Integrating urban agriculture with aquaculture can reduce the use and cost of water, competition for water, chemical fertilizers, and environmental impact of discharging nutrient-rich agricultural water into fresh and saltwater bodies. In addition, aquaculture in cities can directly benefit human health by providing a local source of lean protein. Despite the potential advantages, few studies have demonstrated the feasibility and production advantages of using aquaculture wastewater to fertigate specialty crops in an urban environment. Therefore, we grew four spring crops (bok choy, tatsoi, radish, turnip) and two fall crops (pole beans, sugar snap peas) in nutrient-rich effluent from fish aquaculture versus well or municipal water to evaluate whether the effluent improved soil fertility and crop production. The fish effluent resulted in changes to the soil through an increase in pH and potassium and to crop production through a 9.1% increase in the number of pole beans (mass of beans also trended toward significance). The soils we used were relatively nutrient-rich prior to the application of the fish effluent, which may be responsible for the limited impact, and differences may be more apparent in acidic and nutrient-poor soils or when fertigation is used over a longer duration.

Agriculture in urban and urbanizing areas will be increasingly critical to enhancing food security and food sovereignty, creating income, strengthening social interactions, and improving health outcomes in cities. We used three roofs, a hydroponic system, an aquaponic system, and field rows in an urban environment to grow six dwarf tomato cultivars: ‘Micro Tom’, ‘Red Robin’, ‘Sweet ‘n’ Neat’, ‘Terenzo’, ‘Tiny Tim’, and ‘Tumbler.’ We measured the marketable yield and non-marketable yield, mass of non-marketable tomatoes exhibiting defects, and the content of 12 mineral nutrients in fruits. We found the productivity often varied among cultivars within a cropping system. ‘Terenzo’ and ‘Tumbler’ were always some of the most productive cultivars, whereas ‘Micro Tom’ was normally among the least productive cultivars. The production from ‘Red Robin’, ‘Tiny Tim’, and ‘Sweat ‘n’ Neat’ was more variable, sometimes producing high, moderate, or low mass. The mineral content was especially variable across the cultivars and we did not identify cultivars that were consistently high or low in mineral content across systems, indicating that the mineral content was highly influenced by a genotype x environment interaction. The amount of 5 minerals differed across cultivars in aquaponics, 9 differed in hydroponics, and 6–12 differed in the roof systems. A high-yielding cultivar should be selected first and production methods can then be modified to maximize the nutrient content.

Sweet potato greens are an underused but highly nutritious vegetable that grows well in urban environments and could help alleviate food insecurity and related health problems. Therefore, trials were conducted in field rows and a green roof with seven varieties of sweet potatoes to determine whether 1) they differed in their production of greens and 2) harvesting greens influenced yield or nutrients of storage roots. There was no difference in the mass of sweet potatoes greens harvested among the varieties in either production system. Harvesting greens severely reduced the harvested mass of storage roots, although it increased the content of eight minerals in storage roots, including boron, calcium, copper, iron, phosphorous, potassium, sulfur, and zinc. Urban farmers may have to decide whether harvesting greens or storage roots are their primary objective if harvesting the former limits the latter. Future research should explore the timing of harvesting greens and the amount taken to see if different methods allow for a high yield of storage roots that are high in nutrients.