# Integrating AIoT Technologies in Aquaculture: A Systematic Review
## 3 Components of AIoT in Aquaculture
### IoT Sensors
#### 3.1.4 Deployment Strategies
Data can be transmitted through various methods, including direct transmission to a cloud platform or local gateway. Cloud platforms offer scalable and accessible storage solutions, enabling data to be accessed and analysed anywhere with an internet connection. Local servers provide an alternative storage option, offering more control over data and potentially reducing latency in data access. The choice between cloud storage and local servers depends on data volume, accessibility requirements, security considerations, and available infrastructure. Both transmission and storage methods have significant implications for data accessibility and analysis, influencing the efficiency and effectiveness of AIoT applications in aquaculture. Regular sensor maintenance and calibration are indispensable for ensuring data accuracy and the long-term reliability of IoT sensors in aquaculture systems. Aquatic environments pose several challenges to sensor integrity. Biofouling, accumulating microorganisms, algae, and other aquatic organisms on sensor surfaces, can impede sensor function and lead to inaccurate readings. Corrosion, caused by prolonged exposure to water and dissolved substances, can also damage sensor components. Additionally, physical damage from im \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l} \hline \hline
**Feature** & **LoRa** & **NB-IoT** & **5G** & **Zigbee** & **Wi-Fi** \\ \hline \multirow{2}{*}{Range} & \multirow{2}{*}{Long (Several km)} & \multirow{2}{*}{Long (Several km)} & \multirow{2}{*}{Short to Medium} & \multirow{2}{*}{Short (10–100 m)} & Short to Medium \\  & & & & several km) & & (Up to 100 m) \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Data Rate} & \multirow{2}{*}{Low (0.3–50 kbps)} & \multirow{2}{*}{Low (20–250 kbps)} & \multirow{2}{*}{High (Gbps)} & \multirow{2}{*}{Low to Medium} & \multirow{2}{*}{High (Up to} \\  & & & & (20–250 kbps) & \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Power Consumption Mobility Complexity Cost} & \multirow{2}{*}{Very Low} & \multirow{2}{*}{Very Low} & \multirow{2}{*}{High} & \multirow{2}{*}{Low} & \multirow{2}{*}{Medium to High} \\  & & & & & \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Total Cost} & \multirow{2}{*}{High} & \multirow{2}{*}{High} & \multirow{2}{*}{High} & \multirow{2}{*}{Low} & \multirow{2}{*}{High} \\  & & & Low to Medium & & High \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Total Use Cases in Aquaculture} & \multirow{2}{*}{Remote water} & \multirow{2}{*}{Real-time video} & \multirow{2}{*}{Localised sensor} & \multirow{2}{*}{Medium} \\  & & quality & & & \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Comp. & & distributed sensors & & & \\  & & large-scale farms & & & \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Strengths} & \multirow{2}{*}{Long range, low power, cost-effective} & \multirow{2}{*}{Long range, low power, good} & \multirow{2}{*}{High data rate, low latency, high} & \multirow{2}{*}{Low power, mesh} & \multirow{2}{*}{High data rate, widely available} \\  & & & & & \\ \multirow{2}{*}{Limitations} & \multirow{2}{*}{Low data rate} & \multirow{2}{*}{Low data rate} & \multirow{2}{*}{High power} & \multirow{2}{*}{Short range} & \multirow{2}{*}{Power} \\  & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Comparative table of wireless communication protocols. pacts or abrasion can compromise sensor performance. To address these challenges, regular maintenance schedules and best practices are essential. This includes regular cleaning of sensors to remove biofouling, calibrating sensors to maintain accuracy, and conducting periodic inspections to identify and address any signs of corrosion or physical damage. Adhering to these maintenance protocols ensures that sensors provide reliable data, enabling informed decision-making and effective management of aquaculture operations.