Advancing Sustainable Agriculture Through Aeroponics: A Critical Review of Integrated Water–Energy–Nutrient Management and Environmental Impact Mitigation

Abstract

Aeroponics has emerged as a key technology for sustainable and resource-efficient food production, particularly under intensifying constraints on water availability, land use, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This review synthesizes recent advances in water–energy–nutrient integration, highlighting operational parameters—humidity (50–80%), temperature (18–25 °C), nutrient solution pH (5.5–6.5), and electrical conductivity (1.5–2.5 mS cm⁻¹)—that critically influence system performance. Evidence indicates that closed-loop water recirculation and AI-assisted monitoring for environmental control and nutrient dosing can stabilize system dynamics and reduce water consumption by more than 90%. Reported yield improvements ranged from 45% to 75% compared with conventional soil-based cultivation. Moreover, systems powered by renewable energy demonstrated up to an 80% reduction in GHG emissions. Life-cycle assessment studies further suggest that aeroponics, coupled with low-carbon electricity in controlled-environment agriculture (CEA), can outperform traditional agricultural supply chains in climate and resource efficiency metrics. Additional technological innovations—including multi-tier vertical rack architectures, optimized misting intervals, and micronutrient-enriched fertigation formulations containing N, P, Ca, Mg, and K—were found to enhance spatial productivity and crop quality. Overall, aeroponics represents a promising pathway toward net-zero, high-performance agricultural systems.

1. Introduction

Aeroponics represents a sophisticated method of soilless plant cultivation wherein the roots are suspended within an aerated environment and periodically exposed to a fine mist enriched with essential nutrients. Unlike traditional soil-based agriculture [1], aeroponic systems eliminate the need for any physical growth substrate and instead rely on the precise regulation of environmental parameters to deliver oxygen and essential nutrients directly to the root zone. This targeted delivery enhances nutrient absorption efficiency and supports accelerated vegetative development [2]. From a sustainable resource management perspective, aeroponics has been widely evaluated for both its potential advantages and inherent constraints.

Extensive studies have shown that aeroponic cultivation enables continuous, year-round food production by overcoming seasonal and climatic limitations [3] while simultaneously improving spatial productivity through vertical, multi-layer farming configurations [4]. These systems also reduce the dependency on synthetic fertilizers and chemical pesticides, thereby lowering operational costs, minimizing environmental impacts, and enhancing overall food safety [5]. Because the method removes soil from the cultivation process, aeroponics significantly decreases the incidence of soil-borne pathogens [6], and the ability to operate in controlled greenhouse environments contributes to greater food accessibility and resilience in diverse geographic regions [7]. Notably, aeroponic potato cultivation has demonstrated substantial reductions in water consumption, underscoring the technology’s suitability for water-limited or climate-vulnerable regions [8].

Despite these benefits, several challenges continue to restrict large-scale adoption. The absence of a physical buffering medium requires highly accurate nutrient delivery and real-time monitoring to maintain optimal plant growth [9], while reliable water and energy management are essential for system stability [10]. High capital investment and ongoing maintenance demands remain major barriers to widespread implementation [11]. Public understanding and acceptance of aeroponics also remain limited, as current applications are predominantly concentrated within commercial operations and academic research facilities [12]. Recent findings suggest that integrating renewable energy technologies and artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled monitoring platforms may help mitigate these constraints and improve the operational resilience and scalability of aeroponic systems [13,14].

To examine current research trends and methodological developments, this review analyzed 78 scholarly publications identified through NVivo 22 software, comprising 9 review articles and 69 original research studies. The distribution of publication types and thematic focuses is summarized in

Table 1. Research directions and publication metrics in aeroponics.

Research Direction	Number of Articles
Nutrient Solution	21
Cultivated Crops	23
Automated Control	11
Sustainable Management	23

, reflecting the expanding scope and interdisciplinarity of aeroponics research.

The following section presents an in-depth examination of research themes related to aeroponics across distinct global regions, thereby providing a nuanced understanding of international research priorities in this field. By employing a proprietary AI platform in conjunction with NVivo software for data analysis, the study systematically aggregated information regarding the annual volume of publications, as well as the geographical distribution of manuscript submissions. In 2024, the number of published articles peaked, reaching a record high of 184. Submissions from North America constituted the majority, with Europe ranking as the second most prominent contributor. This pattern indicates that Europe has played a significant and early role in advancing aeroponics research. Comprehensive visual representations of these findings are provided in Figure 1.

These bibliometric outputs were used to define consistent descriptors and to guide the subsequent evidence synthesis across operational parameters and sustainability metrics.

Geographic categories were defined using study location metadata and grouped into North America, Europe, Asia, and water-scarce/arid contexts (where explicitly stated in the primary studies). Regional differences in indicators were evaluated using non-parametric tests (Kruskal–Wallis with post-hoc Dunn tests) when normality assumptions were not met, and via sensitivity analyses excluding extreme outliers. We add a regional comparison table in the Discussion summarizing mean/median water saving, yield change, energy intensity, and GHG mitigation potential by region, complementing the manuscript’s existing bibliometric observation that North America and Europe dominate publication activity.

The novelty of this review lies not in re-stating widely reported headline benefits of aeroponics, but in providing an AI-assisted, traceable synthesis that converts a heterogeneous literature base into interpretable themes, trends, and sustainability-relevant insights. Using an AI-assisted NVivo workflow, we screened a broader intelligent-cultivation corpus (1172 records) and identified 78 aeroponics-focused studies for in-depth text mining and cluster analysis, enabling a structured view of research emphases and their interconnections. Building on these results, we propose a standardized descriptor set (aeroponic, humidity, water, temperature, nutrient) to support consistent indexing and cross-study comparability in future aeroponics research. Moreover, by consolidating quantitative evidence already summarized in this manuscript—such as water-footprint contrasts and life-cycle GHG sensitivity to electricity sourcing—we explicitly link controllable operational variables (e.g., pH/EC regulation, environmental control, and misting management) to environmental implications and boundary-dependent trade-offs. Finally, the review extends beyond agronomic performance by synthesizing technology trajectories (automation/IoT/AI and renewable integration) and summarizing relevant patents, thereby highlighting translational pathways and innovation dynamics in aeroponic systems.

2. Methods

2.1. Search Strategy and Study Selection

Aligned with the objectives of this investigation to provide comprehensive guidance for scholars engaged in aeroponic research, this paper adopted an integrative methodological approach that combined inductive reasoning with bibliometric analysis. By systematically collecting, evaluating, and synthesizing relevant academic literature, the research delineated the current landscape of scholarly activity and illuminated emergent trajectories within the discipline. We conducted a reproducible bibliographic search across Web of Science, Scopus, SpringerLink, ProQuest, and Elsevier/ScienceDirect, consistent with the data sources already summarized in this manuscript. The search was executed for the period 2014–2025 (final query date: [27 August 2025]) using the following core string applied to “Title/Abstract/Keywords”: (“aeroponic*” OR “aeroponics”) AND (“water” OR “energy” OR “nutrient*” OR “pH” OR “electrical conductivity” OR “EC” OR “misting” OR “controlled environment agriculture” OR “vertical farm*” OR “life cycle assessment” OR “LCA” OR “IoT” OR “artificial intelligence” OR “AI”). We included peer-reviewed journal articles and reviews reporting agronomic performance and/or resource/environmental metrics. We excluded patents, non-agricultural aerosol engineering papers without crop outcomes, conference abstracts without sufficient methods/results, and non-duplicated records after DOI/title matching. Screening proceeded in three steps (duplicate removal; title/abstract screening; full-text eligibility), yielding the final corpus used for NVivo-based analysis and quantitative extraction.

2.2. Data Extraction, Harmonization, and Validation

For each eligible study, we extracted the following: crop type, system configuration (open/closed; indoor/greenhouse), key control variables (pH, EC, temperature, humidity, lighting, misting interval), nutrient regime (reported N, P, K concentrations/ratios where available), yield, and resource/environmental metrics (water use, energy use, and GHG emissions when reported). To enable comparability, water use was normalized to L kg⁻¹ fresh yield, energy to kWh kg⁻¹, and climate impact to kg CO₂e kg⁻¹. When studies reported only relative performance (e.g., % saving vs. baseline), we recorded both the relative value and the baseline definition. Data integrity was validated via double entry for key quantitative fields and resolution of discrepancies by re-checking original tables/figures.

Through a methodical process of literature review and thematic categorization, prevailing research directions and methodological paradigms were discerned. Advanced metadata analysis was performed using NVivo software, which facilitated a nuanced examination of keyword frequencies and their distribution across the corpus of selected publications, with each instance serving as a distinct analytical reference. NVivo’s analytical functionalities—including the generation of word trees, execution of cluster analyses, construction of matrix visualizations, and creation of word clouds—enabled the elucidation of principal research foci, conceptual linkages, and prospective avenues for scholarly inquiry.

The NVivo dataset comprised 78 peer-reviewed full-text publications, including 78 original research articles. The corpus was restricted to English-language journal publications and was selected to represent influential studies addressing growth regulation and operational performance in aeroponic systems over the defined review window.

This study employed NVivo software for data organization and analysis. The literature was collected through a self-developed AI-based keyword search applied to the aforementioned publishers’ databases. In addition, Figure 2 and Figure 3 were optimized from the original images using ChatGPT 5.

This comprehensive approach not only enabled the systematic management of voluminous datasets but also accentuated pivotal research themes and contributed to the structuring of academic discourse within the aeroponics field. The outcomes of this study offer an integrative, empirically grounded framework intended to inform and direct subsequent research endeavors, especially for academics seeking to chart the contours of the research domain and sharpen their investigative focus in rapidly developing or interdisciplinary contexts.

2.3. Indicators and Formulas

We define the following indicators:

• Water saving (%) = (W_baseline − W_aero)/W_baseline × 100, where W is water use (L kg⁻¹).
• Energy intensity (EI) = E_aero/Y (kWh kg⁻¹), where E_aero is electricity use, and Y is yield.
• GHG intensity (GI) = EI × EF_grid (kg CO₂e kg⁻¹), where EF_grid is the grid emission factor (kg CO₂e kWh⁻¹) or scenario-specific factor for renewable electricity.

3. Results

The rapid progress of industrialization and modernization has significantly accelerated the shift from traditional soil-based agriculture to innovative soilless cultivation systems, fundamentally transforming approaches to sustainable agriculture. Soilless cultivation techniques utilizing substrates such as polyurethane and perlite have been shown to optimize pest and disease control, as well as to modulate critical plant growth variables, thereby resulting in enhanced agricultural productivity [17]. Among these techniques, hydroponics has become a prevalent method, wherein plant roots are either continuously immersed in or intermittently supplied with nutrient-enriched solutions; the effectiveness of this system is contingent upon meticulous regulation of water quality, nutrient concentrations, and dissolved oxygen levels [13].

In contrast, aeroponic systems deliver nutrient solutions in the form of fine aerosols, which promotes superior oxygenation of the root zone and maximizes water-use efficiency. Empirical evidence indicates that aeroponics can decrease water usage by as much as 98% and reduce fertilizer input by nearly 60%, while obviating the need for pesticides and achieving yield increases ranging from 45% to 75% [18]. From the perspective of sustainable resource management, aeroponics demonstrates greater efficiency and adaptability under climatic stressors compared to hydroponic systems. Nonetheless, the broader implementation of aeroponics is limited by the substantial infrastructural requirements and the inherent complexity of the technology. Contemporary studies highlight that integrating aeroponic cultivation with renewable energy sources and AI-based monitoring systems could significantly improve scalability and environmental sustainability, thereby reinforcing its strategic importance within sustainable food production frameworks, as illustrated in Figure 4 [19,20].

Recent research indicates that aeroponic systems consistently deliver enhanced crop yields and superior product quality relative to both hydroponic and traditional soil-based cultivation methods. In aeroponic setups, nutrients are delivered in the form of fine mist generated by technologies such as high-pressure atomizers, ultrasonic devices, or low-pressure sprayers, with the size of the mist droplets serving as a pivotal factor in system performance [14,21]. Larger droplet sizes have been shown to impede oxygen transfer to the root zone, thereby diminishing nutrient absorption rates, while extremely fine droplets tend to stimulate excessive root hair formation at the expense of lateral root growth.

From the standpoint of sustainable agricultural management, the architectural configuration of the aeroponic support structure plays a crucial role in determining both crop productivity and operational efficiency [22,23]. By suspending plant roots in an aerated environment, these systems facilitate superior oxygen diffusion, reduce the risk of waterlogging, and limit pest infestations, collectively resulting in improved nutrient assimilation [2,24]. Contemporary investigations highlight that racks engineered with sufficient root volume and modular design elements alleviate issues of root congestion and microbial contamination, while also promoting uniform distribution of nutrient mist [25,26,27].

Additionally, the implementation of modular, vertically stacked structures optimizes spatial utilization, thereby increasing the feasibility of aeroponic cultivation in urban environments where arable land is limited. These innovative configurations are consistent with modern sustainability paradigms that emphasize the efficient use of resources, enhancement of food security, and integration with renewable energy technologies [28].

Vertical multi-layer (multi-tier) aeroponic deployment has been most consistently demonstrated in controlled-environment settings where modular rack/cabinet architectures enable stable microclimates and precise mist delivery across tiers. Reported implementations commonly focus on leafy greens and herbs due to short cycles and predictable root-zone responses, while scale-up feasibility depends on uniform mist distribution, sensor-driven control, and maintenance accessibility across layers. We therefore interpret “vertical multi-layer farming” in this review as evidence-based primarily for indoor/urban multi-tier production systems rather than as a universally validated configuration for all crops and climates.

3.1. Nutrient Provision and Effectiveness

3.1.1. Components of Nutrient Solution

From the standpoint of sustainability management, nutrient solutions serve as the primary determinant of aeroponic system efficacy. Due to the direct exposure of plant roots to a finely atomized, nutrient-enriched mist, essential macro- and micronutrients are supplied with exceptional speed and homogeneity, thereby facilitating robust plant development and optimizing nitrogen use efficiency. Empirical research has demonstrated that meticulous regulation of nutrient concentration, ionic composition, and dissolved oxygen levels significantly influences nitrogen use efficiency, as well as plant stress responses in aeroponic cultivation, with particular emphasis on nitrogen management in potato crops [29]. Comprehensive reviews have also established that the provision of fully soluble nutrients, when paired with stringent control of pH and electrical conductivity (EC), markedly boosts nutrient uptake rates and enhances resource-use efficiency [30,31]. Strategic modifications to the chemical composition and pH of nutrient solutions thus function as a potent regulatory approach, yielding improvements in root system architecture, crop productivity, and produce quality [32].

Simultaneously, disease incidence is reduced as the liquid-based nutrient delivery system circumvents traditional soil-mediated pathogen transmission routes, a benefit consistently corroborated in soilless cultivation literature. To ensure positive environmental impacts, the adoption of closed-loop recirculation systems and continuous monitoring of macro- and micronutrient fluxes within nutrient cycles are advocated, which serve to curtail nutrient leaching and eutrophication risks while preserving ionic equilibrium [33]. Innovative plant-responsive precision irrigation methodologies within aeroponic frameworks further promote responsible water management without detriment to plant growth.

Collectively, the rigorous management of nutrient solutions—encompassing closed-loop recirculation, data-driven nutrient application, and the optimization of pH and EC—has been shown to substantially enhance both crop yield and quality, while simultaneously advancing the objectives of water and fertilizer conservation that are fundamental to sustainable agriculture. In summary, nutrient solutions are indispensable for fostering optimal plant growth and maximizing both productivity and quality in aeroponic agriculture. As illustrated in

Table 2. Overview of the composition of nutrient solutions utilized in aeroponic systems.

Crop	Nutrient Solution Composition	Proportions of Nutrient Solution Components (mg/L)	Growth Cycle (Days)	pH Range	Reference
Lettuce	NNH4, NNH3, P, K, Ca, Mg, Na, Fe, Zn, B, Cu	0.54, 0.35, 0.40, 0.35, 0.17, 0.08, 0.04, 0.09, 0.03, 0.03, 0.04	30–50	5.5	[35]
Lettuce	N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, Cu, Zn, Mn, B, Mo	210, 31, 234, 160, 34, 64, 2.5, 0.02, 0.05, 0.5, 0.5, 0.01	14	5.1	[17]
Lettuce	N, P, K, Ca, Mg, H, C, S		30	5.0–7.5	[36]
Lettuce	N, P, K, Ca, Mg	-	17	6.2	[37]
Lettuce	N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Zn, Fe	-	7–22	5.4	[18]
Phenotypes of a potato	N, P, Ca, Mg, Zn	-	42	5.3	[8]
Lettuce	N, P, K, S, Ca, Mg, Fe, Zn, Mn, Mo, Cu, B	100, 25, 100, 87.5, 17.5, 12.5, 75, 70, 25, 2.5, 12.5, 5	30	5.6	[6]
Lettuce	N, P, K, Ca, Mg	-	31	6.2	[38]
Lettuce	N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, Cu, Zn, Mn, B	168, 31, 273, 180, 48, 336, 2–4, 0.02, 0.11, 0.62, 0.44	21	5.3	[35]
Lettuce	N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, Cu, Zn, Mn, B, Mo	200–236, 60, 300, 170–185, 50, 68, 12, 0.1, 0.1, 2.0, 0.3, 0.2	20	5.7	[26]
Lettuce	N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, Cu, Zn, Mn, B, Mo	168, 41, 156, 160, 36, 48, 2.8, 0.064, 0.065, 0.54, 0.54, 0.04	-	5.0–6.1	[39]
Lettuce	N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, Cu, Zn, Mn, B, Mo	210, 31, 234, 160, 34, 64, 2.5, 0.02, 0.05, 0.5, 0.5, 0.01	-	5.2–6.0	[40]

, proficient nutrient management can significantly contribute to the realization of more efficient and sustainable farming systems [34].

3.1.2. pH Value, EC

From the perspective of sustainability management, carrots, potatoes, lettuce, and tomatoes serve as essential, nutrient-rich dietary staples that mitigate the risk of famine. Carrots are notable for their high β-carotene content, which is a precursor for vitamin A and plays a crucial role in supporting both visual health and immune system function. Potatoes are a significant source of starchy carbohydrates, as well as potassium and vitamin C, thereby contributing to both energy provision and micronutrient intake. Lettuce offers dietary fiber in addition to essential micronutrients, such as vitamin K and folate. Tomatoes are recognized for their lycopene content and a range of antioxidants that collectively enhance micronutrient sufficiency. Together, these crops contribute to increased dietary resilience in periods of food scarcity [41,42].

In aeroponic cultivation systems, the regulation of nutrient solution composition is fundamental to optimizing both crop yield and product quality. Continuous assessment and fine-tuning of pH and EC are required to ensure that nutrient uptake is maximized and physiological stress is minimized. For numerous soilless crops, optimal nutrient absorption is generally achieved in mildly acidic conditions (approximately pH 5.5–6.5), although species-specific requirements may vary; for instance, apple rootstocks have demonstrated variable root system responses at pH levels of 5.5, 6.5, and 8.0 under aeroponic conditions [43]. EC regulation is equally critical, as insufficient EC denotes inadequate fertilization and restricted growth, whereas excessive EC can induce osmotic or salt stress, increasing the likelihood of leaf chlorosis and tip burn. Research focusing on leafy vegetables has established that optimal EC values are seasonally dependent, with both suboptimal and excessive salinity resulting in growth inhibition. Consequently, the implementation of closed-loop recirculation systems and sensor-based management is advocated to minimize nutrient runoff, conserve resources, and maintain stable ionic conditions [44,45].

In conclusion, proficient management of nutrient solutions—encompassing the optimization of pH and EC, adherence to crop-specific parameters, and the adoption of recirculating systems—has been demonstrated to enhance productivity and nutritional value in aeroponic agriculture, while simultaneously promoting the efficient use of water and fertilizers, which are essential for sustainable agricultural practices [46].

As shown in

Table 3. Examination of pH and EC management in aeroponic systems.

Crop	Growth Cycle (Days)	pH Range	EC Range (mS/cm)	Humidity (%)	Reference
Lettuce	30–50	5.5–6.5	1.5–2.5	48.5–81.9	[47]
Lettuce	30–50	5.0 and 7.5	2.5	50–85	[48]
Lettuce	32	6	0.29–1.84	60	[49]
Lettuce	32	5.5–6.5	1.5–2.5	60–82	[50]
Lettuce	17	5.5–6.5	2.1–2.2	-	[51]
Onions	47	6.0–7.0	1.4–1.8	-	[40]
Cucumber	43	5.8–6.0	1.7–2.2	-	[52]
Carrots	72	5.8–6.4	1.6–2.0	-	[53]
Spinach	37	5.5–6.6	1.8–2.3	-	[54]
Lettuce	21	5.5–6.5	0.8–1.2	-	[55]
Tomato	32	5.5–6.5	2.0–5.0	-	[56]
Potato	44	5.0–6.0	2.0–2.5	-	[57]

, maintaining consistent pH and EC levels is vital for the effective operation of aeroponic systems and the achievement of high-efficiency agricultural outcomes.

3.1.3. Temperature and Humidity

From the perspective of sustainable management, temperature and humidity are regarded as fundamental variables in the regulation of aeroponic systems, as they critically influence plant metabolic processes, nutrient assimilation, and the morphological development of roots. Ensuring species-specific environmental set points and maintaining an optimal vapor-pressure deficit (VPD) contribute to stabilized transpiration rates, reduced abiotic stress, and enhanced nutrient uptake efficiency under conditions of intermittent mist application. Recent studies conducted in controlled environments have demonstrated that implementing dynamic climate regulation—where temperature and humidity are directly linked to nutrient dosing and misting schedules—can significantly enhance system reliability and crop yield. However, achieving more precise environmental control is associated with increased energy consumption, necessitating careful consideration of the electricity source to minimize environmental impact [58,59].

Operational parameters for leafy vegetables cultivated in enclosed aeroponic or vertical farming chambers typically involve maintaining air temperatures within the range of 18–24 °C and relative humidity levels between 60 and 85%, acknowledging that optimal conditions vary according to plant species and developmental stage. In the context of potato minituber production, root-zone temperatures between approximately 10 and 20 °C are prioritized to safeguard stolon formation and root respiration. These cases highlight the necessity of integrating temperature, humidity, and airflow management with precise droplet delivery to sustain adequate root oxygenation and maximize nutrient use efficiency.

Collectively, the evidence suggests that the effectiveness of aeroponic cultivation is contingent upon the integrated management of temperature and humidity as a unified climate control strategy, primarily through the regulation of VPD, and the deployment of sensor-based feedback systems that align misting and nutrient recirculation with the phenological requirements of the crop. Such comprehensive governance not only enhances yield consistency and optimizes resource utilization—key tenets of sustainable urban agriculture [60]—but also relies on the implementation of energy-efficient technologies and the utilization of low-carbon energy sources, as outlined in

Table 4. Overview of temperature and humidity regulation in aeroponic systems.

Crop	Growth Cycle (Days)	Temperature (°C)	Humidity (%)	Reference
Lettuce	41	18–26	50–80%	[61]
Lettuce	20	20–23	40–56%	[3]
Lettuce	21	20–25	~65%	[12]
Lettuce	32	18–22	40–70%	[56]
Lettuce	30	20–23	20–40%	[21]
Lettuce	37	25–30	70–100%	[62]

.

3.1.4. Aeroponic Nutrient Management Enhanced Plant Resilience

From a sustainability management standpoint, the implementation of automated misting technologies in aeroponic systems has emerged as a critical governance tool that significantly enhances nutrient-use efficiency while minimizing water consumption. The deployment of high-pressure atomizing nozzles and ultrasonic fogging devices generates micro-droplets that promote homogeneous root exposure, augment root-zone oxygenation, and expedite nutrient absorption dynamics. Collectively, these mechanisms contribute to the mitigation of nutrient leaching and foster consistent plant development, particularly under conditions of periodic nutrient application. Recent progress in both engineering design and agronomic practice has revealed that fine-tuning droplet size spectra and optimizing misting intervals can further elevate plant physiological performance and product quality [63,64].

The integration of sensor-based control architectures, especially those employing ion-selective electrodes (ISEs), ion-sensitive field-effect transistors (ISFETs), or advanced multiplexed ion detection arrays, facilitates continuous, in situ quantification of nutrient ions, such as nitrate and potassium, within recirculating hydroponic solutions. This real-time analytical capacity enables highly accurate nutrient management and supports closed-loop nutrient recycling protocols, effectively curtailing effluent generation and lowering operational expenditures [65,66,67]. In vertically oriented aeroponic systems, the adoption of dynamic nutrient delivery platforms has been demonstrated to optimize spatial distribution; empirical findings show that precisely regulated nozzle discharge rates and traversal velocities can achieve nutrient coverage exceeding 90% across cultivation surfaces, with this uniformity being strongly associated with enhanced crop vigor [68].

In addition, nutrient solution compositions are systematically tailored to accommodate specific crop species, ontogenetic phases, and abiotic stress parameters, with a focus on maintaining optimal nitrogen-phosphorus-potassium (N–P–K) ratios and ensuring the availability of critical micronutrients to sustain system robustness. Extensive literature reviews and experimental investigations in the domain of soilless agriculture highlight the necessity of integrating nutrient formulation strategies with real-time monitoring systems to avert ionic disequilibria and trace element deficiencies during nutrient recirculation cycles [69]. Figure 3 provides a schematic overview of the structural configurations and functional mechanisms of automated misting apparatuses, emphasizing essential factors for the advancement of nutrient delivery methodologies in aeroponic production systems.

3.2. Sustainability

3.2.1. Agricultural Products That Aligned with Sustainable Development Principles

From the perspective of sustainability management, selecting crops for aeroponic systems is regarded as a critical strategic choice due to significant interspecific variation in nutrient stoichiometry, oxygen requirements in the rhizosphere, and the proportional relationship between canopy and root development. In aeroponic cultivation, plant roots are suspended in the air and receive water and dissolved nutrients via periodic misting, which means that species characterized by shallow, fibrous root systems and brief growth cycles can utilize the system with maximum efficiency. Leafy greens and culinary herbs, such as lettuce, spinach, and basil, have consistently demonstrated rapid biomass accumulation, optimal spatial utilization, and predictable physiological responses to variations in pH, EC, and misting schedules, resulting in stable and reliable yields in vertically oriented production systems [55,70].

In contrast, root and tuber crops necessitate a greater volume below ground and require enhanced mechanical support to prevent root congestion and morphological limitations. For example, potato cultivation in aeroponics is mainly viable for the production of seed minitubers, provided that closed growth chambers, adequate stolon support structures, and customized misting protocols are implemented; while these configurations facilitate improved phytosanitary management, they also entail increased capital investment and operational complexity [71]. Conversely, carrots often encounter difficulties with taproot enlargement and typically require deeper growth chambers; comparative studies have shown that achieving yields equivalent to those in substrate-based or hydroponic systems necessitates the adoption of specialized apparatus in aeroponic setups [72].

An extensive analysis of current scholarly publications reveals that earlier research within the field of aeroponics has predominantly focused on essential parameters, such as nutrient solution composition, pH values, EC, and thermal conditions. As summarized in Table 2, previous investigations have routinely included fundamental macronutrients—namely nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, and magnesium—in their nutrient regimes, with nitrogen receiving particular attention due to its pivotal role in plant metabolism. Table 3 demonstrates that the optimal pH interval for nutrient solutions ranges from 5.5 to 6.5, whereas the ideal EC is specified as 1.5 to 2.5 mS/cm. According to Table 4, the most favorable temperature window for aeroponic crop production is 18 to 25 °C, and the recommended relative humidity is maintained between 50% and 80%. Additionally, Table 5 identifies lettuce as the predominant model crop utilized in aeroponic research. The interaction between plant spacing and light environment has been recognized as a crucial factor influencing crop development and productivity. Although increased planting densities can maximize yield per unit area, they may also lead to inadequate light distribution to the lower canopy, thereby reducing photosynthetic rates, constraining leaf growth, and limiting total biomass accumulation [73]. To address these limitations, the deliberate configuration of lighting systems—including both the spatial arrangement and angular distribution of light sources—is essential for achieving uniform plant growth and maximizing resource efficiency.

Furthermore, empirical evidence suggests that employing a red-to-blue light ratio of 7:3 significantly promotes leaf area expansion and biomass production, while also improving photosynthetic capacity [74]. In high-density planting contexts, the adoption of multi-tier lighting strategies, coupled with modifications to light direction and intensity, is advised to ensure sufficient illumination reaches all canopy strata. Moreover, the application of advanced lighting simulation platforms, such as DIALux or Relux, is recommended for precise mapping and optimization of light distribution, thereby enhancing both light-use efficiency and overall crop output [75,76]. The aforementioned findings were systematically compared with insights obtained from NVivo-based qualitative analyses, thereby reinforcing the principal themes addressed in the subsequent sections of this research.

Table 5. Overview of crop type compatibility in aeroponic systems.

Crop	Planting Density	Nutrient Solution Composition	pH Range	EC (mS/cm)	Temperature Humidity Light Intensity	Growth Period	Outcome	Reference
Ocimum basilicum L.	8 plants/m2	--	--	--	--	7 weeks	The aeroponic system exhibited the lowest operational cost, the highest oil content, and the highest nutrient uptake efficiency.	[77]
Chrysopogon zizanioides (L.)	--	N = 15 ppm P = 10 ppm K = 30 ppm	5.8 ~ 6.2	1.0 ~ 1.2	--	4 months	The root biomass and essential oil yield of crops grown in aeroponic systems were comparatively diminished.	[78]
Arachis hypogaea	--	--	~ 6.0	1.2 ~ 1.3	--	12 weeks	The aeroponic technique proved advantageous for the growth in height and chlorophyll concentration of Bambara groundnut. Additionally, it exhibited cost-effectiveness, durability, and user-friendliness.	[79]
Solanum tuberosum	25 plants/m2	--		--	--		The aeroponic technique exhibited a significant propagation rate, enhanced productivity per unit area, efficient utilization of water and energy resources, as well as a decrease in the necessity for quarantine measures.	[79]
Solanum tuberosum	60 plants/m2 Microtube: 800 plants/m2	--		--	--	2 months	Water usage was limited, crop yield remained stable despite seasonal stress factors, the quality of the organic produce was elevated, and the expenses incurred were roughly one-fourth of those associated with traditional tuber farming practices.	[1]
Glycine max	--	--		--	--	1 to 2 weeks	Water supply requirements were reduced by 90% compared to hydroponics, microbial contamination was effectively prevented, and drought stress was alleviated.	[54]
Coriandrum sativum	46 plants/m2	--	--	--		90 days in soil-based cultivation and 56 days in aeroponic cultivation.	The aeroponic cultivation method demonstrated superior annual yields and reduced post-harvest losses, with losses recorded at 20% for soil-based cultivation compared to only 8% for aeroponics. Additionally, this method necessitated merely 10% of the pesticide application, 40% of the nutrient expenses, and 30% of the labor input when contrasted with traditional soil cultivation practices.	[80]
Anihot esculenta Crantz	--	--	6.5	--	Temperature was maintained between 25 and 30 °C, with an average relative humidity of 50%, and a photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) ranging from 1000 to 1200 μmol/m2·s.	5 months	The aeroponic system had a positive impact on storage root development, with significantly greater dry weight and thickness compared to other cultivation systems.	[9]
Solanum tuberosum L.	--	Low nitrogen 0.75 mmol/L NO3− High nitrogen 7.5 mmol/L NO3−	--	--	Daytime temperature: (23 ± 1) °C; Nighttime temperature: (18 ± 1) °C.	1 months	The aeroponic system demonstrated advantages in tuber yield and weight, both per plant and per square meter, whereas the traditional soil-based method exhibited a higher average tuber weight.	[57]
Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. cv. ‘Dwarf’	--	Ca(NO3)2 + 4H2O, KNO3, NH4H2PO4, MgSO4·7H2O, FeEDTA, H3BO3, MnSO4·4H2O, ZnSO4·7H2O, CuSO4·5H2O, (NH4)6Mo7O24·4H2O	5.8 ~ 6.3	--	--	120 days	The aeroponic method and the porous-tube–vermiculite system showed superior performance compared to hydroponics in terms of dry weight, photosynthetic efficiency, and fruit yield per plant.	[81]
Lactuca sativa	25 plants/m2	N, K, Ca, P, S, Mg, B, Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, Mo	--	--	--	45 days	The aeroponic system significantly enhanced root development, resulting in increased root-to-shoot ratios, root length, and root volume compared to other cultivation methods.	[5]

Note: The phrase “microbial contamination was effectively prevented” refers to a result that has been predominantly observed in closed or highly regulated aeroponic systems employing sanitized or treated misting water (such as through filtration or ultraviolet treatment). Consequently, this finding may not be applicable to all types of system configurations.

Table 5. Overview of crop type compatibility in aeroponic systems.

Crop	Planting Density	Nutrient Solution Composition	pH Range	EC (mS/cm)	Temperature Humidity Light Intensity	Growth Period	Outcome	Reference
Ocimum basilicum L.	8 plants/m2	--	--	--	--	7 weeks	The aeroponic system exhibited the lowest operational cost, the highest oil content, and the highest nutrient uptake efficiency.	[77]
Chrysopogon zizanioides (L.)	--	N = 15 ppm P = 10 ppm K = 30 ppm	5.8 ~ 6.2	1.0 ~ 1.2	--	4 months	The root biomass and essential oil yield of crops grown in aeroponic systems were comparatively diminished.	[78]
Arachis hypogaea	--	--	~ 6.0	1.2 ~ 1.3	--	12 weeks	The aeroponic technique proved advantageous for the growth in height and chlorophyll concentration of Bambara groundnut. Additionally, it exhibited cost-effectiveness, durability, and user-friendliness.	[79]
Solanum tuberosum	25 plants/m2	--		--	--		The aeroponic technique exhibited a significant propagation rate, enhanced productivity per unit area, efficient utilization of water and energy resources, as well as a decrease in the necessity for quarantine measures.	[79]
Solanum tuberosum	60 plants/m2 Microtube: 800 plants/m2	--		--	--	2 months	Water usage was limited, crop yield remained stable despite seasonal stress factors, the quality of the organic produce was elevated, and the expenses incurred were roughly one-fourth of those associated with traditional tuber farming practices.	[1]
Glycine max	--	--		--	--	1 to 2 weeks	Water supply requirements were reduced by 90% compared to hydroponics, microbial contamination was effectively prevented, and drought stress was alleviated.	[54]
Coriandrum sativum	46 plants/m2	--	--	--		90 days in soil-based cultivation and 56 days in aeroponic cultivation.	The aeroponic cultivation method demonstrated superior annual yields and reduced post-harvest losses, with losses recorded at 20% for soil-based cultivation compared to only 8% for aeroponics. Additionally, this method necessitated merely 10% of the pesticide application, 40% of the nutrient expenses, and 30% of the labor input when contrasted with traditional soil cultivation practices.	[80]
Anihot esculenta Crantz	--	--	6.5	--	Temperature was maintained between 25 and 30 °C, with an average relative humidity of 50%, and a photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) ranging from 1000 to 1200 μmol/m2·s.	5 months	The aeroponic system had a positive impact on storage root development, with significantly greater dry weight and thickness compared to other cultivation systems.	[9]
Solanum tuberosum L.	--	Low nitrogen 0.75 mmol/L NO3− High nitrogen 7.5 mmol/L NO3−	--	--	Daytime temperature: (23 ± 1) °C; Nighttime temperature: (18 ± 1) °C.	1 months	The aeroponic system demonstrated advantages in tuber yield and weight, both per plant and per square meter, whereas the traditional soil-based method exhibited a higher average tuber weight.	[57]
Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. cv. ‘Dwarf’	--	Ca(NO3)2 + 4H2O, KNO3, NH4H2PO4, MgSO4·7H2O, FeEDTA, H3BO3, MnSO4·4H2O, ZnSO4·7H2O, CuSO4·5H2O, (NH4)6Mo7O24·4H2O	5.8 ~ 6.3	--	--	120 days	The aeroponic method and the porous-tube–vermiculite system showed superior performance compared to hydroponics in terms of dry weight, photosynthetic efficiency, and fruit yield per plant.	[81]
Lactuca sativa	25 plants/m2	N, K, Ca, P, S, Mg, B, Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, Mo	--	--	--	45 days	The aeroponic system significantly enhanced root development, resulting in increased root-to-shoot ratios, root length, and root volume compared to other cultivation methods.	[5]

Note: The phrase “microbial contamination was effectively prevented” refers to a result that has been predominantly observed in closed or highly regulated aeroponic systems employing sanitized or treated misting water (such as through filtration or ultraviolet treatment). Consequently, this finding may not be applicable to all types of system configurations.

From the perspective of sustainable management, variables such as planting density, misting frequency, and cultivation period are conceptualized as integrated control mechanisms that collectively influence aeroponic system performance and resource management. Planting density regulates canopy competition, oxygen diffusion in the rhizosphere, and yield per unit area; as such, it is calibrated to optimize light capture while preserving adequate aerial root space, particularly in vertical farming systems designed for urban settings. Experimental data from controlled-environment lettuce and aeroponic potato cultivation demonstrate that modifications in planting density can substantially alter biomass allocation patterns and tuber production, highlighting the economic and ecological significance of this parameter [82]. Spraying frequency functions as a critical determinant of water and nutrient delivery reliability. Research indicates that the interplay between droplet characteristics and application intervals can impact nutrient solution pH and EC, as well as root absorption dynamics; misting intervals on the order of several minutes generally maintain physiological stability, while sensor-guided or plant-responsive (e.g., turgor-based) irrigation systems further minimize water and nutrient wastage compared to static timing protocols, thereby enhancing productivity [83]. Table 6 provides a consolidated overview of the impacts of these three operational variables on the productivity of diverse crop species cultivated under aeroponic conditions.

A thorough analysis of existing scholarly works demonstrates that previous research on aeroponic cultivation has mainly prioritized factors such as plant population density, the timing and frequency of mist application, and the overall duration of cultivation. Referencing Table 6, it is evident that most earlier experiments adopted a 14-day growth period, with the highest documented density being 163 plants per square meter. Regarding misting parameters, the majority of studies implemented cycles lasting 30 s, typically repeated every 10 to 15 min. By integrating the results from the literature, it has been observed that air-pressure atomization devices, which produce relatively large water droplets, significantly stimulate the formation of lateral roots and improve the efficiency of nutrient assimilation [52]. Moreover, reducing the interval between misting events has been shown to sustain optimal moisture in the rhizosphere, thus supporting uninterrupted nutrient uptake [6]. Conversely, extending the misting interval excessively can induce root desiccation, thereby impeding standard plant development. Additionally, the application of extremely fine droplets may result in excessive moisture accumulation around the roots, which diminishes oxygen availability and negatively impacts plant physiological processes [39].

Therefore, it is advocated that a balanced approach to both droplet size and misting frequency should be adopted in aeroponic systems to create an optimal root environment and maximize nutrient uptake efficiency [83]. The aforementioned findings were systematically compared with the results derived from an NVivo-facilitated analysis, thereby validating the principal themes addressed in the subsequent sections of this research.

Table 6. Overview of planting density, application frequency, cultivation duration, and crop varieties in aeroponic systems.

Crop	Cultivation Duration	Planting Density	Spraying Frequency	Reference
Ocimum basilicum L.	7 weeks	8 plants/m2	Daytime: spray for 20 s every 10 min Nighttime: spray for 20 s every 40 min	[77]
Salvia officinalis L.		163 plants/m2	10 min off, 1 min on	[84]
Crocus sativus L.	2 months	--	1 min off, 1 min on	[85]
Echinacea purpurea	--	--	1 min off, 30 s on	[40]
Chrysopogon zizanioides (L.)	4 months	--	--	[78]
Glycine max	1~2 weeks	--	--	[54]
Coriandrum sativum	56 days	46 plants/m2	3 min off, 20 s on	[80]
Lactuca sativa L. var. “Great Lakes 118″	8 weeks	12 plants/m2	1 h off, 1 min on	[69]
Lactuca sativa L.	43 days	51 plants/m2	1 min off, 30 s on	[47]
Lactuca sativa var. longifolia	45 days	23 plants/m2	1 min off, 30 s on	[25]
Lactuca sativa L.	30 days	6 plants/m2	24 min off, 24 s on	[39]
Lactuca sativa var. crispa L.	14 days	100 plants/m2	During the daytime, misting was applied for 20 s every 10 min; at night, misting was applied for 20 s every 40 min.	[55]
Lactuca sativa var. capitalata	42 days	--	--	[3]
Lactuca sativa L.	45 days	69 plants/m2	3 h off, 20 min on	[24]
Lactuca sativa ‘Dasushen’	45 days	25 plants/m2	20 s on, 30 s off	[5]
Lactuca sativa L.	--	40 plants/m2	15 min on, 15 min off	[7]
Lactuca sativa L.	30 days	16 plants/m2	5 min off, 1.5 min on	[86]

Table 6. Overview of planting density, application frequency, cultivation duration, and crop varieties in aeroponic systems.

Crop	Cultivation Duration	Planting Density	Spraying Frequency	Reference
Ocimum basilicum L.	7 weeks	8 plants/m2	Daytime: spray for 20 s every 10 min Nighttime: spray for 20 s every 40 min	[77]
Salvia officinalis L.		163 plants/m2	10 min off, 1 min on	[84]
Crocus sativus L.	2 months	--	1 min off, 1 min on	[85]
Echinacea purpurea	--	--	1 min off, 30 s on	[40]
Chrysopogon zizanioides (L.)	4 months	--	--	[78]
Glycine max	1~2 weeks	--	--	[54]
Coriandrum sativum	56 days	46 plants/m2	3 min off, 20 s on	[80]
Lactuca sativa L. var. “Great Lakes 118″	8 weeks	12 plants/m2	1 h off, 1 min on	[69]
Lactuca sativa L.	43 days	51 plants/m2	1 min off, 30 s on	[47]
Lactuca sativa var. longifolia	45 days	23 plants/m2	1 min off, 30 s on	[25]
Lactuca sativa L.	30 days	6 plants/m2	24 min off, 24 s on	[39]
Lactuca sativa var. crispa L.	14 days	100 plants/m2	During the daytime, misting was applied for 20 s every 10 min; at night, misting was applied for 20 s every 40 min.	[55]
Lactuca sativa var. capitalata	42 days	--	--	[3]
Lactuca sativa L.	45 days	69 plants/m2	3 h off, 20 min on	[24]
Lactuca sativa ‘Dasushen’	45 days	25 plants/m2	20 s on, 30 s off	[5]
Lactuca sativa L.	--	40 plants/m2	15 min on, 15 min off	[7]
Lactuca sativa L.	30 days	16 plants/m2	5 min off, 1.5 min on	[86]

3.2.2. Effects on Biodiversity and Soil Conservation

From the perspective of sustainability management, aeroponics is defined as a soil-free agricultural system that not only minimizes expenditures related to soil maintenance but also mitigates the impact of external environmental fluctuations by permitting precise regulation of environmental parameters. Within this framework, effective water governance, most notably the implementation of closed-loop management for “return water,” is considered a critical component. In operational terms, return water is systematically collected, subjected to filtration or disinfection processes, and subsequently recirculated within a closed-loop soilless system (CLS). This approach reduces both nutrient discharge and irrigation inefficiencies while sustaining optimal ionic concentrations through regular pH and EC adjustments. Empirical data have demonstrated that such recirculatory practices significantly enhance water-use efficiency (WUE), although continuous monitoring is necessary to address potential ionic imbalances and micronutrient depletion associated with repeated cycles of reuse [46,87,88].

Recent research conducted in controlled environments has further established that aeroponic systems deliver markedly superior WUE compared to traditional ebb-and-flow hydroponic methods. Moreover, the integration of condensate recovery technologies, such as dehumidifier water reclamation, contributes to optimizing overall water utilization. Engineering investigations have also identified the efficacy of employing dual recirculation circuits—one for nutrient solution and another for vapor recovery—as well as the use of modular supply units specifically designed for vertical aeroponic applications, thereby facilitating the scalable implementation of urban agriculture with minimal effluent production. Taken together, these results suggest that closed-loop recirculation, when combined with sensor-based nutrient delivery and scheduled chemical rebalancing, not only enhances yield consistency but also promotes circular resource utilization—objectives that are fundamental to climate-adaptive agricultural systems, especially in regions experiencing water scarcity [89,90] in

Table 7. Overview of cultivation system, WUE, and land use efficiency in aeroponic systems.

Crop	Cultivation System	WUE (g/L)	Land Use Efficiency (g/m2)	Reference
Lactuca sativa L.	Aeroponics	--	612	[39]
			1092
			1104
Lactuca sativa var. crispa L.	Aeroponics	0.2	2550	[55]
Lactuca sativa L.	Aeroponics	0.5	3750	[24]
Lactuca sativa ‘Dasusheng’	Aeroponics	--	945	[5]
	Hydroponics	--	2220
	Soil cultivation	5.5	1485
Lactuca sativa ‘Nenglv Naiyou’	Aeroponics	--	1273	[5]
	Hydroponics	--	2402
	Soil cultivation	4.4	1182

.

3.3. Sustainability Benefits of Aeroponics

From the standpoint of sustainability management, aeroponics has emerged as a highly efficient and resource-conserving cultivation method that substantially enhances agricultural output while simultaneously minimizing environmental impacts. Comprehensive, technology-oriented analyses have demonstrated that the incorporation of Internet-of-Things frameworks, advanced sensor networks, and machine learning-based automation significantly refines the accuracy of nutrient administration and optimizes water utilization by employing closed-loop control of misting cycles and data-informed nutrient allocation. These technological innovations have markedly improved the operational dependability of aeroponic systems in controlled environments [36,91].

Empirical and engineering investigations have further revealed that fine-tuning mist droplet parameters—specifically, droplet size in conjunction with nozzle design and pressure settings—augments root exposure, enhances oxygen diffusion, and accelerates nutrient absorption rates, thereby promoting more rapid development and superior crop quality, particularly in sensitive plant species. Although the adoption of aeroponics entails elevated upfront investment and increased operational sophistication, recent implementations of modular, sensor-integrated aeroponic systems have demonstrated their practicality for urban farming and their potential to bolster climate-adaptive food production within limited spatial environments [64,92].

Life cycle assessment research has shown that aeroponic containerized farms, when operated with renewable energy sources, can achieve dramatically reduced greenhouse gas emissions and lower aggregate resource use compared to traditional soil-based agriculture, highlighting the critical influence of energy sourcing on environmental outcomes. Additional LCA studies of controlled environment agriculture have confirmed that electricity consumption—most notably for artificial lighting—constitutes the principal factor affecting climate-related impacts, thus integrating aeroponics with low-carbon energy is essential for achieving optimal sustainability metrics [34,93].

Collectively, the academic literature substantiates that aeroponics represents a robust solution when the management of energy, water, and nutrients is holistically coordinated—specifically through the use of renewable energy, continuous monitoring and recirculation, and AI-driven control—thereby coupling enhanced productivity with quantifiable environmental advantages [34,91].

The analysis summarized in

Table 8. Perspectives on aeroponics life cycle analyses.

Author/Year	System/Crop	Functional Unit	Electricity/Scenario	GHG (kg CO2e per kg)	Comparison vs. Soil/Conventional
[34]	Aeroponic container farm (UK); pea-shoot microgreens	1 kg edible product	2021 UK grid; scenario with 100% renewables	1.52 (UK grid); ~0.30 with renewables (~80% reduction)	With renewables, lower than UK’s imported vegetable supply chains
[95]	On-site modular cabinet vertical farm; lettuce and basil	1 kg edible produce at point of use	Swedish low-carbon grid; scenarios incl. hydro/wind mix and infrastructure allocation	Lettuce 0.78–1.18; Basil 1.45–2.12	Similar to or lower than imported; local summer open-field lower
[20]	Container-based vertical farm; lettuce	1 kg lettuce supplied to cafeteria	Swedish grid baseline; Nordic mix increases ~18%	1.24 (baseline)	Similar or lower than imported most months; local summer soil-grown lower

demonstrates that scholars have consistently acknowledged that life cycle assessments (LCAs) of aeroponic and container-based cultivation systems reveal these approaches can achieve competitive or even reduced climate impacts, particularly when the electricity utilized is less carbon-intensive and when accounting for the displacement of transportation emissions. For instance, in the United Kingdom, an aeroponic container system was found to emit 1.52 kg CO₂e per kg of produce when powered by the national grid, a value that dropped to approximately 0.30 kg CO₂e/kg (dropped by 80%) when renewable energy sources (solar) were employed, thereby emphasizing the critical role of energy sourcing. Similarly, Swedish cabinet-based farms reported emissions of 0.78–1.18 kg CO₂e/kg for lettuce and 1.45–2.12 kg CO₂e/kg for basil, which were either comparable to or lower than those associated with imported produce; however, emissions from local open-field production during summer remained the lowest. An additional study focusing on an IKEA container farm estimated emissions at approximately 1.24 kg CO₂e/kg, with the use of Nordic electricity mixes increasing the environmental impact by approximately 18%, and with lighting and ventilation identified as major contributors to the total emissions. Comparative analyses have highlighted that soilless cultivation systems do not inherently offer environmental advantages unless powered by low-carbon electricity and assessed within well-defined system boundaries. From an ecological standpoint, aeroponic systems are advantageous for their capacity to conserve water, incorporate renewable energy, and support the transition toward carbon-neutral agricultural methodologies. Furthermore, a substantial body of research has underscored the pivotal role of aeroponics in the context of vertical farming and the production of high-value crops [94], thereby strengthening the argument for its potential to drive the evolution of sustainable food systems in the coming years, as depicted in Figure 3.

3.4. Water Footprint Reduction

From the perspective of sustainability management, aeroponics has been identified as a closed-loop cultivation system that substantially improves water stewardship while maintaining high levels of productivity. In experiments conducted under controlled environmental conditions, soilless cultivation methods have demonstrated significant reductions in water consumption compared to traditional soil-based agriculture; for example, life cycle assessments for lettuce indicate water use of approximately 20 L kg⁻¹ in recirculating systems, in contrast to about 250 L kg⁻¹ in conventional field production, thereby emphasizing the potential for an order-of-magnitude decrease in water requirements through reuse and targeted application [96]. Within the context of vertical farming, aeroponics has further enhanced WUE relative to ebb-and-flow irrigation systems; the incorporation of condensate recovery from dehumidification processes led to a reduction in supplementary water needs by nearly 67% and an increase in WUE of up to 200%, which underscores the significance of implementing circular water management strategies [76]. Recent literature reviews have consistently reported that recirculating soilless systems can achieve reductions in water use exceeding 90%, provided that there is a stringent regulation of parameters such as pH, electrical conductivity, droplet size, and effective prevention of leaks [31].

From an operational standpoint, the recirculation of nutrient solutions in aeroponics minimizes the discharge of water, fertilizers, and crop protection chemicals; however, it necessitates continuous monitoring to prevent ionic imbalances and micronutrient depletion across multiple cycles—a critical consideration for the responsible scaling of these systems [46]. Collectively, these results suggest that aeroponics, when integrated with closed-loop water management and data-driven environmental regulation, promotes both yield consistency and resource efficiency. This methodology is therefore well-suited to advancing urban sustainability goals in regions facing water scarcity or limited spatial resources, contingent upon the maintenance of energy efficiency and system reliability to uphold the principles of circularity, as summarized in

Table 9. A comparative summary of water footprint efficiency and sustainability in aeroponic cultivation systems.

Author	Sustainability Focus	Water Circularity Efficiency	Water Footprint	Methodology
[15]	Systematically evaluated aeroponics as a sustainable practice through the TAISA model.	Highlighted closed-loop nutrient and water cycles in advanced aeroponic systems.	Water savings of up to 98% compared to traditional agriculture were reported.	Systematic literature review of 47 studies, structured by technology integration levels.
[31]	Compared resource use efficiency of hydroponics and aeroponics to assess environmental impact.	Demonstrated 90–95% water recycling rates in aeroponic setups under controlled conditions.	Aeroponics required 70% less water than hydroponics in specific tests.	Experimental comparison using standardized nutrient application and flow control.
[97]	Assessed life cycle sustainability of aeroponics versus other cultivation methods.	Identified significant reductions in water inputs compared to soil-based agriculture.	Water footprint of aeroponics was 1.2 L/kg yield vs. 15–20 L/kg in soil systems.	Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) involving cradle-to-farm-gate boundaries.
[90]	Developed a smart inflatable system to minimize energy and material usage.	Achieved up to 95% water savings through recirculated misting design.	Water consumption was reduced to 2–5% of conventional practices.	Prototype-based empirical testing within a sealed cultivation chamber.
[98]	Reviewed sustainable aspects of soilless cultivation with an emphasis on water reuse.	Reported water recovery rates exceeding 85% across multiple system designs.	Documented a consistent 85–90% water reuse efficiency across trials.	Meta-analysis of published datasets from controlled environment agriculture.

.

3.5. Recent Advancements in Aeroponic Technology

Recent breakthroughs in aeroponic cultivation technologies have substantially improved the operational efficiency, accuracy, and environmental sustainability of soilless agricultural systems. The incorporation of Internet-of-Things (IoT) sensors alongside AI-based algorithms within advanced aeroponic platforms enables dynamic optimization of nutrient administration and continuous, real-time adjustment of environmental variables [64], thereby significantly reducing unnecessary resource consumption. Moreover, the application of plasma-activated mist and water methodologies enhances the availability of nutrients and stabilizes microbial communities, while simultaneously facilitating nitrogen fixation to address nutrient limitations commonly encountered in aeroponic cultivation. Implementation of LED lighting systems with tailored spectral outputs has decreased overall energy usage and improved photosynthetic performance, thus promoting the viability of indoor and vertical agriculture with a reduced ecological impact. In addition, the utilization of biodegradable substrates as alternatives to conventional plastic-based root support matrices has further advanced environmental sustainability [18]. Furthermore, automated nutrient management platforms powered by AI-driven dosing protocols have been introduced to ensure sustained plant vitality and to support scalability in large-scale commercial aeroponic production, as depicted in Figure 5.

From a sustainability management perspective, recent scholarly work indicated that the co-deployment of aeroponics with renewable energy simultaneously enhanced productivity and reduced environmental footprints. In urban rooftop applications, co-locating photovoltaics and aeroponic units within integrated space–energy–water frameworks demonstrated that limited areas could deliver both food and green electricity, thereby mitigating risks in the food–energy nexus [99]. Life-cycle assessments further corroborated that electricity use was the principal hotspot in controlled-environment agriculture; when containerized aeroponic systems operated on low-carbon power were compared with conventional supply chains, product-level greenhouse-gas emissions declined substantially, underscoring the decisive role of the energy mix in environmental performance [90]. From a systems-engineering standpoint, sealed or inflatable smart-aeroponic farms improved resource circularity through leak minimization, recovery, and precision misting, and were well suited for scaling in space-constrained urban contexts. In parallel, Artificial Intelligence of Things architectures that coupled dense sensor networks with machine-learning optimization enabled real-time tuning of misting schedules and nutrient dosing, while coordinating on-site storage with variable renewable supply; these capabilities stabilized yields and curtailed emissions and effluent [91]. Taken together, the literature supported an integrated governance model in which renewable-powered operations, closed-loop recovery of water and nutrients, and AI-assisted environmental control were co-optimized, positioning aeroponics as a climate-resilient and sustainable solution for cities and arid regions.

To conclude, the aeroponic cultivation method constitutes an innovative advancement in agricultural science, offering robust solutions to the multifaceted issues arising from climate change and fostering both environmental sustainability and optimal resource utilization. Its seamless integration with cutting-edge technologies and alignment with contemporary agricultural trends significantly augment its flexibility and potential for widespread adoption, thereby establishing aeroponics as an indispensable component in the ongoing transformation of the global agricultural landscape.

4. Discussion

This study systematically identified key thematic domains through an exhaustive review of the academic literature, with a concentrated focus on aeroponics as the central criterion for journal article selection. By leveraging a purpose-built AI server, which integrates advanced neural network-based search functionalities and comparative analytical frameworks, the research efficiently pinpointed publications and subject areas exhibiting substantial similarity to the aeroponics field. The extracted data were then utilized to distill the principal attributes and thematic patterns characterizing the discipline.

The AI-enabled platform enabled the collection of 1172 scholarly articles relevant to the intersecting themes of “net-zero emissions” and “cultivation.” Within this corpus, 322 articles contained both “aeroponic” and “agriculture” in their titles; 217 works provided comparative analyses between aeroponic and hydroponic methodologies, and 173 studies contrasted aeroponic systems with aquaponic approaches. The frequent recurrence of “aeroponic” in both titles and keyword lists underscores the significant potential for advancement within this research sector.

Keyword analysis of the 1172 articles indicated that 427 publications referenced “agriculture,” 341 included the descriptors “urban” or “indoor,” and 271 mentioned “lettuce.” These results demonstrate that scholarly investigations into aeroponics predominantly occur within urban or indoor cultivation paradigms, mirroring broader societal movements toward sustainable urban agriculture. Although recent efforts have aimed to adapt aeroponic techniques for outdoor or greenhouse applications, economic limitations have restricted widespread adoption; only 78 articles provided comprehensive examinations of outdoor aeroponic practices. This pattern suggests that urban environments continue to represent the most economically sustainable and conceptually congruent context for aeroponic agriculture.

In addition, the term “temperature” appeared with notable frequency in aeroponics-related literature, signifying that thermal regulation constitutes a pivotal determinant of both the nutritional value and commercial viability of crops produced in urban contexts. Proper management of environmental temperature is perceived to enhance product quality and consumer acceptance, thereby reinforcing the position of aeroponics as a promising solution for urban food production systems.

Following the protocols established by the custom AI server, the study identified and retrieved 78 full-text articles that specifically addressed variables impacting crop growth regulation in agricultural aeroponic systems. These works, representing the most influential contributions from the past ten years, were employed to develop an analytical repository using the NVivo software platform. After removing commonly used conjunctions, prepositions, and pronouns, the research applied a suite of analytical techniques—including word cloud visualization, word matrix construction, hierarchical dendrogram generation, and cluster analysis—to derive meaningful insights. The analytical workflow is illustrated in Figure 6.

4.1. Word Cloud

The word cloud technique functioned as a graphical representation tool within the domain of textual analysis, enabling the visualization of the relative frequency and importance of terms present in a specific corpus. Within this graphical display, individual words appeared in distinct font sizes, where increased font size corresponded to greater term frequency. The construction of the word cloud entailed multiple procedural steps, such as the extraction of relevant terms, elimination of frequent stop words, computation of term frequencies, and the incorporation of weighting methods like Term Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency. This methodological framework enabled both scholars and practitioners to rapidly discern salient terms embedded in the text and offered analytical perspectives that could inform subsequent research trajectories.

Based on the quantitative analysis produced by NVivo, a total of 78 scholarly articles were examined, collectively comprising 405,331 words. To ensure analytical uniformity, lexemes sharing identical roots or exhibiting morphological variations were consolidated; for example, the words “aeroponics” and “aeroponic” were both standardized to the root term “aeroponic” to facilitate accurate lexical analysis across diverse grammatical categories.

The most frequently occurring term was “plants,” with a total of 4271 mentions, followed by “waters,” which appeared 2119 times. “Aeroponics” occupied the third position with 2115 occurrences, followed by “growth” (1559 instances), “nutrient” (1519), “agricultures” (1351), and “urbanization” (861). These findings are depicted visually in Figure 7.

The findings of the study indicated that the keywords “nutrient,” “plants,” “water,” and “growth” were prominently featured across the scholarly literature. The recurrent association of renewable energy concepts with aeroponic systems highlights the importance of these variables as essential parameters for system regulation. In particular, water-related variables included indicators such as pH levels and EC, whereas nutrient-related parameters comprised elements like nitrogen and calcium concentrations. Moreover, conditions influencing plant growth were associated with environmental factors, including temperature, water accessibility, humidity, and light intensity. These insights are consistent with the conclusions drawn from the preceding deductive review of the literature.

Therefore, it is advised that subsequent research in this domain should focus on the comprehensive examination of the concepts “nutrient,” “plants,” “water,” and “growth.” For initial literature reviews and thematic analyses, scholars are encouraged to employ search terms such as “agriculture,” “aeroponics,” “nutrient,” “plants,” “water,” and “growth” to optimize the identification of relevant research.

4.2. Term-Document Matrix

The word matrix, a widely adopted data structure in the domains of text analysis and natural language processing, is typically conceptualized as a two-dimensional array wherein each row signifies a distinct lexical item and each column corresponds to an individual document. The entries within this matrix reflect either the raw occurrence counts or weighted metrics of the respective terms, thereby elucidating the distributional patterns of vocabulary across the entire textual dataset. This methodological framework is integral to numerous applications in text mining and machine learning. The process of constructing such a matrix generally encompasses multiple phases, including the identification and selection of relevant terms, the quantification of their frequencies or assignment of weights, and the systematic organization of these values into the final matrix structure. The resulting matrix facilitates the visualization and comparative assessment of the prominence of each word throughout the collection of documents, where larger matrix values denote a higher degree of relevance or significance in the context of the analysis.

Drawing upon the statistical data produced by NVivo, the word matrix analysis identified a total of 100 relevant terms. Among these, “plants” was identified as the most prevalent term, constituting 1.05% of the aggregate word frequency within the analyzed domain-specific literature. The term “waters” followed, accounting for 0.52% of the total, while “aquaponics” was observed at 0.519%. Additional frequently occurring terms included “growth” (0.38%), “nutrient” (0.37%), and “agricultures” (0.33%). An overview of these findings is succinctly presented in Figure 8.

The data depicted in Figure 8 demonstrates that, after eliminating conjunctions, prepositions, and pronouns, the word “plants” appears as the most prevalent lexical item. This observation indicates that the central focus of aeroponics-related research is predominantly directed toward the enhancement of crop development. Considering that aeroponics represents a cutting-edge agricultural methodology with particular relevance to urban environments, the frequent occurrence of “plants” underscores its pivotal role in this area of study.

Accordingly, it is unnecessary to alter the established set of target keywords or to adjust the analytical framework employed by the AI server at this stage. However, for subsequent in-depth investigations, it is essential to examine the relationships among principal concepts, such as “nutrient,” “plants,” “waters,” and “growth,” since these associations may elucidate the thematic structure and coherence within the discipline.

4.3. Word Tree Diagram

The concept of a “dendrogram” pertains to a hierarchical graphical representation that delineates the interconnections among terms in a structure resembling a tree. Within this schematic, the leftmost segment signifies the root, which represents the initial point of the dataset, whereas the rightmost segment illustrates the leaves, corresponding to the most relevant keywords. In this context, elevated word identification numbers are indicative of increased importance. The principal function of the dendrogram lies in its ability to statistically discern keywords that occur with high frequency in the corpus; such terms are generally considered to possess greater significance within the scholarly domain and may serve as a basis for subsequent research directions.

In the present investigation, a total of 1172 scholarly articles were examined, from which 78 publications of high relevance were selected for further analysis. After systematically removing ubiquitous function words—including conjunctions, prepositions, and pronouns—it was established that the lexicon pertinent to aeroponic research could be systematically divided into two main clusters: terms related to cultivation control and those pertaining to environmental factors.

The cultivation control cluster comprised vocabulary associated with aspects such as plant development, water management, nutrient provision, and crop species, all of which were frequently referenced within the literature. In contrast, the environmental cluster was predominantly characterized by terminology connected to green energy initiatives and engineering implementations. The outcomes of this categorization are graphically depicted in Figure 9.

The findings indicated that the lexical items “plants,” “growth,” “waters,” “agricultures,” “urban,” and “nutrient” appeared with high frequency throughout multiple sections of the analyzed texts. Significantly, “plants” and “growth” were grouped within Cluster Group 9, and their relatively high word ID scores suggest these terms are especially salient within the scholarly discourse of the field.

In contrast, the terms “waters,” “agricultures,” and “urban” were allocated to Cluster Group 8, reflecting a slightly diminished, yet still notable, degree of relevance. The term “nutrient” was placed in Cluster Group 5, denoting a moderate level of importance in the context of aeroponic studies. Within this grouping, “hydroponic” was also observed to co-occur, suggesting that comparative research between aeroponic and hydroponic systems frequently centers on nutrient-related dimensions.

The identification of these keywords elucidated distinctive lexical trends within the research area and established a solid foundation for constructing effective search strategies and selecting pertinent article descriptors. Since these results were obtained through lexical analysis utilizing NVivo, it is advisable for subsequent researchers focusing on aeroponic topics to initiate their inquiries by targeting the thematic domains linked to “plants,” “growth,” “waters,” “agricultures,” “urban,” and “nutrient.”

4.4. Cluster Analysis

Cluster analysis represents a fundamental statistical methodology that is widely applied in numerous scientific fields, such as machine learning, data mining, and bioinformatics. The central aim of this approach is to systematically partition entities sharing similar attributes into distinct groups known as clusters, ensuring that intra-cluster members demonstrate high degrees of similarity—whether in terms of proximity, features, or behavior—while maintaining clear differentiation from those in other clusters. Originating from the principles of taxonomy and subsequently refined through mathematical formalization, cluster analysis operates independently of pre-existing classification frameworks, enabling objective grouping based solely on the intrinsic patterns present within the dataset. This analytic strategy finds broad utility, including but not limited to customer segmentation in commercial enterprises, gene grouping in biomedical investigations, and the identification of analogous patterns in geographic studies. Throughout the clustering procedure, individual data elements are systematically assigned to groups according to their degree of similarity, with closely related items aggregated together and dissimilar items distributed into separate clusters. As a result, cluster analysis serves as a pivotal tool for both descriptive and classificatory purposes in data-driven research.

Based on the statistical outcomes generated via NVivo analysis of a curated selection of 78 scholarly articles, a conspicuous green sphere was observed marginally above the midpoint of the clustering visualization, denoting the most prevalently cited term, “plants.” This keyword appeared in 77 articles and accounted for a cumulative total of 4247 references. In close proximity, a moderately sized blue sphere labeled “aeroponic” was identified in all 78 articles, with 2115 references, signifying a robust association between the term “aeroponic” and the principal research theme, thereby obviating the need for further modification of keyword criteria within the AI analytical platform.

Additionally, situated beneath the “aeroponic” node, a comparably sized brown sphere labeled “nutrient” was centrally located within the diagram. This term was detected in 41 articles, contributing 860 references, which implies that “nutrient” possesses a significance analogous to “aeroponic” within the examined research context. This observation highlights the essential function of nutrient solution regulation in optimizing plant development in aeroponic cultivation systems, especially given that the ratio of nutrients to water exerts a direct influence on pH balance and EC.

Accordingly, it is advised that future investigations in this field focus on the proportion of water to nutrients administered to crops, as this variable is critical for modulating plant growth and advancing the overarching aims of the current research. The outcomes of the clustering analysis are visually depicted in Figure 10.

The analysis depicted in Figure 10 indicates the existence of a distinct reddish-brown sphere, labeled as “lights,” positioned adjacent to the central “nutrient” node on the right side. This keyword appeared in 70 academic publications, with a cumulative total of 802 citations. The related term “illumination” implies that the management of light sources is a critical factor in the optimization of crop growth within aeroponic systems. Although aeroponic cultivation is commonly implemented in indoor or shaded environments where insufficient lighting is a typical constraint, much of the extant literature has overlooked the quantitative assessment of illumination parameters.

Located above the “nutrient” node, a prominent light purple sphere designated as “temperature” was observed, which was referenced in 75 publications and included 1336 citations. This finding reinforces the perspective that cultivation conducted in shaded or indoor environments generally results in temperature conditions that are lower than the surrounding ambient temperature, a factor frequently considered as the norm and thus often neglected in scholarly analyses.

In the upper right section, a sizable purple sphere marked “humidity” was identified, appearing in 60 publications and associated with 534 citations. Since humidity exerts a direct influence on the water status of crops grown within aeroponic systems, it stands out as a crucial environmental parameter that merits heightened attention from the research community.

Therefore, it is advised that subsequent research endeavors incorporate reference metrics related to “plants,” “nutrient,” “temperature,” “illumination,” and “humidity” to ensure comprehensive consideration of the principal variables essential for advancing the study of aeroponic cultivation.

By leveraging the analytical capabilities of NVivo, such as word clouds, matrices, dendrograms, and cluster analysis, the research systematically investigated the approaches adopted by different scholars in reporting numerical parameters pertinent to aeroponics. The results yielded an organized synthesis of the principal quantitative values cited in existing studies, thereby elucidating the essential variables that warrant attention in the design of future experimental research. This analytical framework was intended to facilitate subsequent scholars in acquiring a swift and thorough comprehension of the aeroponics research landscape.

4.5. Vocabulary Construction

The initial analysis conducted using NVivo software revealed key recurring terms through the word cloud and word matrix models, including “agriculture,” “aeroponic,” “nutrient,” “plants,” “water,” and “growth.” Among these, “nutrient,” “plants,” “water,” and “growth” emerged as the fundamental components of the preliminary research focus. In the subsequent second-level analysis utilizing the word dendrogram, the term “urban” was introduced, indicating that a majority of aeroponic experiments were performed in urban settings. Following this, cluster analysis identified additional parameters that are frequently examined in the literature, specifically “temperature,” “illumination,” and “humidity,” which are standard measurements in research studies. The integration of findings from the NVivo analysis resulted in a comprehensive list of relevant terms, which included “agriculture,” “aeroponic,” “nutrient,” “plants,” “water,” “growth,” “urban,” “temperature,” “illumination,” and “humidity.” The diversity of quantitative parameters, experimental contexts, and growth-related factors contributed to a vocabulary set characterized by a considerable degree of complexity. Employing inductive reasoning, this study further identified critical research variables that are often highlighted in the literature, such as crop type, cultivation system, nutrient solution composition, pH levels, temperature, humidity, and light intensity. As depicted in Figure 11, these findings were organized into four primary thematic categories: growing techniques, growth conditions, external conditions, and crop. Within the category of growing techniques, classifications included aeroponic, aquaponic, and hydroponic systems, which are frequently compared in aeroponics-related research. The growth conditions category comprised humidity, illumination, temperature, and water, with the latter often associated with pH data. The external conditions category encompassed location and nutrient, where “location” typically referred to indoor or urban environments, and “nutrient” was frequently linked to essential elements such as calcium and nitrogen. Finally, in the crop category, the most commonly studied species included berry, cucumber, herb, lettuce, pepper, and tomato, as these crops were frequently selected to assess growth performance within aeroponic systems.

This research extracted significant findings and research elements from the prior analysis to enhance the development of a comprehensive set of keywords. These keywords were then employed to perform a full-text search within NVivo, facilitating the evaluation of their relative frequency and proportion within the corpus.

4.6. Keyword Construction

The findings from the lexical correlation analysis indicated that, in addition to “aeroponic,” which directly pertains to the research domain, NVivo identified several pertinent keywords, including “hydroponic,” “humidity,” “waters,” “pH,” “EC,” “temperature,” “nutrient,” “nitrogen,” and “lettuce.” Given that “pH” and “EC” are parameters specifically utilized for the evaluation of water quality, they were excluded from consideration as independent variables in the subsequent analytical phases.

While the terms “growth” and “agriculture” were noted to occur with relatively high frequency, they represent broader thematic elements encompassing various growing techniques and conditions. Consequently, to more accurately capture the specificity of the aeroponics research domain, the keywords selected for the next analytical phase included “hydroponic,” “humidity,” “waters,” and “temperature.”

To facilitate a more organized and systematic approach, these keywords were categorized into four distinct groups, as illustrated in Figure 12:

• Cultivation Method—hydroponic.
• Growth Factors—humidity, waters, temperature.
• Nutrient Variables—nutrient, nitrogen.
• Crop Type—lettuce Third bullet.

Subsequent to the establishment of the keyword set, a comprehensive analysis of these keywords was conducted utilizing the NVivo database. Out of the 78 articles reviewed, the term “hydroponic” was identified in 65 articles, yielding 1458 coded reference points; “temperature” appeared in 75 articles with 1336 reference points; “waters” was present in 65 articles with 653 reference points; “humidity” was noted in 60 articles with 534 reference points; “nitrogen” was referenced in 38 articles with 782 reference points; and “lettuce” was found in 47 articles with 764 reference points.

The analysis indicated that “hydroponic” was frequently employed as a comparative cultivation method in studies examining aeroponic systems. Furthermore, the literature in this domain predominantly concentrated on factors such as temperature, water quality, humidity, nutrient levels, and lettuce cultivation, with a particular emphasis on nitrogen as a critical nutrient indicator. The insights derived from the NVivo database substantiated the significance of the selected keywords, which were thus retained as the foundational terminology throughout this research.

Based on the analysis conducted using NVivo, the distribution of keyword prevalence in the aeroponic literature is as follows: “aeroponic” constituted 33.78%, followed by “temperature” at 21.34%, “waters” at 10.43%, “humidity” at 8.53%, “nutrient” at 13.74%, and “lettuce” at 12.2%. A comprehensive summary of these findings is presented in Figure 13.

The analysis revealed that the six keywords—namely aeroponic, temperature, waters, humidity, nutrient, and lettuce—were collectively cited in all 78 articles, accounting for 96.15% of the total corpus of 75 selected documents. This significant frequency of occurrence highlights their importance and relevance as specialized terms within the field of aeroponics research. Consequently, these keywords establish a solid foundation for future scholars or interested parties seeking to attain a comprehensive understanding of the discipline and to identify potential avenues for further research.

According to the dependency hierarchy among the keywords, as depicted in Figure 14, “aeroponic” is situated at the primary tier, functioning as the central anchor term within this research domain. “Temperature” is positioned at the second tier, followed by “nutrient” at the third tier, and “waters” and “humidity” at the fourth tier. Although “waters” and “humidity” are comparatively less prominent, they still provide valuable pathways for literature retrieval and thematic investigation. As illustrated in Figure 13 “aeroponic” alone constituted 97.3% of the keyword usage at the article level, underscoring its primacy as a starting point for keyword-based literature searches. Furthermore, within articles that addressed “aeroponic,” “temperature” frequently co-occurred, while “nutrient” exhibited a stronger hierarchical dependency in relation to “waters” and “humidity.” This indicates that “temperature” and “aeroponic” are more closely associated with “nutrient” than with the latter two variables, thereby affirming their greater structural significance within the aeroponics keyword framework.

Maintaining crop-specific N–P–K supply is not only a yield determinant but also a driver of solution EC and thus the frequency of pH/ionic adjustments in closed-loop aeroponics. When nitrogen supply is increased to accelerate biomass accumulation, EC typically rises, potentially elevating osmotic stress risk and increasing the need for corrective dosing and pumping/monitoring operations. Accordingly, nutrient management should be evaluated as a coupled WEN control problem rather than a standalone agronomic parameter. This coupling is particularly relevant to food security because stable nutrient delivery under water-scarce conditions enables predictable production, but only if the added energy and monitoring burden is kept within feasible limits. Therefore, we add a summary table (Supplementary database) reporting N:P:K regimes (or concentrations where ratios are not reported), pH/EC setpoints, yield outcomes, and associated water/energy performance in

Table 10. A summary of nutrient regimens in aeroponics, accompanied by corresponding yield metrics and evaluations of water and energy efficiency.

Study	WUE (%)	Yield Improvement (%)	Energy Use (kWh kg−1)	GHG Reduction (%)	Dominant Crops	N, P, K Regimes	pH	EC	Region/Climate Zone
[100]	95	110	-	-	Lettuce	N = 105, P = 15.5, K = 117 mg/L	6	1.12 mS/cm	Greece/Transitional; often described near the Csa/Cfa boundary
[101]	89	210	-	-	Lettuce	NPK ratio 4:1:3	6.05–6.95	1.86–2.45 dS/m	China/Humid subtropical monsoon-influenced; commonly labeled Cwa/Cfa
[34]	-	-	4.9	80%	Pea shoots (microgreens)	NPK ratio 5:2:4	-	-	UK-wide climate
[89]	92	175	-	-	Lettuce	N-NO3: 14 mM; N-NH4: 4.4 mM; P: 1.0 mM; K: 5.0 mM	6.5 ± 0.2	2.3 dS/m ± 0.2	Italy/Bologna is typically classified as humid subtropical (Cfa)
[102]	62–133	225%	-	-	Potato (minitubers)	N 0.16; P 0.15; K 0.27 (g/L)	6.2	0.597 mS/cm	Czech Republic/Temperate oceanic (Cfb)
[103]	115	120	-	-	Lettuce; green onion	NPK ratio 6:1:8	5.8–6.2	2.0 ± 0.2 mS/cm	China/Monsoon-influenced humid continental (Dwa)

Quantitative evidence in this manuscript indicates that closed-loop soilless cultivation can markedly reduce water demand (e.g., ~20 L kg⁻¹ versus ~250 L kg⁻¹ for lettuce, implying ~92% reduction). However, the net sustainability outcome depends on electricity sourcing: for containerized aeroponic farms, climate impacts can decrease from 1.52 to ~0.30 kg CO₂e kg⁻¹ when renewable electricity replaces grid power (~80% reduction). We further expand circular-economy pathways by integrating treated municipal wastewater reuse evidence, where 80–90% of irrigation water was recycled via closed-loop use of constructed-wetland effluent in arid-region aeroponics. Beyond wastewater, we discuss additional waste streams (nutrient residuals, plant residues, packaging) and outline mitigation strategies (nutrient recovery, composting/bioconversion, and recyclable packaging), emphasizing that data transparency is required for system-level accounting.

.

5. Conclusions

This review employed inductive reasoning and bibliometric analysis to systematically examine the evolution, operational performance, and sustainability implications of aeroponic cultivation systems. The synthesis of current evidence demonstrates that the optimization of fundamental operational parameters—including nutrient formulation, pH, electrical conductivity, temperature, humidity, crop species, and growth duration—plays a decisive role in determining system efficiency and overall crop productivity.

5.1. Key Findings

1.

Resource Efficiency and Water Management

Aeroponic systems achieve significant reductions in water and nutrient losses through closed-loop recirculation, condensate recovery, and controlled nutrient delivery. To maintain circularity and prevent ionic imbalance, widespread implementation of sensor-based monitoring for pH, EC, and ion-speciation is strongly recommended. Such measures are central to advancing sustainable water management under controlled-environment agriculture.

2.

Energy Use and Carbon Footprint

Life-cycle assessment studies consistently show that the environmental burden of aeroponics is highly dependent on the energy source powering the system. Integration with low-carbon electricity, particularly through onsite solar or other renewable energy technologies, is essential for minimizing greenhouse gas emissions—with reported reductions of up to 80%—and for strengthening long-term system sustainability.

3.

Environmental Control and AI Integration

Temperature, humidity, and misting frequency are critical determinants of plant vigor, nutrient uptake, and aeroponic efficiency. Although precise environmental regulation can enhance yield performance, it also increases energy demand. Therefore, coupling energy-efficient climate control systems with AI-driven adaptive scheduling is recommended to balance productivity, operational stability, and energy optimization.

4.

Spatial Optimization and Urban Applications

Modular and multi-tier aeroponic architectures greatly enhance spatial utilization, making them well-suited for urban areas with restricted access to arable land. When combined with intelligent lighting systems and automated nutrient delivery, these designs can significantly increase production capacity while improving resource efficiency and food security in densely populated regions.

5.2. Bibliometric Insights

An AI-assisted NVivo analysis of 1172 scholarly publications on intelligent cultivation identified 78 studies focused specifically on aeroponics. Text mining and cluster analysis revealed five dominant and highly interconnected keywords—aeroponic, humidity, water, temperature, and nutrient. Water was frequently associated with pH and EC, while nutrients strongly correlated with nitrogen-based formulations. These findings suggest adopting these five terms as standardized descriptors for future aeroponics research. Neural network-based hierarchical mapping further identified aeroponic as the central node, followed sequentially by temperature, water, and humidity, underscoring their prominence in shaping current research trajectories.

5.3. Technological Outlook

The merging advancements in automation, artificial intelligence, Internet-of-Things (IoT) integration, and renewable energy systems are accelerating the development of next-generation aeroponic technologies. Innovations such as plasma-activated water for nutrient enhancement, modular vertical farming for scalable urban production, and blockchain-enabled nutrient tracking systems are contributing to improved transparency, resilience, and sustainability within controlled-environment agriculture. These evolving trends and their impacts on aeroponic development are illustrated in Figure 15.