Next Article in Journal
Microalgae as Bioindicators of Changes in Permafrost Catchments: A Reference Area of the Olyokma Nature Reserve, Yakutia
Previous Article in Journal
Temporal and Spatial Analysis of Deformation and Instability, and Trend Analysis of Step Deformation Landslide
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Evaluation of Water Quality in the Production of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in a Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) in the Precordilleran Region of Northern Chile

by
Renzo Pepe-Victoriano
1,2,*,
Piera Pepe-Vargas
1,2,
Anahí Pérez-Aravena
1,
Héctor Aravena-Ambrosetti
1,3,
Jordan I. Huanacuni
1,3,4,*,
Felipe Méndez-Abarca
1,3,
Germán Olivares-Cantillano
5,
Olger Acosta-Angulo
6 and
Luis Espinoza-Ramos
7
1
Área de Biología Marina y Acuicultura, Facultad de Recursos Naturales Renovables, Universidad Arturo Prat, Iquique 101000, Chile
2
Núcleo de Investigación Aplicada e Innovación en Ciencias Biológicas, Facultad de Recursos Naturales Renovables, Universidad Arturo Prat, Iquique 1110939, Chile
3
Programa de Magíster en Acuicultura, Mención en Cultivos de Recursos Hidrobiológicos y Mención en Acuaponia, Facultad de Recursos Naturales Renovables, Universidad Arturo Prat, Arica 1031597, Chile
4
Finfish Aquaculture Sociedad Anónima Cerrada, Tacna 23004, Peru
5
Piscicultura Río Blanco “Federico Albert Taupp”, Escuela de Ciencias del Mar, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, Valparaíso 2340000, Chile
6
Escuela Profesional de Ingeniería Pesquera, Universidad Nacional San Agustín de Arequipa, Arequipa 04000, Peru
7
Escuela de Ingeniería Pesquera, Universidad Nacional Jorge Basadre Grohmann, Tacna 23000, Peru
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Water 2025, 17(11), 1685; https://doi.org/10.3390/w17111685
Submission received: 24 April 2025 / Revised: 28 May 2025 / Accepted: 31 May 2025 / Published: 2 June 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Water, Agriculture and Aquaculture)

Abstract

:
Water quality and the culture performance of juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) were evaluated between 2014 and 2017 in a recirculating aquaculture system (RAS) in the Chilean Altiplano. Key parameters such as temperature, total ammonia nitrogen (TAN), nitrates, and dissolved oxygen were monitored, with values ranging from 7 to 21 °C, <0.1 to 0.63 mg/L, 2.0 to 135 mg/L, and 1.8 to 7.5 mg/L, respectively. Additional parameters—including alkalinity, arsenic, chlorine, true color, conductivity, hardness, phosphorus, pH, potassium, suspended solids, and salinity—were also assessed, comparing different points within the system (head tank, culture tanks, and settling tanks). The results showed that water quality remained within acceptable ranges for aquaculture, although fluctuations in pH and low alkalinity levels caused stress in the fish. Despite these challenges, the specific growth rate (SGR) was 1.49, the feed conversion ratio (FCR) was 1.52, and weight gain reached 298.7%, with a survival rate of 96.2%. This study demonstrates that aquaculture in the Altiplano is feasible and can contribute to the sustainable development of aquaculture in the region. Furthermore, it highlights the importance of comprehensive water quality monitoring to optimize RAS performance in challenging environments.

1. Introduction

In the foothills of northern Chile, particularly in the Arica and Parinacota Region, agriculture, livestock farming, and, to a lesser extent, tourism represent the main sources of income for local communities [1,2]. However, the progressive decline and abandonment of agricultural and livestock activities—largely due to the lack of economic diversification—have contributed to rural depopulation, as younger generations migrate toward urban centers [3]. In this context, aquaculture has emerged as a promising productive alternative for high-altitude settlements [1,4]. Several studies highlight its potential to revitalize rural economies by leveraging existing agricultural infrastructure, such as irrigation reservoirs, greenhouses, and hydraulic systems [4,5]. The reuse of water in land-based aquaculture systems, especially recirculating aquaculture systems (RASs), offers an efficient and sustainable strategy that can complement irrigation practices [5]. These systems are particularly well-suited to the environmental conditions of the Altiplano, where land availability and microclimates provide a favorable setting for the cultivation of freshwater fish [5]. Moreover, high-altitude aquaculture could enhance local food security by offering a reliable protein source, reducing dependency on external food supplies, and contributing to the overall resilience of Andean communities [5].
Among the available aquaculture methods, recirculating aquaculture systems (RASs) stand out for their high water-use efficiency [6]. Compared to flow-through systems, RASs can reduce water consumption by 90% to 99% per unit of production, depending on system design and operational efficiency. While traditional systems may require 30 to 60 L of water per second per ton of fish, a well-optimized RAS can operate with daily water exchange rates as low as 1 to 5% of the total system volume—equivalent to less than 1 L per second for the same biomass [7,8]. In addition, RASs allow precise control of critical environmental parameters, such as temperature, alkalinity, and nitrogen compounds, which is essential in regions where water is a limited resource [9].
Species selection for RASs depends on compatibility with controlled environments, feed conversion efficiency, and economic return. Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) is one of the most widely cultured species in these systems due to its tolerance to high stocking densities, ability to grow under controlled oxygen levels, strong market demand, and well-established production protocols [10]. Moreover, its sensitivity to key water quality parameters, such as dissolved oxygen, temperature, and pH, makes it a suitable model for evaluating RASs in challenging environments. Importantly, rainbow trout has demonstrated adaptability to high-altitude culture systems, maintaining acceptable growth rates when water conditions are properly managed, justifying its study at 3000 m above sea level. Other suitable species include channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), tilapia (Oreochromis spp.) [11], sturgeon, and white shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei), especially in biofloc-based RASs. In contrast, filter feeders such as bivalves are generally less compatible due to their high water volume requirements [12,13].
Unlike flow-through systems, where water quality depends heavily on the incoming source, RASs offer consistent control over key variables, improving conditions such as water cleanliness, dissolved oxygen levels, and the removal of waste residues [14,15].
A recirculating aquaculture system (RAS) is a technology that reuses water in the culture of aquatic organisms through a closed-loop treatment circuit. Its key components include water storage or header tanks, culture tanks, mechanical filters for the removal of suspended solids, and biofilters that convert toxic nitrogenous compounds into less harmful forms. These elements support the maintenance of optimal water quality, enhance water-use efficiency, and reduce environmental impact when compared to conventional aquaculture systems [7].
Water quality is a general condition that determines whether water can be used for specific purposes; it is a relative concept and depends on how the resource is utilized [16]. In aquaculture, water quality is influenced by the physical and chemical properties of water and their interaction with the cultured organisms. Key factors include temperature, dissolved oxygen, salinity, alkalinity, hardness, and nitrogen compounds [17]. However, increasing aquatic pollution and the presence of organic contaminants and heavy metals must also be considered due to their impact on organisms and production goals [18,19].
Each cultivated species has an optimal water quality range necessary for normal development, requiring adjustments to parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, salinity, pH, and alkalinity based on its specific needs. In RASs, water conditions vary between system sections [5]. In water reservoirs, parameters tend to be optimal after biological filtration, whereas at the tank outlets, organic waste and nitrogen compounds accumulate, increasing total ammonia nitrogen (TAN) and reducing dissolved oxygen. In the biofilter, nitrifying bacteria convert ammonium into nitrites and nitrates, reducing water toxicity but requiring high oxygen concentrations to sustain nitrification [7].
Controlling parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, and pH is crucial for fish welfare and growth. Temperature influences both biotic and abiotic processes; an increase in this parameter reduces dissolved oxygen levels, increases ammonia toxicity, and accelerates the decomposition of organic matter, leading to higher oxygen consumption and affecting the metabolism and health of organisms [1,2]. Dissolved oxygen regulation is closely linked to fish health, growth, and survival, making it essential to prevent stress and ensure normal physiological processes. Similarly, extreme pH levels can cause mortality and directly affect the stability of other critical parameters [7,20].
Other parameters, such as alkalinity and hardness, also play a significant role. Alkalinity, which measures the concentration of dissolved alkaline substances, acts as a buffer, stabilizing pH, while hardness reflects the concentration of essential cations such as calcium and magnesium. In both cases, fluctuations in these parameters can lead to pH variations, ultimately affecting fish health [7]. Likewise, water conductivity, which is related to the total ion concentration, impacts fish osmoregulation and overall well-being [17].
In aquaculture, monitoring nitrogen compounds, such as ammonium, nitrite, and nitrate, is crucial. These compounds are generated within the system through fish excretion and the decomposition of organic matter, and their accumulation negatively impacts fish health, particularly in salmonids, which are highly sensitive to ammonia [21]. Biofilters play a key role in removing these compounds, ensuring a healthy environment in intensive aquaculture systems.
Salinity, determined by ions such as chloride, calcium, and potassium, directly influences fish osmoregulation. Chlorides also reduce nitrite toxicity by competing for branchial transport sites [22]. However, high chloride concentrations can affect gas transfer in the gills by increasing the thickness of the blood–water diffusion barrier [23]. Potassium, on the other hand, contributes to osmotic balance [20].
Parameters such as phosphorus, total dissolved solids (TDS), and arsenic are also relevant in aquaculture, as abnormal values can cause issues in production. Phosphorus can promote algal blooms, reducing dissolved oxygen levels [24]. High TDS levels affect fish osmoregulation [25], while arsenic, although less studied, poses a toxicological risk for fish and human consumption [26].
Water color depends on various factors and is influenced by organic compounds and phytoplankton. It can affect light penetration in the water, limiting system productivity [20].
In RASs, continuous monitoring of these compounds ensures optimal culture conditions and production efficiency while minimizing costs and environmental impacts [3,27]. However, despite these advantages, the implementation of RASs also involves significant challenges. These include high initial capital investment in infrastructure and monitoring systems [8], substantial energy demands, and the need for trained personnel to manage complex processes, such as biofiltration and water chemistry [7]. Innovations like renewable energy integration and aquavoltaic systems offer promising solutions to reduce energy consumption and operational costs, enhancing the overall sustainability of RASs [28]. Thus, their feasibility depends not only on technical performance but also on the ability to address economic, energy, and operational limitations—especially in rural or low-infrastructure contexts.
This study aims to evaluate the variability of water quality parameters in a recirculating aquaculture system at 3000 masl. Additionally, it seeks to determine the impact of all studied parameters on the growth and development of rainbow trout juveniles during their first three months of cultivation.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area and Recirculating Aquaculture System Characteristics

The study was conducted at the Copaquilla Pukará Cultivation Center (CPCC) (Figure 1), located in the precordillera of northern Chile, in the locality of Copaquilla (18°23′43″ S, 69°37′58″ W). This center is situated 90 km inland from the city of Arica, in the Arica and Parinacota Region, at an altitude of 3000 m above sea level (m.a.s.l.).
The facility operated a recirculating aquaculture system (RAS) (Figure 2) supplied exclusively by untreated local groundwater, the sole reliable water source in this high-altitude desert region. Given the scarcity of surface water and the extreme arid conditions typical of the Chilean Altiplano, groundwater is indispensable for sustaining aquaculture and local agriculture. The RAS consisted of six circular Australian-type tanks designed for the intensive production of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). This system included a central drainage system and hydraulic connections for water supply and aeration. Additionally, it featured fiberglass tanks installed below ground level, which included two sedimentation tanks and a biofilter tank. The system was also equipped with two water suction pumps (Reggio, model SM 150), a high-pressure blower (Sweetwater, 1.5 hp), and an oxygen generator (Oxiti, 8 LPM).
Water was delivered to each culture tank through a central pipeline with a diagonal flow, regulated by valves, creating a circular motion. The tanks were internally lined with an impermeable material (0.9 mm thick laminated PVC) and were equipped with a central drainage and outflow system. Each tank was also fitted with continuous aeration pipes and oxygen distribution lines, either for regular use or emergency situations. The water used in the tanks was subsequently directed to the sedimentation tanks, designed for the removal of suspended solids.

2.2. Water Quality Monitoring

In this study, water quality parameters in the RAS were measured and categorized into two main types. General parameters included temperature (°C), dissolved oxygen (mg/L), as well as ammonium and nitrate concentrations (mg/L). Special parameters consisted of alkalinity (mg/L), arsenic (mg/L), chloride (mg/L), true color (Pt-Co), conductivity (µS/cm), hardness (mg/L), phosphorus (mg/L), pH, potassium (mg/L), total dissolved solids (mg/L), and salinity (PSU). This monitoring strategy enabled a detailed and continuous record of the water’s environmental conditions. The following section details the measurement criteria and usage of each parameter group.

2.2.1. Fundamental Water Quality Parameters in a SAR System

Temperature and dissolved oxygen (DO) were measured daily, three times a day, using a portable oximeter (YSI, model I55, Hanna Intruments Chile, Santiago, Chile). Nitrogenous compounds were assessed biweekly with a multiparameter photometer (Hanna, model HI83303) throughout the 36 month study. To prevent excessive nitrate concentrations in the culture water, 40% water exchanges were conducted in the decanter tanks whenever nitrate measurements indicated high values. Nitrate levels were monitored directly in the fish tanks by placing the sensor on the side opposite the water inlet, at mid-depth. When elevated nitrate concentrations were detected, water was partially replaced in the decanters to maintain optimal water quality in the entire system.
Additionally, complementary measurements of temperature, DO, and nitrogenous compounds were taken at key points in the RAS to assess parameter variability across different system locations. These measurements were conducted monthly for five months, beginning two months before the fish were introduced into the system. The selected sampling points were as follows:
Point 1: Header tank (HT)—the system’s entry point for untreated groundwater, representing the initial water quality conditions entering the RAS.
Point 2: Cultivation tanks 3 and 4 (CT3 and CT4)—located at the end of the water supply line, these tanks receive water of similar quality but are connected to different hydraulic discharge lines. This configuration allows for comparison of potential water quality differences resulting from flow path and treatment performance within the system.
Point 3: Decanting tanks (DT)—responsible for sediment removal and partial water renewal, representing a key stage for evaluating the effectiveness of solid waste management.

2.2.2. Specific Water Quality Parameters in a SAR System

The special parameters and their analysis methods are described in Table 1. These measurements were conducted monthly for five months, starting two months before the fish were introduced into the system. The selected sampling points were the same as previously mentioned: the water storage pond (WSP), the outlet water from the fish culture tanks (CT3 and CT4), and the biofilter (DT) (Figure 2).

2.3. Juvenile Growth Assessment

The study was conducted between July 2014 and June 2017. At the end of October 2014, 5000 juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) with an average weight of approximately 15 g were sourced from the Río Blanco hatchery, operated by the Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso and located in Los Andes, Valparaíso Region. The fish were transported to the experimental facility in Copaquilla (Arica and Parinacota Region, ~3000 m.a.s.l.), where they underwent a gradual acclimation process to the recirculating aquaculture system (RAS) and high-altitude environmental conditions.
Fish were maintained under natural photoperiod conditions typical of the pre-Andean zone, with approximately 13 h of light and 11 h of darkness during spring and summer months. No artificial lighting was used. Feeding was performed manually three times daily at 08:00, 13:00, and 18:00 h using a commercial extruded trout feed for juveniles (Power 250. Ast. 100 ppm), with a particle size of 2–3 mm and a protein content of 40%. Feed rations were adjusted monthly based on estimated biomass, observed feeding behavior, and water temperature, following the manufacturer’s recommendations. Additionally, 24–48 h fasting periods were applied as a management strategy whenever critical water quality parameters (e.g., ammonia or dissolved oxygen) showed significant fluctuations to prevent biological filter stress.
The fish were stocked at an initial density of approximately 0.45 kg/m3, with 1250 fish per 33,000 L tank. To evaluate the effects of water quality parameters on growth, sampling was conducted every 15 days over the first three months. In each sampling event, 2–3% of the tank population was randomly selected, handled carefully without the use of anesthetics, and individually weighed using a digital scale (Mocco, model V-1026,Rimasa, Santiago, Chile). All handling was conducted using water from the same tank, with minimal air exposure (<15 s) and soft rubber nets to protect the skin and mucosa. Although no physiological stress indicators were quantified, fish behavior was monitored daily, and no signs of stress (e.g., erratic swimming, lethargy, reduced feeding) were observed. The absence of mortality related to handling and the maintenance of a high condition factor throughout the study further support the effectiveness of these practices in minimizing stress. After weighing, all fish were promptly returned to their respective tanks. Growth performance was assessed by calculating the feed conversion ratio (FCR), specific growth rate (SGR), weight gain percentage (%GW), survival rate (%S), and applying the exponential growth equation, following the methodology described by Ricker [30].

2.4. Data Analyses

Statistical analyses were performed using Rstudio statistical software version 2024.09.0+375 from Rstudio, Inc. (Washington, DC, USA). Temperature, dissolved oxygen, ammonium, and nitrate were tested for normality using the Anderson–Darling test and for homogeneity of variance using the Bartlett test. Data were evaluated using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s post-hoc test. When normality assumptions were not met, data were evaluated using the Kruskal–Wallis test to assess differences between treatments and the Dunnett test to determine homogeneous groups [31]. The non-parametric Mann–Kendall correlation test (Kendall Tau) was applied to determine the relationship between temperature–oxygen and ammonium–nitrate. Growth was tested for normality using the Anderson–Darling test and Pearson correlation. A principal component analysis (PCA) was performed to evaluate the relationship between water quality parameters. Graphs were made using the ggplot2 package and expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD).

3. Results

3.1. General Water Quality Parameters

During the colder months of the Southern Hemisphere (April to October), temperatures in the tanks decreased, reaching values below 8 °C. In contrast, during the warmer months (November to March), temperatures increased, exceeding 18 °C between January and March (Figure 3).
The applied non-parametric analysis did not show a significant trend in water temperature during the entire study period (τ = 0.089; p = 0.4535). Similarly, dissolved oxygen levels remained unchanged over time (τ = 0.120; p = 0.3233). On the other hand, Kendall’s correlation coefficient indicated a moderate and highly significant inverse relationship between temperature and dissolved oxygen (τ = –0.475; p = 8.65 × 10−5) (Figure 3).
Dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations in the tanks exhibited an inverse relationship with temperature, also influenced by seasonal changes. During colder months, DO levels were higher compared to warmer months, as elevated temperatures lead to increased oxygen consumption by fish, resulting in lower oxygen levels in the water.
Ammonium concentrations showed moderate fluctuations over the 36 months, generally remaining within a range of 0.25–0.75 mg/L (Figure 4). Peak values were observed toward the end of 2016, with a notable spike in October, likely associated with an environmental event.
The temporal evaluation of ammonium concentrations showed no evidence of a significant trend (τ = 0.078; p = 0.5205). In contrast, nitrate showed a slight but statistically significant increasing trend over time (τ = 0.235; p = 0.04908).
Additionally, a positive correlation of moderate magnitude and high significance was identified between the concentrations of both nitrogenous compounds (τ = 0.484; p = 6.56 × 10−5) (Figure 4).
In contrast, nitrate levels exhibited more pronounced variations, with concentrations reaching up to 1.5 mg/L at several points during the cultivation period. However, each time nitrate levels rose significantly, a subsequent sharp decline was observed, coinciding with water exchanges in the system to reduce its concentration. Overall, the levels of both parameters did not appear to reach values that posed a serious threat to the fish in this culture system.
In Table 2, the measurements of ammonium and dissolved oxygen recorded at different points within the RAS can be observed and compared.
Temperature in December showed normality (A = 0.46826, p = 0.223); however, no significant differences were observed (F = 0.002248, p = 0.999). The HT exhibited higher temperatures compared to CT3, CT4, and the DT, particularly in January and December.
Significant differences in dissolved oxygen levels were observed across all months, with lower values for CT4 and the DT, especially between October and December.
Ammonium concentrations in September and October—when no fish were present—were below 0.1 mg/L. In contrast, significant differences were detected in November (KW = 15.558, p = 0.01), December (KW = 17.857, p = 4.71 × 10−4), and January (KW = 16.892, p = 7.44 × 10−4).
Nitrate concentrations exceeded the recommended limit (<110 mg/L) in several months, particularly in January in the HT (135 mg/L). Elevated nitrate levels were also recorded in CT3 and the DT during November and December.

3.2. Specific Water Quality Parameters

Table 3 presents the values of the specific water quality parameters measured at different points in the RAS, along with their normal or expected reference values.
Phosphoric acid and true color point in similar directions, suggesting that they tend to increase or decrease together. Conversely, arsenic, conductivity, and salinity lie in the opposite direction to phosphoric acid, indicating that as one increases, the others decrease. Meanwhile, calcium hardness and alkalinity are nearly perpendicular to phosphoric acid, suggesting little to no correlation between these variables.
Figure 5 shows the PCA biplot of the water quality variables. The first two dimensions explain 64.8% of the total variability (51.1% by Dim1 and 13.7% by Dim2). Variables such as pH, color, and phosphoric acid are positively associated with Dim1, while conductivity, arsenic, and total dissolved solids (STD) show a negative association. The proximity of chloride, STD, and arsenic suggests a similar contribution pattern, whereas variables like alkalinity and calcium hardness are more closely related to Dim2.

3.3. Juvenile Growth Assessment

Table 4 displays the values obtained for the evaluated growth parameters. Throughout the cultivation period, growth indicators such as SGR, FCR, and %IP showed a steady increase, reflecting the continuous growth of the fish. Additionally, the high survival rate recorded supports the success of the culture during the three-month period, from the introduction of the juveniles in late October to January.
Figure 6 shows the linear relationship between weight and length, with a coefficient of determination (r2 = 0.94), indicating that fish weight increases consistently as their length increases. The condition factor (k) ranges from 1.5 to 2.5.
From the initial stocking of trout in the system, with an average weight of 12 g, a progressive weight increase was observed until the end of the sampling period. This growth is illustrated in Figure 7, which presents an upward curve, clearly depicting the weight progression of the specimens.
In Table 5, the initial and final weights obtained by the fish during the 93 days of the experiment are presented, in addition to the SGR per sampling interval and the percentage gain in weight between sampling.

4. Discussion

Water quality is a critical factor in aquaculture, directly influencing fish growth, health, and survival. In high-altitude farming systems, environmental conditions present additional challenges, such as lower dissolved oxygen availability and more pronounced thermal fluctuations. This study analyzed various water quality parameters in a recirculating aquaculture system (RAS) for rainbow trout farming in the pre-Andean region of northern Chile, at an altitude of 3000 m above sea level. General parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, and nitrogen compounds were assessed, along with specific parameters including pH, alkalinity, and hardness.
This discussion examines the significance of these factors, their implications for high-altitude aquaculture, and the management strategies implemented to optimize system conditions, ensuring the feasibility of trout farming in this challenging environment.

4.1. Water Quality in High-Altitude Aquaculture

Water quality is essential in intensive fish farming, directly influencing productivity and disease incidence [40]. Sustainable aquaculture requires effective water management to ensure the health and growth of cultured species [41,42], beginning with selecting an uncontaminated water source and maintaining optimal environmental conditions [43].
This study used groundwater as the main source, offering advantages such as low turbidity, physicochemical stability, and protection from surface pollutants [44], reducing the need for pretreatment. Gravity aeration from the reservoir to the tanks (Figure 2) was sufficient for initial conditioning. Groundwater also ensures greater supply stability during droughts [45], and its thermal consistency helps buffer temperature fluctuations at high altitudes.
However, challenges include low dissolved oxygen and potentially toxic elements like arsenic or sulfur compounds [46]. In this study, high arsenic concentrations and low alkalinity—typical of Andean groundwater—were observed, which may compromise pH stability. Thus, groundwater use in high-altitude RASs requires proper treatment and monitoring.
Altitude itself poses limitations. At 3000 m.a.s.l. in Copaquilla, reduced atmospheric pressure lowers oxygen solubility [47], which can affect fish health. To address this, constant aeration and oxygenation systems were used to maintain optimal conditions.
Only one trout farming initiative has been documented in the pre-Andean north of Chile (1993–1995) [3]. Currently, no reports exist on salmonid production in this region at the level of technological and productive development presented here. While aquaculture in Chile is centered in the southern coastal zones, the pre-Andean north remains an underutilized area with significant potential.

4.2. Key Water Quality Parameters in a RAS System

Rainbow trout are highly sensitive to temperature, which directly affects their health and physiology [25]. Optimal temperature ranges vary, typically 9–17 °C [25] or 13–18 °C [33]. In this study, fluctuations between 7 and 19 °C—attributed to tank exposure and lack of thermal regulation—were closer to the range proposed by Phillips et al. [32].
Despite suboptimal dissolved oxygen (DO) levels (4.5–7.5 mg/L) compared to the recommended 7.5–12 mg/L [33], no significant mortality occurred, possibly due to compensatory mechanisms like increased gill gas exchange [48]. Nevertheless, ensuring oxygen supply meets demand remains essential for growth.
Higher temperatures reduce oxygen solubility [49,50], which, combined with trout’s high oxygen demand [51,52], can compromise welfare and performance without mitigation [53,54].
Ammonium, a key excretory product, must be managed through water exchange and biofiltration to avoid toxicity [55]. In this study, elevated pH may have favored toxic ammonia (NH3) formation [7], with observed ammonium levels (0.15–0.80 mg/L) exceeding the 0.012 mg/L threshold [34], though without severe mortality.
Nitrites, not measured directly, may have accumulated due to high ammonium. As nitrite impairs oxygen transport [7], management strategies—like water changes and feed suspension—likely reduced both compounds. Biofilter maturation may have further enhanced nitrite-to-nitrate conversion.
Ammonium and nitrate tended to increase together, likely due to linked biogeochemical processes [56], where ammonium is transformed via nitrification, emphasizing the need for integrated nitrogen control [57,58,59].
Statistical analysis identified seasonal and spatial patterns. Temperature peaked in the main tank (HT) during January and December, potentially stressing fish metabolism.
Despite the continuous operation of the aeration system, fluctuations in dissolved oxygen levels—particularly at points CT3 and CT4 during November and December, where values dropped as low as 1.78 and 1.82 mg/L respectively—can be attributed to a combination of environmental, biological, and operational factors. DO levels fell critically low at CT4 and the DT between October and December, highlighting the need for improved aeration in these sections of the system.
Firstly, these decreases coincide with the period of highest temperatures recorded in the system, which reduces oxygen solubility in water and thus the efficiency of aeration. Secondly, the increased biomass present during these months results in a higher biological oxygen demand (BOD) from both the fish and accumulated organic matter (excreta, uneaten feed, and biofilm). This effect may be more pronounced at points such as CT3 and CT4, where water circulation might be less efficient or aeration insufficient to meet the demand.
Furthermore, differences in the aeration system setup or water flow distribution may create microzones with suboptimal oxygen levels. The specific case of the decanter (DT), which showed a higher value (4.84 mg/L) in December, suggests that solids removal at that point may have temporarily reduced local BOD, unlike the active culture tanks.
Ammonium remained below 0.1 mg/L in September–October (no fish) but rose significantly from November to January, likely due to higher temperatures and insufficient biofiltration.
Nitrate exceeded safe levels (<110 mg/L) at several points, particularly at CT3 and the DT in November and December, possibly due to inefficient ammonium conversion or accumulation. Enhancing biofilter efficiency and water exchange is vital to maintain safe nitrogen levels.

4.3. Specific Water Quality Parameters in a RAS System

The pH values fluctuated throughout the study but generally remained within the tolerable range for aquaculture (6.7–9.0) [36]. However, during the first month post-stocking, levels dropped below optimal (5.90–6.10), likely triggering adaptive responses such as gill remodeling [60]. Similar physiological stress under low pH has been documented by Fivelstad et al. [61], albeit at a high energetic cost. No pH values above 9.0 were observed, avoiding detrimental effects on trout survival and appetite as noted by Fivelstad et al. [62].
Fluctuations in pH can influence other parameters. For instance, low pH increases dissolved CO2, intensifying metabolic stress [63], a trend consistent with our observations and possibly mitigated through dietary adjustments and constant monitoring. Leduc et al. [64] reported reduced trout growth under unstable pH conditions, supporting the importance of early stabilization. Unlike Fivelstad’s controlled systems [63], where pH was stable from the outset, early instability here was attributed to groundwater inputs and an immature biofilter.
Alkalinity remained below recommended levels (75–150 mg CaCO3/L) [7], with most readings barely above 40 mg/L. Its buffering capacity proved insufficient, likely contributing to pH-related stress. Despite minor increases after entering the tanks, values remained inadequate. Similar readings in the decanting tanks suggest organic matter decomposition did not enhance alkalinity [65,66]. Although fish survival and growth were not visibly compromised, persistent low levels warrant interventions such as sodium bicarbonate addition [67].
Potassium levels were stable (6.9–8.2 mg/L) during fish presence and within recommended ranges (5–20 mg/L) [37]. Slight increases when fish were absent (7.0–12.5 mg/L) may reflect system dynamics or external inputs. While not a contaminant, potassium is vital for osmoregulation [37], and in aquaponics, KOH supplementation helps regulate pH, enhance biofiltration, and support plant growth [68]. This highlights the potential for future integration of plant-based components in the system.
Phosphorus concentrations rose over time, reaching 40–43 mg/L—well above the aquaculture threshold (<0.1 mg/L) [40]. Feed is the main phosphorus source [69,70], and since fish retain only 15–40% of dietary phosphorus [71,72], the observed accumulation suggests inefficient utilization. Excess phosphorus may cause eutrophication and compromise system balance [69,70].
Initial levels of TDS exceeded trout farming recommendations (<400 mg/L) [36], with values of 450–510 mg/L in the absence of fish. After stocking, levels decreased (250–410 mg/L), possibly due to water changes aimed at nitrogen compound control. Although final levels were slightly above the ideal range, they remained within tolerable limits for freshwater species (<5000 mg/L) [37]. Still, elevated TDS can increase osmotic stress and energy demands [73,74].
Arsenic concentrations exceeded the trout safety limit (<0.05 mg/L) [36], with baseline values of 0.24–0.29 mg/L, likely linked to groundwater contamination, as reported in the Chilean Altiplano and other arid areas [75,76,77]. A slight post-stocking decrease may reflect adsorption onto particulates and organic matter, but levels remained unsafe. Arsenic accumulation in the decanting tank suggests the need for specific removal strategies. Mitigation options include adsorbent media such as activated iron oxide (GFO) [78], modified zeolites [79], or activated alumina [80], as well as ion exchange, pre-oxidation of As(III), and iron-rich or biofilter systems, especially in rural contexts. Selection should consider cost and performance, given the toxicological and food safety risks.
True color (TC) values increased from 5–8 Pt-Co (no fish) to 25–52 Pt-Co post-stocking, surpassing the recommended range (30–50 Pt-Co) [37]. This likely reflects dissolved organic matter accumulation. While not directly harmful to fish [81], elevated TC can reduce light penetration and affect filtration performance.
A principal component analysis (PCA) explained 64.8% of the data variability. The biplot showed a positive association between phosphoric acid and TC and inverse relationships between phosphoric acid and conductivity, arsenic, and salinity. These associations highlight potential indicators of water quality changes, warranting close monitoring.
Overall, the results underscore the importance of continuous water quality monitoring and adequate biological filtration and aeration to maintain optimal conditions for trout farming. Effective management strategies are essential to improve system efficiency and ensure sustainable operations in the Chilean pre-Andean region.

4.4. Impact of Fish Presence on Water Quality in the Culture System

The introduction of fish into the RAS disrupted the initial physicochemical stability, triggering significant changes in water quality [82]. Ammonium excretion, uneaten feed, and organic matter decomposition increased nitrogen compounds, altering chemical dynamics [83]. Fish respiration, along with microbial activity and biofiltration, further contributed to fluctuations in pH and DO.
While the pre-stocking phase showed more stable conditions due to the absence of biological inputs, this stability was artificial and unrepresentative of real aquaculture operations.

4.5. Variations in Water Quality Within the Recirculating System

Water quality varied between sampling points due to biological, chemical, and mechanical interactions within the RAS [84]. The holding tank showed higher temperatures, likely from solar exposure, while DO was lower in the culture tanks due to fish respiration and microbial activity [85].
Nitrogen compounds followed expected patterns, with biofiltration reducing ammonium and increasing nitrate concentrations [43]. Although inter-point differences were not marked, nitrogen transformation was evident.
TDS remained stable throughout the system, suggesting mechanical filtration was effective, though improvements could prevent accumulation in fish tanks. Conversely, pH fluctuated irregularly, possibly due to external or localized chemical factors. These spatial variations emphasize the need for targeted monitoring and control at each system stage.

4.6. Growth

Results align with literature reporting challenges in high-altitude RASs due to low atmospheric pressure [86], low groundwater alkalinity [87], and temperature fluctuations [88]. The feed conversion ratio (FCR) was 1.52, above the ideal 1.0 [89,90], indicating 50% more feed needed per kg of trout. This inefficiency may relate to stress-induced nutrient assimilation issues, shown by phosphorus accumulation post fish introduction. Mitigation includes bioavailable phosphorus sources, solid filtration, controlled feeding, and environmental stabilization [91].
The specific growth rate (SGR) reached 1.49%, lower than in comparable studies [92,93], likely influenced by altitude-related stressors, such as reduced oxygen solubility, thermal fluctuations, and low alkalinity. Management strategies include supplemental oxygenation [94], thermal insulation [95], alkalinity buffering [94], and adjusted feeding [96] to enhance growth and system resilience.
Water quality issues (low DO, elevated ammonia, and arsenic) are known stress factors affecting SGR and FCR in rainbow trout [97,98]. Despite this, survival and condition factors indicate adaptation potential under proper management, though possibly at the cost of growth.
Feeding rates affect SGR significantly; rates at 5% body weight/day increase SGR, whereas feeding to satiation reduces it [99]. Reported SGRs vary widely (Montaña [100]: 4.85–6.8%; Morales [90]: 0.07–3.35%). Environmental stressors (noise, weather) may have reduced appetite without impacting survival, but possibly lowering growth.
Weight increased by 298%, surpassing Sánchez et al. [39] (244.56%), with high survival (87.2–93.78%), consistent with previous findings [101]. The Fulton condition factor (k = 1.5–2.5, r2 = 0.94) indicated good nutritional status and growth consistency.

4.7. Regulatory Standards for Water Quality in Fish Farming

Our analysis included a detailed evaluation of water quality parameters in relation to Chilean regulations for waters intended for aquatic life (NCh1333.Of78. Mod. 1987). This regulation considers a limited set of variables, such as pH, dissolved oxygen, alkalinity, turbidity, temperature, color, and the presence of hydrocarbons.
Although the values obtained in this study complied with the established limits, monitoring a broader range of parameters provided a more comprehensive assessment of water quality. This approach is crucial for ensuring sustainability in aquaculture systems, as factors such as the accumulation of nitrogen compounds, suspended solids, or variations in water hardness can impact the health of the organisms and the efficiency of the recirculation system.

4.8. Sustainability of the Culture

Rainbow trout farming in the pre-Andean region of northern Chile is a sustainable option under challenging environmental conditions, relying on water quality and energy efficiency. The use of clean technologies, especially photovoltaic systems, alongside effective water quality management, reduces environmental impact and supports long-term viability. Variations in spring water parameters such as temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, and nutrients require constant monitoring and control within RASs to ensure fish growth and survival. Strategies like pH regulation and efficient biofiltration help minimize environmental impact and enhance productivity.
Despite higher operational costs at altitude—due to supplemental oxygenation, heating, and treatments like arsenic removal—water savings of up to 95% compared to open systems improve sustainability by reducing scarce water use [102]. The study evaluated solar energy use, benefiting from the region’s high solar radiation [42], which powers pumps and aerators, lowers emissions, and improves system resilience against electricity supply fluctuations [5].
Additional sustainability factors include waste management through recirculation and biofilters [103], alternative fishmeal diets [104], and potential integration of other aquatic organisms to boost resource efficiency and system resilience [105]. Overall, sustainable trout farming in this region depends on combining efficient water management and clean technologies like photovoltaic energy, reducing environmental footprints, ensuring economic viability, and fostering resilience to climate and resource challenges [106,107].

5. Conclusions

This study demonstrates that rainbow trout farming at 3000 m.a.s.l. is feasible under appropriate water quality management. Water parameters generally remained within the limits established by Chilean regulations for aquatic life, and fish growth during the cultivation period confirmed system viability. Variations in water quality across different points and over time highlight the need for continuous, site-specific monitoring to maintain system stability.
Additionally, this work contributes valuable evidence supporting the development of small-scale aquaculture and local producers in northern Chile, one of the world’s most arid regions. Aquaculture emerges as a viable strategy to diversify economic activities in these areas, which are traditionally dependent on agriculture and limited water resources. Future efforts should focus on optimizing feeding regimes, enhancing biofilter efficiency, and refining water recirculation protocols to better control nitrogen accumulation. In parallel, integrating renewable energy sources such as photovoltaic systems could improve the sustainability and operational efficiency of RASs in this environment, supporting long-term system resilience and reducing environmental impact.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, R.P.-V., P.P.-V., A.P.-A. and J.I.H.; methodology, G.O.-C., H.A.-A. and L.E.-R.; formal analysis, R.P.-V., J.I.H. and F.M.-A.; investigation, R.P.-V., P.P.-V., G.O.-C., F.M.-A. and H.A.-A.; data curation, P.P.-V., J.I.H. and F.M.-A.; writing—original draft preparation, R.P.-V., O.A.-A. and A.P.-A.; writing—review and editing, R.P.-V., P.P.-V., A.P.-A., H.A.-A., J.I.H., O.A.-A., L.E.-R. and F.M.-A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Regional Government of the Region of Arica and Parinacota through the project called “Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Farming in a Recirculation System, as a Sustainable Alternative and Productive Development for the Pre-Andean Communities of the Arica and Parinacota Region”, BIP Code: 30158872L0. This article was produced within the framework of the SEASOS International Cooperation Network (Euro-Latin Symbiosis for Sustainable Aquaculture) and the Latin American Agroaquaculture Network (SIBIOLAT).

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available for privacy reasons.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to express their sincere gratitude to the Gobierno Regional de Arica y Parinacota for its support and collaboration with the indigenous communities of the foothill region. Furthermore, we extend our gratitude to the Comunidad Indígena Pukara de Copaquilla (Pukara de Copaquilla Indigenous Community) for providing the physical space necessary to carry out this project. We would also like to thank the Piscicultura Río Blanco Federico Albert Taupp, located on Codelco Andina territory and administered by Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, for providing the specimens and collaboration during this experience. We also thank the LIMZA Laboratory of the Universidad de Tarapacá, which supported us in the analysis of trout culture water.

Conflicts of Interest

Author Jordan I. Huanacuni was employed by the company Finfish Aquaculture Sociedad Anónima Cerrada. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Pepe-Victoriano, R.; Pepe-Vargas, P.; Yañez-Valenzuela, M.; Aravena-Ambrosetti, H.; Olivares-Cantillano, G.; Méndez-Abarca, F.; Huanacuni, J.I.; Méndez, S.; Espinoza-Ramos, L. Growth of Oncorhynchus mykiss (Rainbow Trout) through a Recirculation System in the Foothills of the Extreme North of Chile. Animals 2024, 14, 2567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Pepe-Victoriano, R.; Pepe-Vargas, P.; Huanacuni, J.I.; Aravena-Ambrosetti, H.; Olivares-Cantillano, G.; Méndez-Abarca, F.; Méndez, S.; Espinoza-Ramos, L. Conditioning of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Broodstock in a High-Altitude Recirculating Aquaculture System: First Spawning at 3000 m.a.s.l. in Northern Chile. Animals 2025, 15, 1506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Pepe-Victoriano, R.; Espinoza-Ramos, L.; Aravena-Ambrosetti, H.; Huanacuni, J.I. Cultivo de Truchas Arcoíris (Oncorhynchus mykiss, Walbaum 1792) En El Norte de Chile y Sur Del Perú. In Tópicos en Biodiversidad Transfronteriza; Valladares, P., Aragón, G., Gazritano, A., Eds.; Ril Editores: Santiago, Chile, 2021; p. 260. [Google Scholar]
  4. Pepe-Victoriano, R.; Araya, M.; Wurmann, C.; Mery, J.; Vélez, A.; Oxa, P.; León, C.; Fuentealba, S.; Canáles, R. Estrategia Para El Desarrollo de La Acuicultura En La Región de Arica y Parinacota 2015–2024. Informe Final; Corfo: Santiago, Chile, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  5. Pepe-Victoriano, R.; Aravena-Ambrosetti, H. Primer Centro de Cultivo de truchas Arcoíris bajo un Sistema de Recirculación. En el sector de Copaquilla, región de Arica y Parinacota. Rev. Versión Difer. Salmón-Acuícola 2018, 29, 58–62. [Google Scholar]
  6. Cornejo-Ponce, L.; Vilca-Salinas, P.; Arenas-Herrera, M.; Lienqueo-Aburto, H.; Tapia-Caroca, H.; Kukulis-Martínez, S. Uso Eficiente de Los Recursos Hídricos En Zonas Áridas y Semiáridas: Soluciones Integrales Basadas En La Energía Solar Para Promover El Desarrollo. Rev. Versión Difer. Versión Espec. Segundo Semest. 2022, 19, 49–53. [Google Scholar]
  7. Timmons, M.B.; Ebeling, J.M.; Piedrahita, R.H. Acuicultura En Sistemas de Recirculación; Cayuga Aqua Ventures: Ithaca, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  8. Badiola, M.; Mendiola, D.; Bostock, J. Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS) Analysis: Main Issues on Management and Future Challenges. Aquac. Eng. 2012, 51, 26–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Pepe-Victoriano, R.; Miranda, L.; Ortega, A.; Merino, G. First Natural Spawning of Wild-Caught Premature South Pacific Bonito (Sarda Chiliensis Chiliensis, Cuvier 1832) Conditioned in Recirculating Aquaculture System and a Descriptive Characterization of Their Eggs Embryonic Development. Aquac. Rep. 2021, 19, 100563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Buřič, M.; Bláhovec, J.; Kouřil, J. Feasibility of Rearing Brook Char Fingerlings in an Intensive Recirculating Hatchery as a Complementary Species to Rainbow Trout. Czech J. Anim. Sci. 2016, 61, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Betanzo-Torres, E.A.; Piñar-Álvarez, M.d.l.Á.; Sierra-Carmona, C.G.; Santamaria, L.E.G.; Loeza-Mejía, C.I.; Marín-Muñiz, J.L.; Herazo, L.C.S. Proposal of Ecotechnologies for Tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) Production in Mexico: Economic, Environmental, and Social Implications. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Li, H.; Cui, Z.; Cui, H.; Bai, Y.; Yin, Z.; Qu, K. A Review of Influencing Factors on a Recirculating Aquaculture System: Environmental Conditions, Feeding Strategies, and Disinfection Methods. J. World Aquac. Soc. 2023, 54, 566–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Taufik, M.; Tuan Ismail, T.I.; Manan, H.; Ikhwanuddin, M.; Abdul Salam, A.I.; Abdul Rahim, A.I.; Ishak, A.N.; Kamaruzzan, A.S.; Draman, A.S.; Kasan, N.A. Synergistic Effects of Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) with Combination of Clear Water, Probiotic and Biofloc Technology: A Review. Aquac. Fish. 2023, 9, 883–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bregnballe, J. A Guide to Recirculation Aquaculture: An Introduction to the New Environmentally Friendly and Highly Productive Closed Fish Farming Systems; FAO and Eurofish International Organisation: Rome, Italy, 2015; ISBN 9789251087763. [Google Scholar]
  15. Galli, O.; Sal, F. Sistemas de Recirculación y Tratamiento de Agua; Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Pesca y Alimentos CENADAC: Santa Ana-Corrientes, Argentina, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  16. Bautista, J.C.; Ruíz-Velazco, J.M. Calidad de Agua Para El Cultivo de Tilapia En Tanques de Geomembrana. Rev. Fuente 2011, 3, 10–14. [Google Scholar]
  17. Rodríguez-Gómez, H.; Ánzola-Escobar, E. La Calidad Del Agua y La Productividad de Un Estanque En Acuicultura. In Fundamentos de Acuicultura Continental; Rodriguez, H., Victoria, P., Carrillo, M., Eds.; Instituto Nacional de Pesca y Acuicultura: Bogotá, Colombia, 2001; pp. 43–71. [Google Scholar]
  18. Acosta-Angulo, O.; Pepe-Victoriano, R.; Cornejo-Ponce, L.; Huanacuni, J.I.; Silva, Y.Y.C. Aquatic Quantification of Toxic Heavy Metals Due to Physical-Chemical Factors in Meat Production of Oncorhynchus mykiss (Rainbow Trout) in Controlled Open Systems Case: Lagunillas-Lampa, Puno. In Proceedings of the 8th Brazilian Technology Symposium (BTSym’22). BTSym 2022. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 461–471. [Google Scholar]
  19. Schreck, C.; Hiram, W. Performance Capacity of Fish: Stress and Water Quality. In Aquaculture and Water Quality; Brune, D., Tomasso, J., Eds.; The World Aquaculture Society: Baton Rouge, LA, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  20. Boyd, C.E.; D’Abramo, L.R.; Glencross, B.D.; Huyben, D.C.; Juarez, L.M.; Lockwood, G.S.; McNevin, A.A.; Tacon, A.G.J.; Teletchea, F.; Tomasso, J.R.; et al. Achieving Sustainable Aquaculture: Historical and Current Perspectives and Future Needs and Challenges. J. World Aquac. Soc. 2020, 51, 578–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Alabaste, J.; Lloyd, R. Water Quality Criteria for Freshwater Fish, 2nd ed.; Elsevier: Harlow, UK, 1982; ISBN 9780408108492. [Google Scholar]
  22. Gutiérrez, X.A.; Kolarevic, J.; Takle, H.; Baeverfjord, G.; Ytteborg, E.; Fyhn Terjesen, B. Effects of Chronic Sub-lethal Nitrite Exposure at High Water Chloride Concentration on Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar, Linnaeus 1758) Parr. Aquac. Res. 2019, 50, 2687–2697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Perry, S.F. THE CHLORIDE CELL:Structure and Function in the Gills of Freshwater Fishes. Annu. Rev. Physiol. 1997, 59, 325–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Rosso, L.; Giannuzzi, L. Factores Ambientales y Antropogénicos Que Afectan La Formación de Floraciones de Cianobacterias y Cianotoxinas. In Cianobacterias Como Determinantes Ambientales de la Salud; Ministerio de Salud de la Nación: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2017; pp. 79–93. [Google Scholar]
  25. Wedemeyer, G.A. Physiology of Fish in Intensive Culture Systems, 1st ed.; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 1996; ISBN 978-1-4613-7754-2. [Google Scholar]
  26. Rahmaningsih, S.; Ari, A.I. Pakan Dan Pertumbuhan IKan Kerapu Cantang (Epinephelus Fuscoguttatuslanceolatus). J. Ekol. 2013, 13, 25–30. [Google Scholar]
  27. Pepe-Victoriano, R.; Aravena-Ambrosetti, H.; Pepe-Vargas, P. Integrated Culture of Oncorhynchus mykiss (Rainbow Trout) in Pre-Cordilleran Sector under a Recirculation System in Northern Chile. In Salmon Aquaculture; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  28. Matulić, D.; Andabaka, Ž.; Radman, S.; Fruk, G.; Leto, J.; Rošin, J.; Rastija, M.; Varga, I.; Tomljanović, T.; Čeprnja, H.; et al. Agrivoltaics and Aquavoltaics: Potential of Solar Energy Use in Agriculture and Freshwater Aquaculture in Croatia. Agriculture 2023, 13, 1447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Rice, E.; Bridgewater, L. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater; American Public Health Association, Ed.; American Public Health Association: Washington, DC, USA, 2012; Volume 10. [Google Scholar]
  30. Ricker, W.E. Growth Rates and Models. Fish Physiol. 1979, VII, 677–743. [Google Scholar]
  31. Zar, J.H. Biostatistical Analysis, 5th ed.; Pearson Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2010; ISBN 9780131008465. [Google Scholar]
  32. Phillips, V.; Tschida, R.; Hernandez, M.; Aquino, M. Manual Básico Para El Cultivo de Trucha Arcoiris (Oncorhynchus mykiis). 2017. Available online: https://rnia.produce.gob.pe/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Manual-de-Trucha-1.pdf (accessed on 15 July 2024).
  33. Liñan-Giraldo, W.E. Crianza de Truchas; Macro: Lima, Peru, 2007; p. 104. [Google Scholar]
  34. Camacho, B. Guía Para El Cultivo de Trucha: Oncorhynchus mykiss; Recursos Naturales y Pesca: México, México, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  35. Papadopoulos, D.K.; Lattos, A.; Chatzigeorgiou, I.; Tsaballa, A.; Ntinas, G.K.; Giantsis, I.A. The Influence of Water Nitrate Concentration Combined with Elevated Temperature on Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss in an Experimental Aquaponic Setup. Fishes 2024, 9, 74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. García-Ortega, A.; Calvario-Martínez, O. Manual de Buenas Prácticas de Producción Acuícola de Trucha para la Inocuidad Alimentaria; SENASICA/SAGARPA: México, México, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  37. Boyd, C.E. Water Quality; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; ISBN 978-3-319-17445-7. [Google Scholar]
  38. Blanco, M. La Trucha. Cría En Cautividad; Mundi-Prensa: Madrid, Spain, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  39. Sánchez, I.; Sanguino, W.; Gómez, A.; García, R. Evaluación de Un Sistema de Recirculación de Agua Para Levante de Trucha Arcoiris (Oncorhynchus mikyss). Rev. MVZ Córdoba 2014, 19, 4226–4241. [Google Scholar]
  40. Timmons, M.B.; Ebeling, J.M. Recirculating Aquaculture; Ithaca Publishing Company. LLC: Ithaca, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  41. Tomasso, J.R.; Brune, D.E. Aquacultural Water Quality: The Emergence of an Applied Discipline. In Aquaculture and Water Quality; The World Aquaculture Society: Baton Rouge, LA, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  42. Cornejo-Ponce, L.; Vilca-Salinas, P.; Lienqueo-Aburto, H.; Arenas, M.J.; Pepe-Victoriano, R.; Carpio, E.; Rodríguez, J. Integrated Aquaculture Recirculation System (Iars) Supported by Solar Energy as a Circular Economy Alternative for Resilient Communities in Arid/Semi-Arid Zones in Southern South America: A Case Study in the Camarones Town. Water 2020, 12, 3469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Boyd, C.E.; Tucker, C.S. Pond Aquaculture Water Quality Management, 1st ed.; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 1998; ISBN 978-1-4613-7469-5. [Google Scholar]
  44. Llanes-Cárdenas, O.; Campos, M.N.; Sevilla, P.M.; Guerrero, R.R. Agua Subterránea: Alternativa Acuícola En El Noroeste de México. AquaTIC 2013, 38, 10–20. [Google Scholar]
  45. Sahuquillo, A. La Utilizacion Conjunta de Aguas Superficiales y Subterraneas En Las Sequias. Rev. Real Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fis. Nat. 2000, 94, 183–196. [Google Scholar]
  46. Kinsman-Costello, L.E.; O’Brien, J.M.; Hamilton, S.K. Natural Stressors in Uncontaminated Sediments of Shallow Freshwaters: The Prevalence of Sulfide, Ammonia, and Reduced Iron. Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 2015, 34, 467–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Vásquez-Quispesivana, W.; Talavera Núñez, M.; Inga Guevara, M. Evaluación Del Impacto En La Calidad de Agua Debido a La Producción Semi Intensiva de Trucha (Oncorhynchus mykiss) En Jaulas Flotantes. Rev. Soc. Química Perú 2016, 82, 15–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Geng, C.Y.; Sun, Y.C.; Li, B.L.; Ding, L.; Liu, Y.J.; Wei, X.F.; Liu, W.Z.; Han, L.; Yuan, F.Y.; Wang, P.; et al. Physiological Responses to Heat Stress in the Gill of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Revealed Based on Uplc-q-Tof/Ms Metabolomics. Acta Hydrobiol. Sin. 2023, 47, 1185–1194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Barnes, R.; King, H.; Carter, C.G. Hypoxia Tolerance and Oxygen Regulation in Atlantic Salmon, Salmo Salar from a Tasmanian Population. Aquaculture 2011, 318, 397–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Bergsson, H.; Svendsen, M.B.S.; Steffensen, J.F. Model of Oxygen Conditions within Aquaculture Sea Cages. Biology 2023, 12, 1408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Sandblom, E.; Axelsson, M. Venous Hemodynamic Responses to Acute Temperature Increase in the Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Am. J. Physiol. Regul. Integr. Comp. Physiol. 2007, 292, R2292–R2298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ruiz, N.; García-Meilán, I.; Khansari, A.R.; Teles, M.; Pastor, J.; Tort, L. Repeated Hypoxic Episodes Allow Hematological and Physiological Habituation in Rainbow Trout. Front. Physiol. 2024, 15, 1289903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Mehrim, A.I.; Refaey, M.M. An Overview of the Implication of Climate Change on Fish Farming in Egypt. Sustainability 2023, 15, 1679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Supraba, I.; Istiarto; Triatmadja, R.; Legono, D. Water Temperature Simulation of Rivers in Indonesia. In Proceedings of the 22nd Congress of the International Association for Hydro-Environment Engineering and Research-Asia Pacific Division, IAHR-APD 2020: “Creating Resilience to Water-Related Challenges”, Sapporo, Japan, 14–17 September 2020. [Google Scholar]
  55. Suhr, K.I.; Pedersen, P.B. Nitrification in Moving Bed and Fixed Bed Biofilters Treating Effluent Water from a Large Commercial Outdoor Rainbow Trout RAS. Aquac. Eng. 2010, 42, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Cabello, P.; Luque-Almagro, V.M.; Roldán, M.D.; Moreno-Vivián, C. Nitrogen Cycle. In Encyclopedia of Microbiology; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2019; ISBN 9780128117378. [Google Scholar]
  57. White, L.J.; Rose, M.; Lawson, M.; Joyce, D.; Smith, A.M.; Thomas, G.H.; Dasmahapatra, K.K.; Pownall, M.E. Two Closely Related Ureotelic Fish Species of the Genus Alcolapia Express Different Levels of Ammonium Transporters in Gills. Biol. Open 2022, 11, bio059575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Zimmer, A.M. Ammonia Excretion by the Fish Gill: Discoveries and Ideas That Shaped Our Current Understanding. J. Comp. Physiol. B 2024, 194, 697–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. van Kessel, M.A.H.J.; Mesman, R.J.; Arshad, A.; Metz, J.R.; Spanings, F.A.T.; van Dalen, S.C.M.; van Niftrik, L.; Flik, G.; Wendelaar Bonga, S.E.; Jetten, M.S.M.; et al. Branchial Nitrogen Cycle Symbionts Can Remove Ammonia in Fish Gills. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 2016, 8, 590–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Balm, P.H.M.; Pottinger, T.G. Acclimation of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) to Low Environmental PH Does Not Involve an Activation of the Pituitary-Interrenal Axis, but Evokes Adjustments in Branchial Ultrastructure. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1993, 50, 2532–2541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Fivelstad, S.; Haavik, H.; Løvik, G.; Olsen, A.B. Sublethal Effects and Safe Levels of Carbon Dioxide in Seawater for Atlantic Salmon Postsmolts (Salmo salar L.): Ion Regulation and Growth. Aquaculture 1998, 160, 305–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Witschi, W.A.; Ziebell, C.D. Evaluation of Ph Shock on Hatchery-Reared Rainbow Trout. Progress. Fish-Cult. 1979, 41, 3–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Fivelstad, S. Long-Term Carbon Dioxide Experiments with Salmonids. Aquac. Eng. 2013, 53, 40–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Leduc, A.O.H.C.; Kelly, J.M.; E. Brown, G. Detection of Conspecific Alarm Cues by Juvenile Salmonids under Neutral and Weakly Acidic Conditions: Laboratory and Field Tests. Oecologia 2004, 139, 318–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Kırkağaç, M.U.; Pulatsu, S.; Topcu, A. Trout Farm Effluent Effects on Water Sediment Quality and Benthos. Clean 2009, 37, 386–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Lapenkov, A.; Guzeva, A.; Zaripova, K.; Slukovskii, Z. The Seasonal Dynamics of Geochemical Characteristics of Sediments in the Impact Zone of the Fish Farm (Lake Ladoga, Russia). Aquac. Fish. 2023, 8, 654–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Loyless, J.C.; Malone, R.F. A Sodium Bicarbonate Dosing Methodology for PH Management in Freshwater-Recirculating Aquaculture Systems. Progress. Fish-Cult. 1997, 59, 198–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Wenzel, L.C.; Strauch, S.M.; Eding, E.; Presas-Basalo, F.X.; Wasenitz, B.; Palm, H.W. Effects of Dissolved Potassium on Growth Performance, Body Composition, and Welfare of Juvenile African Catfish (Clarias gariepinus). Fishes 2021, 6, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Boyd, C.E.; McNevin, A.A. Aquaculture, Resource Use, and the Environment; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2015; ISBN 9780470959190. [Google Scholar]
  70. Chatvijitkul, S.; Boyd, C.E.; Davis, D.A.; McNevin, A.A. Pollution Potential Indicators for Feed-Based Fish and Shrimp Culture. Aquaculture 2017, 477, 43–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. d’Orbcastel, E.R.; Blancheton, J.P.; Belaud, A. Water Quality and Rainbow Trout Performance in a Danish Model Farm Recirculating System: Comparison with a Flow through System. Aquac. Eng. 2009, 40, 135–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Sugiura, S.H. Phosphorus, Aquaculture, and the Environment. Rev. Fish. Sci. Aquac. 2018, 26, 515–521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Becke, C.; Steinhagen, D.; Schumann, M.; Brinker, A. Physiological Consequences for Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) of Short-Term Exposure to Increased Suspended Solid Load. Aquac. Eng. 2017, 78, 63–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Becke, C.; Schumann, M.; Steinhagen, D.; Rojas-Tirado, P.; Geist, J.; Brinker, A. Effects of Unionized Ammonia and Suspended Solids on Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in Recirculating Aquaculture Systems. Aquaculture 2019, 499, 348–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Mojiri, A.; Razmi, E.; KarimiDermani, B.; Rezania, S.; Kasmuri, N.; Vakili, M.; Farraji, H. Adsorption Methods for Arsenic Removal in Water Bodies: A Critical Evaluation of Effectiveness and Limitations. Front. Water 2024, 6, 1301648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Zhang, N.; Wei, C.; Yang, L. Occurrence of Arsenic in Two Large Shallow Freshwater Lakes in China and a Comparison to Other Lakes around the World. Microchem. J. 2013, 110, 169–177. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Cornejo-Ponce, L.; Lienqueo, H.H.; Arriaza, B.T. Levels of Total Arsenic in Edible Fish and Shellfish Obtained from Two Coastal Sectors of the Atacama Desert in the North of Chile: Use of Non-Migratory Marine Species as Bioindicators of Sea Environmental Pollution. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A 2011, 46, 1274–1282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Maldonado-Reyes, A.; Montero-Ocampo, C.; Medina-Garcia, J.; Bolado-Rodríguez, S.; Alvárez-Benedí, J.; Herrera-Vazquez, A.; Castaño, V.M. Electro Coagulation Removal of As from Water: The Role of Phases Formation. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2015, 226, 249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Jiménez-Cedillo, M.J.; Olguín, M.T.; Fall, C.; Colín, A. Adsorption Capacity of Iron- or Iron-Manganese-Modified Zeolite-Rich Tuffs for As(III) and As(V) Water Pollutants. Appl. Clay Sci. 2011, 54, 206–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Singh, T.S.; Pant, K.K. Kinetics and Mass Transfer Studies on the Adsorption of Arsenic onto Activated Alumina and Iron Oxide Impregnated Activated Alumina. Water Qual. Res. J. Can. 2006, 41, 147–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Kasagi, S.; Miura, M.; Okazaki, T.; Mizusawa, K.; Takahashi, A. Effects of Tank Color Brightness on the Body Color, Somatic Growth, and Endocrine Systems of Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss. Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 2020, 298, 113581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Abdullah, A.H.; Saad, F.S.A.; Sudin, S.; Ahmad, Z.A.; Ahmad, I.; Abu Bakar, N.; Omar, S.; Sulaiman, S.F.; Che Mat, M.H.; Umoruddin, N.A.; et al. Development of Aquaculture Water Quality Real-Time Monitoring Using Multi-Sensory System and Internet of Things. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021, 2107, 012011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Chong, R.S.-M. Ammonia Toxicosis. In Aquaculture Pathophysiology; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2022; pp. 705–711. [Google Scholar]
  84. Roalkvam, I.; Drønen, K.; Dahle, H.; Wergeland, H.I. A Case Study of Biofilter Activation and Microbial Nitrification in a Marine Recirculation Aquaculture System for Rearing Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar L.). Aquac. Res. 2021, 52, 94–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Boyd, C. Water Quality in Warmwater Fish Ponds, 2nd ed.; Craft Master Printers, Inc.: Auburn, AL, USA, 1981. [Google Scholar]
  86. Garduño-Paz, M.V.; Méndez-Sánchez, J.F.; Burggren, W.; García-Martínez, J.L.A. Metabolic Rate and Hypoxia Tolerance in Girardinichthys multiradiatus (Pisces: Goodeidae), an Endemic Fish at High Altitude in Tropical Mexico. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A Mol. Integr. Physiol. 2020, 239, 110576. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Tong, C.; Li, M.; Tang, Y.; Zhao, K. Genomic Signature of Shifts in Selection and Alkaline Adaptation in Highland Fish. Genome Biol. Evol. 2021, 13, evab086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Liu, M.; Xu, W.; Zhu, F.; Duan, X.; Liu, S.; Chen, D. Length–Weight Relationship and Spatiotemporal Distribution Pattern of Three Schizothoracinae Fishes Along the Nujiang River in the Qinghai–Tibetan Plateau, China. Fishes 2024, 9, 465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Yapuchura-Saico, C.R.; Mamani, E.; Pari-Quispe, D.; Mamani, E. Importance of the Curves of Growth and Efficiency in the Food of Trout Arcoiris (Oncorhynchus mikyss) in the Cost of Production. Comuni Cción Rev. Investig. Comun. Desarro. 2018, 9, 68–77. [Google Scholar]
  90. Morales, G. Crecimiento y Eficiencia Alimentaria de Trucha Arco Iris (Oncorhynchus mykiss) En Jaulas Bajo Diferentes Regímenes de Alimentación. Undergraduate Thesis, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  91. Lu, J.; Bo, Y.; Wang, Y.; Yuan, H.; Xu, Y. Effect of Water Quality Ununiformity on Production of Marine Medaka. Aquaculture 2023, 565, 739114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Chamorro-Montes, P. Comparación Productiva de Dos Sistemas de Cultivo, Estanques Rectangulares y Circulares, En Alevinos de Trucha Arco Iris En La Piscigranja “Los Retoños”—Jauja. Undergraduate Thesis, Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú, Huancayo, Perú, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  93. Leiva, C. Manejo Reproductivo, Crecimiento y Sobrevivencia de Alevinos de Oncorhynchus mykiss Centro Piscícola de Motil: La Libertad—Perú. Undergraduate Thesis, Universidad Nacional de Trujillo, Trujillo, Perú, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  94. Hernández-Gallegos, O.; Pan, T.-C.F.; Hunt von Herbing, I.; Méndez-Sánchez, J.F.; Rodríguez-Vargas, G.; Garduño Paz, M.V.; Ruiz-Gómez, M. de L. Environmental Sustainability at High Altitude in Mexico. Int. J. Environ. Sustain. 2013, 8, 19–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Verleih, M.; Borchel, A.; Krasnov, A.; Rebl, A.; Korytář, T.; Kühn, C.; Goldammer, T. Impact of Thermal Stress on Kidney-Specific Gene Expression in Farmed Regional and Imported Rainbow Trout. Mar. Biotechnol. 2015, 17, 576–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Trenzado, C.E.; Morales, A.E.; de la Higuera, M. Physiological Effects of Crowding in Rainbow Trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss, Selected for Low and High Stress Responsiveness. Aquaculture 2006, 258, 583–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Fivelstad, S.; Waagbø, R.; Zeitz, S.F.; Hosfeld, A.C.D.; Olsen, A.B.; Stefansson, S. A Major Water Quality Problem in Smolt Farms: Combined Effects of Carbon Dioxide, Reduced PH and Aluminium on Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar L.) Smolts: Physiology and Growth. Aquaculture 2003, 215, 339–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Brauner, C.J.; Randall, D.J. The Interaction between Oxygen and Carbon Dioxide Movements in Fishes. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A Physiol. 1996, 113, 83–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Bahabadi, M.N.; Soltani, M. Effect Dietary Energy Levels and Feeding Rates on Growth and Body Composition of Fingerling Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Iran. J. Fish. Sci. 2008, 7, 171–186. [Google Scholar]
  100. Montaña, A. Crecimiento y Sobrevivencia En El Levante de Alevinos de Trucha Arcoiris (Oncorhynchus mykiss) En Sistemas Cerrados de Recirculación de Agua. Undergraduate Thesis, Universidad Militar Nueva Granada, Facultad de Ciencias, Biología Aplicada, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  101. Flores-Mendoza, M.; Ortega B., R.; del Pilar Blanco E., M.; Araníbar, M.J. Respuesta Productiva de Truchas Arcoíris (Oncorhynchus mykiss) al Régimen Alimenticio Con Alimentos Comerciales Bajo Condiciones de Crianza Intensiva En El Lago Titicaca. Rev. Investig. Vet. Perú 2023, 34, e25131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Badiola, M.; Basurko, O.C.; Piedrahita, R.; Hundley, P.; Mendiola, D. Energy Use in Recirculating Aquaculture Systems (RAS): A Review. Aquac. Eng. 2018, 81, 57–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Almeida, P.; Dewasme, L.; Wouwer, A. Vande Denitrification Control in a Recirculating Aquaculture System—A Simulation Study. Processes 2020, 8, 1306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Lim, C.; Webster, C.D.; Lee, C.S. Alternative Protein Sources in Aquaculture Diets; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  105. Hall, J.R.; Martin, G. Filtration of Dissolved Organic Nutrients from Fish Farm Wastewater Using a Macroalgae Biofilter. In WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment; WIT Press: Ashurst, Southampton, UK, 2021; Volume 250. [Google Scholar]
  106. Zhang, K.; Ye, Z.; Qi, M.; Cai, W.; Saraiva, J.L.; Wen, Y.; Liu, G.; Zhu, Z.; Zhu, S.; Zhao, J. Water Quality Impact on Fish Behavior: A Review From an Aquaculture Perspective. Rev. Aquac. 2025, 17, e12985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Martins, C.I.M.; Eding, E.H.; Verdegem, M.C.J.; Heinsbroek, L.T.N.; Schneider, O.; Blancheton, J.P.; d’Orbcastel, E.R.; Verreth, J.A.J. New Developments in Recirculating Aquaculture Systems in Europe: A Perspective on Environmental Sustainability. Aquac. Eng. 2010, 43, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Graphical location of the Copaquilla Pukará Cultivation Center (CPCC).
Figure 1. Graphical location of the Copaquilla Pukará Cultivation Center (CPCC).
Water 17 01685 g001
Figure 2. Layout of the RAS facilities and water sampling points. Green lines indicate the airflow through the system, blue lines represent the movement of clean water, and orange lines indicate the water outflow from the tanks. (a) Cultivation tanks; (b) decanting tanks; (c) biofilter tanks; (d) pumps; (e) blower; (f) header tank.
Figure 2. Layout of the RAS facilities and water sampling points. Green lines indicate the airflow through the system, blue lines represent the movement of clean water, and orange lines indicate the water outflow from the tanks. (a) Cultivation tanks; (b) decanting tanks; (c) biofilter tanks; (d) pumps; (e) blower; (f) header tank.
Water 17 01685 g002
Figure 3. Monthly average variations in temperature and dissolved oxygen during the study.
Figure 3. Monthly average variations in temperature and dissolved oxygen during the study.
Water 17 01685 g003
Figure 4. Monthly average variations in ammonium and nitrate levels recorded during the study.
Figure 4. Monthly average variations in ammonium and nitrate levels recorded during the study.
Water 17 01685 g004
Figure 5. Principal component analysis (PCA) for water quality parameters in Oncorhynchus mykiss culture in the RAS.
Figure 5. Principal component analysis (PCA) for water quality parameters in Oncorhynchus mykiss culture in the RAS.
Water 17 01685 g005
Figure 6. Fulton’s condition factor (k) in relation to weight and length of Oncorhynchus mykiss.
Figure 6. Fulton’s condition factor (k) in relation to weight and length of Oncorhynchus mykiss.
Water 17 01685 g006
Figure 7. Growth of Oncorhynchus mykiss during the first three months of cultivation. The line represents the exponential growth model.
Figure 7. Growth of Oncorhynchus mykiss during the first three months of cultivation. The line represents the exponential growth model.
Water 17 01685 g007
Table 1. Methodology used, based on the Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater [29], for sampling and determining the physicochemical parameters in trout cultivation.
Table 1. Methodology used, based on the Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater [29], for sampling and determining the physicochemical parameters in trout cultivation.
ParametersUnitMethodology
Alkalinitymg CaCO3/LSMWW 2320B
Arsenicmg/LSMWW 3114C
Chloridemg/LSMWW 4500Cl-
True ColorPt-CoSMWW 2120C
ConductivityµS/cmSMWW 2510B
Hardnessmg CaCO3/LSMWW 2340C
Phosphorus (P-H2PO4)mg/LSMWW 4500P-C
pH SMWW 4500B-H*B
Potassiummg/LSMWW 3111B
Total dissolved solidsmg/LSMWW 2540B
SalinityPSUSMWW 2520B
Table 2. General parameter values recorded at different points in the recirculating aquaculture system (RAS). (HT: Header tank; CT3: Cultivation tank 3; CT4: Cultivation tank 4; DT: Decanting tanks). Different superscript letters in the columns indicate statistically significant differences among sampling points within each month (p < 0.05).
Table 2. General parameter values recorded at different points in the recirculating aquaculture system (RAS). (HT: Header tank; CT3: Cultivation tank 3; CT4: Cultivation tank 4; DT: Decanting tanks). Different superscript letters in the columns indicate statistically significant differences among sampling points within each month (p < 0.05).
Water Quality ParametersSampling PointWithout FishWith FishNormal Value
SepOctNovDecJan
Temperature (°C)HT11.00 ± 0.3714.00 ± 0.3315.00 ± 0.3117.00 ± 0.8921.00 ± 1.299 to17°C
[32]
CT38.00 ± 0.29 b9.00 ± 0.55 c12.98 ± 1.66 b17.00 ± 0.89 a20.03 ± 0.74 ab
CT47.00 ± 0.16 c8.00 ± 0.12 d13.98 ± 0.15 b17.03 ± 0.48 a19.00 ± 0.72 b
DT8.03 ± 0.36 b9.95 ± 0.75 b14.00 ± 0.14 b17.03 ± 0.24 a19.03 ± 0.23 b
Dissolved oxygen (mg/L)HT6.31 ± 0.08 c3.43 ± 0.17 b4.45 ± 0.10 a3.14 ± 0.17 b6.80 ± 0.57 a7.5 to 12 mg/L
[33]
CT37.48 ± 0.08 a4.90 ± 0.12 a2.73 ± 0.11 d1.78 ± 0.01 c3.52 ± 0.23 d
CT47.48 ± 0.07 a2.96 ± 0.13 c3.09 ± 0.12 c1.82 ± 0.06 c6.03 ± 0.74 b
DT6.75 ± 0.13 b2.90 ± 0.01 c3.40 ± 0.03 b4.84 ± 0.35 a4.71 ± 0.09 c
Ammonium (mg/L)HT<0.1<0.10.12 ± 0.01 c0.29 ± 0.02 b0.63 ± 0.02 a<0.012 mg/L
[34]
CT3<0.1<0.10.32 ± 0.02 a0.48 ± 0.02 a0.41 ± 0.03 b
CT4<0.1<0.10.28 ± 0.03 b0.21 ± 0.01 c0.20 ± 0.01 c
DT<0.1<0.10.27 ± 0.01 b0.14 ± 0.01 d0.19 ± 0.01 d
Nitrate (mg/L)HT3.83 ± 0.26 a1.63 ± 0.11 c111.00 ± 2.24 c115.00 ± 2.55 d52.00 ± 1.87 c<110 mg/L
[35]
CT32.63 ± 0.17 b3.01 ± 0.16 a121.00 ± 2.41 a131.00 ± 3.30 b43.00 ± 1.73 d
CT43.59 ± 0.11 a2.89 ± 0.16 a116.00 ± 2.23 b121.00 ± 1.87 c62.00 ± 4.05 a
DT2.01 ± 0.04 c2.69 ± 0.10 b118.00 ± 1.57 b135.00 ± 1.80 a58.00 ± 1.30 b
Table 3. Parameter value specifics recorded in the recirculating aquaculture system (RAS). (HT: Header tank; CT3: Cultivation tank 3; CT4: Cultivation tank 4; DT: Decanting tanks).
Table 3. Parameter value specifics recorded in the recirculating aquaculture system (RAS). (HT: Header tank; CT3: Cultivation tank 3; CT4: Cultivation tank 4; DT: Decanting tanks).
Water Quality ParametersSampling PointWithout FishWith FishNormal Values
SepOctNovDecJan
Alkalinity
mg CaCO3/L
HT38.0037.0036.0036.0038.0075–150 mg/L
[7]
CT341.0038.0037.0038.0038.00
CT443.0035.0036.0036.0036.00
DT36.0036.0038.0036.0038.00
Arsenic
mg/L
HT0.240.250.160.150.080.05 mg/L
[36]
CT30.290.290.160.130.07
CT40.240.240.160.130.07
DT0.270.270.160.140.07
Chloride
mg/L
HT65.0085.0055.0055.0028.0010–50 mg/L
[37]
CT3100.0090.0073.0055.0020.00
CT40.240.240.160.130.07
DT110.0070.0070.0058.0010.00
Colour test
Pt-Co
HT5.006.0011.0027.0052.0030–50 TCU
[37]
CT38.007.0011.0024.0013.00
CT46.005.0011.0028.0013.00
DT7.007.0012.0025.0018.00
Conductivity
µS/cm
HT551.00568.00477.00415.00447.0020–500 µS/cm (20 °C)
[38]
CT3621.00590.00513.00412.00421.00
CT4572.00550.00489.00414.00418.00
DT631.00570.00491.00418.00417.00
Calcium hardness
mg CaCO3/L
HT163.00161.00181.0099.00137.0020–100 mg/L
[39]
CT3185.00157.00125.00107.00133.00
CT4572.00148.00156.00101.00129.00
DT631.00161.00142.00101.00134.00
Phosphoric acid
mg/L
HT8.708.7016.0020.0041.59<0.1 mg/L
[40]
CT37.258.4114.0021.0040.72
CT48.418.9918.0021.0043.19
DT9.2811.1619.0023.0041.74
pHHT6.808.596.908.309.196.7–9
[36]
CT36.607.925.908.107.95
CT46.507.606.108.208.44
DT6.508.656.808.608.11
Potassium
mg/L
HT8.257.007.108.268.255–20 mg/L
[37]
CT37.507.506.908.218.19
CT49.009.007.707.677.98
DT8.5012.507.808.138.01
STD
mg/L
HT449.00462.00372.00418.00392.00<400 mg/L
[36]
CT3515.00465.00389.00409.00366.00
CT4476.00453.00257.00409.00373.00
DT483.00472.00396.00400.00285.00
Salinity
PSU
HT0.270.280.230.200.230 to 35 PSU
[36]
CT30.300.290.250.200.22
CT40.280.270.240.200.23
DT0.310.280.240.200.22
Table 4. Growth parameter values for the total fish population in the CPCC.
Table 4. Growth parameter values for the total fish population in the CPCC.
VariablesTotal
Food provided (kg)274.1
Initial biomass (kg)60.4
Final biomass (kg)240.6
Increase in weight (g)180.3
Initial density (kg/m3)1.5
Final density (kg/m3)6
Initial No. of fish5000
Final No. of fish4810
Feed conversion ratio (FCA)1.52
Specific growth rate (SGR)1.49
Weight gain (%)298.7
Survival rate (%)96.2
Table 5. Specific growth rate (SGR) and cumulative growth rate (CGR) of Oncorhynchus mykiss.
Table 5. Specific growth rate (SGR) and cumulative growth rate (CGR) of Oncorhynchus mykiss.
Culture DayWeight (g)SGR (d−1)CGR (d−1)Weight Gain (%)
015.52 ± 2.51
1720.68 ± 1.610.170.1724.9
3226.72 ± 3.060.210.1022.6
4732.44 ± 3.370.220.0717.6
6236.17 ± 3.620.230.0610.3
7849.88 ± 4.800.240.0527.5
9359.99 ± 3.640.270.0416.9
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Pepe-Victoriano, R.; Pepe-Vargas, P.; Pérez-Aravena, A.; Aravena-Ambrosetti, H.; Huanacuni, J.I.; Méndez-Abarca, F.; Olivares-Cantillano, G.; Acosta-Angulo, O.; Espinoza-Ramos, L. Evaluation of Water Quality in the Production of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in a Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) in the Precordilleran Region of Northern Chile. Water 2025, 17, 1685. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17111685

AMA Style

Pepe-Victoriano R, Pepe-Vargas P, Pérez-Aravena A, Aravena-Ambrosetti H, Huanacuni JI, Méndez-Abarca F, Olivares-Cantillano G, Acosta-Angulo O, Espinoza-Ramos L. Evaluation of Water Quality in the Production of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in a Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) in the Precordilleran Region of Northern Chile. Water. 2025; 17(11):1685. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17111685

Chicago/Turabian Style

Pepe-Victoriano, Renzo, Piera Pepe-Vargas, Anahí Pérez-Aravena, Héctor Aravena-Ambrosetti, Jordan I. Huanacuni, Felipe Méndez-Abarca, Germán Olivares-Cantillano, Olger Acosta-Angulo, and Luis Espinoza-Ramos. 2025. "Evaluation of Water Quality in the Production of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in a Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) in the Precordilleran Region of Northern Chile" Water 17, no. 11: 1685. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17111685

APA Style

Pepe-Victoriano, R., Pepe-Vargas, P., Pérez-Aravena, A., Aravena-Ambrosetti, H., Huanacuni, J. I., Méndez-Abarca, F., Olivares-Cantillano, G., Acosta-Angulo, O., & Espinoza-Ramos, L. (2025). Evaluation of Water Quality in the Production of Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in a Recirculating Aquaculture System (RAS) in the Precordilleran Region of Northern Chile. Water, 17(11), 1685. https://doi.org/10.3390/w17111685

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop