Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34173144›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental science and pollution research international2021

Improving the feasibility of aquaculture feed by using microalgae.

Faiz Ahmad Ansari, Abhishek Guldhe, Sanjay Kumar Gupta, Ismail Rawat, Faizal Bux

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Evaluation of Biorefinery Products FromAquaculture nutrition · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Towards Sustainable Aquafeeds: Microalgal (Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  11. Growth Performance of Gilthead Sea Bream (Aquaculture nutrition · 2025
    Article
  12. ExploringAquaculture nutrition · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Faiz Ahmad AnsariInstitute for Water and Wastewater Technology, Durban University of Technology, P O Box1334, Durban, 4000, South Africa.
Abhishek GuldheAmity Institute of Biotechnology, Amity University, Mumbai, India.
Sanjay Kumar GuptaEnvironmental Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, India.
Ismail RawatInstitute for Water and Wastewater Technology, Durban University of Technology, P O Box1334, Durban, 4000, South Africa.
Faizal BuxInstitute for Water and Wastewater Technology, Durban University of Technology, P O Box1334, Durban, 4000, South Africa. faizalb@dut.ac.za.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8108-0238

Funding

Technology Innovation Agency (ZA) TBS13-00019-OC
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aquaculture industry is an efficient edible protein producer and grows faster than any other food sector. Therefore, it requires enormous amounts of fish feed. Fish feed directly affects the quality of produced fish, potential health benefits, and cost. Fish meal (FM), fis oil (FO), and plant-based supplements, predominantly used in fish feed, face challenges of low availability, low nutritional value, and high cost. The cost associated with aquaculture feed represents 40-75% of aquaculture production cost and one of the key market drivers for the thriving aquaculture industry. Microalgae are a primary producer in aquatic food chains. Microalgae are expanding continuously in renewable energy, pharmaceutical pigment, wastewater treatment, food, and feed industries. Major components of microalgal biomass are proteins with essential amino acids, lipids with polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), carbohydrates, pigments, and other bioactive compounds. Thus, microalgae can be used as an essential, viable, and alternative feed ingredient in aquaculture feed. In recent times, live algae culture, whole algae, and lipid-extracted algae (LEA) have been tested in fish feed for growth, physiological activity, and nutritional value. The present review discusses the potential application of microalgae in aquaculture feed, its mode of application, nutritional value, and possible replacement of conventional feed ingredients, and disadvantages of plant-based feed. The review also focuses on integrated processes such as algae cultivation in aquaculture wastewater, aquaponics systems, challenges, and future prospects of using microalgae in the aquafeed industry.

Indexed as

MicroalgaeAnimal FeedAnimalsAquacultureBiomassFeasibility StudiesWastewaterWastewaterAquaculture feedCarbohydratesLipid extracted algaeMicroalgaeProteins

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.