74
edits
Aquaponics (archived - 2012): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Aquaponics
m (→Lighting) |
|||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
There are many different pumps, tanks, filters and systems out there. Should we use a gravity system or multiple pumps? How are we going to deal with heavy metals? What about bacteria? (Good and bad) | There are many different pumps, tanks, filters and systems out there. Should we use a gravity system or multiple pumps? How are we going to deal with heavy metals? What about bacteria? (Good and bad) | ||
All sorts of questions since this is a relativity new science. That's what makes it awesome. | All sorts of questions since this is a relativity new science. That's what makes it awesome. | ||
====System Risk Factors==== | |||
- Pest infestation | |||
- Microbial infection (pythium, et al) | |||
- Nutrient factors (pH, oxygenation, chemical concentration(s) of ammonia, etc) | |||
- Outside contamination (mishandling, foreign introduction of organic or inorganic material) | |||
- Systemic shock (spikes or troughs due to temperature controls, nutrient issues, stress etc) | |||
Significant research data exists regarding an aquaponics research project in Brooks, Alberta conducted in 2003-2005 (insert citation to CDC Brooks project, Savidov et al 2003-2005). Of particular interest is the team's findings regarding plant yield compared to organic soil-based production and current mainstream hydroponic production in Alberta. | |||
The study found plant yields were "considerably higher than average in organic greenhouse production based on soil, but still 15% - 25% lower than average yields in mainstream greenhouse vegetable production based on hydroponics." (insert citation to CDC Brooks Project, section 3.1.2.1). The research document further examines the potential causes, notably a "lack of experience resulted into a massive loss of plants caused by disease and pest infestation during winter period 2003-2004." | |||
Further research reveals a local strain of Pythium Aphanidermatum was largely responsible for major plant loss, including mention of prevention measures to adopt in the future. As a result, plant yields exceeded the industry average in 2004/2005, over the previously observed performance in 2003/2004 (reference Figure 3 and 4 in CDC Brooks project, page 14 and 15). | |||
==Other Groups== | ==Other Groups== | ||