Pollution found in Distant and Deep-sea Wild Fish

Research, Innovation, Inspiration, Human Health Academic and Business Writing Pollution found in Distant and Deep-sea Wild Fish

  • Avatar
    ChinaNudge Researcher
    Binbin
    University: Zhejiang University
    Nationality: China
    September 30, 2019 at 3:51 am

    Earlier this year researchers first reported microplastics found in fish from Nansha Islands in China[1]. The evidence of these pollutants was found in deep sea fish as well [2].
    “Isolating plastic fibres from inside animals from nearly 11 kilometres deep (seven miles) just shows the extent of the problem. Also, the number of areas we found this in, and the thousands of kilometre distances involved shows it is not just an isolated case, this is global.” Commented Dr Alan Jamieson, who led relevant study at Newcastle University[4].
    Recently people began to find more and more traces of various forms of pollution in the ocean. There are so many pollutants that even cannot be listed: nanoparticles, microplastics, organic pollutants, Pesticides, radionuclides, oil spills, etc.[3] Fish is facing severe water pollution, with nowhere to escape.
    For the wild fish, especially those migratory fish like salmon, this cause a series of serious problems. Populations, habitats, and the quality of the wild fish have been greatly damaged[5].
    At a certain stage, wild salmon will swim by Delta that is usually the heart of bustling city, of which the industrial and domestic waste pollute the nearby water environment[6].
    Is that means nowadays we should capture fish and other aquatic cultures carefully to make sure that they are not be polluted? I don’t think it is a good idea. Due to a longtime overfishing and pollution of water resources, captured fish will face with the grim living environment which led to a lower production.
    In fact, though once thriving, the production of captured fish has stagnated since the late1980s. In order to feed growing global population, aquaculture has taken the responsibilities of keeping up with the faster increasing human consumption of fish (151 million in 2016)[7].
    Up until 2016, the farmed fish has occupied 46.82% of human consumption[7]. I believe in the close future the proportion would get higher to match the current demand of the proteins with the reducing production of beef.
    At the same time, accumulation of these contaminants by biomagnification, causing hazards to human food safety. Although studies have shown that some compounds such as PAHs can be removed by fish, but some like PCBs, DDT and DDE are persistent in the environment and are widely present in fish tissues[8].
    Subtle effects of lower levels of these pollutants have been proved in fish consumption during pregnancy such as MeHg [9,10].
    However, fish farms mainly locate in remote environment with water recirculating system, which decline the impacts of most pollutants on the farmed fish. Compared to wild fish, growing under a wide range of regulatory withstand water quality, farmed fish can provide us with safer food.
    This planet seems has been totally polluted by human, that we cannot enjoy the foods directly from nature anymore. I believe the change of diet will be soon.
    Just about 10 years ago, farmed fish had been in human ‘avoid’ diet. However, since more and more people are beginning to be aware of the seriousness of over-fishing, the attitude changed gradually.
    There is also something about social sustainability. Take Japan for example, nowadays fewer young people would like to be a fisher, for the instability Sea Life cannot meet their needs of a safe, convenient and social life. This has been shown from the phenomenon that the old carry nearly all the work in fisheries.
    However, aquaculture provides the similar jobs without these disadvantages. Aquaculture is likely to provide new employment opportunities for the practitioners of decline fishing, and the young labors.
    To be fair, bad agricultural condition such as the low quality of water, could cause a concern of the welfare of farm fish.
    However, these year techniques development already allow a better living environment and lower density for these aquatic creatures. Compared to an unstable surrounding of the wild fish, which is difficult to monitor, ensuring the well-being through the whole producing process is more feasible.
    Furthermore, these controlled processes can also make sure the food safety of aquaculture production, since we have no clear idea about traces of the captured fish and whether these areas have been polluted.
    Is that means we should eat food that all under controlled, to be extreme, how about synthetic meat? I don’t think existing synthetic meat products is good enough to meet the demand of the quantity and variety of protein of contemporary society.
    To sum up, farmed fish is the one we should choose.

    Reference
    [1] Nie H, Wang J, Xu K, et al. Microplastic pollution in water and fish samples around Nanxun Reef in Nansha Islands, South China Sea[J]. Sci Total Environ, 2019,696:134022.
    [2] Chan H, Dingle C, Not C. Evidence for non-selective ingestion of microplastic in demersal fish[J]. Mar Pollut Bull, 2019,149:110523.
    [3] Mearns A J, Bissell M, Morrison A M, et al. Effects of pollution on marine organisms[J]. Water Environ Res, 2019.
    [4] Tayler M. Plastics found in stomachs of deepest sea creatures [Online]. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/nov/15/plastics-found-in-stomachs-of-deepest-sea-creatures. accessed 15.11.17.
    [5] Affandi F A, Ishak M Y. Impacts of suspended sediment and metal pollution from mining activities on riverine fish population-a review[J]. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int, 2019,26(17):16939-16951.
    [6] Moore M N. Do nanoparticles present ecotoxicological risks for the health of the aquatic environment? [J]. Environ Int, 2006,32(8):967-976.
    [7] FAO. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2018 – Meeting the sustainable development goals. Rome. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
    [8] Ferreira M, Caetano M, Antunes P, et al. Assessment of contaminants and biomarkers of exposure in wild and farmed seabass[J]. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf, 2010,73(4):579-588.
    [9] Clarkson TW, Magos L. The toxicology of mercury and its chemical compounds. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2006 Sep; 36(8):609-62.
    [10] Oken E, Choi A L, Karagas M R, et al. Which Fish Should I Eat? Perspectives Influencing Fish Consumption Choices[J]. Environ Health Pers, 2012,6:790-799.

    Avatar
    ChinaNudge Researcher
    Binbin
    University: Zhejiang University
    Nationality: China
    September 30, 2019 at 5:47 am

    ACES ESSAY TITLE AND TUTORIAL
    ‘should we eat farmed fish’
    The title is a guide, use the broadest interpretation: ie the question could come from an ethical, environmental, sustainability or OTHER perspective.
    Produce an essay in a journalistic rather than hard-science style, written for the informed, rather than general reader (so you can assume a level of understanding of the industry).
    You could research and write an exposé
    http://www.robedwards.com/2013/02/farmed-salmon-killed-by-disease-leaps-to-85-million.html
    or you could write a response and challenge an exposé
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2006/oct/22/food.foodanddrink
    In either case you have to
    • argue the points with proven fact from the peer reviewed literature and other recognised sources, some of which may already be on the R drive in your recommended reading folder.
    • show that you can access and search for relevant facts in peer reviewed scientific literature, and that you can discriminate between these and an unfounded statement or personal opinion in a trade journal or newspaper article.
    • Show you have understood the course content and gone significantly beyond it in terms of acquiring facts on your chosen subject.

     With the essay the key differences between H4 and ACES+ are captured in the use of the terms ‘synthesise, distinguish and report’ referring to the use of information from peer reviewed literature and trade journals.

    One of your challenges is the word limit – your limit is 1500, is hard to write really well and keep it relatively brief, so every sentence must count, no waffle, no padding!
    You can use diagrams (original ones would be best, ie one you have produced to encapsulate a train of thought or illustrate a point). And you can use a picture, providing you acknowledge the source.
    I want references1 but use the number superscript method please,
    1. Reinardy, H.C. (2019) ACES Essay: ‘should we eat farmed fish’. Document downloaded Brightspace, accessed 09.09.19
    Or
    1Reinardy HC 2019 ACES Essay: ‘should we eat farmed fish’. Document downloaded Brightspace, accessed 09.09.19
    And make sure when you give the reference in full that whatever way you choose to cite it that the punctuation is consistent!
    If it’s a web reference make sure I can follow a link to it and that you give the date it was accessed.

    Avatar
    ChinaNudge Researcher
    Binbin
    University: Zhejiang University
    Nationality: China
    September 30, 2019 at 5:48 am

    New edition:

    Pollution found in Distant and Deep-sea Wild Fish
    Binbin CAI
    Earlier this year researchers first reported microplastics found in fish from Nansha Islands in China[1]. The evidence of these pollutants was found in deep sea fish as well [2].
    “Isolating plastic fibres from inside animals from nearly 11 kilometres deep (seven miles) just shows the extent of the problem. Also, the number of areas we found this in, and the thousands of kilometre distances involved shows it is not just an isolated case, this is global.” Commented project leader in seabed fish study at Newcastle University, Alan Jamieson[3].
    Recently people begin to find more and more traces of various forms of pollution in the ocean. There are so many pollutants that even cannot be listed: nanoparticles, microplastics, organic pollutants, pesticides, radionuclides, oil spills, etc[4]. Fish is facing severe water pollution, with nowhere to escape.
    For the wild fish, especially those migratory fish like salmon, this cause a series of serious problems. Populations, habitats, and the quality of the wild fish have been greatly damaged[5].
    At a certain stage, wild salmon will swim by Delta that is usually the heart of bustling city, of which the industrial and domestic waste pollute the nearby water environment[6].
    Is that means nowadays we should capture fish and other aquatic creatures carefully to make sure that they are not be polluted? I don’t think it is a good idea. Due to a longtime overfishing and pollution of water resources, captured fish is facing with the grim living environment which led to a lower production.
    In fact, though once thriving, the production of captured fish has stagnated since the late 1980s. In order to feed growing global population, aquaculture has taken the responsibilities of keeping up with the faster increasing human consumption of fish (151 million in 2016)[7].
    Up until 2016, the production of aquaculture has occupied 46.82% of the total[7]. I believe in the close future the proportion would get higher to match the current demand of the proteins with the reducing production of beef.
    At the same time, accumulation of these contaminants by biomagnification, causing hazards to human food safety. Although studies have shown that some compounds such as PAHs can be removed by fish, but some like PCBs, DDT and DDE are persistent in the environment and are widely present in fish tissues[8].
    Subtle effects of lower levels of these pollutants such as MeHg have been proved in fish consumption during pregnancy [9,10].
    However, fish farms mainly locate in remote environment with water recirculating system, which decline the impacts of most pollutants on the farmed fish. Compared to wild fish, growing under a wide range of regulatory withstand water quality, farmed fish can provide us with safer food.
    This planet seems has been totally polluted by human, that we cannot enjoy the foods directly from nature anymore. I believe the change of diet will be sooner than the result of environmental management.
    Just about 10 years ago, farmed fish had been in human ‘avoid’ diet. However, since more and more people are beginning to be aware of the seriousness of over-fishing, the attitude changed gradually.
    There is also something about social sustainability. Take Japan for example, nowadays fewer young people would like to be a fisher, for the instability Sea Life cannot meet their needs of a safe, convenient and social life. This has been shown from the phenomenon that the old carry nearly all the work in fisheries.
    However, aquaculture provides the similar jobs without these disadvantages. Aquaculture is likely to provide new employment opportunities for the practitioners of decline fishing, and the young labors.
    To be fair, bad agricultural condition such as the low quality of water, could cause a concern of the welfare of farm fish.
    However, these year techniques development already allow a better living environment and lower density for these aquatic creatures. Compared to an unstable surrounding of the wild fish, which is difficult to monitor, ensuring the well-being through the whole producing process is more feasible.
    Furthermore, these controlled processes can also make sure the food safety of aquaculture production, since we have no clear idea about traces of the captured fish and whether these areas have been polluted.
    Is that means we should eat food that all under controlled, to be extreme, how about synthetic meat? I don’t think existing synthetic meat products is good enough to meet the demand of the quantity and variety of protein of contemporary society.
    To sum up, farmed fish is the one we should choose.

    Reference
    [1] Nie H, Wang J, Xu K, et al. Microplastic pollution in water and fish samples around Nanxun Reef in Nansha Islands, South China Sea[J]. Sci Total Environ, 2019,696:134022.
    [2] Chan H, Dingle C, Not C. Evidence for non-selective ingestion of microplastic in demersal fish[J]. Mar Pollut Bull, 2019,149:110523.
    [3] Tayler M. Plastics found in stomachs of deepest sea creatures [Online]. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/nov/15/plastics-found-in-stomachs-of-deepest-sea-creatures. accessed 15.11.17.
    [4] Mearns A J, Bissell M, Morrison A M, et al. Effects of pollution on marine organisms[J]. Water Environ Res, 2019.
    [5] Affandi F A, Ishak M Y. Impacts of suspended sediment and metal pollution from mining activities on riverine fish population-a review[J]. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int, 2019,26(17):16939-16951.
    [6] Moore M N. Do nanoparticles present ecotoxicological risks for the health of the aquatic environment? [J]. Environ Int, 2006,32(8):967-976.
    [7] FAO. The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2018 – Meeting the sustainable development goals. Rome. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO.
    [8] Ferreira M, Caetano M, Antunes P, et al. Assessment of contaminants and biomarkers of exposure in wild and farmed seabass[J]. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf, 2010,73(4):579-588.
    [9] Clarkson TW, Magos L. The toxicology of mercury and its chemical compounds. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2006 Sep; 36(8):609-62.
    [10] Oken E, Choi A L, Karagas M R, et al. Which Fish Should I Eat? Perspectives Influencing Fish Consumption Choices[J]. Environ Health Pers, 2012,6:790-799.