The Evolution of Sustainability Metrics for the Marine Ingredient Sector: Moving Towards Holistic Assessments of Aquaculture Feed

References

• Aas TS, Ytrestøyl T, Åsgård T. 2019. Utilization of feed resources in the production of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in Norway: an update for 2016. Aquacult Rep. 15:100216. doi: 10.1016/j.aqrep.2019.100216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aas TS, Åsgård T, Ytrestøyl T. 2022. Utilization of feed resources in the production of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in Norway: an update for 2020. Aquacult Rep. 26:101316. doi: 10.1016/j.aqrep.2022.101316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avadí A, Fréon P. 2013. Life cycle assessment of fisheries: a review for fisheries scientists and managers. Fish Res. 143:21–38. doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2013.01.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ayer NW, Tyedmers PH, Pelletier NL, Sonesson U, Scholz A. 2007. Co-product allocation in life cycle assessments of seafood production systems: review of problems and strategies. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 12(7):480–487. doi: 10.1065/lca2006.11.284.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyd CE, D'Abramo LR, Glencross BD, Huyben DC, Juarez LM, Lockwood GS, McNevin AA, Tacon AGJ, Teletchea F, Tomasso JR, Jr, et al. 2020. Achieving sustainable aquaculture: historical and current perspectives and future needs and challenges. J World Aquaculture Soc. 51(3):578–633. doi: 10.1111/jwas.12714.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calder PC. 2001. Polyunsaturated fatty acids, inflammation, and immunity. Lipids. 36(9):1007–1024. doi: 10.1007/s11745-001-0812-7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calder PC. 2015. Marine omega-3 fatty acids and inflammatory processes: effects, mechanisms and clinical relevance. Biochim Biophys Acta. 1851(4):469–484. doi: 10.1016/j.bbalip.2014.08.010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cashion T, Hornborg S, Ziegler F, Hognes ES, Tyedmers P. 2016. Review and advancement of the marine biotic resource use metric in seafood LCAs: a case study of Norwegian salmon feed. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 21(8):1106–1120. doi: 10.1007/s11367-016-1092-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cashion T, Tyedmers P, Parker RW. 2017. Global reduction fisheries and their products in the context of sustainable limits. Fish Fish. 18(6):1026–1037. doi: 10.1111/faf.12222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cherubini F, Strømman AH, Ulgiati S. 2011. Influence of allocation methods on the environmental performance of biorefinery products—a case study. Resour Conserv Recycl. 55(11):1070–1077. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.06.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Da Silva RFB, Viña A, Moran EF, Dou Y, Batistella M, Liu J. 2021. Socioeconomic and environmental effects of soybean production in metacoupled systems. Sci Rep. 11(1):18662. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-98256-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Schryver AM, Brakkee KW, Goedkoop MJ, Huijbregts MAJ. 2009. Characterization factors for global warming in life cycle assessment based on damages to humans and ecosystems. Environ Sci Technol. 43(6):1689–1695. doi: 10.1021/es800456m.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Vries M, de Boer IJ. 2010. Comparing environmental impacts for livestock products: a review of life cycle assessments. Livest Sci. 128(1–3):1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2009.11.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2018. PEFCR feed for food producing animals. [accessed 2023 Apr 12]. https://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/smgp/pdf/PEFCR_feed.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira I, Gomes-Bispo A, Lourenço H, Matos J, Afonso C, Cardoso C, Castanheira I, Motta C, Prates JAM, Bandarra NM. 2020. The chemical composition and lipid profile of the chub mackerel (Scomber colias) show a strong seasonal dependence: contribution to a nutritional evaluation. Biochimie. 178:181–189. doi: 10.1016/j.biochi.2020.09.022.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO). 2022. State of the world’s fisheries and aquaculture. Rome: (SOFIA) Food and Agricultural Organisation; p. 266.
   Google Scholar
• Free CM, Jensen OP, Hilborn R. 2021. Evaluating impacts of forage fish abundance on marine predators. Conserv Biol. 35(5):1540–1551. doi: 10.1111/cobi.13709.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fréon P, Sueiro JC, Iriarte F, Miro Evar OF, Landa Y, Mittaine JF, Bouchon M. 2014. Harvesting for food versus feed: a review of Peruvian fisheries in a global context. Rev Fish Biol Fish. 24(1):381–398. doi: 10.1007/s11160-013-9336-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fréon P, Durand H, Avadí A, Huaranca S, Moreyra RO. 2017. Life cycle assessment of three Peruvian fishmeal plants: toward a cleaner production. J Cleaner Prod. 145:50–63. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.036.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fry JP, Mailloux NA, Love DC, Milli MC, Cao L. 2018. Feed conversion efficiency in aquaculture: do we measure it correctly? Environ Res Lett. 13(2):024017. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aaa273.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galdos MEA, Albrecht-Ruiz M, Maldonado AS, Minga JP. 2002. Fat content of Peruvian anchovy (Engraulis ringens), after “El Niño” phenomenon (1998—1999). J Food Compos Anal. 15(6):627–631. doi: 10.1006/jfca.2002.1059.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glencross BD. 2009. Exploring the nutritional demand for essential fatty acids by aquaculture species. Rev Aquacult. 1(2):71–124. doi: 10.1111/j.1753-5131.2009.01006.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glencross BD. 2020. A feed is still only as good as its ingredients: an update on the nutritional research strategies for the optimal evaluation of ingredients for aquaculture feeds. Aquacult Nutr. 26(6):1871–1883. doi: 10.1111/anu.13138.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glencross BD, Baily J, Berntssen MH, Hardy R, MacKenzie S, Tocher DR. 2020. Risk assessment of the use of alternative animal and plant raw material resources in aquaculture feeds. Rev Aquacult. 12(2):703–758. doi: 10.1111/raq.12347.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glencross B, Fracalossi DM, Hua K, Izquierdo M, Mai K, Øverland M, Robb D, Roubach R, Schrama J, Small B, et al. 2023. Harvesting the benefits of nutritional research to address global challenges in the 21st century. J World Aquacult Soc. 54(2):343–363. doi: 10.1111/jwas.12948.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glencross B, Ling X, Gatlin D, Kaushik S, Øverland M, Newton R, Valente LM. 2024. A SWOT analysis of the use of marine, grain, terrestrial-animal and novel protein ingredients in aquaculture feeds. Rev Fish Sci Aquacult. :1–39. doi: 10.1080/23308249.2024.2315049.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hardy RW, Kaushik SJ, Mai K, Bai SC. 2022. Fish nutrition—history and perspectives. In: Fish nutrition. Cambridge (MA): Academic Press. p. 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Hilborn R, Amoroso RO, Anderson CM, Baum JK, Branch TA, Costello C, de Moor CL, Faraj A, Hively D, Jensen OP, et al. 2020. Effective fisheries management instrumental in improving fish stock status. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 117(4):2218–2224. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1909726116.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hilborn R, Buratti CC, Díaz Acuña E, Hively D, Kolding J, Kurota H, Baker N, Mace PM, de Moor CL, Muko S, et al. 2022. Recent trends in abundance and fishing pressure of agency-assessed small pelagic fish stocks. Fish Fish. 23(6):1313–1331. doi: 10.1111/faf.12690.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IFFO. 2024. [accessed 2024 Mar 25]. https://www.iffo.com/key-facts.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson A. 2009. Fish in–fish out ratios explained. Aquac Eur. 34(3):5–10.
   Google Scholar
• Jia F, Peng S, Green J, Koh L, Chen X. 2020. Soybean supply chain management and sustainability: a systematic literature review. J Cleaner Prod. 255:120254. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120254.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaushik SJ, Troell M. 2010. Taking the fish-in fish-out ratio a step further. Aquaculture. 35(1):15–17.
   Google Scholar
• Kok B, Malcorps W, Tlusty MF, Eltholth MM, Auchterlonie NA, Little DC, Harmsen R, Newton RW, Davies SJ. 2020. Fish as feed: using economic allocation to quantify the fish in: fish out ratio of major fed aquaculture species. Aquaculture. 528:735474. doi: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2020.735474.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konar M, Qiu S, Tougher B, Vause J, Tlusty M, Fitzsimmons K, Barrows R, Cao L. 2019. Illustrating the hidden economic, social and ecological values of global forage fish resources. Resour Conserv Recycl. 151:104456. doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.104456.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malcorps W, Newton RW, Sprague M, Glencross BD, Little DC. 2021. Nutritional characterisation of european aquaculture processing by-products to facilitate strategic utilisation. Front Sustain Food Syst. 5:378. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2021.720595.
   Google Scholar
• Naylor RL, Goldburg RJ, Primavera JH, Kautsky N, Beveridge MC, Clay J, Folke C, Lubchenco J, Mooney H, Troell M. 2000. Effect of aquaculture on world fish supplies. Nature. 405(6790):1017–1024. doi: 10.1038/35016500.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naylor RL, Hardy RW, Bureau DP, Chiu A, Elliott M, Farrell AP, Forster I, Gatlin DM, Goldburg RJ, Hua K, et al. 2009. Feeding aquaculture in an era of finite resources. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 106(36):15103–15110. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0905235106.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Naylor RL, Hardy RW, Buschmann AH, Bush SR, Cao L, Klinger DH, Little DC, Lubchenco J, Shumway SE, Troell M. 2021. A 20-year retrospective review of global aquaculture. Nature 591(7851):551–563. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03308-6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newton R, Telfer T, Little D. 2014. Perspectives on the utilization of aquaculture coproduct in Europe and Asia: prospects for value addition and improved resource efficiency. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 54(4):495–510. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2011.588349.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Notarnicola B, Sala S, Anton A, McLaren SJ, Saouter E, Sonesson U. 2017. The role of life cycle assessment in supporting sustainable agri-food systems: a review of the challenges. J Cleaner Prod. 140:399–409. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.071.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ott D, Goyal S, Reuss R, Gutzeit HO, Liebscher J, Dautz J, Degieter M, De Steur H, Zannini E. 2023. LCA as decision support tool in the food and feed sector: evidence from R&D case studies. Environ Syst Decis. 43(1):129–141. doi: 10.1007/s10669-022-09874-y.
   Google Scholar
• Parker RW, Blanchard JL, Gardner C, Green BS, Hartmann K, Tyedmers PH, Watson RA. 2018. Fuel use and greenhouse gas emissions of world fisheries. Nature Clim Change. 8(4):333–337. doi: 10.1038/s41558-018-0117-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pikitch EK, Rountos KJ, Essington TE, Santora C, Pauly D, Watson R, Sumaila UR, Boersma PD, Boyd IL, Conover DO, et al. 2014. The global contribution of forage fish to marine fisheries and ecosystems. Fish Fish. 15(1):43–64. doi: 10.1111/faf.12004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regueiro L, Newton R, Soula M, Méndez D, Kok B, Little DC, Pastres R, Johansen J, Ferreira M. 2022. Opportunities and limitations for the introduction of circular economy principles in EU aquaculture based on the regulatory framework. J Ind Ecol. 26(6):2033–2044. doi: 10.1111/jiec.13188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romotowska PE, Karlsdóttir MG, Gudjónsdóttir M, Kristinsson HG, Arason S. 2016. Seasonal and geographical variation in chemical composition and lipid stability of Atlantic mackerel (Scomber scombrus) caught in Icelandic waters. J Food Compos Anal. 49:9–18. doi: 10.1016/j.jfca.2016.03.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shepherd CJ, Jackson AJ. 2013. Global fishmeal and fish-oil supply: inputs, outputs and markets. J Fish Biol. 83(4):1046–1066. doi: 10.1111/jfb.12224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silva CB, Valente LM, Matos E, Brandão M, Neto B. 2018. Life cycle assessment of aquafeed ingredients. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 23(5):995–1017. doi: 10.1007/s11367-017-1414-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevens JR, Newton RW, Tlusty M, Little DC. 2018. The rise of aquaculture by-products: Increasing food production, value, and sustainability through strategic utilisation. Mar Pol. 90:115–124. doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2017.12.027.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svanes E, Vold M, Hanssen OJ. 2011. Effect of different allocation methods on LCA results of products from wild-caught fish and on the use of such results. Int J Life Cycle Assess. 16(6):512–521. doi: 10.1007/s11367-011-0288-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tacon AGJ. 2004. Use of fish meal and fish oil in aquaculture: a global perspective. Aquatic Resour Cult Dev. 1(1):3–14.
   Google Scholar
• Tacon AGJ, Metian M. 2008. Global overview on the use of fish meal and fish oil in industrially compounded aquafeeds: trends and future prospects. Aquaculture 285(1–4):146–158. doi: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2008.08.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tacon AGJ, Metian M. 2009. Fishing for aquaculture: non-food use of small pelagic forage fish—a global perspective. Rev Fish Sci. 17(3):305–317. doi: 10.1080/10641260802677074.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tacon AGJ, Metian M. 2015. Feed matters: satisfying the feed demand of aquaculture. Rev Fish Sci Aquacult. 23(1):1–10. doi: 10.1080/23308249.2014.987209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tacon AG, Metian M, McNevin AA. 2022. Future feeds: suggested guidelines for sustainable development. Rev Fish Sci Aquacult. 30(2):135–142. doi: 10.1080/23308249.2020.1860474.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tukker A. 2000. Life cycle assessment as a tool in environmental impact assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 20(4):435–456. doi: 10.1016/S0195-9255(99)00045-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ytrestøyl T, Aas TS, Åsgård T. 2015. Utilisation of feed resources in production of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in Norway. Aquaculture 448:365–374. doi: 10.1016/j.aquaculture.2015.06.023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang W, Liu M, Sadovy de Mitcheson Y, Cao L, Leadbitter D, Newton R, Little DC, Li S, Yang Y, Chen X, et al. 2020. Fishing for feed in China: facts, impacts and implications. Fish and Fisheries.21(1):47–62. doi: 10.1111/faf.12414.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar