Species feeding lower at the food web like cyprinids (carp) are often advocated for sustainable aquaculture. However, their gastrointestinal biology (lack of stomach) has limited their acid‐peptic digestion, acid lysis of plants and invertebrate tissues, and phosphorus uptake. This review presents data from 118 articles on the use of plant‐based feed additives (PFAs) in Cyprinus carpio (common carp). Our review shows that most PFA research in carp is focused on improving feed and nutrient utilization efficiency along various levels (in vivo digestibility, metabolizability to in situ nutrient loading), while other half is focused on ensuring animal welfare standards (biomass, immunity, welfare). Several reviewed plant‐based additives however tend to do both. The PFAs include essential oils (EOs), plant‐part extracts (PPEs), medicinal plants (herbs) and spices. The effective inclusion rate of EOs is lower (0.5%–0.75%). Whereas PPEs, herbs and spices work at a generic inclusion rate of 2%–5% in carp feeds. Even at an optimum inclusion rate, there are factors controlling PFAs efficacy such as methods of preparation (reviewed). PFAs like lemon beebrush, geranium, dill, Rosemary pepper and common mallow with/without certain pre‐conditions are better to avoid in cyprinid diets. Although certain PFAs may potentially alter organoleptic qualities of carp flesh or might assist in training carp immunity, information on these aspects is limited. The review also provides a quick guide to researchers and feed companies interested in exploring the potential of PFAs in C. carpio aquaculture. Potential PFAs that could be valuable for cyprinids, but not yet explored are also listed.
The use of hydroponics to cultivate economic crops is an emerging agricultural practice in Nigeria. There is, however, a paucity of information on the economic viability and valuation of the production systems. This study investigated hydroponics' profitability and economic viability under small- and medium-scale production systems. The economic viability of ten hydroponic farms were evaluated using the financial metrics: net present value (NPV), internal rate of return (IRR), benefit-cost ratio (BCR), and sensitivity analysis. Sensitivity analysis based on positive and negative changes in the running cost and gross annual revenue was adopted to measure the robustness of the production method. The positive NPVs of the small-scale farmer (€42,895) and medium-scale farmer (€331,465) at a 15% discount rate show that both production scales are economically viable. The ten-year IRR of both production scales was about 83%. Similarly, the BCR showed that both the small-scale farmers (5.07) and the medium-scale farmers (4.91) are significantly profitable. In the sensitivity analysis, the small-scale farmers were more sensitive to recurrent 5% changes in the running cost at the 13% threshold. On the other hand, medium-scale farmers were less sensitive with a threshold value of 58.4%. Similarly, small-scale farmers are more sensitive to a 15% reduction in the gross annual revenue, with a negative net return of -€956. It is imperative to state that, though starting an investment in hydroponics requires a high initial investment, medium-scale farmers would be less sensitive to changes in the running cost of production in the face of uncertainties.