MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408499356 · doi:10.1016/j.afres.2025.100838

The nexus of IoT and aquaculture: A bibliometric analysis

2025· article· en· W4408499356 on OpenAlexaff
Abderahman Rejeb, Karim Rejeb, John G. Keogh

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Food Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring Technologies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNexus (standard)AquacultureInternet of ThingsData scienceFisheryGeographyRegional scienceBusinessComputer scienceFish <Actinopterygii>World Wide WebBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Internet of Things (IoT) in aquaculture presents significant opportunities for improving the sector's productivity, sustainability, and resilience. This study aims to achieve two primary goals: to deliver an extensive overview of IoT applications in aquaculture and to pinpoint emerging trends and research gaps, thereby directing future academic endeavors in the aquaculture field. Through bibliometric analysis, which involved keyword co-occurrence and article co-citation network analyses, we investigated 428 publications from 2012 to 2024 retrieved from Scopus. The review indicates a significant rise in investigative efforts, especially in recent years, highlighting the sector's increasing focus on the role of IoT in tackling the distinct challenges aquaculture faces, including water quality monitoring, disease prevention, and resource efficiency. Prominent themes recognized encompass advanced aquaculture systems, water quality and health monitoring, and sophisticated forecasting tools. This investigation enhances the existing knowledge base by emphasizing key themes, significant studies, and essential technological advancements in IoT-enabled aquaculture, providing one of the initial bibliometric assessments in this swiftly developing field. Future research should focus on enhancing interoperability among IoT devices, improving data security and privacy, integrating artificial intelligence for predictive analytics, and expanding IoT applications to support small-scale and resource-constrained aquaculture operations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.817
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.1830.256
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied Food ResearchSame topicWater Quality Monitoring TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207