Culture of fish in rice fields

Rice is presently grown in 113 countries. Rice farming also offers a suitable environment for the culture of fish and other aquatic organism. This publication synthesizes the available information on the role that aquaculture can play in rice-based farming systems towards food security and poverty alleviation. The review describes the history behind integrating aquaculture with different rice ecosystems, the various production systems in operation such as concurrent, rotational and alternate, the modifications needed to the fields in order to integrate fish with rice farming, and the agronomic and aquaculture management that is necessary. The benefits of integration to communities - economic and environmental - are also described with reviews of the experiences from values countries. The real impacts of rice-fish farming and its future potential in terms of improved income and nutrition are significant but generally underestimated and undervalued. Notable changes have taken place in pest management in rice farming, and in fish seed production and availability making this a particularly relevant moment for emphasizing the importance of rice-fish farming. There is considderable potential for rice-fish farming to expand further in many countries and to contribute substantially towards global food and nutritional security.Freshwater fish, Fish culture

Fish Farms at Sea: The Ground Truth from Google Earth

In the face of global overfishing of wild-caught seafood, ocean fish farming has augmented the supply of fresh fish to western markets and become one of the fastest growing global industries. Accurate reporting of quantities of wild-caught fish has been problematic and we questioned whether similar discrepancies in data exist in statistics for farmed fish production. In the Mediterranean Sea, ocean fish farming is prevalent and stationary cages can be seen off the coasts of 16 countries using satellite imagery available through Google Earth. Using this tool, we demonstrate here that a few trained scientists now have the capacity to ground truth farmed fish production data reported by the Mediterranean countries. With Google Earth, we could examine 91% of the Mediterranean coast and count 248 tuna cages (circular cages >40 m diameter) and 20,976 other fish cages within 10 km offshore, the majority of which were off Greece (49%) and Turkey (31%). Combining satellite imagery with assumptions about cage volume, fish density, harvest rates, and seasonal capacity, we make a conservative approximation of ocean-farmed finfish production for 16 Mediterranean countries. Our overall estimate of 225,736 t of farmed finfish (not including tuna) in the Mediterranean Sea in 2006 is only slightly more than the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization reports. The results demonstrate the reliability of recent FAO farmed fish production statistics for the Mediterranean as well as the promise of Google Earth to collect and ground truth data

Traditional knowledge of wild edible plants used in the northwest of the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal): a comparative study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>We compare traditional knowledge and use of wild edible plants in six rural regions of the northwest of the Iberian Peninsula as follows: Campoo, Picos de Europa, Piloña, Sanabria and Caurel in Spain and Parque Natural de Montesinho in Portugal.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data on the use of 97 species were collected through informed consent semi-structured interviews with local informants. A semi-quantitative approach was used to document the relative importance of each species and to indicate differences in selection criteria for consuming wild food species in the regions studied.</p> <p>Results and discussion</p> <p>The most significant species include many wild berries and nuts (e.g. <it>Castanea sativa, Rubus ulmifolius, Fragaria vesca</it>) and the most popular species in each food-category (e.g. fruits or herbs used to prepare liqueurs such as <it>Prunus spinosa</it>, vegetables such as <it>Rumex acetosa</it>, condiments such as <it>Origanum vulgare</it>, or plants used to prepare herbal teas such as <it>Chamaemelum nobile</it>). The most important species in the study area as a whole are consumed at five or all six of the survey sites.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Social, economic and cultural factors, such as poor communications, fads and direct contact with nature in everyday life should be taken into account in determining why some wild foods and traditional vegetables have been consumed, but others not. They may be even more important than biological factors such as richness and abundance of wild edible flora. Although most are no longer consumed, demand is growing for those regarded as local specialties that reflect regional identity.</p

Maintaining Diversity of Integrated Rice and Fish Production Confers Adaptability of Food Systems to Global Change

Rice and fish are preferred foods, critical for healthy and nutritious diets, and provide the foundations of local and national economies across Asia. Although transformations, or "revolutions," in agriculture and aquaculture over the past half-century have primarily relied upon intensified monoculture to increase rice and fish production, agroecological approaches that support biodiversity and utilize natural processes are particularly relevant for achieving a transformation toward food systems with more inclusive, nutrition-sensitive, and ecologically sound outcomes. Rice and fish production are frequently integrated within the same physical, temporal, and social spaces, with substantial variation amongst the types of production practice and their extent. In Cambodia, rice field fisheries that strongly rely upon natural processes persist in up to 80% of rice farmland, whereas more input and infrastructure dependent rice-shrimp culture is expanding within the rice farmland of Vietnam. We demonstrate how a diverse suite of integrated production practices contribute to sustainable and nutrition-sensitive food systems policy, research, and practice. We first develop a typology of integrated production practices illustrating the nature and degree of: (a) fish stocking, (b) water management, (c) use of synthetic inputs, and (d) institutions that control access to fish. Second, we summarize recent research and innovations that have improved the performance of each type of practice. Third, we synthesize data on the prevalence, outcomes, and trajectories of these practices in four South and Southeast Asian countries that rely heavily on fish and rice for food and nutrition security. Focusing on changes since the food systems transformation brought about by the Green Revolution, we illustrate how integrated production practices continue to serve a variety of objectives to varying degrees: food and nutrition security, rural livelihood diversification and income improvement, and biodiversity conservation. Five shifts to support contemporary food system transformations [i.e., disaggregating (1) production practices and (2) objectives, (3) utilizing diverse metrics, (4) valuing emergent, place-based innovation, (5) building adaptive capacity] would accelerate progress toward Sustainable Development Goal 2, specifically through ensuring ecosystem maintenance, sustainable food production, and resilient agricultural practices with the capacity to adapt to global change.This work was undertaken as part of the CGIAR Research Program on Fish Agri-Food Systems (FISH) led by WorldFish with contribution from the CGIAR Research program on Water Land and Ecosystems (WLE) led by the International Water Management Institute. Both these programs are supported by contributors to the CGIAR Trust Fund. Additional funding support for this work was provided by the Australian Government and the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research grant work was provided by the Australian Centre for International Research through the Development of Rice Fish Systems in the Ayeyarwady Delta, Myanmar (ACIAR project FIS/2016/135). The support through the United States Agency for International Development under Cooperative Agreement No. AID-OAA-L-14-00006 and KAES contribution number 20-317-J and grant number AID-442-IO12-00001 are duly acknowledged. Photo credits: Anon., Finn Thilsted, Anon., Anon., Todd Brown (Figure 1)