Talk:Integrated multi-trophic aquaculture

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Agriculture Mid‑importance

	Agriculture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Technical nature and notability concerns

Like the other user, I too feel that when explain the crux of IMTA, some tech speak is unavoidable. This is true for all science and technology based articles on Wikipedia. There is no way to explain a lot of the concepts without going into technicalities and not losing the gist of the idea.

Notability: Again as mentioned, the article covers IMTA in various countries. That by itself would take care of the notability aspect. Apropos of the 3rd party non-academic publishing: there have been several articles. Some are here:

--Porphyra 15:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback requested

I am not sure I agree that the article is too technical and I certainly disagree that the article is not notable. Unfortunately, when we talk about trophic levels and nutrient cycling some 'technical speak' is unavoidable. From the notable perspective, I would think since there are many official IMTA projects and likely hundreds of incidental IMTA sites around the world, it's worth reporting. At least two other sites that I am aware of have 'linked to' this article, which I don't think would have occurred if the topic were insignificant. This article can not be improved or changed for the better it only changes back to before i edited it and I'm very disappointed in Wikipedia inst the point to be able to edit and then proof read this article for the better

What do others think?

ReidGK 17:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Information

Author list for the original article

The initial posting of this article was a collaborative venture by several IMTA researchers around the world. Contributors included: Reid GK, Chopin T, Robinson S, Neori A, Buschmann AH, Shpigel M, Rodger A, and Bolton J

ReidGK 18:30, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: See the References section of this article to get an idea about who these guys are. (Those are last names and first initials.) WAS 4.250 15:13, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Gregor Reid, a jointly appointed Post Doctoral Fellow with the University of New Brunswick and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, wrote an article on IMTA for the website, with the help of several contributors (Thierry Chopin, Shawn Robinson, Amir Neori, Alejandro Buschmann, Muki Shpigel, Andrew Rodger and John Bolton)" says Fish Farmer Magazine. WAS 4.250 15:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Section in the main Aquaculture article

While the entire aquaculture article section needs an overhaul, I suggest that IMTA be mentioned in the "Environmentally Friendly Methods" section (not my choice of terminology) and then revert to here. Porphyra 13:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree: We have separate articles on various types of terrestrial farming, as well as seperate articles on various types of hydroculture including - but not limited to: Passive hydroponics, aeroponics, historical hydroculture and deep-water culture. Jamutaq (talk) 00:05, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Major changes

I went at the article pretty hard. My intent was not to change the content, but to make it more accessible. I think there is less jargon, but no less content. I'm happy to fix any errors that I created.I embedded several questions as comments in the text. Please help with answers. One question about the subject and the article. I (possibly incorrectly) understand aquaponics as working only with extractor animals at the highest trophic level, whic is similar but not the same. What's the real story behind the separate treatment? Lfstevens (talk) 08:01, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bluehouse farms

At Aquaculture#Integrated, the combination of aquaculture-greenhouses have not been noted. Allready is ie Tilapia fish grown together with tomatoes (bad tomatoes, ... provide food to fish, nutrified water is reused for tomatoes). They are called "bluehouse farms" and are frequently used ie in the Netherlands. refs http://ag.arizona.edu/azaqua/ista/ISTA8/Chappell.pdf , http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/aquaponic.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.223.239 (talk) 07:27, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:IMTA Kelp1.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:IMTA Kelp1.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:30, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

History and selected projects

Perhaps that carp and rice farming can be added to the history section, perhaps along with Rice-Duck farming (see http://theazollafoundation.org/features/rice-duck-azolla-loach-cultivation/ )

also, perhaps Stephen Cross' black cod/shellfish/sugar kelp combo can also be mentioned

ref: NGC magazine, june 2014, http://www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/aquaculture/ http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2657282/How-fish-farms-world-caring-ocean.html

KVDP (talk) 11:57, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Integrated multi-trophic aquaculture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:45, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]