Co-Cultures: Growing together gives more rice and aquatic food
When you eat rice with fish – or rice with crab or shrimp – you probably do not think about where the food came from. And if you do, you probably think that the rice grew in a paddy field, while the fish, crab or shrimp were caught in the sea. However, this may only be partially true. Systems for growing rice and various aquatic animals together have existed for over 1,200 years, but the practice of ‘co-culture’ has only recently gained the attention of the major rice-producing nations and the scientific community (Xie et al., 2011).
Rice is one of the most widely consumed grains in the world and is grown in more than 100 countries. It is a staple food source for over half of the world’s population and of upmost importance for lower income countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa (Bashir et al., 2020). Climate change, declining natural resources and an ever-growing population put immense pressure on both increasing yields and reducing the environmental footprint of rice (Hu et al., 2016; Ahmed and Turchini, 2021). Global trends are thus moving towards sustainable and organic management of biological resources (Chen et al., 2014; Muller et al., 2017). Strategic coupling of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, such as growing crops and aquatic animals together, could help meet this target (Ahmed and Turchini, 2021).
Previous research has shown that co-cultures can boost yields, improve soil health and enhance ecosystem services (Mueller et al., 2012; Campanhola and Pandey, 2019). But even though co-culture systems would help optimise the use of land and water resources to produce food – while reducing the environmental impacts associated with rice monocultures – large-scale and long-term data are lacking (Bashir et al., 2020).
Now, in eLife, Xin Chen and colleagues at Zhejiang University and Bioversity International – including Liang Guo and Lufeng Zhao as joint first authors – report new evidence in support of co-cultures with aquatic animals and rice crops (Guo et al., 2022). Between 2017 and 2020, the team conducted three separate field experiments in which rice was grown with either fish, crabs or soft-shelled turtles. Each set-up also included a control experiment, where rice was grown as a monoculture. No agrochemicals were used to control weeds, pests or diseases during the field trials.
Over the four years, the co-cultures demonstrated multiple benefits (Figure 1). Rice yield was consistently higher in fields containing aquatic animals (between 8.7% and 12.1%). Moreover, the team was also able to harvest significant amounts of fish, crab and turtle as food (between 560 and 2660 kg/ha). Co-cultures also had fewer weeds and maintained consistent levels of mineral nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) in the soil. Moreover, the breakdown of organic matter happened faster in the co-cultures.
Animals are instrumental in moving elements, such as carbon, nitrogen and phosphorus, in the environment (Schmitz et al., 2018). To find out whether the biology of a co-cultured animal would affect the growth of rice, Guo et al. carried out three additional, controlled experiments to trace the movement of nitrogen from feed (labelled with stable isotopes) to aquatic animals and the environment.
Analyses of the animal’s food intake revealed that fish and crabs obtained up to half of their diet (50% and 35%, respectively) from the rice fields, consuming algae, phytoplankton or weeds. Turtles relied more on additional feed, and only derived 16% of their food intake naturally. The animals’ wastes and any uneaten feed also increased the nutrient availability for the rice plants: rice plants used up to a third of the nitrogen from the animal feed.
The work of Guo et al. demonstrates clearly how co-cultures could make agriculture more sustainable, by increasing soil fertility and reducing the need for fertilizers or pesticides. Moreover, these coupled systems could also help fight the spread of malaria by introducing natural, co-culturing predators, such as frogs (which eat the mosquitos) and fish (which eat the mosquito larvae), and so contribute towards several ‘Sustainable Development Goals’ of the United Nations (Khatiwada et al., 2016; Campanhola and Pandey, 2019).
More research is needed to better understand the impact of co-culture on greenhouse gas emissions and nutrient pollution (Bashir et al., 2020). Nevertheless, these experiments provide a good foundation for further studies to explore how agriculture can be made more sustainable.
References
-
The evolution of the blue-green revolution of rice-fish cultivation for sustainable food productionSustainability Science 16:1375–1390.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-021-00924-z
-
Co-culture of rice and aquatic animals: An integrated system to achieve production and environmental sustainabilityJournal of Cleaner Production 249:119310.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119310
-
Can the co-cultivation of rice and fish help sustain rice production?Scientific Reports 6:28728.https://doi.org/10.1038/srep28728
-
Frogs as potential biological control agents in the rice fields of Chitwan, NepalAgriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 230:307–314.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2016.06.025
-
Animals and the zoogeochemistry of the carbon cycleScience (New York, N.Y.) 362:eaar3213.https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar3213
Article and author information
Author details
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank SLU Aquaculture and Jordbruksverket for financial support.
Publication history
Copyright
© 2022, Liu et al.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 1,262
- views
-
- 140
- downloads
-
- 4
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
Further reading
-
- Developmental Biology
- Ecology
Organisms require dietary macronutrients in specific ratios to maximize performance, and variation in macronutrient requirements plays a central role in niche determination. Although it is well recognized that development and body size can have strong and predictable effects on many aspects of organismal function, we lack a predictive understanding of ontogenetic or scaling effects on macronutrient intake. We determined protein and carbohydrate intake throughout development on lab populations of locusts and compared to late instars of field populations. Self-selected protein:carbohydrate targets declined dramatically through ontogeny, due primarily to declines in mass-specific protein consumption rates which were highly correlated with declines in specific growth rates. Lab results for protein consumption rates partly matched results from field-collected locusts. However, field locusts consumed nearly double the carbohydrate, likely due to higher activity and metabolic rates. Combining our results with the available data for animals, both across species and during ontogeny, protein consumption scaled predictably and hypometrically, demonstrating a new scaling rule key for understanding nutritional ecology.
-
- Ecology
Advances in tracking technologies have revealed the diverse migration patterns of birds, which are critical for range mapping and population estimation. Population trends are usually estimated in breeding ranges where birds remain stationary, but for species that breed in remote areas like the Arctic, these trends are often assessed in over-wintering ranges. Assessing population trends during the wintering season is challenging due to the extensive movements of birds in these ranges, which requires a deep understanding of the movement dynamics. However, these movements remain understudied, particularly in the mid-latitudes, where many Arctic breeders overwinter, increasing uncertainty in their ranges and numbers. Here, we show that the Arctic breeding raptor Rough-legged buzzard, which overwinters in the mid-latitudes, has a specific wintering strategy. After migrating ca. 1500 km from the Arctic to mid-latitudes, the birds continue to move throughout the entire over-wintering period, traveling another 1000 km southwest and then back northeast as the snowline advances. This continuous movement makes their wintering range dynamic throughout the season. In essence, this movement represents an extension of the quick migration process, albeit at a slower pace, and we have termed this migration pattern ‘foxtrot migration’, drawing an analogy to the alternating fast and slow movements of the foxtrot dance. These results highlight the potential errors in range mapping from single mid-winter surveys and emphasize the importance of this migration pattern in assessing the conservation status of bird species. Understanding this migration pattern could help to correctly estimate bird populations in over-wintering ranges, which is especially important for species that nest in hard-to-reach regions such as the Arctic.