The Vegetables are the Main Course

by garyd | Jun 6, 2015 | Linked

In iAVs, the soil organisms are, in Star Wars parlance,  “the Force.”

Comprising amoeba, bacteria, fungi, nematodes, protozoa and various arthropods (and even earthworms), they keep the water clean and the fish healthy – and facilitate the plant growth through virtually uncountable interactions.

Without a viable soil ecology, and active plant growth for the extraction of elemental inputs, the fish are not going to survive – much less grow rapidly – in any integrated system.  For practical purposes, however, integrated aquaculture is overwhelmingly about the plants.  The fish are simply a means to the end. Plants are where the food value is – and the financial value, too.  Harvesting fish is a bonus to be had for playing the entire game without fouling out.“

The notion of plants being the main game has become part of current aquaponics thinking but it is derived of iAVs – the progenitor of all other ‘aquaponics systems’.  iAVs has always approached integrated aquaculture from the plants’ perspective.  

With iAVs, the fish growth aspects are completely integrated into horticulture production rather than just tacking some plants onto a recirculating aquaculture system in the interest of achieving tertiary water quality improvement.

And, let’s not kid ourselves, growing lettuce is not the same as growing fruiting plants…..and iAVs was designed to produce fruiting plants – although leaf crops and herbs are also viable when not produced exclusively.

Therefore, iAVs considers all operational aspects (parameters) from the soil organism’s and plant’s ‘point of view’ – not fish considerations first, foremost, much less only. With iAVs, so-called ‘aquaponics’ is dominantly horticulture, not aquaculture. If one provides ideal/proper conditions for rapid bio-conversions and excellent plant growth, then the fish will be/do fine.

If not, the fish are probably stunted, unhealthy or dead anyway, so what’s the point?

If what you want to do is mess with plumbing, pumps, valves, various filtration techniques, and to monitor fish-related parameters, then stick with recirculating aquaculture (RAS) and forget about ‘ponics’.  If what you want to do is make fish as ‘happy’ as possible, then leave them in their native habitats.

If you are not already savvy in regard to botany or have little knowledge about gardening – and the conditions that vascular plants need to thrive – then learn best practices in advance of reliance on plant growth for extraction of nutrient from a media (or other) biofilter.

Mark’s view is that the vast majority of aquaponic enthusiasts lack understanding of the needs of plants – particularly flowering (fruit-bearing) species.  

Furthermore, he is of the opinion that this is one of the primary reasons that aquaponics has not become a commercially viable force in global food production strategy.

The aquaculture component provides the fertilizer source materials to be ‘processed’ by the soil organisms. At best, the fish production aspect represents but 10% of the potential production value – most probably less when ‘done correctly’.  

In other words…..

iAVs is ‘Organic Horticulture’……first, second and third.

-o0o-

Aquaponics’ Biggest Mistake

by garyd | Apr 3, 2015 | Linked

Most people who are interested in aquaponics know that Missouri farmers Tom and Paula Speraneo popularized what is commonly termed flood and drain aquaponics.

For the uninitiated, flood and drain aquaponics in its simplest guise comprises a fish tank and one or more media (usually gravel) grow beds.  Nutrient-rich water is pumped from the fish tank into the gravel grow beds before draining back into the fish tank.  This is the most widely used aquaponics configuration in the world.

What far fewer people know is how the Speraneos came to be involved in aquaponics and where the idea for their basic flood and drain system originated.

Following the completion of his PhD dissertation at North Carolina State University, Mark R. McMurtry undertook a series of trips to showcase iAVs and its benefits for allied faculty staff, students and aquaculture industry professionals.

In December 1989, one such trip to Arkansas put Mark in contact with Tom and Paula Speraneo at the University of Arkansas in Little Rock.

A week later, Mark facilitated a 3-day interactive discussion/workshop at the Meadowcreek Project in Fox, Arkansas for the usual mix of faculty, staff, students and other interested parties – including the Speraneos.

The Speraneos returned home keen to construct an integrated aquaculture system based on what they’d learned from Mark.

As it turned out, they weren’t able to afford the sand that was central to iavs’ effectiveness, so they dug up their gravel driveway for use in their system bio-filter.

Let’s remember that the efficacy of iAVs relies on the use of sand (not gravel) so this was a significant change and one that would have serious implications for aquaponics.

Meanwhile, oblivious to the fact that his work was about to be usurped by a mistake, Mark had begun a promotional tour of sub-Saharan Africa and Middle Eastern countries.

When he returned, he became aware of the Spereaneo’s substitution of gravel for the sand and he counselled them at length about their choice – but they persisted.  This aberration would subsequently be popularised as the flood and drain aquaponics system.

This “mistake”…..subsequently to become willful ignorance…..was what best-selling author Malcolm Gladwell would come to describe as a “tipping point” – one that would have profound, negative implications for aquaponics.

The sand bio-filter is the heart of the iAVs “living machine”.  The substitution of gravel for sand impacted the efficacy of the original iAVs in several ways including:

• significant reduction in mechanical filtration capability
• significant reduction in soil organism populations  and activity
• reduced aeration of media bacteria and plant root zone
• reduced nutrient utilization and system stability
• significant reduction in fish survival, feed rate and growth
• increased capital costs with reduced fish and plant yields
• increased operating cost per unit of production

One of the key features of the iAVs design was its versatility.  The same system design could be used by a backyard farmer or an impoverished villager or a protected cropping greenhouse operator.

The first casualty of the change in media was iAVs’ commercial potential.  

The basic flood and drain system never gained commercial traction because gravel does not lend itself to the mechanisation and automation that is a feature of controlled environment agriculture.  Sand, by contrast, has been used in hydroponic greenhouse culture for decades – subject to all of the usual constraints associated with greenhouse culture.

The iAVs could be built and operated by a humble villager with some seeds and little guidance.  The basic flood and drain system, by contrast, requires a connection to the grid, a pump (or two) and ongoing access to mineral supplements.   The basic flood and drain system also requires greater skills and knowledge arising from the heightened risks that it poses.

As an aside, the Speraneos (who initially gave credit to Mark for their introduction to what was yet to become known as aquaponics), eventually used their utilisation of gravel as a point of sufficient difference (in their minds at least) to assume ownership of the concept.

This process of taking a system design and “tweaking” it (with a view to assuming ownership of the idea that underpins it), was to become a recurring theme in aquaponics.

Anyway, the Speraneos developed an information package and promoted their system through an Internet mail list (the fore-runner of the discussion forum). Interestingly, when this information package first became available, purchasers were asked to agree (by way of a binding legal instrument) not to market their own information packages. It seems that the Speraneos were not keen to have done to them what they had done to Mark McMurtry.

This requirement obviously lapsed at some point because, in 2005, Joel Malcolm bought the Speraneo’s information kit and “tweaked” it into an Australian context.  Australia’s ABC Gardening TV program ran a segment on Malcolm’s home-based system and the basic flood and drain system enjoyed a new surge in popularity.  Regrettably, however, the “new” flood and drain system had the same basic flaw…..the media particle size.

The Speraneo model was adopted by various other kit makers (including Murray Hallam and Sylvia Bernstein) and, while they “tweaked” the model too, none of them managed to grasp the toxic tipping point…..the gravel or expanded clay pebbles.

To summarize, the substitution of gravel (or clay pebbles) for sand was not just a minor detail – it was the aquaponics difference between chalk and cheese.   The iAVs is a living machine whereas the basic flood and drain system is, given a convergence of common events, a killing machine.

In terms of its filtration efficacy, Mark has characterized the use of gravel (as distinct from sand) in the biofilter as “attempting to catch BB’s with a basketball hoop.”

So, the basic flood and drain aquaponics system was/is nothing more than a major mistake.

Notwithstanding its noble bloodlines, the basic flood and drain system is actually an unfortunate mutation with nothing like the productivity, resilience and versatility of its iAVs predecessor.

-o0o-