Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Total Environment Research Themes

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/totert

Seaweeds cultivation methods and their role in climate mitigation and

environmental cleanup
Durga Prasad Behera a, Viral Vadodariya a, Veeraprakasam Veeragurunathan b, Sivaraj Sigamani c,⇑,
Meivelu Moovendhan c, Ramachandran Srinivasan c, Prabhu Kolandhasamy d, Kapilkumar Nivrutti Ingle a,e,⇑
a
Gujarat Institute of Desert Ecology, Bhuj, Gujarat, India
b
CSIR-CSMCRI-Marine Algal Research Station, Mandapam, Tamil Nadu, India
c
Centre for Ocean Research, Col. Dr. Jeppiaar Research Park, Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai, India
d
Department of Marine Sciences, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli, India
e
Department of Ecology, University of Szeged, Hungary

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Seaweed cultivation is an emerging sector of food production that can full fill the future food demand of the
Seaweed farming growing population. Considering the importance, Asia is home to seven of the top ten seaweed‐producing
Climate mitigation nations, and Asian countries contributed 99.1% of all seaweed cultivated for food. Besides, it can reduce the
Carbon sequestration carbon budget of the ocean through seaweed farms and act as a CO2 sink. In the context of climate change mit-
Mitigation of CO2
igation, the seaweed culture is the energy crop, and during its entire life cycle can serve as a bio‐filter and bio‐
Environmental cleanup
extractor. The climate change effect can be reduced by farming seaweed on a commercial scale and it will pro-
tect the coastal area by decreasing the physical damage through damping wave energy. The seaweed can
reduce eutrophication by removing excess nutrients from water bodies and releasing oxygen as a byproduct
in return. The cultivation of seaweed plays an important role as the source of bioenergy for full fill the future
energy requirement and it will act as clean energy through the establishment of algal biorefinery along with the
seaweed cultivation site. Thus, the marine energy industrial sector moves further toward large‐scale expansion
of this sector by adopting energy devices to offer power for seaweed growth for biofuel operation. The current
reviews provides the evidence of seaweed farming methodology adopted by different countries, as well as their
production and output. To mitigate climate change by direct measures such as carbon sequestration, eutroph-
ication risk reduction, and bioenergy, as well as through indirect measures like supplying food for cattle and
reducing the strain on aquaculture. The US, Japan, and Germany lastly suggest the large‐scale offshore com-
mercial farming as a feasible climate change mitigation strategy.

Introduction of an ever‐increasing global population. Since agriculture is extremely

vulnerable to variability in rainfall, climate change affects both irri-
The world's population is rapidly growing according to the World gated and rain‐fed farming in a variety of ways. To fulfill the food
Resource Institute, and each country is attempting to identify alterna- demand, aquaculture is an alternate option since aquaculture is a
tive sources of food and production to meet the demands (Hunter fast‐growing sector by the end of the 20th century (Rohana et al.,
et al., 2017). One of the indicators of agricultural food production is 2009; Merino et al., 2012; Krag et al., 2015).
caused by infectious diseases (Anderson et al., 2004) or pests on the Aquaculture continues to be the most important source of aquatic
other hand (Oerke, 2006). Savary et al. (2012) testified that 20–40 % food, notably in Asian countries. Fish, on the other hand, continue
of worldwide agricultural production (terrestrial) has vanished as a the significant major aquaculture production group in terms of weight.
result of disease and pest infestations. Since 80 % of the human diet Global aquaculture production now exceeds global fish production by
is made up of earth plants (FAO, 2017) outbreaks of infectious diseases almost 18.32 million tonnes (Tacon, 2020). The aquaculture industries
in this sector are a major source of concern for food security. In terms focused their effective production against illnesses and pests that do
of food production, agricultural land capacity does not meet the needs not affect the farmed aquatic animals, if not, resulting in annual losses

⇑ Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (S. Sigamani), [email protected] (K.N. Ingle).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.totert.2022.100016
Received 5 July 2022; Revised 16 September 2022; Accepted 13 October 2022

2772-8099/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

of at least $6 billion (Stentiford et al., 2017). For example, in salmon Country-wise production of seaweed
production, the cost of controlling sea lice pests alone can result in a
9 % loss of farm revenue (Abolofia et al., 2017), whilst shrimp produc- Three of the top seven cultivated seaweeds were mostly used for
tion can lose up to 40 % of global capacity (Stentiford et al., 2017). hydrocolloid extraction, according to the food and agriculture organi-
Seaweeds are somewhat comparable to aquaculture commodities with zation for the year 2018. The species that produce carrageenans
unit values similar to those of aquatic animals and their products, include Eucheuma spp. and Kappaphycus alvarezii, and the genus Graci-
which have quite high trading values. Nevertheless, over the past five laria produced agar. Most species of seaweed utilized for human food
decades, a variety of seaweeds have been grown in a planned manner consumption include Saccharina japonica, Undaria pinnatifida, Pyropia
and have grown to be the next second‐largest aquaculture product in spp., and Sargassum fusiforme. Asian contribute highest in the seaweed
terms of quantity. (FAO, 2018). production, for example, in 2019 Asian contribution was 99.1 percent
The majority of seaweed produced globally in 2016 (FAO, 2018) from cultivation. Seven out of ten topper seaweed producing countries
was produced by red algal species. Around 42 % of seaweed produc- were Eastern or South‐eastern Asia. However, American and European
tion was contributed by the algae genera Eucheuma spp. and Kappaphy- countries contributed 1.4 percent and 0.8 percent of global seaweed
cus spp. also referred to as eucheumatoids and carrageenophytes, production respectively. The three countries that produce seaweed
respectively (FAO, 2018). They are naturally grown and processed on a large scale and with the greatest variety of species are China,
all over the world to create high‐value compound carrageenan, which Indonesia, and the Philippines (FAO, 2018). Depending on taste and
serves better in the food, beverage, and pharmaceutical industries, price, the seaweed consumption is a common practice and tradition
among other things. Carrageenophyte cultivation started in the Philip- in Southeast Asian countries whereas in European countries, it is used
pines, but four nations are currently meeting the world's demand, as food in markets of the United States (US). Seaweed believed as a
including three southeast Asian nations—the Philippines, Indonesia, nutritional food for health with strong consumer choice towards the
and Malaysia—and one African nation—Tanzania. In total, these four organic, sustainable and fair product (Chapman, Stévant, and
countries produced 44.5 % of the world’s carrageenophytes (FAO, Larssen 2015; Gomez Pinchetti 2016).
2018). At present, in the most cultivated system, the annual growth China and Indonesia are the biggest producer of seaweed (Gracilar-
rate of the world seaweed aquaculture sector has declined which ia and Pyropia) comprising 86.6 % of aggregated production (FAO,
might be due to various factors (Cottier et al., 2016) and climate 2018). Similarly, Indonesia mainly produced carrageenophytes includ-
change is one among them (Kim et al., 2017), followed by the aug- ing species Kappaphycus and Eucheuma contributing 38.7 % (FAO,
mented genetic diversity of cultivated crops (Loureiro et al., 2015) 2018). In all total, these leading five genera such as Porphyra, Saccha-
and fluctuation of the market price (Valderrama et al., 2015). The rina, Undaria, Gracilaria, and Eucheuma/Kappaphycus contribute
major aquaculture industries of the world will be affected by catas- 98 % of the world’s cultivated seaweed production (Pereira and
trophic effects of the combined output of the above factor which leads Yarish, 2008). China and Indonesia were the most important seaweed
to crop infestation with pests and infections (Stentiford et al., 2017; farming countries in 2016 and produced more than 26.01 million ton-
Bondad‐Reantaso et al., 2005). This study reviewed the seaweed culti- nes each followed by the Philippines and the Republic of Korea (2.75
vation in the context of India, also discussed the possibilities of sea- million tonnes). The countries such as the Democratic Republic of
weed farming for mitigating the impacts of global climate change Korea (0.489), Japan (0.391), Malaysia (0.206), and Tanzania
and overall environmental benefits. Sections 2, 3, and 4 are discussing (0.119) million tonnes of live weight. American countries like Chile
on seaweed farming production, and methods and commenting on the is the only country that has come in to view global scenario statistics
life cycle assessment of seaweed products. Sections 5, 6, and 7 deal tables, with 15 thousand tonnes of cultivated seaweed (FAO, 2018)
with seaweed farming and climate change mitigation, possible difficul- (Fig. 1).
ties, and finally, in section 8, we are suggesting a few recommenda- Most countries of the European Union and Africa are not involved
tions to overcome certain difficulties. in the cultivation of seaweed, except for a few countries which are very
legible in quantities. This is due to the lack of markets and high cost of
producers compare to Asian producers. As seaweed is not a part of
daily food in Europe, Africa and many countries in the world, the mar-
ket didn’t not develop from ancient time. Many of other applications of
Species-wise contribution, country production, method of seaweeds are the bequest of modern era. Brown algae Lessonia and
farming, and yield Macrocystis, carrageenophytes Sarcothalia crispata, Gigartina skotts-
bergii, and Chondracanthus chamisoii have all been used in Chile; how-
A few seaweed species are produced entirely for human consump- ever, cultivation of the species Gracilaria chilensis is only permitted in
tion worldwide, such as Undaria pinnatifida, Porphyra spp., and Cau- small quantities (Buschmann et al., 2008). By cultivating seaweed at
lerpa spp., while others, such as low‐grade products and trash from different trophic levels, the aquaculture waste has been reduced by
processing industries, are utilized as feed for abalone culture. In the the Integrated Multi‐Trophic Aquaculture (IMTA) concept in Portugal
scenario on seaweed production through farming, the top six countries (Troell et al., 2009). Although Israel uses this approach on a modest
such as China, Indonesia, Philippines, Korean Republic, Korean Demo- scale (Bolton et al., 2009), similar IMTA concepts are also applied in
cratic, and Japan, contributed the highest production from the years South Africa for Ulva cultivation (Neori et al., 2004). The exploitation
2010 to 2016. The other species cultivated in East Asia, are nori (Pyr- of natural stock in Norway has satiated the market's demand for sea-
opia and Porphyra species), Japanese kelp (Luminaire japonica), and weed. The government started several seaweed culture projects
wakame (Undaria pinnatifida). The majority of seaweeds' nutritional focused on research and pilot‐scale production to reduce the demand
value comes from their micronutrient content, which includes vita- for seaweed (Stévant et al., 2017). These projects soon moved to get
mins A, C, and B‐12 (Imchen, 2021) as well as microminerals including commercial authorization for the growth of only Saccharina latissima
iron, calcium, iodine, potassium, etc (Qin, 2018). Aside from fish, sea- in coastal waters.
weed is the only food source for naturally occurring omega‐3 long‐
chain fatty acids. The tropical seaweed species Kappaphycus alvarezii Indian context
and Eucheuma spp. have recently been grown in Indonesia as a source
of raw materials for the extraction of carrageenan. Indonesia increased India just woke up and began seaweed growing in a few coastal
its farming capacity and production output increased from 4 million areas of the Tamil Nadu state for the industry's economic potential.
tonnes in 2010 to over 11 million tonnes in 2015 and 2016. Because of their shallow, wide, and flat coastal shorelines, moderate

2
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

Fig. 1. Global production of seaweed by different countries and percentage contribution of top cultivated species.

wave action, suitable salinities, and temperatures for seaweed cultiva- CSMCRI is the Indian national institute primarily working on seaweed
tion except during the monsoon season these coastal lines have been farming is located at Bhavnagar (Gujarat), their field trials are partic-
identified by Central Salt Marine Chemical Research Institute ularly in the Gujarat coastal area. The remote location of CSMCRI is
(CSMCRI) and the Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute (CMFRI) located at Mandapam (Tamil Nadu), also shows various trials of sea-
as the most suitable for seaweed cultivation. Pepsico India Holdings weed farming. However, the commercial scale cultivation of seaweed
Pvt. ltd., Gurgaon, India began the first commercial cultivation of Kap- is available predominantly in the Tamil Nadu state because of favor-
paphycus alvarezii in 2001 on the southeast coast of Tamil Nadu after able environmental conditions.
obtaining a cultivation technology license from CSIR‐CSMCRI, Bhav- Seaweed industries in India are heavily dependent on wild harvests
nagar. A contract farming model created by women's self‐help groups for phycocolloid production. The species such as Gelidiella acerosav and
(SHGs) with buy‐back commitments for seaweed was successfully Gracilaria edulisare harvested and used for agar production whereas
implemented by the corporation. the species such as Sargassum spp. and Turbinaria spp are used for algi-
The introduction of seaweed farming in many low‐income coun- nate production. In India, the harvesting of Gelidiella acerosa and Gra-
tries along their coastal area as an alternative livelihood option that cilaria edulis has depleted from 2005 to 2016 from the natural
does not have fishing resources (Sievanen et al., 2005) empowers resources due to overexploitation (Meenakshisundaram et al., 2009).
women and reduces poverty (Mantri et al., 2017). Notably, eucheuma- In India, the Kappaphycus alvarezii species is the most promising cul-
toids seaweed farming has improved the socio‐economic status of tivable species which is measurably cultivated in six coastal districts
coastal communities where other livelihood choices are limited e.g. (Cuddalore, Nagapattinam, Pudukottai, Ramanathapuram, Thoothu-
over‐exploitation, decreases, or depletes marine resources kudi and Kanyakumari) in Tamil Nadu, and expansion is underway
(Valderama, 2012). A major project on “Climate Change Mitigation in Gujarat where the commercial activities commenced in 2017 which
and Enhancing Livelihood Options through Seaweed Cultivation and was started in the year 2003 (Mantri et al., 2017). To date, the farming
Conservation ‐ A Model Development for Gujarat” has been approved activity has been experimented with along 30 locations along the
by the Climate Change Department, Gandhinagar through the Gujarat Indian coast containing 6 potential states (Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Kar-
Energy Development Agency on March 8, 2019. The project's imple- nataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Andra Pradesh) of India. After six
menting agency is the Gujarat Institute of Desert Ecology (GUIDE), a months of business establishment, the bio‐economic examination of
research organization with a Kachchh basis that focuses on arid area K. alvarezii individuals and traditional cultural behaviors revealed a
development and marine biodiversity conservation. The study aims positive internal return rate of 210 % (Zuniga‐Jara and Marin‐Riffo,
to develop a model for standardized seaweed farming on the Gujarat 2016). Between 2010 and 2016, India's commercial biomass produc-
coast, which has a long‐term impact on the management of climate tion was 4856 dry tonnes. The largest annual production of 1490
change through the sequestration of atmospheric carbon and the pro- dry tonnes was reached in 2013, and as a result of mass death the fol-
vision of livelihood opportunities for Gujarat's coastal residents. As a lowing year, it sharply decreased.

3
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

Method of seaweed farming and yield situations an alternative farming strategy like offshore culture systems
should be adopted by China, Philippines, Japan, and Korea.
Methods in use worldwide for seaweed farming
Life cycle impact analysis of seaweed-based products for climate
Typically, seaweeds were taken from wild or natural populations, change mitigation
which led to an overuse of marine resources. The native species are
domesticated by creating new farming methods to get over (Dalton The offshore cultivation of seaweed will fill the gap in farming
et al., 1995). Several factors like regeneration capacities of the thallus, areas and the shortage of food and rectify the biofuels complications
species morphology, and relationship with environmental parameters (Naik et al., 2010). Now seaweed cultivation is one of the energy crops
(temperature – irradiance –nutrients ‐ water movement) have been during its entire life cycle used as biologically filter, sorbent and
accountable for the successes of large‐scale seaweed cultivation extractor (Nabti et al., 2017; Ortiz‐Calderon et al., 2017). The carbon
(Tiwari and Troy, 2015). The cultivation methodology purely depends emission is being used as a resource for biomass production, ecosystem
on the taxonomical characteristic of seaweed species. Certain species engineering services in terms of support for cycling of nutrients, and
need a single‐step farming method through vegetative propagation regulation of climate (Overpeck and Udall, 2020). For the quantifica-
(Eucheuma, Kappaphycus, Chondrus, and Gracilaria) while some other tion of the seaweed supply chain, a holistic analysis should be fol-
species need two‐step or multistep farming, similarly, those are prolif- lowed. In this regard, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a scientific
erated from spores (Laminaria, Undaria, Porphyra, Enteromorpha) and technique that will help to understand the impact of bio‐extracted pro-
cannot survive if propagated vegetative method. Seaweeds are often duction systems on the environment and health of human well‐being
grown in one or more step farming methods, depending on how they (Seghetta et al., 2016).
are organized (e.g., clonal vs unitary organisms) (Santelices, 1999). The LCA is one of the potential tools which will help to estimate the
The fragmented vegetatively propagated clonal species, including Gra- basic environmental sustainability where the environmental shock will
cilaria and Kappaphycus, are frequently grown directly in culture sys- connect with different stages of product life across its different value
tems. Seaweed is farmed using a variety of techniques, ranging from an chain opening from the removal of raw materials to disposal or mon-
intense system (tanks or ponds) to a comprehensive open sea farming itoring of recycling of disposal (Table 3). This method has been used to
system using long lines or rafts. The maintenance of a hatchery or evaluate the environmental footstep of seaweed biostimulants. This
nursery for seaweed species like kelp, however, also constitutes indus- method is mostly focusing on estimating the biofuel from algal sources
trial cultivation for propagation. The various cultivation systems are in a sustainable manner. Very few LCA study has been worked out on
carefully tested practically, but the foremost commercially successful macroalgal biorefinery system which pays attention to energy produc-
systems are people who culture seaweeds with lower operational tion (Aresta et al., 2005; Brentner and Matthew, 2011; Alvarado‐
and capital costs (Sahoo and Yarish, 2005). Various methods such as Morales et al., 2013, Aitken et al., 2014). Similarly, there are certain
fixed off‐bottom, raft methods, net methods etc are in practice to cul- reports which determine the environmental footprint of industrially
tivate various seaweeds throughout the world (Fig. 2). All these meth- important seaweed byproducts such as alginates, biostimulants, and
ods have a few advantages as well as a few disadvantage or limitations essential oils (Pérez‐López et al., 2014, 2016; Ghosh et al., 2015,
(Table 1). For example, off‐bottom method, single raft method and Singh et al., 2016, Sharma et al., 2017; Trivedi et al., 2017).
hanging longline method are better only in shallow waters.
In a couple of decades around 100 seaweed taxa were tested in
experimentally the farming system, but only a few selected species Northern European scenario
are being commercially cultivated in the present day, out of them,
the highest taxa contribute to the global seaweed cultivation scenario By using the innovative offshore seaweed cultivation technology, a
belongs to Laminaria, Porphyra, Undaria, Eucheuma, Kappaphycus, biorefinery has been established where the seaweed is used as a key
Gracilaria. Around the world, different nations are involved in sea- biomass resource to develop the bio‐based economy, as it contains pre-
weed cultivation, but the countries like China, Indonesia, Philippines, cious constituents like nitrogen, phosphorus, and proteins (Seghetta
Korea, Japan, and Malaysia are the market leaders for the past few et al., 2016). With the use of six alternative production scenarios,
years in production. The global map of seaweed production, farmed Seghetta et al. (2016) made a comparative LCA exploit the benefits
and wild share of seaweeds is shown in the Figs. 3 & 4. Many research- and reduce trade‐offs in the performance of the environment for future
ers have proposed various techniques for commercial seaweed cultiva- macroalgal biorefineries (MABS) by converting the biomass into three
tion, and a novel seaweed is also being researched by various different products: protein‐rich content for fish feed, liquid fertilizer
techniques and nations (Fig. 5 & Table 2). for agriculture and bioethanol. In comparison with protein‐
producing technologies and other energy, biomass productivity is
highlighted as the major hot spot in the value chain. If a minor design
The yield of different experimented cultivated seaweed in India by raft change in the value chain like the use of stone in place of iron for
method bouncy to weight seeded lines, it will help to decrease human toxicity
(cancer). As an ecosystem engineered to service the life cycle assess-
The floating bamboo raft method has been adopted for pilot‐scale ment drastically improves the results.
cultivation of different cultivated species such as Gracillaria edulis
(Meenakshisundaram et al., 2009; Mantri et al., 2020; Mantri et al., Indian scenario
2015), Gracillaria dura (Mantri et al., 2020, Veeragurunathan et al.,
2015), Gelidella acerosa (Meenakshisundaram et al., 2009, Ganesan The life cycle impact assessment was conducted by Ghosh et al.
et al., 2015), Gracillaria debilis (Veeragurunathan et al., 2016; Veeragu- (2015) followed by Vijay Anand et al. (2018) on the seaweed species
runathan et al., 2019). The biomass yield of the above‐said species Kappaphycus alvarezii and Gracilaria edulis in the Indian setting
through raft cultivation is quite satisfactory and can be adopted on a (Table 1). The eight different scenarios have been proposed and com-
commercial scale to full fill the future requirement of agarophytes pared to the baseline scenario for K. alvarezii to successfully reduce the
demand. In India, various cultivation technologies have been adopted environmental implications, primarily those related to climate change.
over the last twenty years but there are certain challenges such as After price allocation, the factory gate manufacture of the pure sap
high‐temperature, epiphytic infestation, boring and fouling organisms obtained from K. alvarezii is found to be environmentally viable with
that make hindrance for its development. To overcome such alarming a carbon footprint of 118.6 kg CO2 equivalents/kilometer. The impact

4
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

Fig. 2. a-o Methods adopted for seaweed farming globally a) Gacillaria deblis (Square raft), b) Gracillaria dura (Square raft), c) Gracillaria edulis (Tringle), d)
Gelidium (Square), e) Moline Tubular net (Kappaphycus alvarezii), f) Tubular square raft method (Gracillaria edulis), g) Net pouch method G. edulis, h) Gelidium
pusillum, i) Net bag method, Gelidium pusillum j) Gracillaria edulis (Basket method), Concrete block method cylinder type (k, l) and Square type (m, n) (G. edulis,
Gelidium pusillum, G. edulis), o) G. dura.

5
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

Fig. 2 (continued)

6
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

Table 1
Seaweed cultivation methods and its advantages and disadvantages.

Sr. No Cultivation method Advantages Disadvantages

1 Floating raft Provides favorable environmental conditions, Sensitive to weather changes, more ecological risks, no uniform growth
economic, ecofriendly as well as user friendly method
2 Tube net Lower risks weather conditions, uniform growth rate, More seedling requirement, not user friendly, ecofriendly and economic method
useful in deep water with minimum infrastructure
3 Off-bottom monoline Easy to handle particularly walking of farmers during Seedling loss is more, sensitive to various environmental factors such as wind,
low tides, low cost for implementation tides, storms, etc. epiphytes control is almost impossible, difficult to remove in
case of bad weather
4 PVC pipe raft Easy to float, easy to handle Expensive method, not ecofriendly
5 Cage systems Varieties of cages are possible, advantage to tackle the Expenses are higher in terms of implementation, maintenance, possibilities of
epiphytes, sustain in the bad weather conditions biofouling etc
6 Multiple raft longline Useful for large scale production, more economic, Ecological issues can be possible (shadow effect, rise in the particular epifaunal
user friendly or epiphytic organism), risks of loss in case of bad weather
7 Spider web Useful for more production in small location, floating Epiphytic risks, sensitive to weather changes
method show more ecological benefits, possible with
polyculture

of climate change is increased by 51.8 %, 138.5 %, and 14.1 %, respec- age seaweed farming which can be a potential source of food for
tively, depending on the method of transportation used. The more human beings with no increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. The farming
environmentally friendly modes of transportation include rail or the of seaweed can play a very important role in the mitigation of climate
sea. Unexpectedly, a 25 % increase in net biomass production from change impacts directly and indirectly (Fig. 6).
200 kg to 250 kg per raft did not significantly reduce the carbon foot-
print at the factory gate (Ghosh et al., 2015). For the manufacturing of
1000 L of Gracilaria extract biostimulant, an LCA study of Gracilaria Direct mitigation measures
edulis was done to quantify various consequences across 19 environ-
mental categories (Vijay Anand et al., 2018). The environmental Carbon sequestration
impact was divided between seaweed extract and agar‐based on price Over 70 % of the surface of the Earth is covered by the seas, in
allocation. The processing module added a higher proportion of which the coastal vegetation saltmarsh, mangroves, seaweed, and sea-
impacts across multiple projected environmental impact categories grass play a substantial role in removing CO2 from the atmosphere
(electricity requirement, shed, and blow molding sub‐processes), rang- (Chung et al., 2011). Seaweeds have a higher capacity to store atmo-
ing from 65 to 99 % of the overall impacts, across the three phases that spheric CO2 than terrestrial plants (Erlania, 2015), but they are also
went into producing the extract. involved in the circulation of organic matter in a variety of marine
environments, including deep‐sea sediments, intertidal rocky regions,
and shallow beaches (Chung et al., 2013). As a playing role of produc-
Role of seaweed farming for mitigation of climate change, CO2 ers in the marine ecosystem, seaweeds are responsible for producing
sequestration, and global initiative 80 % of organic carbon which forms the base of an entire food web
from direct consumers to higher tropic levels, and they also regulate
United Nations goals set for sustainability included zero hunger many nutrient cycles (Barbier et al., 2019) such as carbon, nitrogen,
along with sustainable production of food resources that can encour- phosphorus cycles, etc. Macroalgae can preserve a substantial quantity

Fig. 3. Global percentage contribution of farmed and wild share of seaweeds.

7
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

Fig. 4. The percentage contribution of world production of seaweeds.

Mitigating risk of eutrophication

Eutrophication is a common environmental risk factor in coastal areas
particularly due to agricultural runoff, floods, drainage, etc. The excess
amounts of nutrients such as phosphates and nitrates in the water bodies
can create the problem of eutrophication. Seaweed farming in such areas
can be a mitigation measure of such issues as seaweed uptake of these
excess nutrients for their growth and releases of oxygen through photo-
synthesis (Rose et al., 2015). By removing the excess nutrients from
coastal waters, seaweeds can reduce the possibilities of harmful algal
blooms such as red tides (Wu et al., 2015). However, the uptake potential
of nutrients by seaweed is varied in different species and different loca-
tions (Chopin et al., 2012). One research study was conducted in Long
Island Sound and the Bronx River Estuary, USA, reported that brown sea-
weed, Saccharina latissima, and red seaweed, Gracilaria tikvahiae have
integrated potential nitrogen and carbon rapidly (Kim et al., 2014).

Providing bioenergy resources

Fig. 5. Globally different methods adopted for seaweed cultivation. Fossil fuel‐based energy sources are considered the most responsi-
ble for global warming and overall climatic change. Blue bio‐economy‐
of carbon within their biomass, transfer some organic matter to other
based products should be a better alternative to integrated biorefinery
habitats, and helps in the mitigation of ocean acidification
approaches (Lopes, 2015). However, possible feedstock and process
(Nellemann, 2009, Duarte et al., 2017). For example, seaweed farming
technologies are big challenges and denote the requirements of a sus-
on a large scale can protect coastal areas by reducing physical damage
tainable source of biomass. Seaweeds can play an important role as a
through dampening wave energy from storm intensity due to climate
source of bioenergy and other products (Lehahn et al., 2016), and com-
change. Nevertheless, overall the process of carbon sequestration is
bat climate change impact (Fig. 8); however, scaling up the large‐scale
dependent on various factors (Fig. 7).
production, industrial input, and sustainability of conversion system
The carbon sequestration rate is not uniform among all seaweeds. It
still need research trials (Jiang et al., 2016). For example, the widely
would depend on the species of seaweed and environmental factors of
cultivated seaweed Kappaphycus alvarezii based biorefinery model is
cultivated sites (Muraoka 2004). Seaweed species are categorized into
developed for the production of various products such as carrageenan,
two parts as per their color and pigment contents show a direct corre-
bioethanol, and biogas (Ingle et al., 2018). Almost 60–70 % of solid
lation with the rate of carbon sequestration (Erlania, 2015). Addition-
fractions after carrageenan extraction from biomass are considered
ally, seasonal fluctuations, cultivation times, location, and metabolic
waste (Uju et al., 2015), which can further be converted into biofuels
responses like the rate of photosynthesis and general growth affect
(Barbier et al., 2019); while liquid fractions before carrageenan extrac-
the rate of sequestration (Banerjee et al. 2009). Abiotic factors such
tion can be used as a plant biostimulant (Eswaran et al. 2005).
as turbidity, nutrients contents, the temperature of seawater, etc can
determine the carbon capture potential of seaweed which is further
converted into carbohydrate compounds (Erlania, 2015) and provide Indirect mitigation measures
more biomass and higher yield. This makes such seaweed species more
popular among seaweed farmers. It is reported that E. denticulatum has Serving as a food source
the highest carbon sequestration and daily growth rate compared to As seaweeds require no land, no fresh water, no nutrients, no fertil-
other species (Erlania, 2015). izers for cultivation, and contains almost all nutrients and trace ele-

8
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

Table 2
Different cultivation methods were adopted in different commercial and experimented seaweed.

Different species Cultivated species Methods of open sea cultivation Cultivated countries Reference

Pyropia and Pyropia yezoensis Fixed pole Japan, Korea, and China (Sahoo and Yarish, 2005)
Porphyra Pyropia tenera Semi floating raft
Pyropia haitanensis Floating raft
Laminaria Laminaria japonica Bamboo raft (Monoline, double line Rope method China, Korea, and Japan (Sahoo and Yarish, 2005)
(Perpendicular, parallel, and upright rope)
Kelp (Saccharina Undaria pinnatifida Bambo raft with hanging method (Horizontal and Japan, Korea, China (Sahoo and Yarish, 2005)
and Undaria) Undaria undarioides vertical) Japan, Korea, and China (Sahoo and Yarish, 2005)
Undaria
peterseniana
Eucheuma and Kappaphycus A fixed, off-bottom monoline method The Philippines, tropical Asia, and (Sahoo and Yarish, 2005)
Kappaphycus alvarezii the Western Pacific region (Trono, 1992)
Eucheuma Floating methods (raft or long lines)
denticulatum
Eucheuma spinosum
Gracillaria Gracillaria edulis Square raft and triangle raft method and tube net method, Thonithurai, Tamilnadu India (Mantri et al., 2015, 2017)
Basket method
A net-pouch method, Square net method
Gracillaria dura Square raft method Thonithurai, Tamilnadu IndiaSimar (Mantri et al., 2020; Mantri et al.,
square net method (Okha) 2015)
Hanging rope, Gujarat
Net bag, Net pouch,
Tubular net
Gelidella aceroa the stone method, Concrete block method (square & Ervadi (Gulf of Mannar) Tamilnadu (Meenakshisundaram et al.,
cylindrical), Square raft method, Square net, India 2009; Ganesan et al., 2015)
Gracillaria deblis Square raft method Thonithurai, Tamilnadu India (Veeragurunathan et al., 2016)
Gelidium pusillum Square raft, Net pouch, and Net bag method Thonithurai (Gulf of Mannar), (Veeragurunathan et al., 2018)
Tamilnadu India

Table 3 ments that are not easily available in terrestrial agricultural products;
Seaweeds and their corresponding LCA studies. they gain attention as a food source for the growing population. Sea-
Seaweed species Objective Study focus Reference weeds show significant nutritional values with health benefits for
human consumption (Déléris et al., 2016) as they contain various min-
Saccharina latissima Comparison of Two Biomass (Taelman
Seaweed Cultivation Production, et al.,
erals, dietary fibers with low lipid levels, high‐quality proteins, antiox-
System in Ireland and Hatchery etc. 2015) idants, and pigments (Fung et al., 2013). In a few parts of the world,
France particularly in East Asian and Southeast Asian countries, seaweeds
Kappaphycus alvarezii Seaweed Based Cultivation (Ghosh are commonly used for human consumption since the ancient period.
Biostimulant Production Process et al.,
However, there are a few risks of seaweed consumption for human
2015)
Gracilaria edulis Plant Biostimulant Cultivation (Vijay health. For example, the ingestion of processed seaweeds such as dried
Process Anand kombu (Japanese name) could represent a danger because of some
et al., neurological problems. One more important risk is the heavy metal
2018) toxicity due to marine pollution which is totally anthropogenic factor.
Laminaria digitata Biofuel Production Cultivation (Alvarado-
Process, Morales
Energy et al., As feed for cattle
Consumption 2013) As containing valuable nutrients, carbohydrates, pigments, etc, sea-
Mixed (red and brown) Biogas Production Feedstock (Ertem
weeds are a better food source for cattle and livestock. The combina-
Variation et al.,
2017) tion of high protein fraction and complex carbohydrates in seaweed
Saccharina latissima Ethanol, Proteins and Energy (Seghetta can be beneficial for cattle (Déléris et al., 2016) and can reduce the
Fertilizers Production Consumption et al.,
2016)
Laminaria digitata Biomethane Production Energy (Czyrnek-
Consumption Delêtre
et al.,
2017)
Enteromorpha Biogas Production Process (Giwa,
prolifera Material 2017)
Saccharina latissima Single Cell Oil Process, (Parsons
Energy et al.,
Consumption 2019)
Gracilaria chilensis and Bioethanol and Biogas Cultivation (Aitken
Macrocystis Method et al.,
pyrifera 2014)
Saccharina latissima Biomass Productivity Seaweed (van
Cultivation Oirschot
and Process et al.,
2017)
Saccharina latissima Nutrients Bioremediation Hatchery, (Thomas
and Carbon Capturing Cultivation, et al.,
and 2021)
Preservation
Fig. 6. Mitigation of climate change through seaweed farming.

9
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

macroalgal cultivation is primarily a promising and acceptable activity

in the protected, nearshore environment. The concept of commercial
offshore farming was first suggested a few decades ago. The close farm
concept for kelp growth, tidal flat farm floating culture (Bird, 1987),
ring cultivation (Buck and Buchholz, 2004), and most recently wind
farm integrated system (Christensen et al., 2013), are some of the
extant ideas for offshore marine biomass of seaweed production. There
is currently no accepted definition of offshore cultivation. Neverthe-
less, in the majority of cases, offshore farming refers to the movement
of farm infrastructure from protected, nearshore locations with conve-
niences to more exposed locations, where frequent harvests may then
have significant logistical and financial ramifications (Troell et al.,
2009). Seaweed plays a significant role in CO2 sinking from the per-
spective of climate change mitigation, and if the biomass is handled
in an environmentally friendly way, the duration of net CO2 removal
can be increased (Chung et al., 2013). Kim et al. (2014) conducted
the field study on carbon sequestration potential in Long Island Sound
Fig. 7. Factors affecting the process of carbon sequestration. (LIS) and Bronx River Estuary (BRE) of seaweed species Gracillaria and
Saccharina, they reported sequestering the carbon (300 kg C ha−1
(LIS) and 727 kg C ha−1 (BRE)) and (1800 kg C ha−1 (LIS) and
1350 kg C ha−1 (BRE)), respectively (Kim et al., 2014, Kim et al.,
2015). Seaweeds like Pyropia/Porphyra, Gracilaria, Kappaphycus/
Eucheuma, Laminaria, and Sargassum are thought to remove a com-
bined total of 54 million tonnes of nitrogen annually and 700 million
tonnes of carbon annually (equal to 2600 million tonnes of CO2) (Kim
et al., 2014, Kim et al., 2015). An economically viable method for mit-
igating and managing the effects of climate change and coastal acidi-
fication could be the introduction of a multi‐crop diversification
approach (IMTA: Integrated Multi tropic Aquaculture), which includes
fish, seaweed, and invertebrates as the cultivated group (Chopin,
2015). Environmental sustainability, societal acceptance, and environ-
mental friendliness are all benefits of multi‐species and multi‐
structural systems in addition to higher profitability/operation/cultiva
tion unit.

Germany

Fig. 8. Seaweed farming mitigate climate change, bioenergy and byproduct. Germany, one of the leading nations in offshore seaweed produc-
tion, began its initial attempts of shifting seaweed operations in the
load on agriculture to produce current conventional feed products early 1990s. Following that, the research was expanded to include site
such as soy and corn products. Seaweeds can be used as additional selection, seeding tactics, growth performance, and reproduction
food by including them in the usual diets of cattle, sheep, pigs, poultry, (Buck and Buchholz, 2004). Laminaria, followed by Palmaria and
and rabbits, however, an entire replacement can be difficult (Duarte Ulva, is used as a potential species for cultivation. Only Laminaria,
et al., 2017). The research study hypothesized that seaweed can one of these three species, can grow well in exposed locations and is
reduce methane production from cattle (Li et al., 2016) by using it well adapted to strong water currents (Buck and Buchholz, 2004).
as feed instead of conventional feeds. When it came to simple handling (such as maintenance, harvesting,
and deployment), the technology that was in use at the time was
adapted and connected to the foundations of offshore wind farms
Minimizing the burden on aquaculture
(Buck and Buchholz, 2004). Although the idea was developed for
Seaweed farming can mitigate the adverse impacts due to climate
the foundations of offshore wind generators, this co‐use concept will
change, particularly by habitat restoration for various marine organ-
help to keep working with offshore infrastructures for seaweed
isms. As seaweeds are primary producers in the marine ecosystem,
(Buck et al., 2004). Later, it was changed to a ring construction in
they can provide food, shelter, and protection to various organisms.
Open Ocean that functions in any harsh North Sea condition designed
The coral reef ecosystem is under threat due to climate change. Sea-
by Buck and Buchholz (2004). Finally, this offshore ring device is the
weed can provide some resistance to climate change impacts (Duarte
first contemporary building that has been widely adopted as a model
et al., 2017). Seaweed compensates for little loss; however, this topic
for mass seaweed production on an industrial scale throughout the
is still not focused worldwide on how seaweeds can help coral. The
world's oceans.
majority of coral reefs are fishing grounds, and under threat of bleach-
ing due to sharp sunlight. Seaweeds can provide shadow effects to
The United States
reduce the intensity of sunlight to some extent.

The University of New Hampshire (UNH) created the IMTA plat-

Large-scale offshore commercial farming for climate change forms for marine fish, shellfish, and seaweeds, which combine the cul-
mitigation initiatives of Germany, the US, and Japan tivation of a feed product (fish) with the cultivation of extractive
species that bio‐mitigate nutrients from the farm and nearby seas.
The production of sustainable biomass for bio‐energy offshore is a The IMTA technology generates product variety, which enhances farm
major challenging task to maintain its sustainability. However, output and contributes to environmental preservation. By turning

10
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

products and uneaten feed from fed organisms into harvestable crops, In case of India, the major focus of seaweed farming is Kappaphy-
the IMTA promotes economic and environmental sustainability by cus, and still this sector is at primary level compare to other seaweed
reducing eutrophication and boosting economic diversification producers. Ingle et al (2022) suggested the integrated multi‐trophic
(Neori et al., 2004; Troell et al., 2003). Salmon, blue mussels, and aquaculture (IMTA) with seaweed in the offshore and coastal area of
kelps have all been successfully grown in Atlantic Canada using the western India. However, IMTA is in only trial phase in India and no
IMTA technique (Chopin et al., 2013). The IMTA act significantly con- specific scientific reference available on this subject yet.
tributes to diversifying fishermen's income, according to the University
of New Hampshire (UNH), which has been working with commercial
Difficulties in seaweed farming and mitigation measures
fishermen on a limited scale. Fishermen have been able to cultivate
and sell the seafood with significant profits by utilizing integrated pro-
Although there is big work already done from the technical point of
duction of steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), blue mussels (Mytilus
view of seaweed farming; there are very limited studies pointing out
edulis), and sugar kelp (Saccharina latissima) on a floating platform.
difficulties in large‐scale farming and combat climate change‐related
issues. It is a tough challenge to get references on the legal and
Japan
legislative‐related documents and possible public potential in the
way of seaweed farming's successful implementation (Roberts and
In Japan, the farming of seaweed was started with Pyropia spp.
Upham, 2012). Seaweed farming's potential challenges and mitigation
(nori) in the late 1600 s, but the industry has since expanded to
options are explored in a few instances but not generally (Ingle et al.,
encompass large‐scale farming of Undaria spp., Saccharina spp., Cla-
2020) (Fig. 9).
dosiphon spp., and Nemacystus spp. According to Aizawa et al.
(2007), the cultivation of 150 million tonnes of Sargassum fulvellum
produces 5 million kl of bioethanol by exploiting the water surface Sustainable biomass supply through cultivation
of less than 1 % of Japan's economic zone, which is made up of 4.48
million km2 (Aizawa et al., 2007). About 90 % of the 150 million ton- The main struggle in seaweed farming on a large scale is the sus-
nes of seaweed are composed of seaweed, while the remaining 10 % is tainability of biomass because the availability of biomass depends on
used in the fermentation and distillation processes. The fibers, algi- various factors. Almost environmental factors can interact with the
nates, and mannitol processes allowed for the separation of 58 % of biochemical components of the macroalgae (Schiener et al., 2015),
the seaweed component consumed during the procedure into bioetha- which make the site selection more important. The majority of sea-
nol. The remaining 42 % is effectively utilized as fertilizer that weed species have a habitat in the intertidal zone ecosystem which
includes ash, nutritious salt, and organic materials as feed for cattle. always faces fluctuations in various parameters such as salinity, tem-
According to a Japanese research study (Aizawa et al., 2007), it would perature, radiation, etc. (Davison and Pearson, 1996). The continuous
be beneficial to apply a variety of techniques to the currently available supply of seaweed is the biggest challenge due to weather and seasonal
technology to determine which ones are the most productive and may changes. To mitigate this, it is necessary to select such seaweed species
lead to the technology's actual commercialization, at least within the which show higher tolerance to adopt such sudden environmental
next five years. changes.

Fig. 9. Difficulties in seaweed farming to combat global climate change.

11
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

Scalability of cultivation 4. Support for local biorefineries from state and central governments
will be helpful for coastal communities to sell their harvested
According to chemical makeup, green algae and terrestrial plants seaweeds.
are almost equivalent. The production of cultivable seaweed with good 5. Seaweed farming on a large scale by the people can be considered
quality for industrial scale‐up depends on its chemical composition farmers rather than industrial workers bound with governmental
which can be changed due to various environmental factors such as support.
diseases, epiphytes, grazing, etc (Sahu et al., 2020). Seaweed's chemi- 6. Local policies for the use of bioproducts such as biofertilizers,
cal composition varies with the area of ocean or sea, nutrients and con- feeds, biofuels, etc can encourage the seaweed farming companies
tamination present in that area, seasonal changes, and climate and people to more in cultivation.
variations which results in discontinuity or low yield or low quality 7. Support and encouragement of IMTA and other combined aquacul-
of biomass. Mitigation of such factors needs governmental support in ture can show other benefits as well as reduce the load on natural
terms of favorable laws, rules, and regulations (Ingle et al., 2020). Sea- resources.
weed farming with other types of aquaculture such as integrated multi‐ 8. With IMTA, as a national or central governmental policy, the main
tropic aquaculture or combined aquaculture can be beneficial to tackle focus should be on the development of blue carbon strategies for
the problem of pests in seaweed (Lehahn et al., 2016). mitigation of climate change impacts, also spatial planning, bio‐
engineering on experimental level etc for better environmental
Cost-effective cultivation and harvest system output.

Seaweeds can be cultivated in offshore, nearshore or onshore envi- Data availability

ronment. Intensive cultivation in the onshore environment requires a
pond on a few hectares of land. Getting such land is one of the most Data will be made available on request.
difficult tasks, only a very few stakeholders can invest the land for such
a project. It is very expensive even if it is possible. The coastal bay Declaration of Competing Interest
development for biomass cultivation is a good solution for the project's
proponents to get around this restriction. This plan could need to The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
face/solve the various environmental and social issues. Currently, interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
the majority of seaweed cultivation is common in coastal areas. ence the work reported in this paper.

Public participation Acknowledgments

Many non‐governmental organizations (NGOs), develop the setup We thanks to Dr. M. Jaikumar of Sea6 Energy Pvt Limited for provid-
for seaweed farming in offshore coastal waters and harvested seaweed ing the seaweed data from the year 2017 to 2019. Special thanks to Dr.
sent to nearby processing industries without any public participation. Raguhraman, NCSCM, Chennai for conceptual the figure. The corre-
The main theme of seaweed cultivation is to give livelihood options to sponding author thankful to Centre for Ocean Research (COR‐SIST)
the coastal communities and carbon sequestration. On the other hand, to provide Seed Amount in terms of financial assistant.
seaweed products have good markets worldwide but still, many prod-
ucts are not in use or accepted by people. Getting public acceptance of
Statements and Declarations
such products is one more difficulty in large‐scale seaweed farming. If
the people are engaged in seaweed farming, they can easily spread and
Funding information: This research not received specific grant
canvases the importance of cultivation and product among the people.
from any funding agency.
In a few parts of the world, seaweed is part of food but many countries
are still unknown this valuable food resource.
Author’s contribution
Concluding remark and recommendations
DB – conceptualization, designed, and wrote the manuscript. VV –
designed the graph and figure. VV – editing and reviewing the manu-
Seaweed farming is one of the best ecological tasks to combat the
script. SS – contributed to writing the introduction and section 2, over-
impact of climate change if it is cultivated on a large scale throughout
all revised the manuscript. MM – technical editing and reviewing. RS –
the world. Further, it serves as a good source of food, feed, and various
Technical reviewing. KP – overall technical editing. KI – wrote sections
pharmaceutical products for human well‐being; however, many diffi-
5, 7, and 8.
culties that arrive with seaweed farming on such a large scale are
Data Availability: Research data can be obtained from the first
mostly related to legal, legislative, and regulatory aspects throughout
author through email.
the globe. With this modification in the traditional farming of sea-
Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable.
weed, these changes are expected to be done for better environmental
Consent for publication: Not applicable.
performance. Here, we recommended the following suggestion which
is expected to provide planning tools for success.
References
1. Raft scale method for farming seems more promising for large‐scale
Abolofia, J., Wilen, J.E., Asche, F., 2017. The cost of lice: quantifying the impacts of
cultivation of economically important seaweeds in India parasitic sea lice on farmed salmon. mare 32, 329–349. https://doi.org/10.1086/
2. Site selection combined with environmental data is needed to 691981.
Aitken, D., Bulboa, C., Godoy-Faundez, A., Turrion-Gomez, J.L., Antizar-Ladislao, B.,
determine any possible harm to the coral ecosystem due to large‐
2014. Life cycle assessment of macroalgae cultivation and processing for biofuel
scale seaweed cultivation. production. J. Cleaner Prod. 75, 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
3. Create public awareness among people and engage them in farming jclepro.2014.03.080.
activity so that the product can easily and commercialized in the Aizawa, M., Asaoka, K., Atsumi, M., Sakou, T., 2007. Seaweed Bioethanol Production in
Japan - The Ocean Sunrise Project, in: OCEANS 2007. Presented at the OCEANS
market. 2007, pp. 1–5. doi:10.1109/OCEANS.2007.4449162.

12
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

Alvarado-Morales, M., Boldrin, A., Karakashev, D.B., Holdt, S.L., Angelidaki, I., Astrup, Ertem, F.C., Neubauer, P., Junne, S., 2017. Environmental life cycle assessment of biogas
T., 2013. Life cycle assessment of biofuel production from brown seaweed in Nordic production from marine macroalgal feedstock for the substitution of energy crops. J.
conditions. Bioresour. Technol. 129, 92–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Clean. Prod. 140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.08.041.
biortech.2012.11.029. Eswaran, K., Ghosh, P.K., Siddhanta, A.K., Patolia, J.S., Periyasamy, C., Mehta, A.S.,
Anderson, P.K., Cunningham, A.A., Patel, N.G., Morales, F.J., Epstein, P.R., Daszak, P., 2005. An integrated method for production of carrageenan and liquid fertilizer from
2004. Emerging infectious diseases of plants: pathogen pollution, climate change fresh seaweeds. US 6,893,479.
and agrotechnology drivers. Trends Ecol Evol 19, 535–544. https://doi.org/ FAO, 2017. Building resilience for food and food security, The state of food security and
10.1016/j.tree.2004.07.021. nutrition in the world. FAO, Rome.
Aresta, M., Dibenedetto, A., Barberio, G., 2005. Utilization of macro-algae for enhanced FAO, 2018. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2018: Meeting the sustainable
CO2 fixation and biofuels production: Development of a computing software for an development goals, The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture (SOFIA). FAO,
LCA study. Fuel Process. Technol., Carbon Dioxide Capture and Sequestration 86, Rome, Italy.
1679–1693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2005.01.016. Fung, A., Hamid, N., Lu, J., 2013. Fucoxanthin content and antioxidant properties of
Banerjee, K., Ghosh, R., Homechaudhuri, S., Mitra, A., 2009. Seasonal variation in the Undaria pinnatifida. Food Chem. 136, 1055–1062. https://doi.org/10.1016/
biochemical composition of red seaweed (Catenella repens) from Gangetic delta, j.foodchem.2012.09.024.
northeast coast of India. J. Earth Syst. Sci. 118, 497–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Ganesan, M., Reddy, C.R.K., Jha, B., 2015. Impact of cultivation on growth rate and agar
s12040-009-0045-2. content of Gelidiella acerosa (Gelidiales, Rhodophyta). Algal Res. 12, 398–404.
Barbier, Michèle, Bénédicte C., Rita, A., Susan, L., Holdt, Jacquemin, B., Céline, R., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2015.10.001.
2019. “PEGASUS - PHYCOMORPH European Guidelines for a Sustainable Ghosh, A., Vijay Anand, K.G., Seth, A., 2015. Life cycle impact assessment of seaweed
Aquaculture of Seaweeds, COST Action FA1406 (M. Barbier and B. Charrier, Eds), based biostimulant production from onshore cultivated Kappaphycus alvarezii
Roscoff, France.” doi:10.21411/2c3w-yc73. (Doty) Doty ex Silva—Is it environmentally sustainable? Algal Res. 12, 513–521.
Bird, K.T., 1987. Cost Analyses of Energy from Marine Biomass. In: Bird, K.T., Benson, P. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2015.10.015.
H. (Eds.), Seaweed Cultivation for Renewable Resources. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. Giwa, A., 2017. Comparative cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment of biogas production
327–350. doi:69. from marine algae and cattle manure biorefineries. Bioresour. Technol. 244.
Bolton, J.J., Robertson-Andersson, D.V., Shuuluka, D., Kandjengo, L., 2009. Growing https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.05.143.
Ulva (Chlorophyta) in integrated systems as a commercial crop for abalone feed in Gomez Pinchetti, J.L., 2016. Algae production and their potential contribution to a
South Africa: a SWOT analysis. J. Appl. Phycol. 21, 575–583. https://doi.org/ nutritional sustainability. J. Environ. Health Sci. 2, 1–3. https://doi.org/10.15436/
10.1007/s10811-008-9385-6. 2378-6841.16.1101.
Bondad-Reantaso, M.G., Subasinghe, R.P., Arthur, J.R., Ogawa, K., Chinabut, S., Adlard, Hunter, M., Richard, C., Meagan, G., 2017. Agriculture in 2050: Recalibrating Targets
R., Tan, Z., Shariff, M., 2005. Disease and health management in Asian aquaculture. for Sustainable Intensification. BioScience 67 (4), 386–391. https://doi.org/
Vet. Parasitol. 132, 249–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2005.07.005. 10.1093/biosci/bix010.
Brentner, L.B., Matthew, J., 2011. “Combinatorial Life Cycle Assessment to Inform Imchen, T., 2021. Nutritional value of seaweeds and their potential to serve as
Process Design of Industrial Production of Algal Biodiesel.” Environ Sci and Technol nutraceutical supplements. Phycologia 60 (6), 534–546.
45 (16): 7060–67. doi:10.1021/es2006995. Ingle, K.N., Polikovsky, M., Chemodanov, A., Golberg, A., 2018. Marine integrated pest
Buck, B.H., Buchholz, C.M., 2004. The offshore-ring: A new system design for the open management (MIPM) approach for sustainable seagriculture. Algal Res. 29,
ocean aquaculture of macroalgae. J. Appl. Phycol. 16, 355–368. https://doi.org/ 223–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2017.11.010.
10.1023/B:JAPH.0000047947.96231.ea. Ingle, K.N., Traugott, H., Golberg, A., 2020. Challenges for marine macroalgal biomass
Buck, B.H., Krause, G., Rosenthal, H., 2004. Extensive open ocean aquaculture production in Indian coastal waters. Bot. Mar. 63, 327–340. https://doi.org/
development within wind farms in Germany: the prospect of offshore co- 10.1515/bot-2018-0099.
management and legal constraints. Ocean Coast. Manag. 47, 95–122. https://doi. Ingle, K.N., Polikovsky, M., Fenta, M.C., Ingle, A.S., Golberg, A., 2022. Integration of
org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2004.04.002. multitrophic aquaculture approach with marine energy projects for management
Buschmann, A., Del, M., Hernández-González, M., Varela, D., 2008. Seaweed future and restoration of coastal ecosystems of India. Ecol. Engi. 176,. https://doi.org/
cultivation in Chile: Perspectives and challenges. Int. J. Environ. Pollut. 33, 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2021.106525 106525.
432–456. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEP.2008.020571. Jiang, R., Ingle, K.N., Golberg, A., 2016. Macroalgae (seaweed) for liquid transportation
Chapman, A.S., Stévant, P., Larssen, W.E., 2015. Food or fad? Challenges and biofuel production: what is next? Algal Res. 14, 48–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
opportunities for including seaweeds in a Nordic diet. Bot. Mar. 58, 423–433. algal.2016.01.001.
https://doi.org/10.1515/bot-2015-0044. Kim, J.K., Kraemer, G.P., Yarish, C., 2014. Field scale evaluation of seaweed aquaculture as
Chopin, T., 2015. Marine Aquaculture in Canada: Well-Established Monocultures of a nutrient bioextraction strategy in Long Island Sound and the Bronx River Estuary.
Finfish and Shellfish and an Emerging Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture (IMTA) Aquaculture 433, 148–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2014.05.034.
Approach Including Seaweeds, Other Invertebrates, and Microbial Communities. Kim, J.K., Kottuparambil, S., Moh, S.H., Lee, T.K., Kim, Y.-J., Rhee, J.-S., Choi, E.-M.,
Fisheries 40, 28–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/03632415.2014.986571. Kim, B.H., Yu, Y.J., Yarish, C., Han, T., 2015. Potential applications of nuisance
Chopin, T., Cooper, J.A., Reid, G., Cross, S., Moore, C., 2012. Open-Water Integrated microalgae blooms. J. Appl. Phycol. 27, 1223–1234. https://doi.org/10.1007/
Multi-Trophic Aquaculture: Environmental Biomitigation and Economic s10811-014-0410-7.
Diversification of Fed Aquaculture by Extractive Aquaculture. Rev. Aquacult. 4 Kim, J., Yarish, C., Hwang, E.K., Park, M., Kim, Y., 2017. Seaweed aquaculture:
(4), 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1753-5131.2012.01074.x. cultivation technologies, challenges and its ecosystem services. ALGAE 32, 1–13.
Chopin, T., Robinson, S., Reid, G.K., Ridler, N., 2013. Prospects for Integrated Multi- https://doi.org/10.4490/algae.2017.32.3.3.
Trophic Aquaculture (IMTA) in the open ocean. Bull. Aquacult. Assoc. Canada 111, Krag, L.A., Herrmann, B., Karlsen, J.D., Mieske, B., 2015. Species selectivity in different
28–35. sized topless trawl designs: Does size matter? Fish. Res. 172, 243–249. https://doi.
Christensen, E.D., Johnson, M., Sørensen, O.R., Hasager, C.B., Badger, M., Larsen, S.E., org/10.1016/j.fishres.2015.07.010.
2013. Transmission of wave energy through an offshore wind turbine farm. Coast. Lehahn, Y., Ingle, K.N., Golberg, A., 2016. Global potential of offshore and shallow
Eng. 82, 25–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coastaleng.2013.08.004. waters macroalgal biorefineries to provide for food, chemicals and energy:
Chung, I., Beardall, J., Mehta, S., Sahoo, D., Stojkovic, S., 2011. Using Marine feasibility and sustainability. Algal Res. 17, 150–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Macroalgae for Carbon Sequestration: A Critical Appraisal. J. Appl. Phycol. 23 (5), algal.2016.03.031.
877–886. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-010-9604-9. Li, X., Norman, H.C., Kinley, R.D., Laurence, M., Wilmot, M., Bender, H., de Nys, R.,
Chung, I., Oak, J., Lee, J., Shin, J., Park, K., 2013. Installing Kelp Forests/Seaweed Beds Tomkins, N., Li, X., Norman, H.C., Kinley, R.D., Laurence, M., Wilmot, M., Bender,
for Mitigation and Adaptation against Global Warming: Korean Project Overview. H., de Nys, R., Tomkins, N., 2016. Asparagopsis taxiformis decreases enteric
ICES J. Mari. Sci. 70 (5), 1038–1044. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fss206. methane production from sheep. Anim. Prod. Sci. 58, 681–688. https://doi.org/
Cottier, C., Elizabeth, J., Nidhi, N., Yacine, B., Marnie, L., Campbell, T., Jianguang, F., 10.1071/AN15883.
Peimin, H., 2016. “Global Seaweed Aquaculture Industry,”. Lopes, M.S.G., 2015. Engineering biological systems toward a sustainable bioeconomy.
Czyrnek-Delêtre, M.M., Rocca, S., Agostini, A., Giuntoli, J., Murphy, J.D., 2017. Life J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 42, 813–838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10295-015-
cycle assessment of seaweed biomethane, generated from seaweed sourced from 1606-9.
integrated multi-trophic aquaculture in temperate oceanic climates. Appl. Ener. Loureiro, R., Gachon, C.M.M., Rebours, C., 2015. Seaweed cultivation: potential and
196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.03.129. challenges of crop domestication at an unprecedented pace. New Phytol. 206,
Dalton, S.R., Longley, R.E., Bird, T., 1995. Hemagglutinins and Immunomitogens from 489–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/nph.13278.
Marine Algae. J. Mar. Biotech. 2 (3), 149–155. Mantri, V.A., Ashok, K.S., Saminathan, K.R., Rajasankar, J., Harikrishna, P., 2015.
Davison, I.R., Pearson, G.A., 1996. Stress Tolerance in Intertidal Seaweeds. J. Phycol. Concept of triangular raft design: Achieving higher yield in Gracilaria edulis.
32, 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-3646.1996.00197.x. Aquacult. Eng. 69, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2015.08.002.
Déléris, P., Nazih, H., Bard, J.-M., 2016. Chapter 10 - Seaweeds in Human Health. In: Mantri, V.A., Ashok, K.S., Musamil, T.M., Gobalakrishnan, M., Saminathan, K.R.,
Fleurence, J., Levine, I. (Eds.), Seaweed in Health and Disease Prevention. Academic Behera, D.P., Veeragurunathan, V., Eswaran, K., Thiruppathi, S., Pothal, J.K., Ghosh,
Press, San Diego, pp. 319–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802772- P.K., 2017. Tube-net farming and device for efficient tissue segregation for
1.00010-5. industrially important agarophyte Gracilaria edulis (Rhodophyta). Aquacult. Eng.
Duarte, C.M., Wu, J.P., Xiao, X., Bruhn, A., Krause-Jensen, D., 2017. Can seaweed 77, 132–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2017.04.003.
farming play a role in climate change mitigation and adaptation? Front. Mar. Sci. 4, Mantri, V.A., Yashesh, S., Thiruppathi, S., 2020. Feasibility of Farming the Agarose-
100. Yielding Red Alga Gracilaria Dura Using Tube-Net Cultivation in the Open Sea along
Erlania, Nyoman Radiarta, 2015. The Use of Seaweeds Aquaculture for Carbon the Gujarat Coast of NW India. App. Phycol. 1 (1), 12–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/
Sequestration: A Strategy for Climate Change Mitigation. JGGE 2. doi:10.17265/ 26388081.2019.1648181.
2332-8223/2015.06.006.

13
D. Prasad Behera et al. Total Environment Research Themes 3–4 (2022) 100016

Meenakshisundaram, G., Thiruppathi, S., Eswaran, K., Reddy, C., Jha, B., 2009. Sievanen, L., Crawford, B., Pollnac, R., Lowe, C., 2005. Weeding through assumptions of
Cultivation of Gelidiella acerosa in the open sea on the southeastern coast of India. livelihood approaches in ICM: Seaweed farming in the Philippines and Indonesia.
Marine Ecol.-Prog. Ser. 382, 49–57. https://doi.org/10.3354/meps07891. Ocean Coastal Manage., Sustain. Integrated Coastal Manage. 48, 297–313. https://
Merino, Gorka, Manuel Barange, Julia L., Blanchard, James H., Robert H., Icarus A., doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2005.04.015.
Edward, H., 2012. “Can Marine Fisheries and Aquaculture Meet Fish Demand from a Singh, S., Singh, M.K., Pal, S.K., Trivedi, K., Yesuraj, D., Singh, C.S., Anand, K.G.V.,
Growing Human Population in a Changing Climate?” Global Environmental Change Chandramohan, M., Patidar, R., Kubavat, D., Zodape, S.T., Ghosh, A., 2016.
22 (4). Elsevier Ltd: 795–806. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.03.003. Sustainable enhancement in yield and quality of rain-fed maize through Gracilaria
Muraoka, D., 2004. Seaweed resources as a source of carbon fixation. Bull Fish Res Agen edulis and Kappaphycus alvarezii seaweed sap. J. Appl. Phycol. 28, 2099–2112.
1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-015-0680-8.
Nabti, E., Jha, B., Hartmann, A., 2017. Impact of seaweeds on agricultural crop Stentiford, G.D., Sritunyalucksana, K., Flegel, T.W., Williams, B.A.P.,
production as biofertilizer. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 14 (5), 1119–1134. Withyachumnarnkul, B., Itsathitphaisarn, O., Bass, D., 2017. New Paradigms to
Naik, S.N., Goud, V.V., Rout, P.K., Dalai, A.K., 2010. Production of first and second Help Solve the Global Aquaculture Disease Crisis. PLoS Pathog. 13, e1006160.
generation biofuels: A comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14, Stévant, P., Rebours, C., Chapman, A., 2017. Seaweed aquaculture in Norway: recent
578–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.10.003. industrial developments and future perspectives. Aquacult. Int. 25, 1373–1390.
Nellemann, C., 2009. Blue carbon. A UNEP rapid response assessment. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-017-0120-7.
Neori, A., Chopin, T., Troell, M., Buschmann, A.H., Kraemer, G.P., Halling, C., Shpigel, Tacon, A.G.J., 2020. Trends in Global Aquaculture and Aquafeed Production:
M., Yarish, C., 2004. Integrated aquaculture: rationale, evolution and state of the art 2000–2017. Rev. Fish. Sci. Aquacult. 28, 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/
emphasizing seaweed biofiltration in modern mariculture. Aquaculture 231, 23308249.2019.1649634.
361–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2003.11.015. Taelman, S.E., Champenois, J., Edwards, M.D., De Meester, S., Dewulf, J., 2015.
Oerke, E.-C., 2006. Crop losses to pests. J. Agric. Sci. 144, 31–43. https://doi.org/ Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of two seaweed cultivation
10.1017/S0021859605005708. systems in North West Europe with a focus on quantifying sea surface occupation.
Ortiz-Calderon, C., Silva, H. C., Vásquez, D. B., 2017. Metal Removal by Seaweed Algal Res. 11, 173–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2015.06.018.
Biomass. In (Ed.), Biomass Volume Estimation and Valorization for Energy. Thomas, J.B.E., Sodré Ribeiro, M., Potting, J., Cervin, G., Nylund, G.M., Olsson, J.,
IntechOpen. doi:10.5772/65682. Albers, E., Undeland, I., Pavia, H., Gröndahl, F., 2021. A comparative environmental
Overpeck, J.T., Udall, B., 2020. Climate change and the acidification of North America. life cycle assessment of hatchery, cultivation, and preservation of the kelp
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Saccharina latissima. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 78. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsaa112.
117: 11856-11858. PMID 32430321 doi: 10.1073/Pnas.2006323117. Tiwari, B.K., Troy, D.J., 2015. Chapter 1—Seaweed sustainability – food and nonfood
Parsons, S., Allen, M.J., Abeln, F., McManus, M., Chuck, C.J., 2019. Sustainability and applications. In: Tiwari, B.K., Troy, D.J. (Eds.), Seaweed Sustainability. Academic
life cycle assessment (LCA) of macroalgae-derived single cell oils. J. Clean. Prod. Press, pp. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-418697-2.00001-5.
232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.315. Trivedi, K. G., Vijay, A., Denish, K., Ranjeet, K., Pradip, V., Arup, G., 2017. “Crop Stage
Pereira, R., Yarish, C., 2008. Mass Production of Marine Macroalgae. Encyclopedia Ecol., Selection Is Vital to Elicit Optimal Response of Maize to Seaweed Bio-Stimulant
2236–2247. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008045405-4.00066-5. Application J Appl Phycol 29 (4): 2135–44. doi:10.1007/s10811-017-1118-2.
Pérez-López, P., Balboa, E.M., González-García, S., Domínguez, H., Feijoo, G., Moreira, Troell, M., Halling, C., Neori, A., Chopin, T., Buschmann, A.H., Kautsky, N., Yarish, C.,
M.T., 2014. Comparative environmental assessment of valorization strategies of the 2003. Integrated mariculture: asking the right questions. Aquacult., Manage.
invasive macroalgae Sargassum muticum. Bioresour. Technol. 161, 137–148. Aquacult. Effluents 226, 69–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0044-8486(03)00469-1.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.03.013. Troell, M., Joyce, A., Chopin, T., Neori, A., Buschmann, A.H., Fang, J.-G., 2009.
Pérez-López, P., Jeffryes, C., Agathos, S.N., Feijoo, G., Rorrer, G., Moreira, M.T., 2016. Ecological engineering in aquaculture — Potential for integrated multi-trophic
Environmental life cycle optimization of essential terpene oils produced by the aquaculture (IMTA) in marine offshore systems. Aquaculture 297, 1–9. https://doi.
macroalga Ochtodes secundiramea. Sci. Total Environ. 542, 292–305. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2009.09.010.
org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.10.045. Trono, G.C., 1992. Eucheuma and Kappaphyeus: Taxonomy and Cultivation, Bull Mar
Qin, Y., 2018. Applications of bioactive seaweed substances in functional food products. Sci Fish Koch Univ 51-65pp.
In: Qin, Y. (Ed.), Bioactive Seaweeds for Food Applications: Natural Ingredients for Uju, W., Wijayanta, A.T., Goto, M., Kamiya, N., 2015. Great potency of seaweed waste
Healthy Diets. Academic Press, San Diego, California, USA, pp. 111–134. biomass from the carrageenan industry for bioethanol production by peracetic
Roberts, T., Upham, P., 2012. Prospects for the use of macro-algae for fuel in Ireland and acid–ionic liquid pretreatment. Biomass Bioenergy 81, 63–69. https://doi.org/
the UK: An overview of marine management issues. Marine Policy 36, 1047–1053. 10.1016/j.biombioe.2015.05.023.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.03.001. Valderama, Diego 2012. Tanzania Proceedings.” IIFET Tanzania Proceedings, 1–11.
Rohana, S., Doris, S., Jiansan, J., 2009. Global aquaculture and its role in sustainable Valderrama, Diego, Junning, C., Nathanael, H., Neil, R., Iain, C., Neish, Anicia, Q.,
development - Subasinghe - 2009 - Reviews in Aquaculture doi:10.1111/j.1753- Hurtado, Flower, E., 2015. “The Economics of Kappaphycus Seaweed Cultivation in
5131.2008.01002.x. Developing Countries: A Comparative Analysis of Farming Systems.” Aqua Econo
Rose, J.M., Bricker, S.B., Deonarine, S., Ferreira, J.G., Getchis, T., Grant, J., Kim, J.K., and Manage 19 (2): 251–77. doi:10.1080/13657305.2015.1024348
Krumholz, J.S., Kraemer, G.P., Stephenson, K., Wikfors, G.H., Yarish, C., 2015. van Oirschot, R., Thomas, J.-B.-E., Gröndahl, F., Fortuin, K.P.J., Brandenburg, W.,
Nutrient Bioextraction. In: Meyers, R.A. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Sustainability Potting, J., 2017. Explorative environmental life cycle assessment for system design
Science and Technology. Springer, New York, New York, NY, pp. 1–33. https:// of seaweed cultivation and drying. Algal Res. 27, 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2493-6_944-1. algal.2017.07.025.
Sahoo, D., Yarish, C., 2005. Mariculture of Seaweeds, in: Phycological Methods: Algal Veeragurunathan, V., Eswaran, K., Malarvizhi, J., Gobalakrishnan, M., 2015. Cultivation
Culturing Techniques. pp. 219–237. doi:10.1016/B978-012088426-1/50016-0. of Gracilaria dura in the open sea along the southeast coast of India. J. Appl. Phycol.
Sahu, S.K., Ingle, K., Mantri, V., 2020. Epiphytism in Seaweed Farming: Causes, Status, 27, 2353–2365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-014-0514-0.
and Implications. pp. 227–242. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-38192-9_9. Veeragurunathan, V., Prasad, K., Singh, N., Malarvizhi, J., Mandal, S.K., Mantri, V.A.,
Santelices, B., 1999. A Conceptual Framework for Marine Agronomy. Hydrobiologia 2016. Growth and biochemical characterization of green and red strains of the
398–399, 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4449-03. tropical agarophytes Gracilaria debilis and Gracilaria edulis (Gracilariaceae,
Savary, S., Ficke, A., Aubertot, J.-N., Hollier, C., 2012. Crop losses due to diseases and Rhodophyta). J. Appl. Phycol. 28, 3479–3489. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-
their implications for global food production losses and food security. Food Sec. 4, 016-0898-0.
519–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-012-0200-5. Veeragurunathan, V., Vadodariya, N., Chaudhary, J.P., Meena, R., 2018. Experimental
Schiener, P., Black, K.D., Stanley, M.S., Green, D.H., 2015. The seasonal variation in the cultivation of Gelidium pusillum in open sea along the south east Indian coast.
chemical composition of the kelp species Laminaria digitata, Laminaria hyperborea, Indian J. Mar. Sci. 47, 10.
Saccharina latissima and Alaria esculenta. J. Appl. Phycol. 27, 363–373. https://doi. Vijay Anand, K.G., Eswaran, K., Ghosh, A., 2018. Life cycle impact assessment of a
org/10.1007/s10811-014-0327-1. seaweed product obtained from Gracilaria edulis – A potent plant biostimulant. J
Seghetta, M., Tørring, D., Bruhn, A., Thomsen, M., 2016. Bioextraction potential of Clean Produc 170, 1621–1627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.09.241.
seaweed in Denmark — An instrument for circular nutrient management. Sci. Total Wu, H., Huo, Y., Zhang, J., Liu, Y., Zhao, Y., He, P., 2015. Bioremediation efficiency of
Environ. 563–564, 513–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.04.010. the largest scale artificial Porphyra yezoensis cultivation in the open sea in China.
Sharma, L., Banerjee, M., Malik, G.C., Gopalakrishnan, V.A.K., Zodape, S.T., Ghosh, A., Mar. Pollut. Bull. 95, 289–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2015.03.028.
2017. Sustainable agro-technology for enhancement of rice production in the red Zuniga-Jara, S., Marin-Riffo, M., 2016. Bioeconomic analysis of small-scale cultures of
and lateritic soils using seaweed based biostimulants. J. Cleaner Prod. 149, Kappaphycus alvarezii (Doty) Doty in India. J. Appl. Phycol. 28, 1133–1143.
968–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10811-015-0616-3.

14