AQUACULTURE14 Running Head: Aquaculture Feeds

Raw materials from marine source are mainly fishmeal and fish oil from industrial fisheries, the co-products of aquaculture and fishing and marine worms Fishmeal and fish oils Fish oil and fishmeal are rich in protein, and they are extracted from fish that contains small amount of forage or low trophic levels of fish species like krill, anchovy, and herring that gather in oceans that are open and immense schools along the coastline. There is a need to ensure that the fish oils and fishmeal

Running Head: AQUACULTURE 1
Aquaculture Feeds
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Institution Affiliation
Date

AQUACULTURE 2
QUESTION ONE
Sources of marine raw materials used in aquaculture diets
There has been an increase in the usage of marine raw materials in carrying out
aquaculture. Raw materials from marine source are mainly fishmeal and fish oil from industrial
fisheries, the co-products of aquaculture and fishing and marine worms
Fishmeal and fish oils
Fish oil and fishmeal are rich in protein, and they are extracted from fish that contains
small amount of forage or low trophic levels species like krill, anchovy, and herring that gather
in oceans that are open and immense schools along the coastline. Fish oil and fishmeal are
continuously used since they are products that are easily digestible. The aquaculture industry is
increasingly growing, and hence the demand for these products is increasing. Also, quality
fishmeal has been proved to provide a well-balanced quantity of more significant fatty acids,
minerals, amino acids and phospholipids which are helpful in increasing the production capacity
and the rate of growth of farmed fish. They are also highly demanded since they tend to be well
absorbed by cultured fish which hence decline the levels of water pollution and advance the
effectiveness of the systems of production (Árnason et al, 2015).
Fish oil and fishmeal that are extracted from forage fisheries remain to be the best
regarding nutritional status for farmed species. If the fish oils and fishmeal are used in a
responsible way and traceability of their usage ensured, then their usage can be maintained for a
long time. The continuous growth of global aquaculture requires that the existing fish oils and
fishmeal be used in an economical way in order to enhance sustainability. They should be
reserved to be used for certain phases of fish farming like juvenile, larval or spawning stages or

AQUACULTURE 3
sometimes they can be used as finishing feed (Mariojouls, Le Gouvello & Simard, 2019). Some
environmental scientists and Non-Governmental Organizations have expressed concerns over the
usage of krill meal contained in fish oil and fishmeal. The Marine Stewardship Council has put
in place some standards which are important for ensuring that fishmeal and fish oils are used in a
sustainable manner. This includes controlling how the ecosystem is impacted, and on the
spawning stock biomass hence this assists in ensuring adequate fish are left in the water in order
to regenerate what has been taken out (Wever, Krause & Buck, 2015). Forage species are
sensitive to ocean acidification and temperature hence they are more susceptible to changes in
climate. Alteration in the temperatures of the ocean reduces the available nutrients, and this can
be visible especially in the cases of La Nina and El Nino occurrences which cause a disruption in
the upwelling systems. Fisheries sustainability should be ensured in order to strengthen the
health of the available fish stocks and also to make sure they are more resistant to impacts of
climate change (Silvenius, Grönroos, Kankainen, Kurppa, Mäkinen & Vielma, 2017)
Co-products of aquaculture and fishing
There are some other fish by products that are used as fish feed. These by-products are
used directly in the form of mash or slurry and are different from the trash fish that are
transformed into fishmeal first. These co-products are rich in protein, and hence this makes them
increase in demand. Considering the cost of energy that is used in transforming wet weight of the
co-products of fishing and aquaculture to a dry product it is less effective as compared to the cost
of energy used in production of raw materials that are of high value like hydrolysates. This
reason hence favors the production of some raw materials that are of high quality as compared to
co-products of fishing and aquaculture. Hence this makes the usage of co-products of fishing and
aquaculture low thus enhancing their sustainability. Excess nutrients that arise from fertilizers

AQUACULTURE 4
used in lands may lead to algal blooms. Algal blooms cause a depletion in the level of oxygen in
the environment which in turn results in threatening the survivability of forage fish (Griffiths,
2016).
Marine worms
There has been an increase in the production of marine worms which is a form of an
ingredient for feeds. People are continuously using marine worms because it can be integrated
with organic waste, and hence it helps in conserving the environment. Marine worms can also be
produced from solid substrates/faeces from fish farms or marine aquaculture. The natural nature
of marine worms increases its demand. Due to the industrial feasibility and the nutritional
potential of the marine worms’ farms that use the marine worms as raw materials should be
evaluated in a proper way in order to enhance the sustainability (Elissen, Hendrickx, Temmink,
Laarhoven & Buisman, 2015).
Constraints for future aquaculture production
There exist some factors that may hinder the effective production of aquaculture. Potential
constraints towards the production of aquaculture include;
Price fluctuations
Price fluctuation is a major challenge that affects the global production of aquaculture.
Price fluctuation negatively influences the willingness of potential investors to invest in
aquaculture production. The discovery of new species has seen high profits for a short period
followed by a long period of reduction in price hence the collapse of several operators in the
market (Pelletier, Klinger, Sims, Yoshioka & Kittinger, 2018).

AQUACULTURE 5
Problems related to ponds
Problems related to ponds like excess weeds and seepage are continuously influencing
the production of aquaculture. These problems reduce the overall yield of aquaculture.
Problems related to infrastructure
Infrastructure facilities including cold storage, connectivity of ponds to roads, and
transportation facilities are essential for transporting fish produce to the market. So many regions
in the world lack these facilities hence making the transportation of fish products to the market a
difficult task.
Poaching and theft
Poaching and theft are also other factors that challenge the production of aquaculture.
This is evident, especially in people who operate leased ponds; there are occurrences of poaching
or deliberate poisoning arising due to enmity, jealousy, or rivalry (Turchini, Trushenski &
Glencross, 2019).
QUESTION TWO
Main arguments surrounding the fish in fish out
The use of fish oil in feeds, fishmeal, and the quantity of wild fish that is useful in the
production of reared fish is one of the long and persisted debates in aquaculture. The argument
specifically concentrated on the use of fishmeal and oil on salmon foods (Taylor & Kluger,
2018) .The Fish in- Fish out ration is the most appropriate approach useful in aquaculture to
converts amount of wild fish into an entity of farmed fish. There were different figures quoted
regarding the amount (tonnes) of wild fish that is used to make a single tonne of the salmon diet,

AQUACULTURE 6
also called the (FIFO ratio). There were different versions of fish in – fish out concept which
emerged due to the aim of the key metrics for assessment and standards schemes for stimulating
the improvement of the environment worries, better management and positively give the
consumers hopes (Glencross et al, 2016).
Jackson’s approach for calculating the fish in – fish out ratio was similar to the
procedures used by the Global Aquaculture Alliance’s Best Aquaculture Practices (BAP). On
the other hand, the calculations used by the Seafood Watch that were named Feed Fish Efficacy
Ratio (FFE), and the calculations of the Aquaculture Steward Council (ASC) called the Forage
Fish Dependency Ratio (FFDR) are associated with those recent proposed and published salmon
ratio by Tacon and Metian. The calculations of Seafood Watch called the FFE, and those of ASC
called Forage Food Dependency Ratio are more comparable to the most recent recommended by
Tacon and Metian. The current mean ratio of FI: FO for salmon is around 1.31 and all forms of
FI: FO ratio is used recently by certifiers at the farm gates to determine how fish are produced
together with utilization of their by-products (Guillen et al, 2019).
The quoted ratio of figures ranged from 3:1 to 10:1. In 2006, the figure for salmon was
given, and it is the most recently published figure with a ratio of 4.9:1, which means one tonne of
salmon is produces by 4.9 tonnes of wild fish. To demonstrate how the figure was founded, and
one tonne of wild fish and assume that they will produce 0.050 and 0.225 tonnes of fishmeal. By
2006, an average salmon diet included 20% fish oil and 30% fishmeal, meaning that 50 kg of oil
could be used to produce 250 kg of salmon diets. Salmon contains 1.25 feed conversion ratios
(FCR) that result in a volume of salmon equivalent to 200kg. Therefore while making a salmon
diet, the first 1 tone (1000 kg) has to be turned into 200 kg of salmon, and this is the ratio of fish

AQUACULTURE 7
in – fish out (FIFO) which is 5: 1, that is (1000: 200) and thus comparing accurately with the
more recent globally proposed salmon figure of 4.9: 1 (Ytrestøyl, Aas & Åsgård, 2015).
Currently, the aquaculture transforms around 65% of the wild fish that is used for
fishmeal at a Fish in – Fish Out ratio of 0.66 to 0.70. The amount of global fishmeal production
through aquaculture is increasing as other livestock industries using aquaculture products have
replaced other livestock feeds with fishmeal, whereby these industries consume around 35% of
the produced fish meal. The aquaculture market has expanded largely due to consistency increase
of fish oil and fishmeal in the international market. There is a need to correct and improve the
proposed formulae by Jackson for his equation had a lot of errors. The improvements in the
fishmeal production technology have promoted the protein recovery from the demand and
consumption rate of whole fish (Lam, 2016).
The latest fishmeal consumption in the industry figures range from 32.5 percent to 24.5
percent of the whole fish. The oil products vary in the fat content and it depends with the species
of the seafood and this leads to a huge influence on the FIFO ratio. The FIFO ration published by
Tacon and Metian remains the most apparently used and easy to relate to in both public debate
and in scientific publications. However this FIFO values that were published for seafoods
production ranges from less than 2 – 8.5 as per the publications of Jackson in 2009, and Tacon
and Metian in 2008 during the last decade. The inclusion of different levels of marine
ingredients, varied conversion ratios in feeds, different industrial fish conversion efficiencies into
fishmeal and fish oil are the cause of variation in the FIFO values that have been reported (Boyd,
2015).

AQUACULTURE 8
Jackson came up with another methodology which is a more global perception for many
aquaculture productions with diverse demands for fish meal and fish oil. It shown that, FIFO
ratio can be calculated through combination of several methods of aquaculture production, with
the varied dependency on both the fish oil and the fish meal (Greenwood, 2019).
QUESTION THREE
Alternatives to main sources of marine raw materials
To decrease the overall usage of fishmeal and fish oils and their byproducts there has
been a development of alternative techniques that are more effective. The limited supply of fish
oil and fishmeal globally is another factor that spearheads the need to develop some alternatives.
To overcome the challenges posed by the limited supply of fishmeal and fish oil, new nutrients
sources have been discovered ranging from plant, insect, animal and microbial kingdom.
Innovation is being undertaken in order to find effective processing methods and equipment for
feed and ingredients. Also, estimation of nutrients requirement of different fish species is
undertaken in order to reach a diet formulation that is accurate and breeding programs are being
innovated for ensuring fish tolerance to the new ingredients is improved. The major protein rich
feeds for aquatic animals remain to be fish meal and fish oils because they are easily available
and produced. The alternatives to the main sources of marine raw materials may include;
Insects
Insects have proven to have high contents of protein and fibre and also the composition
of amino acid is excellent. The research available indicates that insects that have been raised on

AQUACULTURE 9
waste products are easily transformed to protein rich materials and hence can be used as a good
substitute for fishmeal. Insects feeds do not affect the palatity or growth rates but the
performance is greatly influenced by the insect species that has been used and the specific fish.
In terms of cost insect meal tend to be ten times expensive comparing to other protein feeds. The
price may decrease in future if the production efficiency and scale is increased (Pinotti,
Giromini, Ottoboni, Tretola & Marchis, 2019).
Microalgae
Microalgae have proved to be effective alternatives for the fish feeds that originate from
marine ingredients. The production of microalgae is mainly through cultured fermentation that is
conducted under environment conditions that are controlled. The production of microalgae is not
yet well developed hence the volumes of production are low with high cost as compared to the
production of fish meal and fish oil (Suganya, Varman, Masjuki & Renganathan, 2016).
Microalgae are expensive and hence for now they are unable to meet the demands of
aquaculture. Production volumes are still low and hence raising a concern over there
sustainability and hence replacing the marine raw materials with microalgae can result to
deterioration in health and performance of the aquaculture. If the availability of microalgae is
enhanced the outlook is promising because of the high level of protein that microalgae contains
(Shah et al, 2018).
Schizochytrium limacium
Schizochytrium limacinum has been used as a source of lipid in diets for giant grouper
(Epinephelus lanceolatus), it contains 40% algal and soy ingredients. The growth rate of
aquaculture fed on Schizochytrium limacinum is similar as to those that receive fish ingredients.

AQUACULTURE 10
It is recommended that a blend of soy protein concentrate, Schizochytrium limacinum and
soybean meal can substitute a minimum of 40% of protein from marine sources without
jeopardizing the condition or performance of the fish and it is promising to use it as the main
source of lipid in the feed (Kissinger, García-Ortega & Trushenski, 2016).
Camelina (C.sativa)
Available research indicate that Camelina that are genetically engineered are effective
alternative for fish oil. Genetically engineered Camelina are a source of adequatre level of
essential fatty acids that are required to sustain the requirements of farmed fish. Camelina oil is
suitable for feeding fillet and also sustains the nutritional requirements of Atlantic salmon.
Camelina oils have proved to be effective and hence using it as an alternative for fish oil can
maintain the health of the aquaculture and the general performance of the aquaculture (Betancor
et al, 2017).
Seaweed meal
The testing of two distinct commercial varieties of seaweed meal have been conducted
for Tilapia and Arctic charr. No unfavorable results was shown on feed utilization and growth
rates. Specifically, Rainbow trout (type of seaweed meal) combined with Mussel meal portrayed
no unfavorable results in terms of physical parameters, feed utilization and growth rates.
Rainbow trout contains high levels of protein, comparing it with fishmeal they contain almost the
same levels of protein and hence it is a good source of protein to aquaculture. Seaweed meal and
Blue messel meal are sustainable ingredients because they are locally available and hence they
are important in lowering the carbon footprint of fish feed in several areas (Liland et al, 2017).
Implications of the alternatives

AQUACULTURE 11
It is important to note that the above discussed alternatives for marine sources are
effective alternatives. The usage of the alternative sources like insects, seaweed meal and
Schizochytrium limacium are essential alternatives for fishmeal because they are rich in protein
(Henchion, Hayes, Mullen, Fenelon & Tiwari, 2017). Camelina (C.sativa) is an alternative for
fish oil since it is rich in fatty acids that are necessary for fish growth and performance. Due to
the nutritional quality of the alternatives the overall performance and health of the aquaculture
can remain the same as the usage of marine ingredients.

AQUACULTURE 12
Reference
Árnason, J., Björnsdóttir, R., Larsen, B. K., Thrandur Björnsson, B., Sundell, K., Hansen, A.
C., ... & Kalsdóttir, S. (2015). Local fish feed ingredients for competitive and sustainable
production of high-quality aquaculture feed LIFF.
Betancor, M. B., Li, K., Sprague, M., Bardal, T., Sayanova, O., Usher, S., ... & Tocher, D. R.
(2017). An oil containing EPA and DHA from transgenic Camelina sativa to replace
marine fish oil in feeds for Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.): Effects on intestinal
transcriptome, histology, tissue fatty acid profiles and plasma biochemistry. PloS one,
12(4), e0175415.
Boyd, C. E. (2015). Overview of aquaculture feeds: Global impacts of ingredient use. In Feed
and feeding practices in aquaculture (pp. 3-25). Woodhead Publishing.
Elissen, H. J. H., Hendrickx, T. L. G., Temmink, H., Laarhoven, B., & Buisman, C. J. N. (2015).
Worm-it: converting organic wastes into sustainable fish feed by using aquatic worms.
Journal of Insects as Food and Feed, 1(1), 67-74.
Glencross, B., Blyth, D., Irvin, S., Bourne, N., Campet, M., Boisot, P., & Wade, N. M. (2016).
An evaluation of the complete replacement of both fishmeal and fish oil in diets for
juvenile Asian seabass, Lates calcarifer. Aquaculture, 451, 298-309.
Greenwood, M. (2019). Seafood Supply Chains: Governance, Power and Regulation. Routledge.
Griffiths, H. (2016). Bringing New Products from Marine Microorganisms to the Market. In The
Marine Microbiome (pp. 435-452). Springer, Cham.
Guillen, J., Natale, F., Carvalho, N., Casey, J., Hofherr, J., Druon, J. N., ... & Martinsohn, J. T.
(2019). Global seafood consumption footprint. Ambio, 48(2), 111-122.

AQUACULTURE 13
Henchion, M., Hayes, M., Mullen, A., Fenelon, M., & Tiwari, B. (2017). Future protein supply
and demand: strategies and factors influencing a sustainable equilibrium. Foods, 6(7), 53.
Kissinger, K. R., García-Ortega, A., & Trushenski, J. T. (2016). Partial fish meal replacement by
soy protein concentrate, squid and algal meals in low fish-oil diets containing
Schizochytrium limacinum for longfin yellowtail Seriola rivoliana. Aquaculture, 452, 37-
44.
Lam, M. E. (2016). The ethics and sustainability of capture fisheries and aquaculture. Journal of
Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 29(1), 35-65.
Liland, N. S., Biancarosa, I., Araujo, P., Biemans, D., Bruckner, C. G., Waagbø, R., ... & Lock,
E. J. (2017). Modulation of nutrient composition of black soldier fly (Hermetia illucens)
larvae by feeding seaweed-enriched media. PLoS One, 12(8), e0183188.
Mariojouls, C., Le Gouvello, R., & Simard, F. (2019). Feed and Feeding in Certification
Schemes of Sustainable Aquaculture. In Oceanography Challenges to Future Earth (pp.
387-397). Springer, Cham.
Pelletier, N., Klinger, D. H., Sims, N. A., Yoshioka, J. R., & Kittinger, J. N. (2018). Nutritional
attributes, substitutability, scalability, and environmental intensity of an illustrative subset
of current and future protein sources for aquaculture feeds: Joint consideration of
potential synergies and trade-offs. Environmental science & technology, 52(10), 5532-
5544.
Pinotti, L., Giromini, C., Ottoboni, M., Tretola, M., & Marchis, D. (2019). Insects and former
foodstuffs for upgrading food waste biomasses/streams to feed ingredients for farm
animals. animal, 1-11.

AQUACULTURE 14
Shah, M. R., Lutzu, G. A., Alam, A., Sarker, P., Chowdhury, M. K., Parsaeimehr, A., ... &
Daroch, M. (2018). Microalgae in aquafeeds for a sustainable aquaculture industry.
Journal of applied phycology, 30(1), 197-213.
Silvenius, F., Grönroos, J., Kankainen, M., Kurppa, S., Mäkinen, T., & Vielma, J. (2017). Impact
of feed raw material to climate and eutrophication impacts of Finnish rainbow trout
farming and comparisons on climate impact and eutrophication between farmed and wild
fish. Journal of cleaner production, 164, 1467-1473.
Suganya, T., Varman, M., Masjuki, H. H., & Renganathan, S. (2016). Macroalgae and
microalgae as a potential source for commercial applications along with biofuels
production: a biorefinery approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 55, 909-
941.
Taylor, M. H., & Kluger, L. C. (2018). Aqua-and Mariculture Management: A Holistic
Perspective on Best Practices. In Handbook on Marine Environment Protection (pp. 659-
682). Springer, Cham.
Turchini, G. M., Trushenski, J. T., & Glencross, B. D. (2019). Thoughts for the future of
aquaculture nutrition: realigning perspectives to reflect contemporary issues related to
judicious use of marine resources in aquafeeds. North American Journal of Aquaculture,
81(1), 13-39.
Wever, L., Krause, G., & Buck, B. H. (2015). Lessons from stakeholder dialogues on marine
aquaculture in offshore wind farms: Perceived potentials, constraints and research gaps.
Marine Policy, 51, 251-259.
Ytrestøyl, T., Aas, T. S., & Åsgård, T. (2015). Utilisation of feed resources in production of
Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in Norway. Aquaculture, 448, 365-374.