Dimitris Stoidis J. C. Tarafdar As a general query, you get far more biomass from entering fish feed into the system (duckweed, shrimp, etc.) developing fish which then produce a greater nutrient variety and amount (at proper stocking levels) for gentle feeding greens and for heavy feeding tomatoes. Hands down, the greatest biomass per cubic meter of used water is via aquaponics not only due to the animal product but also due to the reduced water waste. Open Loop hydroponic/aeroponic systems require much incidental energy input and produce vast amounts of wastewater. Closed Loop systems dramatically reduce the waste, but introduce more challenges without challenging an aquaponics system for biomass efficiency.

Aeroponic towers function as part of many aquaponic systems. My preferred design is independent aquaponic systems with separate filtration & UV water clarification systems. Aeroponic towers mounted over floating raft beds offer maximum biomass potential per square meter of floor space, capitalizing upon differing solar radiation needs of plants while providing ease of maintenance and planting & harvesting. The two method plant growth system allows for a greater diversity of plant product in the same space.

Deep tanks allow for increased marine creature production and options for greater numbers of species. Placing the tanks along the north side (away from the sun in the northern hemisphere) in such a manner that they extend to man height allows them to serve as heat banks, storing solar radiant heat during daylight hours to release in the cooler evening hours while the depth allows your fish to move to their preferred temperature zones. Riverine species from colder climates benefit from a portion of the tank being beneath ground level, to reduce the effects of summer heat.

In short, the two techniques are not mutually exclusive and may be used in tandem for great efficiency.

Aeroponic grow towers mounted above floating raft beds (growing herbs/ greens) may produce heavy feeding tomato plants and may produce tuber crops which grow less well in floating raft/flooding bed systems. Mounting towers is an exceptional use of vertical space in a greenhouse and they can reduce the need for shading in midsummer sun. The type of plants selected for each system is a key to biomass computation. Most plant biomass actually comes not from soil/water nutrients but from carbon harvested from CO2.

Perhaps this question might be better phrased?

A different sort of question is implied by re-wording this to account for end-product nutrition, especially if human-beneficial phytochemicals are sought beyond the earlier measured "essential vitamins and minerals." The system location & mode of operation becomes key in that regard.

I feel like my responses are sometimes too long and might be more than expected. I hope someone can benefit from them when I choose to share.

Aeroponics has higher yield than aquaponics.

Both are commercially viable.

aeroponics nourishes the plant with nutrient laden mist, but care should be taken that it should be highly caliberated, slight malfunctioning of instruments on these part can cause to loss of crop.One advantage of aeroponics is you can grow root crop also.

In comparison to aquaponics, aeroponics needed less water and electricity.

@ Dimitris, the concept is different between aquaponics and aeroponics. The advantage of aquaponics is raising fish and growing crops at the same time. The advantage in this system we are getting is plant easily get nutrition from the fish waste as well as plant control and reduced the ammonia load for the fish tank.You may say it is a system of symbiosis between plants and fish grown.

Aeroponics is a variation of hydroponics, but instead of using a grow bed filled with media,the plants are instead suspended,, with roots facing a sprinkler system connected to a main nutrient reservoir. It use little or no media at all. Aeroponics completely liberating the roots of the plants and allowing to come into contact with pure air. Here crops grow quickly and yields are high. It uses least amount of water over time and all excess water that is not used by the roots of the plants are simply drained back to the nutrient tank.

Now comes to your first question - which one has higher yield?

Definitely plants yield was more under aeroponics but overall yield was more under aquaponics due to fish components.

Which one are more commercially viable?

Definitely aquaponics are more commercially viable than aeroponics as it gives both plant and fish yields.

Which needs less water and use of electricity?

Aeroponics need less water and use of electricity as already explained that the unused water can be drained back to the nutrient tank.

Thank you very much for your answers. Why does aquaponics need more electricity? Both of them use artificial light and pumps. Is it due to the air pumps that are required for the aquaponics that make this difference?

J. C. Tarafdar Ashwini Tiwari

@ Dimitris, because an additional fish component is involve in aquaponics.

Dimitris Stoidis J. C. Tarafdar As a general query, you get far more biomass from entering fish feed into the system (duckweed, shrimp, etc.) developing fish which then produce a greater nutrient variety and amount (at proper stocking levels) for gentle feeding greens and for heavy feeding tomatoes. Hands down, the greatest biomass per cubic meter of used water is via aquaponics not only due to the animal product but also due to the reduced water waste. Open Loop hydroponic/aeroponic systems require much incidental energy input and produce vast amounts of wastewater. Closed Loop systems dramatically reduce the waste, but introduce more challenges without challenging an aquaponics system for biomass efficiency.

Aeroponic towers function as part of many aquaponic systems. My preferred design is independent aquaponic systems with separate filtration & UV water clarification systems. Aeroponic towers mounted over floating raft beds offer maximum biomass potential per square meter of floor space, capitalizing upon differing solar radiation needs of plants while providing ease of maintenance and planting & harvesting. The two method plant growth system allows for a greater diversity of plant product in the same space.

Deep tanks allow for increased marine creature production and options for greater numbers of species. Placing the tanks along the north side (away from the sun in the northern hemisphere) in such a manner that they extend to man height allows them to serve as heat banks, storing solar radiant heat during daylight hours to release in the cooler evening hours while the depth allows your fish to move to their preferred temperature zones. Riverine species from colder climates benefit from a portion of the tank being beneath ground level, to reduce the effects of summer heat.

In short, the two techniques are not mutually exclusive and may be used in tandem for great efficiency.

Aeroponic grow towers mounted above floating raft beds (growing herbs/ greens) may produce heavy feeding tomato plants and may produce tuber crops which grow less well in floating raft/flooding bed systems. Mounting towers is an exceptional use of vertical space in a greenhouse and they can reduce the need for shading in midsummer sun. The type of plants selected for each system is a key to biomass computation. Most plant biomass actually comes not from soil/water nutrients but from carbon harvested from CO2.

Perhaps this question might be better phrased?

A different sort of question is implied by re-wording this to account for end-product nutrition, especially if human-beneficial phytochemicals are sought beyond the earlier measured "essential vitamins and minerals." The system location & mode of operation becomes key in that regard.

I feel like my responses are sometimes too long and might be more than expected. I hope someone can benefit from them when I choose to share.

David Fisher Thank you very much for your answer. More information is always welcomed. I have to be honest that I have seen any combination of the two on my reasearch so far and its something really interesting. Can you take the water nutrient from the aquaponic and put it on the aeroponics? Does it need extra filtation or process?

In India, aquaponics has gained more commercial popularity. Aeroponics is still being tried.

Dimitris Stoidis The nutrient water flows downward through the aeroponic towers into the growbeds. The beds can be any sort of media to include clay pellet or floating raft. The same filtration systems are used, ie. swirl filter, UV filter, etc.

Many Literature mentioned that Aquaponics and Aeroponics are viable for the commercials ventures, and those articles could be true in case of Aquaponics. For Aeroponics, it may not be the case, if the enterprise is set up in the developing or under-developed countries. This is mainly attributed by lack of the raw materials for the construction and the laboratory equipment readily available at cheaper rate. Further, nutrient solution for aeroponics is complicated (requirement various from crop to crops) and may require expertise, which adds extra cost.

For more details, the economics cost analysis on Aeroponics potato minituber production will be published soon. keep on updates.

One major difference between the two systems is that the surface area of aquaponic compared to the volume water used is too small compared to the earoponic and that means that the contribution of the plant part to the income of this system is too small because of the small number of plant grown in such system. the other thing is that with earopnic system you can grow crops that can not be grown in aquaponic and this can contribute much in which system are you going to use.