Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19 doi: 10.1111/raq.

12218

Intelligent feeding control methods in aquaculture with an

emphasis on fish: a review
Chao Zhou1,2,3,4 , Daming Xu1,2,3, Kai Lin1,2,3, Chuanheng Sun1,2,3 and Xinting Yang1,2,3
1 Beijing Research Center for Information Technology in Agriculture, Beijing, China
2 National Engineering Research Center for Information Technology in Agriculture, Beijing, China
3 National Engineering Laboratory for Agri-product Quality Traceability, Beijing, China
4 School of Automation, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, China

Correspondence
Xinting Yang, Beijing Research Center for
Information Technology in Agriculture,
Shuguang Huayuan Middle Road 9#, Haidian
District, Beijing 100097, China.
Email: yangxt@nercita.org.cn
and
Chuanheng Sun, Intelligent System
Department, National Engineering Research
Center for Information Technology in
Agriculture, Shuguang Huayuan Middle Road
11#, Haidian District, Beijing, 100097, China.
Email: sunch@nercita.org.cn
Received 4 May 2017; accepted 9 August
2017.
Abstract
In aquaculture, feeding is the primary factor determining efficiency and cost, so it
is important to know when to stop feeding to maximize efficiency. Until now, fish
feeding has been mostly based on artificial discrimination, which is usually time-
consuming and laborious. In recent years, intelligent feeding control according to
changes in behaviour and growth status has gained increasing attention. This
approach involves many methods as well as monitoring and feedback equipment
and can automatically determine the feeding demands of fish. This review sum-
marizes the development of intelligent feeding control methods, such as mathe-
matical models, acoustic methods and computer vision, in aquaculture over the
past three decades. All methods have unique application scenarios and models for
the culture to which they are most suitable, and the advantages and disadvantages
of each method in the laboratory as well as in pond, cage and recirculating aqua-
culture systems are analysed. Studies show that improvements in sensor accuracy
and hardware and software processing speed have promoted the development of
new technologies and methods, providing effective or potential support for intel-
ligent feeding control. However, its accuracy and intelligent are still need to be
improved to meet the needs of actual feeding scenarios. Through close collabora-
tions between engineers and fish behaviourists, the feeding machine and system
will be more elaborate and precise on the basis of the above methods, and the
level of intelligence will be further improved.
Key words: acoustic, aquaculture, computer vision, feeding behaviour, intelligent feeding
control, mathematical model.

aquaculture systems is in the form of tiny particles (Masser

Introduction
Over the past 30 years, aquaculture has developed into a
thriving industry, with an average annual projected growth
rate of 4.5% from 2010 to 2030 (Brug
ere & Ridler 2004).
By 2030, nearly two-thirds of the fish consumed globally
will be provided by aquaculture (Bank 2013; FAO, 2016).
With the continuous expansion of intensive farming, the
proportion of expenses related to feed costs has increased
(de Verdal et al. 2017). For example, expenses have
increased by 40–50% for Atlantic salmon (Liu et al. 2014;
Føre et al. 2016), by 60–80% for carp farming (Føre et al.
2011; Wu et al. 2015) and by up to 86% for some other
species (catfish: 81–86%) (Rola & Hasan 2007). It is
reported that more than 60% of the feed used in
1993), and the decomposition of these particles consumes
oxygen and produces ammonia and other toxic substances.
This process stresses the fish and creates an excessive bur-
den on filtration and oxygen supply equipment (Chang
et al. 2005). Therefore, determining when to start and stop
feeding is very important because the effectiveness of the
feeding control method directly affects the feed conversion
rate and breeding and is very significant for improving fish
welfare and reducing costs (Watanabe 2002; Føre et al.
2011; Wu et al. 2015).
There are many more problems in feeding fish than in
feeding livestock. Until now, the feeding of fish has been
mostly based on artificial discrimination. At an actual pro-
duction site, the cultured fish are fed according to the

© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 1

C. Zhou et al.
feeding rate calculated based on the weight of the fish.
However, fish appetites are affected by weather, tempera-
ture, dissolved oxygen and other factors, and each feeding
process is often affected by the personal experience of the
observer. Thus, the results can vary from person to person
in ways that cannot be quantified using a unified standard
(Mallekh et al. 2003; Liu et al. 2014). Therefore, determin-
ing the amount of feed and feeding frequency remains
more of an ‘art’ in aquaculture, and there is an urgent need
to develop intelligent controls for feeding that are sensitive
to environmental conditions or growth status.
With the development of artificial intelligence, physiol-
ogy and behaviour, research has shown that the swim-
ming speed and direction of fish change during feeding,
so a change in feeding behaviour reflects appetite (Wyatt
1972; Pinkiewicz et al. 2011; Martins et al. 2012). Fish
feeding behaviour data are essential for determining intel-
ligent feeding management strategies and systems, an
important feature of which is the variety of monitoring
and feedback equipment involved. More quantitative
information is needed for analysis and use as a control-
ling variable to develop an intelligent feeding control pro-
gramme that is highly adaptive. Currently, it has become
a hot research topic (Xu et al. 2006; Zion 2012; Sun et al.
2016).
This review summarizes different intelligent aquaculture
feeding control methods that are responsive to the needs of
fish that have been developed over the past 30 years,
including acoustic methods and computer vision, and pre-
sents their basic concepts and principles. Additionally, this
study explores the relationship between fish appetite and
growth (body length, weight, quantity), feeding behaviour
and feed distribution, consumption and accumulation rate.
In addition, many potential technologies and methods that
can be used to guide and manage feeding operations are
discussed. The classification of each method is based on the
technology used to acquire fish appetite information and
the intelligent feeding feedback control algorithm. Finally,
we draw a conclusion on the future of intelligent feeding
control methods and discuss the major obstacles that need
to be overcome so as to achieve a major breakthrough for
successful applications in a commercial scale fish farm. This
review can provide a reference for aquaculture practitioners
and scholars to guide research into and the production of
new techniques.
Factors influencing fish feeding
Fish feeding and appetite are affected by a variety of inter-
nal and external factors, as shown in Figure 1 (Sun et al.
2016). Studying these factors can provide a basis for the
development of various intelligent feeding control methods
and systems.
2 © 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
The physiological and nutritional needs of fish are the
internal factors that affect feed intake and appetite. The
physiological regulation of appetite is closely related to
peripheral and central signals from the brain (Rønnestad
et al. 2013), and the nervous and endocrine systems have
been reported to play a role in regulating fish feeding beha-
viour (Volkoff & Peter 2006). As one of the most important
organs in the nervous system, the hypothalamus controls
feed intake through hormone secretion (Demski & North-
cutt 1983), and there have been many studies on the regula-
tion of appetite by hormones (Nakamachi et al. 2006; Kiris
et al. 2007). Neuropeptide Y is an important factor that
affects feed intake and feeding behaviour (Yokobori et al.
2012), and its role has been confirmed by studies of tilapia
and goldfish (Nakamachi et al. 2006; Kiris et al. 2007). In
juveniles of many species, the RNA/DNA ratio also signifi-
cantly influences fish growth and feeding (Myron et al.
2003). Therefore, physiological factors are important deter-
minants of the feeding habits of fish, but optimally satisfy-
ing the living ethology of farmed fish, as expressed by their
nervous system, should also be carefully considered when
developing a specific feeding control method or system
(Papoutsoglou 2012).
Nutrition is also a very important internal factor as the
main purpose of fish feeding is to satisfy the protein and
energy demands of the fish, which are also related to feed-
ing behaviour and feed intake. Among the nutritional fac-
tors, the protein, lipid and cholesterol levels are the most
important. For example, when the protein to energy ratio
in feed increases, the intake by rainbow trout will decrease
(Cho & Kaushik 1990). The energy and essential fatty acids
in fish are mainly derived from dietary lipids (Stavros et al.
2010), and cholesterol has been shown to affect the feeding
behaviour of juvenile turbot (Yun et al. 2011). In addition,
fish feed intake may also be influenced by differences in the
feed carbohydrate and vitamin E contents, dietary prefer-
ences and other factors (Huang & Huang 2004; An et al.
2008; Xia et al. 2012). Furthermore, nutrition can directly
affect fish appetite, which is reflected in fish growth. In
actual production, a novel, nondestructive and intelligent
method or system is needed to monitor fish growth so that
the feeding control strategy can be adjusted in real time
according to the results.
External factors include the environment and manage-
ment practices, and temperature, photoperiod and dis-
solved oxygen are the most important environmental
factors. Close relationships between feeding behaviour and
temperature (Jonassen et al. 2001; Myron et al. 2003) or
photoperiod (Biswas & Takeuchi 2003; Petit et al. 2003)
have been reported in some species, and feed consumption
rates increase at higher temperatures and dissolved oxygen
concentrations (Buentello et al. 2000). Salinity may also
affect the feed conversion rate and growth of some fish
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19

Figure 1 Factors that affect feeding behaviour.
(Likongwe et al. 1996; Imsland et al. 2001). Furthermore,
the colour of the surrounding environment can affect fish
feeding behaviour and growth. For example, flounder cul-
tured in a white tank always exhibit faster growth rates than
those cultured in a black tank (Takahashi et al. 2004).
Therefore, it is necessary to study how changes in environ-
mental factors influence growth rate and adjust the amount
of feed provided to fish in real time, which is a key compo-
nent of an intelligent feeding system.
Human management practices also significantly influ-
ence fish feeding behaviour, including the feeding rate, fre-
quency, time and amount (Dwyer et al. 2002; Silva et al.
2007; Wang et al. 2007). Body weight calibration and satia-
tion determination are the two most widely used methods
for estimating feeding rate (Chipps et al. 2000). Within the
optimum feeding rate range, there is a significant linear
relationship between the feeding rate and the growth rate,
and fish growth tends to stabilize or decline when the feed-
ing rate is above the optimum (Zhang et al. 2011). Numer-
ous studies of fish have shown that increasing the feeding
frequency can promote growth to a certain extent, but
beyond a certain range, there is no obvious promotional
effect (Dwyer et al. 2002; Silva et al. 2007; Wang et al.
2007). In contrast, some studies have shown that feeding
frequency does not significantly affect fish growth and feed
utilization (Wang et al. 1998), but this may be related to
differences in the species being cultured and the experi-
mental design. Therefore, it is necessary for feeding to be
reasonable and not excessive because the fish demand for
feed determines the feed conversion rate, which is an
important principle in designing intelligent feeding control
systems.
Under intensive cultivation conditions, environmental
conditions are relatively stable; feed is abundant; and fish
production is relatively stable. In this case, the growth of
fish is mainly restricted by feed intake. Therefore, feeding
operations, including feeding time, rate, and frequency and
method, are some of the most important factors affecting
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Feeding control methods in aquaculture
the growth of cultured fish. Based on the studies discussed
above, we can see that the effects of dietary factors are
numerous and complex, and regardless of whether one
considers internal or external factors, their impact on fish
feeding can be expressed through feeding activity and are
directly reflected in the growth status. Therefore, based on
changes in the appetite and feeding behaviour of fish com-
bined with their growth status, an intelligent optimization
algorithm can be used to realize an intelligent feeding con-
trol system that is responsive to the needs of fish.
Feeding control methods based on mathematical
models
A very important issue in aquaculture is monitoring and
predicting the feed consumption of cultured fish, and this
problem can be solved using mathematical models. Models
can be used to predict the feed intake based on specific fac-
tors, and a feeding system can be effectively described by a
mathematical model based on the knowledge and experi-
ence of experts.
Many models can be used to calculate daily feed intake
(Buterbaugh & Willoughby 1967; Stickney 1979), and these
models can be divided into two basic categories: empirical
growth models and bioenergetic models (Cho & Bureau
1998). Empirical growth models are mathematical models
that are established via regression analysis and other mathe-
matical methods. In addition, most methods for construct-
ing models are primarily based on body length or weight
gain as well as feeding rate (Elliott 2006). The empirical
growth models have been developed for black bass (Boeh-
lert & Yoklavich 1983) and rainbow trout (Cho 1992). A
feeding table is a representation of an empirical growth
model, and it can be used to simulate the relationship
between growth and feeding. Several experiments were per-
formed in a previous study to investigate the relationships
between fish growth and optimum feeding levels at differ-
ent temperatures (Cui & Hung 1996). The advantage of an
3
C. Zhou et al.
empirical growth model is that it is very accurate within the
range of the data used to establish the model and can be
used to predict the actual production of stable aquaculture
enterprises. However, there are some problems associated
with empirical growth models; they cannot explain the bio-
logical mechanisms responsible for the observed patterns,
and extrapolated results for data outside the range of the
model have large errors.
Bioenergetic models are established based on a complete
energy budget equation according to the conversion of
energy in the body. Bioenergetic models were first proposed
at the University of Wisconsin (Kitchell et al. 1974, 1977),
but principles similar to those used in these models had
previously been proposed (Ursin 1967; Kerr 1971). In
recent decades, the study of bioenergetic models has pro-
gressed greatly, and models have been developed for eels
(Kamstra et al. 1998), tilapia (Chowdhury et al. 2013),
gibel carp (Zhou et al. 2005), Diplodus sargus and
Sparus aurata (Libralato & Solidoro 2008; Serpa et al.
2013) and other fish. The growth, energy consumption and
nitrogen and phosphorus conversion rates of fish can be
predicted from feeding models according to the principles
of nutrient energetics (Cho & Bureau 1998). Bioenergetic
models can accurately describe an energy budget and its
relationship with the main influencing factors, such as
human management operations, temperature, body weight
and density. However, model results are often affected by
sub-model deviations and the use of indirect experimental
data. In addition, models vary based on different condi-
tions, such as breeding conditions, feed type and culture
management.
In recent decades, many bioenergetic and empirical feed-
ing control models have been studied. However, all the
models mentioned above have their own advantages and
disadvantages. For instance, empirical models ignore the
basic biological characteristics of fish and generally lack sci-
entific explanations (Sun et al. 2016), but bioenergetic
models that account for all the factors affecting fish feeding
behaviour are difficult to develop. Implementing a model
that considers all factors would require a highly complex
system that would be almost impossible to engineer. How-
ever, mathematical models are the basis for the intelligent
feeding control methods described below.
Feeding control methods based on computer vision
According to a recent review by Zion (2012), computer
vision technology has been widely used in aquaculture in
recent years. This technology is mainly used for counting,
size and mass measurements, sex identification, quality
inspection, species and stock identification, and the moni-
toring of welfare and behaviour. In aquaculture, informa-
tion about fish behaviour, feed consumption and biomass
4 © 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
is closely related to appetite, and reliable input data are
required for intelligent feeding machines or systems. Com-
puter vision technology provides an effective means for
obtaining this information, and two of its most important
applications are feeding behaviour analysis and feed detec-
tion.
Feeding behaviour analysis
Computer vision technology provides an automatic, no-
contact method for analysing the feeding behaviour of fish.
Its development is relatively simple and provides a new
approach for analysing fish appetite and feeding activity,
which can be vital to the development of an intelligent
feeding control method or system with efficient monitoring
and feedback tools. The study of feeding behaviour is
mainly focused on analysing individuals and groups.
Individual feature analysis
Detecting the behaviour of individuals is accomplished
using single cameras, underwater cameras, stereovision or
near-infrared vision, and other useful information related
to fish feeding, such as fish length, average weight and dis-
tribution, can be collected. This information can help farm-
ers develop more effective feeding practices (Brown &
Chivers 2006; Oppedal et al. 2011).
Using a single camera has obvious advantages in obtain-
ing the above information, and studies have shown that the
area of an image of a fish is closely related to its mass (Bala-
ban et al. 2010a,b; G€um€ ußs & Balaban 2010). For example,
the masses of grey mullet, carp and tilapia can be estimated
from their pixel area (Zion et al. 1999). Machine vision has
been used to detect the presence and number of fish to esti-
mate appetite and provide feed automatically (Loo 2013).
Additionally, the speed of fish during feeding is an impor-
tant parameter (Cha et al. 2012), and a single camera-based
system has been developed to quantify behavioural varia-
tions (Papadakis et al. 2012) at each feeding stage with
minimal frame loss to provide data to inform intelligent
feeding. Furthermore, changes in behaviour when fish are
under stress are also a focus of single-camera computer
vision research. By increasing stressful conditions, research-
ers can study how changes in the environment are reflected
in behaviour (Kane et al. 2004; Xu et al. 2006; Xiao et al.
2015), which can provide a reference for the analysis of fish
feeding behaviour.
In deep water or when studying benthic fish, an under-
water camera is used to detect changes in behaviour. The
most significant applications of underwater video are fish
detection and species identification (Zion et al. 2007a;
Spampinato et al. 2010), biometric measurements (Costa
et al. 2006) and biomass estimation (Lines et al. 2001; Dios
et al. 2003; Lee et al. 2004). Additionally, the feeding
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19

behaviour and movement patterns of some benthic fish
species, as well as changes in their behaviour and distribu-
tion due to environmental conditions, have also been stud-
ied (Fedra & Machan 1979; Mallet & Pelletier 2014), but
there are still many difficulties to overcome under practical
conditions. Underwater images are usually of poor quality
due to the limited range of visibility, low and uneven illu-
mination, bright artefacts, noise, blurring, diminishing col-
our, etc. (Ghani & Isa 2015), but some algorithms have
been developed to address these issues and determine the
shape, size and orientation of swimming fish (Atienza-
Vanacloig et al. 2016; Hung et al. 2016). Commercial
video-based feeding systems have been used in aquaculture
(AQ1SYSTEMS, 2017). Underwater images of feeding fish
can be transmitted via WLAN to a feed boat/barge or by
3G (Internet) to anywhere in the world, and fish behaviour,
size and number can measured via image processing. The
above systems and methods can effectively reduce feed
waste, but their accuracy still needs to be improved to
accommodate complex site and environment related varia-
tions.
Stereo vision has a significant advantage in determining
fish size and three-dimensional (3D) position, which are
useful for controlling the feeding process. In recent years,
stereo vision has been used to measure fish size (Harvey
et al. 2002, 2003; Costa et al. 2006), count fish (Costa et al.
2009), predict fish biomass (Hockaday et al. 2000; Dios
et al., 2003), make real-time classifications (Zion et al.
2007a) and perform other analyses. The direct linear trans-
formation method is widely applicable to monitoring fish
in various situations and has been used to estimate their
body length and 3D distribution, which provides useful
information for feeding (Torisawa & Kadota 2011). In
addition, to more accurately monitor aquaculture systems,
scholars have studied the use of calibration equations to
estimate resources from images captured from cages (Dios
et al., 2003; Costa et al. 2006), and cameras have also been
improved (Harvey & Shortis 1998; Harvey et al. 2003) to
improve the accuracy of measurements and the ability to
capture moving objects (Pippy et al. 1997; Costa et al.
2006, 2009). However, using stereo vision requires finding
the same point in two or more cameras, increasing the dif-
ficulty involved with developing these methods.
Since the 1960s, with the development of computer tech-
nology, near-infrared technology has developed rapidly. In
agriculture, its application has been extended to obtaining
crop growth data, nondestructive testing of agricultural
products and other aspects. In some aquaculture facilities,
light conditions are usually insufficient, resulting in images
with low brightness and high contrast (Zhou et al. 2017a);
however, near-infrared computer vision technology is not
affected by visible light intensity and can yield good imag-
ing results in environments with relatively dim light
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Feeding control methods in aquaculture
(Farokhi et al. 2016; Hung et al. 2016). Furthermore, the
cost of this technology is also very low, and the methods
are easy to develop. According to recent research by
Shcherbakov et al. (2013), an 850 nm wavelength near-
infrared light source will not affect the normal growth of
fish and is consequently suitable for monitoring fish beha-
viour in aquaculture systems with poor lighting. In fact, a
near-infrared system has already been deployed and has
achieved very good results in the 3D tracking of fish move-
ments (Pautsina et al. 2015). The operating principle is
based on the strong absorption of light in the near-infrared
range by water, allowing the distance to a fish to be esti-
mated based on the corresponding brightness of the fish in
the image. The results indicate that fish usually orient along
the tangent of a circle, and deviations can be caused by
feeding events and other factors. In addition, near-infrared
computer vision has also been used as a novel method for
quantifying variations in fish feeding behaviour, and a
quantitative feeding behaviour index has been proposed
(Zhou et al. 2017b). Based on the results of the above anal-
ysis, fish feeding activity was quantified, and intelligent
feeding control was realized. Although it is not a very new
or advanced technology, it is an effective method for quan-
tifying fish activity, which can be used to guide aquaculture
practices.
Group features analysis
When using computer vision technology to analyse fish
feeding behaviour, it is generally necessary to detect the
position of fish to track them, and tracking accuracy
directly affects the results. However, it is difficult to track a
moving fish, and robustly and reliably tracking several fish
is a major challenge in the field of computer vision. An
effective alternative method is to analyse an entire popula-
tion with a large number of subjects. Abnormal behaviours,
especially rapid acceleration and agglomeration, by a whole
school of fish may reflect information relevant to feeding
operations and fish appetite (von Campenhausen et al.
1981; Conrad et al. 2011). Velocity and position are often
used to quantify and analyse fish feeding behaviour, and
the scatter and movement intensity of populations of rain-
bow trout (Sadoul et al. 2014), salmon (Liu et al. 2014),
tilapia (Zhangying et al. 2016; Zhao et al. 2016) and sole
(Duarte et al. 2009) have been quantified. This analysis can
be performed during image processing and feature extrac-
tion by summing the changes in the intensity of adjacent
frames caused by fish movement of the fish or quantifying
the difference between two consecutive frames (Gonzalez &
Woods 2006). Additionally, improved kinetic energy mod-
els (Zhong et al. 2007; Cao et al. 2009; Xiong et al. 2012),
particle advection schemes (Ali & Shah 2007) and optical
flow (Lucas & Kanade 1981) are typical methods. Based on
the feeding behaviour parameters, an index quantifying
5
C. Zhou et al.
feeding activity, such as the image processing activity index
(Duarte et al. 2009) and the computer vision-based feeding
activity index (Liu et al. 2014), can be determined. Finally,
the artificial expert method, the stomach and bowel digesta
index (Eggers 1979; Tohtz 2011) and the Reynolds model
(Reynolds 1987) can be used to validate the performance of
the method. All these indexes can describe the feeding
behaviour of fish well, and all the proposed methods can
effectively detect burst aggregation and scattering beha-
viour and are highly successful at predicting feeding beha-
viour. After developing intelligent feeding programmes and
efficient signal processing systems in a study, fish feeding
intensity was continuously monitored to control the feed-
ing process in a tank and automatic feeding control was
achieved, which improved feeding efficiency (Atoum et al.
2015).
At present, with the sustainable development of intensive
farming, breeding density is also increasing in aquaculture
systems. Although the processing speed of software and
hardware has improved in recent years, it is very difficult to
track and identify individual fish in a large group of fast
moving populations. Therefore, trying to avoid individual
tracking and research on group behaviour has become a
focus of study. Recent advances have also shown a trend
towards population-based behavioural research in the study
of intelligent fish feeding.
Feed detection
When fish feed, residual feed particles not only cause stress
in fish and affect their welfare but also adversely affect the
environment. Therefore, studying the accumulation and
consumption of feed can help farmers develop production
plans and adjust feeding strategies. Information on the loss
of feed particles is also particularly important for providing
suitable doses when drugs or nutritional supplements are
included in the feed. A tool or method is needed to provide
feedback and accurately measure rations and the loss of
feed particles during feeding. In addition, aquaculture
researchers would benefit from a system that can provide
data on the amount of feed that is not eaten during the
feeding process (Foster et al. 1995). Computer vision is a
possible method for achieving the above goals.
Underwater cameras have been shown to be useful tools
for detecting residual feed in some studies. A method for
automatically detecting feed particles in images using a
downward-pointing lens was described by Foster et al.
(1995), but this method was not widely accepted by farm-
ers. Due to the limitations of the software and hardware
processing capabilities at that time, this method was too
slow for real-time operation. In contrast, using cameras is a
widespread and effective way to directly observe cultured
fish and feed consumption (Ang & Petrell 1997), and an
6 © 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
automatic method has since been developed and tested to
detect falling feed pellets in a complex and variable under-
water scene (Parsonage 2001). However, due to video cam-
era positioning, the number of other objects in the scene,
and the variable and uncontrollable background lighting
conditions, the method is complicated and easily generates
errors. To evaluate the effects of feed particles on visual
analysis systems, the ability of these systems to detect
wasted feed particles should be evaluated (Parsonage & Pet-
rell 2003).
Cameras are commonly used to provide feedback to
determine feeding conditions: when the residual feed
observed by cameras reaches a certain amount, feeding is
stopped. Intelligent feeding can be achieved by installing a
residual bait quantity calculator and a residual feed collec-
tion device that, when combined with a camera, can stop
feeding when the amount of residual bait reaches a thresh-
old. Currently, similar commercial systems have been
applied to feeding in cages. One such system includes feed
particle sensors, underwater cameras and other compo-
nents (CCS Feed Systems, Akvasmart, Norway) that farm-
ers can use to monitor fish feeding conditions and realize
integrated automatic feeding.
The above-mentioned research mainly relates to fish cul-
tured in cages, but in recirculating aquaculture systems
(RASs), accurately estimating the excess feed floating on
surface of the water is one of the problems that needs to be
solved to achieve intelligent feeding. However, this is diffi-
cult due to the small size of feed that is partially submerged
in water and the reflective nature of water. Therefore, the
detection of single feed particles is very challenging. In
addition, feed detection should be carried out in real time
to effectively control feeding. All possible feed particles in
an image can be detected using a feed detector with a corre-
lation filter, allowing nonfeed objects to be classified;
finally, a local search can be used to improve computational
accuracy and efficiency (Atoum et al. 2015) to achieve
automatic feeding control in high-density aquaculture sys-
tems.
Errors in feed detection occur due to various fac-
tors: other substances that are similar in shape to feed par-
ticles, poor image quality due to changes in illumination
and water quality or turbidity, and mismatched processing
and sampling rates (Parsonage & Petrell 2003). Therefore,
the accuracy of machine vision-based methods is the deci-
sive factor in the process of feed detection.
In summary, computer vision methods are relatively
inexpensive and easy to develop, so they are very suitable
for use in clear aquatic environments. However, in practical
applications, water quality is often affected by waves, bub-
bles and turbidity, which all effect the ability to recognize
feed particles (Iban~ez et al. 2012). Additionally, when ana-
lysing the 3D trajectory of fish, it is often necessary to use
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19

binocular or multi-camera systems, which require complex
algorithms to find the same point in images from multiple
cameras. Therefore, it is difficult to develop these systems
and their further application is limited. Finally, light is not
always sufficient in most aquaculture facilities, so computer
vision methods often require additional light sources that
can affect the normal growth of fish and, in serious cases,
cause algae outbreaks (Dios et al., 2003; Kane et al. 2004;
Xiao et al. 2015; Saberioon et al. 2016). This problem can
be improved using near-infrared vision.
As shown in Table 1, machine vision can be applied to
control feeding via feed detection and behaviour analysis.
Although a variety of culture models are utilized, each has a
technology that is most suitable. For example, in 1990s and
2000s, studies mainly focused on the individual behaviour
of fish in cages and laboratory environments. In recent
years, with the development of software and hardware tech-
nology and the popularity of RASs, the research of group
behaviour has attracted the attention of more and more
scholars. Intelligent feeding according to the needs of fish
has become a focus of machine vision research. However,
the research objects in aquaculture are usually uncontrol-
lable and moving rapidly, and image quality is often
affected by light conditions, reflections, fish overlap and
other factors. Therefore, many challenges remain that need
to be overcome (Zion 2012).
Feeding control methods based on acoustic
technology
Compared with the properties of light waves and electro-
magnetic waves, acoustic waves undergo little propagation
loss in water, and their propagation distances are long,
making them the best way to detect and identify small
objects underwater (Rodrıguez-Calder on & Kuehl 2013).
The amount of bait or the behaviour of fish measured with
an acoustic sensor has been used to determine when to stop
feeding. These data acquisition methods can be divided
into passive acoustics, sonar imaging, acoustic training and
bio-telemetry (Polonschii et al. 2013).
Bio-telemetry
Bio-telemetry is a technology that can be used to track indi-
vidual animals, has been used in fish breeding (Chris et al.
2009) and has become an appropriate method for detecting
fish behaviour in real time, providing the signals required
to develop automated monitoring and feeding systems
(Ehrenberg & Steig 2002; Cooke et al. 2004b; Sarker et al.
2013).
In the past, acoustic signal systems utilized analogue elec-
tronic equipment, and the movement and location of fish
were measured by sending a simple sound pulse signal.
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Feeding control methods in aquaculture
Currently, with the development of embedded microcon-
trollers and improved sensor technology, telemetry trans-
mitters are becoming increasingly advanced and can be
used to monitor the movement and behaviour of fish as
well as record environmental parameters (Cooke et al.
2004a; Føre et al. 2011). AccelTag (AccelTag, ThelmaBiotel,
Trondheim, Norway) is an example of a typical tag (Fig. 2)
that transmits highly sensitive signals to the receiver, which
can be monitored online, and behavioural parameters can
be determined using a corresponding algorithm. Using an
implanted acoustic accelerometer, one study showed that
swimming activity sharply increased during feeding periods
and that irregular feeding resulted in an activity range with
a larger amplitude, representing an increase in the swim-
ming behaviour of tagged fish (Kolarevic et al. 2016). Thus,
telemetry can be used to reflect and quantify fish appetite.
Bio-telemetry can obtain relatively accurate data, such as
the location of fish and their swimming direction during
feeding and free swimming. However, it is necessary to
insert a small emitter or attach it to the surface or interior
of the fish when it is used for bio-telemetry. This method is
recommended for use with fish that are large relative to the
tag. In addition, the implantation process is harmful to the
fish as the method involves handling the fish and potential
injury.
Passive acoustics
High-density intensive farming has resulted in new require-
ments for adjusting feed quantity according to the needs of
the fish while minimizing waste (Kasumyan 2009; Amirko-
laie 2011), so identifying a signal that is directly related to
feed intake has become an important field of research
(Burel et al. 1997; Mallekh et al. 1998). Fish produce
sounds in various situations, such as during capture, inges-
tion or chewing (Myrberg 1981), that may be due to sud-
den acceleration during prey capture (Erens et al. 1998),
rapid changes in pressure in the mouth when feed is
inhaled, or the friction between the teeth and the feed (Lau-
der 1986; Colson et al. 1998).
It is difficult to determine the intensity of feeding activity
via direct visual observation (Mallekh et al. 2003), but
some researchers have studied the changes in sound signals
during turbot feeding (Mallekh et al. 1998). The feeding
sounds of turbot (Lagard
ere & Mallekh 2000) and trout
(Lagard
ere et al. 2004) in breeding environments were
obtained and analysed to verify the feasibility of using
sound to represent feeding activity. A corresponding algo-
rithm was used to detect the feeding sounds of turbot (Mal-
lekh et al. 2003) and giant tiger prawns (Smith & Tabrett
2013), and the results showed a relationship between sound
energy and feed consumption rate. A commercially avail-
able passive acoustic system has been designed to control
7
 8
C. Zhou et al.

Table 1 Summary of computer vision methods

Application Principle Technology Species Culture Results or accuracy Advantages Disadvantages References
model

Feed Feed quantity Underwater Salmon Cage Average count error: 10%; Intuitive, The accuracy needs Foster et al. (1995); Ang and
detection calculation camera FCR improvement: 21%; real time to be improved Petrell (1997); Parsonage
Miss rate: 0.1  0.1–1.3  0.4/f and Petrell (2003)
Single camera RAS Detection rate of 90:8%; Atoum et al. (2015)
Individual Weight, size Underwater Tuna Cage Success rates (up to 90%); Accurate Difficult to track Atienza-Vanacloig et al. (2016)
behaviour camera individual fish in a
Stereo vision Tuna Cage Error: 2.2%; large group Costa et al. (2009)
Accuracy: 99%; Torisawa and Kadota (2011)
Tilapia, Carp, Pond Species recognition accuracy of Zion et al. (2007a)
mullet two sets: 97.8% and 98.9%;
Speed, Single camera Grouper, Sea Laboratory Minimal frame loss: <21s/24 h); Cha et al. (2012); Papadakis
direction bream, carp, Performance of TBR: 95%; et al. (2012); Xiao et al.
tilapia Significant changes: P < 0.05 (2015);Xu et al. (2006)
Near-infrared Salmon RAS Mean depth estimation error: Pautsina et al. (2015)
vision 5.3  4.0 (SD) cm;
Biomass Stereo vision Salmon, Perch Cage Mean error: <0.5%; Lines et al. (2001); Dios
Errors: 4% (tanks), 5% (cages); et al. (2003); Hockaday et al.
Errors: 1% (2000);
Underwater Shrimp Pond Linear correlation index: R = 0.99, Hung et al. (2016)
camera P < 0.005;
Single camera – RAS Accuracy: 80% Loo (2013)
Aggregation Near-infrared Carp RAS Linear correlation coefficient: 0.945 Zhou et al. (2017b)
level vision
Group Feeding activity Single camera Rainbow Trout Laboratory Total variation: >94% Best for high Accuracy is greatly Sadoul et al. (2014)
behaviour culture density affected by the
Flounder, RAS Success rate: >97.20  1.23%; algorithm Zhao et al. (2016); Duarte
Salmon, Tilapia Correlation coefficient: r2 = 0.80; et al. (2009); Liu et al. (2014);
Correlation coefficient: 0.92 Zhangying et al. (2016)

© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19

Figure 2 Structure of an acoustic tag.
the feeding of fish in aquaculture systems. In it, a hydro-
phone is placed in the feeding area to collect the sound sig-
nals during feeding, and specific algorithms are used to
estimate feed demand in real time (AQ1SYSTEMS 2014).
All the above studies support the use of feeding sounds
to evaluate feed consumption. However, it is necessary to
measure and verify the relationship between feed consump-
tion and feed intake. In addition, in an actual production
process, environmental noise at the breeding site is mostly
periodic noise, while feeding sounds are random signals;
therefore, removing environmental noise will help improve
the accuracy of this method.
Sonar imaging
Sonar imaging has long been used to investigate the
behaviour of fish in the ocean. Currently, computer
vision-based observations are not always reliable, espe-
cially in dark or muddy water, and the advantage of
acoustic imaging is more obvious in these conditions
(Rakowitz et al. 2012). The basic principle underlying an
acoustic wave sensing system is to produce images of
fish and feed particles using acoustic sensors. Sonar
images are obtained using an echo sounder based on the
echo-integration technique, and an image processing
method is used to analyse the images. These images pro-
vide information related to feed based on behaviour and
growth status data that can be used to design an auto-
mated feeding system.
According to some studies, the quantity of fish is related
to the acoustic intensity (Conti et al. 2006). Sonar imaging
based on split beam methods has been used to monitor the
movement behaviour of individual fish, and it can deter-
mine their 3D positions (Handegard & Tjøstheim 2005;
Rakowitz et al. 2008; Tao et al. 2010). Dual-frequency
identification sonar, which can produce results similar to
those from optical images, shows great potential for detect-
ing fish behaviour (Rose et al. 2005; Handegard & Williams
2008; Xie et al. 2008). Multi-frequency digital scanning
sonar imaging has also been used to collect information
about fish during feeding (Michel et al. 2002). The Peneye,
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Feeding control methods in aquaculture
a product of Feeding Systems A.S. (British Columbia,
Canada), uses a hydro-acoustic sensor to monitor the posi-
tion and density of fish in cages. If feed is supplied when
fish are hungry, they will rise to the surface and then des-
cend when their appetite has diminished (Bulcock et al.
2001). In general, changes in the positions of fish are
related to changes in appetite, and analysing fish location
and density signals can provide basic data to develop soft-
ware to control feeding machine systems.
The image processing method for sonar imaging is simi-
lar to conventional image processing methods. In addition,
it also contains echo intensity information, which is more
abundant than the information contained in an optical
image. It is very suitable for estimating fish biomass and
the 3D position of fish in deep-water large-volume culture
systems. However, sonar imaging systems are expensive,
and it is necessary to further reduce the cost to meet the
needs of actual production.
Acoustic training
Research has shown that fish can be effectively trained
acoustically (Zion & Barki 2012). A study of the biologi-
cal and acoustic abilities of fish found that the hearing
range of most fish is between 50–1500 Hz (Popper &
Schilt 2008; Fay & Popper 2009), and some fish have
the ability to detect different frequencies (Wysocki &
Ladich 2005; Xiao & Braun 2006) and variations in
sound signals (Abbott 1972; Tennant & Bitterman 1975).
In a recent study, groups of trained common carp were
shown to have the ability to distinguish sound signals,
which can be associated with a specific pulse of pure
food; the fish may learn to distinguish the sound signals
that call them to the feeder from other irrelevant back-
ground signals in their environment (Zion et al. 2007b,
2010). For example, using low-frequency audio signals,
many wild cod were shown to be attracted to certain
locations for regular feeding (Bj€ ornsson et al. 2010;
Bj€ornsson 2011). In addition, regular training of fish is
an effective method for feeding practices (Zion et al.
2011a,b). Acoustic training is often used in fixed-point
feeding in large-volume systems, which can effectively
prevent blind and disorderly feeding and reduce feed
waste and water pollution.
The underwater acoustic method has low requirements
for visible light. As shown in Table 2, it is more suitable for
large-volume cultivation systems, such as in a cage, or in
laboratory. The volume of an individual tank in RASs is
smaller than that of the sound waves, and there is often a
blind spot. In addition, the acoustic method is easily
affected by noise, and its application is further restricted by
its high cost and technical difficulty (Belcher et al. 2002;
Zion & Barki 2012; Saberioon et al. 2016).
9
 10
C. Zhou et al.

Table 2 Summary of acoustic methods

Technology Equipment Application Species Culture Results or accuracy Advantages Disadvantages References
model

Bio- telemetry Acoustic tag Feeding Cod Cage Detection rate: 84.9  6.0% Accurate Contact, Chris et al. (2009)
behaviour damage
Salmon Cage Speed: nonfeeding (0–0.1 ms 1), Føre et al. (2011)
feeding: >0.6 ms 1
Salmon RAS Linear relationship: R2 = 0.78 Kolarevic et al. (2016)
Starvation grade Rainbow trout Laboratory Average success rates: 85% Cubitt et al. (2008)
Passive Hydrophone Feed consumption Shrimp Laboratory Linear relationship: R2 = 0.96 High correlation Easily disturbed Smith and Tabrett (2013)
acoustics by noise
Feeding voice Trout, turbot Fish farm Frequency range: 4–6 kHz; Lagard
ere et al. (2004);
quantization Frequency range: 7–10 kHz Lagard
ere and Mallekh
(2000)
Turbot Cage Frequency band: 6–8 kHz Mallekh et al. (2003)
Sonar Echo sounder, Behaviour Naked fish Cage Speed (0.02–0.7 ms 1):90%; Intuitive, easy to use High cost Tao et al. (2010);
imaging DIDSON observation TS significantly: v2 = 126.7, Rakowitz et al. (2008);
P < 0.001; Handegard and
Range: 0.04–0.1 m s 1 Tjøstheim (2005);
Salmon, sablefish, Cage Error: <10%; Handegard and Williams
halibut Probability interval: 95% (2008); Xie et al. (2008);
Significant: F1,18 = 3.34, P = 0.084 Rose et al. (2005)
Halibut Cage Frequency range: 310–1100 kHz Michel et al. (2002)
Acoustic Underwater Feeding Carp, Laboratory Carp can discriminate two Simple and easy to use Training fish Zion et al. (2010, 2011a,b)
training speaker training tilapia acoustic signals, galilaeus can are needed
associate an acoustic signal
with food, its behaviour can be
maintained by periodic retraining

© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
 Feeding control methods in aquaculture

a et al. (2010)
Saberioon and Cisar (2016)
Other feeding control methods

azquez and Martınez

In addition to the above-mentioned technologies, other

Chang et al. (2005)

References

Rubio et al. (2004)

Wu et al. (2015);
methods have been used to control feeding and may be fea-

Soto-Zarazu
sible alternatives, although there has been no large-scale
research on their application (Table 3).

(2005)
When feeding fish, an on-demand system does not need

Vel
to be pretimed, nor does the feed quantity need to be set
(Jobling et al. 2001). In the past, sensors were usually

Fish need to be trained

mechanical switches that were triggered by fish activity.

Complex models are

Need to set complex

Complex algorithm
Disadvantages
The core component of these systems is an electromechani-
cal feeder composed of a solenoid-operated sliding door.

parameters
This system is activated by the fish biting and pulling on

needed
the sensor, which generates a digital signal that triggers the
feed distributor, and it can continuously record feeding
behaviour (Sanchezvazquez et al. 1994), making the system
useful for on-demand feeding in bass aquaculture. These

Low cost, easily

High reliability
High accuracy
Advantages
systems have been used for feeding European sea bass
(Rubio et al. 2004) and goldfish (Velazquez & Martınez

replaced
Low cost
2005), and their low cost and easy replacement make them
an excellent option for commercial culture.
Infrared sensors are also commonly used in monitoring.
The sensor collects behavioural and other data as the input Behaviour can be detected
variables of the control programme to achieve intelligent and stop feeding decision
Results or accuracy

System accurate: 98%

Feed clearance times:

food saving: 29.12%

feeding. The basic approach is to use a sensor set under the

Accuracy: 97.89%;
SGR: 0.61  0.03;
can be determined

FCR: 2.45  0.55

culture vessel to measure the amount of residual feed parti-
cles; reaching a threshold value indicates that the fish have

24.7  9.2
eaten enough and feeding can stop. Another important SGR: 0.97;

application of infrared sensors is to detect fish behaviour.

Gathering behaviour can be observed by an infrared photo-
electric sensor and converted to digital signals, and a feeder
Laboratory

equipped with such a sensor and a governing feedback con-

Culture
model

trol strategy can stop feeding in response to the gathering

RAS

RAS

RAS

behaviour, thus achieving an intelligent feedback control

–

system (Chang et al. 2005). This allows feeding operations

to be stopped before the water is polluted by excess feed.
Sea bass

Goldfish
Species

tilapia
Tilapia
Perch,

Recently, a new piece of hardware based on single-point

Eel

3D imaging technology has been introduced that can pro-

vide 3D single-point data in real time based on structured
Table 3 Summary of other feeding control methods

light (SL) emission. The SL sensor provides information

Temperature, dissolved
Fish biting and pulling
Gathering behaviour

about the geometry of the 3D space, and more detailed

information is obtained using a colour camera. These tech-
Principle

on the switch

Fish tracking

niques provide a practical method for studying fish beha-

viour and can be used to develop a low-cost real-time
oxygen

tracking system. Using SL sensors to collect data in 3D

space, the trajectory of the fish can be determined in each
frame, which can also reflect the feeding behaviour (Saberi-
Infrared photoelectric

oon & Cisar 2016). Moreover, this method could be

Water quality sensor
Mechanical switch

extended to the study of fish behaviour by evaluating addi-

Structured light

tional conditions such as velocity and inter-individual spac-

ing, and it can also be used to study the behaviour of
Method

sensor

individual fish in a group in 3D space, which would pro-

vide useful information about fish schooling.

Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19

© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 11
C. Zhou et al.
In aquaculture, the environment is one of the most
important factors affecting fish appetite, and in recent
years, many intelligent feeding control methods based on
changes in water quality parameters have been developed.
These methods mainly use sensors to measure water quality
parameters, among which temperature and dissolved oxy-
gen are the most important parameters for determining the
adequate food quantity at each feeding time. Based on the
feeding table, an intelligent optimization algorithm can be
used to adjust the feeding quantity in real time. By quantiz-
ing the appetite of fish during feeding based on the change
in dissolved oxygen, an adaptive neural-based fuzzy infer-
ence system for feeding decision-making was developed,
and its predictions were similar to observations of actual
food search behaviour (Wu et al. 2015). A similar fuzzy-
logic-based feeder system was also developed for tilapia that
accounted for the effects of temperature and dissolved oxy-
gen to provide accurate feeding parameter estimates, thus
reducing feed waste (Soto-Zaraz ua et al. 2010). These sys-
tems provide new strategies for food management in inten-
sive aquaculture systems, and the main benefits are savings
in terms of food (reducing the feed conversion rate) and
manpower and reduced water pollution that minimize eco-
nomic losses.
Intelligent feeding systems
The feeding machine is a very import focus of this study.
To improve feeding accuracy and reduce labour costs,
many scholars have researched and developed intelligent
and automatic feeding systems.
Traditional and on-demand feeding machines
The traditional automatic feeding machine can only pro-
vide a fixed amount of feed at a time according to a preset
programme, and it is only a substitute for manually throw-
ing bait. It does not alter the amount of feed or the timing
according to changes in the behaviour of the fish or the
environment. Strictly speaking, it is not automatic feeding
in the true sense (Alan€ar€a 1996).
In this historical context, the on-demand feeding
machine has emerged as a possible alternative. These sys-
tems usually contain a sensor that records and responds to
the feeding status of fish and feeds them when triggered
(Yukinori et al. 2016). These systems have the potential to
allow for efficient, automatic feeding based on demand, but
researchers have discovered that dominant individuals can
prevent other hungry fish from approaching the feeder and
that the feeding machine is only suitable for trained fish;
untrained fish cannot use this feeding machine (Cov
es
et al. 2006). The disadvantages of on-demand feeding
machines have limited their use.
12
Intelligent feeding machines and systems
With the development of artificial intelligence technology,
a feeding machine that can calculate feed in real time has
been developed using acoustic monitoring, computer and
sensor technologies. The system is mainly composed of an
automatic loading and transportation system combined
with a blanket dripping and control system (Papan-
droulakis et al. 2002). As the control system can monitor
and respond to feedbacks in the feeding process in real
time, it can automatically determine the feed demands of
fish (Chang et al. 2005). The Akvasmart, Norway and Stor-
vik AS, Norway, system has feedback mechanisms that
detect the feeding behaviour of fish until the feed is fin-
ished, which allows fish to be fed to satiation without over-
feeding and the consequent feed waste. Computer vision
and acoustic sensors are commonly used feedback methods
to determine feeding conditions in practice. They collect
environmental, behavioural and other data as input vari-
ables to the control programme to achieve intelligent feed-
ing (Petrell & Ang 2001; McFarlane et al. 2002; Parsonage
& Petrell 2003; Sarker et al. 2013).
Based on an analysis and summary of the available litera-
tures, a breeding facility was found to be developing a feed-
ing system that can match the culture mode and feeding
control technology to the breeding pattern. For example,
the traditional automatic feeding machine is suitable for
small pond farming, so on-demand feeding machines could
be used in small ponds, RASs or small cages to possibly
reduce food waste. Therefore, the development of an intel-
ligent feeding system can avoid waste due to excessive feed-
ing and can be used in ponds, RASs and cages.
Discussion and conclusion
Fish feeding represents a complex systems engineering
problem with numerous influencing factors that are partic-
ular to aquaculture. Between the breeding objects and feed-
ing machine, water was existed as a special medium. The
delivery of feed to aquatic animals in a water medium
requires particular physical properties of the feed and spe-
cial feeding techniques. It is impossible to feed aquatic ani-
mals as is done with other farm animals. According to the
requirements of animal welfare, feeding should not inter-
fere the normal growth of fish or cause pressure, which fur-
ther limits the application of some techniques or methods.
On the other hand, the fish is a fast moving and constantly
changing target, its behaviour and growth status are diffi-
cult to monitor and obtain, and many undesirable factors
such as overlap, occlusion caused by fish activities will also
interfere with the accuracy and intellectualization of the
method. Therefore, the feeding control method must over-
come the interference from the water and fish activities.
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
 Feeding control methods in aquaculture

These are extremely challenging conditions for feeding con-
trol development and are likely the main reason for restrict-
ing its further application to production practice in a
commercial scale fish farm.
In the past 30 years, researchers have been trying to
study lots of intelligent methods and techniques to improve
feeding efficiency. Currently, feeding control technologies
based on artificial discrimination have been unable to meet
the needs of real production. From the summary of the lit-
erature presented above, it is clear that developing a com-
mon technology or method to solve precision feeding
problems in all culture models or even for a single culture
model is difficult, or even impossible. Table 4 summarizes
the advantages and disadvantages of several feeding control
methods and their suitable applications, which can help
provide the most suitable feeding control method for dif-
ferent culture models. The advantages of mathematical
models are that they can estimate the amount feed amount
needed for fish in a certain group or over a certain period,
which is very significant for the overall production process.
However, mathematical models are not very intelligent and
cannot be adjusted to control the amount of feed according
to fish appetite. Additionally, many parameters can affect
fish feeding, and models cannot completely account for all
influencing factors. Machine vision is an inexpensive tech-
nology that does not harm the fish. However, its applica-
tion in aquaculture needs to overcome some challenges,
such as water surface reflectivity and low image quality.
Although this method is very suitable for use in environ-
ments with clear water or good light conditions, the light
intensity is low most aquaculture facilities, so machine
vision methods require an additional light source to achieve
good image quality, which can affect normal fish growth.
This problem can be solved using near-infrared computer
vision as its imaging quality is not affected by the intensity
of visible light. Compared with optical technology, acous-
tic-based feeding control methods are not affected by light
intensity and water turbidity, and their scope of application
is large. These methods are very suitable for use in
large-volume culture systems. However, it is still necessary
to improve the accuracy of their application in aquaculture,
and their high cost also limits their further application.
Other methods have their own advantages and disadvan-
tages. Mechanical switches are simple, but the fish need to
be trained, and the performance of the SL sensor still needs
to be improved.
In our opinion, although the intelligent methods have
not yet been extensively applied and accepted by practition-
ers at the actual production site (see Table 4). However,
the intelligent feeding control method based on the
demand of fish feed is still the trend of development. The
general trend in the development of intelligent feeding con-
trol is the use one or more control methods. Combining
methods to complete the feeding process is common
because ‘when and how often’ are important issues when
using a mathematical model to estimate the feed intake of a
group or overtime. Similarly, the questions of how much
food should be offered to rearing tanks can be solved by
automatically adjusting the amount of feed according to
the appetite of the fish. In recent years, there has been more
emphasis on the study of group behaviour in fish. It is
increasingly obvious that the most suitable feeding control
method must be chosen according to the different culture
models. These methods are likely to become an important
part of intelligent feeding control machines and systems,
and these methods could potentially improve breeding effi-
ciency.
Through monitoring, feedback systems and feeding con-
trol methods have become more and more intelligent, and
the parameters of interest are related to the growth status
as well as environmental and behavioural changes. The
development of feedback and control systems is trending
towards combining pictures and video and analytical soft-
ware. By developing a deep understanding of the continu-
ous effects of environmental factors, physiological factors
and feed quality factors on fish feeding, combined with
advances in artificial intelligence technology, big data, the
Internet of things and other new technologies, it is

Table 4 Comparison of various feeding control methods

Advantage Disadvantage Application and Suitable culture model

acceptance level

Artificial observation Intuitive Expensive, easily affected by Used widely in Small-scale farming
method subjective experience production site
Mathematical model Group level is accurate Poor flexibility in single feeding Used widely in Intensive cultivation
control production site
Acoustic Useful in water with low High cost, difficult to develop, Rarely used in Large-volume aquaculture
ambient light acoustic label is a contact technology production site model, such as a cage
system
Machine vision Low cost, simple to develop Higher visibility requirements, Less used in Good lighting condition
low contrast images production site

Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19

© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd 13
C. Zhou et al.
expected that in the near future, various intelligent opti-
mization algorithms will be developed and utilized, high
precision and multi-function sensing and feedback control
devices will be equipped, the improved, new or potential
methods will be proposed to provide more and more
intelligent solutions to measure as many feeding character-
istics as possible, the methods and feeding machines and
systems based on the above technologies will also be more
sophisticated and precise, thus further improving the level
of intelligence.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the National Key Technol-
ogy R&D Program of China (2015BAD17B04) and the Bei-
jing Natural Science Foundation (6152009).
References
Abbott RR (1972) Induced aggregation of pond-reared rainbow
trout (Salmo gairdneri) through acoustic conditioning. Trans-
actions of the American Fisheries Society 101: 35–43.
Alan€ar€a A (1996) The use of self-feeders in rainbow trout
(Oncorhynchus mykiss) production. Aquaculture 145: 1–20.
Ali S, Shah M (2007) A Lagrangian particle dynamics approach
for crowd flow segmentation and stability analysis. 2007 IEEE
Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition,
pp. 1–6. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ.
Amirkolaie AK (2011) Reduction in the environmental impact
of waste discharged by fish farms through feed and feeding.
Reviews in Aquaculture 3: 19–26.
An TD, Ben S, Annea VD, Johanw S (2008) Effects of dietary
starch and energy levels on maximum feed intake, growth and
metabolism of Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus. Aquaculture
277: 213–219.
Ang KP, Petrell RJ (1997) Control of feed dispensation in sea-
cages using underwater video monitoring: effects on growth
and food conversion. Aquacultural Engineering 16: 45–62.
AQ1SYSTEMS (2017) Fish Feeding Systems. [Cited 10 Jul 2017.]
Available from URl: http://www.aq1systems.com/farming/
13510000.html.
Atienza-Vanacloig V, Andreu-Garcıa G, L opez-Garcıa F,
Valiente-Gonzalez JM, Puig-Pons V (2016) Vision-based dis-
crimination of tuna individuals in grow-out cages through a
fish bending model. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture
130: 142–150.
Atoum Y, Srivastava S, Liu X (2015) Automatic feeding control
for dense aquaculture fish tanks. ISPL 22: 1089–1093.
Balaban MO, Chombeau M, Cırban D, G€ um€ußs B (2010a) Pre-
diction of the weight of Alaskan pollock using image analysis.
Journal of Food Science 75: E552–E556.
Balaban MO, Soriano MG, Ruiz EG (2010b) Using image analy-
sis to predict the weight of Alaskan salmon of different spe-
cies. Journal of Food Science 75: E157–E162.
14
Bank W (2013) Fish to 2030: prospects for fisheries and aquacul-
ture. The World Bank, Washington, DC; Report No.: 83177-
GLB.
Belcher E, Hanot W, Burch J (2002) Dual-Frequency Identifica-
tion Sonar (DIDSON). Proceedings of the 2002 International
Symposium on Underwater Technology, pp. 187–192; IEEE,
Piscataway, NJ.
Biswas AK, Takeuchi T (2003) Effects of photoperiod and feed-
ing interval on food intake and growth rate of Nile tilapia
Oreochromis niloticus L. Fisheries Science 69: 1010–1016.
Bj€
ornsson B (2011) Ranching of wild cod in ‘herds’ formed with
anthropogenic feeding. Aquaculture 312: 43–51.
Bj€
ornsson B, Karlsson H, Thorsteinsson V (2010) Effects of
anthropogenic feeding on the migratory behaviour of coastal
cod (Gadus morhua) in Northwest Iceland. Fisheries Research
106: 81–92.
Boehlert GW, Yoklavich MM (1983) Effects of temperature,
ration, and fish size on growth of juvenile black rockfish,
Sebastes melanops. Environmental Biology of Fishes 8: 17–
28.
Brown GE, Chivers DP (2006) The dynamic nature of antipreda-
tor behavior: prey fish integrate threat-sensitive antipredator
responses within background levels of predation risk. Behav-
ioral Ecology and Sociobiology 61: 9–16.
Brug
ere C, Ridler N (2004) Global aquaculture outlook in the
next decades: an analysis of national aquaculture production
forecasts to 2030. Atlantic Region. Rome, Italy; Report No.:
1001.
Buentello JA, Gatlin DM, Neill WH (2000) Effects of water tem-
perature and dissolved oxygen on daily feed consumption,
feed utilization and growth of channel catfish (Ictalurus punc-
tatus). Aquaculture 182: 339–352.
Bulcock P, Bostock J, Jauncey K, Beveridge MCM, Telfer T
(2001) The evolution of aquaculture feed supply systems.
Eurofish 2: 74–76.
Burel Christine, Robin J, Boujard T (1997) Can turbot, Psetta
maxima, be fed with self-feeders? Aquatic Living Resources 10:
381–384.
Buterbaugh GL, Willoughby H (1967) A feeding guide for
brook, brown, and rainbow trout. The Progressive Fish-Cultur-
ist 29: 210–215.
von Campenhausen C, Riess I, Weissert R (1981) Detection of
stationary objects by the blind Cave Fish Anoptichthys jordani
(Characidae). Journal of Comparative Physiology 143: 369–
374.
Cao T, Wu X, Guo J, Yu S, Xu Y (2009) Abnormal crowd
motion analysis. 2009 IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), pp. 1709–1714. IEEE,
Piscataway, NJ.
Cha BJ, Bae BS, Cho SK, Oh JK (2012) A simple method to
quantify fish behavior by forming time-lapse images. Aquacul-
tural Engineering 51: 15–20.
Chang CM, Fang W, Jao RC, Shyu CZ, Liao IC (2005) Develop-
ment of an intelligent feeding controller for indoor intensive
culturing of eel. Aquacultural Engineering 32: 343–353.
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

Chipps SR, Einfalt LM, Wahl DH (2000) Growth and food con-
sumption by tiger muskellunge: effects of temperature and
ration level on bioenergetic model predictions. Transactions of
the American Fisheries Society 129: 186–193.
Cho CY (1992) Feeding systems for rainbow trout and other sal-
monids with reference to current estimates of energy and pro-
tein requirements. Aquaculture 100: 107–123.
Cho CY, Bureau DP (1998) Development of bioenergetic models
and the Fish-PrFEQ software to estimate production, feeding
ration and waste output in aquaculture. Aquatic Living
Resources 11: 199–210.
Cho CY, Kaushik SJ (1990) Nutritional energetics in fish: energy
and protein utilization in rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri).
World Review of Nutrition and Dietetics 61: 132.
Chowdhury MAK, Siddiqui S, Hua K, Bureau DP (2013) Bioen-
ergetics-based factorial model to determine feed requirement
and waste output of tilapia produced under commercial con-
ditions. Aquaculture 410–411: 138–147.
Chris R, Michael C, Whuntting H, Winsorh W (2009) A self-
contained system for observing and quantifying the behavior
of Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua, in an offshore aquaculture
cage. Aquaculture 293: 49–56.
Colson DJ, Patek SN, Brainerd EL, Lewis SM (1998) Sound pro-
duction during feeding in Hippocampus seahorses (Syng-
nathidae). Environmental Biology of Fishes 51: 221–229.
Conrad JL, Weinersmith KL, Brodin T, Saltz JB, Sih A (2011)
Behavioural syndromes in fishes: a review with implications
for ecology and fisheries management. Journal of Fish Biology
78: 395–435.
Conti SG, Roux P, Fauvel C, Maurer BD, Demer DA (2006)
Acoustical monitoring of fish density, behavior, and growth
rate in a tank. Aquaculture 251: 314–323.
Cooke SJ, Hinch SG, Wikelski M, Andrews RD, Kuchel LJ, Wol-
cott TG et al. (2004a) Biotelemetry: a mechanistic approach
to ecology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19: 334–343.
Cooke SJ, Thorstad EB, Hinch SG (2004b) Activity and energet-
ics of free-swimming fish: insights from electromyogram
telemetry. Fish and Fisheries 5: 21–52.
Costa C, Loy A, Cataudella S, Davis D, Scardi M (2006) Extract-
ing fish size using dual underwater cameras. Aquacultural
Engineering 35: 218–227.
Costa C, Scardi M, Vitalini V, Cataudella S (2009) A dual cam-
era system for counting and sizing Northern Bluefin Tuna
(Thunnus thynnus; Linnaeus, 1758) stock, during transfer to
aquaculture cages, with a semi automatic Artificial Neural
Network tool. Aquaculture 291: 161–167.
Cov
es D, Beauchaud M, Attia J, Dutto G, Bouchut C, Begout
ML (2006) Long-term monitoring of individual fish triggering
activity on a self-feeding system: an example using European
sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax). Aquaculture 253: 385–392.
Cubitt KF, Williams HT, Rowsell D, McFarlane WJ, Gosine RG,
Butterworth KG et al. (2008) Development of an intelligent
reasoning system to distinguish hunger states in Rainbow
trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Computers and Electronics in
Agriculture 62: 29–34.
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Feeding control methods in aquaculture
Cui Y, Hung SSO (1996) A prototype feeding-growth table for
White Sturgeon. Journal of Applied Aquaculture 5: 25–34.
Demski LS, Northcutt RG (1983) The terminal nerve: a new
chemosensory system in vertebrates? Science 220: 435–437.
Dios JRM-D, Serna C, Ollero A (2003) Computer vision and
robotics techniques in fish farms. Robotica 21: 233–243.
Duarte S, Reig L, Oca J (2009) Measurement of sole activity by
digital image analysis. Aquacultural Engineering 41: 22–27.
Dwyer KS, Brown JA, Parrish C, Lall SP (2002) Feeding fre-
quency affects food consumption, feeding pattern and growth
of juvenile yellowtail flounder (Limanda ferruginea). Aquacul-
ture 213: 279–292.
Eggers D (1979) Comments on some recent methods for esti-
mating food consumption by fish. Journal of the Fisheries
Research Board of Canada 36: 1018–1019.
Ehrenberg JE, Steig TW (2002) A method for estimating the
“position accuracy” of acoustic fish tags. ICES Journal of Mar-
ine Science 59: 140–149.
Elliott JM (2006) Number of meals in a day, maximum
weight of food consumed in a day and maximum rate of
feeding for brown trout, Salmo trutta L. Freshwater Biology
5: 287–303.
Erens KF, Matsuno Y, Yamanaka Y, Fujieda S (1998) Studies on
underwater sounds produced by Yellowtail Seriola quinquera-
diata and Amberjack Seriola dumerili in net pens at culture
grounds in Middle Kagoshima Bay. Fisheries Science 64: 353–
358.
FAO (2016) The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2016.
FAO, Rome, Italy.
Farokhi S, Flusser J, Ullah Sheikh U (2016) Near infrared face
recognition: a literature survey. Computer Science Review 21:
1–17.
Fay R, Popper A (2009) Fish hearing and bioacoustics since
1973. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 125: 2485–
2485.
Fedra K, Machan R (1979) A self-contained underwater time-
lapse camera for in situ long-term observations. Marine Biol-
ogy 55: 239–246.
Føre M, Alfredsen JA, Gronningsater A (2011) Development
of two telemetry-based systems for monitoring the feeding
behaviour of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) in aquacul-
ture sea-cages. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 76:
240–251.
Føre M, Alver M, Alfredsen JA, Marafioti G, Senneset G, Birke-
vold J et al. (2016) Modelling growth performance and feed-
ing behaviour of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) in
commercial-size aquaculture net pens: model details and vali-
dation through full-scale experiments. Aquaculture 464: 268–
278.
Foster M, Petrell R, Ito MR, Ward R (1995) Detection and
counting of uneaten food pellets in a sea cage using image
analysis. Aquacultural Engineering 14: 251–269.
Ghani ASA, Isa NAM (2015) Underwater image quality
enhancement through integrated color model with Rayleigh
distribution. Applied Soft Computing 27: 219–230.
15
C. Zhou et al.
Gonzalez RC, Woods RE (2006) Digital Image Processing, 3rd
edn. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Upper Saddle River, NJ.
G€um€ ußs B, Balaban MO (2010) Prediction of the weight of
aquacultured rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) by
image analysis. Journal of Aquatic Food Product Technology
19: 227–237.
Handegard NO, Tjøstheim D (2005) When fish meet a trawling
vessel: examining the behaviour of gadoids using a free-float-
ing buoy and acoustic split-beam tracking. Canadian Journal
of Fisheries & Aquatic Sciences, 62: 2409–2422 (2414).
Handegard NO, Williams K (2008) Automated tracking of fish
in trawls using the DIDSON (Dual frequency IDentification
SONar). ICES Journal of Marine Science 65: 636–644.
Harvey ES, Shortis MR (1998) Calibration stability of an under-
water stereo-video system: implications for measurement
accuracy and precision. Marine Technology Society Journal 32:
3–17.
Harvey E, Fletcher D, Shortis M (2002) Estimation of reef fish
length by divers and by stereo-video: a first comparison of the
accuracy and precision in the field on living fish under opera-
tional conditions. Fisheries Research 57: 255–265.
Harvey E, Cappo M, Shortis M, Robson S, Buchanan J, Speare P
(2003) The accuracy and precision of underwater measure-
ments of length and maximum body depth of southern blue-
fin tuna (Thunnus maccoyii) with a stereo–video camera
system. Fisheries Research 63: 315–326.
Hockaday S, Beddow TA, Stone M, Hancock P, Ross LG (2000)
Using truss networks to estimate the biomass of Oreochromis
niloticus, and to investigate shape characteristics. Journal of
Fish Biology 57: 981–1000.
Huang CH, Huang SL (2004) Effect of dietary vitamin E on
growth, tissue lipid peroxidation, and liver glutathione level
of juvenile hybrid tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus x O. aureus,
fed oxidized oil. Aquaculture 237: 381–389.
Hung C-C, Tsao S-C, Huang K-H, Jang J-P, Chang H-K, Dobbs
FC (2016) A highly sensitive underwater video system for use
in turbid aquaculture ponds. Scientific Reports 6: 31810.
~ez C, Caiola N, Rovira A, Real M (2012) Monitoring the
Iban
effects of floods on submerged macrophytes in a large river.
Science of the Total Environment 440: 132–139.
Imsland AK, Foss A, Gunnarsson S, Mhg B, Fitzgerald R, Bonga
SW et al. (2001) The interaction of temperature and salinity
on growth and food conversion in juvenile turbot (Scophthal-
mus maximus). Aquaculture 198: 353–367.
Jobling M, Cov
es D, Damsg ard B, Kristiansen HR, Koskela J,
Petursdottir TE et al. (2001) Techniques for measuring feed
intake. Food Intake in Fish, pp. 49–87 Blackwell Science Ltd.,
Oxford, UK.
Jonassen TM, Imsland AK, Kadowaki S, Stefansson SO (2001)
Interaction of temperature and photoperiod on growth of
Atlantic halibut Hippoglossus hippoglossus L. Aquaculture
Research 31: 219–227.
Kamstra A, Jwvander H, Nijhof M (1998) Performance and opti-
misation of trickling filters on eel farms. Aquacultural Engi-
neering 17: 175–192.
16
Kane AS, Salierno JD, Gipson GT, Molteno TCA, Hunter C
(2004) A video-based movement analysis system to quantify
behavioral stress responses of fish. Water Research 38: 3993–
4001.
Kasumyan AO (2009) Acoustic signaling in fish. Journal of
Ichthyology 49: 963–1020.
Kerr SR (1971) A simulation model of lake trout growth. Journal
of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 28: 815–819.
Kiris GA, Kumlu M, Dikel S (2007) Stimulatory effects of neu-
ropeptide Y on food intake and growth of Oreochromis niloti-
cus. Aquaculture 264: 383–389.
Kitchell JF, Koonce JF, Magnuson JJ, O’Neill RV (1974) Model
of fish biomass dynamics. Transactions of the American Fish-
eries Society 103: 786–798.
Kitchell JF, Stewart DJ, Weininger D (1977) Applications of a
Bioenergetics Model to Yellow Perch (Perca flavescens) and
Walleye (Stizostedion vitreum vitreum). Journal of the Fisheries
Research Board of Canada 34: 1922–1935.
Kolarevic J, Aas-Hansen Ø, Espmark  A, Baeverfjord G, Terjesen
BF, Damsg ard B (2016) The use of acoustic acceleration trans-
mitter tags for monitoring of Atlantic salmon swimming
activity in recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS). Aquacul-
tural Engineering 72–73: 30–39.
Lagard
ere JP, Mallekh R (2000) Feeding sounds of turbot
(Scophthalmus maximus) and their potential use in the control
of food supply in aquaculture: I. Spectrum analysis of the
feeding sounds. Aquaculture 189: 251–258.
Lagard
ere JP, Mallekh R, Mariani A (2004) Acoustic characteris-
tics of two feeding modes used by brown trout (Salmo trutta),
rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and turbot (Scophthal-
mus maximus). Aquaculture 240: 607–616.
Lauder GV (1986) Aquatic prey capture in fishes: experimental
and theoretical approaches. The Journal of Experimental
Biology 125: 1–16.
Lee D-J, Schoenberger RB, Shiozawa D, Xu X, Zhan P (2004)
Contour matching for a fish recognition and migration-
monitoring system. Proceedings of the SPIE Optics East,
Two and Three-Dimensional Vision Systems for Inspection,
Control, and Metrology II, 5606-05, pp. 37–48; SPIE, Phi-
ladelphia, PA.
Libralato S, Solidoro C (2008) A bioenergetic growth model for
comparing Sparus aurata’s feeding experiments. Ecological
Modelling 214: 325–337.
Likongwe JS, Stecko TD Jr, Stauffer JR, Carline RF (1996) Com-
bined effects of water temperature and salinity on growth and
feed utilization of juvenile Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus
(Linneaus). Aquaculture 146: 37–46.
Lines JA, Tillett RD, Ross LG, Chan D, Hockaday S, Njb MF
(2001) An automated image-based system for estimating the
mass of free-swimming fish. Computers & Electronics in Agri-
culture 31: 151–168.
Liu Z, Li X, Fan L, Lu H, Liu L, Liu Y (2014) Measuring feeding
activity of fish in RAS using computer vision. Aquacultural
Engineering 60: 20–27.
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

Loo JL (2013) The use of vision in a sustainable aquaculture
feeding system. Research Journal of Applied Sciences Engineer-
ing & Technology 6: 3658–3669.
Lucas BD, Kanade T (1981) An iterative image registration tech-
nique with an application to stereo vision. Proceedings of the
7th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence -
Volume 2, pp. 674–679. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.,
Vancouver, BC, Canada
Mallekh R, Lagardere JP, Begout Anras ML, Lafaye JY (1998)
Variability in appetite of turbot, Scophthalmus maximus under
intensive rearing conditions: the role of environmental fac-
tors. Aquaculture 165: 123–138.
Mallekh R, Lagard
ere JP, Eneau JP, Cloutour C (2003) An
acoustic detector of turbot feeding activity. Aquaculture 221:
481–489.
Mallet D, Pelletier D (2014) Underwater video techniques for
observing coastal marine biodiversity: a review of sixty years
of publications (1952–2012). Fisheries Research 154: 44–62.
Martins CI, Galhardo L, Noble C, Damsg ard B, Spedicato MT,
Zupa W et al. (2012) Behavioural indicators of welfare in
farmed fish. Fish Physiology and Biochemistry 38: 17.
Masser M (1993) Management of Recreational Fish Ponds in
Alabama. World Aquaculture 23: 41–47.
McFarlane W, Williams H, Roswell D, White C, Gosine R, Fin-
stad B et al. (2002) Intelligent monitoring systems for aqua-
culture: enhancing the efficiency of feeding systems.
Aquaforum Conference Proceedings January, pp. 24–25,
Science Council of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Michel APM, Croff KL, McLetchie KW, Irish JD (2002) A
remote monitoring system for Open Ocean Aquaculture.
OCEANS ‘02 MTS/IEEE, pp. 2488–2496 vol. 2484.
Myrberg AA (1981) Sound communication and interception in
fishes. In: Tavolga WN, Popper AN, Fay RR (eds) Hearing
and Sound Communication in Fishes, pp. 395–426. Springer,
New York, NY.
Myron AP, Lawrence JB, Elaine MC, David AB (2003) Effects of
food consumption and temperature on growth rate and bio-
chemical-based indicators of growth in early juvenile Atlantic
cod Gadus morhua and haddock Melanogrammus aeglefinus.
Marine Ecology Progress Series 251: 233–243.
Nakamachi T, Matsuda K, Maruyama K, Miura T, Uchiyama M,
Funahashi H et al. (2006) Regulation by orexin of feeding
behaviour and locomotor activity in the goldfish. Journal of
Neuroendocrinology 18: 290–297.
Oppedal F, Dempster T, Stien LH (2011) Environmental drivers
of Atlantic salmon behaviour in sea-cages: a review. Aquacul-
ture 311: 1–18.
Papadakis VM, Papadakis IE, Lamprianidou F, Glaropoulos A,
Kentouri M (2012) A computer-vision system and methodol-
ogy for the analysis of fish behavior. Aquacultural Engineering
46: 53–59.
Papandroulakis N, Dimitris P, Pascal D (2002) An automated
feeding system for intensive hatcheries. Aquacultural Engineer-
ing 26: 13–26.
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Feeding control methods in aquaculture
Papoutsoglou SE (2012) The role of the brain in farmed fish.
Reviews in Aquaculture 4: 1–10.
Parsonage KD (2001) Detection of Fish-Food Pellets in Highly-
Cluttered Underwater Images with Variable Illumination.
University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Parsonage KD, Petrell RJ (2003) Accuracy of a machine-vision
pellet detection system. Aquacultural Engineering 29: 109–123.
Pautsina A, Cısar P, Stys D, Terjesen BF, Espmark AMO (2015)
Infrared reflection system for indoor 3D tracking of fish.
Aquacultural Engineering 69: 7–17.
Petit G, Beauchaud M, Attia J, Buisson B (2003) Food intake
and growth of largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides) held
under alternated light/dark cycle (12L:12D) or exposed to
continuous light. Aquaculture 228: 397–401.
Petrell RJ, Ang KP (2001) Effects of pellet contrast and light
intensity on salmonid feeding behaviours. Aquacultural Engi-
neering 25: 175–186.
Pinkiewicz TH, Purser GJ, Williams RN (2011) A computer
vision system to analyse the swimming behaviour of farmed
fish in commercial aquaculture facilities: a case study using
cage-held Atlantic salmon. Aquacultural Engineering 45: 20–
27.
Pippy JHC, Whelan WG, O’Connell MF (1997) A Field Guide to
Counting and Measuring Salmonids Using the Silhouette Imag-
ing and Counting System (SIACS). Department of Fisheries
and Oceans, St. John’s, NF, Canada; Report No.: 2365.
Polonschii C, Bratu D, Gheorghiu E (2013) Appraisal of fish
behaviour based on time series of fish positions issued by a
3D array of ultrasound transducers. Aquacultural Engineering
55: 37–45.
Popper AN, Schilt CR (2008) Hearing and Acoustic Behavior:
Basic and Applied Considerations, pp. 17–48. Springer, New
York, NY.
Rakowitz G, Herold W, Fesl C, Keckeis H, Kubecka J, Balk H
(2008) Two methods to improve the accuracy of target-
strength estimates for horizontal beaming. Fisheries Research
93: 324–331.
Rakowitz G, Tuser M, R  ıha M, J
uza T, Balk H, Kubecka J (2012)
Use of high-frequency imaging sonar (DIDSON) to observe
fish behaviour towards a surface trawl. Fisheries Research 123–
124: 37–48.
Reynolds CW (1987) Flocks, herds and schools: a distributed
behavioral model. SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics 21: 25–34.
Rodrıguez-Calder on C, Kuehl SA (2013) Spatial and temporal
patterns in erosion and deposition in the York River, Chesa-
peake Bay, VA. Estuarine Coastal & Shelf Science 117: 148–
158.
Rola WR, Hasan MR (2007) Economics of Aquaculture Feeding
Practices: A Synthesis of Case Studies Undertaken in Six Asian
Countries. FAO, Rome, Italy; Report No.: 505.
Rønnestad I, Y ufera M, Uebersch€ar B, Ribeiro L, Sæle Ø,
Boglione C (2013) Feeding behaviour and digestive physiol-
ogy in larval fish: current knowledge, and gaps and bottle-
necks in research. Reviews in Aquaculture 5: S59–S98.
17
C. Zhou et al.
Rose CS, Stoner AW, Matteson K (2005) Use of high-frequency
imaging sonar to observe fish behaviour near baited fishing
gears. Fisheries Research 76: 291–304.
Rubio VC, Vivas M, Sanchez-Mut A, Sanchez-Vazquez FJ,
Cov
es D, Dutto G et al. (2004) Self-feeding of European
sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax, L.) under laboratory and
farming conditions using a string sensor. Aquaculture 233:
393–403.
Saberioon MM, Cisar P (2016) Automated multiple fish tracking
in three-Dimension using a Structured Light Sensor. Comput-
ers and Electronics in Agriculture 121: 215–221.
Saberioon M, Gholizadeh A, Cisar P, Pautsina A, Urban J (2016)
Application of machine vision systems in aquaculture with
emphasis on fish: state-of-the-art and key issues. Reviews in
Aquaculture 8: 1–19.
Sadoul B, Evouna Mengues P, Friggens NC, Prunet P, Colson V
(2014) A new method for measuring group behaviours of fish
shoals from recorded videos taken in near aquaculture condi-
tions. Aquaculture 430: 179–187.
Sanchezvazquez FJ, Martınez M, Zamora S, Madrid JA (1994)
Design and performance of an accurate demand feeder for the
study of feeding behaviour in sea bass, Dicentrarchus labrax L.
Physiology & Behavior 56: 789–794.
Sarker PK, Bureau DP, Hua K, Drew MD, Forster I, Were K
et al. (2013) Sustainability issues related to feeding salmonids:
a Canadian perspective. Reviews in Aquaculture 5: 199–219.
Serpa D, Ferreira PP, Ferreira H, da Fonseca LC, Dinis MT,
Duarte P (2013) Modelling the growth of white seabream
(Diplodus sargus) and gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata) in
semi-intensive earth production ponds using the Dynamic
Energy Budget approach. Journal of Sea Research 76: 135–145.
Shcherbakov D, Kn€ orzer A, Espenhahn S, Hilbig R, Haas U,
Blum M (2013) Sensitivity differences in fish offer near-infra-
red vision as an adaptable evolutionary trait. PLoS One 8: 1–
11.
Silva CR, Gomes LC, Brand~ao FR (2007) Effect of feeding rate
and frequency on tambaqui (Colossoma macropomum)
growth, production and feeding costs during the first growth
phase in cages. Aquaculture 264: 135–139.
Smith DV, Tabrett S (2013) The use of passive acoustics to mea-
sure feed consumption by Penaeus monodon (giant tiger
prawn) in cultured systems. Aquacultural Engineering 57: 38–
47.
Soto-Zaraz ua GM, Rico-Garcıa E, Ocampo R, Guevara-Gonzalez
RG, Herrera-Ruiz G (2010) Fuzzy-logic-based feeder system
for intensive tilapia production (Oreochromis niloticus). Aqua-
culture International 18: 379–391.
Spampinato C, Giordano D, Salvo RD, Chen-Burger Y-HJ,
Fisher RB, Nadarajan G (2010) Automatic fish classification
for underwater species behavior understanding. Proceedings
of the first ACM international workshop on Analysis and
retrieval of tracked events and motion in imagery streams, pp.
45–50. ACM, Firenze, Italy.
Stavros C, Maria P, Nikos P, Michalis P, Ioannis N, Con-
stantinosc M (2010) Effect of dietary lipid levels on growth,
18
feed utilization, body composition and serum metabolites of
meagre (Argyrosomus regius) juveniles. Aquaculture 307: 65–
70.
Stickney RR (1979) Principles of Warmwater Aquaculture. Wiley
Inter-Science, New York, NY.
Sun M, Hassan SG, Li D (2016) Models for estimating feed
intake in aquaculture: a review. Computers and Electronics in
Agriculture 127: 425–438.
Takahashi A, Tsuchiya K, Yamanome T, Amano M, Yasuda A,
Yamamori K et al. (2004) Possible involvement of melanin-
concentrating hormone in food intake in a teleost fish, barfin
flounder. Peptides 25: 1613–1622.
Tao J, Gao Y, Qiao Y, Zheng H, Wang X, Wan L et al.
(2010) Hydroacoustic observation of fish spatial patterns
and behavior in the ship lock and adjacent areas of Gez-
houba Dam, Yangtze River. Acta Ecologica Sinica 30: 233–
239.
Tennant WA, Bitterman ME (1975) Extradimensional transfer
in the discriminative learning of goldfish. Animal Learning &
Behavior 3: 201–204.
Tohtz J (2011) Testing assumptions of fish bioenergetics models
by direct estimation of growth, consumption, and activity
rates. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 122: 784–
796.
Torisawa S, Kadota M (2011) A digital stereo-video camera sys-
tem for three-dimensional monitoring of free-swimming
Pacific bluefin tuna, Thunnus orientalis, cultured in a net cage.
Aquatic Living Resources 24: 107–112.
Ursin E (1967) A mathematical model of some aspects of fish
growth, respiration, and mortality. Journal of the Fisheries
Research Board of Canada 24: 2355–2453.
Velazquez M, Martınez FJ (2005) Design and testing of a faeces-
collecting device for fish digestibility studies using demand or
automatic feeding. Aquacultural Engineering 33: 126–134.
de Verdal H, Komen H, Quillet E, Chatain B, Allal F, Benzie
JAH et al. (2017) Improving feed efficiency in fish using selec-
tive breeding: a review. Reviews in Aquaculture 9: 1–19.
Volkoff H, Peter RE (2006) Feeding behavior of fish and its con-
trol. Zebrafish 3: 131.
Wang N, Hayward RS, Noltie DB (1998) Effect of feeding fre-
quency on food consumption, growth, size variation, and
feeding pattern of age-0 hybrid sunfish. Aquaculture 165: 261–
267.
Wang Y, Kong L-J, Li K, Bureau DP (2007) Effects of feeding
frequency and ration level on growth, feed utilization and
nitrogen waste output of cuneate drum (Nibea miichthioides)
reared in net pens. Aquaculture 271: 350–356.
Watanabe T (2002) Strategies for further development of aquatic
feeds. Fisheries Science 68: 242–252.
Wu T-H, Huang Y-I, Chen J-M (2015) Development of an
adaptive neural-based fuzzy inference system for feeding deci-
sion-making assessment in silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus)
culture. Aquacultural Engineering 66: 41–51.
Wyatt T (1972) Some effects of food density on the growth and
behaviour of plaice larvae. Marine Biology 14: 210–216.
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd

Wysocki LE, Ladich F (2005) Effects of noise exposure on click
detection and the temporal resolution ability of the goldfish
auditory system. Hearing Research 201: 27.
Xia S, Zhao P, Chen K, Li Y, Liu S, Zhang L et al. (2012) Feeding
preferences of the sea cucumber Apostichopus japonicus
(Selenka) on various seaweed diets. Aquaculture 344–349:
205–209.
Xiao J, Braun C (2006) The temporal resolution of goldfish
hearing: an auditory evoked potential study of gap detection.
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 120: 3326.
Xiao G, Feng M, Cheng Z, Zhao M, Mao J, Mirowski L (2015)
Water quality monitoring using abnormal tail-beat frequency
of crucian carp. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 111:
185–191.
Xie Y, Michielsens CGJ, Gray AP, Martens FJ, Boffey JL (2008)
Observations of avoidance reactions of migrating salmon to a
mobile survey vessel in a riverine environment. Canadian
Journal of Fisheries & Aquatic Sciences 65: 2178–2190.
Xiong G, Cheng J, Wu X, Chen Y-L, Ou Y, Xu Y (2012) An
energy model approach to people counting for abnormal
crowd behavior detection. Neurocomputing 83: 121–135.
Xu J, Liu Y, Cui S, Miao X (2006) Behavioral responses of tilapia
(Oreochromis niloticus) to acute fluctuations in dissolved oxy-
gen levels as monitored by computer vision. Aquacultural
Engineering 35: 207–217.
Yokobori E, Azuma M, Nishiguchi R, Kang KS, Kamijo M,
Uchiyama M et al. (2012) Neuropeptide Y stimulates food
intake in the Zebrafish, Danio rerio. Journal of Neuroen-
docrinology, 24: 766–773.
Yukinori M, Rosli MK, Tan NH, Chung FL (2016) Demand
feeding system using an infrared light sensor for brown-
marbled grouper juveniles, Epinephelus fuscoguttatus. Sains
Malaysiana 45: 729–733.
Yun B, Mai K, Zhang W, Wei X (2011) Effects of dietary choles-
terol on growth performance, feed intake and cholesterol
metabolism in juvenile turbot (Scophthalmus maximus L.) fed
high plant protein diets. Aquaculture 319: 105–110.
Zhang L, Zhao Z, Xiong D, Fang W, Li B, Fan Q et al. (2011)
Effects of ration level on growth, nitrogenous excretion and
energy budget of juvenile yellow catfish, Pelteobagrus ful-
vidraco (Richardson). Aquaculture Research 42: 899–905.
Zhangying Y, Jian Z, Zhiying H, Songming Z, Jianping L,
Huanda L et al. (2016) Behavioral characteristics and statis-
tics-based imaging techniques in the assessment and
Reviews in Aquaculture (2017) 0, 1–19
© 2017 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd
Feeding control methods in aquaculture
optimization of tilapia feeding in a recirculating aquaculture
system. Transactions of the ASABE 59: 345–355.
Zhao J, Gu Z, Shi M, Lu H, Li J, Shen M et al. (2016) Spatial
behavioral characteristics and statistics-based kinetic energy
modeling in special behaviors detection of a shoal of fish in a
recirculating aquaculture system. Computers and Electronics in
Agriculture 127: 271–280.
Zhong Z, Ye W, Wang S, Yang M, Xu Y (2007) Crowd Energy
and Feature Analysis. 2007 IEEE International Conference on
Integration Technology, pp. 144–150, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ.
Zhou Z, Xie S, Lei W, Zhu X, Yang Y (2005) A bioenergetic
model to estimate feed requirement of gibel carp, Carassius
auratus gibelio. Aquaculture 248: 287–297.
Zhou C, Yang X, Zhang B, Lin K, Xu D, Guo Q et al. (2017a)
An adaptive image enhancement method for a recirculating
aquaculture system. Scientific Reports 7: 62343. 1–11.
Zhou C, Zhang B, Lin K, Xu D, Chen C, Yang X et al. (2017b)
Near-infrared imaging to quantify the feeding behavior of fish
in aquaculture. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 135:
233–241.
Zion B (2012) The use of computer vision technologies in aqua-
culture – a review. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture
88: 125–132.
Zion B, Barki A (2012) Ranching fish using acoustic condition-
ing: has it reached a dead end? Aquaculture 344–349: 3–11.
Zion B, Shklyar A, Karplus I (1999) Sorting fish by computer
vision. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 23: 175–187.
Zion B, Alchanatis V, Ostrovsky V, Barki A, Karplus I (2007a)
Real-time underwater sorting of edible fish species. Computers
& Electronics in Agriculture 56: 34–45.
Zion B, Rosenfeld L, Karplus I (2007b) Social facilitation of
acoustic training in the Common Carp Cyprinus carpio (L.).
Behaviour 144: 611–630.
Zion B, Karplus I, Barki A (2010) Generalization and discrimi-
nation of positive and negative acoustic stimuli in the com-
mon carp (Cyprinus carpio). Behavioural Processes 83: 306–
310.
Zion B, Barki A, Grinshpon J, Rosenfeld L, Karplus I (2011a)
Retention of acoustic conditioning in St Peter’s fish Sarothero-
don galilaeus. Journal of Fish Biology 78: 838.
Zion B, Karplus I, Grinshpon J, Rosenfeld L, Barki A (2011b)
Periodic reinforcement of acoustically conditioned behavior
in St. Peter’s fish, Sarotherodon galilaeus, for ranching pur-
poses. Aquaculture 315: 394–399.
19