Wild fish cannot meet the global demand for fish, making aquaculture the most suitable alternative to support the increase in fish consumption (López-Mas et al., 2021). Additionally, the FAO’s SOFIA 2024 report highlights that aquaculture has surpassed fishing as the primary source of fish and seafood supply.
However, the debate among consumers about choosing between farm-raised fish and wild-caught fish has been ongoing for years, and it is important to understand the differences in terms of nutrition, environmental impact, and health implications.
This article delves into the key distinctions, helping you make an informed decision when it comes to seafood. However, it is important to note that the information provided in this article, while based on scientific study results, should not be considered as specific medical or nutritional advice. Consult with a healthcare professional or a qualified dietitian for personalized recommendations.
The Public Perception Problem: Are Farmed Fish Less Healthy?
Let’s face it, the image of farm-raised fish often comes with a side of skepticism. Many consumers worry that unsanitary aquaculture environments or artificial fish feeds compromise nutritional value compared to their wild counterparts.
In studies conducted in five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom), López-Mas et al. (2021) and Wongprawmas et al. (2022) reported that European consumers believed wild fish had better taste and superior quality, but that farmed fish was superior in terms of control, price, availability, and ethics.
Beyond the Hype: Unveiling Nutritional Nuances
The truth, as with most things in life, is more nuanced. Recent scientific studies, compiled through a comprehensive literature review, paint a more complex picture. The nutritional quality of both farmed and wild fish can vary depending on several factors, including:
- Species: Different fish species naturally have varying levels of vitamins, minerals, and healthy fats.
- Geography: The regional environment where the fish is raised or caught can influence its nutrient profile.
- Diet: In the case of farmed fish, the specific ingredients used in their feed can affect their nutritional content.
Farmed vs Wild Fish: A Nutritional Breakdown
Farmed Fish or Wild Fish?
Below we provide definitions to help differentiate farm-raised fish from wild-caught fish, although for aquaculturists and fishermen these differences may seem obvious, they are not so for seafood consumers.
What is Farmed Fish?
Farmed fish comes from aquaculture, the activity of raising fish in controlled environments such as ponds, cages, or tanks. This production method allows for close control of the fish’s diet, growth, and environment, resulting in a consistent and predictable supply of seafood. Common farmed fish species include salmon, tilapia, catfish, and carp; aquaculture farms also produce crustaceans (shrimp, crabs), mollusks (mussels, oysters, scallops), echinoderms (sea urchins, sea cucumbers), seaweeds, and more.
What is Wild Fish?
Wild fish is caught in its natural habitat, such as oceans, rivers, and lakes. This method relies on natural fish populations, which can lead to fluctuations in availability and price. Popular wild fish species include tuna, cod, sole, and salmon.
Key Differences Between Farmed and Wild Fish
Flavor and Texture
- Farmed Fish: The flavor and texture of farmed fish can vary depending on the species, diet, and farming conditions. Generally, farmed fish tend to have a milder flavor and softer texture than wild fish.
- Wild Fish: The flavor and texture of wild fish are more varied and complex due to their natural diet and active lifestyle. Wild fish typically have a more intense flavor and firmer texture.
Nutrition
Farmed Fish
The nutritional content of farmed fish can be affected by their diet, which often includes feeds supplemented with omega-3 and other nutrients. Farmed fish may have higher levels of omega-3 than wild fish. Jensen et al. (2021) reported that farmed salmon contained significantly more fat (18%) than wild salmon (6%); additionally, Yiğit et al. (2024) highlighted that farmed fish contribute higher levels of amino acids and fats compared to their wild counterparts.
Bartley et al. (2022) recommend focusing on various strategies to achieve better results in nutrition and health: aquaculture feeds, genetic selection, whole fish and system approaches, and ecological aquaculture farming systems.
Wild Fish
Wild fish obtain their nutrients from their natural diet, which varies by species and habitat. Wild fish may have higher levels of certain minerals, such as iron and zinc, compared to farmed fish. Jensen et al. (2021) reported that wild salmon had a slightly higher protein content (16%) compared to farmed salmon (15%); while Heilpern et al. (2021) concluded that replacing wild freshwater fishing with chicken and aquaculture in Iquitos (Peru) has the potential to exacerbate iron deficiencies and limit the supply of essential fatty acids in a region already experiencing a high prevalence of anemia and malnutrition.
Heilpern et al. (2023) compared the concentrations of six essential dietary nutrients in over 5,000 species of wild fish, aquaculture species, poultry, and livestock, representing over 65% of animals consumed globally; and concluded that wild fish are richer in nutrients and more variable than farmed animals. The researchers also estimated that achieving the recommended intake of all nutrients with farmed species could require consuming almost four times more biomass than with wild fish.
Francis et al. (2024) compared the nutritional content and potential contaminants of two popular fish options in Sabah (Malaysia), wild and farmed: tilapia and Asian sea bass, and reported:
- Wild Tilapia: Contained a high amount of protein (16.9%) and offered more carbohydrates (0.7%) and moisture (80.25%) compared to farmed tilapia. However, farmed tilapia had higher fat content (3.55%) and more overall energy (94.5 kcal per 100 g).
- Farmed Sea Bass: Led in terms of protein (18.45%), fat (0.9%), carbohydrates (0.8%), and ash content (21.04%), translating to more energy (85.5 kcal per 100 g) compared to wild sea bass.
- Safety First: Both wild and farmed tilapia and sea bass had safe levels of iron for human consumption. Interestingly, only wild tilapia contained detectable levels of zinc.
Sustainability
Farmed Fish
The sustainability of aquaculture is a complex and controversial topic. Some aquaculture practices can have negative environmental impacts, such as nutrient pollution and antibiotic use. However, aquaculture can also offer environmental benefits, such as reducing pressure on wild fish populations. López-Mas et al. (2023) conducted a survey of consumers in France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain and reported that European consumers perceived farmed fish as more sustainable, locally sourced, providing environmental benefits, generating employment, improving living conditions, fostering rural development, and ensuring fairer fish prices than wild fish.
Wild Fish
The sustainability of wild fishing depends on effective management of fish populations and the protection of marine ecosystems. Overfishing and destructive fishing practices can threaten the sustainability of wild fish populations. López-Mas et al. (2023) reported that consumers in France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain believed wild fish ensured animal welfare and were more organic but caused more environmental harm than farmed fish.
Contaminants
- Farmed Fish: Farmed fish may be exposed to water and feed contaminants, such as antibiotics, pesticides, and heavy metals. However, sustainable aquaculture practices can help reduce exposure to contaminants.
- Wild Fish: Wild fish may be exposed to environmental contaminants, such as mercury, PCBs, and dioxins. Jensen et al. (2021) determined that wild salmon contained higher levels of certain contaminants (dioxins, dioxin-like PCBs, mercury, and arsenic) compared to farmed salmon; however, all levels were well below the European Union’s safety limits.
The levels of contaminants in wild fish can vary by species, location, and age. Here are some studies:
Heavy Metals
Simukoko et al. (2021) evaluated heavy metal levels in wild and farmed tilapia in Lake Kariba, Zambia, and found that essential metals were higher in farmed tilapia, while non-essential metals were higher in wild tilapia. Habib et al. (2024) collected wild and farmed fish (Labeo rohita) to determine heavy metal concentrations and concluded that wild fish generally contain higher concentrations of heavy metals compared to farmed fish, suggesting potential health risks for consumers who primarily consume wild fish.
On the other hand, Tahity et al. (2022) reported that farmed barramundi (Lates calcarifer) had higher levels of heavy metals, particularly lead (Pb), in the liver compared to wild fish; however, in both wild and farmed fish, muscle tissue contained the lowest levels of heavy metals compared to gills and liver, and the measured levels of most metals in both wild and farmed fish were below recommended safety limits for human consumption.
Microplastics
Garcia et al. (2021) studied the concentration of microplastics in Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) from aquaculture farms in the Huila region of Colombia, and two local species (Prochilodus magdalenae and Pimelodus grosskopfii), naturally present in surface waters; and concluded that wild species had a higher prevalence of microplastics; however, farmed fish had a greater diversity of microplastics.
Sultana et al. (2023) reported that in Bangladesh, wild fish (Gibelion catla, Heteropneustes fossilis, Labeo rohita, Mystus tengara, and Ompok pabda) from the Padma, Turag, and Bhairab rivers had a higher percentage (88.4%) of microplastics compared to their farmed counterparts (66.67%), and polyethylene was the most common type of microplastic found, followed by polyester and others.
Price
- Farmed Fish: Farmed fish is usually cheaper than wild fish due to lower production costs and greater efficiency.
- Wild Fish: The price of wild fish can be more variable due to availability and demand. In general, wild fish tends to be more expensive than farmed fish.
Methodologies and Tools to Identify the Origin and Sustainability of Fish
Certifications
Certificates, or labels, play a crucial role in ensuring that aquaculture and fishery products meet rigorous sustainability and social responsibility standards, providing confidence to consumers and international markets. Here is a list that can help you select your aquaculture or fishery products:
- ASC (Aquaculture Stewardship Council): Global certification for aquaculture products that ensures sustainable production practices.
- MSC (Marine Stewardship Council): Certification for sustainable fishing in oceans and seas, ensuring that products come from healthy fish populations and responsible fishing methods.
- GlobalGAP Aquaculture: Worldwide standard for Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) in aquaculture, covering food safety, environmental, animal welfare, and natural resource management aspects.
- BAP (Best Aquaculture Practices): Certification program that covers environmental, social, food safety, and animal health aspects in aquaculture.
- Friend of the Sea: Certification for seafood products from sustainable fishing and aquaculture, ensuring compliance with environmental and social criteria.
- GLOBALG.A.P. Chain of Custody (CoC): Certification that ensures the traceability and custody chain of aquaculture products from the farm to the final consumer, guaranteeing quality and sustainability.
- Naturland Aquaculture: Certification that promotes organic and sustainable production in aquaculture, covering environmental and social standards.
Stable Isotopes of Carbon (δ13C) and Nitrogen (δ15N)
Liu et al., (2020) used ratios of stable isotopes of carbon (δ13C) and nitrogen (δ15N) from fish scales to differentiate between wild, lake-farmed, and pond-farmed carp from Dongting Lake, China. They achieved discrimination accuracies of 100%, 95%, and 100% for wild, lake-farmed, and pond-farmed carp in the training set, and 100% in the test set.
Which Type of Fish is Better?
The answer to the question of which type of fish is better, farmed or wild, is not straightforward. Both types of fish offer advantages and disadvantages, and the best option for you will depend on your individual priorities.
Factors to consider when choosing between farmed and wild fish:
- Flavor and Texture: If you prefer a milder flavor and softer texture, farmed fish may be a good option. If you prefer a more intense flavor and firmer texture, wild fish may be a better choice.
- Nutrition: If you are concerned about getting enough omega-3s, farmed fish may be a good option. If you are concerned about getting enough minerals, wild fish may be a better choice.
- Sustainability: If you are concerned about environmental impact, research the aquaculture practices and wild fishing practices used to produce the fish you are considering. Choose fish from sustainable sources certified by organizations such as the Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC) or the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC).
- Contaminants: If you are concerned about exposure to contaminants, choose fish with low levels of mercury and other contaminants. You can find information about contaminant levels in fish on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website or organizations like Consumer Reports.
- Price: If you are on a budget, farmed fish may be a more affordable option. However, do not skimp on quality. Choose fish from reliable sources and consider the factors above when making your decision.
General Recommendations for Consumers
Vary Your Diet: Eat a variety of farmed and wild fish to get a full range of nutrients and reduce your exposure to any particular contaminant.
- Choose Sustainable Fish: Choose fish from certified sustainable sources to support responsible fishing and aquaculture practices.
- Consume Fish in Moderation: Fish is a healthy source of protein and omega-3 fatty acids, but it is important to consume wild fish (e.g., tuna) in moderation because they have the potential to accumulate heavy metals or microplastics.
Recommendations for Aquaculturists
Based on the findings of López-Mas et al., (2021), Wongprawmas et al., (2022) propose the following recommendations for the aquaculture industry:
- It is necessary to address consumers’ negative beliefs about farmed fish (e.g., antibiotics, freshness) through targeted marketing campaigns. In this regard, information should be provided on the positive impacts of aquaculture.
- Marketing efforts should emphasize the positive aspects of farmed fish:
- Lower levels of chemical hazards (heavy metals, contaminants)
- Lower biological risks (parasites)
- Segmenting consumers based on their beliefs allows for specific marketing strategies to improve the image of farmed fish for each group.
Conclusion
By making informed decisions about the fish you consume, you can support sustainable fishing and aquaculture practices, protect your health, and enjoy the delicious benefits of fish as part of a healthy diet.
In this article, we describe a series of criteria that consumers should review when choosing between wild-caught and farm-raised fish. We also cite some strategies that aquaculturists should implement to reduce the negative publicity that aquaculture products have and to promote their consumption.
References
Bartley, D. M., M. Beveridge, M. C., Phillips, M. J., J. Tacon, A. G., & Verdegem, M. (2022). Enhancing the nutritional values of farmed fish production systems. Reviews in Aquaculture, 15(1), 3-6. https://doi.org/10.1111/raq.12722
Francis, L. G., Aming, M. F., Mohd Idris, S. I., Mazlan, N., Othman, R., Fui Fui, C., Shapawi, R., & Shah, M. D. (2024). Comparison of nutritional compositions and heavy metals analysis between wild and farmed Tilapia (Oreochromis sp.) and Asian Seabass (Lates sp.) in Sabah, Malaysia. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 133, 106467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2024.106467
Garcia, A.G., Suárez, D.C., Li, J. et al. A comparison of microplastic contamination in freshwater fish from natural and farmed sources. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28, 14488–14497 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-11605-2
Habib, S.S., Naz, S., Fazio, F. et al. Assessment and Bioaccumulation of Heavy Metals in Water, Fish (wild and Farmed) and Associated Human Health Risk. Biol Trace Elem Res 202, 725–735 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12011-023-03703-2
Heilpern, S. A., Fiorella, K., Cañas, C., Flecker, A. S., Moya, L., Naeem, S., Sethi, S. A., Uriarte, M., & DeFries, R. (2021). Substitution of inland fisheries with aquaculture and chicken undermines human nutrition in the Peruvian Amazon. Nature Food, 2(3), 192-197. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00242-8
Heilpern, S. A., Almeida, R. M., Fiorella, K. J., Flecker, A. S., Williams, D., & McIntyre, P. B. (2023). Nutritional challenges of substituting farmed animals for wild fish in human diets. Environmental Research Letters, 18(11), 114030.
Jensen, I., Eilertsen, K., Otnæs, C. H., Mæhre, H. K., & Elvevoll, E. O. (2020). An Update on the Content of Fatty Acids, Dioxins, PCBs and Heavy Metals in Farmed, Escaped and Wild Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar L.) in Norway. Foods, 9(12), 1901. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9121901
Liu, Z., Yuan, Y., Zhao, Y., Zhang, Y., Nie, J., Shao, S., & Rogers, K. M. (2020). Differentiating wild, lake-farmed and pond-farmed carp using stable isotope and multi-element analysis of fish scales with chemometrics. Food Chemistry, 328, 127115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.127115
López-Mas, L., Claret, A., Reinders, M. J., Banovic, M., Krystallis, A., & Guerrero, L. (2021). Farmed or wild fish? Segmenting European consumers based on their beliefs. Aquaculture, 532, 735992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2020.735992
López-Mas, L., Claret, A., Arvisenet, G. et al. European consumers’ beliefs about the main pillars of the sustainability: a comparison between wild and farmed fish. Aquacult Int 31, 2035–2055 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10499-023-01070-2
Simukoko, C. K., Mwakalapa, E. B., Bwalya, P., Muzandu, K., Berg, V., Mutoloki, S., … Lyche, J. L. (2021). Assessment of heavy metals in wild and farmed tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) on Lake Kariba, Zambia: implications for human and fish health. Food Additives & Contaminants: Part A, 39(1), 74–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/19440049.2021.1975830
Sultana, N., Tista, R.R., Islam, M.S. et al. Microplastics in freshwater wild and farmed fish species of Bangladesh. Environ Sci Pollut Res 30, 72009–72025 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-26512-5
Tahity, T., Islam, M. R., Bhuiyan, N. Z., Choudhury, T. R., Yu, J., Noman, M. A., Hosen, M. M., Quraishi, S. B., Paray, B. A., Arai, T., & Hossain, M. B. (2022). Heavy Metals Accumulation in Tissues of Wild and Farmed Barramundi from the Northern Bay of Bengal Coast, and Its Estimated Human Health Risks. Toxics, 10(8), 410. https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics10080410
Wongprawmas, R., Sogari, G., Gai, F., Parisi, G., Menozzi, D., & Mora, C. (2022). How information influences consumers’ perception and purchasing intention for farmed and wild fish. Aquaculture, 547, 737504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2021.737504
Yiğit, Ü., Ergün, S., Yiğit, M. (2024). An extensive review of human health benefits from consuming farmed or wild fish, specifically gilthead seabream (Sparus aurata). Aquatic Research, 7(3), 166-177. https://doi.org/10.3153/AR24015
