Water footprint of lettuce production in aquaponic and hydroponic systems
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29312/remexca.v15i3.3304Keywords:
growing room, NTF system, sustainable agricultural techniques, tilapiaAbstract
Sustainable agriculture allows the efficient use of natural resources, particularly water. This study aimed to compare the water footprint of the lettuce (Lactuca sativa L.) cultivation in two production systems: aquaponic and hydroponic, in order to understand its impact on water resources. Both production systems were established in a shade house in the state of Sonora, Mexico. The experiment was conducted from May 20 to July 29, 2020. The estimation of the WFtotal was calculated by adding the blue water footprints, consumption of water sheet in the development of the crop and of the inputs and materials used in each system (based on information from the scientific literature). The results indicated an average harvested lettuce weight of 0.056 kg (±0.005 kg) in the aquaponic system and 0.097 kg (±0.007 kg) in the hydroponic system. The statistical analysis was evaluated with the Student’s t-test with a significance level of 5%. The estimated BWFs were 0.2941 and 0.1721 m3 kg-1, the WFtotal were 2.6841 m3 kg-1 and 0.1821 m3 kg-1 for the aquaponic system and hydroponic system, respectively, for 19 plants in each system. The values of the WFtotal were high since they represent the sum of the blue water footprints and the WFinputs and materials. The results of this research confirmed the hypothesis proposed as the aquaponic system registered a greater water footprint. However, it is advisable to generate more knowledge on the subject.
Downloads
References
Barbosa, G.; Gadelha, F.; Kublik, N.; Proctor, A.; Reichelm, L.; Weissinger, E.; Wohlleb, G. and Halden, R. 2015. Comparison of land, water, and energy requirements of lettuce grown using hydroponic vs conventional agricultural methods. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 12:6879-6891.
Bautista, D.; Otazo, E.; Román, A.; Pavón, N. y Prieto, F. 2020. La huella hídrica de diferentes cultivos: un panorama global. Revista Latinoamericana el Ambiente y las Ciencias. 11(28):419-422.
Biswas, A.; Duary S.; Islam, A. and Bhattacharjee, S. 2023. water footprint and productivity of lettuce with non-conventional water resources biological forum an international journal. 15(4):01-04.
Blandón, E. E. y Benavidez, L. E. 2020. Evaluación de dos variedades de Lactuca sativa bajo condiciones de acuaponía con las técnicas de canaleta, NFT horizontal vertical. Tesis de licenciatura. Universidad Católica del Trópico Seco. Nicaragua.
Caro, L. N. 2014. Estimación de la huella hídrica de la producción de lechugas ‘baby’ bajo sistema hidropónico. Tesis de licenciatura. Universidad de Chile, Chile.
Delaide, B.; Goddek, S.; Gott, J.; Soyeurt, H. and Jijakli, M. 2016. Lettuce (Lactuca sativa L. var. Sucrine) growth performance in complemented aquaponic solution outperforms hydroponics. Water. 8(10):467-473.
Flores-Aguilar, P.; García-Trejo, J. y Martínez-Guido, S. 2020. Acuaponía: una alternativa versátil e integral en la producción de alimentos para el entorno mexicano. Digital Ciencia@UAQRO. 14(1):43-53.
García, E. 2004. Modificaciones al sistema de clasificación climática de Köppen. México, DF. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM).
González, O.; González, L.; Comolli, J.; Santinón, J.; Agüero, C. y Roux, J. 2021. Parámetros productivos de dos especies de peces autóctonos (Piaractus mesopotamicus y Prochilodus lineatus) en un sistema acuapónico con lechuga (Lactuca sativa sp). Agrotecnia. 31:43-55. Doi.org/10.30972/agr.0315815.
Haghighi, E.; Madani, K. and Hoekstra, A. 2018. The water footprint of water conservation using shade balls in California. Nature Sustainability. 1:358-360. Doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0092-2.
Harun, S. N. and Hanafiah, M. M. 2018. Blue a green water use of cultivating selected crops in Malaysia. AIP Conference Proceedings. Doi.org/10.1063/1.5027942.
Hernández, S. 2019. Degradación y durabilidad de materiales y componentes constructivos. México, DF. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM).
Hoekstra, A. Y. and Chapagain, A. K. 2008. Globalization of water: sharing the planet’s freshwater resources. Oxford, UK. Willey-Blackwell.
Hoekstra, A. Y. and Mekonnen, M. M. 2011. Global water scarcity: monthly blue water footprint compared to blue water availability for the world’s major river basins. Delft, The Netherlands: UNESCO-IHE.
Hoekstra, A. Y.; Chapagain, A.; Aldaya, M. and Mekonnen, M. 2011. The water footprint assessment manual. Setting the global standard. London, UK. Earthscan. 228 p.
Kluender, E. 2013. Quantification of water footprint: calculating the amount of water needed to produce steel. The Journal of Purdue Undergraduate Research. 3:50-57. Doi.org/10.5703/jpur.03.1.08.
Kubitza, F. 2017. pH da agua regula excrecao e toxidez de amonia. Revista Panorama de Aquicultura. 27(160):14-23.
Le Roux, B.; Van der Laan, M.; Vahrmeijer, T.; Annandale, J. G. and Bristow, K. L. 2018. Water footprints of vegetable crop wastage along the supply chain in Gauteng, South Africa. Water. 10:539-545. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10050539.
Lennard, W. and Ward. J. 2019. A comparison of plant growth rates between an NFT hydroponic system and an NFT Aquaponic System. Horticulturae. 5(2):27-34. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae5020027.
Martínez, Y. R. 2013. La Acuaponía como alternativa de producción agropecuaria sostenible ¿Una posibilidad para tener en casa? REDICINAySA. 2(5):16-23.
Mekonnen, M. and Hoekstra, A. 2011. The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 15:1577-1600. Doi:10.5194/hess-15-1577-2011.
Monsees, H.; Suhl, J.; Maurice, P.; Kloas, W.; Dannehl, D. and Würtz, S. 2019. Lettuce (Lactuca sativa, variety Salanova) production in decoupled aquaponic systems: Same yield and similar quality as in conventional hydroponic systems but drastically reduced greenhouse gas emissions by saving inorganic fertilizer. PLoS One. 14(6).
Oltra, M. y Melgarejo, J. 2020. Huella hídrica y sostenibilidad de los recursos hídricos en la provincia de Alicante. El agua en la provincia de alicante. Alicante, España. Diputación Provincial de Alicante Universidad de Alicante.
Orjuela, M. A. y Vargas, D. F. 2016. Estrategias para el uso eficiente del agua a partir de la estimación de huella hídrica en cultivos de lechuga (Lactuca sativa) y brócoli (Brassica) para una finca de diez hectáreas en mosquera cundinamarca. Tesis de Licenciatura. Universidad de La Salle, Colombia.
Pérez-Rincón, M.; Hurtado, I.; Restrepo, S.; Bonilla, S.; Calderón, H. and Ramírez, A. 2017. Water footprint measure method for tilapia, cachama and trout production: study cases to Valle del Cauca (Colombia). Ingeniería y competitividad. 19(2):115-126. https://doi.org/10.25100/iyc.v19i2.5298
Portillo, A.; Muñoz, C.; López, D.; Pinto, F.; Cristancho, H.; Gironza, M.; García, M.; Gil, R. y Echavarría, V. 2020. Catálogo de identidad 2019. Bogotá, Colombia: SWISSAID.
SADER. 2019. Secretaría de Agricultura y Desarrollo Rural. Conozcamos un poco más sobre la lechuga. Gobierno de México. México, DF.
SAGARHPA. 2018. Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Recursos Hidráulicos, Pesca y Acuicultura. En 2017 aumentaron las exportaciones agrícolas de Sonora 22%. Gobierno de México.
Sendanayake, S. 2016. Life cycle analysis of ferrocement rainwater tanks in Sri Lanka: a comparison with RCC and HDPE tanks. International Journal of Advances in Engineering Research. 12(2):30-42.
SIAP. 2019. Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera. Avance de Siembras y Cosechas. Resumen por estado. http://infosiap.siap.gob.mx:8080/agricola-siap-gobmx/ResumenProducto.do.
SIAP. 202. Servicio de Información Agroalimentaria y Pesquera. Al alza, producción y exportación de lechuga mexicana. https://www.gob.mx/agricultura/prensa/al-alza-produccion-y-exportacion-de-lechuga-mexicana?idiom=es.
Shi, R.; Ukaew, S.; Archer, D.; Hee, J.; Pearlson, M.; Lewis, K. and Shonnard, D. 2017. Life cycle water footprint analysis for rapeseed derived jet fuel in north dakota. ACS Sustainable Chemestry and Engineering. 5(5):3845-3854.
Somerville, C.; Cohen, M.; Pantanella, E.; Stankus, A. y Lovatelli, A. 2022. Producción de alimentos en acuaponía en pequeña escala. Cultivo integral de peces y plantas. FAO. Documento técnico de pesca y acuicultura 589. FAO, Roma. Doi.org/10.4060/i4021es.
Tolón, A.; Lastra, X. y Fernández, V. 2013. Huella hídrica y sostenibilidad del uso de los recursos hídricos. Aplicación al Poniente Almeriense. Revista Electrónic@ de Medio Ambiente. 14(1):56‐86.
Valenzuela, R.; Martínez, P. y Arévalo, J. 2017. Evaluación preliminar de un sistema de recirculación de aguas para un prototipo implementado en la producción de tilapia roja (Oreochromis sp.). Ingeniería y Región. 18(2):25-33. https://doi.org/10.25054/ 22161325.1737.
Wang, F.; Wang, S.; Li, Z.; You, H.; Aviso, K. B.; Tan, R. R. and Jia, X. 2019. Water footprint sustainability assessment for the chemical sector at the regional level. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 142:69-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.resconrec.2018.11.009.
Water foodprint network. 2016. Global average water footprint.
Wilson, A. 2018. Los hidropónicos: guía suprema de los hidropónicos para salvar tiempo y dinero. Barcelona, España. BABELCUBE-Books.
Zaman, A. and Newman, P. 2021. Plastics: are they part of the zero-waste agenda or the toxic-waste agenda? Sustain Earth. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42055-021-00043-8.
Zárate, E.; Fernández, A. y Kiuper, D. 2017. Guía metodológica para la evaluación de la huella hídrica en una cuenca hidrográfica. Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura (IICA). San José, Costa Rica.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The authors who publish in Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas accept the following conditions:
In accordance with copyright laws, Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas recognizes and respects the authors’ moral right and ownership of property rights which will be transferred to the journal for dissemination in open access. Invariably, all the authors have to sign a letter of transfer of property rights and of originality of the article to Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias (INIFAP) [National Institute of Forestry, Agricultural and Livestock Research]. The author(s) must pay a fee for the reception of articles before proceeding to editorial review.
All the texts published by Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas —with no exception— are distributed under a Creative Commons License Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), which allows third parties to use the publication as long as the work’s authorship and its first publication in this journal are mentioned.
The author(s) can enter into independent and additional contractual agreements for the nonexclusive distribution of the version of the article published in Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas (for example include it into an institutional repository or publish it in a book) as long as it is clearly and explicitly indicated that the work was published for the first time in Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agrícolas.
For all the above, the authors shall send the Letter-transfer of Property Rights for the first publication duly filled in and signed by the author(s). This form must be sent as a PDF file to: revista_atm@yahoo.com.mx; cienciasagricola@inifap.gob.mx; remexca2017@gmail.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International license.
