-therapeutic
purposes in aquaculture is prohibited by law. Incidentally, antibiotics do not improve growth or efficiency in fish (like they do in cows, swine, and chickens). However,
antibiotics have been known to be added to fish food in other countries.
(top)

15. Are antibiotics used at all in U.S. aquaculture?

As vaccines have been developed for the major diseases that impact aquaculture (including salmon), antibiotic use has all but disappeared in the U.S. There
occasionally is still a need to use them in special cases approved by a vet. All drugs, including antibiotics, used in aquatic species farmed in the U.S. have been proven
safe and effective and are undetectable at the time of harvest (as prescribed by FDA withdrawal times). At present, only three antibiotics are registered and sold for use
in the United States as feed additives for disease control in farmed fish. The use of parasiticides is similarly restricted by FDA regulations.
(top)

16. Are farmed salmon fed or injected with dyes?

No. In the wild, salmon eat krill and other tiny shellfish that contain natural pigments called carotenoids, which are powerful antioxidants and precursors of vitamin A.
Carotenoids, specifically astaxanthin and canthaxanthin, give salmon flesh its distinctive pigment. Farmed salmon are supplemented with natural and/or synthetic
astaxanthin that is identical to the pigment that salmon get in the wild. Both natural and synthetic astaxanthin are processed and absorbed by wild and farmed fish in
exactly the same manner.
(top)

17. How many pounds of other fish are required to produce

one pound of salmon?
None there is no requirement for fish to be in diets for farmed salmon or any other fish. It is possible to feed salmon on a fish-free diet. However, inclusion of fish in
the diets of farmed salmon reflects the diet of wild salmon and confers the nutrient benefits associated with eating salmon. Until replacements (such as algae) with
nutritional elements similar to fishmeal and fish oil are commercialized, salmon and marine fish will need some fishmeal and fish oil in their diet. However, researchers
are making significant progress in reducing the amount of fishmeal and fish oil used in the diets of farmed seafood while maintaining the human health benefits.
The answer to how much is used (as opposed to required) is a moving target, depending on how much fish meal and fish oil is used in any particular salmon diet.
Recent data indicates reflects that the production of one pound of farmed salmon uses the fish oil from about five pounds of wild fish (depending on the oil content of the
species used), but the fishmeal from only 1.3 pounds of fish. The excess fishmeal from those wild fish is used in the diets of other farmed animals.
Considered in the aggregate, aquaculture uses about half a metric ton of wild whole fish to produce one metric ton of farmed seafood. The amount of fish you get out
(as seafood) relative to the amount of fish you put in (in the diet) known as fish-in/fish-out (FIFO) conversion ratios vary greatly among species. Piscivorous fish
especially those new to aquaculture require more fishmeal and oil in their diet than omnivorous species.

Did you know?

Aquaculture producers have been able to reduce the amount of fishmeal
and fish oil in the diets of farmed fish by targeted specific growth
periods. Increasingly, fishmeal and fish oil is used only for broodstock
and larval nutrition, as well as in the finishing diet before the product
goes to market. This minimizes the amount of fishmeal and fish oil used
while maintaining the health of the fish during growth and the health
benefits of the finished product.

(top)

18. Why dont we just eat fish from these pelagic fisheries
(i.e. further down the food chain)?
To a certain extent, we do. Increasingly, species like mackerel, herring, sardines, and anchovies are sold for human consumption. As well, fish oil in the dietary
supplement industry is the fastest growing segment of that market. However, consumer demand for species such as salmon, grouper, cod, and tuna drives the market
for both farmed and wild fish. Pelagic fish (such as anchovy and menhaden) generally are in far less demand (especially in western countries) for direct human
consumption.
(top)

19. Doesnt uneaten fish food accumulate on the ocean floor

and pose an environmental risk?
Jurisdictions that regulate net-pen aquaculture set limits to what can accumulate under aquaculture facilities. In the U.S., this is typically set at no net accumulation on
an annual basis. Feed for farmed animals is the most expensive input to fish farming (about 60% of the cost of growing fish). For this and environmental considerations,
fish farmers take extreme precautions to avoid over-feeding. Farmers use advanced technology including automated feeders and underwater cameras to provide feed
and monitor consumption. Due to these advances in technology and careful siting, feed accumulation on the ocean floor is much less of a consideration than it once
was. Additionally, fish farmers work with state regulators to monitor the benthic effects of their operations.

Did you know?

Site fallowing is a technique used to address potential environmental
impacts. For example, state law in Maine requires salmon farms to
fallow their sites for one year after harvest. Fallowing requires the
removal and cleaning of all equipment and leaving the site undisturbed,
which allows the sea floor beneath the sea cages to recover from any
potential impacts of fish farming.

(top)

20. Does NOAA fund research on alternative feeds?

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), in partnership with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), launched the NOAA-USDA Alternative
Feeds Initiative in 2007 to accelerate the development of alternative feeds for aquaculture. The purpose of the Alternative Feeds Initiative is to identify alternative dietary
ingredients that will reduce the amount of fishmeal and fish oil contained in aquaculture feeds while maintaining the important human health benefits of farmed seafood.

Since 1998, NOAA has been supporting alternative feeds research through the National Marine Aquaculture Initiative, a competitive grants program. Through this
program, the agency has funded nutrition projects for a variety of marine fish species including black sea bass, cobia, cod, flounder, shrimp, snapper, sablefish and tuna.
This research generated information on use of probiotics, identification of dietary requirements, and use of alternative proteins and processing byproducts. Since the
1950s, NOAA Fisheries Service labs have worked on diet development for Atlantic and Pacific salmon, sablefish, black sea bass, lingcod, rockfish, and several other
marine species. NOAA labs helped develop methods for improved recovery and use of seafood processing waste and invasive species meals for use in aquaculture
feeds.
(top)

21. What are some of the constraints to reducing

aquacultures dependence on wild fisheries?
Fish meal and fish oil produced from wild harvest fisheries are among the highest quality proteins and lipids available. For several decades, the supply has been stable
but fully exploited; that is unlikely to change no matter if the demand is from aquaculture, agriculture, human consumption, or any other source. Although NOAA, its
partners, and others are making significant strides toward reducing and, in some cases, replacing fishmeal and fish oil in aquaculture diets, two major constraints exist.

Growth in worldwide population and the related increase in demand for all types of food. As landings from wild fisheries are limited to maintain healthy fish
populations, the expanded supply of seafood will have to come from aquaculture fed on alternative feeds. While this is a constraint, it also is an opportunity for the
United States to develop environmentally-responsible commercial aquaculture and work with partners to improve aquaculture practices around the world.

The technical challenge of alternative ingredients. The challenges for researchers are to develop alternative ingredients that fish will eat and that supply the
nutrition fish require to grow; and to make available alternative ingredients that are commercially viable. Current research, including that being done through the NOAAUSDA Alternative Feeds Initiative, is making great strides toward overcoming these challenges.
(top)

22. What are specific areas of research that will lead to

decreased dependence on fishmeal and fish oil?
The development of alternative feeds would benefit from increased investment in research and development in many areas. Key among these is to develop costeffective ways to produce the hearth healthy marine omega-3 fatty acids. Continued evaluation of alternative protein and oil sources such as by-products from other
industries (e.g., biofuel), fish processing waste, and newer sources such as worms, insects, and algae will yield insights into the nutrient profiles of alternative
ingredients and how they may meet the nutrient requirements of farmed species.
(top)

Fisheries Service

THE FRENZY FOR FISHMEAL ALTERNATIVES AQUACULTURE

INDUSTRY IS EXPLORING GREENER AND CHEAPER CHOICES
FOR SUSTAINABLE FORAGE FISH
Posted by Rietta on Wednesday, January 1st, 2014 with 2 Comments

We all know we need to eat healthy- even if we dont always do it- but fewer people are aware that they need to eat food that
also has a healthy diet. If our food is sick, we can get sick too; we eat what they eat. Luckily, there are people who look out
for that. Aquaculturists are concerned with healthy foods for their fish and shellfish. Fish bodies also need essential nutrients
and their food source is something every seafood lover should be concerned about. We already know that with wild-caught
fish we need to be informed about mercury levels and any other possible contaminants. Farm fish have slightly different
concerns when it comes to their food. Not only can it be unhealthy, but the amount that farm fish need to eat can have
massive and unsustainable reactions down the food chain.

When fish are farmed, they are often fed fishmeal and fish oil. Fishmeal is a mixed product created from forage fish, the
small fish we know as herring, anchovies, sardines and many others. Larger carnivorous fish such as tuna or salmon need to
eat several times their body weight in fishmeal to produce a profitable amount of meat. This can often lead to immense
consumption rates of fishmeal, which is very expensive for the aquaculture farm and puts a high fishing pressure on wildcaught forage fish. There has been a recent push in aquaculture to find cheaper and greener alternatives to fishmeal that
provide each fish with the essential nutrients they need while still producing healthy seafood for human consumption.
Whether or not they find one will have a massive impact on the entire seafood industry.
The demands of aquaculture
Aquaculture is one of the fastest growing food industries; it already supplies half of the worlds consumption of seafood.
Weve mentioned before that aquaculture could be the savior for seafood lovers by taking fishing pressure off of wild
populations. It allows us to enjoy those species whose commercial wild fisheries have collapsed like the abalone while the
wild population rebuilds itself. But in reality some fish farms only shift the pressure from larger fish to smaller fish. Forage
fish destined for fishmeal are wild-caught in countries such as Peru and Chile in reduction fisheries.
The amount of fishmeal and fish oil we dedicate to aquaculture has expanded exponentially over the last decade to meet the
growing demand and will only increase more unless alternatives are found. Researchers and the aquaculture industry have
fervently been searching for fishmeal substitutes that are both healthy for the fish and affordable. We are seeing great
promise with some of these substitutes, but there is still much work to be done.
There is a land-based example we can use. Fishmeal and fish oil have also been used as feed for swine and poultry farms for
decades. These industries have already developed alternative feeds that are now more commonly used and based on grains,
corn, and soybean. Terrestrial animals are naturally evolved herbivores and thus well suited for a vegetarian diet.
Aquaculture is a different story. Fish do not adapt as well to an entirely vegetarian diet, especially with terrestrial crops, and
tend to suffer from disease and low growth rates.
Forage fish do have an advantage. They reproduce quickly and are very resilient to fishing pressures. Many of the reduction
fisheries are managed well and successfully regulated. With quota and catch limit systems in place, the use of forage fish as
fishmeal could be sustainable. But the aquaculture industry continues to grow every year and it has become a very hungry
mouth to feed. With the aquaculture boom over the last 20 years, there are many concerns that the reduction fisheries are
depleting an essential food source for countless animals. It has the potential to collapse innumerable ocean ecosystems if not
managed properly.
Hungry fish
Aquaculture farms and environmentalists are motivated to find fishmeal alternatives. Fishmeal prices have risen
dramatically in the last two decades from $750/ton 20 years ago to more than $2,100/ton last year. 60-65% of the operating
costs of a fish farm is feed. With these costs, farming fish starts to become a very expensive venture.
But research is in favor of the aquaculture industry where diets were once formulated to contain 40% or more of fishmeal,
they are expected to drop to as little as 10% worldwide by 2020 with the addition of healthy alternatives. This means that fish
farms will need to buy less pure fishmeal and more cost-effective substitutes.
Research is not just limited to looking for fishmeal substitutes. Scientists are examining how farmed fish make use of feed,
different formulas, timing dietary needs with developmental stages and other strategies. They are attempting to analyze feed
use efficiency as a whole in order to calculate the perfect diet for different species.
Fishmeal alternatives
Farmed fish just like the human body need a specific mix of proteins, nutrients, vitamins and minerals to thrive.
Fishmeal is already a natural and well-balanced source of high-quality protein, containing the perfect ingredients for optimal
growth and health for both types of fish. Its the same reason that seafood is so good for humans!

Interestingly, fish tend to be picky eaters just like humans. Imagine being stuck in a tank with food you wont touch. Even if
the food is chock full of all the essential nutrients you could ever need, it isnt worth much if you wont eat it. The biggest
challenges to developing alternatives are finding feed that fish will eat, supplying the nutrients that fish need to grow, and
making alternative ingredients that are commercially plausible.
Research is now providing us with solutions to achieving the same balance without sourcing forage fish. Alternatives that are
currently being explored:

Leftover trimmings This solution is simple, effective, and reduces waste. Trimmings consists of the leftover bits
that are not used in fillets or steaks in the fish processing industry. These have all the nutritional benefits of fishmeal
and would normally go to waste. They are now contributing significantly as raw materials for fishmeal production.

Insects and worms The black soldier fly has proven to be a greener and cheaper alternative to fishmeal. With a
high level of protein (60-65%) and a great digestibility for salmon in studies (82.1%) this little fly has become an
area of strong interest for several large feed firms. The flies are raised on waste food or discarded scraps before
being processed into a protein meal, so there is little to no environmental damage.

A plant-based diet Soybeans, barley, rice, wheat gluten and many others are already in use. But these often dont
have all the essential nutrients and must be mixed with other feeds. Soybean has been known to cause enteritis in
fish. An interesting side effect of a plant-based diet is a change in the color of the fish meat. If consumers are used to
buying red trout fillets, they might find it a problem to now buy a yellow fillet, even if there is no difference in taste.

Seaweed - Algae has immense potential to become a viable alternative. Fast-growing and packed with nutrients,
algae is quickly becoming a strong area of interest for the aquaculture industry. One of the main concerns over
fishmeal alternatives is finding those that contain omega-3s. Fish do not produce omega-3s themselves, they
accumulate it in the food they eat. In fact, omega-3s originate with the many types of algae that are at the bottom of
the food chain. This is where algae could be amazing they have the potential to replace fish oils as well as fishmeal
in aquaculture use. Studies on trout and white seabass have been extremely promising, but no algae alternatives
have been commercially developed just yet.

It is interesting to note that some aquaculture farms do not need to search for fishmeal alternatives. Shellfish such as oysters,
abalone and clams are filter feedings and consume plankton. That means all farmers have to ensure is that their farms have a
steady flow of water from the ocean and their shellfish will feed themselves!
Support sustainable seafood farming
As one of the fastest-growing food industries in the world, aquaculture is rising quickly to meet the demand of the worlds
population of seafood consumers. The industry must learn and adapt quickly if it is to provide safe, healthy, profitable
seafood that has little impact on the environment. Support sustainable aquaculture by ordering your farmed fish from Pucci
Foods, a distributor that is committed to working with partners who practice sustainable seafood farming.
- See more at: http://puccifoods.com/pucciseafood-new/blog/frenzy-fishmeal-alternatives-aquaculture-industry-exploringgreener-cheaper-alternatives-fishmeal/#sthash.sdMvvoPe.dpuf