Sandponics is NOT iAVs

tl;dr;  iAVs (Integrated AquaVegeculture System) is NOT “Sandponics.” iAVs is an open-source, scientifically validated system using fish waste as the sole nutrient source for plants grown in sand, which also acts as a highly efficient biofilter. This unique design leads to exceptional water conservation and high yields. “Sandponics” is a trademarked, hydroponic system owned by a Japanese company, operating on different principles. Mislabeling iAVs as “Sandponics” leads to inaccurate research and misinformation. Let’s use the correct term, iAVs, to respect its inventors and promote accurate understanding..

What is Sandponics?

Sandponics, a term trademarked by Sumitomo Electric Industries, Ltd. (Justia, n.d.), is a unique, soil-free cultivation system initially developed by the company in the 1970s, utilizing sand as the primary growing medium (Baba & Ikeguchi, 2015). Conceived as an early “natural light plant factory,” the original system aimed to enhance agricultural productivity through year-round, controlled environment farming, featuring an air-permeable sand bed, a dripping water supplier, and a liquid fertilizer dilutor to ensure stable production (Baba & Ikeguchi, 2015).

A key characteristic of this early system was sand’s higher soil moisture tension, which could improve produce taste through condensed flavors (Baba & Ikeguchi, 2015). Over the decades, this system evolved significantly, leading to “New Sandponics” (NSP) by 2017, which refined the concept by incorporating a floor irrigation method (Kanazawa et al., 2017). NSP drastically reduces sand volume to approximately 10% of earlier versions, with this minimal sand medium placed above a liquid fertilizer tank; an irrigation cloth then uses capillary action to draw fertilizer upwards into the sand (Kanazawa et al., 2017). This advanced system includes a moisture-permeable root-proof sheet, the efficient irrigation cloth, a water-level controlled tank, and a design promoting air contact with the lower medium for enhanced root oxygenation, thereby reducing weight and maintenance while allowing precise control for higher yields and quality (Kanazawa et al., 2017).

Clarifying this distinction is important, as the confusion between iAVS and Sandponics has unfortunately led to the publication of research papers that contain inaccuracies. This not only consumes valuable time and resources for researchers but also contributes to the spread of misinformation that misrepresents iAVS and its capabilities.

What is iAVs?

 Integrated Aqua~Vegeculture System ( iAVs ), the progenitor of what is  now referred to as ‘aquaponics’ by many.   However, iAVs is notably different from all subsequent ‘aquaponic’ deviations in several significant aspects:  

  1. iAVs produces exceptional yields with far lower capital and operating costs. 
  2. iAVs production is ‘organic’, all natural and generates zero waste of any type. 
  3. iAVs establishes an intentional, symbiotic ecosystem for food production, and 
  4. iAVs was explicitly developed for application in challenging (arid) environments. 
  5. iAVs has been formally researched, documented, and published in peer-review.
  6. iAVs has been commercially proven (USDA) and open-source (free) since 1985. 
  7. IAVs is adaptable to non-electrified, resource-poor, and climate challenged areas.  iAVs is simultaneously simple, natural, reliable, intensive, resilient, adaptable, scalable,  sustainable and exceptionally conserving of water, energy and other resources. 

Origins and Core Concept

The integrated aqua-vegeculture system (iAVs), was a key development emerging from North Carolina State University (NCSU) in the 1980s, validated by USDA-funded research and trials. It was pioneered by graduate student Mark McMurtry and his professor, the late Doug Sanders, with significant contributions and collaboration from a multidisciplinary research group including Paul V. Nelson, and drawing on broader expertise from consultants such as Merle Jensen and Doug Gross (Diver & Rinehart, 2000; Goodman, 2011; Gross, 1988; McMurtry et al., 1987; Owens & Hall, 1990, citing McMurtry et al., 1987).

This system is a tightly-coupled, virtually symbiotic method for co-producing fish (aquaculture, typically tilapia species like Oreochromis aureus or hybrids such as O. mossambicus x O. niloticus, raised in tanks often constructed by digging into the ground and using a liner, with the bottom typically sloped or, preferably, catenary-shaped to optimize waste removal and collection (Gross, 1988)) and a wide range of vegetable crops (olericulture, including tomatoes, cucumbers, bush beans, melons, leafy greens, herbs, and even tree seedlings) (Diver & Rinehart, 2000; Goodman, 2011; Gross, 1988; McMurtry et al., 1987; McMurtry et al., 1990a; McMurtry et al., 1990c; McMurtry et al., 1993; McMurtry et al., 1997b; Owens & Hall, 1990; Sanders & McMurtry, 1988; “Aqua-Vegeculture Systems,” 1988; “Aquaculture in Greenhouses,” 1988; McClintic, 1990). The system operates on scientifically determined component ratios (e.g., typically a 1:2 fish tank volume to biofilter volume, and 1:6 fish tank volume to biofilter area) to ensure balance.

Research Foundations and Nutrient Cycling


Research on the aqua-vegeculture system at NCSU, as documented in McMurtry’s work with his collaborators, focused on efficiency and optimizing yields, examining elements like component ratios, nutrient uptake, water quality maintenance, food value, water use efficiency (demonstrating water reuse over 100 times and producing, for example, 6g of fish and 17g dry weight vegetables per liter of water consumed), and economic productivity. Crucially, this extensive research demonstrated and definitively proved the system’s overall functionality and its capacity to be an economical way to commercially produce these crops, with reported yields like over 50 kg of tilapia/m³ of water cultured annually, alongside substantial vegetable yields (e.g., 360 kg of tomatoes/m³ of fish tank water equivalent area) (Diver & Rinehart, 2000; Goodman, 2011; McMurtry, 1990b; McMurtry et al., 1990c; McMurtry et al., 1990e; McMurtry et al., 1994; McMurtry et al., 1997a; McMurtry et al., 1997b; Owens & Hall, 1990, citing McMurtry et al., 1987).

A core principle of the aqua-vegeculture system is its reliance on endogenous nutrient cycling: the primary, and sole, fertility input to the system is a quality commercial fish feed, ideally without added vitamins or hormones that could accumulate or be unnecessary for plants (McMurtry et al., 1997b; Gross, 1988). Fish are fed according to a schedule that avoids late-day feeding, for instance, not after 2 pm, to manage nutrient input and fish metabolism effectively. Fish feed rates are carefully managed (e.g., 20-30 g/m²/day of biofilter for fruiting crops) to match plant needs.

Plant nutrients are derived entirely from the aquaculture component, encompassing fish metabolic waste products (fecal matter, urea, urine), uneaten fish feed, and decomposing organic matter. This includes both dissolved nutrients and solids, which undergo rapid aerobic mineralization on the surface of the sand bed furrows. The presence of algae, particularly in the furrows of the grow beds where water is introduced, is an intentional and beneficial aspect of the system design, contributing to nutrient cycling, buffering the system during startup, and supporting the overall health of the sand bed ecosystem (Gross, 1988).

The system is expressly designed to operate without supplemental chemical fertilization for the vegetable crops. Indeed, when built and operated according to the research-based recommendations, the fish waste alone is consistently sufficient to fertilize the plants, with no nutritional deficiencies observed in the crops (McMurtry et al., 1997a; McMurtry et al., 1997b; Simos & Gordon-Smith, 2023). Plants benefit from dual nitrogen availability (ammonium and nitrate), enhancing uptake efficiency.

The Path to Optimized iAVs: An Iterative Research Journey


The development of iAVs was not a singular breakthrough but an iterative process of scientific inquiry spanning several years. Significant foundational work, including numerous unpublished experiments and preliminary trials conducted by McMurtry and his colleagues, preceded the formally published research. These early investigations were crucial for establishing fundamental parameters, such as the optimal physical characteristics of the sand medium – its particle size distribution (ideally 0.4mm-1.2mm), freedom from silt and clay, and inert nature – which proved critical for long-term, clog-free operation and effective biofiltration.

Each subsequent published study, such as those examining component ratios (McMurtry et al., 1997b), nutrient uptake by various crops (McMurtry et al., 1990a, 1993), and water use efficiency (McMurtry et al., 1997a), systematically built upon previous findings. For instance, understanding the nutrient generation capacity of a given fish biomass informed the necessary biofilter volume and surface area, which in turn dictated optimal planting densities and crop selection strategies. This progressive refinement allowed the researchers to develop a holistic understanding of the system’s complex interactions, from microbial dynamics within the sand bed to the physiological responses of both fish and plants. The culmination of this extensive body of work – encompassing both the foundational unpublished trials and the peer-reviewed publications – was the formulation of comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations for constructing and operating an iAVs. These guidelines address everything from material selection (like sand specifications and liner types) and system geometry (tank shapes, bed slopes, drain design) to operational protocols (feeding rates, irrigation cycles, planting strategies, and pH management), all designed to ensure the system’s stability, efficiency, and productivity as demonstrated through years of rigorous scientific inquiry.

Accessibility, Simplicity, and Open-Source Ethos
iAVs was designed to be built and operated effectively without requiring operators to possess specialized training or advanced technical knowledge (Gross, 1988; Simos & Gordon-Smith, 2023). This design philosophy was guided by the “KISS principle” (Keep It Simple, Stupid), aiming for ease of adoption and robust functionality, especially in resource-limited settings where complex technologies might be impractical. Research at NCSU was not pursued because the technology was considered to have evolved to a point where it was ready for grower application. NCSU tried to licence the technology exclusively to multinational corporations, but Dr. McMurtry engaged in a year-long battle to retain the ‘rights of invention’ to iAVs and he made it open-source so it can be used without restriction by anyone.

The Multifunctional Sand Biofilter
Vegetable crops in the aqua-vegeculture system are cultivated in scientifically designed sand beds, which are multi-functional and integral to its operation. These beds, typically constructed by lining an excavated area, with the bottom of the sand biofilter sloped (e.g., 2cm per meter) towards the fish tank to facilitate gravity drainage (Gross, 1988; Sanders & McMurtry, 1988), and filling it with a specific grade of coarse builder’s sand (ideally 0.4mm-1.2mm particle size, free of silt/clay, providing immense specific surface area for microbial biofilms) (McMurtry et al., 1997a; Gross, 1988), though it is crucial to ensure that sand, especially if sourced near industrial areas, is free from pollutants; testing for contamination is advisable if the source is questionable. Similarly, if the water source for the system is from an unsuitable source, it should also be tested for contaminants to ensure the safety and health of both fish and plants.

The functional characteristics of appropriate sand are consistent and effective regardless of climate, serve as: a physical substrate providing well-aerated and readily draining anchorage for plant roots; a mechanical filter trapping particulate waste from the fish tank effluent; a site for the aerobic decomposition of these organic solids; and, most critically, as “sand biofilters” where the sand and plant roots function together to purify the water, transforming over 2-3 months into a biologically active, living soil equivalent, fostering robust microbial diversity, enabling natural nutrient release beyond simple NPK, and enhancing overall plant health and resilience (Diver & Rinehart, 2000; Goodman, 2011; Gross, 1988; McMurtry et al., 1987; McMurtry et al., 1990a; McMurtry et al., 1997b, Sanders & McMurtry, 1988).

Sand Bed Surface Design and Function
The surface of the sand bed is prepared with parallel ridges for planting and furrows for water distribution. The furrows also serve as sites for surface detritus accumulation and mineralization, with detritus intentionally managed on the furrow surface, preventing the clogging issues seen in other media-based systems. The ridges remain free of detritus and act as ventilation stacks that allow the sand to ‘breathe’ and are vital to prevent clogging (Gross, 1988; Sanders & McMurtry, 1988). A critical aspect of this design, as demonstrated in the iAVs research, is that the sand, when correctly selected and the system operated as intended, does not clog and never requires cleaning or replacement, remaining functional indefinitely as a mature biological filter (McMurtry et al., 1997b; Gross, 1988).

The Reciprocating Biofilter (RBF) Operational Cycle
The operational cycle of the aqua-vegeculture system involves drawing effluent water, laden with fish ‘wastes’ and sediments, directly from the bottom of the fish tank—meaning no fish ‘waste’ is discarded as it all contributes to plant nutrition (McMurtry et al., 1997a; Gross, 1988). This water is then periodically pumped—often using a simple, single food-safe hose from the water pump to the sand biofilter, minimizing plumbing —onto the surface of the sand biofilters. This intermittent irrigation regime, a Reciprocating Biofilter (RBF) function, involves flooding the beds multiple times daily (e.g., 8 times daily, exchanging ~25% of tank volume per cycle, as per McMurtry et al., 1997a, 1997b), but with no irrigation at night. This flood-and-drain cycle is crucial: as water drains, it actively pulls atmospheric oxygen deep into the sand bed, super-oxygenating the root zone and microbial communities, allowing for extended drainage periods that are crucial for aeration and microbial activity (McMurtry et al., 1997a; Gross, 1988).

Microbial Ecology and System Chemistry
As the nutrient-rich water percolates through the sand, a complex microbial community, including beneficial nitrifying bacteria, becomes established (Gross, 1988; “Aquaculture in Greenhouses,” 1988). These bacteria are vital for converting toxic ammonia from fish waste first into nitrites and subsequently into nitrates, a form less toxic to fish and readily available for plant uptake; plants may also assimilate nitrogen in organic amino acid forms (Diver & Rinehart, 2000; Gross, 1988; “Aquaculture in Greenhouses,” 1988).

System management includes maintaining water pH, which tends to stabilize naturally within an acceptable range (e.g., 6.4 +/- .4) due to the buffering capacity of the sand bed, nitrification processes (which are less dominant due to direct ammonium uptake by plants), and plant uptake of anions, eliminating the need for alkaline amendments when the system is balanced (McMurtry et al., 1997b; McMurtry et al., 1990b; Gross, 1988). If all the plants are harvested at the same time, or there is insufficient plant growth it may cause the pH to lower rapidly, as demonstrated in the iAVs research.

Free ammonia (NH₃) is kept below toxic levels for the fish, partly by maintaining pH below 7.0 (Owens & Hall, 1990). The recommended pH for iAVs is 6.4 +/- .4 and the pH should be adjusted, if needed, before it is added to the fish tank. The plants then assimilate these nitrates and other dissolved minerals, effectively acting as a “living filter” and purifying the water, which in turn influences the growth of the fish (Diver & Rinehart, 2000; McMurtry et al., 1990c; “Aqua-Vegeculture Systems,” 1988; Gross, 1988).

Integrated Management: Plants and Fish
Planting strategies involve a diverse mix of crops, such as a 50/50 balance of fruiting plants and other vegetables, and ensuring plants are at different growth stages through staggered harvesting to maintain continuous nutrient uptake and system stability (Simos & Gordon-Smith, 2023). It is recommended to focus on nutrient dense crops rather than plants like lettuce which uptake mostly nitrogen.

Fish stocking densities are also managed according to defined guidelines (e.g., starting with 80-100 tilapia fingerlings/1000L) to balance nutrient production with the biofilter’s capacity (McMurtry et al., 1997a; Gross, 1988).

The Slit Drain: Ensuring Aeration, Drainage, and Water Conservation
The biologically filtered water then drains from the beds, via a simple slit drain system (a horizontal cut in the liner, not a restrictive pipe). This design is essential for the ‘breathing’ action of the bed, maximizing aeration, ensuring complete and rapid drainage, and, in combination with the sloped bottom, ensures there are no anaerobic zones, enhancing aeration via suction (Diver & Rinehart, 2000; Gross, 1988; McMurtry et al., 1987).

This completes the recirculation loop, maintaining water quality suitable for fish health and growth while employing extremely conservative water-management practices (Gross, 1988; McMurtry et al., 1987; “Aqua-Vegeculture Systems,” 1988; McClintic, 1990). This makes iAVs highly suitable for food security in arid and resource-poor regions.

iAVs: A Precisely Engineered System, Distinct from Aquaponics
Crucially, iAVs is not an aquaponics technique. The standard and widely accepted definition of aquaponics refers to a system that combines aquaculture (raising aquatic animals) with hydroponics (cultivating plants in water, typically without soil or in an inert medium, where nutrients are delivered in a pre-dissolved form). In contrast, iAVs operates under distinct principles, representing an integration of aquaculture with olericulture (a branch of horticulture) where plants are grown in a biologically active sand medium that also serves as the primary biofilter.

Furthermore, iAVs is specifically designed to function as a holistic, integrated unit, where its parts and operating procedures are based on scientific research to work synergistically. It is a precisely engineered system; altering individual components without a thorough understanding of their interplay is akin to modifying a high-performance engine without appreciating the engineering principles involved – the result is often a significant reduction in efficiency, or even outright failure. This differs from many general aquaponic approaches, which can be more modular or “piecemeal,” allowing for a wider variety of component assembly and operating principles that may not be as tightly coupled or optimized as the original iAVs design. The Speraneo modification, replacing sand with gravel, significantly reduced efficiency by compromising filtration, aeration, and nutrient cycling, leading to the need for separate biofilters and solids removal in many subsequent “aquaponic” designs.

The Significance of ‘Aqua-Vegeculture’
The deliberate avoidance of the ‘-ponics’ suffix in naming the Integrated Aqua-Vegeculture System is also significant. Derived from the Greek word ponos, meaning ‘work’ or ‘toil,’ the ‘-ponics’ suffix in agricultural contexts often carries connotations of intensive labor, highly engineered environments, and meticulous management of inputs. The iAVs, in stark contrast, was conceived and designed with an emphasis on functional and technological simplicity, aiming to harness natural ecological processes, minimize operator labor, and function with a high degree of self-regulation (McMurtry et al., 1994; McMurtry et al., 1997a; Gross, 1988). Thus, the nomenclature reflects a conscious philosophical choice to distinguish iAVs from systems that might imply greater toil, underscoring its design for ease of operation and ecological integration rather than intensive, engineered control.

A Final Message

We invite you to explore iAVs and engage with us.  

We seek to help people in establishing food security by implementing water-conserving  intensive agriculture to the benefit of your community, region and the world.  We would like to help you in helping others to learn and to implement the iAVs technology,  such that together we may improve the health, security and vitality of their communities.

You can read the full analysis and evidence here:

Taylor, B. (2025). The Conflation of iAVs and Sandponics: A Commentary on Sewilam et al., (2022). Zenodo.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17684492

References

  1. Ali, P. A., & Watson, R. (2016). Peer review and the publication process. Nursing Open, 3(4), 193-202. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.54
  2. Baba, M., & Ikeguchi, N. (2015). Industrial Cultivation Using the Latest Sandponics System. SEI Technical Review, 80, 104–108.
  3. Bhattacharjee, M. (2025). SUSTAINABLE FOOD PRODUCTION USING WASTEWATER AQUAPONICS AS AN ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY SYSTEM. Agricultural & Applied Economics Association Annual Meeting, Washington D.C., July 27-29, 2025. Retrieved from https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/355579/
  4. COPE Council. (2019, November). COPE Guidelines: Retraction Guidelines. Committee on Publication Ethics. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4
  5. El-Nemr, M. A., El-Desuki, M., El-Bassiony, A. M., & Fawzy, Z. F. (2012). Effect of different potassium levels on the growth, yield and quality of tomato grown in sand-ponic culture. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 6(3), 779-784.
  6. Goodman, E. R. (2011). Aquaponics: community and economic development (Master’s thesis). Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  7. Gross, H. D. (1988). The Aqua-Vegeculture System. [Unpublished manuscript/Internal Report]. Office of International Programs, North Carolina State University.
  8. iavs.info. (n.d.). Retrieved May 17, 2025 from https://www.iavs.info/
  9. Justia Trademarks. (n.d.). SANDPONICS – Trademark Details. Trademark Registration No. 5409239. Retrieved May 17, 2025, from https://trademarks.justia.com/872/79/sandponics-87279671.html
  10. Kanazawa, S., Matsuo, K., Baba, M., Misu, H., & Ikeguchi, N. (2017). High Quality Agricultural Production Support System by Smart Sand Cultivation Device “New Sandponics”. SEI Technical Review, 84, 165-171.
  11. Kimera, F., Mugwanya, M., Dawood, M., & Sewilam, H. (2023). Growth response of kale (Brassica oleracea) and Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) under saline aqua‐sandponics‐vegeculture system. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 2427. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-29509-9
  12. Knopf, J. W. (2006). Doing a Literature Review. PS, Political Science & Politics, 39(1), 127-132. https://doi.org/10.1017/S10490965060602DoingALiteratureReview
  13. Kotzen, B., Appelbaum, S., Məmmədova, G., & Junge, R. (2019). Aquaponics: Alternative Types and Approaches. In B. Kotzen & S. Appelbaum (Eds.), Aquaponics Food Production Systems: Combined Aquaculture and Hydroponic Production Technologies for the Future (pp. 131-168). Springer, Cham.
  14. Lukhwareni, R., Nomngongo, P. N., Nibamureke, U. M. C., Moila, K., Sekete, N. W., Ndamane, G. T., Njom, H. A., Sithole, L., Rudolph, M., & Ngobese, N. Z. (2025). The assessment of Oreochromis mossambicus muscle tissue and the yield performance of Solanum tuberosum in a small‑scale sandponics system. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 32, 36495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-025-36495-0
  15. Makokha, P., Ssali, R. T., Rajendran, S., Wanjala, B. W., Matasyoh, L. G., Kiplagat, O. K., McEwan, M. A., & Low, J. W. (2020). Comparative analysis for producing sweetpotato pre-basic seed using sandponics and conventional systems. Journal of Crop Improvement, 34(1), 84-102. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427528.2019.1674758
  16. McMurtry, M. R. (1990b). Performance of an integrated aquaculture-olericulture system as influenced by component ratio (Doctoral dissertation). North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC. Retrieved from https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/1840.20/41550
  17. McMurtry, M. R., Nelson, P. V., & Sanders, D. C. (1987). Mineral Content and Yield of Bush Bean, Cucumber, and Tomato Cultivated in Sand and Irrigated with Recirculating Aquaculture Water (Technical Bulletin No. 289). North Carolina Agricultural Research Service.
  18. McMurtry, M. R., Nelson, P. V., Sanders, D. C., & Hodges, L. (1990a). Sand culture of vegetables using recirculated aquacultural effluents. Applied Agricultural Research, 5(4), 280–284.
  19. McMurtry, M. R., Sanders, D. C., & Nelson, P. V. (1993). Mineral nutrient concentration and uptake by tomato irrigated with recirculating aquaculture water as influenced by quantity of fish waste products supplied. Journal of Plant Nutrition, 16(3), 407-419. https://doi.org/10.1080/01904169309364551
  20. McMurtry, M. R., Sanders, D. C., Cure, J. D., Hodson, R. G., Haning, B. C., & St. Amand, P. C. (1997a). Efficiency of water use of an integrated fish/vegetable co‐culture system. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society, 28(4), 420-428. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-7345.1997.tb00281.x
  21. McMurtry, M. R., Sanders, D. C., Patterson, R. P., & Nash, A. (1997b). Effects of biofilter/culture tank volume ratios on productivity of a recirculating fish/vegetable co-culture system. Journal of Applied Aquaculture, 7(4), 33-51. https://doi.org/10.1300/J028v07n04_03
  22. MyAquaponics. (2022). Sandponics Magic – From Barren Sand to Luscious Food Jungle in 2 Months : 2022 [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/zE15HXvg1lA
  23. Nair, C. S., Alsudain, M. B. H., Manoharan, R., Nishanth, D., Subramanian, R., Manga, A., & Jaleel, A. (2024a). Sandponics: A Sustainable Agriculture Solution for Food Security and Resource Efficiency in Arid Regions. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture and Environment, 3(4), e70033. https://doi.org/10.1002/sae2.70033
  24. Nair, C. S., Manoharan, R., Nishanth, D., Subramanian, R., Neumann, E., & Jaleel, A. (2024b). Recent advancements in aquaponics with special emphasis on its sustainability. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society. Published online. https://doi.org/10.1111/jwas.13116
  25. Salman, J. R., & Abd-Alwahab, S. K. (2024). Exploring the Physiological Traits of Eggplant (Solanum melongena L.) Cultivated in a Sandponics Growing System. University of Thi-Qar Journal of Agricultural Research, 13(1), 212-216. https://doi.org/10.54174/utjagr.v13i1.307
  26. Sewilam, H., Kimera, F., Nasr, P., & Dawood, M. (2022). A sandponics comparative study investigating different sand media based integrated aqua vegeculture systems using desalinated water. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 11093. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-15291-7
  27. Smith, R. (2006). Peer review: a flawed process at the heart of science and journals. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 99(4), 178-182. https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680609900414
  28. Subramanian, R., Nair, C. S., Manoharan, R., & Jaleel, A. (2024). Sustainable leafy green production in sand media based integrated aqua vegeculture system under salinity. Research Square (Preprint). https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4310047/v1

Leave a Reply