Public Perceptions of Aquaculture: Evaluating Spatiotemporal Patterns of Sentiment around the World

Froehlich, Halley E.; Gentry, Rebecca R.; Rust, Michael; Grimm, Dietmar; Halpern, Benjamin S.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0169281

Cited by 132 publications

(98 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, some scientific articles on aquaculture report there is no agreed definition of "offshore aquaculture" (Holmer, 2010;Klinger and Naylor, 2012). Such terminology is not simply semantics; it has important implications for public perception and understanding, regulatory implementation and comparison, and environmental consequences (Holmer, 2010;Froehlich et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Offshore Aquaculture: I Know It When I See It

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Offshore aquaculture is increasingly viewed as a mechanism to meet growing protein demand for seafood, while minimizing adverse consequences on the environment and other uses in the oceans. However, despite growing interest in offshore aquaculture, there appears to be no consensus as to what measures commonly define an offshore site or how effects of offshore aquaculture-relative to more nearshore practices-are assessed. This lack of agreement on what constitutes offshore aquaculture has the potential to convolute communication, create uncertainty in regulatory processes, and impede understanding of the ecological implications of offshore farming. To begin addressing these issues, we reviewed and analyzed biologically-focused primary and gray literature (N total = 70) that categorize and quantify characteristics of offshore aquaculture from around the world. We found that many "offshore" descriptions are relatively close to shore (<3 nm) and significantly shallower (minimum depth ≤30 m) than may be assumed. We also uncovered an overall lack of consistent reporting of even the most common location-focused metrics (distance from shore, depth, current), a dearth of impact related studies (n = 17), and narrow scope of the studies themselves (i.e., 82% nutrient pollution). Of the finite subset of articles that investigated negative ecological impacts of offshore aquaculture, we found the probability of any measurable impact from an offshore farm appears to significantly decrease with distance from the farm (probability of measurable response at 90 m ± SE = 0.01 ± 0.03). Such general, but informative points of reference could be more robustly quantified with better systematic and standardized reporting of physical farm characteristics and a broader scope of ecological investigation into the effects of marine aquaculture. With offshore aquaculture still in its infancy, consistent metrics are needed for a comparable framework to guide sustainable offshore aquaculture research and development globally.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Offshore Aquaculture: I Know It When I See It

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This tendency is typical for all countries that develop aquaculture [2][3][4][5][6]. The typical, most mass object of the Ukrainian aquaculture is a silver carp, which catch is 44 % from the general catch of fresh-water fish [1].…”

Section: Reports On Research Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Substantiation of Hot Smoking Parameters Based on Sensory Researches in Hot Fish Marinades Technology in the Jelly Pouring

Barysheva

Glushkov²,

Manoli

et al. 2017

EUREKA: Life Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern technologies of food products provide creation of healthy, tasty and safe products, characterized by high organoleptic properties, balance by main food factors and structural-mechanical parameters of a product. The main technological process in the technology of fish marinades and a jelly pouring is the hot smoking. Technological parameters of the hot smoking have been scientifically grounded on the base of the statistical processing of data of sensory studies. Organoleptic assessment of semi-products after the thermal processing was carried out by 5-point system corresponding to the elaborated scale. The quantitative assessment of organoleptic parameters of the quality of experimental samples was determined by the totality of all assessment points, taking into account chosen weight coefficients depending on the importance degree of a given parameter at forming consumer qualities of a product. The generalizing quality parameter was calculated as a sum of assessments of organoleptic parameters – taste, consistence and appearance. Individual assessments of separated quality parameters of products (in points) were put in degustation lists and statistically processed by the averaging method. The smoking process realization, according to scientifically grounded parameters allows to produce the new type of tasty, healthy and presentable culinary products of a perspective object of Ukrainian aquaculture – silver carp of a prolonged storage term.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, while capture fisheries have ceased growth (Pauly and Zeller, 2016) the aquaculture sector continues to increase at an astonishing rate, now accounting for half of all seafood and highlighting its importance for future economic growth and food security (FAO, 2016). Although aquaculture plays a key role in global food systems, public perception of aquaculture activities are often negative and accompanied by many misconceptions, hindering productive and informed discussion (Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 2005;Bacher, 2015;D'Anna and Murray, 2015;Froehlich et al, 2017). It is suggested that clear communication and adequate investigation into the real and perceived threats of aquaculture could help shift public perception and support the growth and sustainability of aquaculture activities (Froehlich et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although aquaculture plays a key role in global food systems, public perception of aquaculture activities are often negative and accompanied by many misconceptions, hindering productive and informed discussion (Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 2005;Bacher, 2015;D'Anna and Murray, 2015;Froehlich et al, 2017). It is suggested that clear communication and adequate investigation into the real and perceived threats of aquaculture could help shift public perception and support the growth and sustainability of aquaculture activities (Froehlich et al, 2017). Thus, public accessibility to rigorous, high quality science is critical to stimulate productive dialogue regarding aquaculture activities and sustainability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predator in the Pool? A Quantitative Evaluation of Non-indexed Open Access Journals in Aquaculture Research

2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predatory open access (OA) journals can be defined as non-indexed journals that exploit the gold OA model for profit, often spamming academics with questionable e-mails promising rapid OA publication for a fee. In aquaculture-a rapidly growing and highly scrutinized field-the issue of such journals remains undocumented. We employed a quantitative approach to determine whether attributes of scientific quality and rigor differed between OA aquaculture journals not indexed in reputable databases and well-established, indexed journals. Using a Google search, we identified several non-indexed OA journals, gathered data on attributes of these journals and articles therein, and compared these data to well-established aquaculture journals indexed in quality-controlled bibliometric databases. We then used these data to determine if non-indexed journals were likely predatory OA journals and if they pose a potential threat to aquaculture research. On average, non-indexed OA journals published significantly fewer papers per year, had cheaper fees, and were more recently established than indexed journals. Articles in non-indexed journals were, on average, shorter, had fewer authors and references, and spent significantly less time in peer review than their indexed counterparts; the proportion of articles employing rigorous statistical analyses was also lower for non-indexed journals. Additionally, articles in non-indexed journals were more likely to be published by scientists from developing nations. Worryingly, non-indexed journals were more likely to be found using a Google search, and their articles superficially resembled those in indexed journals. These results suggest that the non-indexed aquaculture journals identified herein are likely predatory OA journals and pose a threat to aquaculture research and the public education and perception of aquaculture. Several points of reference from this study, in combination, may help scientists and the public more easily identify these possibly predatory journals, as these journals were typically established after 2010, publishing <20 papers per year, had fees <$1,000, and published articles <80 days after submission. Subsequently checking reputable and quality-controlled databases such as the Directory of Open Access Journals, Web of Science, Scopus, and Thompson Reuters can aid in confirming the legitimacy of non-indexed OA journals and can facilitate avoidance of predatory OA aquaculture journals.

show abstract

Public Perceptions of Aquaculture: Evaluating Spatiotemporal Patterns of Sentiment around the World

Cited by 132 publications

References 54 publications

Offshore Aquaculture: I Know It When I See It

Offshore Aquaculture: I Know It When I See It

Substantiation of Hot Smoking Parameters Based on Sensory Researches in Hot Fish Marinades Technology in the Jelly Pouring

Predator in the Pool? A Quantitative Evaluation of Non-indexed Open Access Journals in Aquaculture Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About